POLICE MISCONDUCT IN MODERN LAW ENFORCEMENT: IS IT HURTING OR HELPING PUBLIC CONFIDENCE?

By

Edmond R. Gray

Ethics in Preserving Public Safety

A Partial Fulfillment for the Degree of PhD in Public Policy

Criminal Justice

Submitted to

Professor Richard Worch

Walden University

May 26, 2010

Table of Contents

Police Misconduct in Modern Law Enforcement: Is It Hurting or Helping Public Confidence?

1.      Abstract

2.      Introduction

3.      Police Misconduct in Modern Day America

4.      Background

5.      Review of the Literature

6.      Investigation

7.       Prevention Methods

8.      Conclusion

9.      Literature Review

10. References

Abstract

Police Misconduct in Modern Law Enforcement: Is It Hurting or Helping Public Confidence?

Police officers have one of the most difficult tasks of protecting the community, while preserving their own integrity and the good image of the institution. In order to keep their jobs, police officers are expected to maintain a higher moral standard both on and off duty. Besides, they undergo several ethics trainings each year to strengthen them for the job. Nonetheless, police officers continue to face regular dismissals mostly for misconduct and other ethics violations. This literature review will look at key studies done in the area of police misconduct that are centered on street-level bureaucrats that are constantly faced with important value choices. Attempts will be made to examine whether enough is being done to prevent these ethics violations.

The review will look at those issues that contribute to ethical and unethical behaviors. For the purpose of this review, focus will mostly be on the police officers, and their interaction in the community, using existing data. Toward the end, an attempt will be made to see whether enough has been done to reduce police misconduct and other ethics violations. Attempts will be made to see whether the inability of an officer to report the misconduct or unethical behavior of a colleague is influenced by his/her character, the type of misconduct, departmental traits, relationship, or attitude?  

Introduction

Throughout history, efforts to police society have been characterized by police misconduct and other ethics violations to some degree (Johnson 2004). Therefore, ethics in policing is as old as law enforcement itself.  However, the negative perception against policing goes as far back as the great railroad strike of 1877, Johnson (2004). The passage of the Volstead Act of 1919 is said to have a long-term negative impact on the culture of policing itself. By the 1920s, crime was growing negatively in conjunction with the demand for illegal alcohol. Many law enforcement agencies stepped up against the use of unlawful alcohol. And by the Hover administration in the late 1920s, the Wickersham Commission was formed to look into widespread lawlessness against civilians by law enforcement agencies (Johnson 2004).

Nonetheless, the discovery made that all forms of cruelty to extract involuntary confessions from people, existed across the law enforcement isle, and coupled with subsequent land mark legislations, i.e. Brown v Mississippi, the advice to uphold the due-process clause of the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution, and others, sort of sealed this greater negative public perception toward the police profession (Johnson 2004).

Police Misconduct in Modern Day America

Though there are detailed statistics on the use of force in the United States, there was no literature found that comprehensively catalogued the prevalence of police misconduct in the US? For instance, a US Department of Justice report on police use of force in 2001 indicated that in 1999, a total number of 422,000 people complained that some forms of police misconduct were used on them, Holmes (2000). Equally, a 2006 Justice Department report shows that only 26,556 total number citizen complaints on the use of force were reported within the US; and of these, about 2000 were found to be credible, Hickman (2006).

Some studies have shown that some attempts have been made to cover up police misconduct. One study sponsored by the Federal government (Police Service Study), in which some 12,000 randomly selected citizens were interviewed in three metropolitan areas, it was discovered that about 13.6 percent of those asked said they have reasons to complain their local police department for actions of misconduct, yet only 30% of these folks actually filed formal complaints. In the same vein, a Human Rights Watch report of 1998, all of the 14 precincts that were looked at by Human Right Watch said, filing complaints for alleged police misconduct was “unnecessarily difficult and sometime intimidating” (http://www.aclu.org/police/gen/14614pub19971201.html; Human Rights Watch) .   

