An Honest Assessment

One of the most difficult things to analyze in law enforcement is an after-action assessment of what went right, what went wrong and how we can learn from it after a critical incident. The first step is to be honest about what happened. Life is not perfect in anyone’s world, but that is no more evident than in the imperfect world of policing. If we could script it ahead of time like on TV, then we would be perfect every episode. But we don’t get to script what happens in our world. Often we are dealt a bag of crap and we are expected to make it taste good.

Police operate in a realm of uncertainty. Officers in exigent circumstances have to cobble together incomplete bits and pieces of information to decide an appropriate course of action, and do it fast. Then it gets reviewed in slow motion by people who were not there. They get time to examine every moment frame by frame in the safe space of a conference room. Let’s be honest. Their conclusions are arrived at in a second-guessing environment with all of the information handed to them, not just bits and pieces.

I am prefacing the observations I have following the horrific mass murder of 19 children and 3 teachers at a Uvalde, Texas school for a reason. It’s because no matter how many times an incident like this occurs, the reaction following it turns into the same ritual. We do the same thing. We go from shock and horror at what just happened, memorials and GoFundMe pages get set up and that is understandably appropriate. The next phase involves politicians using it for face time, fundraising for their campaign, to virtue signal and maybe score some cheap political points off the backs of the dead and their survivors. The third phase of the ritual is that people start looking for someone to blame for the incident. Attempts are made usually by the media and other agenda driven people. Somebody has to be blame for this other than the perpetrators themselves. And what better entity to hyper-analyze than the law enforcement response.

I am very familiar with what occurs in the early moments of critical events like this: mass confusion and pandemonium. There is little information available, and in many cases partial information. The media monitors police call scanners so sometimes they beat police there and want something said. They’ll settle for anything. New information continues to roll in as the incident unfolds. I get it. But unlike many people including current and retired law enforcement officials who blurt out comments without knowing all the facts and information that undermine law enforcement, I won’t do that. I’ll take a different approach.

Life is not perfect. Neither are law enforcement officers. That scene at that Uvalde school was an old-fashioned cluster-you know what. Hint, it rhymes with suck. Nothing that was happening was in law enforcement’s favor to aid their decision-making. It is reported that a door at the school that was supposed to be locked was propped open. A high-ranking officer at the scene is reported to have made a command decision that it was no longer an active shooter but a barricaded subject as the shooting was still going on. Those two situations, active shooter and barricaded subject would involve a very different response. Sometimes all you have to work with ends up as a best guess. But decisions still have to be made in exigency nonetheless.

In these events, information rapidly evolves. I know from experience that often the first so-called facts coming through are those most subject to change. The military refers to it as the fog of war. That phrase is defined as the uncertainty in situational awareness experienced by participants in military operations. You simply don’t know. Look, I still don’t know what to believe with all the reported events in the media, two weeks after the Uvalde shooting happened. Some reports said officers delayed entry for an hour

while waiting for equipment. Other reports had officers going in immediately. I don’t know, but at this point that is irrelevant. What is relevant is what does law enforcement do going forward. In more specific terms, the question this profession has to ask themselves is what can they do better in the future to influence a different outcome, a better outcome that instills confidence in the public that we can do this and that we can be counted on. Let’s face it, this was not our finest hour as a profession. We need to publicly admit it. The public doesn’t expect perfection from us. They do and should demand a level of excellence from us if we want to be considered a profession. That is what professionals do. They expect more of themselves. It’s a behavior issue.

From a technical issue, there is this. As sheriff of one of the 50 largest sheriff’s offices in the country and a state of Wisconsin certified law enforcement training center, I always had this complaint about our training. Too much of it occurs in controlled static and sterile environments. I don’t know how to create real life chaos and pandemonium, but those two elements change things. Tabletop exercises are done in a controlled environment. Additionally, we too often fall into the trap of preparing for the last event. School buildings have not changed much. One of the most notables that set the stage for active shooter incidents in the last half-century occurred at Columbine High School in Colorado in 1997. Police were criticized for a slow response to that active shooter. They were staging and waiting for equipment as the shooting was going on. That was nearly 25 years ago and here we are again. The questionable police response issue reared its ugly head again during the Parkland, Florida High School shooting a few years ago and here we are dealing with the same criticism about the school shooting in Uvalde. We are better than this, and it’s time we show it at these incidents.

In critical incidents, time is not always on your side. If the shooting is still underway, it’s go time. You don’t always have time for the static response of setting up a command post, implementing the incident command system (ICS) and waiting for more resources to arrive. A rapid response is required. Look at how first responders of the NYPD and NYFD performed during the attacks on the World Trade Center on Sept 11, 2001. They rushed into a burning building. They instinctively put themselves in harm’s way to evacuate people out of those towers. They didn’t have time to neatly set everything up first or think about their own safety. Then the buildings collapsed, trapping them inside and killing hundreds of first responders. They epitomized selflessness.

In these active school shooters, we are expected to immediately rush in, locate and confront the shooter whether we have all the equipment and personnel we need or not. The objective is to have the shooter turn from shooting teachers and children and turn his sights on shooting at law enforcement officers instead. They are at least armed and have a better chance at surviving than unarmed kids and teachers. Is that gut wrenching? Hell yes, it is. One’s fear cannot override their duty to perform. I am not suggesting it’s easy, but it is what we signed up for. How often is that conversation had at training sessions?

Yes, this is hard stuff, but this conversation must be had internally. We have to do some soul searching here. Otherwise, we will be dealing with another black eye on this profession like the one the Uvalde tragedy gave us.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of Americas Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

NYC Mayor Eric Adams: Failing Upward?

By: Joel E. Gordon

He ran on being a veteran police executive. While there were those with high hopes that a former police official being elected as mayor of America's largest city would result in positive progress on crime rates and stimulate positive progress in a city on the decline, those with insider knowledge correctly thought otherwise. Now the New York City mayor is reportedly exploring a possible presidential run in 2024?

New York City crime is way up since DeBlasio left. Reportedly up by 65% on subways and 43% overall.Perhaps more people should have paid attention to clues that Eric Adams was not the answer to the city’s crime problems.

An example is the summer 2020 incident where a Brooklyn woman followed then-Borough President Eric Adams’ advice for New Yorkers to settle disputes neighbor-to-neighbor rather than calling 911 and was shot dead after she followed Adams advice and confronted some neighborhood hooligans setting off illegal fireworks. Adams had said people should talk to their neighbors about the “nonviolent act,” rather than call the authorities and risk a “heavy-handed” police response.

What?

Now this … Mayor Adams recently publicly stated that he is tired of seeing NYPD officers on their phones at subway stations — and is asking New Yorkers to snap a picture when they see it happening,.“You walk downstairs, you see five transit officers standing at the booth looking at their phones.” “If you see it, send me a picture. Let me know,” he said, “because I’ll go to that district the next day and see exactly what’s happening.” “Send me a shot. New Yorkers, you see that, send me a photo and I will be at that station.”

Fortunately, Pat Lynch and the PBA are speaking up as Adams is seemingly uninformed and mistaken again. Selling out the officers when frequently the officers are looking at their department-issued smartphone as a result of being ordered to use them on official business; Lynch suggested perhaps NYPD management might as well go back to pen and paper resulting in longer response times and lack of officers to help. Having the public make officer complaints by snapping pictures sets up unnecessary confrontations and unwarranted feelings of ill will.

So, Mayor Adams has now called a meeting with the NYPD’s commanding officers to solicit ideas, three plans each to reduce crime in their patrol areas, about combating soaring crime ahead of the historically heightened violent crime summer months.

Adams has also requested statistics on crime, summonses, homeless encampment clearings and Civilian Complaint Review Board cases, as well as information on each command’s integrity control officer. “I have a major meeting with all of my commanders,” he said. “We’re going to sit down for several hours to get our summer plan in order, as well as think how we deploy police.”

But not everyone is taking it seriously. One source with knowledge of the meeting quipped that commanders think bringing ideas to combat crime is a “joke” according to a report in the New York Post newspaper.

In a recent interview, Mayor Adams unequivocally stated that city employees who were fired for being unvaccinated will never get their jobs back. This nonsensical policy will further contribute to the permanent loss of highly trained and valuable employees and investigators.

It is clear that Mayor Adams is no fan of many of his former police colleagues and likewise they not of him. Are New Yorkers pleased with Adams’ performance? As former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani has asked “When does the honeymoon end?” Likely it is already rapidly waning.

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

FBI: Famous But Illegal

I want you to imagine something for a minute. You may have to suspend your sense of disbelief as I proceed, but give it a try.

