Police And Courts: Above Or Bound By The Law?

Police officers are not above the law and are not given a free pass just because they are law enforcement officers. Whether on or off-duty, police officers must obey the law and can be punished for breaking it. However, there are certain circumstances in which police officers may be permitted to perform acts that would usually be illegal for private citizens. For example, exceeding speed limits or ignoring traffic lights when responding to an urgent call.

Police officers can be held accountable for their wrongdoing, misconduct, and illegal acts, such as domestic violence, hit and run, or any other crime. They can be sentenced to prison, pay fines, and be placed on probation. Additionally, police officers can violate an individual's civil rights through false arrests, illegal searches and seizures, use of excessive force, assault, racial profiling, and more.

While police officers have certain powers and exemptions, they are ultimately subject to the law and can face consequences for their actions.

Police breaking the law to enforce the law

In the United States, police officers are never permitted to break the law. However, the law grants them certain powers that may make other laws not applicable to them while performing their duties. For instance, police officers are allowed to use vehicles with sirens and lights, exceed speed limits, or ignore traffic lights and signs.

In some cases, police officers may be required to direct another person to commit an illegal act or participate in criminal activity themselves in order to further an investigation. This is especially true for undercover police operations, where officers may be authorised to engage in criminal activity to maintain their fictitious identities or gather evidence. For example, they may establish fencing businesses that pay cash for stolen goods, participate in money laundering, introduce drugs into prisons, or commit perjury.

While these acts of "authorised criminality" are considered justifiable and sometimes necessary, they are also secretive and unaccountable, conflicting with the basic premises of democratic policing. This practice raises fundamental questions about the limits of acceptable police conduct and can undermine social support for law enforcement.

The use of undercover police operations and sting operations, which involve deceiving suspects and may entail police engaging in criminal activity, poses serious ethical concerns. The nature and frequency of these operations are often not well-known, restricting public scrutiny and creating a risk of police abusing their powers.

In conclusion, while police officers are not permitted to break the law, they may be authorised to engage in certain activities that would typically be considered illegal for private citizens. These actions are justified as necessary for effective policing and gathering evidence, but they also raise complex ethical and legal questions that require further examination and regulation.

Police powers and their limits

Police officers are not above the law. They are law enforcement officers and, whether on or off duty, they must obey the law. When police officers break the law, they can be punished just like any other citizen. Courts hold police officers accountable for their wrongdoing, misconduct, and illegal acts. Police officers can go to prison, serve probation, and pay fines when convicted of criminal acts.

However, there are certain situations in which police officers are permitted to perform acts that would usually be illegal. For example, when it is in the interests of public safety, police officers may direct traffic the wrong way down a one-way street or go through a red light. This is generally permitted under traffic laws, which allow police officers to override certain rules.

Another example is when police officers are working undercover. They may be involved in buying and selling drugs as part of an operation to catch a drug kingpin. While their actions may be illegal, they are permitted in the course of their duties.

It is important to note that police officers must have a warrant or probable cause to conduct a search and seizure. Probable cause means that an officer believes a crime was or will be committed, and it is sufficient for a search or arrest warrant. However, police officers cannot abuse their power and arrest individuals without cause, as this would violate a person's civil rights.

In the United States, there have been instances where police officers have faced consequences for breaking the law, such as in the case of the murder of George Floyd. However, it is also common for police misconduct to go unpunished, and many acts of police brutality do not result in criminal charges.

While police officers have powers that allow them to perform certain illegal acts, they are still subject to the law and can be held accountable for their actions.

Police misconduct and accountability

While it is true that police officers have a considerable amount of power, it is important to note that the majority of them are not corrupt. According to the Bureau of Justice, only 0.02% of police officers in the US engage in corrupt activities. However, when police misconduct occurs, it can have severe consequences, and it is crucial to hold officers accountable for their actions.

Police misconduct can take various forms, including the misuse of power, excessive use of force, abuse of asset forfeiture policies, and routine stopping and frisking of individuals. Noble-cause corruption is also prevalent, where officers believe they are working towards a noble cause, such as making the world a safer place, but end up justifying unethical actions. This can lead to practices such as falsifying evidence, conducting illegal searches, and profiling vulnerable citizens.

To address police misconduct and promote accountability, several mechanisms can be implemented. Community-based accountability involves implementing policies that make the police directly responsible to the people they serve. Civilian oversight and review boards play a crucial role in this process, allowing for increased collaboration and relationship-building between the police and the community. Transparency is another key aspect, where clear procedures are established for police officers to provide information about their practices to the community. This includes wearing body cameras, providing identification and informative cards, and strengthening the right of civilians to record police interactions.

