By Sam Frescoe
Welcome to the next installment of Sam’s Estimate. Sam’s
Estimate is an evaluation, assessment, or appraisal of a particular issue,
organization, or topic. Typically, items of interest are selected from the
current American discourse; however, some are selected otherwise. The Estimate
attempts to combine facts and philosophy in a thoughtful manner.
·
Opinion:
a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or
knowledge
·
Perspective:
a particular attitude toward, or way of regarding, something; a point of view
·
Fact:
a piece of information presented as having objective reality
·
Philosophy:
pursuit of wisdom; an analysis of the grounds of and concepts expressing
fundamental beliefs
Sam’s Estimate offers the opinions and perspectives of the
author. Facts are cited and philosophy is championed as mechanisms to inform
those opinions and perspectives. While the rigor demonstrated by The Estimate
is not satisfactory for a comprehensive defense, this post is not intended to
declare a matter “settled.” The intention is to be thought provoking in a
grounded manner. – Sam Frescoe
From the American Discourse
This is the fourth of four planned Estimate segments focused
on Black Lives Matter. This post is based on the following BLM connected
publications (12 July 2016): Campaign
Zero.
Getting Started
This post presents the Assessment in the following order:
BLUF, sentiment, the Assessment, and supporting comments. This post attempts to
estimate the impact of BLM’s Campaign
Zero. There are bulleted statements throughout the post that contain my thoughts, opinions and perspectives. Additionally, to better understand the breadth and depth of particular phrases and sets of statements as a whole, I employ an examination of synonyms; and then, attempt to reconstruct the spirit and intent of the original thoughts using those synonyms. This is not an attempt to put words in their mouths; whereas, an attempt to understand their thoughts.
Side Note – Start
It is assumed that conclusions from prior Estimates hold for this Estimate.
· BLM believes black people experience physical violence sanctioned by the government.
· BLM believes black people experience political, economic, and social violence sanctioned by the government; and, black people are powerless to stand against that violence.
· BLM is popular, active, appealing, and dangerous.
· BLM is angry, virtue signals, injudicious, racist, sexist, and politically progressive
· BLM is a contradiction and is disingenuous, a racist movement, a sexist movement, a disruptive movement, a separatist social-political movement, a homosexual-phobic organization, and is illogical.
Side Note – End
Bottom Line Up Front
·
Champaign Zero is a policy platform/agenda associated
with BLM· Champaign Zero intends to leverage executive powers of Federal and State institutions and authorities
· Champaign Zero is exclusively focused on regulating policing practices
Popular Sentiment
“Indeed, in America there is a strange and powerful belief
that if you stab a black person ten times, the bleeding stops and the healing
begins the moment the assailant drops the knife. We believe white dominance to
be a fact of the inert past, a delinquent debt that can be made to disappear if
only we don’t look.” [1] –
Ta-Nehisi Coates“It was the last day of school, and I was walking with my dad, preparing to leave. Suddenly, he paused, looked at me intently and said, ‘Son, you’re a black male, and that’s two strikes against you.’ To the general public, anything that I did would be perceived as malicious and deserving of severe punishment and I had to govern myself accordingly. I was seven years old.” [2] – Jazmine Hughes
“We’ll probably have to have a few uncomfortable conversations to sort of get things right, so everybody can walk and enjoy America like it’s supposed to be enjoyed.” [3] – Jamie Foxx
“Also, police lives matter. We have to maintain law and order. Without the presence of the police, we would be lost. We would destroy ourselves without them.” “So I definitely see a value in them. But we need to clean up both the communities and the police force.” [4] – Arthur Reed (aka Silky Slim) Slim is the former leader of Baton Rouge, Louisiana’s Southside Wrecking Crew and an ex-high-ranking Crip.
“When people say ‘Black Lives Matter,’” Obama said, “that doesn’t mean blue lives don’t matter.” [5] – President Obama
Sam’s Assessment
1. Champaign
Zero is a platform of policy proposals intended to change law enforcement
behavior using Federal and State institutions and authorities.
a. Acceptance
of restricting officers suspected of misconduct or wrong-doing.
b. Assumes
police violence against black actors is always unacceptable.
2. Champaign
Zero is associated with BLM as an agenda for realizing BLM objectives (ex:
“…reforming structural issues…” with law enforcement).
a. Champaign
Zero desires to correct perceived shortfalls of American society by correcting
the institutions of that society. In this case, policing.
b. Champaign
Zero demands outcome-based equality.
