In 1996, Len Davis, a former officer with the New Orleans Police Department was sentenced to death for the murder of Kim
Groves. Groves had the misfortune of witnessing Davis and another officer brutalize a 17-year-old. She sealed her fate by
making a formal complaint to the police department. Davis, who was no stranger to excessive force complaints, arranged for
her murder through a criminal contact. This was one of many incidents of corruption and unethical behavior with which NOPD
had to contend. Other departments including Miami, Los Angeles and New York City have also been humiliated by corruption in
the past. Many good officers on those departments had to withstand the fallout from a handful of senseless criminal activities
perpetrated by thugs with badges.
There are people in this country who would quickly point out that most peace officers have no ethics. More reasonable people
would contend law enforcement officials are generally ethical with only a few reprobates here and there. An integral part
of any law enforcement agency is the ethics with which it polices. While policies, procedures and departmental priorities
may differ in degrees, law enforcement ethics must remain etched in stone. Without it the community in which it serves will
have little or no confidence in its officers.
As law enforcement officers, we see the day to day activities of our brothers and sisters in uniform. Most of us are out
there every day doing a tough job in the worst of circumstances and are still able to do the right thing most of the time.
That says a lot for the law enforcement community. Unfortunately, the public rarely hears about our good decisions and all
too often are deluged with news reports of bad ones.
According to author Oscar Wilde, "Morality, like art, means you have to draw a line someplace." We are called upon to ‘draw
a line’ in every decision we make and action we take. The squinted eyes of scrutiny by the media and the public are
always cast in our direction. Few jobs in this country garner as much haughty examination as law enforcement officers. It
just goes with the territory.
Take a look around you. We live in a world that is plagued with immorality and unethical activities: Pornography, sexual
crimes, fraud, lying, cheating, stealing, hate crimes, terrorism and murder are in the headlines every day throughout this
nation. Our culture is beguiled with the tantalizingly juicy fodder that our media broadcast and print. When a cop screws
up, it’s gobbled up by the public. Moreover, the actions of a sullied few are used against every decent peace officer
in the United States.
Corruption in law enforcement is nothing new nor unique. Sadly, too often when there is a problem it has taken on a life
of its own before actions are taken and changes are made. The Knapp Commission hearings, made famous by New York City police
officer Frank Serpico’s whistle blowing campaign to end corruption, found corruption was so rampant that NYPD officers
were labeled as either "grass eaters" (petty, peer pressured corruption) or "meat eaters" (major premeditated corruption).
The Christopher Commission, created after the Rodney King incident, found that excessive force complaints were frequently
alleged against members of the Los Angeles Police Department. To be fair, certainly not every officer nor a majority of officers
in New York City or Los Angeles are corrupt or use excessive force, but in the eyes of some in the public one bad cop means
the whole department is corrupt. The adage ‘perception is reality’ plays a massive role in the public’s
view of law enforcement activities.
The consequences of unethical behavior are innumerable. When an officer decides to go against departmental policies and
procedures, break the law or violate civil rights, he or she is inviting reprimands, suspensions, loss of reputation, demotions,
loss of employment, career suicide, lawsuits or a prison term. The officer’s family and friends are in for a difficult
time to be sure. The department will suffer too: morale will plummet, members of the department will endure ridicule and additional
review by the public or oversight entities, and the community it serves will lose confidence and likely become apathetic to
any legitimate police concerns. Being unethical can best be described as "a minor acquisition at a major cost."
A few years ago, I was attending an ethics seminar conducted by a highly credentialed Missouri police chief. Many of the
issues he discussed were on point, but he made a comment that gave me pause. He was comparing fire departments and police
agencies in their handling of media coverage. Ultimately, the chief explained, the reason fire departments get good press
and police departments do not is because fire departments have good public relations abilities. While fire departments may
have good PR skills, I couldn’t disagree more with the good chief. The reason fire departments get good press is because
they put out fires and drag people out of burning buildings. Police departments get bad press because we write tickets, make
arrests and investigate people suspected of committing crimes. Nothing in that toxic mixture is going to get the public to
love us. Add to those things any unethical activities and our public relations problems increase exponentially.
How do decent peace officers and their administrators fight against the anti-law enforcement views held by some members
of the public and ravenous media perched ready to report police blunders? Certainly there is no avoiding some of it. It is
inherent in police work that we are going to anger people be watched more carefully than other public services. You can’t
issue citations or make arrests and expect everyone to be happy about it. Frankly it goes against human nature. Nothing makes
some people happier than to catch a cop breaking the law, especially when such a person has a video camera or tape recorder
in hand.
There is much we can do to help ourselves. Police officers have been accused of many crimes. Sadly, sometimes police officers
are guilty of committing criminal acts. In other cases the so-called injustices are simply a misunderstanding of police activities
or an intolerance of officer safety practices. What is more, occasionally police officers are accused of things they did not
do. The best defense to unethical behavior is simply don’t be part of it. When you see an ethics storm looming nearby,
don’t stand around and wait for it to strike, stop it if possible and by all means don’t participate.
How does a law enforcement professional consistently make ethical decisions? It’s easy to say, "Do the right thing
every time," but far less easy in practice. We may strive to be ethical, but on occasion the decision made in a moment comes
back to haunt us for a lifetime.
When you face an ethical dilemma, perhaps you should first put it through a test. In fact, put it to the "CARE" test. CARE
is an acronym for consider, assess, reinforce and effect.
Have you considered the ramifications of the intended decision or action?
Have you assessed the situation completely and ensured you have exhausted all other avenues of resolution?
Is your decision or action being reinforced by your professional ethics, departmental policies and existing laws?
Are you certain you are prepared to effect your decision or action?
By making decisions with those questions in mind we stand a far better chance of being ethical and the actions we’ve
taken are less likely to fail at the time of public scrutiny.
It’s hard to be perfect and certainly none of us are held to that standard; however, each of us is called upon to
be as reasonable, as professional and as ethical as possible. Draw your line, take a stand and be the honorable law enforcement
officer you know you are.
This article in abridged form appears in the November issue of American Police Beat, page 37.
