Analysis of Police Discretion - Admission/Application Essay Example

I. According to a recent article by the New York Times d October the police arrested 400 demonstrators from the “Occupy Wall Street” protestors who took their gripes on the gray pavement. The police claimed that protestors who used the walkway were not arrested but those who took over the roadway and impeded vehicle traffic were arrested. Many protesters however said that they were tricked and trapped by the police by allowing them onto the bridge only to net hundreds of them after. There were no physical barriers to stop the rioters and some reporters even noted that at some point, police commanders were leading the way including the Chief of the Department. Whether what the police did was right or wrong, this was a clear act of police discretion. Police discretion is when policemen act more-or-less as autonomous agents separated from public scrutiny and the cumbersome due process (Wortley). This action may include decisions that represent a responsible choice in line with the understanding of what is lawful, right or wise. In the report above, the police exonerated the people on the streets who stayed within the walkways but at some point arrested those who chose to walk on the roadway. Taking all actions into account, both were causing impediments to traffic but the police, whether they deliberately “weeded out” those who were willing to cause direct obstacles to traffic, arrested only 400 people. II. There two schools of thought in police discretion according to Wortley: On one hand, discretion has been praised as flexible and efficient, as when assessing the culpability of an offender one takes the contextual and mitigating factors that come with the offense. On the other hand, there exists a danger of leaving the police unchecked, with justice redefined in terms of their own priority, which may not correspond to the priorities of the wider community. On a practical note, the former notion seems to have more weight: In light of recent technological and social advancements, it can be largely anticipated that criminals will find more ways to avert crimes that deserve, by the “spirit of the law” punishment. It only seems reasonable then that when criminals get creative in their deeds, it must be met with equal creativity from the police. As Kelling stated, more police have found that existing practices were “out of touch” with existing practices. Discretion then would not only catch the perpetrators but also prevent the implications of the crime. As in the example stated above, leading the protestors on, the police prevented the possible aggravation of the traffic, along with a riot that could have been violent. On a purely ethical note, there seems to be a misalignment with the principles of policing, as being simply watchmen or “law enforcers”, with what the police have done in the report. In ethics, we consider three basic criteria for judging whether an act is ethical or not: the object of the action, the intention or ideals, and the consequences. In terms of the object of the action, the police allowed the protestors on to the bridge and even talked them into it seem fine as it is, and the consequences of a further riot both to citizens involved in both factions and to civilians may have been abated. But if the intention of the police in doing so was that the protesters could be “legitimately” caught, then the whole act in itself is wrong. And arguably, the ends do not justify the means. However, as I write this essay and use a concrete example as reference, I am slightly inclined to say that police discretion is favorable. This is insofar as it has become a reactive policy to a preventive policy with the assumption that the public is conscious and prudent about their actions as well, as I assumed for the citizens of New York. And thus it should follow that police discretion be attributable to how the public performs on an ethical and moral scale their level of social maturity. My reasoning for this is two-fold: First, a society that already is very ethical need little reminder on what is and isn’t criminally prosecutable and what actions contribute to progress and an anal application of the law need not be justified. And second, a morally progressive society should free up resources for enforcement to prevent bigger crimes, which take up a lot of planning and conscious effort from criminals. This view may offer a “maintain society or change society” dichotomy, and it may even sound initially opposite to the “maintain hence passive-reactionary stance” and “change hence proactive-preventionary stance”. But this view impinges on a society, which relies on incentive and disincentives and pure conditioning without the idea of freedom to choose what is right or wrong, and not on a society based on moral ascendancy and political maturity. Nevertheless, at the very least, police discretion should depend on the disposition of society, to which this policy would be beneficial. III. Many guidelines today for managing an efficient and non-abusive form of police discretion is by reorganizing the administration of police departments and including training materials that address day-to-day problems that confront and plague officers (Kelling). There is no doubt that there should be improvements in response time as well as putting emphasis on the police as the front end of the justice system (Kelling). However, I would suggest the inclusion of a more holistic form of training, one that focuses on the character, which would still inherently allow a policeman to use his freedom in everyday work. It must be part of the every officer’s training what Egon Bittner calls as “the manly virtues” which include honesty, loyalty, aggressiveness and visceral courage. They should be placed in an environment that allows them to internalize these attitudes both on paper, in application to their own action, and always in relation to civilians and crooks. This may include, ethics, philosophy and even anthropological classes and seminars that should broaden their view about society, the very institution they serve. Also, in line with the systematic improvement of administration, I would suggest a certain mentoring system, and not simply assigning a shrink to each department that would help each officer handle his or her own problems, whatever they may be. This should serve as a self sustaining support system for the whole police department, keeping in mind also that every mentor should serve as an example to his mentee. Again, there should be focus on that pro-active mentality and dynamic flexibility to be able to circumnavigate as many possible line work scenarios in a wide range of environment. At the end of the day, it would still be the choice of the person what to do on a specific occasion as his own “judgment call”. IV. In my final analysis of police discretion as a practice, there are two insights that could prove useful in further defining the study of this subject: First, police discretion is usually triggered by the disposition of a society as a whole. The view of police discretion in terms of a phenomenon devoid of its social implication is baseless as the goal of any government administration is to better society. Aggregately, people’s living conditions and even philosophies should be understood before putting policy into place. Second, administration should build on the foundation of a deeper understanding of man and the ability to think critically and to act in an effective yet prudent manner- skills that is not only needed by an organization leader but even a line man as well which can be brought by policies such as liberal education and mentoring. In the end what would really make a difference is if police work was made more people-oriented, rather than the gun-slinging stereotype portrayed by various media. Were the arrested demonstrators asked what they really want or what they really wanted to do? Or did the police even think what they were thinking? Perhaps when policemen start asking questions like this, society at large would understand how integral law enforcement and policemen are to our society. Works Cited: Baker, Al, Moynihan, Colin, and Maslin, Sarah. “Arrest Toll on Brooklyn Bridge Rises to 700.” The New York Times. 1 Oct. 2011. Web. 3 Oct. 2011. Kelling, George. “Broken Windows and Police Discretion”. National Institute of Justice Research Report. Oct. 1999. Web. 3 Oct. 2011. Wortley, Richard. “Measuring police attitudes towards discretion.” Criminal Justice and Behavior. 2003. Web. 3 Oct. 2011. Linnan, David. “Police Discretion in a Continental European Administrative State: The Police of Baden-Wurttemberg in the Federal Republic of Germany”. Law and Finance Institution Partnership. N.d. Web. 3 Oct. 2011. Read More