3. Champaign
Zero presents itself as an authority on policing in America.
a. Routine
presentation of claims as facts without supporting evidence.
b. Champaign
Zero holds police departments to blame for all deaths at the hands of officers,
exclusively and without exception.
c. Direct
association with President Obama indicates political popularity.
Side Note – Start
What factors must be present to
create a criminal situation?” – 1) Law labeling behavior as criminal
(government actor); 2) Law enforcement (government actor); 3) Opportunity for
criminality (any actor); 4) Person that behaves criminally (any actor); 5) Profit/Benefit
to such behavior (any actor).
What factors must be present for a
police killing?” – 1) a police officer; 2) a suspect/subject; 3) the act of
killing; 4) motivation to kill.
Side Note – End
COA-1: If Champaign Zero can claim victories for improving
“freedom and liberty” for blacks, then it is highly likely that BLM will seek
to realize additional political ends. Given the association of Champaign Zero
with BLM, and that BLM adheres to its Manifesto and Guiding Principles, then it
seems reasonable that BLM will likely continue pressing its position within
modern discourse. Examples may include the following.
a. Increase
media popularity; Increase acceptance by moderate groups (ex: Evangelical
Christians); Increase recruiting of resentful people groups.
b. Embrace
racism: Promote blacks issues as more legitimate than non-black issues; Increase
virtue signaling; Increase rhetoric against society at large; Blame entrenched “white
supremacy” as a root cause.
c. Embrace
sexism: Reduce role of males in authority positions; Promote plight of black
women; Seek to normalize LGBTQ behavior; Reduce traditional family constructs; Leverage
premise of white supremacy regardless of issue.
d. Promote
collective outcomes: Continue to demand changing societal institutions over
changing cultural expectations; Continue to segregate itself from norms while
demanding authorities embrace radical views as common; Embrace international
law as acceptable American law; Seek to bypass legislative processes by executive
action or judicial ruling.
Campaign Zero
Champaign Zero is a policy platform that advocates the
belief that “We can live in a world where the police don't kill people by
limiting police interventions, improving community interactions, and ensuring
accountability.”[1] To
that end, the platform is calling for “deliberate action from policy-makers at
all levels of government to implement these policy solutions.” [2]Champaign Zero is described by the Huffington Post[3] as a “set of policy demands on the federal and state level introduced by Black Lives Matter activists” and a “detailed list of specific proposals that they want to bring about “a world where the police don’t kill people.” The Huffington Post stated that the policy platform aims to reform existing structural issues with policing and put in place new systems that will end police violence against black Americans. Champaign Zero claims each proposal is informed by discussions with protesters from across the country and the recommendations of President Barack Obama’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing.
Champaign Zero is connected to BLM.
·
NPR reports that activists in the Black Lives
Matter movement have answered critics who have asked for specific policy
proposals. A group in the movement published a 10-point agenda to reduce police
violence in this country. The plan is called "Campaign Zero." [4]
·
The Washington Post reported that the leaders of
Black Lives Matter released a series of policy solutions to address police
killings, excessive force, profiling and racial discrimination, and other
problems in law enforcement, called “Campaign Zero.” [5]
Champaign Zero seems to have been founded by four
individuals, The Planning Team: @nettaaaaaaaa, @deray, @samswey, and @MsPackyetti. [6]
Review of their associated biographies reveals the following: two are
protesters, two are teachers, one is a data analyst, all are Millennials, all
are black, all are associated with urban center issues, three achieved
celebrity notoriety as a result of Ferguson, and one graduated from Stanford having
studied how race and racism impact the U.S. political system.
Champaign Zero is popular with national politics and is
associated with President Obama. Referencing the picture below, Brittany
Packnett (left) of Campaign Zero meets with President Barack Obama, Rep. John
Lewis, Senior Adviser Valerie Jarrett and Rev. Al Sharpton at the White House
to discuss race relations on Feb. 18, 2016.[7]
Framing by Campaign Zero
Frame-1: “More than one thousand people are killed by police
every year in America.” [9] – Hasty
Generalization – Given the lack of finite constraints (“every year”), and lack
of data source citation(s); then it is reasonable to call this claim into
question. Data from government and non-government sources seems to be limited
and mismatched. The Google query, “FBI people killed by police per year”, did
return government and non-government sources.[10]
Reporting FBI-based data seemed to focus on justifiable homicides and officer
homicides; whereas, non-government sites seemed to focus on total numbers.
