{"id":349841,"date":"2025-12-18T17:17:30","date_gmt":"2025-12-18T17:17:30","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/peraltafinancing.com\/uncategorized\/law-enforcement-agency-policies-prohibiting-officers-from-associating-with-criminals-north-carolina-criminal-law\/"},"modified":"2025-12-18T17:17:30","modified_gmt":"2025-12-18T17:17:30","slug":"law-enforcement-agency-policies-prohibiting-officers-from-associating-with-criminals-north-carolina-criminal-law","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=349841","title":{"rendered":"Law Enforcement Agency Policies Prohibiting Officers from Associating with Criminals \u2013 North Carolina Criminal Law"},"content":{"rendered":"<p> <br \/>\n<\/p>\n<div>\n<p>Many law enforcement agencies have policies prohibiting officers from associating with criminals, or with felons. From time to time, an officer is disciplined or terminated for violating such a policy. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.savannahnow.com\/story\/news\/crime\/2024\/02\/01\/savannah-police-officer-fired-for-relationship-with-convicted-felon\/71604613007\/\">This recent story<\/a> covers a Savannah officer who was fired for having \u201ca relationship with a convicted felon.\u201d <a href=\"https:\/\/abc13.com\/post\/harris-county-sheriffs-office-deputy-selena-perez-resigns-investigation-association-felons-docs-show\/17140085\/\">This article<\/a> addresses a Texas officer who resigned in lieu of termination for \u201cmaintain[ing] close ties to two known felons.\u201d This post discusses such policies, including whether they infringe on officers\u2019 associational rights under the United States Constitution, and concludes with a few points to consider about the scope of such policies.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Policies prohibiting officers from associating with criminals are widespread.<\/strong> Here are some examples of policies adopted by North Carolina law enforcement agencies:<\/p>\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/public.powerdms.com\/RPD1\/tree\/documents\/865740\">Raleigh Police Department, Departmental Operating Instruction 1104-05<\/a>: \u201cAll employees are prohibited from having regular or continuous associations or dealings with any person the employee knows, or should know, is under criminal investigation or indictment. Employees are prohibited from associations with persons who have a reputation in the community or the Department for present involvement in felonious or criminal behavior, except as necessary in the performance of official duties or where unavoidable because of other personal relationships or living location.\u201d<\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/townofcarrboro.org\/DocumentCenter\/View\/7891\/10-Rules-of-Conduct\">Carrboro Police Department, Policies and Procedures Manual, Chapter 1: Rules of Conduct<\/a>: \u201cMembers shall avoid associations or dealings with persons whom the member knows, or reasonably should know, to be a racketeer, sexual offender, gambler, felon or suspected felon, person under criminal investigation or indictment, or person who has a reputation in the community for present involvement in criminal activity.\u201d<\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/public.powerdms.com\/GPD19\/tree\/documents\/759533\">Greenville Police Department, Policies and Procedures, Chapter 26: Disciplinary Procedures and Internal Investigations<\/a>: \u201cEmployees shall avoid associating with, or conducting business with, persons whom they know, or should know, to be racketeers, sexual offenders, professional gamblers, suspected felons, persons under criminal investigation or indictment, or who have a reputation in the community for present involvement in felonious or criminal behavior, except as necessary in the performance of official duties or where unavoidable because that individual is a close relative of the employee.\u201d<\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/public.powerdms.com\/ConcordPolice\/documents\/2615888\/01.01%20Code%20of%20Conduct\">Concord Police Department, General Order 1.01: Code of Conduct<\/a>: \u201cCoworkers shall avoid regular or continuous associations with persons or groups they reasonably believe, know or should know are planning to, or are engaged in, criminal behavior, or who advocate the overthrow of government, such that the association would undermine the public trust or affect the coworker\u2019s credibility or integrity. The exceptions are associations that are necessary in the performance of duty or familial relationships of which the Chief of Police is cognizant.\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>My sense in talking with members of the law enforcement community is that such policies exist in most agencies, either expressly or as a norm that is understood to fall under broader prohibitions, such as those against conduct unbecoming of an officer or conduct detrimental to the agency.<\/p>\n<p><strong>These policies serve several purposes.