On the issue of racial profiling as a form of police misconduct, there are quite a number of literatures out there. However, two credible sources, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch did confirm situations in which other institutions within the public safety arena used brutal force within lockdown facilities (Human Rights Watch 2006).

Background

This review on police integrity comes against the backdrop that police ethics is at the middle of law enforcement most important needs (Carter & Wilson 2006). Research analyses have shown that in executing their jobs, police officers are regularly confronted with some of the toughest ethical challenges to their professional and individual characters. These research analyses recommended that the focus of police integrity be moved from traditional issues like corruption and excessive force, to new and challenging areas that will help to regulate and improve the overall character and development of the cop and the department (Klockars et al 2006; Raines 2006). A review of three literatures, added momentum into the need for the expansion argument in that it further discovered three central areas that control the flow of change for the individual: self-leaning inner value (universal self values, standards on one’s own values, variables on individual effects); “other oriented outcome core values”, and those outcomes based on social values (Hubert et al 2008; Giacalone & Jurkiewicz, 2003; Ray and Anderson, 2000). Self-leaning inner values – have to do with one’s values and preferences in life, shared into three subsets – general individual values,” individual voice values and individual outcome values (Hubert et al 2008)”. According to Giacalone and Jurkiewicz (2003), Universal self values– are determined by how an individual is inspired by his own belief through self-actualization and optimism. However, those who are passionate about expanding police integrity beyond the traditional lines, the ethics of a decision exceed financial implications and short term measures. They are mostly placed on the long term and systemic consequences for all stakeholders (Hubert et al 2008). Basically, short term interests should carry a long term consequence. The rationale for planning beyond the immediate is to accommodate the long term effects of today’s actions (Ray and Anderson, 2000).

In the United States, every state has its monitoring commission that watches over the attitudes of cops (Beech 2000). In policing, the internal affairs division has the duty to investigate incidents and likely activities of criminal act and professional misconduct of police officers. In the same vein, other structures refer to internal affairs as professional standards, inspector general, office of professional responsibility, and others, Beech (2000). Research shows that having a division that handles professional misconduct does not only control or reduce the police misconducts, but reinforces the feeling that those outside the police force have an option to seek redress against the police without bias (Belasic 2007). Take the City of San Francisco in Northern California for instance, has its Office of Citizen Complaints that was created in 1983 through voters’ proposal.

As the result of this, those civilians who are not part of the San Francisco Police Department were able to have their complaints against police officers investigated by the Office of Citizen Complaints; Washington DC has a similar initiative that was established in 1999, refer to as the Office of Police Complaints (Belasic 2007).  In the State of Florida, that function is handled by the Florida Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission. “The commission which was established in 1977 is tasked with the responsibility of setting minimum standards for officer training and hiring, creates systems for denying, suspending, and revoking licenses (Beech 2000)”.

But unlike, the City of San Francisco which was mandated by a civilian initiative, the Florida Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission came into being, through the Florida Legislature with the hope that police officers respect the law, and sustain good moral character (Florida Department of Law Enforcement, 2009). The task of supervising police behavior is a difficult and at times, very risky task; because of this, in most police departments around the nation, those working in internal affairs are in a detective command, but directly report to the chief, or to a board of civilian police commissioners (Belasic 2007). All of these disciplinary commissions are set up to investigate various public safety violations (Belasic 2007).

The need to regulate illegitimate police behaviors or activities that are related to the performance of an officer’s official duties and violate state or federal criminal laws, department policies, professional ethics, or administrative rules and procedures goes as far back as the Hoover administration, when a number of police departments rose to the occasion of addressing widely held public concerns of the need to increase professionalism and identify the changes needed for law enforcement (Johnson 2004; Belasic 2007; Henry 2004; Beech 2000).

Police misconduct is an important public policy issue as well as a recurring problem that is widely discussed and debated by police officers, police administrators and executives, lawmakers and public officials, and members of the public (Belasic 2007).   Police departments around the country are taking various measures to improve their internal investigation procedures with the hope of replacing negative public perception against the police with an overwhelming public trust, Charleston Gazette (January 9, 2000)

Review of the Literature

            In order to determine what constitute an ethics violation, there is the need to establish a clear definition for the meaning of ethics. According to Webster, ethics is the study of the universal nature of morals and the particular moral choices an individual makes while dealing with others. There is a greater philosophical meaning of ethics that has to do with conduct, honesty, character, integrity, morality, and others are connected to our human behavior (Weisburd et. al., 2006).

