Fto Tibbett

Sergeant Williams did not make a sound decision by assigning Officer Roberts under the guidance and training of FTO Tibbett. It is obvious that Williams was aware of Officer Tibbett’s behavior as a womanizer since he is widely referred to as “Ladies man.” Therefore, within the police department, such piece of information would have been vital in assigning any persons of opposite sex to partner with FTO Tibbett. Sergeant Williams should thus have notified Roberts about the nature of the man and at the same time warn Officer Tibbett not to make sexual advances on the recruit. Furthermore, Sergeant Williams should have exercised caution on who to assign as trainer to FTO Roberts. In the event where a female officer has to be searched in the field, …show more content…
As such, it would be difficult for such individuals to engage in sexual advances and flirtations. Unless the trainer officer is not attracted to persons of the same sex, then assigning them to an individual of the opposite sex is not ideal. As such, Sergeant Williams should have noted that assigning the two together would reduce their productivity. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs ranks sex as among the basic needs, which should be considered when assigning officers to trainers. Therefore, one would be justified to think that Sergeant Williams contributed greatly to Officer Roberts’ predicaments.
Additionally, it is right for Roberts to feel cheated by Williams although she is an adult of sound mind and should also be liable to her own decisions. Therefore, it is beyond doubt that Roberts consented to Tibbett’s sexual advances, which bore the pregnancy. If the sexual escapade between the two was forced, then Roberts should have reported the sexual harassment and assault. But neither of that happened and thus Roberts is also liable for the pregnancy. Besides, Officer Tibbett should have abstained from the sexual advances with the young officer knowing that he would not leave his family for

Show More

Related Documents: Fto Tibbett

FTO Scenarios