Police Corruption in New Jersey - Case Study Example

Police Corruption INTRODUCTION In the modern civil society, police officers are commonly regarded as the ground level ity, responsible to enforce laws to maintain peace and safety within the community. They are thus, bestowed with the power to act, detain and take precautionary actions based on their suspicion of crime or any risk that might affect the safety as well as peace within the community. Certainly, in the wake of modern warfare and the continuous conflicts witnessed with regards to the frictions between political, economic and social dimensions today, policing has attained much significance (Sklansky, 1209-1211). It can subsequently be asserted that because police departments today hold the most crucial and key the significance in the legislating systems of any country, faults and ethical infirmity within the system may result in havoc, causing disruptions in the entire socio-political scenario of the same (Cheurprakobkit and Bartsch, 449-451). However, presuming police officers as saintly or entirely distinguished from common human nature shall be irrational. The persisting amount of faults and errors, with regards to ethical limitations have certainly proven the fact that police officers are also humans and it is often problematic for them as well to suppress their sole human nature, influenced by provocations on both emotional and physical forms. Notably, police officers are allowed to use rational force to shield themselves and the common public from undue physical harms caused by criminals but certainly, the officers are not left or entitled to an excessive force (Chan, Lai and Yang, 35-51). THESIS STATEMENT In this paper, illustrations have been drawn from two most recent cases of police corruption as witnessed in New Jersey and New York. Correspondingly, providing a brief background on the cases and the type of corruption it indicates as persisting within the police department, this thesis intends to offer an evidence based elaboration of the consequences associated with such misconducts, not only on the society but also on the police department. Considering that such actions have made the innocent people suffer to a great extent, recommendations will also be provided in this thesis. Notably, the cases referred to in this thesis exhibits the recent lawsuit ruling of Therman Brown against Elizabeth Police Department of New Jersey and the David Ranta case against the New York Police Department. DISCUSSION Force officers hold a prime position within the police department. Subsequently, actions those can be categorized as examples of police brutality exhibits a very much negative portrayal of the law enforcement officials, who, rather than offering safety, confidence and security to the community people are themselves involved in violating laws. For instance, police brutality in New Jersey has been a major concern, which has been defined as a major drawback to the law and order system followed in the country. To be specific, police brutality can be explained as the reflection or misconduct of police officers, practicing their power and authority in an unjust manner. Police brutality, has certainly not been unique to New Jersey, but has also been scattered in many places around the country. However, recent unveiling of many facts that mainly focused on the policing practices during the late 1990s and the early 2000s have revealed major distortions in the New Jersey police department, which is comparatively among the top listed in America. To be specific in this context, reports have discussed that almost 99% of the complaints remain unregistered and undecided, which were filed against the New Jersey Police Department (Huffintonpost, “99 Percent of Police Brutality Complaints Go Uninvestigated in Central New Jersey: Report”). Unfortunately, there have been many records showcasing police misconducts. In such circumstances, it has been observed that society welfare and stability comes at stake when law enforcers are themselves involved in law-breaking activities. Cases exhibiting irrational force used by the police officers, commonly referred as police brutality has therefore become a major concern for the legal system in almost every country, every state, every county and every city today (Walsh and Conway, 61-62). One of the prominent and most debated among these is the US state police departments, wherein the police departments of New Jersey and New York have attracted major attention concerning the occurrences of police corruption cases in these states. In New Jersey as well as in New York, there are various cases and events, arguing on the ethical infirmity, which relates to the way the police department officials have been involved in corruption and misused their power in order to suffice their personal concerns. The cases registered against the officers of these police departments mainly encompass the instances of police brutality, money laundering, ticket trafficking, misrepresentation of evidences as well as severe issues such as police involvement in drug trafficking. As observed in subsequence, these issues have apparently hindered the degree of social security and stability in these states, demanding for a more vigilant law enforcement system. The Issue Of Police Brutality In New Jersey. Illustratively, digging the earlier records in order to have vigilance on the practices of the New Jersey Police Department, many unknown facts came into knowledge of the common public, stimulating furthermore case files and lawsuits against veteran police officers, alleged of conducting brutality. For instance, in a very recent case filed against Elizabeth Police Department, the city police department in the Union Country of New Jersey, plaintiff Therman Brown alleged to have been subjected to police brutality on racial account. The case history of Mr. Brown herein reveals that he was arrested in August 2005 for driving recklessly through the red light, which