Imagine that the New York Police Department, the Chicago Police Department, the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Office or any other large local law enforcement agencies was accused of the following activity. Imagine the reaction from the New York Times, LA Times, Chicago Tribune or USA Today if a local police agency was accused of a long-standing pattern of breaking rules on investigations and illegally using informants and undercover agents to spy on politicians, journalists or religious persons engaged in constitutionally protected activity. Let’s say that any one of these agencies was found to be involved in a consistent pattern of noncompliance, and that one of the biggest problems identified was one of the unauthorized use of investigative methods including physical surveillance that hasn’t been approved on people not accused of a crime in 28 cases in a one-year time frame. In addition to that, what if it was discovered that the higher-ups in one of those agencies deliberately allowed its officers to break the law to catch criminals and other illegal activity for confidential human sources? What if an audit discovered that the agency broke its own rules 747 times in 18 months on sensitive investigations including intercepts of communications? And after all of this, it was discovered that internal audits learned of these things and that corrective measures did not stop the rule breaking or law violations? What do you think the public’s reaction would be after reading of these discoveries in a lengthy series in the newspaper? Outrage you’d expect, correct?

At the least you would expect that if a local law enforcement agency did all these things, the U.S. Department of Justice would dispatch the FBI in for a criminal probe and civil rights violations, right? But what if I told you that all of the breaches of policy and the law were committed by the FBI itself? This is not a one-off, unintended mistake or behavior by one or two federal agents. In fact, according to a newspaper story that discovered all of what I detailed here, it is believed that this behavior is cultural in nature and the congressional Senate Judiciary Committee that oversees the FBI says this misconduct suggests that this involves a “pattern and practice” within the FBI and it goes all the way to the top.

So, what do we do? The Senate Judiciary Committee, in my view, lacks the ability to really drill down inside the secretive and walled-off institution that is the FBI. Whenever there is a Senate hearing involving the FBI, you get a lot of stonewalling and responses like, “I cannot answer that because it is confidential and would compromise ongoing investigations”. That answer makes Senate members back down. The fact is that it is oftentimes a lie used to get around disclosing what would be embarrassing information about agency behavior. Members of Congress and their staffs are ill-equipped to oversee an agency like the FBI.

That brings me to another issue. Our classification system in our federal intelligence community used to protect government secrets is in serious need of revamping. Too much that government is engaged in on investigations is classified as secret or top secret when there is no need to do so. There is very little supervision over it, and for the most part it is left to the discretion of the individual investigating agents. Also, the length of time that something needs to be kept from public disclosure needs be reviewed after a period of time, like every 90 days. Like I said, classifying something as secret or top secret is used to hide illegal and improper behavior from the public and congressional committees charged with oversight on behalf of the American people. My suggestion is that Congress needs a committee of retired former U.S. attorneys and federal judges that reviews classified information to determine if it should continue to be kept classified. These former practitioners understand the process of government secrets and are best suited to know when violations of the Constitution have taken place, and when these things are discovered, referrals to the USDOJ should be made for possible criminal or civil rights investigations and federal grand jury indictments.

This might seem to some as extreme and that something less such as retraining might resolve these issues. The problem is that that has already been done in many instances, and when follow-up audits occur it found that the retraining and corrections failed to change the behavior. I think firing someone or a criminal indictment would deter most of this behavior. Slaps on the wrist or retraining in repeated instances is not an effective deterrent.

Law enforcement agencies are granted an extreme amount of trust by the public. In most cases, it is blind trust that they are not abusing their authority. Cops have awesome authority. They can take a person’s freedom from them and ruin lives. In addition to that, the thought that our government is surveilling citizens engaged in lawful activity should be disturbing to everyone. The least we can expect is that they behave in ethical and honorable ways to maintain that blind trust. Integrity matters.

That there doesn’t seem to be much alarm by corporate media on this disclosure is alarming as well. They are supposed to be a watchdog of government activity and behavior. The media was given First Amendment protection by the Founders so they could be free of government interference. Not that long ago, a media entity would make a big deal of this because of their mistrust for government. Now we get shoulder shrugs at this abhorrent abuse of power. Man, have times changed.

The FBI has become an embattled agency. It recently settled a lawsuit against it by families in Parkland, Florida after the government admitted that the FBI did not follow up on tips about the Marjory Stoneman Douglas school shooter that could have prevented the massacre. It is also under scrutiny for its role in the Trump-Russia collusion conspiracy and for using counterterrorism resources to investigate parents who are speaking out against school board policies. And it recently botched a case involving the alleged plan to kidnap the Michigan governor that ended up with an acquittal. The jury concluded that the defendants were entrapped by the FBI.

The FBI needs an external review up, down and across the entire bureau by people who have no vested interest in squashing what they would find. I would start with the appointing of a commission by the Senate Judiciary Committee-an independent civilian-led agency of civil liberty experts and lawyers, to drill down into what is really going on inside the FBI. And by the way, where is the American Civil Liberties Union when you need them?

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of Americas Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

TRENDING: Civilian Investigators?

By: Joel E. Gordon

The Baltimore Police Department announced plans to become one of the first law enforcement agencies in the nation to hire civilians to investigate low-level crimes, internal affairs complaints and cold cases.

Baltimore will set “a standard for staffing allocations in law enforcement agencies across the country,” which have struggled with hiring and retention, Baltimore Mayor Brandon Scott said. “This will free up our sworn detectives to better meet the needs of our residents by being out on our streets, deterring and solving crimes.”

Baltimore has 2,274 sworn officers and 519 civilian employees, below the budgeted 2,640 sworn officers and 615 civilian positions.

Nine civilians would be added to the department to staff the city’s Group Violence Reduction Strategy, which aims to focus resources on people most likely to be the victims of violence or perpetuate it. Ten civilians would be moved to facilities and fleet maintenance duties, freeing up officers for patrol or other duties. Twelve civilians will help staff the Telephone Reporting Unit, which receives non-serious police reports that do not require an officer’s response. Unlike sworn police officers, civilian officers would not carry guns, have arrest powers or require the same level of academy training.

The new civilian investigator positions would have a starting salary of $49,000 and still require background investigations “but allows us to hire at a much faster pace, helps us with speed; it helps with frequency. We can get to cases faster, and we can take on more cases at the same time. We don’t want to reduce or compromise quality.” Police Commissioner Michael Harrison said.

Harrison said the plan is not about taking away jobs from sworn members of the department. Police union leaders, however, expressed skepticism about the plan and said department leaders should focus on hiring more officers.

“The priorities of the BPD should be recruitment and retention of sworn personnel,” said Sgt. Mike Mancuso, president of Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 3. “The reason for hiring civilian investigators is nothing more than the BPD’s acknowledgment that the BPD cannot hire or retain sworn officers.”

Now additionally, Police Commissioner Michael Harrison announced the newest initiative, calling it SMART policing, which stands for “strategic management and alternative response tactics.” He said the goal is decreasing violent crime by freeing up sworn officers to focus more on proactive patrols, community policing and emergency calls: “To be efficient with our ever-shrinking resources, to be effective in where we’re spending our time and what we’re asking officers to do. According to the Baltimore Sun newspaper, 80% of Baltimore 911 calls are non-emergencies. Under the full plan, if you call 911 to report a theft in Baltimore, dispatchers will soon ask you to do it over the phone or online, instead of sending a police officer to respond in person. If you report someone having a behavioral health crisis, a social worker will be dispatched instead of the cops. Non-emergency calls and minor car accidents will trigger similar non-police responses.

Will non-police responders be ready for criminal acts and violent encounters?

Increasing the number of civilian employees has been a trend in policing for the past 20 years, said Chuck Wexler, executive director of the Police Executive Research Forum, the D.C.-based policing think tank.

Baltimore has already had an issue with a civilian hire and investigative quality is being questioned. The Baltimore Police Department fired a civilian employee who was hired on April 11, 2022 and is a person of interest in a homicide investigation which dates back to 2020. City police identified the official as the chief of fiscal services, which is the No. 3 position in BPD's fiscal division. He was terminated soon after he got on an elevator at police headquarters and was recognized by a detective working the homicide case in which he is a person of interest. This was just one week after he was hired. It has also been discovered that he was put on the city's gun offender registry in 2019 yet apparently that, too, was missed in any background check.

Baltimore Mayor Brandon Scott released a statement later, saying: "Upon learning of a systems failure in the civilian hiring process at the Baltimore Police Department yesterday, Mayor Scott has directed Baltimore City Chief Human Capital Officer, Quinton Herbert, to perform a comprehensive review of BPD's civilian hiring practices and submit recommendations to improve their policies and procedures. Mayor Scott is committed to reforming HR practices throughout the city to ensure we hire only eligible and qualified candidates to fill these critical positions in city government."

Harrison said the department is investigating how that may have been missed in a background check."We are working to ascertain the answers to those questions ourselves ... There was a background investigation done, and the HR department did a background investigation. It was missed.”

So the question remains, will civilian personnel replace or will they supplement highly trained sworn personnel? Will quality of investigations suffer to greater levels than before? Will civilian employees be held to the same level of accountability as those sworn to uphold the law? What danger lies ahead as civilian positions in law enforcement encroach on traditionally held responsibilities of sworn personnel?

