It should be obvious by now that body cameras are not the sole answer to preventing bad police behavior. That’s because they don’t solve a problem that is far more common in police departments than many people think: unfit officers who are a threat to the public, to other cops, and indeed to themselves.
These weak cops, who are probably present in every department in America, need to be identified early and weeded out of police service.
Recommended Stories
My experience in police work includes 15 years with the NYPD, and after that as an assistant police chief in Hartford, Conn. and Providence, R.I. From what I saw in my career, bad police actors usually show early signs that help identify them and their bad tendencies long before anyone ends up dead.
For example, such cops repeatedly lodge charges of resisting arrest. Their arrestees frequently need medical attention. They are subject to an inordinate number of Internal Affairs investigations. They receive an unusually high number of civilian complaints.
But the identification of these patterns is only step one for department leadership. Frontline supervisors and higher-ranking police managers also need to have the mettle to do their jobs, and they need to be held accountable. Unfortunately, police leadership often find themselves hamstrung by collective bargaining which they’ve had little to do with, and which foists on them unreasonable protections like “the police officers Bill of Rights.” Wherever that prevents them from doing this effectively, it has to change. Supervisory teams can neither ignore, nor be forced to ignore, their imperative to maintain discipline in their departments.
The recent decision not to charge the Washington D.C. officer who shot and killed Terrence Sterling, a 31 year-old unarmed man who rammed a police cruiser with his motorcycle, is just the latest example of a justice system that too often goes overboard to protect officers. This in turn causes more mistrust of the police and indeed the entire criminal justice system.
Part of the problem is that the narrative about police use of deadly force almost always omits two things. First, that a subset of police officers exists who are so on edge and afraid that they present a clear and present danger. Second, that there is an overwhelming sense of fear that has infected our entire police culture, which only gets worse each time the police shoot and kill an unarmed person.
Forty or fifty years ago, cops everywhere understood the job might require the ultimate sacrifice. Today though, the police zeitgeist overemphasizes personal survival. Add to that the militarization of departments and their employment of military-style tactics, along with the constant messaging about the primacy of officer safety. It all fuels a sort of paranoia that adds to the chasm between the police and the community.
After the death of Michael Brown in Ferguson several years ago, the Black Lives Matter movement erupted causing resentment amongst the police. I felt at the time that Brown’s behavior before the shooting made him a curious choice to rally support around. But in the wake of so many other shootings of unarmed men of color – in North Charleston, in Tulsa, in Baton Rouge, and in Minneapolis — I find it hard to reject that movement’s basic argument.
This is especially true once you’ve considered that some recent unarmed and unthreatening victims like Philando Castile in Minneapolis were decent productive members of their communities and hardly public menaces.
The simple truth is that some of the cops we’ve recruited and trained are unfit to do the job. They’re simply too scared or too full of bias and hatred to act responsibly or safely in stressful encounters with the public.
There are more than just a few bad apples, but it’s also important to recognize that a much larger number of officers honorably and heroically risk their lives every day to protect us. And every time the police are shot or stabbed or otherwise victimized by violence it adds to the legitimate concerns officers have for their safety. So it’s important for those outside the fray to take a balanced view as they/we form judgments.
Real peril also lies during quiet periods between incidents. It is too easy for leaders to lose focus and do little or nothing to prevent the inevitable next police shooting death of an unarmed person.
I believe two things need to happen to change this tragic pattern. First, the police brass must recognize the warning signs and separate the craven from the courageous — and if they can’t do that job, they need to be replaced. Second, we also have to change the negative narrative and messaging that suggests ubiquitous danger for officers from all sides. Only then will we allow the police to escape the negative image that’s in danger of being permanently imprinted in the public psyche.
Andrew Rosenzweig served with the NYPD for 15 years and later as chief investigator for the New York County District Attorney’s Office. He later served as assistant chief of police in the Providence and Hartford Police Departments.
If you would like to write an op-ed for the Washington Examiner, please read our guidelines on submissions.
