Police Misconduct and Corruption

There are many debates and research that is put into the topic of corruption, also known as "organized crime". To clarify what police corruption is, it is the misconduct in which these sworn officials break their "contract" also known as their oath for personal gains and departmental perks. One or more officers can be involved. There are many opinions and voices to be heard from a wide variety of people whether it's from local communities, politicians, and even those from news and social media sites.

In a democratic country law enforcement officers are expected to undertake their duties with dignity and respect thus following both the rule of law and its procedure. Law enforcement officials whose duty is to enforce the law should abide by the law and should be accountable for both their decisions and consequences of it. But the main issue is – quis custodiet ipsos custodes – who controls the controllers? This critical issue is of importance because the history of policing is littered with scandals in which police officers broke the law and also in which the police organisation failed to detect the deviance (or colluded in it; or tried to deflect investigations by defensive opposition). I will be examining in this article police corruption and its prevention and I shall focus on three main aspects: definitions of corruption; the forms it takes in different societies; ways of preventing

Growing up our parent always told us that police officers were the good guys, and the people that committed crimes were the bad guys. There was a time in our lives that we believed that this was true, police are good, and criminals are bad, simple as that. Police officers played a prominent role in our lives growing up, some were looked at as role models, guidance counselors, but most of all they were our friends. However, at what point did that connection dissipate between police officers and the community? This disconnection was most prominently exemplified in the New Orleans Police Department (NOPD), where officer corruption, murder, and lawlessness was ramped within the department. Corruption had become a culture, a way of life for some officers in New Orleans, where supervisors dismissed allegations. Could the use of Rotten Apple mechanism help reduce the corruption in the NOPD? Comparatively, could the application of the Rotten Barrel models provide protection from police misconduct during an investigation?

Police corruption can also be explained by the lack of protection and security police feel they have. They also feel like they are being disrespected by individuals in society, which is why they rely on the subculture for protection and support (Skolnick, 1966). The police subculture has created a lot of secrecy within the organization, which contributes to police misconduct. Police officers will often ignore another police officer’s corrupt actions in order to maintain a good reputation within the subculture (Tator & Henry, 2006). For example, 84% of police officers have directly witnessed another officer using more force than necessary out on the streets (US Department of Justice, 2017). However, instead of reporting the acts of others, 52%

The Miami River Cops scandal was an unfortunate blemish on the Miami Police Department’s reputation. Many factors contributed to the 100 plus police officers involvement, three of the most significant being; corrupt leadership, personal greed, and victimless crimes. The Miami Police Department responded tenaciously to the corruption by establishing measures with the aim of preventing such rampant corruption in the future. As shocking as the Miami River Cops corruption scandal may seem, it is certainly not the only case of police corruption to happen within the United States. Another equally shocking case of police corruption occurred in Cleveland, Ohio when 44 officers from five law enforcement agencies were charged with corruption stemming from narcotics.

Corruption has always been a danger to law enforcement, just as it has been a danger to all of mankind since the beginning of time. Since the very first police agency was formed in the 1800s, corruption has been widespread. The 19th century was an era in which politics played a very large role in police forces. Various political parties essentially had some police departments in their pockets, and as long as officers served to further those political parties’ agendas, the officers’ continued employment was guaranteed. Since politicians have not always been known for being straight-laced, one can easily see how corruption within police departments became prevalent. Since officers were not serving the people, but rather the political elite, their motives were constantly in question. It was not long before politicians began employing police officers to overlook and even protect their illicit activities. Through this practice, officers began to see the potential monetary and political benefits of allowing and participating in certain illegal actions. Even after the establishment of countermeasures such as police commissions, civil service exams, and legislative changes, corruption remained rampant. This corruption was perhaps best exemplified by none other than the actions of many officers within the Rampart Division of the Los Angeles Police Department.