Is this a good idea? You decide.

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

DISTRUST?

By: Joel E. Gordon

Was this a leak or a planned course of act of insurrection toward the authority and sanctity of the United States Supreme Court?

The recent “leak” on the draft opinion on an abortion case which is reported to be a repudiation of Roe versus Wade is unprecedented. SCOTUS Chief John Roberts responded with a statement:

The Marshal of the United States Supreme Court heads the United States Supreme Court Police, a security police service answerable to the court itself rather than to the president or attorney general. It handles security for the Supreme Court building and for the justices personally. Is the Chief Justice distrustful of the president, the attorney general or the Department of Justice and its FBI?

President Biden’s response is telling where he says in part “…if the Court does overturn Roe, it will fall on our nation’s elected officials at all levels of government to protect a woman’s right to choose. And it will fall on voters to elect pro-choice officials this November. At the federal level, we will need more pro-choice Senators and a pro-choice majority in the House to adopt legislation that codifies Roe.”

My Body My Choice?
✔-ABORTION
X - VACCINE

Interestingly, it has been said that when Joe Biden's COVID mandates were enacted he must have known there was no more "my body, my choice" and that progressive gender identity beliefs would negate the abortion issue to be strictly one of “women” with newfound identifiers and pronouns. Perhaps the contention that the COVID jabs are different because they are for the common good would be valid if the inoculations prevented COVID or its spread but they have been proven they do not.

Senator Joe Biden voted to allow States to overturn Roe vs. Wade until he voted against it. Which way are his advisors telling him the wind is blowing today? This is more about federal v. state power, than the legality of abortion itself. Some states will allow for abortion, some will have restrictions and some will outlaw if the “leaked” ruling stands. 

Is it the hope of the president’s party that by utilizing this wedge issue that it will help boost progressive liberal voter turnout in an attempt to stem the tide of a Republican conservative landslide in the upcoming congressional mid-term election? It appears that is their goal because from where I sit they have little else.

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

HERE WE GO AGAIN

Several recent shooting events that occurred in different parts of the country should serve as a grim reminder that of the gang wars of the 1980s are returning in a new form. That was a time when homicide rates were at record levels, as were other serious crimes. The violence back then was over turf and dominance of the drug trade, specifically over control of the cocaine industry. Today it seems to be retaliatory shootings for ongoing feuds. Where these are occurring today, however, like a shopping mall, a house party or other public place catches more innocent bystanders who happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Thirty years ago, we had responsible public officials who put their political ambitions aside and began to demand stricter law enforcement to quell the violence. At the federal, state and local levels, legislators approve things like tougher laws, higher bail upon arrest and longer prison sentences. All three aspects of the criminal justice system were working in concert with each other. Not like today.

At street level, police went on offense. Using specialized units, they targeted, yes I said targeted organized gangs. They broke up gangs by targeting the infrastructure and took down leaders. They made mass arrests of gang members. They utilized strategies like stop, question and frisk and order maintenance enforcement that made life miserable for crooks. Prosecutors charged those arrested with felony offenses. High bail was set, keeping them locked up and away from the street. Special drug courts were set up for faster prosecution. The judges assigned became familiar with how these gangs operated and were less likely to dole out a light sentence. Several federal task forces were set up to steer the most serious offenders into federal court. Operation Ceasefire and Project Triggerlock focused on offenses involving a standalone firearm case such as felon in possession of a firearm with no other charge. At the state level upon conviction for a standalone gun charge, the most time that could be handed out by a judge in many states was a two-year maximum prison term. At the federal level upon conviction, a felon in possession of a firearm charge carried a mandatory 10-year term of incarceration in a federal prison. Part of the thought was to remove that offender to a prison facility far away from the neighborhoods they terrorized. It made it inconvenient for them to get such things like family visits. It was at a time when elected officials both black and white did not buy into sympathizing about career criminal offenders. They cared more about stopping violence in neighborhoods. There were no criminal sympathizing advocates with any real platform or influence to get in the way. What followed was nearly two decades of historic lows in violent crime all across America. That meant fewer victims, more livable public spaces and the return of law and order in cities.

That was then. Let’s look at now.

Recently a spate of what the media is referring to as mass shootings have occurred in Sacramento California, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and South Carolina. The media is trying to make this a gun issue. That is a mistake. It is a gang issue, not a gun control issue. Memo to anti-gun movement activists: It’s not the gun, it’s the perpetrator, stupid. Only a depraved mind would use a gun to settle disputes or to take property by force.

In problem solving, it is imperative to correctly identify what the problem actually is before coming up with recommendations to abate it. If it is misidentified from the start, the wrong remedies will be applied that won’t fix the problem and might even make the problem worse. Many of the so-called mass shootings thus far have the appearance of being gang-related. The people arrested have long criminal histories and ties to gangs. I am encouraged that the Department of Justice is creatively using the

federal statute known as RICO laws -- Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act -- to prosecute neighborhood street gangs. They should use that same statute to prosecute smash and grab retail thefts and carjackings. There is no doubt a gang connection to those crimes.

What happened over the last 10 or so years is that city officials took their foot off the gas. They caved to criminal advocates who made unsubstantiated claims that the tough on crime strategies of the ‘80s and ‘90s was racially motivated to intentionally lead to mass incarceration of black people. They called police strategies like stop, question and frisk and broken windows policing covertly racist because it targeted minorities. No data or research backed up these lies. Public officials lost their backbone and fell for going soft on crime to flaunt their racial sensitivity. Prosecutors stopped charging career criminals and courts went light on sentencing. To hell with the fact that the overwhelming majority of the crime victims much like they were in the ‘80s are black. These criminal justice practitioners back then did not care about race politics. Crime victim advocates lost their seat at the table of public policy to subversives like Black Lives Matter and ANTIFA. Incarceration of criminals was called the new Jim Crow. Assertive policing lost its political support. What followed was predictable.

We are now in a period of a crime surge all across America. High-profile smash and grabs from department stores demonstrate how out of control things are. Mayor Lori Lightfoot in Chicago blamed business owners for not doing a better job of safeguarding their products. People are feeling helpless about government’s ability to control things.

According to the FBI crime statistics, murder was up 32% in 2021. In fact, black homicides between 2010 and 2019 are 42% higher than the preceding 10 years. Blacks make up 13% of the U.S. population. This is an aspect of disparate impact that you will not hear talked about by virtue-signaling liberals. Aggravated assaults like nonfatal shootings are at record levels, as are auto thefts and robberies. Police agencies have been defunded. A mass exodus out of the profession leaves agencies understaffed and under-resourced. Recruiting has been made impossible due to the nonstop bashing of police and politically motivated prosecutions. Who would want to choose policing as a career after all this?

The way forward out of this morass is simple. One thing we cannot control are the urban pathologies that contribute to criminal activity. Things like inadequate parenting, broken homes, failing schools, generational gang and drug involvement, failure to lead a more mainstream life with better lifestyle choices are things that the police and government cannot control. However, government can do things that can influence behavior change in ghetto areas. If you want good behavior, you reward it. If you want less bad behavior, then you punish it.

That is what cities did in the 1980s. They got tough on crime. They used the criminal justice system to punish criminals and criminal behavior. Failed second chance programs didn’t exist. After a period of effective anti-crime policies, crime dissipated precipitously. Go figure.

It’s time to get back to what worked. Tough enforcement. If we only have the courage. There is no reason to reinvent the wheel here. Quality of life enforcement and using jails and prisons as a crime control tool will produce early positive results. Think of the lives that will be saved and the human suffering that can be alleviated.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of Americas Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

SEARCHING FOR TRUTH

By: Joel E. Gordon
“When you want to help people, you tell them the truth. When you want to help yourself, you tell them what they want to hear.” – Thomas Sowell

The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines truth as the body of real things, events and facts: ACTUALITY.

Truth used to be and largely remains a simple matter for me. Truth is the opposite of a lie or of being deceitful and is supposed to be rooted in fact. However, it is not so simple to many any longer in our current cultural environment.

Fortunately for law enforcement, police body camera use has overall proven to be a blessing to our law enforcement community. Their implementation has proven time and time again that constitutional policing is the norm, much to the dismay of the anti-police law and order naysayers.

Perception vs. reality: So how is one, in this day and age of false narratives, fake news and social media lies expected to be able to determine what is reality or fact absence of being rooted in ideology? In a culture where “truth” seemingly appears to be in the eye of the beholder, a free society and its governing bodies have no business regulating free speech or determining what is disinformation or misinformation. The Department of Homeland Security’s creation of a Disinformation Governance Board has set off a backlash of opposition. Amid a growing anti-censorship sentiment, many have suggested that the initiative amounts to policing speech and have likened it to the Ministry of Truth from George Orwell’s book “1984.”