made him liable for a traffic ticket. However, in the report of Elizabeth Police Department, Mr. Brown was also alleged for causing obstructions to the justice system and making attempts to resist arrest, which caused his physical injuries when trying to jump-off of a 6-foot tall fence. Correspondingly, the judgment was given and he was prosecuted as per the testimonial submitted against him by the then in-charge officials of the case. Challenging the testimonial, it was in year 2011 that Mr. Brown filed a lawsuit against the Elizabeth police officers involved in his arrest on allegations that he was a victim of police brutality. He argued to have been hit by the pistol of one of the veteran officer, David Conrad that eventually injured him severely. Following such action, later, with the aid of other two officers, Vincent Flatley as well as Athanasios Mikros, created a cover-up case, falsely alleging Mr. Brown of the aforesaid misdeeds (Turruso, “Elizabeth police brutality case yields $1.5M for man who said he was pistol-whipped by cops in 2005”). While at the initial instance, when Mr. Brown protested on the truthfulness of the testimonial submitted by the police officers went rejected by the justice, his later attempt to propound the truth brought him justice. In the case filed by Mr. Brown in 2011, the judgment revealed that the police officers involved in his arrest were guilty of conducting brutality against him, foregoing their bestowed responsibilities. Hence, in order to compensate the physical and mental damage, Mr. Brown was awarded $1.5 million agreeing to the allegation that police brutality was indeed practiced in the case of Therman Brown (Turruso, “Elizabeth police brutality case yields $1.5M for man who said he was pistol-whipped by cops in 2005”). Further investigations of the case disclosed that in the year 2005, when the accused was arrested, no justifiable evidence was founded for him being guilty apart from his head injury, which the police officials argued to have been caused when he was trying to escape the arrest while Mr. Brown contradicted arguing that it was actually caused by the pistol of David Conrad, who had hit him and thus performed brutality. As the case proceeded, Mr. Brown alleged that during the questioning, the police officers have struck victim very hard on his head, making him suffer physical as well as psychological stemming (Kupferberg, 129-176). Mr. Brown also accused the police officers to have been racially violent during the questioning session, drew further attention from activists in the country, making it a landmark case. Moreover, his allegations that he was charged on the basis of a false report to mislead the investigation was also proved in the verdict, giving strong evidence on police misconduct. Notably, the various evidences obtained in the re-assessment of the case, such as the video of the incident, other witnesses and neurosurgeons, justified the truthfulness of the allegations brought by Mr. Brown against the police department officials (Turruso, “Elizabeth police brutality case yields $1.5M for man who said he was pistol-whipped by cops in 2005”). While this has been one of those 1% cases, which are heard and reconsidered on the grounds of police brutality, there are many similar cases that remain unresolved pleading against police brutality practices in New Jersey. Undeniably, this occurrence indicates towards the massive amount of negligence persisting within the police departments considering the probability that such occurrences may have also been persistent in other city legislative offices and policing departments. The Issue of Police Corruption in New Jersey: As mentioned above, in the most simplistic way, the term ‘police corruption’ relates to the misuse of the power and authority for their personal gains. There are various examples of police corruption that can be found if investigated at a broader paradigm, which commonly include the bribery and extortion. It is worth mentioning in this regard that corruption within the police department often leads to a very high cost to the society, as it is considered to encourage crime and hinder social security to a large extent making the future growth of the economy doubtful too. Moreover, report of corruption within the police department, also have been criticized to cause negativity in the view of public image creating a feel of insecurity amid the society. Meanwhile occurrences of corruption cases at such a magnitude as described above within the New Jersey have greatly affected the social stance of the society. As argued by Clymer, the corruption within the New Jersey and its protected actions amid corrupt police officers has become a productive basis of income for these professionals at the cost of their professional integrity (1309-1382). Critics have thus been far arguing that corruptions have almost fully transformed the police department and have made them to act dishonestly. Although various researches and studies have been conducted on the topic of police corruption, a major proportion of the problem area remains untouched to address the various ways of police corruption and the motivations or reasons underlying such misconducts by police officers. While attention has been drawn considerably on the ethical implications and social consequences of such misconducts by police officers, only a limited amount of attention has been provided towards the economic burden borne by the society. This particular argument can be well understood by considering a very recent case that was file in the city of Camden. In the recent lawsuit judgment, the Camden city has granted to pay $3.5 million in compensation to 88 people in compensation to the losses borne by this particular group due to extensive corruption in the Camden Department of police leading to evidence misplacement, distortion of proofs and false case filing. The local dailies, covering this particular case, noted that the fight between the innocents