Injustice and Criminal Justice

History proves that there are biases or perceived biases when conducting investigations on inter-departmental law enforcement officials. This essay is necessary to investigate and research these biases, explain why having external agencies conduct criminal and administrative investigations of a criminal nature regarding allegations of law enforcement officials on-duty and off-duty conduct should be a law and moved into legislation immediately. These criminal allegations are not specific to any criminal offense and should be open to the possibility of considering any and all potential criminal actions by law enforcement personnel—up to and including DUI, Domestic Assaults, shootings, fights, car crashes, drug use, and more.

It is fact that most criminal activity committed by a law enforcement officer goes unreported. For example, when looking at Domestic Assaults, law enforcement personnel hold the highest rate nationally. However, as we know, domestic violence goes unreported more often than it gets reported. A lot of times, it is common for victims of domestic violence to only seek assistance or shelter if they are easily able to prove the crime (Romero, 2019). This is even more true for a victim of domestic violence at the hands of a law enforcement officer—victims of these types of abusers are seldom looked at as victims, and their case is handled solely by individuals that work closely to their abuser creating an obvious bias.

“Law enforcement officers have specialized training, a badge, a gun and the backing of an entire police community that extends past their own agency. Domestic Violence victims of a police officer are particularly vulnerable because the officer who is abusing them: has a gun, knows the location of battered women’s shelters, and knows how to manipulate the system to avoid penalty and / or shift blame to the victim,” (Romero, 2019). For these reasons, it is extremely dire that light is shed on criminality of law enforcement officers—whether that be in regard to romantic relationships held off duty that go astray, or drunken late-night drives, or a fight that occurs off-duty, or whatever the case may be that would lead any other individual in society to ascertain a misdemeanor or a felony conviction. Having an unbiased entity, completely separate from the Department and organization in which they have created a home for their career is essential in ensuring that justice is properly served when necessary.

When a crime is otherwise committed within the community, an individual as the victim or party in the case can request records through a public records request. When a law enforcement officer commits a crime, not only does the crime get added into the public records database—but also to their personnel file because of the fact that it is handled in house. State and municipalities will not release any information in most cases to a victim of a crime within the State of Alaska, even if they are a party in the case, because of their close proximity to the case, and obvious perceived or true biases. This does not make this a legal course of action, but it is what has been socially accepted previously. Having an unbiased agency handle criminal and administrative investigations of a criminal nature, would release the Departments from any liability of releasing the records in regard to the officer.

In an interview with James Lopez (2021), the Deputy Inspector General with the Texas Department of Public Safety, the requirements for releasing these records differ significantly from the State of Alaska. Requested information is released in the State of Texas per the Texas Government Code, Chapter 552.001 which gives the public a right to access government records. Lopez (2021) further explained that all government information is presumed to be available to the public—exceptions may apply to the disclosure of some information (e.g., requiring certain records to contain redacted information, such as social security numbers, dates of birth, etc.) but all other information is considered public record.

Typically, there is a societal image that comes along with being a police officer and most of the time police officers do live up to that image. However, when a victim of a crime at the hands of a law enforcement officer speaks up, they challenge this image—the image of the “personal family, but they also challenge the concept of the police family as well … When domestic violence occurs in a police home, police departments choose to keep the incident a family secret and deal with it in-house,” (Romero, 2019). Dealing with criminal conduct by one of your own in-house can lead to friends, co-workers, superiors, and so forth investigating the crime with an obvious bias. If this case were to be handed off to an external agency to investigate criminally and administratively, regardless of if charges were to be brought or not, it would eliminate any perceived or obvious biases. Another likely scenario is if a department is aware that the seriousness of the accusations could be career ending, is it plausible to assume that they would handle the case in-house in order to cover up the crime? When an officer goes home, departments will turn a blind eye to what occurs off-duty the majority of the time—unless these actions see the light of day through newspapers or media sources.

When an officer with a criminal complaint open against them has a history of appropriately handling their professional business without complaint, does it matter what they do when they go home? It should. Trooper Kamau Leigh with the Alaska State Troopers stated in an interview in 2020 that when it comes to criminal offenses conducted by a law enforcement officer, a lot of times if it involves one of their own it has been proven that fellow officers will be less likely to report the crime if they cannot trust their leadership not to brush the crime under the rug. In this instance, the crime continues to go unreported by a law enforcement officer knowledgeable of the crime until a trustworthy and unbiased entity is found. There is no question that good cops hate bad cops more than the general population, however the law enforcement community is tightly knit and there are biases in every which way you turn.

A way to help alleviate the silo effect so often seen in law enforcement (e.g., the blue wall or the blue line—when a victim stands up against a law enforcement officer) is to have an entity entirely outside of the department investigate the crime. Upon completion of interviews with several state agencies from Texas, Alaska, Washington and California—a common theme was found. Having a separate entity (whether that be a separate agency, or a dedicated silo of individuals unaware of the individual entirely and from elsewhere in the State) to investigate crimes conducted in an off-duty form by their law enforcement officers was found to be necessary; however, there was one outlier. Alaska. Specifically, unless it is requested that an external agency reviews the crimes for prosecution, the State of Alaska would not have any external agencies review internal criminal investigations.