It has not been without further controversy when it was announced that the board’s executive director would be Nina Jankowicz, who has in the past supported Democrats, praised efforts to crack down on coronavirus “misinformation” on social media, was a Hunter Biden laptop denier, propped up the Steele Dossier Russia collusion lies and spoke as a far-leftist partisan. The self-proclaimed ‘Mary Poppins’ of disinformation is unbelievably seen on video singing and asking “who do I f**k to be famous and powerful,” her own words, among other things. Is this parody or truth? You decide. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas defended Jankowicz, calling her "eminently qualified," a "renowned expert" and "neutral." One thing is for certain; questions about her credibility and judgment are understandable.

I know that we as individuals can look at the same scenario or images yet take away a different

perspective based upon our own experiences, wants, ideology and prejudices. In many cases, though, could it be said that failure to see an entire event or scenario will cause a distorted perception of what has actually occurred or is occurring? Compartmentalized thinking is often used for justification, right or wrong, to rationalize a taken position. For many years, as a thoughtful philosopher by nature, I have been thinking about how compartmentalized thought (or partial information) is detrimental to critical thinking. Does a lack of understanding of cause and effect and unintended consequences stymie the ability to "see the whole picture"? The belief that we all have our "own truth,” being further fueled by academia, is increasingly bothersome to me. Schools are guilty of compartmentalizing subject matter restricting students’ understanding of reality and further limiting a world view full of facts, connections and questions yet to be answered. Is this way of thinking possibly at the root of our cultural decline?

The Urban Dictionary offers this definition of My Truth (which if it’s not mine is your truth)... My Truth: Pretentious substitute for "non-negotiable personal opinion" Often used by academics, this is a convenient phrase for avoiding arguments because people can contradict your opinion but not your "truth." The phrase is often used when seeking to justify a controversial personal stance or action because people are not allowed to argue with "your truth."

It is compartmentalized partisan thinking that leads to people believing that they are entitled to their "own truth.” Compartmentalized thought then lends itself to that perception of multiple truths dependent on opinion rather than fact. It seems as though a view of the complete picture would, more often than not, reveal a universal truth as the body of real things, events and facts: ACTUALITY.

Silencing conservative or alternative thinking individuals via campus boycotts, government influence and social media limitations due to "political correctness" concerns further exacerbates the problem of failing to give individuals the chance for gaining necessary information so all sides are heard and honestly evaluated.

If truth remains in doubt and is controversial, then divisiveness will surely continue to expand and grow in our society. To seek unity - the kind of unity and patriotism seen immediately after September 11, 2001 - we should be open to diversity in thought for honest evaluations all the while remaining protective of facts in seeking the real and honest truth.

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 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

SO WHAT’S A “GOOD COP”?

By: Joel E. Gordon

Competence, like truth, beauty, and contact lenses, is in the eye of the beholder. – Lawrence J. Peter (The mastermind behind "The Peter Principle" concept of management).

What does being a good cop mean? In most professions the goals that need to be met for competence are clear. A good doctor has healthy patients. A good lawyer wins cases. A good plumber keeps the water flowing and leaks from occurring. A good cook or chef … Well you get the idea.

In today’s environment, a good cop is mostly defined by the view of the beholder. Self-identified progressives, liberals and conservatives will surely possess different views. Jurisdictional differences in ideology and policy also greatly impact the definition of what makes a good cop. Presumably, public safety and crime reduction should be universal goals.

One fact is certain: Although many are quick to critique law enforcement duties and activities, not everyone can or should do this job!

FROM REAL POLICE TO SECURITY MONITORS?

In Illinois vs. Wardlow528 U.S. 119 (2000) the Supreme Court held in a 5 to 4 decision that the police had reasonable suspicion to justify a stop because nervous, evasive behavior, like fleeing a high crime area upon noticing police officers, is a pertinent factor in determining reasonable suspicion to justify a stop.

But apparently this is no longer allowable in Baltimore. Does implementation of Baltimore’s ongoing Consent Decree and similar doctrine lead to the death of reasonable suspicion as we know it?

Baltimore’s consent decree specifically states that police will not be able to stop someone in a high-crime area just because the person is trying to avoid contact with an officer, according to the document.

It mandates basic training for making stops and searches. It also commands officers to use de-escalation techniques and send specially trained units to distress calls involving people with mental illness.

The agreement discourages the arrests of citizens for "quality-of-life offenses" such as loitering, littering or minor traffic violations. It also requires a supervisor to sign off on requests to take someone into custody for a minor infraction. So while fighting with a suspect, officers need to obtain a sergeant’s approval to arrest a violator for failure to obey a lawful order or even for resisting arrest until escalating to an assault on police? When I think of city government combined with Department of Justice Consent Decree intervention, one word comes to mind: DELUSIONAL.

In a repudiation of broken windows policing policy which historically led to increased arrests, the pendulum has swung in an opposite and counterproductive direction if the goal was to identify lawbreakers and uphold reasonable societal norms of cleanliness and safety. Now, predictably in the face of increasing rates of crime, the broken windows policing model is getting a second look in places like the city of New York. What’s a “good cop” to do?

Perhaps decades of concern over political correctness, along with adherence to the Peter Principle have served to blur the lines to a definition of what is a good cop. Remember “The Peter Principle”?"In a hierarchy every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence. In time every post tends to be occupied by an employee who is incompetent to carry out its duties. Work is accomplished by those employees who have not yet reached their level of incompetence."

To me, a good cop will always be the peace keeper who gets to know the community to be served and who takes an ownership interest in the community’s success. One who insists on autonomy within reasonable guidelines, in the effort to keep criminal activity to a minimum in a primary area of responsibility while staying true to their oath of office in upholding the Constitution and without fear or favor standing ground against tyranny and unlawful activity from any directive or source. It was more than once during my active law enforcement years where I asked for an order to be put in writing when I felt that a directive was inconsistent with my mandate or oath of office.

As had been said many times over “An officer is someone who wrote a blank check made payable to the community that they serve for an amount up to and including their life.” While there is truly no way to repay such fearless and competent dedication to a job or such epic proportions, filled with nearly insurmountable obstacles each and every day, we must say thank you to all of the countless good cops out there.

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 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

How Bad Public Policy Gets People Killed

Last week in Sacramento, California, six people were killed and a dozen bystanders wounded after a shootout in the street outside a nightclub area of the city. The usual reaction, shooting from the hip (no pun intended) without knowing any facts followed. Media reports called it a mass shooting, adding to the alarmism category of gun violence that the gun control movement likes to use. The gun control ninnies then immediately called for more gun control, including head coach Steve Kerr of the Golden State Warriors who said mourning is no longer enough and called on elected officials to enact more gun control. Joe Biden, speaking from the same talking points, echoed Kerr’s drivel. Keep in mind that California already has the most stringent gun control laws in the nation. Then others took to social media in knee-jerk fashion unarmed with any facts and it was put out that a white male was the suspect. This brought about a sigh of relief in some circles among those who did not want to hear that black perpetrators were responsible. In fact, it was at least three black males who have been arrested. The original report of a white male perpetrator proved to be false.

Now we are learning some facts from Sacramento police as the investigation continues to unfold. The Los Angeles Times is now reporting that it wasn’t a mass shooting in the literal sense where a lone gunman mows down people in a place open to the public like a church, shopping mall or a school. They are now reporting that this was a shootout between rival gangs. Most of the victims were collateral damage-unintended bystanders. Three men have been arrested. All are black. It should come as a surprise to no one that both have long criminal histories. Many soft on crime elected officials are clueless about urban crime. Criminal apologists continue to blame external forces like poverty, racism, white supremacy and not enough federal and state community block grant money being spent on programs for inner-city youths. Let’s dissect that for a minute.

Generational gang involvement and other questionable lifestyle choices by young black males, failing K-12 public schools, inadequate parenting, no responsible fathers in the home for positive role modeling are all self-inflicted urban pathologies that exist in most urban cities with a significant black population. When you add failed urban policies like a soft on crime woke criminal justice system that relies too heavily on no-bail policies along with an over-reliance on probation, reduced sentences in exchange for a plea bargain and an early release from prison, you end up with a volatile mix. The inane idea to defund police agencies becomes the ignitor. Then, BOOM! You have bloodshed in the form of high instances of street crime and violence while naïve city officials wring their hands in disbelief about what is happening or what to do about it.

In the Sacramento shootout, the three suspects who have been arrested so far had long criminal histories. In the aftermath of the arrests, we get the same tired rhetoric from people.

