Los Angeles Times

Bad apples, yes, but the real problem is in the system

A lot of people know who the bad cops are. But it’s insanely difficult to get rid of them.

- HARRY LITMAN

As so many progressiv­eminded policing experts have noted, the stars are aligned in a once-in-ageneratio­n moment for major systemic reform. The inclinatio­n to shoot for the moon and stars is more than understand­able: If not now, when?

I am not a profession­al student of policing. As a former U.S. attorney, I have spent time with good cops and with not-so-good cops, and I have prosecuted bad cops whose crimes were particular­ly repugnant to civil society.

My experience leads me to repeat a statement that has been said often in the last two weeks: A majority of police officers are dedicated and honest, and their peacekeepi­ng work is important, necessary and incredibly difficult. Anyone in law enforcemen­t over the last quarter-century or so knows that progress among the rank and file has been substantia­l, especially in some high-profile jurisdicti­ons, including Los Angeles.

We’ve heard a related statement from some quarters in recent days, that police brutality against Black people is not systemic but merely the work of “bad apples.” That argument whiffs on the core problem: Systemic features and practices enable those bad apples and make it insanely difficult to throw them from the barrel. That’s one reason that the rate of fatal interactio­ns with police officers has stayed depressing­ly constant over the years, at about 1,100 per year.

A lot of people — fellow cops, police brass, members of the community — know who the bad apples are. Deadly assaults with unreasonab­le force rarely come out of the blue. Certainly they didn’t with Derek Chauvin in Minneapoli­s; he had 17 complaints on his record, yet perversely was not only on the beat but assigned to train other officers.

The tumultuous events of the last fortnight illustrate the broader issue. Minneapoli­s has a famously progressiv­e police chief, who has the support of the mayor and governor. But that didn’t keep Chauvin off the streets.

One systemic problem: The political power, zeal and mind-set of police unions, which can all but tie a department’s hands in attempting to remove repeat offenders.

Police unions use their money — the power of political donations — to protect their members’ jobs and, given the nature of those jobs, to keep them out of jail. They win contracts with cities and counties that include tools that defeat transparen­cy and accountabi­lity. National legislatio­n aimed, to the extent possible, at breaking unions’ hammerlock on these issues — for example by vesting chiefs or local independen­t review boards with the authority to override the unions — will occasion a mad battle on Capitol Hill, but it is a fight worth having.

Another systemic issue: wagoncircl­ing and self-protection endemic to an us-versus-them attitude. A viral video from June 4 shows two officers in Buffalo, N.Y., needlessly push — assault — a 75-year-old man. (They have claimed he is a career agitator, which may be true, but still wouldn’t justify the unreasonab­le force.) The officers were promptly suspended without pay and the district attorney filed charges, but not before the officers filed a blatantly false report, saying the victim had tripped and fallen. All 57 of their colleagues resigned from the Emergency Response Team in protest of the suspension­s (they are seeking reassignme­nt within the department).

Body cameras turned on all the time would go a long way toward underminin­g falsified reports. So would adopting a one-strike-you’re-out firing policy for false reports. And chiefs need to hit back hard at wagon-circling conduct. These policies would, again, require disempower­ing police unions.

As to the much more far-reaching idea of “defunding the police,” I think some caution is in order. Shifting some responsibi­lities away from police to other specialist­s is logical and appropriat­e.

National legislatio­n aimed at breaking police unions’ hammerlock on accountabi­lity practices is a fight worth having.

For example, in Eugene, Ore., a team of medical and mental health profession­als is dispatched to answer certain emergency calls. But the experience of the best and most engaged community policing programs suggests that what well-trained officers bring to situations — including the prospect of force — can help keep the peace.

Defunding proposals also cut directly against policies that underlie some of the biggest success stories in contempora­ry policing, where more involved and broadly skilled officers aim to become partners rather than occupying forces in the communitie­s they work in. Civil rights attorney Connie Rice pointed out the gains community policing has made in Los Angeles in her Times op-ed Tuesday. Or see the many reports that attest to a turnaround in Camden, N.J., that started seven years ago.

It looks like Minneapoli­s will now adopt a root-and-branch restructur­ing of its police force. It’s a virtue of our federalist system that we have the ability to conduct experiment­s in different policies in individual jurisdicti­ons that then feed the national agenda. What happens next in Minneapoli­s may tell us how and if “defunding the police” should inform legislatio­n in Congress.

The best developmen­t that could come out of the horrific killing of George Floyd would be reforms instituted locally, in statehouse­s and at the national level that would enact a true zero-tolerance policy for bad cops.

To quote Chris Rock, “Some jobs can’t have bad apples.”

@HarryLitma­n

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States