Misconducts of Police Officers - Essay Example

Disclosing Officer Untruthfulness to the Defense: Is a Liars Squad Coming to Your Town? In this modern age, court decisions are becoming crucial because every judgment is considered more innovative than previous decisions/ judgments. For instance, the United States Supreme Court case decisions provide ample importance for service record of government officials who appear as witnesses. This enforces the authority and discretionary power of superior officers over his/her subordinates. For instance, in USA, Chief of Police of a municipality possesses a number of duties to be performed. Within his /her area of surveillance and upon other subordinate officers, the duties include patrolling and inspecting, taking disciplinary actions like full dismissal or punishment duty sanctioning and promotion. Within this context, one can see that the duty of the Chief of Police of a municipality in USA is crucial in helping the judiciary to take apt decisions on cases under Supreme Court decision. Thesis statement: As the chief of Police in a municipality, what decision will be taken by you on an allegation on your subordinate officer: termination from service without considering his/ her clean service record or significant disciplinary action? The Case As the Chief of a municipality, I am responsible to conduct investigation upon the deeds and misconducts of my subordinates. Besides, I am authorized to take disciplinary actions including termination from service. One day, my Deputy Chief advised me that one of my officers is misusing one of the computers in our patrol section. Before approaching me, the Deputy Chief conducted a primary investigation and collected evidence. When we conducted an internal investigation, we happened to know that the suspected officer used to visit pornographic websites. When I questioned the officer, he denied the charge and pointed out that he does not know anything about the incident. So, we decided to conduct further investigation on the case to collect evidence. Internal investigation Further investigation included a primary internal investigation to gather evidence. When we searched the computer misused by the officer, it was evident that he used to search pornographic websites. Furthermore, I questioned the officer personally but he did not admit his mistake. As the officer was not ready to admit his mistake/ misconduct, we decided to seek help from our crime analysis department. The investigation proceeded and the computer crime analyst detected that the officer misused one of the computers in the patrol department. For instance, the computer crime analyst proved that the officer made use of his own log on password to visit a number of pornographic websites. This was solid evidence against the denial of the officer. Then, the officer admitted his mistake and pleaded that he will not do the same again. Evidence against the officer The most important evidences against the officer are pointed out below. First of all, the officer is a responsible person within the structure of police department. Bumgarner (2004) states that the code of West Virginia (Chapter 30, Article 29) defines a law-enforcement officer as an authorized person to enforce state laws. One can see that a police officer is authorized to maintain law and order. In this case, the officer’s misuse of one of the computers in the patrol division is a punishable offense. Besides, it is the responsibility of a police officer to be responsible towards his superior officer. When the person who is authorized to maintain law and order acts against the same, the public will blame the superior officer. When questioned, the officer pointed out that he does not know anything about the incident. In this context, the officer committed a crime and was trying to deny his role. Further investigation proved that the officer made use of his own log on password to visit a number of pornographic websites. Factors in favor of the officer On the other side, there exist a number of factors to be considered before taking apt disciplinary actions against the officer. They are pointed out below. First of all, the Chief of Police must consider the officer’s service for the last 15 years. One and only prior evidence against him was reported before 10 years. For instance, disciplinary action was taken against this officer on behalf of his involvement in a fault traffic accident. But this incident occurred before 10 years. For the last 10 years, the officer paid special attention in obeying law and order. Besides, the officer’s initial denial proves that he knew less about cyber crimes. For instance, he was not aware of the fact that a computer crime analyst can detect the crime and collect evidence against him. Later, he admitted his mistake. This proves that the officer is less aware of the seriousness of his misconduct. Decision McNeil and Brain (2007) make clear that the court decision on the case- Brady v. Maryland is significant because the prosecutors are responsible to reveal evidences related to the guilt of the defendant. In this case, decision making is strictly limited to my discretionary power. Considering the evidences against and in favor of the officer, I decided to take an apt decision. The evidences like inappropriate usage of computer, denial of the charge and fault traffic accident is totally against the officer. But his status as a responsible officer and his service for 15 years is favorable for him. So, I decided to take an apt decision. It was not fair to terminate the fifteen year veteran with a virtually clean record. So I decided to impose significant disciplinary action as opposed to termination from service. The factors that helped me to attain the foretold decision As pointed out earlier, some factors are against the officer. Champion (2005) opines that case United States v. Bagley points out the role of the government witnesses in receiving payment (say, bribe) for their services. But in this computer misuse case, the officer’s status and his service to our motherland cannot be totally neglected. Besides, his words made clear that he was not so aware of the seriousness of his misconduct. In addition, he promised me that he will not repeat the same in future. Singer (2008) states, that the Supreme Court made clear that the State possesses the discretionary power / right to disclose valuable evidence favorable to the accused person. As a superior officer, I have responsibility over my subordinates. According to Szypszak (2009), the case- United States v. Agurs, is significant because it points out that the prosecutors are not above law and order but are fully responsible for their misconduct. One can see that the punishment given to the officer must help him to realize the seriousness of the crime conducted by him. On the other side, it is not fair to terminate the officer from his service because he was willing to admit his mistake. Besides, we can keep our watchful eyes upon this officer. When he is not terminated, he may become more responsible and duty-minded. In addition, termination will badly affect the officer because he is a law abiding officer. For instance, his service for the last 15 years proves the same. So, I think my decision to impose significant disciplinary action is apt for the misconduct of the officer. Summing, one can see that there exists a number of evidence against the officer. But the favorable factors are more valuable than the evidence collected by the subordinate officer and the computer crime analyst. Besides, the officer admitted that he will not repeat the same again. In this case, the Chief of Police is the ultimate authority on taking apt decision. So, he can make use of his discretionary power in imposing significant disciplinary action against the officer. In this case, special consideration is given to the person because of his status as a responsible police officer. References Bumgarner, J. B. (2004). Profiling and criminal justice in America: a reference handbook. Santa Barbara, California: ABC-CLIO. Champion, D.J. (2005). The American dictionary of criminal justice: key terms and major court cases G - Reference, Information and Interdisciplinary Subjects Series. USA: Scarecrow Press. McNeil, B.F., & Brain, B.D. (2007). Internal corporate investigations. USA: American Bar Association. Singer, R.G. (2008). Criminal procedure II: from bail to jail Examples & explanations series. USA: Aspen Publishers Online. Szypszak, C. (2009). Understanding Law for Public Administration. USA: Jones & Bartlett Learning. Read More