Noble Cause Corruption

Pollack, Chapter 9

Why place limits onthe police?

Trustworthiness of the results– Weak-willed may falsely confess– Innocent may confess to gain

leniency– Witnesses may shape their

testimony to what authorities want– Officers convinced of someone’s

guilt might lie or shade the truth Democratic values

– Balance of power between citizens and the State– Fairness to the weak – “the little guy”– Public trust and confidence in the police

Professionalism– Avoid brutalizing the police– Encourage craftsmanship and attention to detail– “Slippery slope”

Carl Klockars’“The Dirty Harry Problem”

Police driven by the “noble cause” of making the world safer

Means – ends dilemma: are “bad” meansjustified when seeking “good” ends?

Police frustrated by laws and regulations– Miranda v. Arizona (1966): If custodial interrogation must read rights– Exclusionary rule (Mapp v. Ohio, 1961): Evidence gathered in violation of the

Constitution is inadmissible– Conduct that “shocks the conscience”: Due Process clause, Fourteenth

Amendment– Right to counsel: Sixth Amendment– Criminal and civil law– Agency regulations

Police frustrated by moral standards imposed by outsiders. Police frustrated by practical obstacles

– Uncertainty, lack of information– Uncooperative victims, witnesses and suspects

Atlanta PD Narcotics OfficersLie on Affidavit, Kill 88-year old

On November 21, 2006 narcotics detectivesplanted stolen marijuana on a dealer, usingit to extort his “cooperation.” The dealerpointed out a house he said contained a kiloof cocaine.

An officer then lied on an affidavit, saying a reliable informant bought cocaine in the house, and obtained a “no-knock” search warrant, lying more to justify its necessity. When they started busting inside the reinforced front door the only occupant, a scared elderly woman, shot at them through the door. They fired back, killing her.

Realizing there was no dope, they planted marijuana in the house and left. They then paid the drug dealer $30 to lie about it.

One of the officers later admitted everything to the FBI. Two officers pled guilty and got 10 and 12-year prison terms. They claimed in the plea agreement that these kinds of lies were common in their agency, which put a lot of pressures on officers to make narcotics seizures and arrests.

All these officers’ cases are being questioned. A man who claimed drugs were planted on him and served two years in prison has already been released.

Means-ends dilemma:ethical analysis

Does making the world safer requiretaking shortcuts?

– Under what circumstances?– What kinds of shortcuts?– How far to go?

Issue: what if an officer is partly motivated by self-interest? Some approaches for testing ethical justifications

– End must be good– No better alternative– Means must not undermine equal or greater end– Means must not violate laws or regulations– Behavior must not be self-serving

Coercive interrogationand leading interviews

Examples– Defining a situation as non-custodial– Misrepresent the seriousness of a crime– Psychological tricks (feigning sympathy,

blaming the victim)– Promises or threats– Fabricating evidence– Jailhouse confessions

Poor practices can result in unreliable evidence and testimony

– Witness misstates observation ormisidentifies suspect

– Witness gains false confidence in an ID– Victim or witness lies to please police

Thomas Doswell

On August 1, 2005, nearly 20 yearsafter being imprisoned for rape,Thomas Doswell was freed after beingexonerated by DNA. Doswell, whowas identified by the victim and awitness, claimed all along he wasinnocent, leading parole boards torepeatedly refuse to release him.Doswell was first ID’d from an8-picture photospread in which hisphoto was the only one prominently labeled with an “R”, signifying a prior arrest for rape (he had been acquitted of raping a girlfriend.) The victim also reported that her attacker had a beard, but Doswell only had a mustache.

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 7/30/2005

Code of Silence andwhistleblowing

Code of silence natural in critical occupations and professions – Doctors, nurses– Corrections, police, military– Workers need to depend on each other in dangerous or risky situations– Reluctance to take risks if all errors will be reported

Code may have some value– Hard to work with peers who lack mercy – Difficult for outsiders to correctly judge policing situations– Why lose a good officer for being human?

Code consistent with virtue of loyalty– Accept that loyalty is good but it should be extended beyond the police

circle to others in the community (ethics of care)– “Friends” who will not reform when asked to do so are “scoundrels” who

deserve the consequences (ethics of virtue)– Fair systems of investigation and punishment

Shouldthepolicelie?

Lying, deception andundercover work

Types of lies– Accepted lies - used in legally

sanctioned techniques(undercover work)

– Tolerated lies – make job easier– Deviant lies - lying in court

Why undercover?– May be only way to investigate secret

and consensual crimes Legal and moral issues

– Entrapment and predisposition– Amplifying crime

Would crimes have beenotherwise committed?

Was the undercover effortdriven by a known crime problem?

Were agencies motivated by a need to show statistics?

Ethical dilemma

Detectives interrogate Ricky, a notorious gang member. They are sure that Ricky was involved in a drive-by shooting that left two innocent people dead. The murder weapon was recovered; there were no fingerprints. But Ricky doesn’t know that.

Detectives advise Ricky of his rights. He agrees to talk. Detectives falsely inform Ricky that his prints were found on the gun. They also tell him that any cooperation will be brought to the attention of the prosecutor.

Stunned, Ricky admits he was present. He identifies another gangster as the shooter. Ricky insists he doesn’t know how his prints got on the gun – maybe he accidentally touched it.

1. Identify the most relevant values2. Apply the most appropriate ethical theory and resolve the dilemma3. Identify key factors that might influence (a) how police officers perceive this

dilemma, and (b) how they might resolve it

Fighting terrorism – the abuses: COINTELPRO

Secret FBI program (1956-1971) to discreditgroups considered to be anti-Government

– Black Panthers– Students for a Democratic Society– Socialist Workers Party– Native Americans– Anti-war protesters– NAACP and Dr. Martin Luther King

Methods– Infiltration by spies – the agent provocateur– Burglaries and illegal phone taps– Fake letters and phony propaganda to create rifts between

individuals and groups

http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/cointelpro/doc218.gif

Phony letter to discredit Jean Seberg by alleging that she was pregnant by a member of the Black Panther Party

1976 Church Committee report, which condemned COINTELPRO as a serious threat to civil liberties, concluded that it was partly motivated by a “frustration with Supreme Court rulings limiting the Government's power to proceed overtly against dissident groups”

Fighting terrorism – the abuses:LAPD Public Disorder Intel. Division

Formed during the Red scare following WW-II– Spied on alleged Communists and sympathizers– Expanded to include anti-war protestors and “subversives”

Infiltrated undercover officers Extensive physical and electronic surveillance Created a huge records system Cooperated with COINTELPRO Targets included L.A.’s Mayor, members of the City Council, the

Governor and members of Congress, the National Organization for Women, the Beverly Hills Democratic Club, religious, civil rights and environmental groups

In 1981 a lawsuit forced it to disband and open up its records PDID functions were taken over by the Anti-Terrorist Division, with

much more restrictive guidelines for initiating investigations

Chilling effect?NYPD infiltrates protests

According to the New York TimesUC officers regularly infiltrate rallies

Targets include Iraq war protestorsand bike riders

Police videotapes obtained by the Times indicate that UC officers and informers worked at seven major events between 8/04 and 12/05

Officers carried protest signs, held flowers and rode bicycles. The same female officer frequented these events, wore protest buttons

and videotaped participants. Police admit the surveillance. They say its purpose is to “keep order

and protect free speech” Protestors say officers distort their message and provoke trouble

– A sham arrest of UC officers led to the arrest of two protesters who came to the UC’s defense.