Examples include: 1) Think Progress reporting 1186 deaths in 2015.[11]
2) KilledByPolice.net reports 773 deaths in 2013, 1111 in 2014, and 1208 in
2015.[12]
Both non-government sites claim to use news reports as a data collection source.Frame-2: “Nearly sixty percent of victims did not have a gun or were involved in activities that should not require police intervention such as harmless "quality of life" behaviors or mental health crises.” [13] – Hasty Generalization – Given the lack of finite constraints (“nearly sixty”, “should not”, “harmless”, “quality of life” behaviors, mental health crises), lack of data source citation(s), and lack of determination criteria; then it is reasonable to call this claim into question. If the claim is informed by data, then the large use of imprecise language suggests hasty generalizations are being passed as factual.
Frame-3: “We can live in an America where the police do not kill people. Police in England, Germany, Australia, Japan, and even cities like Buffalo, NY, and Richmond, CA, demonstrate that public safety can be ensured without killing civilians.” [14]
– Hasty
Generalization – Simple Google searching produces open source information suggesting
the claim is false (killings reported in England [15]
and Germany[16]
in 2015; no data was found for Australia or Japan; officer killings were
reported for NY [17]
and CA [18]
in 2016).
– Stacked
Evidence – Because policing reflects human nature as tempered by cultural
values, it should be noted that by comparing America with England, Germany,
Australia, Japan, and specific cities in NY and CA assumes that each respective
set of cultural values is identical, or capable of becoming identical enough,
to realize a desired output of human nature. In this case, police not killing
people. The claim does not address the issues of human nature, cultural
definitions of criminality, policing practices, or any other similar factors.
Frame-4: A comprehensive package of urgent policy solutions - informed by
data, research and human rights principles - can change the way police serve
our communities. [19]
– False
Authority – Reference The Planning Team composition. It does not hold that
Champaign Zero has policing expertise simply because it claims to be “informed
by data, research and human rights principles.”
– Hasty
Generalization – Campaign Zero does not specify data sources, research results,
or human rights principles. Their web site does offer summary data; however,
links to raw data sets, data acquisition procedures, original questions,
statistical analysis procedures, or acknowledgement of biases.
Side Note – Start
The result of a Google search
generally suggests that human rights principles, as a concept of governance,
are associated with the United Nations. The definition of each principle is
stated at the end of this post under the Critical Terms heading.
Side Note – End
Campaign Zero Areas of Interest
Objective-1: End policing of minor “broken windows” offenses.
Proposal-1a: Decriminalize these activities or de-prioritize their
enforcement: Consumption of Alcohol on Streets, Marijuana Possession,
Disorderly Conduct, Trespassing, Loitering, Disturbing the Peace (including
Loud Music), Spitting, Jaywalking, and Bicycling on the Sidewalk. Champaign
Zero does constrain the proposal to “activities do not threaten public safety.”
[1]
Side
Note – Start
False Authority – Champaign Zero does not define any activity, does not
explain how any activity does not pose a threat to public safety, and does not
define the scope of public safety.
False Authority – “Broken Windows” Theory is not defined. An abbreviated discussion
is at the end of this post under the Critical Terms heading.
For the purpose of argument, I assume the phrase “do not threaten public
safety” to mean those activities/behaviors do not realize harm to persons or
property not lawfully possessed by the actor. In this context, I agree that
there are circumstances that should not be criminalized: simple possession of
property and minding your own business. However, I disagree with disregarding
minor misconduct all together. Example-1: Disturbing the Peace should be
addressed by simple dispersal. Example-2: Trespassing (the unauthorized entry
upon any facility, installation or real property[2])
is a violation of property rights, and the actor(s) should be subject to
arrest.
Side
Note – Stop
Objective-2: Establish enforceable protections against
profiling to prevent police from intervening in civilian lives for no reason
other than the "suspicion" of their blackness or other aspects
of their identity.
Proposal-2a: Policies supporting the objective should include: [3]· immigration status, age, housing status, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, disability, HIV status, race, religion and national origin as protected groups
· the right for people to seek court orders to stop police departments from profiling
· bans on both intentional profiling and practices that have a disparate impact on protected groups
· ban stops for "furtive" movements such as a reaching for waistband or acting nervous
· ban stops for being in a high-crime area
· ban stops for matching a generalized description of a suspect (i.e. black male ages 15-25)
· require officers to establish objective justification for making a stop and to report every stop including location, race, gender, whether force was used and whether a firearm was found
· end the use of predictive policing technology, which uses systematically biased data to enhance police profiling of black people and communities
Side
Note – Start
False Authority, Lack of Definition – Profiling refers to the law
enforcement practice of the detention, interdiction, or other disparate
treatment of an individual on the basis of the racial or ethnic status of such
individual.[4]
False Authority – Probable Cause: sufficient reason based upon known
facts to believe a crime has been committed or that certain property is
connected with a crime. Probable cause must exist for a law enforcement officer
to make an arrest without a warrant, search without a warrant, or seize
property in the belief the items were evidence of a crime. The SCOTUS upheld
the Totality of Circumstances standard that focuses "on all the
circumstances of a particular case, rather than any one factor" [Illinois
v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (1983)].
