August 9th marked the one year anniversary of the deadly confrontation between Officer Darren Wilson and Michael Brown in Ferguson, MO, and a date that will carry a bit of infamy in the history of policing in America. Far more than just another high profile encounter resulting in the death of a violent, assaultive offender at the hands of police – a conclusion both local authorities and the United States Justice Department arrived at in the aftermath – the shooting of Brown vaulted a small and mostly unknown St Louis suburb into international prominence as the epicenter and symbol of a growing conflict between police and many of the communities they struggle to protect. In Ferguson, as well as many other communities across the country, the simmering distrust boiled over into explosive violence.
Ferguson wasn’t the only flashpoint – other high profile incidents followed – but, without Ferguson and absent the growing media fervor over controversial police actions, most would have likely faded into obscurity in fairly short order after brief local notoriety. In some, as with Darren Wilson, the officers were or will ultimately be cleared of wrongdoing. In others, the officers acted within the law but their tactics have come under fire. And, sadly, some have or will come under indictment, whether deservedly or in the wake of political pressure.
This is not a rant about media oversight, or even the tendency of some outlets to fan the flames for what are ostensibly self-serving reasons. Such is the landscape of our modern information age and one we need to either adjust to or learn how to become competent players within. And it is not about how the political class responds to, hides from, or exploits the hard truths of our profession. They are politicians and, despite campaign promises and carefully crafted personas boasting uncompromising principle, politics is very often about opportunitism, compromise, and manipulation.
If the fallout of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Eric Garner on Staten Island, Tamir Rice in Cleveland, or other high profile incidents haven’t yet invaded your world, it is coming. This article and its companion to follow are about what we can anticipate, and how to take care of ourselves in a changing world.
------------------
On August 12th, Illinois Governor Bruce Rauner signed into law Illinois Senate Bill 1304 (SB1304), popularly described as a so-called “police reform package.” Actually, a close inspection of the law, as originally introduced, shows its original purpose to be rather more benign as it relates to actual law enforcement. A brief synopsis of the bill explains it… “amends the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963. In provision regarding refund of costs, fines, or fees upon reversal of conviction on a finding of actual innocence, the refund shall be determined by the judge and paid by the clerk of the court based upon the availability of funds in the subject fund account.”
Had it remained merely a legislated revision of dry criminal procedure and directed at the state’s various circuit courts, of interest only to the Land of Lincoln’s various county clerks and defense attorneys, no one would have paid it the slightest heed. Instead, two House Amendments added later make it somewhat of a game changer for cops in Illinois. It’s these amendments that turn it into a “police reform package.” As one of those cops, the coming changes have definitely gotten my attention.
The bill’s first amendment, now written into law, is called the “Police & Community Relations Improvement Act.” Although the act is lengthy and written in legalese, the relevant takeaways for Illinois officers include the following (from a Bill Summary Overview prepared by the Police Benevolent & Protective Association):
- Requires independent review of all officer-involved deaths.
- Clarifies and codifies case law regarding the appointment of special prosecutors.
- Requires law enforcement agencies to report, on a monthly basis, the number of officer-involved shootings and arrest related deaths.
- Expands the basic training curriculum to include courses on procedural justice, cultural competency, implicit bias, proper use of force and law enforcement authority, dealing with the disease of addiction, the mentally ill, sexual assault victims, and more.
- Requires annual in-service training on law updates and use of force and three year training on procedural justice, civil rights, cultural competency, and proper use of force.
- Requires data collection on pedestrian stops which result in an arrest, frisk, or search. • Officers must also provide stop receipts for all “stop and frisks”.
- Provides additional funding to the State Crime Laboratory Fund to assist in the clearing of the backlog of DNA kits. • Requires the State Police to update to an electronic tracking system and submit quarterly reports on the processing of DNA evidence submitted to the lab.
- Defines chokeholds and limits the use of chokeholds to situations when deadly force is warranted.
- Creates a database for law enforcement to identify and keep track of officers dismissed for misconduct.
- Establishes the Commission on Police Professionalism to review performance standards governing the professionalism of officers, including the current training requirements and whether law enforcement officers should be licensed.
The second of the amendments is specific to the use of body cameras. Although their use in Illinois is not mandated at this time, and departments where they are used have implemented them voluntarily, elements of the law portend a time when they will be required of all the state’s patrol officers. The PBPA Bill Summary Outline provides as the minimum requirements of the bill:
- Establishes minimum standards for the use of body cameras that must be adopted by any agency utilizing officer worn body cameras.
