Police And The Law: Who Watches The Watchmen?

Police officers are meant to enforce the law, but there are times when they break it. A study by Bowling Green State University found that between 2005 and 2011, around 1000 police officers were arrested each year for various crimes, including simple assault, driving under the influence, and aggravated assault. While police are not permitted to break the law, they do have powers that make other laws not applicable to them. For example, they can exceed speed limits or ignore traffic lights when responding to a call. In addition, police officers are trained to use methods of deception, intimidation, and manipulation to circumvent legal restrictions. This can include coercing confessions, conducting unwarranted searches, and falsifying evidence. The blue code of silence also exists, where police officers do not turn each other in for misconduct.

Police misconduct

However, police misconduct goes beyond these permissible circumstances and often involves serious violations of the law and individual rights. Some common types of police misconduct include:

• Sexual offences
• Coerced false confessions
• Intimidation
• False arrest
• False imprisonment
• Falsification of evidence
• Spoliation of evidence
• Police perjury
• Witness tampering
• Police brutality
• Police corruption
• Racial profiling
• Unwarranted surveillance, searches, and seizure of property

In some cases, police officers may bribe or lobby legislators to pass laws that grant them excessive power. They may also engage in selective enforcement, targeting individuals based on personal biases or racial discrimination. The "blue code of silence" is a term used to describe the tendency of police officers to protect each other and not report misconduct within their ranks.

Instances of police misconduct can have severe consequences, including the erosion of individual rights, miscarriages of justice, and a loss of public trust in law enforcement. To address these issues, there has been a growing trend of implementing civilian agencies and review boards to investigate and make disciplinary decisions regarding police misconduct. Additionally, the use of body-worn cameras (BWCs) by police officers is being explored as a potential deterrent and documentation tool.

Police powers

In the United States, the police power is primarily held by state governments, with the federal government exercising limited authority in specific contexts, such as over conduct within US territories and interstate commerce. This division of power is outlined in the Tenth Amendment, which states that any powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved for the states or the people.

The legislative and executive branches of state governments exercise police powers through the enactment and enforcement of laws and regulations. While states can compel obedience to these laws, they must not infringe upon the rights protected by the US Constitution or their state constitutions, nor employ unreasonably arbitrary or oppressive measures.

The broad scope of police powers has been recognised in various court cases, including the 2019 California Supreme Court case, *T-Mobile, LLC v. City and County of San Francisco*, which affirmed the authority of local governments to regulate land use for the public health, safety, and welfare.

While police officers are bound by a code and are not above the law, there are instances where they may perform acts that would be illegal for a private citizen. For example, exceeding speed limits when responding to an urgent call or conducting an illegal stop and search based on reasonable suspicion. In the latter case, the Supreme Court ruled that evidence obtained during an illegal stop could be used in legal proceedings under certain circumstances, such as when an outstanding arrest warrant is discovered during the stop.

Police officers may also direct another person to commit an illegal act as part of an undercover operation or exceed speed limits when responding to urgent calls. However, it is important to note that police powers are not without restrictions and are subject to judicial scrutiny to ensure they do not infringe upon individual rights and freedoms.

Police interrogation tactics

One well-known tactic is the "good cop-bad cop" routine, also known as the Reid Technique. This involves an officer unequivocally stating the suspect's guilt and presenting a theory of the crime, while another officer pretends to be the suspect's friend. This tactic aims to create emotional extremes to break down mental defences and elicit a confession.

Police officers are also allowed to lie during interrogations, as long as the lie does not constitute a false promise or threat. They may claim to have evidence, such as DNA or fingerprints, or that an accomplice has already confessed, even if this is not true. Officers can also use deception by offering the suspect a drink, cigarette, or food and then obtaining their DNA without a warrant.

Another tactic is to isolate the suspect for a short period, appeal to their religion or beliefs, or show them graphic images related to the crime. Police may also impersonate inmates, fake arrests, or play on the suspect's emotions by claiming that a confession is in their best interest.

The Reid Technique has faced criticism for not being based on scientific evidence and potentially leading to false confessions. Alternative approaches, such as the PEACE method used in England, involve a less confrontational style. The PEACE method includes steps such as preparation and planning, engaging and explaining, obtaining the suspect's account, closure, and evaluation.