I agree that the presumption of innocence and equal protection under the
law must be robustly upheld and accorded to all citizens. Additionally, I agree
that police forces should be deployed to address demonstrated behaviors versus
forecasted behaviors.
I strongly disagree with dismantling profiling to such a degree. First,
criminal actors have one or more of the listed features, attributes, or
behaviors. Second, “protected groups” represent the definition of
discrimination (one people group is placed at a higher or lower, more or less favorable,
status relative to others). Example: A criminal actor is not caught in the act.
However, the description is a white (race) male (gender), age 20-30 (age),
homeless (housing), transgendered (identity) homosexual (orientation),
wheelchair bound (disability), AIDS patient (HIV), Christian (religion), here
illegally from Canada (immigration), and likely hiding a knife
("furtive" movements). But, the proposal is in full effect; and now,
police are not allowed to “suspect” anyone that fits the description.
Side
Note – Stop
Objective-3: Establish Alternative Approaches to Mental
Health Crises
Proposal-3a: Mental health crises should not be an excuse for heavy-handed
police interventions and are best handled by mental health professionals.
Establish and fund Mental Health Response Teams to respond to crisis
situations. [5]
Side
Note – Start
False Authority, Lack of Definition – Again…there is lack of definition. What
is a “mental health crisis”? Some examples of mental health crises include
depression, trauma, eating disorders, alcohol or substance abuse, self-injury
and suicidal thoughts. If you suspect a friend or family member is experiencing
an emotional crisis, your help can make a difference.[6]
Sometimes, these changes happen suddenly and obviously. Events such as a
natural disaster or the loss of a job can bring on a crisis in a short period
of time. Often, though, behavior changes come about gradually. [7]
There is an assumption that use of Team is appropriate. However, given
the definition, how could an officer make that determination? Why is there no
exception for self-defense of the officer (per the human rights principles)?
In general, I agree that, when possible, use of such a Team could solve problems
as way to demonstrate service before enforcement.
Side
Note – Stop
Objective-4: Establish effective civilian oversight
structures
Proposal-4a: Establish an all-civilian oversight structure with discipline
power that includes a Police Commission and Civilian Complaints Office. [8]
Side
Note – Start
I agree that because policing is a public institution, and that the
public is expected to support and comply with its officers; therefore, the
public should be proactively informed of policies, practices, and procedures.
And, that officers demonstrating misconduct should be disciplined and/or
dismissed.
I agree that hearings should be public, as with other hearings; however,
a public hearing is not appropriate if doing so puts operations or operators in
undue jeopardy.
I agree that membership should not be extended to those currently serving
in law enforcement.
I disagree with appointment of a Police Chief. Because policing
encompasses social leadership and governance monopoly of force, the Chief of
Police should be an elected position. A commission should vet candidates and
report their findings. The Chief should answer to the Mayor and the public.
I disagree with the proposed scope of executive authority. It is a
conflict of interest for executive governing bodies to be empowered to hire,
terminate, investigate, and discipline at will.
I disagree with the training requirement. What is trained by whom?
I disagree with the proposed membership qualifications. Members should
not be selected from candidates offered by community organizations. Doing so is
a deliberate effort to circumvent the will of voters; and it would incentivize
policing to increasingly political; and it would prompt campaigning outside
public view.
Side
Note – Stop
Concerning the Civilian Complaints Office…[10]
Side
Note – Start
I agree that mandating a complaints resolution process, supporting
components, and reporting is favorable.
I disagree with the proposed scope of executive authority. It is a
conflict of interest for executive governing bodies to be empowered to hire,
terminate, investigate, and discipline at will. It is a conflict of interest
for an investigative body acting as ombudsmen to also act as a public policy
think tank affecting its own policies. It is a conflict of interest for an investigative
body to act in a judiciary capacity (ex: find quilt, levy penalties, decide
cases, etc.).
I disagree with the proposed membership qualifications. Members should
not be selected from candidates offered by community organizations. Doing so is
a deliberate effort to circumvent the will of voters; and it would incentivize
policing to become increasingly political; and it would prompt campaigning
outside public view.