and the police department of the Camden city ended after almost two years, which has convicted five police officers charged against the allegation that they were involved in corrupt practices within the department, conducting fabrication of evidences, planting evidence and many more. This case involved a series of lawsuits, which were filed against the police officers in the federal court as well as other state superior courts. As a majority of the cases filed and executed by these police officers was based on forged or fabricated evidences or misrepresentation of facts by these corrupt officers, suspects of those cases had to face severe penalties affecting their social, economic as well as personal life (American Civil Liberties Union, “Camden Agrees to pay $3.5M to Victims of Police Corruption”). Evidently, such conducts pose different intruding questions to the legislative system of the state regarding the validity and reliability of the case judgments delivered till date based on the testimonials submitted by the police officers in-charge. This action from the police department to plant evidence mainly reflects a very serious form of corruption making the professionals liable for serious consequences. To be considered in this regard, corruption has not been a very recent phenomenon in the police department of New Jersey. Following a series of such occurrences, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) was created to prevent corruption having continuous monitoring and vigilance of the performance of police officers. While concentrating on few of the solved cases, during the investigation it was found that three out of every five members in the police department were guilty of different types of misconducts. It was also revealed that many of the actions were left undetected as because of the breakdown within the department of Internal Affairs imposing further serious effects on the viability of the legislative system overall. As a consequence of these lacunas and gaps persisting in the transparent practices of police department in New Jersey, especially in the city of Camden, all the 88 persons were found to have served prison sentences for a number of years, based on forged or fabricated evidences and thus, making the penalty false. Correspondingly, in compensation of the misconduct, the city had to pay $3.5 million to these sufferers (American Civil Liberties Union, “Camden Agrees to pay $3.5M to Victims of Police Corruption”). CONCLUSION Referring to the cases illustrated in the discussion above, along with providing due significance to the secondary literatures available on the occurrences of police corruption, it can be asserted that indeed such occurrences pose a serious internal threat to social sovereignty and security at a larger paradigm. Few of the major facts obtained from the study suggests that such occurrences or malpractices have not been an issue of the modern world, but rather, have been persisting since decades, in the legislative systems around the world. Accordingly, counter measures have also been taken to prevent malpractices amid the police departments, among which the most common can be identified as Hippocratic oath for police officers and setting-up of special vigilance departments to track and omit corruption within police departments. Nevertheless, police corruption has remained a major issue of concern to the legislative system, not only in New jersey or the US, but to the entire world. Certainly, maintaining law and order within the society holds considerable significance to preserve social security and peace. Thus, it becomes highly essential to identify the devastating and straight impacts of corruption persisting within police departments. Considering on a broader concept it is very necessary to take upgraded, advanced and all-inclusive the investigation processes so that police officers become more aware of their social duties and responsibilities and withdraw themselves from such malpractices. To be precise, during the training or recruitment one should primarily focus on the discussion of what serious steps will be taken towards the police officers if they were found to be involved in the process of individual brutality and in corruption, which might increase their awareness regarding the issue. In addition, the policy measures taken to counter such acts within the departments, through whistle-blowing, should also be encouraged to ensure that one corrupt police officer is duly discouraged to create a negative impact on other officers. Works Cited “Camden Agrees to Pay $3.5M to Victims of Police Corruption.” American Civil Liberties Union. 2013. Web. 21 Jun 2014. Chan, Juin-Jen, Lai, Ching-Chong and Yang, C. C. “Casual police corruption and the economics of crime: Further results”. Prospective criminal’s decision and crime rate. 20 (2000): 35-51. Print. Cheurprakobkit, Sutham and Bartsch, Robert A. “Police Performance: A Model For Assessing Citizens’ Satisfaction And The Importance Of Police Attributes.” Police Quarterly 4.4 (2001): 449-468. Print. Clymer, Stieven. D. “Compelled Statements from Police Officers and Garrity Immunity.” New York University Law Review 76 (2001): 1309-1382. Print. “99 Percent Of Police Brutality Complaints Go Uninvestigated In Central New Jersey: Report.” Huffintonpost, 2014. Web. 21 Jun 2014. Kupferberg, Noah. “Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems.” Transparency: A New Role for Police Consent Decrees. 42.1 (2008): 129-176. Print. Sklansky, David Alan. “Not Your Fathers Police Department: Making Sense of the New Demographics of Law Enforcement”. Competency Effects 96.3 (2005): 1209-1244. Print. Turruso, Julia. ‘Elizabeth police brutality case yields $1.5M for man who said he was pistol-whipped by cops in 2005’. The Star-Ledger. 2011. Web. 21 Jun. 2014. Walsh, Dermot P. J. and Vicky Conway. “Police Governance and Accountability: Overview of Current Issues.” Crime, Law and Social Change 55.2-3 (2011): 61-86. Print. Read More