Political accountability involves using "political checks" to influence the structure and behaviour of police departments. This can be achieved through contingent federal funding, internal review, and increased reporting. Enhancing federal oversight by enforcing laws such as Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1974 can also help address civil rights violations by police departments.

Civil and criminal lawsuits are additional mechanisms for holding police officers accountable. Civil lawsuits can be brought against individuals or government entities for constitutional violations, while criminal lawsuits hold law enforcement officers accountable under state statutes. However, critics argue that criminal actions against police officers often face delays and challenges due to laws and policies that are overly deferential to police officers. As a result, advocates have called for independent prosecutors to handle these cases to ensure impartiality.

In summary, police misconduct can have detrimental effects on community trust and legitimacy. By implementing various accountability measures, such as community involvement, political oversight, and legal actions, it is possible to promote responsible and transparent policing while holding officers accountable for their actions.

Civil rights violations by police

While the vast majority of law enforcement officers in the United States perform their jobs with respect for their communities and in compliance with the law, there are incidents of civil rights violations by police. Federal criminal civil rights law prohibits law enforcement agents from interfering with federally protected rights, depriving rights under colour of law, or using force or the threat of force to interfere with the free exercise of civil rights.

The US Department of Justice (DOJ) enforces laws that address police misconduct, including criminal and civil statutes that cover the actions of state, county, and local officers, as well as federal law enforcement officers. These laws protect all persons in the United States, citizens and non-citizens alike.

The types of law enforcement misconduct covered by these laws include:

• Excessive force
• Sexual assault
• Intentional false arrests
• Theft
• Intentional fabrication of evidence resulting in a loss of liberty
• Discriminatory harassment
• Coercive sexual conduct
• Unlawful stops, searches, or arrests

In the case of criminal statutes, violations are punishable by fines and/or imprisonment. The DOJ brings a case against the accused person, and the evidence must establish proof "beyond a reasonable doubt". In civil cases, the DOJ brings the case against a governmental authority or law enforcement agency, and the proof need only satisfy the lower standard of a "preponderance of the evidence". The DOJ seeks to correct a law enforcement agency's policies and practices that fostered the misconduct and may require individual relief for the victim(s).

If individuals believe their rights have been violated, they can file a complaint with the DOJ, although the DOJ does not act as the victim's lawyer and cannot give legal advice. They can also contact the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) or the United States Attorney's Office (USAO) in their district.

Police searches and seizures

In the United States, the Fourth Amendment protects citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures by law enforcement officers. A search or seizure is considered unreasonable if it is conducted without a valid search warrant and does not fall under an exception to the warrant requirement.

Search Warrants

Search warrants are issued by a judge and authorise law enforcement officers to search a particular location and seize specific items. To obtain a search warrant, the police must demonstrate probable cause, meaning they have a reasonable belief that they will find evidence of a crime in a particular place or in the possession of a specific person.

Exceptions to the Warrant Requirement

There are several circumstances under which police are authorised to conduct a search without a warrant:

• Consent: Police may search a location if they obtain consent from a person with a reasonable expectation of privacy in that area. The consent must be given freely and voluntarily.
• Plain View: If an officer is on the premises lawfully and spots evidence in plain view, they may seize it without a warrant.
• Search Incident to Arrest: During a lawful arrest, an officer may search the individual's person and their immediate surroundings for weapons or other items that could harm the officer.
• Exigent Circumstances: Police can conduct a warrantless search in urgent situations, particularly when public safety is at risk, or if they believe a suspect will destroy evidence or flee.
• Automobile Exception: An officer may search a vehicle if they have a reasonable belief that contraband is contained inside.
• Hot Pursuit: Police may enter a private dwelling without a warrant if they are in "hot pursuit" of a fleeing criminal.

Limitations

The Fourth Amendment does not protect citizens from searches by private security guards, unless they are acting for or with the police. Additionally, there is no expectation of privacy for items or locations in plain view.

Legal Doctrines

If a search or seizure violates the Fourth Amendment, two main legal doctrines can be applied:

• Exclusionary Rule: Evidence obtained through an unreasonable search or seizure cannot be used against a defendant at a criminal trial.
• Fruit of the Poisonous Tree: Evidence obtained as a result of unconstitutionally seized evidence is also not admissible against the defendant.

Police Powers

While the police are not permitted to break the law, certain powers are explicitly granted to them that may involve acts that would be illegal for private citizens. For example, exceeding speed limits or ignoring traffic laws when responding to a call. In some cases, police may be authorised to direct another person to commit an illegal act as part of an investigation.

Frequently asked questions