Side
Note – Stop
Objective-5: Remove barriers to reporting police
misconduct
Proposal-5a:
For all stops by a police officer, require officers to give civilians their
name, badge number, reason for the stop and a card with instructions for filing
a complaint to the civilian oversight structure. [11]
Side
Note – Start
I agree. Reason for the stop should be provided in common terms and
include a direct reference to the law in question.
Side
Note – Stop
Objective-6: Establish standards and reporting of police
use of deadly forceProposal-6a: Authorize deadly force only when there is an imminent threat to an officer's life or the life of another person and such force is strictly unavoidable to protect life as required under International Law. [12]
Side
Note – Start
I strongly disagree. The United States is a sovereign nation AND not a
subject of any other law. I absolutely reject the premise that international
law is suitable for American policing because it’s international law.
Additionally, I reject the minor premise that the Federal government is
appropriate for governing local policing on the grounds of the Tenth Amendment.
Side
Note – Stop
Proposal-6b: Require that an officer's tactical conduct and decisions leading up to using deadly force be considered in judgements of whether such force was reasonable. [13]
Side
Note – Start
I agree.
Side
Note – Stop
Proposal-6c: Require officers give a verbal warning, when possible, before using deadly force and give subjects a reasonable amount of time to comply with the warning. [14]
Side
Note – Start
I agree.
Side
Note – Stop
Proposal-6d: Require reporting of police killings or serious injuries of civilians. [15]
Side
Note – Start
I agree.
Side
Note – Stop
Proposal-6e: Require the names of both the officer(s) involved and victim(s) to be released within 72 hours of a deadly force incident. [16]
Side
Note – Start
I disagree. This information should be released during the course of
public hearings and/or a trail held in a court of law.
Side
Note – Stop
Proposal-6f: Policies should include guidance on reporting, investigation, discipline, and accountability and increase transparency by making the policies available online. [17]
Side
Note – Start
False Authority, Lack of Definition – AGAIN…define human rights.
I agree with scope of policy guidance, the preference of de-escalation,
and view of belligerent behavior not warranting use of force (ex: talking back,
actions not presenting harm to officers or other persons).
I disagree with weaponry proposal. Because society sends officers into
harm’s way intentionally, society is morally obligated to provide the means to
deter and/or answer and defeat expected threats.
Side
Note – Stop
Objective-7: End traffic-related police killings and dangerous
high-speed police chases
Proposal-7a: Prohibit police officers from: shooting at moving vehicles; moving
in front of moving vehicles; high-speed chases of people who have not and are
not about to commit a violent felony. [18]
Side
Note – Start
I agree. Reduction of potential harm from officers unto the public should
be reduced as a matter of local policy.
Side
Note – Stop
Objective-8: Monitor how police use force and proactively hold officers accountable for excessive force
Proposal-8a: Report all uses of force to a database with information on related injuries and demographics of the victims. [19]
Side
Note – Start
False Authority, Lack of Definition – AGAIN…define use of force.
False Authority, Lack of Definition – AGAIN…define victim. Why should a
recipient of force be classified as a victim (casualty, sufferer, injured
quarry) by default?
Side
Note – Stop
Proposal-8b: Establish an early intervention system to correct officers who use excessive force. [20]
Side
Note – Start
Who make abuse determination? What is the remedy available to the accused
for settling unjust losses or harms? What is the punishment for those who
approved unjust decisions?
Side
Note – Stop
Objective-10: Require police departments to notify the
state when an officer is found to have willfully violated department policy or
the law, committed official misconduct, or resigned while under investigation
for these offenses.
Proposal-10a: Maintain this information in a database accessible to the
public and prohibit these officers from serving as police officers, teachers or
other governmental employees. [21]
Side
Note – Start
False Authority, Lack of Definition – AGAIN…define state. Does this mean
a State government or the Federal government?
I agree that 1) guilty verdicts should be publicly recorded. 2) After
convection, there is a loss of future LE opportunity.
I disagree that a public database for wrong-doing must provide suspected
wrong-doing. This presents opportunity to use those resources in an unjust
manner. Due process and the presumption of innocence must be maintained.
Side
Note – Stop
Objective-11: Lower the standard of proof for Department
of Justice civil rights investigations of police officers
Proposal-11a: Allow federal prosecutors to successfully prosecute police
officers for misconduct by passing legislation to eliminate the requirement
that an officer must "willfully" deprive another's rights in order to
violate Section 242. [22]Proposal-11b: Use federal funds to encourage independent investigations and prosecutions[23]
Proposal-11c: Pass legislation such as the Police Training and Independent Review Act of 2015 or use of existing federal funds to encourage external, independent investigations and prosecution of police killings. [24]
Side
Note – Start
I disagree. Doing so effectively creates an unprotected class of persons.
