PERCEPTION - THE APPEARANCE OF OUR ACTIONS MATTER!

By: Joel E. Gordon “Your job gives you authority. Your behavior gives you respect” - Irwin Federman

Let me start by reaffirming that I bleed BLUE and believe that the overwhelming majority of law enforcement personnel are competent, courteous, concerned and caring!

However, law enforcement must periodically take a step back and take an honest and closer look at what brought us into an environment of disdain toward law enforcement, defunding efforts, and worsened adversarial encounters on a seemingly more frequent basis.

While many reasons may be through no fault of our own, my thoughts are focused on where our own responsibilities lie. Like many other retirees and veteran law enforcement professionals, in many respects, I find myself to be disappointed and dismayed, no longer recognizing the profession in many ways. From active-duty liability fears for clearly doing what’s right to stand down orders and other burdensome guidance resulting from cultural shifts, the profession has been moved in ways beyond my comprehension.

A little historical perspective: My first encounter with law enforcement occurred as a young teen on a beautiful early summer day in 1974. While riding my bicycle, I spotted a large mixed-breed (German shepherd-type) dog weaving in and out of traffic at a busy intersection. I was convinced that I was about to witness the dog being struck by a car. As luck (or so I thought) would have it, a police officer was sitting in his marked patrol car right there in a parking lot. As I approached the officer he opened the driver’s side window as if it was a big chore for him to do. I asked, “Can you please help me with the dog before he gets hit?” The officer looked over at me through the open driver’s side window of the patrol car, and curtly stated; “Who do you think I am? SUPERMAN?” (In spite of the officer’s unnecessarily rude response and refusal to assist, the dog was saved).

Back to more recent times, I was made aware of a situation where an officer was dispatched at the request of EMS on a forced entry to a private residence not knowing if they may be faced with a dangerous individual or encounter. The officer responded disgustedly on-air “For God sakes they have as much authority to force entry as we do.” So who is supposed to make a scene safe, anyway? While discourteous interactions such as these are contributing factors in a divide among those who should be working together, investigations which result in the appearance of partiality can add further to diminished support.

I was involved in a serious crash when a full-size city bus rear-ended the car I was operating after I had yielded onto and had already began travel on an interstate highway. Upon arrival of local law enforcement, the responding officer took an immediate statement from the bus driver on-scene, but refused to take my statement, instead insisting on a statement from me via email. I was, in fact, admitted as a trauma patient overnight to the hospital as a result of the crash after driving myself for an examination but took time to prepare and email the statement from my hospital bed. The statement included incriminating statements by the bus operator over his failure to control and rush to get to his destination. When I paid to obtain the crash report I discovered that the reporting officer had falsely claimed that I had never sent the statement (which I maintained proof of) and listed the primary cause of the crash as my failure to yield right-of-way. Right or wrong, nothing that transpired will change the feeling that I had on-scene that the officer would work to cover for the public transportation bus operator. If I feel that way, is it any wonder others question investigative integrity? Add to the mix those law enforcement agencies that were enforcing Executive Orders on pandemic business closures and mask wearing directives, making enforcers of the LAW something that they were never intended to be and turning many law-abiding citizens against those taking these actions. This is akin to the same objections I have always had in enlisting law enforcement in the involvement in such regulations as community covenants pertaining to items such as fence setbacks, plantings, grass cutting (or lack thereof), approval of exterior property paint color selections and like issues.

In this day and age there seems to be a great tendency for government to overplay its hand. Certainly, the perception that federal law enforcement, such as the FBI, has the strong appearance of being politicized and the Department of Justice seems to overwhelmingly fit into this category of overreach and inconsistent enforcement and investigatory actions. In law enforcement, as public servants, we each must play it straight and right down the middle. Anything less than an impartial, helpful attitude of community service in law enforcement is unacceptable. While there is always a time and place for firmness and ensuring compliance to lawful orders we must make certain that law enforcement is right in doing so. If it isn't within the sworn obligation to constitutional values, impartiality, and duty to service of our profession in holding the line as society's protectors, then it's time for re-evaluation in operations and attitude.

Shouldn’t actions, whenever possible, encourage even more supporters and fewer enemies? Of the people, by the people, and for the people should be our guiding principle. We will all be the better for it.

Joel E. Gordon is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com