It is important for individuals to be aware of their legal rights during police interrogations. Suspects have the right to remain silent, request a lawyer, and stop the interrogation at any time. Understanding these rights can help prevent involuntary confessions and protect oneself from incriminating statements.

Police accountability

Community-based accountability involves implementing policies that make the police directly responsible to the people they serve. Civilian oversight, both on a policy level and in the review of complaints and disciplinary measures, is crucial for creating direct accountability and building positive relationships between law enforcement and the community. For example, in Berkeley, California, the Police Review Commission holds public meetings where community organizations can voice their concerns, make proposals, and introduce resolutions for police policy reform. Transparency is also a vital aspect of community-based accountability, which includes clear procedures for police officers to provide information to the public and policies requiring officers to provide their name, badge number, and instructions on how to report complaints. The use of body-worn cameras and strengthening the right of civilians to record police interactions can also improve transparency and accountability.

Political accountability involves "political checks" on both national and local levels, such as contingent federal funding, internal review, and increased reporting. One key tactic is enhancing federal oversight of police departments by enforcing Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1974, which prohibits recipients of federal funds from discriminating based on race, color, or national origin. By requiring police departments to demonstrate proactive efforts to address racially biased policing, the Department of Justice can incentivize reforms that promote both public safety and civil rights protections.

Civil lawsuits are another mechanism for holding police officers and departments accountable. Federal lawsuits can be brought against individuals who deprive others of their rights while acting under the "color of state law," regardless of whether their actions are sanctioned by the state. Civil rights suits, such as those brought under 42 U.S.C. 1983, are a primary way to hold law enforcement accountable, as they empower civilians to take legal action themselves.

Criminal prosecutions hold law enforcement officers accountable under state statutes. Criminal lawsuits may be initiated by state prosecutors, but critics have noted challenges in these cases due to laws and policies that are overly deferential to police officers, incestuous relationships between prosecutors and police, and discriminatory jury selection practices. To address these concerns, advocates have called for independent or special prosecutors who are not typically affiliated with the police department being investigated. Individual officers can also be held criminally liable under 18 U.S.C. 242, which allows for prosecution against officials who willfully deprive individuals of their rights.

While police officers are generally not permitted to break the law, there may be situations where they have certain exemptions or justifications for their actions. For instance, in the United States, the Supreme Court has ruled that evidence obtained during an illegal stop can be used in legal proceedings under specific circumstances, such as when an officer conducts a search after learning of an outstanding arrest warrant. However, this ruling has been criticized for potentially eroding Fourth Amendment rights and disproportionately affecting people of color.

Police corruption

There are several common types of corrupt acts committed by police officers:

• Death in custody: The murder of an accused or convicted person in custody, sometimes involving the disabling of bodycams.
• Corruption of authority: Accepting free meals, drinks, or other gratuities because of their position as police officers.
• Extortion/bribery: Demanding or receiving payment to overlook a crime or potential future crime. This can include protection for illegal activities, ticket fixing, altering testimony, destroying evidence, and selling criminal information.
• Theft: Stealing from a suspect, victim, or corpse, such as taking drugs for personal use during a drug bust or taking personal objects from a corpse at a crime scene.
• Shakedowns: Accepting a bribe to not arrest someone who has committed a crime.
• "Fixing": Undermining criminal prosecutions by withholding evidence or failing to appear at judicial hearings, often in exchange for a bribe.
• Perjury: Lying to protect oneself or other officers in a court of law or a department investigation.
• Overtime fraud: Obtaining large sums of overtime pay without actually working.
• The "frameup": Planting or adding to evidence, especially in drug cases.
• Ticket fixing: Cancelling traffic tickets as a favour for friends and family of other police officers.

Accurate information about the prevalence of police corruption is hard to come by, as corrupt activities tend to be secretive and police organisations have little incentive to publish information about corruption. However, in some countries, large-scale corruption involving the police is institutionalised. Studies have also shown that in countries with economic instability and low police salaries, police corruption is more likely to occur as officers seek additional income through bribes.

Frequently asked questions