Posted on Dec 14, 2019
Analysis: Why the U.S. Military Usually Punishes Misconduct but Police Often Close Ranks
1.91K
10
4
5
5
0
No "blue wall of silence:" A military lawyer explains why the US armed forces take accountability and justice seriously.
Analysis: Why the U.S. Military Usually Punishes Misconduct but Police Often Close Ranks
Posted from govexec.com
Law
Justice
Rules
Regulation
Accountability
Posted 5 y ago
Responses: 2
2
2
0
The article by “Human Rights Watch” was so wrong and anti police it’s almost comical. I was in the National Guard and activated for 21 months after 9-11. I was also a civilian police officer for 8 years before I had to retire in 2007 due to a work related injury. The reason why police officers support each other so much is because we are constantly being falsely accused of things we haven’t done. I can give countless examples. My department had cameras in our patrol cars my entire career. We also had them inside and outside our police department. I had people make excessive force or demeanor complaints against me at least ten times. I was cleared EVERY time because the video and audio showed they were lying.
And we don’t blindly support each other unconditionally “blue wall of silence” During my time as a police officer, other police officers were arrested for theft, domestic violence, and Dwi. Numerous others (including myself) were written up and either suspended or lost vacation time for violating rules or violating department policy. We need to complete a “use of force report” every time we get into any altercation that rises to striking or higher. The report is then reviewed by the senior detective, police chief, county prosecutors office, and then sent to the state attorney generals office.
Police “generally defend” each other because much like being in combat, most people don't know what it’s like to make a split second decision and then be second guessed by so many who weren’t there and were never in that situation. For example, I responded to an unwanted person who was drunk and punched someone. He ran into the woods behind the house prior to my arrival. It was after midnight and as I was searching for him, I saw him laying on the ground hiding behind a tree. When I told him to show his hands, he sprung up and pointed his cell phone at me. He wanted “suicide by cop.” It would of been a justified shooting because his actions implied he had a weapon and police do not need to be shot at first to use deadly force. It’s only because my flashlight was on his hands that I was able to see it was a cell phone. However if I did shot him, to the world I would have shot an unarmed person.
And we don’t blindly support each other unconditionally “blue wall of silence” During my time as a police officer, other police officers were arrested for theft, domestic violence, and Dwi. Numerous others (including myself) were written up and either suspended or lost vacation time for violating rules or violating department policy. We need to complete a “use of force report” every time we get into any altercation that rises to striking or higher. The report is then reviewed by the senior detective, police chief, county prosecutors office, and then sent to the state attorney generals office.
Police “generally defend” each other because much like being in combat, most people don't know what it’s like to make a split second decision and then be second guessed by so many who weren’t there and were never in that situation. For example, I responded to an unwanted person who was drunk and punched someone. He ran into the woods behind the house prior to my arrival. It was after midnight and as I was searching for him, I saw him laying on the ground hiding behind a tree. When I told him to show his hands, he sprung up and pointed his cell phone at me. He wanted “suicide by cop.” It would of been a justified shooting because his actions implied he had a weapon and police do not need to be shot at first to use deadly force. It’s only because my flashlight was on his hands that I was able to see it was a cell phone. However if I did shot him, to the world I would have shot an unarmed person.
(2)
(0)
TSgt Carl Jackson
Capt Gregory Prickett - that may be your experience but not mine. We were held to a high standard. We routinely had uniform and weapon inspections. Twice a year we qualified with our handgun, shotgun, and ASP. When we qualified with our weapons we also reviewed the attorney general “use of force” guidelines. Every police officer was 100% held accountable for every action taken and word that they spoke. Like I said earlier, when I was first hired we had wireless microphones on our uniforms and cameras in our cars. It was later upgraded to cameras on the uniforms that many departments have today. Every use of force was documented and reported. Every complaint was investigated and documented.
I’m from NJ and prior to getting hired every police officer is required to take a written test, pt test, background check (similar to getting a secret clearance), psychological evaluation, numerous interviews, then attend a police academy thats over 20 weeks long, Once you graduate you are assigned to a field training officer for 8-12 weeks. Then your on probation for 1-2 years during which you can be fired for any reason and the discretion of the chief and I have seen that happen numerous times.
And you mention the two civilians who were “minding there own business” when they were killed by the police. It sounds like the officers involved were investigated by the police and they were held accountable. The article in human rights watch implies that doesn’t happen in the civilian police force but it sounds like that’s exactly what happened in your example.
From my experience, an overwhelming percentage of civilian police are dedicated well trained people who sacrifice a lot to protect people. I have seen an officer killed and many others get bones broken while doing their job. Much like the military, civilian police see humanity at its worse. Murders, suicides, woman and children beaten, child abuse etc. Through it all, police are expected to be professional and held accountable for their actions.
I have also personally handcuffed another police officer for committing a crime and like I mentioned earlier, I have seen others arrested also. So like I said earlier, that article is 100% contrary to everything I have seen and experienced. Sounds like the culture at your department was different from mine.
I’m from NJ and prior to getting hired every police officer is required to take a written test, pt test, background check (similar to getting a secret clearance), psychological evaluation, numerous interviews, then attend a police academy thats over 20 weeks long, Once you graduate you are assigned to a field training officer for 8-12 weeks. Then your on probation for 1-2 years during which you can be fired for any reason and the discretion of the chief and I have seen that happen numerous times.
And you mention the two civilians who were “minding there own business” when they were killed by the police. It sounds like the officers involved were investigated by the police and they were held accountable. The article in human rights watch implies that doesn’t happen in the civilian police force but it sounds like that’s exactly what happened in your example.
From my experience, an overwhelming percentage of civilian police are dedicated well trained people who sacrifice a lot to protect people. I have seen an officer killed and many others get bones broken while doing their job. Much like the military, civilian police see humanity at its worse. Murders, suicides, woman and children beaten, child abuse etc. Through it all, police are expected to be professional and held accountable for their actions.
I have also personally handcuffed another police officer for committing a crime and like I mentioned earlier, I have seen others arrested also. So like I said earlier, that article is 100% contrary to everything I have seen and experienced. Sounds like the culture at your department was different from mine.
(0)
(0)
TSgt Carl Jackson
Everyone is welcome to their opinions but perceptions aren’t facts. People see what they want to see. If you have a anti police bias you will only see the bad in police officers. I’m guilty of the opposite. I always give the police the benefit of the doubt because I have been wrongly accused and judged several times. A overwhelming majority of police do not turn a blind eye to other officers who are excessive in their use of force. But I’m not trying to change anyone’s mind, I just wanted to defend my profession which from my perspective, was a very unfair article. However be careful with your generalizations. Police are hired not elected around me so I never seen any “political creatures.” When you talk about your “red flag”and “gang with badges,” it’s exactly why police rally and support each other because so many have an anti police bias. EVERY police officer I ever worked with would have unconditional given their life to save the life of any “civilian” including yours. And as I said earlier I worked with one who did.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
PO1 William "Chip" Nagel the military is held to a higher standard. We can’t afford any mistakes or we can lose lots of lives. The police close ranks because their accountability might be discredited by making this info public
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google