A lawyer for one of the defendants said, “It's more than just the criminal justice system. As a community, we need to address gun violence,” she said. “We are failing everyone. We are failing our young people.” I maintain that we aren’t failing anybody, a dysfunctional black culture is. Sacramento Mayor Darrell Steinberg, a longtime advocate for gun control, struck a similar theme in the aftermath of the shooting by announcing that he will join legislative leaders and criminal justice reform advocates to again call for “immediate and substantial investments in crime prevention and healing services for crime victims.” The mayor acknowledged that millions of dollars have been spent on early intervention and gang prevention but that Sacramento, “needs to do even more.” He said the Sacramento police need to get more illegal guns off the street. One state senator said that, “If it takes another 107 laws to stop this

senseless gun violence then it’s worth it.” There you go, folks. They suggest the same old solution: Pour more money on it and make more new laws. That’s not the right thing to do. In fact, it’s stupid.

Let’s look into the criminal histories of the suspects. The three who have been arrested to date were all convicted felons with numerous arrests for serious acts. They aren’t supposed to possess firearms. They simply did not care about that law. That means that the California criminal justice system failed to adequately punish these career offenders on previous arrests. One of the suspects was sentenced to prison in 2018 for domestic violence and assault. Four years later, he was released early from that 10-year sentence. The prosecutor in the case opposed his early release from state prison because as she described him in a parole hearing, “He’s a career criminal and a danger to the community”. A deputy district attorney at a parole hearing described one of the suspects this way. “Inmate Martin has for his entire life, displayed a pattern of criminal behavior. While the current case on review may not be violent under the Penal Code, Inmate Martin’s criminal conduct is violent and lengthy. Inmate Martin has committed several felony violations and clearly has little regard for human life and the law.” He has prior felony convictions for robbery, felon in possession of a firearm. This slug was a ticking time bomb who was unleashed to walk among law-abiding people. He had served a prison sentence in 2016 and was arrested again in 2018. Let this serve as a reminder that these misnamed “second chance” programs do not work. They are reckless and unnecessarily put law-abiding people at risk of death and injury like the six dead and a dozen injured in Sacramento, yet Sacramento elected officials still believe that more laws are needed.

These violent career criminals are not unique solely to Sacramento. They walk among us in every urban city in America where soft criminal justice systems reign supreme. All of them pursue a progressive soft on crime agenda. Regarding what happened in Sacramento I always say, coming to a city near you.

It is time to stop these socially engineered experiments in criminal justice using human subjects like lab rats. It is time to lock these miscreants up and throw away the key. Lefties say that we can’t arrest our way out of this violent crime surge. I disagree. Yes, we can, by using jails and prisons as a crime control tool, one that led to a two-decade period of what was called, The Great Crime Decline all across America. We had historic lows in violent and nonviolent crime. That means fewer crime victims and safer neighborhoods. Were the jails and prisons full? Sure, but who cares? We were a safer America, a better America. Let’s do it again.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of Americas Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

FBI: Pot Calling The Kettle Black

This headline refers to a proverb that I remember my parents saying to me when I was little boy. It means, “someone guilty of something they accuse another of.” This is very appropriate in the case of behavior by the United States Department of Justice and their investigative arm, the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Like every other law enforcement agency, they carry a sense of trust given by the public. It is a sacred trust that must be closely guarded because once law enforcement loses that trust, it is very hard to regain. Nobody needs a corrupt law enforcement agency. I stressed that every day in my time as sheriff of Milwaukee County. The reason is that law enforcement agencies have awesome government power and authority. They can make arrests summarily. Due process doesn’t kick in until afterward. In addition to that, the word of a law enforcement officer carries more weight in report writing and testimony under oath in a court of law. Think about that.

So, when I read accounts about the FBI violating not only its own internal policies but violating people’s rights under the U.S. Constitution, suffice it to say I was not surprised, and I should have been. The reason I wasn’t surprised is because this agency has exhibited a pattern of this behavior for a while now. Just like with state and local law enforcement agencies, they are dealing with the human element in their personnel. Every so often an officer goes outside their documented policies and goes over to the dark side to commit egregious violations of the public trust. There is a difference, however, between a one-off that occurs in local law enforcement agencies and the pattern being exhibited by the FBI.

This goes back to the 2016 presidential election where FBI agents ran with a fake dossier from a previously discredited source by the British intel agency MI5 about then-candidate Donald Trump as the basis to secure a search warrant to wiretap Trump’s campaign. This dossier reached the highest levels of the Bureau. It is not too much to ask the FBI to do its due diligence in getting secondhand information before running to a magistrate seeking a warrant especially involving a wiretap on a presidential campaign. Any local law enforcement officer would know that they have to look at the source and vet him or her for trustworthiness before using the information. They have to tell the judge that they have relied on this source in the past and he is considered reliable. But it doesn’t stop there.

A former FBI lawyer involved in the Trump investigation pleaded guilty to altering an email that the showed source was not a source with the CIA, when the original email indicated that the source was a source used by the CIA. Follow that?

Now, there is this. In 2019, a Judge ruled that the FBI had gone too far in a search warrant raid and delivered a blistering account of those raids in a case involving a Wall Street financier. The FBI said in a statement that a typographical error in the warrant was to blame. The judge called it recklessness. That’s not all.

Now the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee is asking the U.S. Department of Justice Inspector General to review FBI agents’ failure to follow rules in sensitive domestic investigations that came to light in an internal audit. Senate Judiciary officials said that, “The violations are widespread and systemic. The sheer number of investigations that fail to comply with Domestic Investigation and Operations Guide rules suggest a pattern and practice of evading rules which opens the door for political and other improper considerations to affect the decision-making process.” That is a scathing indictment. The same audit found that FBI agents violated their own rules 747 times in 18 months while conducting sensitive investigations involving individuals engaged in politics, government, the news media and religious

groups. This, ladies and gentlemen, is cultural in nature. To call this department rule violations is putting it kindly. These are violations of people’s constitutional rights. These are civil rights violations. It has become standard operating procedure within the FBI. Worse yet, nobody will be held accountable. The Bureau gave the perfunctory statement about taking this seriously. Sure, now that they have been caught. FBI Director Christopher Wray’s credibility in now under question by the House Judiciary Committee for past discrepancies about these violations in previous testimony before the House Committee.

Here is why I bring this up. I have said over and over again that when law enforcement is right, I will defend them to the wall, but when law enforcement officers and agencies are wrong, I will call them out. The FBI and USDOJ never hesitate with breakneck speed to parachute into a local community when a police use of force occurs, especially when the officer is white and the suspect is black. They turn over every rock looking for the slightest thing that might suggest wrongdoing. They do this without being asked and before the local investigation is completed. They misread statistical data on traffic stops and declare a local agency guilty of a pattern and practice of racial discrimination and then arm-twist them into a consent decree basically taking the agency over, thus federalizing local law enforcement. During the Obama administration, they conducted 22 pattern and practice investigations. They found local agencies guilty of it in 21 cases. That doesn’t pass the smell test folks. They know that weak-kneed mayors will fall on the sword and not fight the ruling. This places the city’s officers under a cloud of suspicion and has them spending time away from the street and filling out onerous federal reports on traffic stops, field interview incidents and even minor uses of force. Then some cop-hating activists exploit the collected data to hammer the officers as engaging in targeting black residents. It is a basic truth that high-crime areas in urban centers have high percentages of black residents. It is also true that a high percentage of crime and violence involves black perpetrators. It stands to reason, then, that most traffic violators, field interview stops and arrests will involve black people. That isn’t targeting. It is a statistical reality.

I would suggest that the FBI focus on a culture change within their own agency. Their credibility and public trust are in the toilet. It reminds me of a Bible passage in Matthew 7:3-5 in thinking about the behavior of the FBI. It says, “Why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye (local law enforcement)and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.”

It is a classic example of the meaning of the pot calling the kettle black.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of Americas Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

Let’s Right Some Wrongs: Facts DO Matter!

By: Joel E. Gordon

Abraham Lincoln once asked an audience how many legs a dog has if you count the tail as a leg. When they answered “five,” Lincoln told them that the answer was four. The fact that you called the tail a leg did not make it a leg.

Facts do matter and repeating propaganda does not make assertions factual by virtue of repetition of less than truthful innuendo.

In political jargon, a useful idiot is a derogatory term for a person perceived as propagandizing for a cause without fully comprehending the cause's goals, and who is cynically used by the cause's leaders. Were the waning "pigs in a blanket, fry 'em like bacon" Black Lives Matter movements’ organizers playing the progressive left? You decide.

Law enforcement has been weathering a decline in law and order due largely to wrong-headed thought supported by prosecutors who are more akin to defense attorneys and those politically appointed feckless police leaders who had demonstrated their willingness to “take a knee” resulting in increased rates of crime in too many jurisdictions.

As policing is “re-imagined” through policy changes and via consent decrees, officer discretion has often been compromised. Yet officer discretion and a reasonable level of autonomy in the performance of duty is necessary to accomplish stated goals toward enhanced community policing initiatives. Micromanagement, Monday morning quarterbacking, and a philosophy that police are guilty unless and until proven innocent have too often taken precedence over real fairness and common sense enforcement of our laws.