- Requires cameras to be turned on at all times when the officer is on duty and responding to calls for service, during any law enforcement-related encounter, and when the officer is engaged in any law enforcement-related activity that occurs while the officer is on duty.
- Requires cameras to be turned off when practicable at the request of a victim, witness, or community member reporting a crime or when speaking with a confidential informant.
- Allows officers the discretion to turn off the cameras when engaged in community caretaking functions, such as participating in town halls, conducting community outreach, or delivering death notifications.
- Requires officers whenever practicable to provide notice of recording in situations where an expectation of privacy exists, such as entering someone’s home or hospital room.
- Officers are allowed to review the recordings prior to making statements or filing reports; however, the officer must indicate doing so in incident reports or other documentation.
- Includes a mechanism to protect officers from discipline for minor policy or procedure violations, such as uniform violations, that may be viewed on the recording by the officer’s supervisor.
- Clarifies that the eavesdropping act does not prohibit citizens from recording officers in their official duties in public or where the officer has no expectation of privacy. • However, provides that such recording by citizens may be limited as officers are expressly permitted to take reasonable action to maintain safety and control, secure crime scenes and accident sites, protect the integrity and confidentiality of investigations, and protect the public safety and order.
- Exempts officer-worn body camera recordings from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), with some exceptions. • If a recording has been flagged due to a complaint, use of force, discharge of a firearm, arrest, or resulting death or bodily harm, the recording shall be disclosed in accordance with FOIA. • However, if a victim or witness has an expectation of privacy (i.e. sensitive situations in the home), the law enforcement agency must obtain the permission of the victim or witness prior to FOIA disclosure.
- Provides a grant funding mechanism to assist law enforcement agencies with purchasing officer-worn body camera equipment and storage.
I am not necessarily opposed to most of these provisions or their impact on how I do my job. Those of the “Police & Community Relations Improvement Act” provide greater transparency for an increasingly skeptical public, lend themselves to improved professionalism and competency through training in a rapidly evolving world that demands more of us than ever, and supports my belief that law enforcement should be a true profession with demanding standards of education, training, performance, and ongoing personnel development. And although I not a fan of body cameras for officers and doubt they really do what most of their proponents believe they will, I think the law as crafted is not unreasonable. Believe me, as a lifelong resident of Illinois, that’s not something you’ll often hear.
I am certain, however, there will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth among many of my colleagues. I am sure, too, I’ll be hearing from some of you reading this now telling me how I’m naïve, that doom is sure to follow, policing is terminally defanged, etc, etc… Go ahead; I’ll gladly entertain dissenting thoughts and views (spelling and grammar counts, BTW).
------------------------
As you can tell, almost all of the content of these two amendments can be traced to recent events dominating the public eye and originating outside Illinois, such as Ferguson, Staten Island, Cleveland, and wherever the clamor for body cameras to ensure police accountability has been heard. Other states and jurisdictions are scrambling to create law and policies in response to these controversial, high profile incidents, in many cases far more exacting and restrictive of the police. This is the path we are on, like it or not. For the first time in many years – decades, even – a growing number of the population has come to expect the worst of law enforcement; we are expected that, without supervision and utter transparency, we will violate rights at the drop of a hat, we will behave brutally without justification, and we will be driven by racial prejudice. This is, of course, ridiculous and insulting but it is perceived reality by a not insignificant number, and the political class has been eager to placate their anger.
Saturated with criticism of our profession, frustrated at the willful ignorance of those unwilling to accept that sometimes people acting violently must be met with force, and tired of being presumed guilty by association when one of our ranks does screw up, police officers morale has lately been plummeting. The sense of anger and/or weariness is palpable. The changing landscape feels foreign for veteran cops and many are starting to wonder if it’s time to get out. An alarming number wonder why anyone would enter the profession today and even actively discourage young people from considering law enforcement as a vocation.
So, as we look back at the one year anniversary of the deadly confrontation between Officer Darren Wilson and Michael Brown in Ferguson, MO, we face the ongoing fallout of a year of constant and often harsh scrutiny. Taking care of ourselves emotionally becomes a priority, some steps of which we will address in our next article.
