Consent Decree
The Database
About Arrests
Officer Info
Arrest Stats
Traffic Stats
Public Comments and Feedback

The feedback forum is provided as a public service. Please do not abuse it. You may post anonymously by simply leaving your name BLANK (user name "Anonymous" will be displayed instead). All fields are optional, except, of course, the comment body. You do not have to enter your name or email address, or a URL - these are all completely optional; enter them if you wish.

Please note that your comment will be public. If you wish to contact us privately, please use the email address on the "About" page.

The comments are arranged in reverse chronological order. The most recent comments are at the top of the list, now, instead of the bottom.

Note: By placing comments here, you are not communicating with the Tulsa Police Department. This is simply a public forum. If you wish to contact or email the Tulsa Police Department, please go to

1/31/2007 3:25:57 PM (17)
Earlier you posted a response to why commendations were not shown on this web site ...
"and I have now fixed that."

Some officers DO have their commendations reported on this site while several other officers that I know that have received commendations are not listed even though they are officially on file.

Also, my chain of command is incorrect (almost two years old).

I like the site, but it seems there are several inconsistancies that lead me to distrust the information listed.
Is this a problem with the information given to you or something else?



1/31/2007 3:14:37 PM (16)
This crazy database still shows me as being on leave without pay in Iraq; but I'm still logging activity by way of arrests, awards, etc.-- I can't be in two places at once, though that would be way cool.



1/31/2007 9:30:08 AM (15)
I understand that the SDS (Systems Development and Support ???) division of the City is responsible for the database that you gathered your info from. It is commonly thought that the police department would be at fault for any inaccuracies, but the fact is that the computer guys at SDS put it together.


1/30/2007 10:54:34 PM (14)

I carefully considered whether I should do that or publish it anonymously. In the end, I did not want my background, or my race, or my gender, or my profession to be used as any claim for bias.

To let the numbers truly speak for themselves, it is necessary to remove all personal distractions, and that includes getting no credit for what I think is a fine piece of work.

But, thank you for your kind word.


B. George
1/30/2007 4:58:25 PM (13)
I think the site is well done and the information is interesting. If the creator(s) of the site were willing to sign their name to it, it would make it more credible.



B. George
1/30/2007 3:42:41 PM (12)
I think the site is well done and the information is interesting. If the creator(s) of the site were willing to sign their name to it, it would make it more credible.



1/29/2007 10:17:03 PM (11)


1/29/2007 5:42:55 PM (10)

It is our policy to not get involved in matters of opinion or personal differences, however it should be known that we did take your exact concerns into consideration when making the site.

As we have said before: We think the numbers speak best when they speak for themselves.


1/27/2007 1:07:08 AM (9)

I wish I could say that I am the author of the data and that I could guarantee the accuracy of it. But, I cannot.

What I can guarantee, however, is that what you see is what the department is publishing.

If you ceased street duty in 2005 (and, lets face it, who would know this better than you?) and yet the data shows you made arrests and citations all the way through 2006, then I'd say that casts serious doubt on the integrity of the data that the department is publishing.

This presents no small quandry for me.

On the one hand, it is my intent to accurately render the data - which I have done.

But on the other hand, it was not my intention to make misleading or outright erroneous statements about individuals.

It seems to me to be at once unfair and unavoidable. Unfair in that the data seems to imply that you did things that you are quite certain (and which could be easily corroborated) that you did not. But unavoidable in that this is what the data says.

That casts doubt on other things - perhaps much more important other things. For instance, what if complaint reports are inaccurate?

Personally, I do not think that fact of the matter is in doubt. Rather I think the dates are in doubt.

If I had to wager a guess, I'd bet that the date field that got exported from the department's database was not actually the arrest date, but the system date, or the "date entered" date (the date the thing hit the records department and was entered in the database).

Because of the certainty and demonstrable nature of your experience, I will be adding a disclaimer to the "The Database" page.

If you had to choose, would you prefer Branson or Six Flags?


1/26/2007 6:46:37 PM (8)
This is not accurate. It shows that I have arrests and written citations all the way up to 2006. I went inside in 2005.



 [Prev]  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10   11  12   [Next] 

   Add your comment or reply:

 Name: (Optional)
 EMail: (Optional)
 Url: (Optional)
  Enter the word you see here in the validation field. If you make a mistake,
just press your back button to retry.


No affiliation with the Tulsa Police Department or the City of Tulsa is expressed or implied - Copyright © 2006-2011 - TPDD.ORG - All Rights Reserved.