SO, WHO ARE THESE COPS WE KEEP HEARING ABOUT?
A disclaimer: I am not a cop. I don't even play one on TV. Having said that, I do know a little something about law enforcement. I even have friends in law enforcement, but my friends are not like the ones that keep making headlines these days.
Why would anyone want to be a cop? Why would anyone want a job paying the same as, or a little more than, a clerical position, especial one that could get you killed?
Although a few large departments across the country require a bachelors degree, the vast majority of police departments (and practically all small departments) require only a high school diploma or a GED (General Equivalency Diploma), which simply means you spent an hour or two passing a subject knowledge test. Then, of course, you enter an eight week or longer police academy program. Graduate from this certification program and, voila, you're a cop.
The relative ease and immediacy of employment, combined with public sector job security and a career path with medical and retirement benefits, might be a motivator for some individuals looking for a job. But wait, there's more: There are two personality characteristics, which can co-exist in the same person, at least one of which can be found in many, though not all, cops. The first of these is what is sometimes referred to as the “Type A” personality, which includes individuals who tend to be excitement or thrill seekers. The old saw, “Fools rush in where angels fear to tread” comes to mind. Don't misunderstand, this can be a positive, not a negative, trait; it is important to have a person who will ignore his own safety and rush into a burning building to save its occupants. But if coupled with poor impulse control or a lapse in judgment, such split-second decision-making can also have very unfortunate consequences.
The second personality characteristic is much less positive and creates far more problems than it solves; it is the need for power and control over others. This is the sneaky one, the one that cops never mention on their list of employment objectives. The badge and the uniform are the physical expression of power over others that is satisfying for such individuals. It is the challenge to this power and control that is so threatening. During the debacle in Ferguson, we could see in the videos and hear in the voices of the officers, “I have the power here,” “I am the law”, “You WILL do what I tell you”, and “I'll kill you if you don't.”
Many of the unfortunate and often headline-grabbing occurrences between cops and the citizens they serve and protect are directly related to the officers' perception that their power and control is being challenged by those citizens. Add the impulse control issues and/or judgment lapses and, again, it's easy to see why we have these serious and unwanted outcomes.
I have just returned from a civil trial in the U.S. District Court in Charleston, SC, where I testified for the plaintiff in a wrongful death suit. The case involved an on-duty uniformed officer (white) who shot and killed the former mayor (also white) of the town in which police department the officer was employed. This case embodies all that is wrong with law enforcement in South Carolina, and probably in the country as a whole. The particular circumstances of this case are presented below.
The officer, 41 years old, had been a police officer for some ten years. During that time---which included multiple stretches lasting several months during which the officer was either unemployed or was working outside of law enforcement---the officer was hired, then fired or let go, by no less than seven different police departments in the state. Dogged by repeated allegations of excessive use of force, a charge of CDV (Criminal Domestic Violence) against a live-in girlfriend, poor judgment, lying, failure to follow proper procedures, etc., etc., he went from job to job. He was working in the eighth department when the shooting took place, and had already been accused there on several occasions of using excessive force. One of those accusations came from an employee of the ex-mayor, who then expressed his concerns about the officer's behavior to the current mayor of the town.
I know, at this point, you're asking, “Why did people keep hiring this guy?” One of the hallmarks of the Antisocial Personality (also called Sociopathic or Psychopathic Personality) is the ability to make a good first impression on others. This good impression doesn't last and people realize, often after the damage is already done, that the person is undependable, unreliable, lies, doesn't do what he says he will do, and is never at fault; it's always someone else. It's said that the best lies are those that have a grain of truth. His reasons during employment interviews for his various terminations included statements like, “The Chief really liked me, but the mayor had it in for me.” “I refused to change my paperwork and say something that wasn't true.” “This other cop was jealous and kept telling lies about me.” “All the blacks on Council were mad 'cause I kept arresting their relatives.”
Except for one brief stint at a county sheriff's department, this officer worked exclusively in small to tiny departments in towns that were barely a wide spot on a well-traveled highway. His last town, which had no business or property tax income, relied on traffic tickets and fines for practically all the town's expenses, including the salaries of each town employee. This officer, in effect, was keeping the town on the map through his efforts. As has been said, “Don't kill the goose that lays the golden egg.”
These small towns don't pay a lot and offer very little incentive for young cops to work there, so they end up with desperate officers no one else wants.
Now for the circumstances surrounding the shooting: Bad blood between the ex-mayor and the officer may have involved competition over a woman; it did involve hubris over the allegation of excessive force against the ex-mayor's employee. According to reports of the activities prior to the shooting, there was a verbal confrontation in the Town Hall between the ex-mayor and the officer regarding the claim of excessive force. Following this meeting, the ex-mayor left and, shortly thereafter, so did the officer. Minutes later, on a dirt road within yards of the town hall, the officer had placed his police vehicle across the road, blocking the path of the ex-mayor in his vehicle.
Here, testimony from the officer and the facts (including forensic evidence) seem to clash. The officer stated that the two men were standing outside their vehicles talking when the ex-mayor, who was, of course, unarmed, attacked the officer, threw him to the ground and began pummeling him about the head and face. In self-defense, the officer drew his weapon, a 45 caliber Glock, and fired once, fatally wounding the ex-mayor. He then called the police chief on his radio saying “Officer needs assistance.”
The EMTs reported that when they arrived on scene, they observed the officer and the chief standing about one hundred feet away, making no attempt to approach the victim, who was still alive at that point. The later autopsy showed a bullet that entered the upper chest and traveled downward through the body, exiting from the lower back. This trajectory suggests it would have been extremely difficult to accomplish while lying on one's back being pummeled. A far more reasonable explanation would be from a standing position firing down at someone on his knees.
SLED ( the State Law Enforcement Division) concluded their investigation into this shooting without taking any action which, considering the law enforcement credo, is not surprising.
That brings us to consider something which might seem strange until you give it a little thought: The courts themselves are a prime example of, you guessed it, Law Enforcement. Prosecutors, District Attorneys, Judges, the entire court system, all embrace a law enforcement system in which the uniformed street patrolman is only the readily visible face. Each part of this system depends on every other part to run smoothly as an oiled whole and glitches are to be smoothed over if the system is to run as intended.
And finally: The thin blue line must be defended and it is fortunate that, as in Blackjack, a tie goes to the dealer.