<\/strong> First, they prevent conflicts of interest from arising. If an officer has a close personal relationship with someone on the wrong side of the law, there is always the risk that the officer will tip the person off about an investigation or will treat the person more favorably than a stranger engaged in similar activity. That would frustrate the impartial administration of justice and could even endanger other officers. Second, they protect the reputation of the agency. If the public were to learn of connections between officers and people involved in criminal activity, the public could lose faith in the agency or begin to view it as corrupt.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The Constitution protects a right to free association.<\/strong> Actually, it protects two distinct kinds of associative rights.<\/p>\n<p><em>The right to expressive association. <\/em>The first is the right to expressive association under the First Amendment. By its terms, the First Amendment protects religious liberty, free speech, and the rights to assemble and to petition the government for redress of grievances. However, the Supreme Court of the United States has stated that \u201c[w]hile the freedom of association is not explicitly set out in the Amendment, it [is] implicit in the freedoms of speech, assembly, and petition.\u201d <em>Healy v. James<\/em>, 408 U.S. 169 (1972).<\/p>\n<p>When it comes to public employees\u2019 First Amendment rights, courts apply something called the \u201c<em>Pickering <\/em>test,\u201d named after <em>Pickering v. Board of Education<\/em>, 391 U.S. 563 (1968) (holding that a teacher\u2019s public criticism of the school board\u2019s financial management was protected by the First Amendment and could not be a basis for firing the teacher). In a nutshell, a government employer violates the First Amendment when (1) the employer disciplines or terminates an employee, (2) as a result of the employee\u2019s speech as a citizen on a matter of public concern, and (3) the speech was not likely to damage the efficient provision of public services severely enough to outweigh the employee\u2019s interest in speaking. <em>See generally Lawson v. Union County Clerk of Court<\/em>, 828 F.3d 239 (4<sup>th<\/sup> Cir. 2016) (summarizing the law and listing various ways in which an employee\u2019s speech may be harmful, such as impairing discipline and harming relationships with co-workers).<\/p>\n<p>Bringing this all together in the context of an officer\u2019s right to expressive association, issues seem to arise mainly with regard to . . . motorcycle clubs. For example, in <em>Piscottano v. Murphy<\/em>, 511 F.3d 247 (2d Cir. 2007), four correctional officers were terminated or otherwise disciplined as a result of their membership in the Outlaws Motorcycle Club. The officers sued, and the Second Circuit applied Pickering. It ruled that joining or otherwise supporting the Outlaws was expression on a matter of public concern (because motorcycle clubs are a matter of public concern, given that many are linked to criminal activity) but that the Department of Correction\u2019s restriction of that expression was justified because membership was likely to embroil officers in fights with other clubs that would reflect poorly on the Department, was likely to impede officers\u2019 ability to collaborate with other law enforcement agencies in investigations, and was likely to create conflicts of interest if the officers supervised Outlaws or members of rival groups in prison.<\/p>\n<p>Likewise, in <em>Turner v. United States Capitol Police<\/em>, 34 F.Supp.3d 124 (D.D.C. 2014), an officer was terminated after he joined the Tribes Motorcycle Club. That club is apparently a non-outlaw club, but the officer\u2019s membership led the officer to spend time around other motorcycle clubs, including outlaw clubs with members who were felons and white supremacists. He sued to contest his firing, alleging, among other things, a violation of his right to expressive association. The court dismissed the claim, applying Pickering and concluding that the agency\u2019s \u201cinterest in the efficient operation of law enforcement activities . . . outweighs plaintiff\u2019s interest in his cited activities,\u201d and stating that the officer\u2019s \u201cmultiple encounters with outlaw organizations and individuals could reasonably be expected to reflect poorly on the Capitol Police\u201d and to interfere with its operations.<\/p>\n<p>Issues regarding the right to expressive association may also arise when officers affiliate with certain political or advocacy organizations, including those on the far left or right that promote a mistrust of government in general or of law enforcement in particular. In <em>Greco v. City of New York<\/em>, 686 F.Supp.3d 191 (E.D.N.Y. 2023), a NYPD officer sued after he was fired, allegedly because of his association with Roger Stone, the Proud Boys, the Oath Keepers, and other groups connected to the storming of the United States Capitol. A federal judge declined to dismiss the officer\u2019s claim that his firing violated his right to expressive association, concluding that the officer \u201csufficiently allege[d] that he engaged in expressive conduct that touched on a matter of public concern\u2014namely, the 2020 Presidential election.