Unethical Behavior In Law Enforcement

The composition by recruiting officers is to manufacture loyalty and conformity by implying the craving to seek approval during training and later by experienced officers during their career. Leading officers frequently influence new recruits by their unethical behavior and poor decisions making. Many officers are aware of the wrong behaviors, while others justify their actions by the principles “us versus evil” that “justifies all that police do to control their turf, including righteous abuse of suspects and malcontents” (Crank, 1998). Most officers will follow their footsteps out of fear, rejection, and becoming cut off from the organization.

After reading all the material regarding Jeffery Bell, Darryl Forrest and Dustin Sillings all 3 whom were members of the Kansas City Police special unit known as (SCORE) Selective, Crime, Occurrence, Reduction Enforcement unit. I came up with several unethical behaviors throughout the course of the year from January 2010 to January 2011. One, all 3 officers violated the victims constitutional rights. Rights that were taken away were the freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures and not to have their property taken without due process under the law. (The Criminal Indictment: United States of America v. Jeffrey M. Bell, Darryl M. Forrest, and Dustin Sillings) Each officer took it upon themselves to steal various items including money from

After the civil war, local politicians rewarded their supporters with jobs as police officers. The officer were not trained and there was not a standard to become an officer. The are were event when entire departments were involved in misconduct and corruption. There was not much hope in this era because there was a lack of supervision that allowed officers to behave the way that they pleased. (Walker, Samuel, and Richards, M. 1996)

Toxic leadership, likely found in all agencies at some point, and the general awareness of toxic leaders with whom individual officers have worked, makes this a real problem for law enforcement agencies. Knowing the root and cause of this type of leadership helps develop understanding on the part of those that can effect a change in leadership within an agency. Comprehending the methods by which such environments develop and their negative impact on the agency as a whole - via individual officers’ experiences, opens the doors on hidden collusion that destroy morale.

There have been several studies and implemented policies within agencies all over the world directed to prevent and deter police misconduct / corruption. In the early 1990s, the Mollen Commission of Inquiry revealed a serious police corruption problem in the New York City Police Department (NYPD). One of the key recommendations of the commission was that their internal investigative structure the Internal Affairs Bureau (IAB) be reconstituted as it had failed to effectively tackle the problem. Almost a decade since the establishment of a new IAB, it is hailed as a noteworthy example of how such a structure should operate if police corruption is to be adequately dealt with. (Newham, 2003).

The Miami River Cops scandal was an unfortunate blemish on the Miami Police Department’s reputation. Many factors contributed to the 100 plus police officers involvement, three of the most significant being; corrupt leadership, personal greed, and victimless crimes. The Miami Police Department responded tenaciously to the corruption by establishing measures with the aim of preventing such rampant corruption in the future. As shocking as the Miami River Cops corruption scandal may seem, it is certainly not the only case of police corruption to happen within the United States. Another equally shocking case of police corruption occurred in Cleveland, Ohio when 44 officers from five law enforcement agencies were charged with corruption stemming from narcotics.

Police officers are trained to read, write and analyze numbers. They are also trained how to handle firearms, identify non-lethal weapons, use defensive tactics effective, conduct search and seizure, driving techniques, investigate criminal acts and the laws of arrest, but how many police take a course on ethical conduct or learn the meaning of sworn oath? Some police officer feel ethics is not important and training is of low – priority. Law enforcement officers take oaths creates an ethical landmine. Officers have to weigh their personal values against colleague demands that may develop a hostile environment and cause ethical issues to flourish. When police officers demonstrate unethical practices, negative issues occur. Corruption scandals are painful reminders that officers need more

In a survey 52% of police officers said it is common for law enforcement officials to disregard the inappropriate conduct of other officers. While 61% of officers claimed they usually do not report serious abuse that they have directly witnessed by colleagues. Yes, we all know that there are always going to be a few corrupt and unethical people within every profession, but these statistics show that within the police officer profession there are far more than a few corrupt and unethical

Corruption within the New York Police Department is a quickly growing phenomenon; to an extent, this is largely due to the cop culture that encourages silence and draws the line at honesty. The good, honest officers are afraid to speak up against co-workers and in the process become corrupt themselves. When police departments were first established in the mid-nineteenth century, corruption quickly followed suit. It began with minor acts of misconduct and today deals with serious criminal activities. Scholars have noted that there is a strong correlation between the officers taking part in corrupt acts and officers wanting to fit in with the culture. In this paper, I argue that the deeper an officer in the New York police department gets into the police culture, the more likely it is that they become involved in narcotic corruption

Recently the US Department of Justice revealed its findings following a request by current Baltimore City Mayor, Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, in light of the Freddie Gray incident. According to the Baltimore Sun, the results detail gross violations of the civil rights of Baltimore City residents by the Baltimore Police Department. The probe also indicated numerous unethical policing practices by the Baltimore Police Department that was targeted at specific city demographics.

Police executives have always had different issues within the police department. Most police executives try to find a quick fix in order to solve the issue of police misconduct. Police misconduct is defined as inappropriate action taken by police officers in relation with their official duties (Police Misconduct Law & Legal Definition, n.d.). In order to solve this issue, one must acknowledge their different challenges, overcome the “code of silence”, and find out the role of organizational culture.

When this loyalty to the subculture becomes too strong, the unity that follows can adversely affect the ethical values of the officers (Martin 2011). This type of work environment causes officers to feel like they are doing what is wanted by their organizations and the public and the officers may continue with the behavior because the pressure to produce results is greater than that to follow the rules. A law enforcement department might choose to punish an individual, but the fear of punishment usually is not enough to change unwanted behavior (Martin 2011).

In this country we are seeing an increase in ethical violations in the field of law enforcement. I will go into detail about some of the main ethical issues we are seeing today and what can be done to prevent such acts from happening. When one officer is being unethical it has a huge effect on how the public views law enforcement as a whole. Many officers go undetected for a long time before getting caught, but an officer committing ethical violations will have their day it’s just a matter of time. In order to improve this growing problem we must first understand why there is such a problem in the field of law enforcement.

Some argue that corrupt police officers are simply the product of a corrupt culture of the agency they work for. These officers are socially introduced to a number of informal rules when they begin employment. This process and these rules serve two main purposes. First, this process is designed to minimize the chances of external or internal controls being mobilized to address the behaviors and, secondly, to keep corrupt activities at a level that is acceptable and likely undetectable. The rule most often referred to in this connection, is the “Code of Silence.” Officers are socialized into not cooperating with investigations regarding fellow officers. Whether or not the officer participates in corrupt activities for financial gain, an officer’s adherence to the “Code of Silence” places them squarely amongst the corrupt of the profession (Price, 1972).

These types of misconduct arise throughout police jobs that include routine procedures such as traffic stops, ticket writing, directing traffic, and discouraging potential threats to those in their community. What often go unnoticed, though, are the undercover works and the corruptions that go on within a department. The four terms associated with these conflicting values are deviance, which is behavior inconsistent with the norms, values, or ethics, corruption, which is forbidden acts involving misuse of office for gain, misconduct, which is the violation of departmental procedures, and favoritism which is unfair “breaks” to friends or relatives.