Lopez (2021) stated that, “arrests or complaints made of department employees by outside agencies are criminally investigated by the arresting agency.” By having an external agency handle these complaints and arrests, it relieves the department from any perceived biases as the case either does or does not go to prosecution. Within the State of Alaska, differing from the State of Texas, the Alaska Bureau of Investigation (ABI) is held within the ranks of the Alaska State Troopers and is employed solely by the Department of Public Safety (DPS)—therefore, all investigators with the ABI are troopers employed by DPS. In order for the State of Texas to eliminate the obvious conflict of interest that is present in Alaska, between DPS and ABI, the Texas Department of Public Safety will bring in either the Criminal Investigations division or will bring in the Texas Rangers to investigate the complaint according to Texas Highway Patrol Captain, Tim Simmons. Additionally, if there is a conflict of interest perceived or confirmed within a local CI or Ranger in regard to the investigation the Texas DPS will bring in individuals from another location within the state to conduct the investigation. This would be the last option before asking the FBI to step in and handle the investigation or asking another state agency to assist.

An anticipated question by the State of Alaska, would be why would we need to have a separate entity or department to conduct investigations when they already have a separate division (still under DPS) to do so? Texas Department of Public Safety officials stated that unless a case warranted federal review, it would not leave the jurisdiction of the DPS. The main difference between Texas and Alaska, however, is that Texas has several other entities they are afforded to bring in. Based on conversations, the Criminal Investigations division is essentially outside of the DPS and the Texas Rangers are separate from the rest of DPS and DPS is willing to bring in individuals from around the state that do not have any knowledge of the individual being investigated in order to elevate any biases (confirmed or perceived). Alaska will have ABI within DPS conduct all of their investigations. This includes partnering and assisting everyday Troopers from around the state in handling more complex cases, and participating on the Special Emergency Reaction Team (SERT)—thus creating relationships with law enforcement personnel all over the state.

The main concern for creating a separate entity, separate from any state or local law enforcement agencies, would be the significant cost associated with the creation of such an organization and would require the approval and funding from legislation. If, however, an entity were to be created, the cost would be significantly less if prior law enforcement officials were hired into the positions of investigators in this entity because of the prior training already done for these individuals. The biases of hiring strictly prior law enforcement officials into these roles though, would be mitigated through hiring out of state applicants along with internal state retirees and separated individuals. Much like the Washington State Police hiring processes bring in law enforcement officials from around the United States, to promote their internal applicants without bias (Bloom, 2021). The biases could also be limited within this agency by swearing an oath or giving testimony to not having any personal or professional relation to the individual in which they are to investigate. Or it would be possible to hire civilians into these positions and offer them similar training to law enforcement investigators to conduct these investigations, the only stipulation perceived by Lopez (2021) would be that changes to the law would need to be made in order to provide civilian law enforcement investigators the authority to investigate and / or make arrests. This learner does not believe that these individuals would be necessary for the arrests, but yes, for the investigations.

In this case the argument could be raised that without being law enforcement personnel, how can we trust these individuals to thoroughly investigate and hold individuals accountable for their actions? Or how will this entity affect personnel and employment within the department itself? The answers are quite simple actually. Have you ever heard of Human Resources or of the Office of Professional Standards? If you have, then you can understand how an individual that is not a law enforcement officer can investigate criminal accusations of law enforcement personnel. The Office of Professional Standards and Human Resources within the State of Alaska’s Department of Public Safety is employed solely by civilians, as is many other state agencies. The qualifications that go into the position descriptions for HR or OPS would be essentially the same—the only difference would be that this third-party entity could propose criminal charges against a law enforcement officer (much the same as the Department of Law civilian attorneys do) and would not be tied any one department to alleviate any and all perceived biases. The investigators would either anonymously take in complaints, meaning the investigators identity would be anonymous until an unbiased individual was matched with the case, or there would be a separate screening team for the intake of complaints. To answer the second question, it would not affect current employees at all unless they decided to apply to work in these positions—as it would not affect Department budgetary requirements because it would not be part of the Department.

In an article by Leigh Goodmark (2016), police responded to a domestic violence

incident involving a law enforcement officer and his wife. When the wife was able to exit the residence because the law enforcement officer fled up the stairs upon police arrival, the fleeing officer reached out the second story window and shot and killed his wife who was leaving the house. The spokesman for the department had insisted that the 20-year law enforcement veteran did not receive special treatment, but then stated, “the minute he fired at that young lady and our police officers—he was treated as a suspect,’ … When he fired a shot, Smith became a suspect—but apparently not before.” Could the officers responding to the scene for help have stopped this incident from occurring, had they been willing to treat their fellow officer as a suspect at the time they would have treated anyone else that way? This is a dramatic and quite illustrating visual of the preferential treatment that law enforcement officials receive by their own agency. It is clear that current policies and protocol to mitigate abuse by law enforcement officers are ineffective (Mennicke & Ropes, 2016). Not only are the policies currently in place ineffective in eliminating off-duty criminal conduct by officers regarding domestic violence, but the perception that a law enforcement officer can commit a crime and not be held accountable is unacceptable.

