Short on scripture today, but longer on my own thoughts about Police Officers. 

“We must allow the Word of God to correct us the same way we do to encourage us.”  A.W. Tozer

2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

By now most people have heard that one of the NFL players is refusing to stand while our national anthem is being played.  He feels that police officers are not held to a high enough standard since when they “kill” someone they are put on administrative leave.  In addition the people of color are not getting the same treatment others are receiving (presumably causations.)

First, the reason a Police Officer is placed on administrative leave after any shooting (or accusation of serious misconduct) is the incident has to be investigated.  The officer is taken off the street just in case the shooting was not warranted or the actions were criminal.

It has been proven over and over – in the past couple of years even – that not always the first accounts by witnesses are truthful – it would be foolish to not undertake a full investigation before condemning the officer.

The officer should not be punished for doing the job he was trained for until it is shown that the officer made a mistake in judgement, or even deliberately committed a crime.  Placing the officer on administrative leave allows the officer to be paid while the investigation is done.

IF the investigation shows that the officer was in the wrong, then appropriate measures should and, for the most part, will be taken.  Those measures could be anywhere from a verbal reprimand, to suspension, to termination, to incarceration.

Administrative leave has nothing to do with guilt or innocence at that point, but only to insure that if the officer is not guilty the officer is not punished as removing his pay would do.

There are strict rules, some of which are governed by contracts, and laws that protect everyone from being unfavorably punished.  There is a process to allow the accused the opportunity to defend themselves.  During that time the accused is presumed innocent.

Is the system perfect?  No, but it doesn’t allow punishment to be meted out until proof is shown – in the case of criminal charges the standard is beyond reasonable doubt, in the case of other situations, civil or employee misconduct, it is the preponderance of the evidence.

The one, criminal charges, is a high percentage, not 100% but quantitavily I would say about 80 to 90%, the other is by weight, 50.1% (more likely than not) the person committed the violation.  But both have to be carefully investigated before any punishment is assigned.

As the Sheriff (and in a Police Department) I have received complaints against deputies.  We look at the seriousness of the complaint and make a decision if we should take the deputy off the road until the complaint is adjudicated.

I have had deputies accused of crimes.  In these cases there are two investigations – the criminal, which is usually done by another agency and often times taken before a Grand Jury before charges are levied – and the administrative which is handled by my Office.

The administrative case is usually handled by a higher ranking deputy, and sometimes an investigative board will be appointed so that more than one deputy is involved in the investigation, interviews, etc.

The admin investigation has access to the criminal investigation and can use any information obtained, not always can the administrative evidence be used in a criminal case, because of the different standards in obtaining information.

If a deputy was charged with a crime we did not wait until the deputy went to trial to make a decision.  Administrative investigations and decisions are usually done within a matter of days, although it may take longer, whereas a criminal trial may be months or even years in the future.

If we found that a deputy probably committed the offence we would then go through the process of administrative action. 

The deputy is told of the outcome of the investigation and given the opportunity to refute any of it in front of the person(s) who make the decision – in the Sheriff Office, the Sheriff, with very few exceptions makes the decision.

The deputy has a right to appeal the decision and it can go all the way to arbitration where a person or persons listens to both sides and makes a ruling – does the arbitrator agree that the deputy was ‘guilty’ and is the penalty for the actions warranted.  Sometimes they will rule the deputy was guilty, but the punishment was too severe and make an arbitrary decision on what the punishment should be.

Administrative Leave is NOT a reward, it is a protection for the agency and the public in case the Officer was wrong so the officer cannot use undue influence – or continue the behavior – while being investigated.

Second, the officer is human.

The officer is selected from society, and sometimes the environment the officer was raised in may affect the way the officer sees others. 

Police agencies as well as the legislative bodies and other government officials are well aware that the officer in the field should be as unbiased as possible.

The days of hiring a police officer off the street, placing a uniform and badge on them, giving them a gun and telling them to go forth and enforce the laws are long gone.

Most law enforcement agencies go through a grueling process to select the right person for their agency.

The candidate must pass a criminal background check, as well as several written and oral tests before they are seriously considered.  They must show that they are physically capable of doing the job.

Most agencies do some kind of psychological testing to ascertain whether the candidate has the personality and bearing to do the job.  It takes into consideration biases as well as decision making, anger, etc.

IF the candidate gets through this far then a more extensive background investigation is conducted.   Neighbors, friends, relatives, teachers, past employers are contacted.  Not just the ones listed on the application – who normally give a good recommendation – but anyone else we may find who knows the candidate.

Once the candidate is hired the officer goes through extensive training by both the department, by assigning field training officer(s) for him, and an academy that goes through months of teaching and training of the officer to be as professional as possible. 

The officer is on probation anywhere from a year to two years, depending on the department, where any conduct that might seem to the department to be inappropriate can result in termination.  That decision can be made ‘without’ cause.  The officer ‘just didn’t make probation” or some other wording indicating that for this department the officer didn’t meet their standards, there are no appeal rights.

After probation the officer has rights to the job and any decision to terminate must have a reason, unlike the probationary officer that is discharged, the ‘regular’ officer can appeal the decision.

Rarely do we find an officer who is so biased that the officer will intentionally make decisions based on the color of the skin.  It happens, of course, but most departments – especially in the past several decades – strives to weed those officers out before they are hired, but if not, as soon as the bias affects the officer’s decisions are noted, then appropriate actions to correct the officer’s conduct is done.

It can go all the way from reprimands, to schooling, to termination and criminal charges if they are warranted.

In the case of a shooting, the officer can be traumatized, even if the officer had NO choice, a life was taken and for most people that is an emotional tragedy, a tragedy that some officers cannot overcome. 

In addition to the officer having to wait for the investigation to be concluded most departments have the officer go to counseling.  In some departments, usually large ones, there is a peer group where other officers that have had to use their guns can help the officer deal with their emotions. 

Smaller agencies often use that same group, thanks to the larger agencies willingness to help, to help the officer work through those emotions.

Most officers become officers because they want to help society and the victims.  Their training is to do all they can to help people, not just make arrests.  Their function is to be a peace officer, not a judge and jury.  Most officers know and support the distinction.

Most shooting incidents, involving Officers, occur in fractions of minutes, often just seconds and most shootings are ruled justifiable due to the circumstances at the time.

In these emotional times, far too many people have an agenda against the police and do anything they can to try and gain something from their accusing Officers with no proof, only something happened and they didn’t like it.

There are huge headlines when the incidents occur, but the clearance of the officer(s) rarely make the front page – so the problem grows instead of allowing level heads to prevail.

It can take weeks and even years to completely investigate a shooting, while the officer had but a mere moment to make the decision.

Try that on for size.

Later, Art