\u201d<\/p>\n<p><em>The right to intimate association.<\/em> The other type of associative right protected by the Constitution is the right to intimate association. In <em>Roberts v. United States Jaycees<\/em>, 468 U.S. 609 (1984), the Supreme Court stated that \u201cchoices to enter into and maintain certain intimate human relationships must be secured against undue intrusion by the State because of the role of such relationships in safeguarding the individual freedom that is central to our constitutional scheme.\u201d There appears to be some doctrinal dispute about whether this right actually derives from the First Amendment or is more appropriately based in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Regardless, it protects the ability of individuals to marry, to form families, and to cohabit with relatives. (Exactly how far the concept extends is not completely settled.)<\/p>\n<p>Agency policies against associating with criminals limit officers\u2019 ability to form relationships with certain individuals and therefore limit the officers\u2019 right to intimate association. However, courts overwhelmingly have upheld such policies against challenges based in the right to intimate association. For example, in <em>Ross v. Clayton County, Ga.<\/em>, 173 F.3d 1305 (11<sup>th<\/sup> Cir. 1999), a county correctional officer was demoted for living with his brother, who was on probation. The officer sued, but as to the officer\u2019s freedom of intimate association claim, the Eleventh Circuit stated that \u201c[i]n the context of law enforcement, there is a special need to employ persons who act with good judgment and avoid potential conflicts of interest.\u00a0 Personal associations with felons or active probationers could undermine appropriate objectives of a law enforcement agency.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Similarly, in <em>Bautista v. County of Los Angeles<\/em>, 190 Cal.App.4th 869 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010), a sheriff\u2019s deputy was fired \u201cfor engaging in a personal relationship with a known prostitute and heroin addict.\u201d The issue on appeal was whether the agency\u2019s policy against associations with criminals violated the deputy\u2019s freedom of intimate association. The matter was particularly poignant because the deputy subsequently married the individual in question. The reviewing court upheld the policy and the deputy\u2019s termination because \u201c[t]he Department has a legitimate interest in regulating the behavior of its sworn officers to minimize conflicts of interests and protect the credibility and integrity of the Department.\u201d Collecting several prior cases, the court further stated that \u201canti-fraternization rules prohibiting police officers from socializing with those who they know are engaging in criminal activity have routinely been upheld against constitutional challenges.\u201d<\/p>\n<p><strong>Reflections on policies. <\/strong>One possible conclusion from the above is that courts generally seem satisfied with these policies, so there\u2019s no need to spend too much time worrying about the details. But another conclusion is almost the opposite: because courts regularly uphold these policies, it is up to agencies to ensure that their contents are fair and serve their intended purposes. Having spent some time reviewing various agency policies and reading judicial opinions about them, I offer a few thoughts for agencies\u2019 consideration:<\/p>\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>First, consider including an exception that allows officers to associate with criminals in the course of the officers\u2019 duties. I think that\u2019s generally understood, but it still may be reassuring to codify.<\/li>\n<li>Second, consider including an exception for close family members. Although the policy in <em>Ross <\/em>didn\u2019t include such an exception and was upheld, policies that require officers to sever family ties may be more vulnerable to constitutional challenges. They also may prevent individuals who would be good officers from applying to serve. Agencies that include family exceptions sometimes include requirements like notifying the agency about family associations.<\/li>\n<li>Third, consider limiting the policy to individuals who are <em>currently <\/em>involved in criminal activity. It is not likely the intention of most policies to prevent officers from having friends who made youthful mistakes but who are now responsible citizens. Having a policy that is drawn more narrowly may also help to prevent selective enforcement of the policy, or at least the perception of selective enforcement.