"Troubled" officers create difficult to overcome obstacles when developing a unified vision for the country. Accountability among bad actors isn't something we can take lightly as it is a primary trust issue that reverberates throughout our society. Whether we are talking about capital riots or anarchists taking to the streets, our very fabric of society requires maximum trust in our institutions and their ability to hold the Constitution and Universal Justice in high regard.
Great officers are remembered for their helpfulness, politeness and their use of wisdom when enforcing the law or coaching others to act appropriately. They are honored members of our communities and are those that create bridges among people and enhance trust in the system. On the opposite end of the spectrum officers that violate basic norms of society and engage in criminal misconduct without accountability quickly erode that trust.
Law enforcement has been politicized by both sides of the political spectrum. Right and wrong are seen through a partisan lens that limits the ability of people to think about the bigger picture of how law enforcement should and could function within our state and our country. Simply stumbling along the same path with our eyes closed and our ears covered no long works for the vast majority of Americans๐๐๐.
Building trust rests on acting trustworthy and with integrity so as to encourage interaction. If someone is trusted it is because they have exhibited consistent good judgment and sound morality (i.e. not abusing, lying, misleading, harassing, etc...). When trust is broke it doesn't just impact impact that specific interaction but also the perceptions of community (i.e. branding of the system as ineffective and unjust).
Sometimes an example might help formalize a "bad apple's" behavior. An officer has been rumored to engaged in all types of dishonest and destructive behaviors. These include things like 1. targeting and intimidating minorities, 2. groping young ladies on arrest, 3. alleged raping of a drunk underage girl, 4. illegal investigations based on self-interest, 5. corruption and 6. false witnesses on the stand, 7. associated with hate group members, 8.) encouraging White radicalism, etc...
Remember: These are only accusations and rumors at the moment. They are not necessarily true!
Anyone can throw an accusation but not everyone can support it; nor should victims be required to do the work that should be done by a trustworthy system. It is up to the internal mechanisms to take this information and investigate these claims to ensure there is no substantive nature to them (in an unbiased manner). The information provided by a fair and impartial review would determine what the next course of action should be (terminate employment, prosecute, etc...)
Important Point: An unbiased investigation is what makes it possible to determine truth from falsehood and know where the grey areas exist.
If these complaints are shared from multiple sources (i.e. raising validity) it is important to consider the possibility that such rumors may (and often do) have a kernel of truth to them. Rumors have power and investigating when issues arise helps to determine the risk factors involved. Not knowing these also means there is a high potential that that the problem could arise again, again, and again causing more damage (Who becomes liable for intentional ignoring "bad apple" behavior".
Important Choice: Multiple sources could be an indication of widespread behavior or purposeful misinformation. It is important enough for entities with integrity to launch an investigation.
What you don't want is consistent inconsistency in the application of law (i.e. systematic injustice). This occurs when there are systemic problems that have been ignored because they are embedded into the culture of enforcement. Each problem is seen from the same cultural, religious, and/or racial vantage points (i.e. a biased perception of what an "American" looks like) which skews all decision making throughout the entire system (i.e. the need for diversity in law enforcement).
Important Point: Consistent inconsistency in the application of law leads to systemic injustice.
If you spend some time in different groups of people and listen to their stories you can hear how many distrust the Justice System (Its only an observation). You will hear the same themes over and over throughout different people in different communities (i.e. why BLM appealed to multiple communities). They don't feel as though the justice system is concerned with their needs and applied fairly. They may respect law enforcement but don't believe at the end of the day their lives, concerns, and needs are respected (i.e. lowering the value of life).
 |
| Gallop Poll, 2020 |
Important Point: Lack of faith in the application of law/policing seems to be a common theme for a simple majority of 52% (Brenan, 2020).
What you will also notice from this poll is that confidence of policing rose by Republicans to 82% while it dropped by Democrats to 28%. Of course that was prior to the capital riots so it is possible these percentages have changed. There is a risk that policing is increasingly being seen as helpful to a particular cause, race, or political need and that could be very dangerous for future institutional trust that could lead to more violence and protests (Notice from that Poll that the Military 72% and Small Business 75% are trusted by Americans ๐).
Important Point: Politicizing policing as pro or anti certain groups could lead to more violent riots in the future.
Failure of leadership means a failure on the ground. Poor policies on the leadership level often means poor results on the ground as values, beliefs, and methods are shared among connected entities. Enhancing trust in communities relies in part on the development of a national leadership structure that moves beyond partisan politics and into a more bi-partisan image of our future (i.e. same poll indicates people trust Congress 6% Great Deal and 7% Quite Along leaving 83% in the Some and Very Little categories.๐ฑ)
Important Point: As partisan and racial/ethnic/religious differences in justice occur (lack of Universal Justice) we will find increase in faction as the justice system becomes an extension of political distrust.
What we often find is that there are two sets of laws at work. Those who engage coordinated ethnic/racial/religious based hate crimes are also often involved in other entitlement behaviors. While the law may be written the same it isn't applied the same. One might "turn a blind eye" to the law for some and maximize punishments for others thereby inadvertently tuning others into what will and what won't be enforced.
Important Point: As a nation, if we are going to get serious about our constitution, our national purpose, thwart extremism, and be an economic beacon of equality then we will need to think about "universal justice" where application is the same.
Social Contracts: The US has the Bill of Rights and the UN has the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that stand as social contracts by which people willingly agree that as long as these are upheld they will work within the current geopolitical system. While these documents are well known among the international community and the political class, local law enforcement doesn't have sufficient training to understand how that functions in everyday life (Long term social stability requires us to hold these social contracts in high regard).
Possible Solutions: Spreading the American brand of economic opportunity and universal rights starts right at our doorstep. Universalizing justice restores trust, reduces societal factions, and increases economic engagement. That may require new leadership in our communities and nation as what we know to be right is sidelined by political persuasion and past poor policy. Our international influence rests on how we handle these issues here.
Transparency and Public Review: Creating transparency in the Information Age will rest on reporting information to the public as a feedback loop and as an opportunity for outside review and analysis. As more data/information is available for public consumption, it ensures transparency to individuals/groups, researchers, government and international stakeholders. The ability to have confidence that current institutions are meeting the needs of people means providing the information that leads to effective metrics and feedback loops.
Side note: This is being written as not for or against policing as the institution is necessary to protect life and liberty. I know great officers and I know people abused by poor officers. What I can say is that I hope we solve this problem so that our nation can fulfill its destiny and lead other countries into a new era of economic and social prosperity. Its time for the silent center and bi-partisanship to be our vanguard forward.
Brenan, M. (August 12, 2020). Amid Pandemic, Confidence in Key U.S. Institutions Surges. Gallop https://news.gallup.com/poll/317135/amid-pandemic-confidence-key-institutions-surges.aspx
