Public not served by police secrecy

By: JOHN PARKER - Commentary | Saturday, June 9, 2007 7:12 PM PDT

Public confidence in the integrity of the government is indispensable to faith in democracy; and when we lose faith in the system, we have lost faith in everything we fight and spend for.

---- Adlai Stevenson, 1952 speech

The state Senate voted on Monday to pass Senate Bill 1019, which will reverse some of the damage inflicted on the citizens' right to have an open discipline process for peace officers in California. As a former police officer and police oversight executive, I know that our police forces generally perform admirably, keeping our streets, homes, businesses and persons safe and secure. Most officers honor their pledge to protect and serve. There are, however, some who abuse the public trust and the exceptional authority they are granted to question, detain, arrest and even use deadly force. There are virtually no other public officials who can have such an effect on our lives.

Yet since an August 2006 California Supreme Court decision, Copley Press v. Superior Court of San Diego, police officers enjoy a special legal status that no other public sector employee does. With Copley, California law now prevents the public from learning about police officers who have been disciplined because of misconduct ---- a public right to know that existed for decades and was quite workable. All hearings and records that, pre-Copley, were made public are now shrouded in secrecy. Even if an officer is found guilty of misconduct, the records remain undisclosed. In essence, the California Supreme Court's excessively broad interpretation of state law created a secret police force that is no longer accountable to the public.

Such secrecy around police misconduct damages police-community relations and the public trust. This, of course, has the unwelcome effect of undermining law enforcement efforts, which is why the National Black Police Association, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, the California Newspaper Publishers Association, and the mayor and police chief of Los Angeles, among dozens of others, have all endorsed a bill before the California Legislature that would override this bad decision and restore public access to police officer records.

SB 1019 will reverse the damaging effects of the court's decision and re-establish the status quo that was in place prior to Copley. SB 1019 would essentially overturn Copley and would allow civilian review boards and other police oversight agencies to hold public hearings about citizen complaints on police misconduct, just as they did before the August decision.

Police associations claim that these behind-closed-doors hearings and identity protections are a matter of privacy rights. But there is no right to privacy in official misconduct. We have the right to know about misconduct by all public employees ---- like teachers and politicians, and doctors and lawyers. The public needs to have confidence in the integrity of the criminal justice system that wields such power over our liberty and lives. Secrecy can only result in heightened public mistrust of the government and systems that embody our democracy. The majority of citizens who believe in openness of our law enforcement disciplinary system should contact their state legislators and the governor's office and demand passage of this measure into law.

Carlsbad resident John Parker retired in March after 10 years as executive director of the Citizens Law Enforcement Review Board. Before that, he was an Oakland police officer for 22 years.

First name only. Comments including last names, contact addresses, email addresses or phone numbers will be deleted. All comments are screened before they appear online, so please keep them brief. Comments reflect the views of those commenting and not necessarily those of the North County Times or its staff writers. Click here to view additional comment policies.

5 comment(s)[-]Go to Top

Mike wrote on Jun 9, 2007 10:28 PM:Unfortunatly most complaints against police are false so they need to keep the hearings private to protect cops...Otherwise all people would remember is that someone made a complaint and will wonder if it is true...If cops commit a crime they are prosecuted, even if the general public wouldn't be prosecuted you can just about guarentee a cop will and thats the way it should be...Cops should be held to a higher standard. As for the hearing keep em private, fire the bad cops and arrest the criminal cops like they do now but don't make cops afraid to do their jobs..After all they get paid the same either way and if there afraid to do their jobs they might not do it!!!

Over Reaction wrote on Jun 10, 2007 5:08 AM:This proposed legislation is an over reaction to the LAPD gang response and other mishandling of public issues. The idea is worth considering for situations like LAPD but needs to be more thoughtfully developed for the general welfare of police officers and their families. The Copley court decision did not prevent the use of bad cop's records for trial purposes. No other employees, public or private sector are held to this standard of disclosure for routine discipline issues.

To Mike wrote on Jun 10, 2007 8:19 AM:Blah..blah..blah I've heard it all before. Twisted logic to support a self serving policy. Get it all out in the open. Like Mr. Parker pointed out, it's necessary due to the extraordinary powers given to police.

RG wrote on Jun 10, 2007 2:14 PM:Everything Mr. Parker said sounds right to me. Do we need cops out there? Of course we do. Do we need over zealous and bad cops out there? No. The review boards help to keep the bad ones at a minimum while ensuring fair and proper oversight. Of course the police associations prefer to keep the code of silence in effect. They want identity protection and privacy rights for their offenders? Hogwash. The public has a right to know if, when and who those offenders are when they violate the rights of citizens.

To To Mike wrote on Jun 17, 2007 12:04 AM:Your argument is Blah, Blah...Sums it right up...It's simple if they cops do something wrong they are prosecuted and it all is public...The things the board reviews are that don't end up in the public are courtesy complaints, not following procedures, etc which are mainly unfounded.Which is why it shouldn't be public since too many are false!!! Not to mention the board are people who are not in law enforcement or don't know much about it so their opinions while important to cops shouldn't have much weight and is really an uneducated opinion...Kind of like a car mechanic telling a computer techinican that they installed something wrong when they have no idea how to install anything in a computer!!!

Submit Comment[-]

(optional)
   

Advertisement

Videos