Corruption within the New York Police Department is a quickly growing phenomenon; to an extent, this is largely due to the cop culture that encourages silence and draws the line at honesty. The good, honest officers are afraid to speak up against co-workers and in the process become corrupt themselves. When police departments were first established in the mid-nineteenth century, corruption quickly followed suit. It began with minor acts of misconduct and today deals with serious criminal activities. Scholars have noted that there is a strong correlation between the officers taking part in corrupt acts and officers wanting to fit in with the culture. In this paper, I argue that the deeper an officer in the New York police department gets into the police culture, the more likely it is that they become involved in narcotic corruption

From the first police station built in Boston to what is today's modern police force there has always been corruption inside the criminal justice system, whether it be something as little as a small bribe to look the other way, or something more serious like getting away with a major offense. The department of justice has had trouble from top to bottom with corruption and it has proven to be a difficult problem to fix. When policing in the U. S. were just starting out corruption and law bending was more prevalent but harder to see which Police officers who were following the rules and who was bending the law in their own favor to gain an advantage for themselves rather than looking out for the community as a whole. This is because when policing first started out there were limited officers, which meant less word of mouth and less people to respond to and

Police corruption is one of the ethical issues affecting law enforcement officers. Corruption is defined as “impairment of integrity, virtue or moral principle; inducement to do wrong by improper or unlawful means” (Merriam Webster Online, 2009). While the most recognizable form of corruption involves officers taking money for favors (bribery), the actions that are considered corruption include filing false police reports, harassment of any person due to sex, race, creed, religion, national origin or sexual orientation, and failure to protect the rights of citizens. Corruption exists in all levels of law enforcement.

Police executives have always had different issues within the police department. Most police executives try to find a quick fix in order to solve the issue of police misconduct. Police misconduct is defined as inappropriate action taken by police officers in relation with their official duties (Police Misconduct Law & Legal Definition, n.d.). In order to solve this issue, one must acknowledge their different challenges, overcome the “code of silence”, and find out the role of organizational culture.

In the United States of America, corruption in the law enforcement department are continuing to be a major problem in the community. Some police officers are using their authority to attain profit and pleasure from resident, while other good police are continuing to do what’s right. Police corruption can happen anywhere, but major cities are dealing with corruptions such as Los Angeles, New York City, Philadelphia, and New Orleans. For example, six Philadelphia law enforcement officers were arrested for kidnapping a drug suspect and threating to cause harm to his family, which led to holding the suspect over the balcony railing from a 18th floor building (Assefa, 2014). Their misconduct and unethical leadership became one of the worse situations

Police officers are supposed to be professional as they represent our country. According to Burns, “Police misconduct is seen as hypocritical in the sense that society puts great trust in officers to enforce the law in a fair and just manner” (Burns, 2013). The community is trained to put trust in the police department; however, some officers are making it hard for individuals to trust them. When police corruption occurs it is to be stopped before hand to develop a better police force.

Police corruption has become an international problem. This was initially a common practice during the period when the police institutions were being developed but the effect has been felt by many people, even affecting peacekeeping operations. The police abuse and corruption has become endemic in the U.S making many citizens seek help from other organization. An example of such a case was experienced in the police training program in Afghanistan were the civilians were brutally abused forcing

Some argue that corrupt police officers are simply the product of a corrupt culture of the agency they work for. These officers are socially introduced to a number of informal rules when they begin employment. This process and these rules serve two main purposes. First, this process is designed to minimize the chances of external or internal controls being mobilized to address the behaviors and, secondly, to keep corrupt activities at a level that is acceptable and likely undetectable. The rule most often referred to in this connection, is the “Code of Silence.” Officers are socialized into not cooperating with investigations regarding fellow officers. Whether or not the officer participates in corrupt activities for financial gain, an officer’s adherence to the “Code of Silence” places them squarely amongst the corrupt of the profession (Price, 1972).

In today’s society, the amount of crime that occurs can be quite difficult to deal with and responsibility ends up falling on police to curtail it. Unfortunately, the infectious nature of crime often drags these assigned “stoppers” into the same mud that they are trying to prevent others from falling into. When officers abuse their legally sanctioned position of authority, it is known as police corruption. It is a persistent problem that is more significant in a criminal sense than the average person committing a crime because it is happening by a representative/protector of the law. Since police are not judiciaries, they do not determine