Goodmark (2016) explains: “That the shooting was sudden and took the responding officers by surprise, ‘you’re not expecting to go to a home of a police officer, someone you work side by side with, who engages you in a gun battle.’” Goodmark then states, “Perhaps police should have expected the worst.” (2016) Treating offenders and abusers with biased respect, honor, trust or any other feelings that would cause them not to pull their weapons when they would do so for anyone else in society—needs to stop. A law enforcement officer that commits a crime of a criminal nature is no different than anyone else that would commit a criminal offense.

“During the pendency of an internal investigation, an agency may place involved officers on administrative leave or reassignment should they be determined to pose a risk to themselves, the agency, or the community; should their presence become disruptive to the successful completion of the investigation; or if the agency determines that termination is likely.” (U.S. Department of Justice) It is most certainly not a waste of time to ask a higher-level agency or another state agency to handle a situation, because victims have rights as well. Police departments routinely see the assailants rights and are required to preserve those rights with the possibility of the case being thrown out if they are not—however, the victims’ rights are not a forethought.

This is a call to action, and something must be done to hold criminal law enforcement officials to justice if it is necessary. This learner believes every law enforcement agency should conduct investigations by a separate entity when investigating criminal allegations of their own personnel—in which case, laws, statues, employment codes, arrest codes, would need to be re-written, but look at the lack of liability it would bring for the department if the department were to implement it. As well as the justice it will bring for victims in these situations, even if no criminal charges are brought they will know that their case was treated the same way as any other case would have been handled.

References

a. Bloom, T. (2021) Interview: Captain of the Oregon State Police.

b. Chezum, N. (2019, June 24). Officer Involved Domestic Violence: A Survivor Story. Retrieved from https://ncadv.org/blog/posts/officer-involved-domestic-violence-a-survivor-story

c. Goodmark, L. (2015). Hands up at home: Militarized masculinity and police officers who commit intimate partner abuse. Brigham Young University Law

Review, 2015(5), 1183-1246. Retrieved from

http://library.capella.edu/login?qurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.proquest.com%2Fscholarly-journals%2Fhands-up-at-home-militarized-masculinity-police%2Fdocview%2F1837554359%2Fse-2%3Faccountid%3D27965

d. Mennicke, A. M., & Ropes, K. (2016, December). Estimating the rate of domestic violence perpetrated by law enforcement officers: A review of methods and estimates [Scholarly project]. In Science Direct. Retrieved March 15, 2021, from https://www-sciencedirect-

com.library.capella.edu/science/article/pii/S1359178916301331?via%3Dihub

e. N. (n.d.). National Statistics. Retrieved March 15, 2021, from

https://ncadv.org/STATISTICS

f. Leigh, K. (2020) Interview: Alaska Department of Public Safety, State Trooper.

g. Llopis, G. (2013, November 4). The 4 Most Effective Ways Leaders Solve Problems. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/glennllopis/2013/11/04/the-4-most-effective-ways-leaders-solve-problems/?sh=49bde744f974

h. Lopez, J. (2021) Interview: Texas Department of Public Safety Inspector General Office.

i. Romero, S. N. (2019, Dec 07). When law enforcement police their own: Policies lack for officers accused of domestic violence. Visalia Times - Delta / Tulare Advance -Register Retrieved from

http://library.capella.edu/login?qurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.proquest.com%2Fnews papers%2Fwhen-law-enforcement-police-their-

own%2Fdocview%2F2322336268%2Fse-2%3Faccountid%3D27965

j. Simmons, T. (2021) Interview: Texas Department of Public Safety Highway Patrol Division.

k. Song, J. K. (1999, Oct 15). Returning guns to accused police officers criticized: Domestic-violence groups decry exemptions allowing law enforcement officers accused of abuse to carry their firearms on duty. Honolulu Star - Bulletin Retrieved from

http://library.capella.edu/login?qurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.proquest.com%2Fnews papers%2Freturning-guns-accused-police-officers-

criticized%2Fdocview%2F412298023%2Fse-2%3Faccountid%3D27965

l. Ostapovich, V., Barko, V., Okhrimenko, I., Yevdokimova, O., Ponomarenko, Y., Prontenko, K., . . . Bloshchynskyi, I. (2020). Psychological profile of successful criminal police officer. International Journal of Applied Exercise Physiology, 9(3),

120- 133. doi:http://dx.doi.org.library.capella.edu/10.26655/UAEP.2020.3.27

m. U.S. Department of Justice. (n.d.). Standards and Guidelines for Internal Affairs: Recommendations from a Community of Practice. Retrieved March 15, 2021, from https://cops.usdoj.gov/RIC/Publications/cops-p164-pub.pdf