1 Ethics in Law Enforcement

2  Define ethics and discuss the importance of the appropriate training  Recognize the National Law Enforcement Disciplinary Research Project (The National Institute of Ethics)  Explain the Continuum of Compromise  Explain the Code of Silence Performance Objectives

3 … more on Objectives Identify Why Law Enforcement Officers, Both on and off Duty, Should Exemplify the Highest Ethical and Moral Standard

4 What are Ethics?

5  Standards or rules of conduct by which we live. A system of rights and wrongs  Values—Beliefs upon which our actions and decisions are made  Integrity—Having character that develops hope, honesty, courage, empathy, etc. It is wrong to lie, steal, and cheat.

6 Do We Need to Teach Ethics? YES WE DO!

7 Ethics and Integrity in Law Enforcement is the Greatest Training and Leadership Need for Several Critical Reasons

8  Misconduct becomes front page news that is often distorted  Citizens confidence in agency declines  Career ending ramifications (promotions/demotions)  Officers and their families face public humiliation  Some officers as a result of misconduct commit suicide (two to three times the number of those who die in the line of duty)  Civil law suits resulting in enormous settlements and judgments

9 Ethics Should Be Viewed as Career Survival Training  We need to be trained to prevent us from succumbing to unethical behavior.  Simply defining ethics and reading the Code of Ethics can’t achieve this.  Further evidence to support the need for comprehensive training. (Recent news)  We need the training to survive in our career and make it to retirement.

10 National Law Enforcement Disciplinary Research Project A national research project conducted by training commissions/councils throughout the nation that compiled statistics between 2000 and 2005 on officers who received formal discipline by their respective state commission or council.

11 Findings  Between 2000 and ,884 law officers went through the de-certification process  502 of these cases were dismissed  Of the remaining 3,382 officers  2,296 officers were totally decertified

12  The average age of the de-certified officer was 32  93% were male and 7% were female  73% were Caucasian 19% were African American and 8% were Hispanic  85% were line officers  Average years of sworn service was 7.2 years Additional Findings

13 Crimes Committed Resulting in De- certification  Greed (26.99%)  Anger (19.69%)  Lust (12.74%)  Peer Pressure (12.70%)

14 Questions?

15 Before training, we must understand what causes officers to commit unethical acts  They justify their actions with excuses  They experience momentary selfishness  They make a bad decision  They are afraid of paying the price for doing the right thing  Accountability? Do we hold people accountable?

16 Continuum of Compromise The continuum of compromise outlines the path of ethical compromise and can be used to help officers mentally prepare for the ethical dilemmas they will face

17  It is the framework for understanding and teaching how the transition from “honest cop” to “compromised officer” can occur.  When inadequately prepared, even the most honest, above reproach officers can make inappropriate split-second ethical decisions.

18  Understanding the issues and being mentally prepared will help officers assume responsibility for and make more appropriate decisions.  Officers who view compromise as an “all or none” phenomenon will not see compromise as an unlikely event and will not become mentally prepared.

19 First is a Sense of Victimization  When young officers over-invest in and over-identify with their professional role the will develop a sense of singular identity based on their job and an increase sense of victimization  A perceived sense of victimization can lead to the rationalization and justification of acts of omission  As a sense of perceived victimization intensifies, officers become more distrusting and resentful of anyone controls their job role

20 Second is Acts of Omission  “ Acts of Omission” occur when officers rationalize and justify not doing things they are responsible for doing  Acts of omission can include selective non- productivity (ignoring certain traffic and criminal violations)  Over looking activity, over looking superficial investigations, omitting paperwork, lack of follow up, and just doing enough to get by are examples of activities officers omit

21 Third is Acts of Commission – Administrative  Once officers routinely omit job responsibilities, the journey to the next step is not a difficult one to make  Instead of just omitting duties and responsibilities, officers commit administrative violations— Breaking small rules is no big deal

22 Finally, Acts of Commission – Criminal  Unsuspecting officers can unwittingly travel to the next and final stage of the continuum  At first, acts of criminal commission appear benign and not any different than the acts of administrative commission  Officers will rationalize embellishing overtime and payroll records because they owe me. What’s the big deal?”

23 Acts of Commission – Criminal (Cont.)  The initial honest, dedicated, above reproach officers now ask, “where did it all go wrong,” “how did this happen” as they face the realities of personal and professional devastation and criminal prosecution.

24 Questions?

25 “Code of Silence” Do Officers Participate in the Code of Silence? Does the Code of Silence Exist?

26 What is the Code of Silence?

27 Academy Recruit Code of Silence Research  79% said that a law enforcement code of silence exists and is fairly common throughout the nation  52% said that the fact that the code of silence doesn’t really bother them  24% said the code of silence is more justified when excessive force involves a suspect who is arrogant or abusive  46% said they would not tell on another officer for having sex on duty

28 Continued  7% said nothing is wrong with lying to prevent another officer from getting in trouble because the bond of loyalty among officers is so important  23% said that they would not tell on another officer for regularly smoking marijuana off duty  24% said that they would be more likely to participate in the code of silence if their supervisor and the administration treated employees with great respect

29 Research of the types of incidents that prompted officers to take part in the code of silence  Anger was the most frequent incident over which the code of silence occurs (41%)  Peer Pressure was the second most common motivation (20%)  (16%) of the circumstances were motivated by greed  (8%) of the situations were related to lust  (15%) of the remaining incidents were DUI offenses, illegal searches, misconduct, FTO doing personal business on duty, and perjury

30 What Officers Suggested for Controlling the Code (Ones Who Participated)  Conduct good ethics training  More consistent accountability  Ensure open communication between officers and leaders  Provide an anonymous reporting system  Protect whistleblowers

31 Officers Who Had Not Concealed Information  Teach officers to make good ethical and moral direction (ethics training)  Hire officers with integrity  Hold people accountable for their actions  Give individuals a confidential way to report misconduct  Consistent enforcement of the rules

32 Not Dealing With the Code of Silence Will Eventually Destroy the Integrity of an Agency

33 Conclusion The Oath of Honor—I Will Always Hold Myself and Others Accountable for Having Courage to Do the Right Thing

34  Define ethics and discuss the importance of the appropriate training  National Law Enforcement Disciplinary Research Project (The National Institute of Ethics)  Continuum of Compromise  Code of Silence Performance Objectives

35 … more on Objectives Identify Why Law Enforcement Officers, Both on and off Duty, Should Exemplify the Highest Ethical and Moral Standard