The document discusses various mechanisms for holding police accountable in America, including both internal police mechanisms and external oversight. It describes accountability as police answering for their conduct to the public, officials, and courts. Internally, it discusses supervision, policies, complaint investigations, early intervention systems to identify problematic officers, and accreditation. Externally, it outlines political, judicial, civil lawsuit, federal pattern/practice suits, consent decrees, injunctions, criminal prosecution, and citizen oversight options.

1. Police in America
Chapter Fourteen
Accountability of
the Police
McGraw-Hill
© 2013 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved.

2. A Definition of Accountability
 Accountability means having to answer for
one’s conduct. Both police organizations
and individual police officers are
accountable to the public, to elected
officials, and to the courts for how well
they control crime and maintain order
while remaining in compliance with the
law.
14-2

3. The Dimensions of
Accountability



The police should be
accountable to the
public for what they
do.
The police should be
accountable to the
public for how they do
their job.
Governmental officials
must hold the police
accountable.

The Dilemmas of Policing in
Democracy


Public often demands crime control
techniques that are unlawful
A Historical Perspective on
Accountability:

Throughout most of their history,
American police were not held
accountable

Procedures for accountability began
to develop in 1950’s
• COMPSTAT
14-3

4. Accountable for What the Police Do

Traditional approach
 Crime rate
 Clearance rate
 Response time

New Measures
 Survey of citizens
about their
neighborhood officers

COMPSTAT
 Holds middle level
managers accountable
for crime in their areas
 Command officers are
asked to explain data
and detail what they
are doing about crime
trends.
14-4

5. COMPSTAT
 COMPSTAT: Computer Comparison
Statistics. An Organizational model, first
used by the New York City police in 1994,
that allows police departments to blend
timely intelligence, effective tactics, rapid
deployment of personnel, and vigorous
follow-up and assessment.
14-5

6. Accountability for How the
Police Do Their Job
Internal Mechanisms of Accountability:
Accountability

Routine supervision
Sergeant
Span of control
Close supervision
Coaching, Mentoring, Leading
Organizational Culture
Corrective Action: Formal and
Informal
 Written policies and reporting
requirements
 Performance Evaluations






• Christopher Commission

Internal Affairs Units
 Investigates misconduct
 Accreditation standards
• CALEA
 Code of silence
 Early warning systems
• Complaints
• Lawsuits
• Use of force
14-6

7. Internal Discipline Issues
 Staffing
 Training for investigators
 Appropriate Discipline
 Consistent and Fair Discipline
14-7

8. Standards of IA Citizen Complaint
Procedures


The 2000 Internal Affairs Policy and Procedures
(IAPP) of New Jersey requires each department
to accept complaints “from any person, including
anonymous sources”
Using Discipline Records in Personnel Decisions
 1991 Christopher Commission changed LAPD
standards to take more factors into consideration
when promoting or reassigning officers
• Ex: Number of prior violations, pattern of misconduct in the
past, nature and seriousness of past violations
14-8

9. The “Code of Silence”
 “Code of Silence”:
Also known as the
“blue curtain,” a code of honor among
police officers whereby officers refuse to
testify against corrupt colleagues, creating
a veil of secrecy around police actions.
14-9

10. Early Intervention Systems

Officers with Performance Problems
 Early Intervention System: A management
information system that complies and analyzes data
on problematic police officer behavior, citizen
complaints, police officer use-of-force reports, and
other indicators to identify officers with recurring
performance problems.

The Nature of EI Systems
 Performance data is entered into a computerized
database
 Data is analyzed to identify problem officers
14-10

11. The Components of an Early
Intervention System

Identification




Performance indicators
Analysis of data
Identification of officers with performance problems
Selection
 Assessment of identified officers
 Selection of officers for intervention

Intervention





Effort to improve officer performance
Supervisor’s counseling
Training
Referral to professional counseling
Follow-up
 Monitor officer’s performance, postintervention
14-11

12. Goals of EI Systems
 Different target audiences
 Individual officers
• Improve performance of those having trouble dealing
with citizens
 Supervisors
• Give them data to help focus their efforts
 The department
• Improve the department as a whole by systematically
identifying unacceptable officer performance
 Police-community relations
• Reduce specific problems in the community while
simultaneously communicating to the public
14-12

13. Effectiveness of EI Systems



Successful in reducing officer use of force and
citizen complaints
Successful in identifying officers with
performance problems and correcting their
performance
Improvement of management and supervision
 Sergeants can evaluate the strengths and
weaknesses of their squads before meeting them
 Managers can intervene with help before misconduct
occurs and requires discipline
14-13

14. Risk Management and Police Legal
Advisors

Risk Management (RM): a process widely used
in private industry and in health care agencies to
reduce the cost associated with lawsuits against
the organization.
 Not widely used in U.S.

Police Legal Advisor: a lawyer or team of
lawyers employed by the police department
itself.
 Purpose is preventative: review policies before a
problem arises
14-14

15. Surveying the Community
 Another method to holding police
departments accountable is to survey
residents about their experiences and
perceptions of the department
14-15

16. Accreditation

The Nature of Accreditation:
 Accreditation is the process of voluntary professional selfregulation that serves as a final approach to establishing
minimum national standards in policing.

