Police Unions & Law Enforcement Rights

I’ve have thought about writing this for a couple of months, however, I felt that with all the animosity of this Presidential election people wouldn’t read or consider anything objectively.  Now that the election has occurred and people seem to have calmed down, at least for now, I wanted to share some thoughts.

 

First, I want to tell you a bit of my experience in order that you understand what I’m basing my thoughts on.  I was in law enforcement for 38 years (1981-2019) as a sworn officer (person with arrest powers), the last 6 years as a Chief/ Manager.  I spent 5 years investigating police misconduct and investigating or supervising investigations of misconduct of other employees.  I served as a Commissioner on the Florida Criminal Justice Standards & Training Commission which governs the certification (licensing) of Law Enforcement, Corrections and Probation Officers within the state.  During my career I’ve also served as an Employee Representative, elected officer and State President for a law enforcement “union” and met with State Legislators on police rights.  I point this out to also demonstrate that I’ve been on both sides, ensuring rights were observed and as a manager recommending and enforcing discipline when a complaint against an officer was sustained.  While most of my experiences are with the State of Florida statutes other states have similar provisions in their statutes or regulations.

 

In the weeks after George Floyd’s death there were protests around the country, some were violent.  During and after the protests politicians and police chiefs were criticized for not terminating “bad cops”.  Some responded to this criticism by blaming police unions and/ or police rights.  As they used this excuse people began to believe and agree with them!  If you say something long enough people will believe it, if people perceive something to be true than it is true regardless of the facts.  A major problem with this is that it can cause action to be taken that will actually harm people.  The rights that people complain are protecting “bad cops” only pertain to Administrative Investigations, if the investigation is criminal the Constitutions Rights apply, not the Administrative Rights. 

 

So, let me ask what is wrong with Administrative Rights?  In an Administrative Investigation the officer is compelled to give a statement and cannot refuse to answer questions because of the Constitutional Right that a person cannot be forced to give evidence against themselves.  The only exception in Administrative Rights is that if an officer lies; commits perjury, during the Administrative Investigation, then the information can be used in a criminal prosecution.  That is why an agency will normally interview the subject officer last, they will conduct an investigation and determine if there will is evidence of criminal behavior, if not then they will conduct an administrative interview.  If during an administrative interview an officer indicates that there may have been criminal behavior the interview will be stopped, and the subject officer advised of his/ her Constitutional Rights.

 

During an Administrative Investigation, an officer has a right to know their accuser, know the evidence against them, be interviewed during there duty hours when possible and that they be allowed to take breaks when necessary.  Citizens get upset when there is an officer involved shooting or incident in which a person dies and the officer choses not to give a statement on that same day, many will insist that the agency should have made the officer give a statement and because of their anger don’t realize why the officer wasn’t forced to provide a statement!  When a person becomes a law enforcement officer, they do not forfeit their Constitutional Rights.  In many states there are specific administrative rights for officers because in years past they were treated as if they had limited Constitutional Rights.  My question to people would be if you are angered when you believe an officer violated a person’s rights why do you support violating an officer’s rights?

 

Administrative Rights are not the evil that some have portrayed them to be.  When I was the Chief Steward for the City of Miami (FL) police union (FOP Miami Lodge #20) I attended a county Community Relations Board’s (CRB) Law Enforcement subcommittee meeting.  There were two activists that were arguing against the state’s Peace Officers Bill of Rights and wanted this subcommittee to recommend that the CRB go on the record and lobby the State Legislature to repeal that statute.  I sat there and listened to the activists presentation and argument for repeal.  After they finished, I was introduced to the committee by the staffer, I was asked if I would like to make any comment before they voted to support a repeal of the statute?  I asked the committee members if they had ever actually read the statute they were about to vote on?  None of the committee had ever read the statute so I passed out copies and asked the members to read the statute first and then I’d be willing to discuss their concerns.  After reading the statute the members asked me if that was it, was there anymore?  I replied that I had given them the complete statute, the chairperson looked at the activists and said that the statute was only fair for officers and asked them what specifically they objected to (I had given the activists a copy as well).  Those two men got up from the table and left the room without saying anything, the committee voted not to recommend or support a repeal.  I tell this story only to show that people should not react in the heat of the moment or while angry.

 

As far as Police Unions are concerned, they protect an officer’s rights and negotiate employment benefits, they DO NOT protect criminal behavior!  The union ensures that the police administration does not attempt to take short cuts in an administrative investigation which will cause a termination to be   overturned on appeal.  Some larger unions may hire professional people to assist in the running of the union but many (like the one I was involved with) are run by law enforcement officers.  They do not want “bad cops” on their department, but they cannot stand by and be quiet when an administration violates an officer’s rights.  You cannot pick and choose whose rights should be protected or else all will lose their rights.  If an administration violates an officer’s rights to gain a termination what is to prevent them from condoning someone violating a citizen’s rights during an investigation?  Police unions take on that fight to preserve the integrity of the profession.

 

Are there aspects of the judicial system that can and should be fixed or improved, of course, but the answer cannot be violating the rights of officers.  The hardest thing to do is to defend the rights of someone you dislike, the vast majority of law enforcement officers’ practice that philosophy every day and should be treated the same.  However, meaningful changes will not be made by first alienating people, police unions are willing to work with citizens to ensure that they have a police agency that all will be proud of.  Police unions and police administrations can provide an understanding of why there are certain procedures and practices, but we must be willing to listen to each other and stop shouting or blaming each other.

 

That’s My Opinion, What’s Yours