And as indicated earlier, the study of police misconduct is impeded by the need for precise definition as well as by the dual contexts in which a range of behavioral patterns and practices classified under the expansive rubric of misconduct can occur (Henry 2004). Even though the two are noticeable, people improperly associate police misconduct with police corruption; both are distinguishable in such time when actual violation of state or federal law is usually needed to define corruption (Henry 2004). This is not the situation with the more widely defined impression of police misconduct; hence, corruption can be considered as part of misconduct, Henry (2004).

A lot has been written on police ethics, of all, mostly two issues have been identified as areas of concern. One of these has to do with the level of damage and public perception that ethical misconduct has done to policing, and how much has the public perception of misconduct hurt the profession itself (Johnson et. al. 2005; Klockars et. al. 2006;Beech 2000). An equal number of different writers have shown concerns for the part that police leadership plays in the overall ethical policing violations. For instance, the Center for Society, Law & Justice (2006, August) gives account of few leadership workshops under the tutelage of the US Attorney General, in which ethics, integrity and leadership were the topics of that symposium. The overarching theme adopted by participants at the leadership conferences, was ethical commitment. Another area of misconduct that will be looked at is the use of force, also known as the force continuum theory.

The considerable focus of this review will look at those literatures, which discuss or attempt to look the precise answer of what seems to be the main driving force behind the perception that the public hold towards policing. A number of research focuses has been on the use of force by the police. Legally, police officers are allowed to use force (Skolnick et. al. 1995). However, police leaders and the public in general, expect such force to be reasonable and only used when necessary (Skolnick 2002).

A number of literatures hold that largely, in dealing with riots and other public disorderly conducts, some police officers gradually develop the notion, and sense of authority, if I may say, that they are above society and the law, especially under the traditional reaction-based policing model (Skolnick 2002; Loree 2006; Owens et. al., 2002; Stetser 2001).  But some say that the lack of knowledge of the main functions of the police in the community is another reason for public bias against the police (Belasic 2007; Henry 2004; Raines 2006). According to Beech (2000), positive Public perception of the police today is still low. Among the very negative views held by people against the profession, is one which claims that the true function of the police is hidden behind the claim that they exist primarily to fight and prevent crimes.   

Investigation

Along the line of misconduct, “the bad apple paradigm theory” came into being to distinguish those good cops from their colleagues, who are generally considered bad and unprofessional (Owens 2002). The “Bad Apple Paradigm” failed to remove the general public euphoria that police misconduct is a systemic problem rather than individually generic (Loree 2006).

At least, two literatures (Skolnick 2002; Loree 2006) discuss systemic factors of corruption as, pressures to conform to certain traditional police practices dubbed the Blue Code of Silence – this is a practice in which cops who have crossed the professional lines, are protected by their departments, sort of an ‘us v the public’ situation, which breeds mistrust for the institution; a second situation has to do with a command and control structure that has its beginnings to an unreasonably, rigid hierarchical foundation – research has shown that “the tougher the leadership structure of a police organization, the lower the chances of finding ethical-decision making”, Owens et. al. (2002); lastly, there is the existence of the deficiencies in internal accountability mechanisms, such as investigation processes, and others (Loree 2006).

No matter how little the police use force to contain a situation, some members of the public will still complain that minimal force is no different than over the limit force (Stetser 2001). The appropriate force that should be used by the police is defined in the ‘use of force continuum policy’, statutory and common laws (Stetser 2001).