Benefits
 Reduced insurance costs
 Improved use of force reporting
 Improved procedures for juveniles

Criticisms
 Voluntary process
 Set minimum standards, but do not define optimum standards
for excellence
 Only address purely formal aspects of administration without
addressing specific content
 Too expensive and time-consuming
14-16

17. External Mechanisms of
Accountability

The political process
 Citizens can elect police chiefs, sheriffs, and other
officials and thus, they control the police and other
government agencies through the political process
 Executive Branch
• Appoints police chiefs, directors of state police, U.S.
attorney general
 Legislative Branch
• Budgets
 Judicial Branch
• Serves as a check and balance, assuring compliance with
the law
14-17

18. The Courts

The Supreme Court and the Police
 Mapp v. Ohio (1961): “all evidence obtained by searches and
seizures in violation of the Constitution is, by that same authority,
inadmissible in a state court

Impact of Supreme Court Decisions
 Miranda requirements changed how officers are trained and go
about gathering evidence
 Studies show the exclusionary rule does not limit the crime-fighting
capacity of the police
 Court is limited, though, as it cannot supervise day-today police
operations

Civil Suit against the Police
 Victims of police abuse can sue in federal court under state or
federal law for civil damages
 Lawsuits are expensive, time-consuming, and difficult to win
14-18

19. Federal “Pattern or Practice” Suits

Department of Justice Suits
 Most pattern or practice suits are brought through the
U.S. Justice Department
 Pattern or practice cases are settled through a consent
decree, a memorandum of agreement, or an
investigative findings letter
 Pattern or practice cases: more than “sporadic bad
incidents” and requires “information indicating a pattern
of misconduct”

State and Private Suits
 Attorney General can bring civil suits against
departments
14-19

20. Federal “Pattern or Practice” Suits
Cont.
 Court-Ordered Reforms
 Require a set of management changes
related to accountability including use of force
reporting, EI systems, improved citizen
complaint procedures, and officer training
 Court-Appointed Independent Monitors
 Monitors function to oversee implementation
of the court-ordered reforms, assists the
department in implementing reforms, and to
issue public reports on reform progress
14-20

21. Federal “Pattern or Practice” Suits
Cont. II

The Impact of Consent Decrees
 Overall, they were successful in achieving their intended goals

Thinking About Court-Ordered Reform
 Is litigation an effective tool for bringing about organizational
change in law enforcement agencies?
 Is litigation an appropriate tool in all situations?
 Will reforms be sustained following the end of a MOA or consent
decree?

Injunctions
 Led by civil rights groups to target police practices that
systematically violate citizen rights

Criminal Prosecution
 Police officers who violate the law can be prosecuted as criminals
 Successful persecution is extremely difficult
14-21

22. Citizen Oversight of the Police


Citizen Oversight: The process by which people
who are not sworn officers are involved in some
way in the review of citizen complaints against
police officers
Rests on the assumption that police subculture
prevents officers from objectively investigating
complaints against fellow officers
14-22

23. Two Models of Citizen Oversight

1. Civilian Review Boards
 A board of citizens that review individual complaints
and make recommendations to the police chief

2. Police Auditors
 Do not investigate individual citizen complaints
 Monitor the operations of the police department

Goals and Objectives
 Both operate on the assumption that providing some
citizen input will improve policing
 Seek increased transparency of police departments
 Both issue detailed public reports of findings
14-23

24. Citizen Oversight: Pro and Con

Cons:





It intrudes on the professional independence of the police
Non-officers are not qualified to review police operations
Too expensive and duplicates the work of internal affairs
Internal affairs units sustain more complaints against
police officers
Pros:
 Serves to open up police departments and end historic
isolation from the public
 Enhances public confidence in the complaint process
14-24

25. The New Paradigm: Complaints as
a “Learning” Tool


Complaints were once ignored and went
uninvestigated, but today, departments view
complaints as tools to gain useful information
about possible problems that need to be
addressed.
Blue-Ribbon Commissions
 A form of external accountability
 Function to bring together experts in the field and
define minimum standards that can be used to seek
improvement in local departments
 Sponsor original research and generate new
knowledge about policing
 Comprehensive in scope
14-25

26. The News Media




Play an important role in police accountability
through reporting on what the police are doing on
a daily basis
Helps public to make informed decisions relating
to policing
Influential in exposing serious police problems
Sometimes contribute to police problems
 Only represent sensational stories
 Focus too much on crime and ignore other police work
 Tend to emphasize negative aspects of policing
• Unwritten rule of news media is that good news is not news
14-26

27. Public Interest Organizations
 Public Interest Orgs. like the American
Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in Oakland
are involved in attacking police
misconduct
 ACLU briefs were the basis for the Court’s
decision in the landmark Mapp and Miranda
cases
 NAACP has long record of fighting police
use of excessive force against African
Americans
14-27

28. Accountability and Crime Control: A
Trade-Off?
 Do strict accountability measures limit the
crime control effectiveness of the police?
 Bayley argues breaking the law does little
to improve crime control and harms the
police, weakens their authority and
reduces crime-control effectiveness
14-28

29. A Mixed Approach to Police
Accountability
 Represents a blend of internal and
external mechanisms
 No single method is the key to achieving
accountability
 System of checks and balances
•
•
•
•
Elected officials
Police administrators
Courts
Citizens
14-29