While a large impact, perhaps the largest, has been felt in underserved, impoverished neighborhoods, the middle class is also being hurt from policies that attack safety, freedom and prosperity.

Americans are smart. We know that the results we see in our own lives are real through obvious consequences we witness daily whether acknowledged by the “elites” or not. Who wouldn’t truly believe what they see with their own eyes, anyway?

The recent revelation confirming that the previous media denial that the contents contained on Hunter Biden’s laptop were, in fact Hunter Biden’s, has further cast aspersions on Americans’ trust of government, big tech and the media. When at least 51 “intelligence experts,” our president, the White House press secretary and others are ensnared in the lie that the laptop was “Russian disinformation” then who can be trusted?

While short of the defined criteria of a criminal conspiracy, this was quite a scheme through deception on a massively large scale designed to influence perceptions and tip the scales on election outcomes. A report from the Media Research Center shows that the media’s lack of coverage and big tech’s suppression of certain issues and scandals surrounding Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden may have cost President Donald Trump the election.

Some of these topics include former Biden staffer Tara Reade and her sexual assault allegations against Biden, the Hunter Biden scandal, Vice President Kamala Harris’s extreme liberal voting record in the Senate, the U.S.’s economic jump in the third quarter, millions of jobs added, America’s energy independence, Operation Warp Speed successes and Trump’s facilitation of multiple peace deals in the Middle East.

One in six Biden voters polled, 17 percent, said they would have changed their vote had they been aware of these stories. The report also found that without even voting for Trump and simply refusing to vote for Biden, “These voters would have handed all six critical states, and a second term, to Trump if the news media had properly informed them about the two candidates.”

Trump has initiated a civil lawsuit.

Have any of the “experts” looked in the mirror for a moment of self-reflection? Are they incapable of recognizing when they are wrong? With the admission by the New York Times that the laptop story is true, Joe Biden is inarguably a compromised president. His own personal denials further complicate analysis of his presidency on both materiality and motive with Ukraine, Russia and China taking center stage.

And this too … is it any wonder that so many Americans want real answers on both the origin and the handling of the COVID-19 pandemic? Why is there reportedly such a deficit on knowledge when it comes to the effectiveness of natural immunity? After two years, is this even possible from a scientific standpoint or just another deception through denial and omission?

As Americans, we must insist on more from our government representatives and their appointees. Government in our United States of America was designed to serve, not control or take advantage of, you and I.

To my sisters and brothers in law enforcement, remember why you joined the fight and keep being of honorable service. You are the best of the best and with perseverance, better days can be seen on the horizon. Truth, justice and the American way must prevail. Let’s right some wrongs. See you at the polls on Election Day!

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

A Tree Fell; Did Anybody Hear It?

There is an old adage that asks, if a tree falls in the forest and no one is around, does it make a sound? That question is a good one to ask in what I am going to analyze. It involves the acquittal of a Louisville police officer last week by a Kentucky jury on a charge of 3 counts of wanton endangerment while serving a narcotics search warrant. The jury verdict last week did not get the national news coverage that the initial story did. If that doesn’t ring a bell, then maybe the name Breonna Taylor will. She was killed after her thug boyfriend fired shots through a door to serve a search warrant. Now that I have your attention, I’ll walk you thru this.

Officer Brett Hankison was the only officer charged in the case that sparked nationwide riots, something that has become the automatic default for politically motivated cop haters before waiting for facts to be determined and released. Just like incidents going all the way back to Ferguson, Missouri in 2014 when Officer Darren Wilson defended his life against thug Mike Brown who was trying to disarm him, this has become standard operating following officer uses of force. You remember the “hands up, don’t shoot” lie that was spawned out of that incident? Hankison’s name is hardly known, but Breonna Taylor’s name has become a nationwide symbol for the lie constructed about not only police use of force, but for banning no-knock search warrants. You may have seen recent legal-based columns by me on the issue of no-knock search warrants that separate fact from fiction. The Louisville police incident has been labeled in cop-hating media as a no-knock incident even though the police have said that they did knock. There is no evidence to suggest that they did not knock before being fired upon. One of the officers on the entry team was struck by gunfire that followed a knock on the door. That fact is rarely mentioned in any news accounts.

The reporting of this incident has been so one-sided that it makes clear the anti-police bias in liberal media coverage of these incidents. In one story from USnews.com, Taylor’s name was mentioned 10 times. In another short two-page column from Yahoo News, Taylor’s name was mentioned four times. Both stories pointed out the race of the officer (white) and of Taylor (black). This is done to inflame the situation and make it a race issue. That is more explosive.

In neither column was the creep who shot through the door, wounding an officer, mentioned in post acquittal news accounts. In one of the columns I mentioned, he was only referred to as “Taylor’s new boyfriend.” His name is Kenneth Walker. He has a criminal history. Walker said he wouldn’t have fired through the door if he had known it was police. Seriously? So, it is reasonable to fire through a door because whoever knocked didn’t answer? What if had been a parcel delivery driver? What if the person knocking didn’t hear you ask the question not to mention that police serving a search warrant wouldn’t want to give up the element of surprise, something that could reasonably endanger their lives? Narcotics search warrants are a high-risk activity and drug dealers are often armed. By the way, Walker admitted that officers knocked on the door. But let’s not let facts get in the way of a good story.

Officer Hankison took the stand in his own defense and testified in part that he did absolutely nothing wrong. I agree wholeheartedly. Any reasonable officer would have returned fire here. Hankison returned fire in the direction of the sound of shots being fired at officers in the dark. Officers train in nighttime shooting with limited or no visibility. Hell yes it can be risky. Several shots ended up going through walls into adjacent apartments. There is no evidence to suggest that Hankison knew that there were other apartments behind the one that the shots came from. That shots went into another nearby residence is the fault of Taylor’s boyfriend, Kenneth Walker. By the way, he should have been charged with attempted murder of police officers. He faced no such scrutiny. When officers are fired upon

unprovoked, they most certainly are legally entitled to use force to defend themselves. No one in those apartments was struck by the shots. Twenty-six people testified against Hankison, arguing that he endangered their lives by firing. None of them mentioned that they learned that Walker fired at police first and that it was his action that started this. No. Let’s excuse thug Walker’s behavior and blame everything on police. That is what I call cultural rot and dysfunction.

It is this phenomenon that causes much of the black-on-black violence in ghettos all across America. Witnesses fail to come forward when thousands of black victims are shot or murdered by a black perpetrator, and you don’t hear anything about how black lives matter. But let a cop use justifiable force, something that occurs in rare instances anyway against a black suspect, and riots with looting and arson occur. And here is another thing to ponder. Breonna Taylor dying in this incident is tragic. She seemed by all accounts to be a decent person. Her judgment, however, in choosing who to date comes into question. Questionable lifestyle choices have consequences. Let this be a lesson. With all the information available on the internet to do a background search, people should take the time to research people before dating them … but I digress.

The issue of what justice looks like came into play when after Hankison’s acquittal, Louisville Mayor Greg Fischer issued a statement that said, “Today’s decision adds to the frustration and anger of many over the inability to find more accountability for the tragic events of March 13, 2020. I know for many, justice has still not been achieved.“ What the hell is he talking about? He is insinuating that justice only occurs when police officers are railroaded with a witch-hunt indictment and then found guilty no matter that no evidence is offered to prove their guilt. Let me remind this blowhard virtue signaling two-bit politician that justice occurs when due process takes place. Taylor and her family got due process through a criminal trial, not to mention a $12 million civil suit settlement. That’s justice. The jury in this case only needed three hours to find a not guilty verdict. That says something in and of itself. In our system of jurisprudence, people are entitled to due process. They are not entitled to a particular outcome they desire. That is called mob justice.

So, let’s take a look at the damage done to officers. Hankison and several other officers were prematurely fired. Careers were lost all in a rush to judgment done to appease the cop-hating mob. Their lives and those of their families have been ruined permanently. How do we put that toothpaste back in the tube? That is the only injustice that occurred here, Mayor Fischer. Serving police officers up as sacrificial lambs in these incidents when they are doing what they have been trained to do and for what they took an oath to do has got to stop. It will only stop when police executives grow a backbone and stand up to mayors and the local media and support the men and women they send into harm’s way every day to serve and protect.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of Americas Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

LEGACY: WHY WE WRITE …our lasting attempts to make the world a better place.

By: Joel E. Gordon

One glance at a book and you hear the voice of another person, perhaps someone dead for 1,000 years. To read is to voyage through time. – Carl Sagan

It should come as no surprise that many of us with backgrounds in law enforcement find enjoyment in the act of expressing our thoughts in the written word. We spend our careers documenting everything from our activities to our investigations while justifying our actions along the way. We develop our skills in such a way as to conform to legal requirements for use in criminal proceedings and trials. We become increasingly thoughtful and insightful as we continue down our chosen paths.