The ability to investigate police misconducts in the United States is not only left to the mercies of internal affairs, and various civilian and police commissions, for accountability purposes, and coupled with the idea of reinforcing the credibility of the investigation process, District Attorneys have oversight responsibility of looking into cases where aggrieved public misconducts have been reported (Gallagher 2007).  In a recent study conduct against the Chicago PD, out of over 10,000 reported complaints of misconducts, filed between 2002 and 2004, only 19 of them resulted into substantial disciplinary actions (Gallagher 2007). At the height of the findings, was that some officers with criminal inclinations were still allowed with impunity to function in the system. 

To tell the seriousness of this matter, District Attorneys who are allowed to investigate police misconducts, have themselves, come under scrutiny. This is owing to the fact that these District Attorneys depend upon their various police departments for evidence to prosecute police officers who are charged with ethics violations and criminal misconduct (Gallagher 2007).

Efforts to address police misconduct in the US transcended local police and internal civilian commissions during the 1990s, through the creations of other federal and local government mechanisms (Gallagher 2007). For instance, the Rodney King incidence of 1991, helped to create the Christopher Commission (an independent commission on the LAPD), which uncovered the existence of abusively forms of misconduct; in other states such as New York, media organizations alleged that the “Blue Code of Silence” hampered their efforts to investigate misconduct, Raab (2002, New York Times). By the methodology used, Literatures have shown that both the police and the public have convincing indications of the intention to end police misconduct.

Prevention and Methods

 Literatures have shown that both the public and the police frown on police misconduct. Many calls have been made by the public to reinforce the integrity of the procedures used to investigate police misconduct to ensure accountability though public participation (Willis 2006; Civil Rights Division 2003). Between the public and police, few independent organizations are participating in the prevention efforts.

 For instance, Copwatch, a US based consortium of agencies which actively monitors and collects evidence on police activities with the hope of preventing police misconduct, and in conjunction with Amnesty International are two of the many independent organizations which exist to provide unimpeded reports on misconduct.

Within the police, many law enforcement officials who have written or given account of police misconduct hold, among others, that cynicism, mistrust, over stretch/burnout, stress and boredom as few of the likely reasons for officer misconduct (James 2003; Delattre 2002). One writer states that “there is a fair amount of evidence to support that crime pays, and you can get away with it; there is disrespect for limits, for truth telling, it runs to a central contempt for limits and self control; see Delattre personal communication, August 16, 1997 (Delattre 2002). There are varying literatures about the causes of law enforcement misconduct, however, an overwhelming number of police professionals acknowledge that ethical misconduct brings the reputation of the profession down, and there is need to address the situation (Beech 2000).   

Much has been done to curb police misconduct, for instance, in 1994; Congress came up with the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act. It provided the Attorney General, the ability to file lawsuits seeking to reform police units found engaged in conducts that violate the rights of citizens. Since the passage of this law, eleven jurisdictions have benefitted from it (Pittsburg Bureau of Police, Steubenville PD, New Jersey State Police, LAPD, DC Metropolitan PD, Buffalo PD, Mount Prospect, Illinois PD, and the Montgomery, Maryland PD (Civil Rights 2003)

Conclusion

An array of literature on misconduct can be obtained from the academic literature of policing. These literatures present the way definitions and concepts of police misconduct have been discussed and digressed upon over the course of American police history. Although definitions of misconduct historically focused on various police misconducts that involve varying interests, concerns about police misconduct and civil rights violations resulting from the urban riots of the 1960s led to dramatically increased public, legal, and organizational attention. Forms of misconduct such as brutality and civil rights violations ultimately entered public discourse about misconduct during that era.

In the same token, the perception of racial profiling was recorded under the various police misconduct when acknowledged.  “The notion of “noble cause corruption”—such activities as perjury, falsifying or planting evidence on suspects, and other illegal or illegitimate behaviors that can be rationalized as serving a legitimate criminal justice goal and do not involve an implicit material gain for the officer involved—has recently received media and academic attention and has been subsumed within definitions of police misconduct, Henry (2002)”.