This is the definition of discrimination.
I disagree. The DOJ, an LE agency, must be restricted to the will of The
People in the same manner as police force personnel; otherwise, more power
incentivizes the benefits of wrong-doing.
I disagree. Equality and due process under the law are requirements, not
encouragements. If “encouragement” takes primacy over “requirement”, then
investigations and prosecutions cannot be independent; they will become
political.
Side
Note – Stop
Objective-12: Establish a permanent Special Prosecutor's
Office at the State level for cases of police violence
Proposal-12a: The Special Prosecutor's Office should be: required
and authorized to prosecute all cases of where police kill or seriously injure
a civilian, in-custody deaths and cases where a civilian alleges criminal
misconduct against a police officer; equipped with an office and resources to
conduct thorough investigations; required to have its Chief Prosecutor
chosen from a list of candidates offered by community organizations. [25]
Side
Note – Start
I agree that if the office is created, then it should be resourced.
I disagree. Use of if “this”, then “that” without regard to circumstance
is an abuse of authority. If an investigation warrants a trial, then go to
trial. An allegation, while sufficient to warrant an investigation, is not
sufficient to warrant a criminal proceeding.
I disagree. Controlling candidacy in this way is a deliberate effort to circumvent
the will of voters; and, would incentivize policing to become increasingly
political; and, would prompt campaigning outside public view.
Side
Note – Stop
Objective-13: Require independent investigations of all
cases where police kill or seriously injure civilians
Proposal-13a: The independent investigators should be: required and
authorized to prosecute all cases of where police kill or seriously injure a
civilian, in-custody deaths and cases where a civilian alleges criminal
misconduct against a police officer; required to investigate all cases where
police kill chosen at random from a list of the largest
ten agencies in the state; required to report their findings to
the public. [26]
Side
Note – Start
I disagree. This is an investigative body, not a prosecution body.
Side
Note – Stop
Objective-14: Increase the number of police officers who
reflect the communities they serve
Proposal-14a: Require police departments to develop and publicly report a
strategy and timeline for achieving a representative proportion of police
officers who are women and people of color through outreach, recruitment and
changes to departmental practices. [27]
Side Note
– Start
I disagree. If police departments were required to control personnel
according to community demographics (hire/fire according to race and sex), then
the end result is institutionalized racism and sexism. Problem-1: Assuming the
“women and people of color” mismatch to local demographics is small enough to
be controlled, and will remain small enough to continue to be controlled, is a
fallacy. The assumption does not hold because when the government subsidizes
the solution to a problem, then more of that problem will develop (ex: men,
age, LGBTQ, language, ethnicity, creed, etc.). Problem-2: Without controls that
oppress choice, there is no guarantee that changes in institutional behavior
will realize a desired result. Therefore, to achieve the desired result people
inside the institution, and outside the institution, must be forced to comply
with the mandate; or, there will always be some non-compliance/risk to that
mandate (requirement).
Side
Note – Stop
Objective-15: Use community feedback to inform police department policies and practices
Proposal-2: Require a regular survey (Ex: Milwaukee survey) to be fielded to the community to gauge their experiences and perceptions of the police and use this information to inform: police department policies and practices; police officer evaluations; police officer pay incentives. [28]
Side
Note – Start
My primary concern is with regard to tying survey results directly to
evaluations and compensation. While an officer can change his/her behavior
towards the public, the public is in no way obligated to change their behavior
towards the officer. Therefore, it’s possible to create a situation in which
the officer may be doing everything right, but still receive an unfavorable
action with regard to evaluation and/or pay.
Side
Note – Stop
Objective-16: Body Cams
Proposal-16a: Require the use of body cameras - in addition to dashboard cameras - and establish policies governing their use. [29]
Side
Note – Start
I agree with the deployment and use of body cameras, civilian review,
public release on request, video storage, anonymity to prevent public viewing
outside trial, and use of FIOA.
I disagree with review of emancipated relatives, and the following
restrictions.
·
“Negative evidentiary factor” – This is loaded
and biased. This provides an opportunity for subjects to cite anonymity, then
allege wrong-doing against the officer; thus, leaning the officer without an
affirmative defense. There is not a case were lack of this type of recording
would not present “a negative evidentiary factor”
·
Restrict “reviewing footage” – This sets-up
opportunity for officers to perjure themselves. This is predatory against
officers.
