Bad Apples

This is not a story that I would usually comment on, but there is a point to be made.

On July 30th, 2013, a Seattle newspaper editor was taking pictures with his cell phone of police activity (officers surrounding a man sitting on a planter box on a downtown street corner), when he was rushed by a King County deputy sheriff and ordered to stop taking pictures or face immediate arrest.

The newspaper editor, in order to avoid confrontation, moved farther away from the scene, and standing on the public sidewalk, continued to photograph the action. He was approached again by the deputy sheriff, who then ordered him off the entire block, again threatening him with arrest.

The editor returned to his office and subsequently filed a complaint against the deputy sheriff with the King County Sheriff's Department. After a six month investigation, the King County Sheriff terminated the deputy, effective as of yesterday.

In a public statement, the King County Sheriff said, "You have a constitutional right to photograph the police. Threatening to arrest a citizen for legally taking photos of cops while on public property is a constitutional violation, as far as I am concerned."

The termination letter sent to the deputy sheriff further stated:

Suffice it to say, in my judgement, the evidence shows that (i) you abused your authority in your dealings with the complainant on July 30, and (ii) thereafter, rather than be accountable, you attempted to recast events in a light more favorable to you. Stated broadly, you claim you interacted with the complainant in a civil, professional manner that was nothing more than ‘social contact’. But the evidence is that you approached the complainant because you took exception with him lawfully exercising his right to take photographs of you and your colleagues while lawfully standing on public property; you were agitated and confrontational; you essentially ‘squared off’ with him; you expressly and/or implicitly threatened to arrest him if he did not leave immediately in the specific direction you pointed.

Your ill-advised actions also play to some of the most basic fears among some citizens, which is that a police officer may indiscriminately exercise his or her power in violation of their rights, and that in the event of a complaint, the officer will just deny the allegations and ‘circle the wagons’ with his or her fellow officers with the expectation they will take care of their own. In a matter of minutes, your actions violated the trust that we, as a department, spend years trying to build and maintain.

The deputy sheriff, represented by his union, is considering an appeal.

The newspaper editor had this to say,

For the record, I’m not gleeful that the deputy got fired, although it’s welcome evidence that the Sheriff takes complaints seriously. This incident — and my complaint — is not about me. After growing up in this town, I believe that certain cops regularly submit civilians, particularly racial minorities, to abusive treatment. Now, more than ever, I think citizens should complain if they encounter hostile, unconstitutional, or violent policing. Most cops are not problem cops. Most work hard and keep us safe. It’s miserable that abusive cops ruin those good cops’ reputations, and if we’re going to get from here to a place where the public trusts the police more, it will require police brass continuing to punish the bad apples.

I, for one, applaud the Sheriff for taking decisive action. This story also illustrates that people must stand up for their legal Constitutional rights. But still, this story would not be one that I would focus on, because these types of incidents occur hundreds, if not thousands, of times a day across the country.

What caught my eye was this.

The deputy in question has a long history of misconduct, with approximately 120 allegations against him and 21 cases of sustained misconduct (more than any other officer in the department). The deputy was repeatedly told to improve interactions with the public, and provided with remarkable investments of coaching and counseling. The deputy underwent three performance-improvement plans, two training sessions, and two multi-visit sessions with a social psychologist, coaching sessions with supervisors, and 80 hours of time off without pay. He was demoted from sergeant to deputy for another incident in August 2013.

My point and question is, why wasn't this man discharged earlier? How many other officers, that may have dozens of verifiable complaints against them for excessive force or civil rights violations, are being harbored in other departments? Why are they still carrying badges and the authority to use deadly force?

Particularly in the face of increasing police militarization, it is more imperative than ever that the public feels secure in their guardians, and in the knowledge that corrupt and abusive individuals will be relieved of their authority.