Police Reform Will Survive Trump Administration – Walker
In a piece published on The Crime Report on November 28, 2015, Sam Walker argues that police reform will survive the in-coming Trump Administration. To be sure, the administration will have a terrible impact on virtually all civil rights issues: voting rights, sex discrimination, reproductive rights, immigration, and others. Police reform, Walker argues, has taken hold among many police chiefs, who recognize that the important new approaches of de-escalation, procedural justice, and training over officer tactical decision-making, make sense and will make their jobs a lot easier (fewer use of force incidents, complaints, lawsuits, etc.). The federal government has little direct impact on local police departments (except for DOJ civil rights investigations and consent decrees, which surely will end). Thus, it is very possible that the reform movement of the last few years will continue.
Read Walker’s Crime Report piece: trumppolicereform
New DOJ Investigations, Consent Decrees Unlikely – Walker
In a story in the Louisiana Advocate regarding the possibility of a Justice Department investigation of the Baton Rouge police department and a consent decree, Sam Walker commented that it was very unlikely. “The Trump administration is jut not interested in an aggressive approach to police issues,” he commented. He added that “They’re really hostile to civil rights enforcement generally.” This includes voting rights, sex discrimination, the rights of the disabled, and all other civil rights issues. Read the story: batonr-doj-inv
Walker: Police Tactical Reforms Will Accomplish More Than Prosecutions
In a story in the Minneapolis Star Tribune related to the prosecution of the officer in the controversial St. Anthony, MN fatal shooting, Sam Walker commented that prosecutions of police officers are very difficult to obtain, and convictions are even more difficult. Prosecutors work closely with local police and are reluctant to bring criminal charges, he commented. Additionally, judges and juries have deep cultural biases in favor of the police, he explained.
More progress will be made in reducing fatal police shootings through improved policies and training on police tactics that through prosecution, Walker explained. Officer de-escalation of encounters with citizens will lead to fewer uses of force, including those that escalate into the use of deadly force. Procedural justice, where officers treat people with respect and answer their questions, will reduce conflict-filled encounters and, as a consequence reduce officer uses of force. The odds of increasing the number of prosecutions and convictions, by contrast, are very slim at best.
Read the Star-Tribune story: mncrimprosec
Trump DOJ Will Represent a “Historic Shift” in Public Policy, Says Walker
The advent of a Trump Administration Department of Justice will represent a “historic shift” in public policy, argued Sam Walker in the Baltimore Sun the day after the presidential election. The shift will be particularly evident with regard to federal investigations of police misconduct. Federal investigations of a “pattern or practice” of violations of civil rights were authorized by the 1994 Violent Crime Control Act. The first consent decree involved the Pittsburgh police department in 1997. The administration of President George W. Bush walked away from police misconduct, bringing no investigations of big city police departments and settling investigations with technical assistance letters, which are not enforceable in a federal court. President-elect Trump and his surrogates have made it clear that they have no interest in addressing police misconduct. Trump has called for more stops and frisks as a means of reducing crime. They have also criticized those who have protested police misconduct. The shift in DOJ civil rights policy under Trump, Walker added, will extend to voting rights, sex discrimination, LGBT rights and all other civil rights issues. Read the Baltimore Sun article: trumpdojbaltsun
Walker: Police Unions Create a “Culture of Impunity” for Officers
In a September 19, 2016 article on police unions in The New Yorker, Sam Walker stated that certain police union contract provisions create a “culture of impunity,” meaning the belief that they do not have to answer for their conduct. One of the most common contract provisions in this regard are 48-hour “waiting periods” before an officer can be questioned by a department supervisor about a critical incident (a use of deadly force or a use of excessive force incident, for example). Walker also pointed out that years ago police unions learned they could neutralize mayors by threatening to accuse them of being “soft” on crime. This tactic is usually called “playing the crime card.”
Read The New Yorker article: policeunionsnewyorker
The Human Costs of Police Misconduct vs. The Costs of Reform
Recent public debates over the costs of police reform, particularly Justice Department consent decrees with seriously troubled departments, have all focuses on the dollar costs. A recent story in the San Francisco Chronicle pointed out that the Settlement Agreement in Oakland, California (the result of a private law suit and not DOJ intervention) has cost $13.6 million over 13 years, not including the costs of new computer technology and body cameras, and new staff positions. (No other city has failed to comply with court-ordered reforms for such a long time, it should be noted.)
Former Oakland police chief Anthony Batts (2009-2011) stated that “It’s outrageous. That’s a lot of money for a city like Oakland. It could have been spent on Head Start programs.”
Sam Walker replied in the Chronicle that “It’s offensive to this of this just in terms of the dollar cost, because there’s a human and social cost when people are shot and beaten up by the police.” How can you measure the human cost of a life lost because of an unjustified police shooting? How can you measure the cost to the person’s family in terms of pain and suffering? In cases of excessive force, how can you measure the cost of the physical pain and also the indignity inflicted on the person? Police misconduct also has a social cost. Patterns of police misconduct alienate local African American communities.
And to these human and social cost, we should add the enormous payouts in civil suits to the victims of police brutality and shootings in cities where abuse goes uncorrected. In Chicago, for example, taxpayers paid out $210 million between 2012 and 2015, or about $50 million a year. Consider how many Head Start programs, or after school programs that money would have bought
True, Walker has observed on other occasions, court-ordered reforms are expensive. But those costs are more than outweighed by the human and social costs of allowing police misconduct to continue.