According to the Strong Interest Inventory, which is used in career selection and assessment, many of those best suited to a career in law enforcement score highest in the categories of Social, Enterprising and Realistic. Social people are responsible, humanistic and concerned with the welfare of others. Those who are enterprising have a great facility with words which they frequently put to effective use in leadership roles. Realistic individuals deal in practical truths. Being service-oriented, it becomes our desire to try and make our world a better place through the sharing of our observations and solutions so that we can continue to add value to the world around us.

How many times has a law enforcement professional said that they should write a book about their experiences on the job? Some of us have done so. Others become columnists or submit articles we think will be of interest to publications such as the Blue Magazine.

In my case I have embarked down all three literary paths. I have written a book which chronicles my career, been chosen as a featured columnist for a regional newspaper and been given the honor to have the opportunity to write for Blue magazine. Those of us with literary skills have already mastered the art of police-style technical writing. That is, we endeavor to say exactly what we mean without risk of “double meanings” or misinterpretation by the reader. We then continually strive to put our abilities to their highest and best use.

When I finally wrote my book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer’s Story, which was published in 2014, it was over 30 years in the making before I actually took a year to write it. I did it because I wanted my story to be told. I wanted others to be able to learn from my experiences and gain insight into my life behind the badge. Beyond that, I wanted to leave a legacy for future

generations of my family, many of whom I won’t live to see, so that they will be able to share in my thoughts and life experiences and maybe gain a little more understanding into their own lives and feelings as well.

Writing both columns and magazine articles continues to be a rewarding endeavor, as well. It’s really a labor of love. Generation of ideas for topics of interest is as much fun as “putting pen to paper” and expanding those ideas into works of value to others. (I say “putting pen to paper” as a throwback concept as I use both my smartphone/tablet and laptop computer).

My fellow writers and contributors to the Blue Magazine and other publications must know of what I speak. Years ago, I decided to start a Facebook group called Police Authors Seeking Justice in light of the war against the police in my native Baltimore and throughout our nation. I envisioned a forum where police authors and commentators could share their thoughts and works while banding together as a force for good and support for law enforcement in general. It was through creation of this group that I was introduced to the Blue Magazine and many of you and have been given additional forums for my writings as a result. I am honored to have ascended to become the current Managing Editor of the Blue Magazine – the Independent Voice of Law Enforcement as well as a regular online columnist for the magazine and its readers.

I enjoy the writings of fellow brother and sister police authors. I have found that both our differences and commonalities in experiences serve as an inspiration while demonstrating the breadth and depth of our law enforcement family. I encourage all law enforcement professionals who have the inclination to author to do so. After all, there is strength in numbers and as we stand together we have many more thoughts and teachings to contribute as our world and profession continue to evolve now and into the future.

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

Police Mental Health And Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome

I have talked about this issue incessantly. I have referenced it in columns I have authored here in BLUE Magazine, I have talked about it when interviewed on cable news shows and podcasts and I have talked about it as a keynote speaker at various political events. No I don’t get tired about bringing it up. I will not stop beating this drum until we get policy makers and elected officials who always seek law enforcement endorsements at election time to provide funding for research and mental health treatment benefits for every man and woman who puts on the badge and uniform of their community and goes out to serve and protect.

What I do get tired of however is the deafening silence from the political class, many of whom caused these stress syndromes with their non-stop bashing of police and a refusal by others who know better to counter the hateful and destructive narrative. Too often in our twenty-four hour news cycle it becomes difficult for an en important issue to have any staying power at the top of headline news. Issues are talked about for one cycle and the it’s, an for our next story. This issue of police mental health and suicide is one of those issues. We hear a story, mainly local but sometimes national, about an officer taking their own life. Three minutes later it’s on to the next story. I don’t know if it is because news editors find it hard to talk about or to subject their viewers to or that it isn’t sexy enough to for ratings.

Unlike the liberal corporate media and others who just want to talk around the issue of police and mental health, I will continue to keep this front and center for policy makers until there is more money budgeted and more grant money awarded for research and mental health treatment for frontline law enforcement officers. It took the NFL Payers Association, the union representing professional football players decades before the league and owners admitted that there was a problem with concussions that was causing long term brain damage to players. The league paid one billion dollars in damages to settle the lawsuit. There was a plethora of research that had been done linking trauma to the head to long term brain damage. Why do I mention this? Because there is the same pattern here where departments and elected officials at the local level who are either demonstrating deliberate indifferent to this issue issue or they are in denial that something needs to be done.

In an article that appeared in the Washington Times newspaper, writer Jeff Murdoch details new information. Mental health experts are saying that the mass anti police climate is traumatizing police officers. Officers are “more likely to lead to make mistakes in potentially deadly encounters that stir up anti-cop narratives”. That’s not all.

Cherylynn Lee, a police psychologist said that, “by telling them that they are bad people, that is going to lead to trauma. When someone is suffering trauma or stress, it has an impact on the brain. It’s more difficult to concentrate and clouds thinking.” She went on to say that, national police rhetoric reduces resiliency, the term used to describe a person’s ability to adapt and recover from trauma. She now has a waiting list of officers wanting her services for treatment. She says many other clinicians are not taking new patients because they simply have no room on their wait list. This is an example of not having enough resources to treat officers earlier in their PTSD process to eliminate ingrained psychological damage. There’s more.

A Harvard University study of 5000 law enforcement officers found that: “40% have sleep disorders and that those with sleep disorders had a 25% higher risk of expressing and get and a 35% higher risk of having a complaint levied against them and a 43% higher chance of making a serious administrative error.” I find these results and figures are staggering. Does any elected official who spews this hateful anti police rhetoric?

Some cops are fighting back by suing their agencies and governmental bodies after being fired citing that they suffered from PTSD. This is something I hope continues to happen until governmental agencies look deeper into this crisis and provide grants for further study and health coverage for treatment so that this condition can be caught in earlier stages and reversed to bring officers back to health. And think of the collateral damage to a struggling officer’s family. They see that their loved one has a problem and do not know where to turn for help. Employee assistance programs are not the solution. Cops do not treat these government units. You cannot lump in law enforcement officers in with other city or county workers. No other city worker deals with what an officer does on the job and cops will not trust that the information they provide will not leak into the public or their agencies are notified due to an over reaction to not notifying someone due to some state laws requiring that certain people be notified of certain information resulting in an administrative suspension. Being stripped of of their badge and gun is a big deal to an officer. They lose their self esteem and identity.

That more research is being conducted and more data coming out is a good start but it is not enough. We need action, we need more resources. It is not enough to simple say we care, we have to demonstrate it. If not now, then when? Police suicide shows no evidence of lessening. So far in the first six weeks of 2022, 19 law enforcement officers have taken their own lives. It’s the second leading cause of officer deaths nationally.

My suggestion is that police unions, bargaining agents and Fraternal Orders of Police get involved and lead this push. They have political power in state capitals and in local government. They need to use that power for national attention on this very important officer survival issue.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of Americas Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

TUNNEL VISION: Avoiding Cognitive Dissonance

By: Joel E. Gordon

Please note: this is not meant to be divisive, insulting or disrespectful but rather should serve as a reminder to some and as a wake-up call to our die-hard progressive friends.

Sometimes people hold a core belief that is very strong. When presented with evidence that works against that belief, it cannot be accepted. That would create a feeling that is extremely uncomfortable, called cognitive dissonance. And because it is so important to protect the core belief, individuals will rationalize, ignore and even deny anything that doesn't validate their belief. For those who continue to support the Biden administration due to your own core beliefs, your level of gullibility exceeds my level of comprehension. Isn't it interesting how so much of yesterday's "misinformation" and alleged "conspiracy theory" continues to become today's fact? Everything from supply chain issues, transitory then admittedly actual runaway non-transitory inflation, to flawed ideals being portrayed as "science" and then not, to unlawful and possibly treasonous and provable spying operations at the very highest levels of government, failed military operations with denial of mistakes made, unfulfilled promises like assurance of no vaccination mandates and then announced vaccine mandates, disavowing police defunding after it was already underway while violent crime spiraled out of control, and the list goes on to include monetary support for illicit drug abuse in the name of safety and equity(?) instead of expenditure on drug rehab and treatment, etc.