·
Facial Recognition Software – Disagree. If LE
has ability to make a positive ID based on physical evidence, then LE should
make that connection and act accordingly.
Side
Note – Stop
Objective-17: The Right to Record Police
Proposal-17a: Ban police officers from taking cell phones or other
recording devices without a person's consent or warrant and give people the
right to sue police departments if they take or destroy these devices. [30]
Side
Note – Start
I agree.
Side
Note – Stop
Objective-18: Invest in Rigorous and Sustained Training
Proposal-18a: Require officers to undergo training - including
scenario-based training - on the following topics on at least a quarterly basis
and involve the community - including youth of color - in their design and
implementation…[31]
Side
Note – Start
False Authority, Lack of Definition – AGAIN…define procedural justice.
Procedural justice focuses on the way police and other legal authorities
interact with the public, and how the characteristics of those interactions
shape the public’s views of the police, their willingness to obey the law, and
actual crime rates.[32]
I agree with training and with community interaction.
I am concerned with proposing that officers could act in a mediation or
conflict resolution role. If the scope is limited to de-escalation, then okay;
otherwise, there is a conflict of interest and I am opposed.
Side
Note – Stop
Objective-19: Intentionally consider 'unconscious' or 'implicit' racial bias
Proposal-19a: Require current and prospective police officers to undergo mandatory implicit racial bias testing, including testing for bias in shoot/don't shoot decision-making, and develop a clear policy for considering an officer's level of racial bias…[33]
Side
Note – Start
I agree with certifications and being selective with regard to officer
assignments.
I disagree within a hiring context as the proposal would incentivize
racial biasing along political lines versus incentivizing uniform enforcement
of laws and public service. Performance evaluations should be left to local
decision-makers.
Side
Note – Stop
Objective-20: End police department quotas for tickets and arrests
Proposal-20a: Ban police departments from using ticket or arrest quotas to evaluate the performance of police officers. [34]
Side
Note – Start
I agree.
Side Note –
Stop
Objective-21: Limit fines and fees for low-income people
Proposal-21a:
Pass policies requiring local governments to: ban issuing fines or arrest
warrants for civilians who fail to appear in court for a traffic citation; ban
generating more than 10% of total municipal revenue from fines and fees; allow
judges discretion to waive fines and fees for low-income people or initiate
payment plans; prohibit courts from ordering individuals on parole or probation
to pay supervision fees and other correctional fees. [35]
Side
Note – Start
I agree with allowing judges to waive cruel and unusual punishments.
I disagree with mandating specific rules to specific people groups. This
would be the definition of discrimination.
Side
Note – Stop
Objective-22: Prevent police from taking the money or
property of innocent people
Proposal-22a: Prohibit police from: seizing property of civilians (i.e.
civil forfeiture) unless they are convicted of a crime and the state
establishes by clear and convincing evidence that the property is subject to forfeiture;
keeping any property that has legally been forfeited (instead, this property
should go to a general fund). [36]
Side
Note – Start
I agree.
Side
Note – Stop
Objective-23: End the Federal Government's 1033 Program
Providing Military Weaponry to Local Police Departments
Proposal-23a: End the supply of federal military weaponry to local police
departments under the 1033 program. [37]
Side
Note – Start
I agree. If local LE needs something, then the community can purchase
that something.
Side
Note – Stop
Objective-24: Establish Local Restrictions to Prevent
Police Departments from Purchasing or Using Military Weaponry
Proposal-24a:
Restrict police departments from purchasing or using military weaponry. [38]
Side
Note – Start
I agree. If local LE needs something, then the community can purchase
that something.
I agree that police uniforms should not look like military uniforms.
I disagree as a blanket policy measure. If a technology is needed, then
use that technology to meet the need of the situation.
Side
Note – Stop
Objective-25: Remove barriers to effective misconduct investigations and civilian oversight
Proposal-25a: Remove contract provisions, local policies, and provisions in state Law Enforcement Officers' Bills of Rights laws that conceal misconduct or hamper civilian oversight. [39]
Side
Note – Start
I disagree on the grounds of due process. The presumption of innocence
and protection of due process must be protected. However, a contract document
should not provide legal protections for officers demonstrating misconduct or
wrong-doing.
