Never facing you accuser is a phenomena in hospitals too. Everything is handled in HR. They're really not the sharpest knives in the drawer and they're more interested in adhering to protocol than conducting an investigation.
Anther problem would be finding an outside investigative body that could be reasonably impartial. It couldn't be staffed with representatives of various groups, because they all have agendas now.
Would a random citizen review board work? Like jury duty?
It also doesn't seem like every complaint would trigger the review, because in a good number of cases I'm sure the complainants have an axe to grind.
I'm thinking more along the lines of an imaginary Officer Smith who has 35 various complaints against him. And 35 is an average number in his department. Some are legit and some are axe grinders. Yet within that 35, 15 complaints are for excessive use of force. Would that be a useful trigger for a real investigation.
Plus, I'm sure good cops know who the bad cops are. Is there a way for the good cops to assist in the removal of the bad cops? Do police unions make removing bad apples unnecessarily difficult?
Cambridge PD has a civilian review board. You can guess how that goes. How would you make sure that they are not just as biased against as some people think the police admin is biased for?
Off Smiths 15 use of force complaints:
How does someone decide what is excessive if they are not actually on scene, or have FULL video from start to finish? It’s like trying to decide if there was pass interference without multiple camera replays and slo-mo, everybody thinks they saw something and ten people who saw it will tell you ten different ways it went down.
Probably a bad a analogy but it makes the point of very fine details that need to be seen before you make the call and the difference between a professional witness (a referee for example) as they say (someone who is trained and experienced in the events being discussed) and someone that’s possibly seeing something for the first time and doesn’t really understand what they’re seeing at all.
Most people see a fight or even a big melee on the street and they’re emotionally affected by it, it’s real life violence and it’s frightening to them even though they’re not personally involved, they’re not used to it so it’s disturbing. How will they then report accurately what transpired when they’re not accustomed to mentally recording such details and removing the emotions from it that could make or break a call?
How then would this civilian review board understand exactly what level of force is needed or exceeded for each particular incident, unless 1) it’s painfully obvious due to FULL and clear video of the incident again from start to finish or 2) they were actually there for the incident from its start to finish, and that’s just an impossibility.
There really is no easy answer to it, I’m not trying to be a dick with all of the above questions back at you, but those are only a small amount of things that need to be considered.
To your last point and question that “you’re sure the good cops know who the bad cops are”; this is just inherently not accurate, as much as some folks want to believe it is, it’s just not true.
You could work with someone for years and never see them do anything wrong, and then you see them on tv being arrested by the feds or IA for something. These dirty cops don’t flaunt their own breaking of laws or criminal activity in front of everyone and we just ignore it like “ya whatevs dude, it’s all good.” That’s ridiculous.
You’d be surprised just how many cops get into fights with each other over stupid shit they’re doing or have done on the street, not criminally but stupid just the same and dangerous.
I taught some classes at the academy for about 10 years, there’s recruits that I’ve noted should be removed from training and find employment elsewhere, stating point blank that they’re going to be a f***ing problem mark my words and it goes ignored by the chiefs. The DI’s at the academy have made numerous reports and sent them upstairs to be reviewed for immediate dismissal, for any number of reasons, be it incompetence, dangerousness on the range, arrogance, chips on their shoulder, or just not fit for this kind of duty, and most all of them are denied and continue in training, and the admins train of thought is well shit we paid all this money so far we can’t get rid of them now, we need numbers on the street and they need to keep numbers $$ down for their bosses so they let them stay and just pray the lawsuit doesn’t come eventually when they f*** up. And they do, and they come, and the chiefs still will not get rid of them. They’re too afraid of being sued themselves for discrimination these days if they let someone go so they try and bury them somewhere safe and hope nobody notices.
I would argue that it’s not the union at all making it difficult to remove bad or poorly performing officers, but the administration itself. The union would love to get rid of them because they end up paying so much money of our money in lawsuits and attorneys fees for bullshit over and over and it affects morale and discipline in all areas when we see someone who shouldn’t be there, continue to operate with impunity and continue to be a problem child because the chiefs are afraid to act out of political correctness and politics.
That’s my honest take of it from a street level perspective. I have no politics involved in it and no big desk to lose so I can see things clearly and it starts at the top. I spoke about this about a week ago somewhere here, the chiefs and the politicians are the biggest reason our depts are such clusterf***s these days. Because they promote test takers and yes men instead of promoting actual leaders, and once upstairs at the big table it’s protect ourselves at all costs while we smoke cigars and go play golf, ‘this is the life’ type of thinking, and we ain’t losing it for any of you loser street cops.
People think policing is all this thin blue line all day long stuff, 100% US V THEM, it’s not, well it might be US (cops) vs THEM (our own administration), but my description of it, at least where I worked, is like being on a sinking pirate ship. You can decide what that would be like.