<\/li>\n<li>Fourth, consider whether to bar officers from associating with people who have only a \u201creputation\u201d of being involved in criminal activity. Such provisions are inherently somewhat vague and reputations are not always based in fact. On the other hand, one of the goals of policies against associating with criminals is to protect the agency\u2019s image and maintain public confidence, so perhaps it is reasonable to require officers to steer clear of people with bad reputations.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>As a final note, I\u2019m always happy to hear from readers who have information, comments, questions, or concerns about any of my posts. Our new blog platform doesn\u2019t support comments, but you can always reach out to me by email; my address is on my <a href=\"https:\/\/www.sog.unc.edu\/about\/faculty-and-staff\/jeffrey-b-welty\">UNC faculty page<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Many law enforcement agencies have policies prohibiting officers from associating with criminals, or with felons. From time to time, an officer is disciplined or terminated for violating such a policy. This recent story covers a Savannah officer who was fired for having \u201ca relationship with a convicted felon.\u201d This article addresses a Texas officer who [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[171523,171524,123853,101339],"tags":[5353,171526,14206,14207,20098,19355,12685,843,11704,13992,171525],"dealstore":[],"offerexpiration":[],"class_list":["post-349841","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-agency-policy","category-associating-with-criminals","category-first-amendment","category-police","tag-agency","tag-associating","tag-carolina","tag-criminal","tag-criminals","tag-enforcement","tag-law","tag-north","tag-officers","tag-policies","tag-prohibiting"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v26.4 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Law Enforcement Agency Policies Prohibiting Officers from Associating with Criminals \u2013 North Carolina Criminal Law - Som2ny Network<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=349841\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Law Enforcement Agency Policies Prohibiting Officers from Associating with Criminals \u2013 North Carolina Criminal Law - Som2ny Network\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Many law enforcement agencies have policies prohibiting officers from associating with criminals, or with felons. From time to time, an officer is disciplined or terminated for violating such a policy. This recent story covers a Savannah officer who was fired for having \u201ca relationship with a convicted felon.\u201d This article addresses a Texas officer who [&hellip;]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=349841\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Som2ny Network\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-12-18T17:17:30+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=349841#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=349841\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#\/schema\/person\/b85e3c3dc0e1daea076524dc8810c371\"},\"headline\":\"Law Enforcement Agency Policies Prohibiting Officers from Associating with Criminals \u2013 North Carolina Criminal Law\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-12-18T17:17:30+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=349841\"},\"wordCount\":2062,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#organization\"},\"keywords\":[\"Agency\",\"Associating\",\"Carolina\",\"Criminal\",\"Criminals\",\"Enforcement\",\"law\",\"North\",\"Officers\",\"Policies\",\"Prohibiting\"],\"articleSection\":[\"agency policy\",\"associating with criminals\",\"First Amendment\",\"Police\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=349841#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=349841\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=349841\",\"name\":\"Law Enforcement Agency Policies Prohibiting Officers from Associating with Criminals \u2013 North Carolina Criminal Law - Som2ny Network\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2025-12-18T17:17:30+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=349841#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=349841\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=349841#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?bp_activities=1\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Law Enforcement Agency Policies Prohibiting Officers from Associating with Criminals \u2013 North Carolina Criminal Law\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/\",\"name\":\"Som2ny Network\",\"description\":\"Daily Deals\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Som2ny Network\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/4a0953c4-logo-300x86-1.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/4a0953c4-logo-300x86-1.png\",\"width\":300,\"height\":86,\"caption\":\"Som2ny Network\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"}},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#\/schema\/person\/b85e3c3dc0e1daea076524dc8810c371\",\"name\":\"admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/729ae85bf62b9917e93538db2f2688ca?s=96&r=g&default=https%3A%2F%2Ffivemor.com%2Fwp-content%2Fplugins%2Fbuddypress-first-letter-avatar%2Fimages%2Fdefault%2F96%2Flatin_a.