Side
Note – Stop
Objective-26: Keep officers' disciplinary history
accessible to police departments and the public
Proposal-2: Remove contract provisions, local policies, and provisions in
state Law Enforcement Officers' Bills of Rights laws that allow police officers
to: expunge or destroy records of past misconduct (both sustained and
un-sustained) from their disciplinary file; prevent their disciplinary records
from being released to the public via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
request. [40]
Side
Note – Start
I agree.
Side
Note – Stop
Objective-27: Ensure officers do not get paid after they
kill or seriously injure a civilian
Proposal-27a: Remove contract provisions, local policies, and provisions
in state Law Enforcement Officers' Bills of Rights laws that allow police
officers to: receive paid leave or remain on desk-duty during an investigation
following a police shooting or other use of deadly force; receive paid leave or
remain on desk-duty after being charged with a felony offense. [41]
Side
Note – Start
I disagree on the grounds of due process. The presumption of innocence
and protection of due process must be protected.
Side
Note – Stop
Your View
Your thoughts and perspectives are important. I invite you
to tell me what you believe with the comment section below or at samfrescoe@gmail.com. Please check out The Sam
Frescoe Project on Facebook.
Thank you. – Sam Frescoe
© 2016 – SamFrescoeProject.Blogspot.com
– All Rights Reserved
Related Posts
Critical Terms
·
Race:
(n) an arbitrary classification of modern humans, sometimes, especially
formerly, based on any or a combination of various physical characteristics, as
skin color, facial form, or eye shape, and now frequently based on such genetic
markers as blood groups.[42]
·
Racist:
(n) a person who believes in racism, the doctrine that one's own racial group
is superior or that a particular racial group is inferior to the others.[43]
·
Racism:
(n) a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human
racial groups determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving
the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to dominate others
or that a particular racial group is inferior to the others. – (n) a policy,
system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine;
discrimination. – (n) hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.[44]
Human Rights Principles
·
Universality:
Human rights must be afforded to everyone, without exception. The entire
premise of the framework is that people are entitled to these rights simply by
virtue of being human. [45]
·
Indivisibility:
Human rights are indivisible, interdependent and interrelated, which means that
in order to guarantee civil and political rights, a government must also ensure
economic, social and cultural rights (and vice versa). The indivisibility
principle recognizes that if a government violates rights such as health, it
necessarily affects people’s ability to exercise other rights such as the right
to life or the right to vote. [46]
·
Participation:
People have a right to participate in how decisions are made regarding
protection of their rights. This includes but is not limited to having input on
government decisions about rights. To ensure human rights, governments must
engage and support the participation of civil society on these issues. [47]
·
Accountability:
Governments must create mechanisms of accountability for the enforcement of
rights. It is not enough that rights are recognized in domestic law or in
policy rhetoric. Effective measures must be put in place so that the government
can be held accountable for realizing human rights. [48]
·
Transparency:
Transparency means that governments must be open about all information and
decision-making processes related to rights. People must be able to know and
understand how major decisions affecting rights are made and how public
institutions, such as hospitals and schools, which are needed to protect
rights, are managed and run. [49]
·
Equity
and Non-Discrimination: Human rights must be guaranteed without
discrimination of any kind. This includes not only purposeful discrimination,
but also protection from policies and practices which may have a discriminatory
effect. The standard of non-discrimination is complemented by the principle of
equity. Governments must secure the equal enjoyment of human rights by
everyone, which may require distributing resources in a way that reduces
existing inequities and prioritizing actions that support those with greater
needs. [50]
“Broken Windows” Theory
·
The broken windows theory is a criminological
theory of the norm-setting and signaling effect of urban disorder and vandalism
on additional crime and anti-social behavior. The theory states that
maintaining and monitoring urban environments to prevent small crimes such as
vandalism, public drinking, and toll-jumping helps to create an atmosphere of
order and lawfulness, thereby preventing more serious crimes from happening. [51]
·
Others allege that Broken Windows is
discriminatory, used as a tool to target minorities. Still other critics
suggest that order-maintenance policing leads to over-incarceration or tries to
impose a white middle-class morality on urban populations.[52]
Conflict of Interest
A term used to describe the
situation in which a public official or fiduciary who, contrary to the
obligation and absolute duty to act for the benefit of the public or a
designated individual, exploits the relationship for personal benefit,
typically pecuniary.[53])
[2] 10 CFR
160.3
[3] Here’s
What Black Lives Matter Activists Want Politicians To Do About Police Violence.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/black-lives-matter-policy-demands_us_55d7392ae4b0a40aa3aa9443
(accessed 160711) Julia Craven Reporter, The Huffington Post; Ryan J. Reilly
Senior Justice Reporter
[10] As of
160727