Read the San Francisco Chronicle story here: oaklandScandal
“Digital Revolution” Reshaping Public Attitides Abourt Police Misconduct,” Walker Tells Voice of America
In an interview with Voice of America following the fatal police shootings of African-American men in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and St. Paul, Minnesota, Sam Walker argued that a “digital revolution” is reshaping public attitudes about police misconduct. Before the proliferation of cell phone cameras, many white Americans refused to believe that police misconduct, including shootings and beatings, was as bad as it is. But new new visual evidence of incidents in the two recent shootings provides disturbing evidence that is hard to ignore. The communications revolution really began with the videotape recording of Los Angeles police officers repeatedly beating Rodney King on March 3, 1991. The broadcast of the recording had a profound impact on public awareness of police brutality. Digital cameras have only accelerated the revolution.
Read the Voice of America story: DigitalRevolutionVOA2016
Chicago Tribune Reveals History of Police Union Power on Accountability Issues
A May 20, 2016 story in the Chicago Tribune revealed how the Chicago police union gained its power over police accountability issues, in particular union contract provisions that impede department investigations of alleged officer misconduct. In Chicago, it all began in 1981 with a deal in which union leaders agreed to not push for significant wage and benefit raises in return for certain “management issues” related to accountability.
In somewhat different ways and at different times (in most cases earlier than Chicago), the same process occurred in other cities.
In 1981, under Mayor Jane Byrne, the city and the Fraternal Order of Police negotiated the first collective bargaining agreement. (Previous agreements had been “handshake” deals.) The city was “strapped for cash,” according to the Tribune story.” John Dineen, then-president of the FOP, told the Tribune that “they wanted to keep the police happy . . . So they’d give away a lot of working conditions things. It was always working conditions versus money.”
Sam Walker commented that as the years went on, “The union people have always been very focused. They know what they want [particularly regarding protections for officers].
Although not quoted in the story, Walker argues that police union leaders have been a disservice to their members in two ways. First, they have chosen in many instance not to fight aggressively for wages and benefits. Second, by winning protections for officers guilty of misconduct they have allowed serious abuses to continue. Pubic outrage over those abuses has seriously damaged the image of the department (legitimately so, given the seriousness of the misconduct) and harmed the morale of the officers. A different bargain would have meant that bad officers would have been fired or chosen to resign, and the remaining officers would have enjoyed a better public image, better morale –along with better wages.
Read the Tribune story: ChicagoUnionTradeoffHistory
Police Chiefs Group Calls for Higher Standard in Police Use of Force
The Police Executive Research Forum (PERF), a highly respected and forward-looking professional association of police chiefs and police commanders, issued a remarkable 30-point policy paper on police use of force. Most important, Principle #2 called on police departments to “adopt policies [on police use of force] that hold themselves to a higher standard than the legal requirement of Graham v. Connor.” The Supreme Court in Graham v. Connor held that officer use of force is constitutional if it is “objective reasonable.” Many critics have argued that interpretations of that standard have consistently justified police actions. The result, critics charge, has been many incidents that are “lawful but awful”: in compliance with the court’s ruling, but outrageous in terms of standards of decency and the impact on community relations.
In a Commentary published by The Crime Report, Sam Walker praised the PERF statement, arguing that it is refreshing to see a police chiefs group advocating a higher standard for the police. The PERF report also recommended (Principle #6) a policy under which officers would have a “Duty to intervene” when they see other officers using excessive force. It was a major advance in recent years when police departments began requiring officers to report excessive force by other officers (and we have no evidence on the extent of compliance with such policies). Requiring officers to act to prevent or stop other officers from using excessive force would definitely set a welcome and long overdue higher standard in policing.
Read Sam Walker’s Commentary in The Crime Report: PERF30Principles OPED
Read the PERF report on Use of Force: Taking Policing to a Higher Standard: PERF30Principles
DOJ Begins Collaborative Reform with San Francisco Police; Walker Praises Initiative
The Justice Department announced that it was launching a Collaborative Reform Process review of the San Francisco Police Department. The Collaborative Reform Process is run by the Office of Community Policing Services unit of DOJ, and is different from the “pattern or practice” investigations, which are conducted by the Civil Rights Division of DOJ. The Collaborative Reform Process is exactly that: a collaborative effort between DOJ and the local police department, which voluntarily agrees to participate. Many civil rights activists criticize the collaborative process because recommendations are not binding on a police department.
Sam Walker supports the Collaborative Reform Process for several reasons. The resources of the Civil Rights Division are extremely limited, and it is not able to investigate all police departments that have problems. In many departments, moreover, there may be problems with police misconduct but the evidence might not be strong enough to prove in court that there is a clear “pattern or practice.” Walker cites the example of the first Collaborative Reform Process, involving the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, which he argues resulted in a very thorough review of the department’s failures on officer use of force and concluded with an excellent set of recommendations. The Collaborative Reform Process also produced a very critical report on shootings in the Philadelphia Police Department.
Read about the San Francisco effort: SanFranCollabReform
Read the Las Vegas Collaborative Reform Process report: LasVegasForceReport_2012
Read the Philadelphia Collaborative Reform Process report: PhiladCollabRefrom