The persistent stiffness shown toward police misconduct shed light on the need for effective police accountability, both to the organization and to the public (Henry 2002). And owing to the dynamism of modern police work, the unavoidability of a variety of discretions afforded to police officers, and the intrinsic difficulty of adequately and continually supervising their actions, one must at least, expect some level of police misconduct. This is especially true with the extremities of administrative rule violations that form the bigger share of police misconduct. It is almost impossible for any police agency to create enforcement mechanisms and systems of accountability that will be wholly effective in getting rid of all forms of misconduct. According to Henry (2002), the most effective way to reduce misconduct is through enhanced public accountability and organizational transparency, and obtained through a continually comprehensive process of ongoing policy review and adjustment.

Literature Reviews

1. Weisburd, D., Greenspan, R., Hamilton, E., Williams, H., & Bryant, K. Wills, D. (2006, May). Integrity: preventing corruption through pro-active police management. The Chief of Police, 20, 31-32. Retrieved May20, 2010

         American society has long entrusted to its police the authority to use force in the pursuit of justice, law, and order. This authority is often glorified in books, television, and movies, where the police are constantly seen as responding to violent felons with equally violent reactions. This research was conducted by a team of law enforcement experts headed by Professor David Weisburd. The task of the team was to look at the issue police brutality resulting from the use of force. This came against the backdrop that the reality of police use of force is much less dramatic and the boundaries of legitimate police use of force are much more constrained than defined in culture. The police indeed have discretion to use violence when it is required. However, the potential abuse and actual abuse of such authority remain both a central problem for police agencies and a central public policy concern.

2. Johnson, T., Johnson, D., & White, J. (2005, June 2).Organizational roadblocks to prevent public misconduct. Paper presented at the Ethics and Integrity of Governance: A Transatlantic Dialogue Conference, Leuven, Belgium. Retrieved 2010-05-22.

            This study was undertaken in Canada to examine the causes of public mistrust in public institutions. The study was intended to mostly look at how government institutions can once win the public trust. According to the study, government executives are constantly challenged to overcome the sometimes multiple cultural and sub cultural barriers, that neutralize or defeat the good intentions of public institutions. The study looks at systems like the United States on how it wins public trust. According to the study, ethics training is a good start to gain public trust through ethical behavior. The study also advocates for training on the understanding of one’s culture, the theoretical bases on why something is right or wrong, the removal of potential road blocks to enable the system to be effective. 

3. Klockars, C. B., Ivkovich, S.K., & Haberfeld, M. R. (December, 2005). Enhancing police integrity. National Institute of Justice. www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij. Retrieved on May 24, 2010.

            This is a research that was done for practical purposes and published in the National Institution for Justice. It was done to measure police corruption, which before then was a very difficult thing to do. This study did not use the traditional research approach used in previous studies. And rather than focusing on corruption, the researchers measured the integrity of police officers and their organizations. The tools and techniques that the researchers developed for the study can be used by police executives to find out how well officers understand their agency’s rules on misconduct as well as their opinions about the seriousness of the different types of misconduct, the appropriate discipline for the misconduct, and their willingness to report behavior. The research findings are that an agency’s culture of integrity, as defined by clearly understood and implemented policies and rules, may be more important in shaping the ethics of police officers than hiring “right” people.

References

1.      Beech, B. (2000, January). Ethics in policing: Not just shoulds, coulds, and ought. Retrieved on May 20, 2010 from http://www.fdle.state.fl.us/fcjei/slp%20papers/beech.pdf

2.      Ryan Gallagher (2007-04-04). "Study: Police abuse goes unpunished". Medill School, Northwestern University, Chicago. http://news.medill.northwestern.edu/chicago/news.aspx?id=6125. Retrieved 2010-21-05.

3.      Johnson, Marilynn S. (2004). Johnson. ed. Street Justice: A History of Police Violence in New York City. Beacon Press. pp. 365. ISBN 0807050237.

4.      Loree, Don (2006). "Corruption in policing: Causes and consequences; A Review of the Literature" (PDF). Research and Evaluation Community, Contract and Aboriginal Policing Services Directorate.

5.      Skolnick, Jerome H. (2002). "Corruption and the Blue Code of Silence". Police Practice and Research 3(1): 7.

6.      Matthew Hickman (2006-06-26). "Citizen complaints about police use of force". Bureau of Justice Statistics. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/ccpuf.htm. Retrieved 2010-05-20.

