Lawmen and officials walk fine line on social media posts
On Nov. 9 Police Chief Lang Holland of Marshall, Ark., resigned after posts, attributed to him on Parler, called for violence and harassment against Democrats and widely circulated on social media. The town’s mayor said the inflammatory remarks did not reflect the community.
On Nov. 11 the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission released a statement that an employee had resigned while the agency was investigating the employee’s role in posting inappropriate comments on a personal social media site.
Commission Director Pat Fitts said the comments did not reflect its values and were counter to its efforts for inclusivity and diversity.
“We take this issue seriously and have been investigating it vigorously since Monday,” Fitts said.
After discovering that the employee’s personal social media page had displayed offensive photos and comments, the Game and Fish Commission immediately placed the employee on administrative leave and began an internal investigation. The employee subsequently resigned while the investigation was underway.
Last week, Stuttgart Police Chief Mark Duke made a post that complained that the presidential election had been stolen from Donald Trump and those who had stolen the election were all “criminals,” characterizing them as “deep state pedophiles.” Accompanying his post was a captioned photograph, or meme, of former Soviet dictator Josef Stalin.
On Nov. 16, the mayor of Stuttgart, David Earney issued a statement before the city council meeting regarding Duke’s social media post, stating he had accepted an apology and expression of regret from Duke for the divisive political post. The mayor went on to say that he wanted a social media policy to be drafted immediately, with the help of the city attorney, for all city employees, council members and elected officials.
While city residents called for Duke’s resignation, Earney announced on Monday he would be resigning as mayor effective Dec. 31.
Can law enforcement officers and city employees enjoy the same level of free speech protection civilians make use of every day on social media or can they be punished for expressing themselves on politically charged topics?
As more and more individuals are going to social media to exercise their freedom of speech, there has been much debate on whether city employees, elected officials and law enforcement officers should be held to a higher standard for their actions on and off-duty.
Can law enforcement officers and city employees enjoy the same level of free speech protection civilians make use of every day on social media or can they be punished for expressing themselves on politically charged topics?
Every certified law enforcement officer serving the state, a county, or a municipality in the state of Arkansas who goes through the Commission on Law Enforcement Standards and Training (CLEST), is held accountable for obeying the standard rules set forth by the agency. All sworn officers are expected to abide by the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics as outlined in CLEST Regulation 1020 Specification S21 and a signed copy of the Code of Ethics is maintained in the employee’s personal file.
According to CLEST, the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics, which is administered as an oath to all trainees during the Basic Course, states that officers should keep their private life unsullied as an example to all and to behave in a manner that does not bring discredit to themselves or the agency.
The oath also states the officer will never act officiously or permit personal feelings, prejudices, political beliefs, aspirations, animosities, or friendships to influence decisions.
The Arkansas Municipal League offers samples of suggested personnel handbooks to help cities establish guidelines, including guidelines for appropriate conduct stating that cities expect their employees to accept certain responsibilities, adhere to acceptable principles in matters of personal conduct, and exhibit a high degree of personal integrity at all times. The example says this not only involves sincere respect for the rights and feelings of others, but also demands that both while at work and in their personal lives, employees refrain from behavior that might be harmful to the employees, co-workers, the citizens, and/or the city.
Whether an employee is on-duty or off-duty, his or her conduct reflects on the city, and an employee should observe the highest standards of professionalism at all times.
Those standards are in place in the city of Pine Bluff, which has social media policies in place for the police department, fire department, and non-uniformed employees. The guidelines encourage employees to participate freely in social media while still upholding the mission, vision, values, service and behavioral standards.
The policy for the Pine Bluff Fire Department states that firefighters’ online presence reflects the department and that their actions captured via images, posts, or comments can reflect on department because of their employment status with the organization.
The policy also states that anything posted online is public information.
The Pine Bluff Police Department policy provides information of a precautionary nature as well as prohibitions on the use of social media by department personnel. When it comes to the use of blogs, social media web postings, chat rooms, etc, as an employee of the Pine Bluff Police Department, the use and application of good judgment, decency, and common sense is expected both on and off duty, the guidelines state. This expectation also applies while performing official duties of the department and/or engaging in the various computer or digital media activities both on and off duty.
Employees making posts on social media are also expected to be respectful to all members of the Pine Bluff Police Department including administrators, supervisors, and their coworkers. This also includes the elected officials of the City of Pine Bluff as well as other local law enforcement officials.
Speech containing obscene or sexually explicit language, images, or acts and statements or other forms of speech that ridicule, malign, disparage, or otherwise express bias against any race, religion, gender, or any other protected class of individuals will not be tolerated according to the policy.