|
|
Site NavigationHomeAbout us People's Police Report Shootings & deaths Cool links Other Information Contact info Donate
|
Rapping Back #20: Swapping stories of sensationalism, scandal and strategy by society's servants of "safety" Police Welcome New Chief, Not His Vision In the February Rap Sheet, incoming Portland Police Chief Mark Kroeker repeated his vision for the Bureau. His ad-campaign-style slogan states the Bureau's goals are: "1. To reduce crime and the fear of crime; 2. To improve the quality of life in neighborhoods; and 3. To improve the community and police relationship." To his credit, Kroeker added comments that the Bureau should be "deeply ingrained with respect for fellow human beings inside and outside the organization" and should be "an organization where corruption of all kinds is eliminated, and where a sense of organizational family exists, but not at the expense of public inclusion." In a fascinating and lengthy rebuttal to the Chief's vision included in the same issue, Officer Stephen Mosier of the Telephone Report Unit explained that much of the Chief's proposal falls outside the authority of police officers. He notes that to reduce crime and the fear of crime, the police would have to be empowered to address the "varied legal, economic, social, cultural, moral and religious factors which are often cited" as causes of crime. But, he adds, since the police are not part of the legislative branch of government which decides which laws to institute, and are not part of the judicial branch which determines how to deal with criminals, they cannot alone meet this goal. He also cites economic factors that contribute to crime, including interest rates and inflation, noting "the perception that every family must have two bread winners...is not something the bureau can change." Mosier clearly addresses the limitations of police influence on crime: "We should not look at a dip in the crime rate and claim credit for causing it th[r]ough our efforts any more than we should view a rise in crime as being caused by us through our lack of effort." He notes that police are only given the power to investigate criminal suspects, arrest them, and deliver them to the justice system. "If we lose sight of that and errantly begin to see 'the reduction of crime' as our duty and are then, unable by our best efforts to cause crime rates to fall, we will increase the likelihood that eventually well-intended officers will come to see it as their 'duty' to step outside the bounds of their lawful authority and begin to trespass upon the rights of citizens whose rights they have sworn to protect." On the issue of improving neighborhoods, he notes the Police Bureau's only duty in that regard is to "remove criminals from those neighborhoods and to provid[e] traffic safety...and similar activities directly related to the peace and safety of the citizenry." Finally, regarding improving the relationship between the police and the community, Mosier believes that should be the Chief's #1 priority, rather than #3. He closes by repeating that police need not seek power that is inappropriate, but rather do their duty well and "earn the respect of the community they serve." Retired officer Duke Smith weighed in in the December issue, similarly criticizing the idea of a police mission statement as "a politician's theme song." Smith adds that "Police departments were formed for one purpose only--to protect the public from lawbreakers." We wonder how much the rank-and-file have differing ideas from the upper management of the PPB. We will be watching to see how the Chief's tenure unfolds (also see article in this issue). Why Wait? Rap Sheet Editor Says Police Should Always Shoot First Retired cop and editor Loren Christensen, back in fine form, wrote in the January Rap Sheet about the "action/reaction principle." Basically, it's a reminder to police that if someone takes an action, the officer's reaction will always be slower. So Christensen rattles off a list of helpful hints, such as staying at an arm's length from a suspect. He relates the story of David Grossi from Police Marksman magazine, who has gone to court "several times" to demonstrate the "action/reaction" principle. One example situation is when Grossi fires a "dummy gun" cotton ball at an officer who is expecting him to shoot, but in many cases Grossi "is able to turn 180 degrees and shoot the officer before the officer can get off a shot." Grossi's partner, Bill Lewinsky, a hostage negotiator, says "it may be impossible for the officer not to shoot even if the subject pointing the gun at him turns away as if to flee." Christensen explains that an officer's attention is not focused on the parts of the armed suspect's body that would indicate they are preparing to flee, but on the gun. "Here is where the situation gets unpleasant for the armed suspect and for the officer when the Monday morning quarterbacks start jumping up and down screeching that the cops didn't play fair...Once the officer's brain decides to shoot, it's virtually impossible to interrupt the completion of that action." The article goes on to describe how quickly suspects turn around (.24 seconds) versus how long it takes an officer to decide whether there is a threat and to shoot (.33 to 2.0 seconds). "In each test, the suspect would have been shot in the back because of his action of turning away was faster that the officer's reaction" (we ran similar info from Wound Ballistics Review, April 1997, in PPR 15).
Christensen's conclusion: "Tell people not to point guns at police officers, or anyone else, for that matter. And of course, there are always those brain-dead critics who say the police should wait for the suspect to fire first. Yeah, OK. We'll do that when yaks grow wings and fly." Since the Portland Police draw their guns on unarmed suspects on a regular basis, we recommend that we all live by the rules of not pointing guns at people, winged yaks or no. Shooter Cop Gives Sound Advice for Police Under Internal Affairs Scrutiny Lonn Sweeney (one of the cops involved in the 1992 shooting of 12-year-old Nathan Thomas and the man who held him hostage) weighed in on "the IA Beef" in January's Rap Sheet. Sweeney reports on the experience of dealing with Internal Affairs when accused of misconduct. He warns other officers not to have a "lax attitude": "remember, even if the event may not seem like a big deal, someone has made an allegation that you did something wrong." He reminds the Rap Sheet readers (the police) that IA is not out to "get them," but that their mission is to do fact finding so others can make a determination. Sweeney suggests not using profanity, though not necessarily because it is unprofessional. He says the use of foul language "has the potential to be in the headlines at some point," noting that "it may play well between officers to explain a point, but an IA interview is not the place for it." His second tip is to prepare for the interview by rereading reports of the incident ahead of time. Third: "Check the attitude at the door." While "the investigator assigned to IA would love to have the authority to decline frivolous and nuisance complaints, that is not within their power." Among the final thoughts he gives are ground breaking ideas: answer the question that was asked, don't speculate on an answer you don't know the answer to, and tell the truth. One wonders why police need to be reminded of these concepts. College Degrees for Cops May Slow Beatings Lt. Jeff Barker wrote a letter (appearing in the January Rap Sheet) in response to Rob Blanck's November column trashing the idea of college degrees for cops. Barker admits it limits the pool of applicants, but blames competition with the private sector for the real difficulties in hiring. "Being a cop ain't a job, it's a calling." The thought behind a 1970's contract provision for some college education, Barker says, is that "potential officers would know how to write better...would be exposed to basic sociology and psychology...some possible interaction with people who were different from themselves." "A national study showing that officers with college degrees are less likely to be involved in use of excessive force may mean something." Barker ends by scolding Blanck for "denigrating the new people hired today because they have a college degree. With all the other problems plaguing the Portland Police Bureau we certainly do not need to declare class warfare on each other."
|
April, 2000
|
|
Portland Copwatch Portland Copwatch is a grassroots, volunteer organization promoting police accountability through citizen action.
People's Police Report
#20 Table of Contents
|