General Assembly action decimates policing in Maryland
In the name of “police accountability and transparency” the partisan General Assembly hastily cobbled together pernicious amendments to existing laws and created new laws that systematically decimates Maryland policing and its ability to effectively perform its statutory duties to safeguard lives and property, maintain order; provide public safety, enforce laws; and make arrests.
The rights of police officers are guaranteed by the Constitution and U.S. Supreme Court precedence. However, the General Assembly has repealed the “Maryland Law Enforcement Officer’s Bill of Rights” to deny officers their constitutionally guaranteed rights to due process and equal protection, under the Fourteenth Amendment, as well as violate police officer’s privacy rights by amending the Maryland Public Information Act.
However, this Maryland law is in violation of the existing Privacy Act of 1974 and the Freedom of Information Act regarding employment records, personal identification identifiers, health and security information prohibited from being publicly disclosed.
The most draconian effect of this law is the mandate a “police officer who uses lethal force against a person in a manner inconsistent with [Maryland Use of Force Statute, Section 3-524] that results in death [or serious injury] may be charged with manslaughter, murder, … reckless endangerment or assault under Title 2 of the Maryland Criminal Code.”
This mandate is legally flawed because the crime of murder, manslaughter, and assault all require intent, which requires “a deliberate, premeditated, and willful killing committed by lying in wait” or wanton disregard for the life and safety of another.
In Graham vs. Connor, the Supreme Court found that “reasonableness of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight. The calculus of reasonableness must embody allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second judgments — in circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving — about the amount of force that is necessary in a particular situation.”
This new law is not consistent with the current national policing use of force standard of “objectively reasonableness” established by the same Supreme Court decision. The “Maryland Use of Force Statue” requirement for “necessary force and proportional” is not recognized by the courts ( judicial notice) or professional law enforcement organizations nationwide.
Additionally, the law mandates the elimination of the “Qualified Immunity” doctrine under the U.S. Supreme Court doctrine of Harlow v. Fitzgerald..
The General Assembly has added s a new subtitle “Police Accountability and Discipline,” to Title 3 of its Maryland Public Safety Article, which mandates “police accountability boards for each county,” be created, “appointing civilian members to ‘charging committees’ and trial boards. . . membership determined by the local legislative body… Active police officer may not be a member of a police accountability body.”
However, the law as written does not specify core competencies, terms of office, financial compensation, security vetting and removal of “appointed civilian members to charging committees and trial boards.
The only reference to core competencies is a superficial and inexplicit statement, the Maryland Police Training and Standards Commission will provide “individuals training on matters relating to police procedures,” and “develop and adopt by regulation, a model uniform disciplinary matrix for use by each law enforcement agency in the state.”
This vague and obscure wording does not identify current nationally recognized and validated evidence-based police disciplinary standards or matrices.
This legislation will spawn a whole new cottage industry of defense attorneys filing frivolous lawsuits alleging police officers misconduct to leverage their client’s pending criminal prosecution, using any and all personally protected information obtained during any police administrative hearing personnel records and prejudicial and libelous information the gleaned from police.
This is a form of double jeopardy and opportunity for harassment and other nefarious personal attacks on police officers and their families.
The General Assembly should prepare itself for a litany of legal actions ranging from Writs of Mandamus, court injunctions, and voter referendum to rectify their anti-police laws.
Robert A. Smith is president and CEO of Protection Metrics, a law enforcement and intelligence training and education firm. A retired U.S. Secret Service special agent-in- charge, he is a life member of the International Association of Chiefs of Police, and former deputy assistant director of the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center. He lives in Annapolis.