7.      Holmes, Malcolm D. (2000), Minority Threat and Police Brutality: Determinants of Civil Rights Criminal Complaints in U.S. Municipalities, 38, Criminology, pp. 343, http://heinonlinebackup.com/hol-cgi-bin/get_pdf.cgi?handle=hein.journals/crim38&section=21

8.      Owens, Katherine M. B.; Jeffrey Pfeifer (2002). "Police Leadership and Ethics: Training and Police Recommendations". The Canadian Journal of Police and Security Services 1(2): 7.

9.      Stetser, Merle (2001). The Use of Force in Police Control of Violence: Incidents Resulting in Assaults on Officers. New York: LFB Scholarly Publishing L.L.C. ISBN 1-931202-08-7.

10. Skolnick, Jerome H.; Fyfe, James D. (1995). "Community-Oriented Policing Would Prevent Police Brutality". in Winters, Paul A.. Policing the Police. San Diego: Greenhaven Press. pp. 45–55. ISBN 1-56510-262-2.

11. Selwyn Raab (1993-05-02). "The Dark Blue Code of Silence". New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/books/98/02/08/home/15700.html. Retrieved 2010-05-24.

12. Civil Rights Division (2003-01-01). "Department of Justice Police Misconduct Pattern or Practice Program". U.S. Department of Justice. http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/split/faq.htm#pppmp.htm. Retrieved 2010-05-23.

13. Carter, L., & Wilson, M. (2006, August). Measuring professionalism of police officers. The Police Chief, vol. 73, no. 8, 42-44. Retrieved on May 20, 2010.

14. Center for Society, Law & Justice. (2006, August). Managing Law Enforcement Integrity the State of the Art. Retrieved May 21, 2010 from http://www.nicic.org/Library/021824

15. Ferrell, C. (2003, November). Code of silence: Fact or fiction? [Electronic Version]. The Police Chief, vol. 70, no. 11.

16. Frank, M., McConkey, K., Huon, G., & Hesketh, B. (1995). Individual perspectives on police ethics. Payneham, SA: National Police Research Unit.

17. Jacocks Jr., A. M., & Bowman, M. D. (2006, April). Developing and sustaining a culture of Integrity. The Police Chief, vol. 73, no. 4, 16-22.

18. James, R., (2003, October). For the veteran Officers: Leadership, ethics, and wellness training. [Electronic Version]. The Police Chief, vol. 79, no. 10.

19. Johnson, T., Johnson, D., & White, J. (2005, June 2). Organizational roadblocks to prevent public misconduct. Paper presented at the Ethics and Integrity of Governance: A Transatlantic Dialogue Conference, Leuven, Belgium.

20. Margolis, G., & March, N. (2004, April). Branding Your Agency: Creating the Police Department's Image [Electronic Version]. The Police Chief, 71.

21. Weisburd, D., Greenspan, R., Hamilton, E., Williams, H., & Bryant, K. Wills, D. (2006, May). Integrity: preventing corruption through pro-active police management. The Chief of Police, 20, 31-32.

22. Robinson, P. (2004, August). Shared Responsibility: The next step in professional ethics [Electronic Version]. The Police Chief, vol. 71, no. 8.

23. Trautman, N., (2000). Police Code of Silence Facts Revealed. Paper presented at the Legal Officers Section Annual Conference International Association of Chiefs of Police.

24. U.S. Department of Justice (2005). Enhancing police integrity. NIJ Research in Brief (NCJ Publication No. 209269). Washington, D.C.: Klockars, C., Ivkovich, S., & Haberfeld, M.

25. U.S. Department of Justice (2000). Police Attitudes Toward Abuse of Authority: Findings from a National Study. NIJ Research in Brief (NCJ 181312). Washington, DC:

26. Klockars, C. B., Ivkovich, S.K., & Haberfeld, M. R. (December, 2005). Enhancing police integrity. National Institute of Justice. www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij. Retrieved on May 24, 2010.