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/729ae85bf62b9917e93538db2f2688ca?s=96&r=g&default=https%3A%2F%2Ffivemor.com%2Fwp-content%2Fplugins%2Fbuddypress-first-letter-avatar%2Fimages%2Fdefault%2F96%2Flatin_a.png\",\"caption\":\"admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?author=1\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Law Enforcement Agency Policies Prohibiting Officers from Associating with Criminals \u2013 North Carolina Criminal Law - Som2ny Network","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=349841","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Law Enforcement Agency Policies Prohibiting Officers from Associating with Criminals \u2013 North Carolina Criminal Law - Som2ny Network","og_description":"Many law enforcement agencies have policies prohibiting officers from associating with criminals, or with felons. From time to time, an officer is disciplined or terminated for violating such a policy. This recent story covers a Savannah officer who was fired for having \u201ca relationship with a convicted felon.\u201d This article addresses a Texas officer who [&hellip;]","og_url":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=349841","og_site_name":"Som2ny Network","article_published_time":"2025-12-18T17:17:30+00:00","author":"admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"admin","Est. reading time":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=349841#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=349841"},"author":{"name":"admin","@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#\/schema\/person\/b85e3c3dc0e1daea076524dc8810c371"},"headline":"Law Enforcement Agency Policies Prohibiting Officers from Associating with Criminals \u2013 North Carolina Criminal Law","datePublished":"2025-12-18T17:17:30+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=349841"},"wordCount":2062,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#organization"},"keywords":["Agency","Associating","Carolina","Criminal","Criminals","Enforcement","law","North","Officers","Policies","Prohibiting"],"articleSection":["agency policy","associating with criminals","First Amendment","Police"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=349841#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=349841","url":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=349841","name":"Law Enforcement Agency Policies Prohibiting Officers from Associating with Criminals \u2013 North Carolina Criminal Law - Som2ny Network","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#website"},"datePublished":"2025-12-18T17:17:30+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=349841#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=349841"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=349841#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?bp_activities=1"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Law Enforcement Agency Policies Prohibiting Officers from Associating with Criminals \u2013 North Carolina Criminal Law"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/","name":"Som2ny Network","description":"Daily Deals","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#organization","name":"Som2ny Network","url":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/4a0953c4-logo-300x86-1.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/4a0953c4-logo-300x86-1.png","width":300,"height":86,"caption":"Som2ny Network"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#\/schema\/person\/b85e3c3dc0e1daea076524dc8810c371","name":"admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/729ae85bf62b9917e93538db2f2688ca?s=96&r=g&default=https%3A%2F%2Ffivemor.com%2Fwp-content%2Fplugins%2Fbuddypress-first-letter-avatar%2Fimages%2Fdefault%2F96%2Flatin_a.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/729ae85bf62b9917e93538db2f2688ca?s=96&r=g&default=https%3A%2F%2Ffivemor.com%2Fwp-content%2Fplugins%2Fbuddypress-first-letter-avatar%2Fimages%2Fdefault%2F96%2Flatin_a.png","caption":"admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/fivemor.com"],"url":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?author=1"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/349841","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=349841"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/349841\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=349841"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=349841"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=349841"},{"taxonomy":"dealstore","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fdealstore&post=349841"},{"taxonomy":"offerexpiration","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fofferexpiration&post=349841"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}