Some actual headlines in case you were wondering:

· Hunger in America could get worse as supply chains tighten - CNN

· It’s Official: Inflation Is Not Transitory – Forbes

· Mask Mandates Didn’t Make Much of a Difference Anyway – Bloomberg

· Lesley Stahl Is Wrong And Trump Is Right: The Obama Administration Spied On The Trump Campaign – The Federalist

· Durham says Democrat-allied tech executive spied on Trump’s White House office – Washington Examiner

· Biden Had Firm at Center of Trump Hacking Scandal on Campaign Payroll – Washington Free Beacon

· Biden says he is ‘rejecting’ critical accounts from U.S. commanders about the Afghanistan evacuation – Washington Post · Joe Biden: COVID vaccination in US will not be mandatory - BBC

· Biden's illegal vaccine mandate is about politics, not science – The Hill

· Omicron Makes Biden’s Vaccine Mandates Obsolete – Wall Street Journal

· Pelosi: "Defund the police" not the policy of the Democratic Party – Axios

· Even Democrats are now admitting 'Defund the Police' was a massive mistake - CNN

· ‘That’s a world war’: Biden won’t send troops to get Americans out of Ukraine – NY Post

· US places up to 8,500 troops on alert for possible deployment to Eastern Europe amid Russia tensions – CNN

· U.S. deploys troops to Eastern Europe; thousands more on standby - Politico

· SF group handing out free crack-pipe kits expects to expand – San Francisco Examiner

(Yes, the original 2014 San Francisco program included plans for a free crack-pipe exchange program).

And not to ignore a vital issue of importance when it comes to the strength of our economy and national security, the squandering of a newly achieved decades-old goal of American energy independence by an attack on fossil fuels Joe Biden launched on day one of his presidency. Remember when Barack Obama voiced concerns about Joe Biden's presidential candidacy and warned allies not to underestimate Joe Biden's ability to "f**k things up?" Voters should have listened.

Even “fake news” CNN is now beginning to see the truth, as are some other liberal media outlets albeit slow to become enlightened to what many “flyover Americans” in less-populated areas know all too well. The real pandemic is those not being able to admit they have largely been wrong. Believing in an artificial level of the effectiveness of lockdowns, social distancing, masks and vaccinations all while ignoring real science on many topics such as therapeutics and naturally acquired COVID immunity subsequent to contracting COVID-19 have not been the correct answers. Too many individuals have died from post-COVID complications even among those triple-vaccinated. Forget about Anthony Fauci’s 14-days to slow the spread. What happened to candidate Biden's promise to shut down COVID-19 completely? Did you believe him?

A reminder, "conservatives" and traditionalists are not the enemy if we disagree with anyone else's views and exercise our God-given and constitutional right to express same. In fact, I and many others only want the best for the common good of our country, the world and for all its people. Truth be told, many of today’s conservatives would have been considered liberals of old and modern-day liberal/progressives would be labeled radicals by many in a not so long ago bygone era. Many must believe why risk cognitive dissonance instead “explaining things away” or rejecting new information that conflict with their existing beliefs through avoidance. I know each side believes that this applies to the other ... but let’s get real. The Biden presidency is a disaster and has placed our country in crisis. How bad will it get? Will WWIII be imminent? Will our babies, pets and we go hungry due to supply chain issues and increasingly empty store shelves worsened by trucker boycotts due to mandate protests? Our safety is already severely compromised. Law enforcement and our military are being abused and misused too, often further exacerbating our standing both here at home and abroad.

I had never seen healthy people being punished for non-compliance, as many livelihoods have been taken away, while sick individuals are being denied therapeutics and care… until now, that is. I truly never would have imaged such a situation could ever exist in our country.

America: many generations struggled and fought to keep our “home of the brave” “a land of the free.” Now is the time to see things for what they are together. Our future lives, freedoms and livelihoods are likely dependent upon 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

CONTROL THROUGH DEPENDENCY

By: Joel E. Gordon

The term drug paraphernalia refers to any equipment that is used to produce, conceal, and consume illicit drugs. It includes but is not limited to items such as bongs, roach clips, miniature spoons, and various types of pipes. Under federal law the term drug paraphernalia means “any equipment, product or material of any kind which is primarily intended or designed for use in manufacturing, compounding, converting, concealing, producing, processing, preparing, injecting, ingesting, inhaling, or otherwise introducing into the human body a controlled substance.” - National Drug Intelligence Center: U.S. Department of Justice.

Now the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services is reported to be giving grants to programs that hand out crack pipes to drug addicts as part of a program to “keep drug users safe”  and as part of its plan to “advance racial equity." Yes, you read that right!

The idea is reported to be an attempt to limit infections among drug users. The $30 million Biden administration grant program, to begin distribution of funds in May, includes money for nonprofit groups and local governments to purchase 'safe smoking kits/supplies according to a report in the Washington Free Beacon. The pipes would also convince people to smoke instead of injecting drugs because injections are riskier, the report goes on to say. However, equipment that qualifies for funding includes fentanyl strips as well as syringes.

Funding for the "harm reduction" grant program is provided through Democrats' American Rescue Plan.

Under current federal law, it is unlawful to do any of the following:

·       Sell or offer to sell drug paraphernalia,

·       Mail drug paraphernalia or transport it through interstate commerce,

·       Import or export drug paraphernalia.

Simple possession of paraphernalia is not a federal crime. However, under some state laws merely owning or having these items is illegal. Typically, police check for drug residue, and if it's clear that a pipe, bong, hookah or other item was used for smoking illegal substances, a person may face drug paraphernalia charges.

Examples of Drug Paraphernalia

Federal law lists numerous specific examples of prohibited paraphernalia, including:

·       Pipes made of glass, wood, stone, plastic or ceramic,

·       Water pipes, bongs and chillums (a long, hollow pipe usually made of clay),

·       Roach clips (objects used to hold burning materials like rolled cigarettes or joints that are too small to be held by hand),

·       Miniature spoons that hold less than one-tenth of a cubic centimeter, often used for snorting cocaine,

·       Freebase cocaine kits, or paraphernalia used to smoke cocaine.

Some states have longer lists of banned items such as scales and balances intended to weigh controlled substances, equipment designed to test the strength or purity of controlled substances, materials or chemicals used to "cut" or dilute the strength of narcotics and syringes or needles for injecting controlled substances.

Both federal and state laws identify various factors that law enforcement officials must use to distinguish between a lawful physical object (e.g., a scale or a spoon) and unlawful drug paraphernalia.

In states that have legalized marijuana for recreational use, lawmakers may have eliminated certain objects from the list, such as bongs or roach clips. However, even if a state no longer outlaws these items, federal law still considers them to be illegal drug paraphernalia and forbids their sale.

Penalties for Possessing or Distributing

Punishments for drug paraphernalia are generally less severe than for offenses involving illicit drugs themselves. Under the federal statute, the maximum sentence for selling paraphernalia is three years, plus a fine. As noted above, federal law does not outlaw possession per se.

Under state laws, penalties vary. In some states, drug paraphernalia possession is a misdemeanor. While most states treat paraphernalia distribution as a misdemeanor, some punish it as a felony, for example, if it involves sale of items to minors.

What is going on here? Is an American president, Joe Biden, and his administration trying to create or allow a country full of addicted Hunter Bidens? Is the goal control through dependency? Is there no respect for the rule of law or for long established norms which evolved and were developed for the common good? Racial equity?

Had enough yet?

Sgt. Clyde Boatwright, president of the Maryland Fraternal Order of Police, said government resources are better spent on preventing drug abuse rather than making it safer.

"If we look at more of a preventive campaign as opposed to an enabling campaign, I think it will offer an opportunity to have safer communities with fewer people who are dependent on these substances."

Perhaps a prophetic Ronald Reagan may have said it best. “Either you will control your government, or government will control you.”

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

MAYDAY in Baltimore: #cityincrisis

MAYDAY in Baltimore: #cityincrisis

While still freshly mourning a lone Baltimore police officer, Keona Holley, who was ambushed and executed while sitting in her patrol car, now this…

Baltimore has lost three of the bravest among us: Lt. Paul Butrim, Firefighter/Paramedic Kelsey Sadler, and EMT/Firefighter Kenny Lacayo. All made the ultimate sacrifice. For that, Baltimore owes them the deepest gratitude and respect. These heroes of the Baltimore City Fire Department were responding to a two-alarm fire in a vacant home in the 200 block of South Stricker Street at 6:00am when the structure collapsed. A fourth EMT/Firefighter, John McMaster, remains at the hospital in critical but stable condition. This is a gut wrenching tragedy for our city, the Baltimore City Fire Department, and most importantly the families of our firefighters. There are no words to describe the pain and the severity of the losses we have suffered today. My heart is with the Firefighters, their families, and the entire Baltimore City Fire Department who put their lives and safety of others before their own wellbeing each and every day. I ask that all of Baltimore keep them in our prayers during this extremely difficult time. – Baltimore Mayor Brandon Scott

Baltimore City Fire Department Chief Niles Ford: “Every day our Firefighters, our first responders put their lives on the line for the sake of others. Three Firefighters lost their lives in service to our city, and another remains in critical condition. From this moment, we will honor those we lost, for their bravery, their courage, their love for helping others and the respect they had for the Baltimore City Fire Department."

As they were working a structure fire at an abandoned three-story row house in southwest Baltimore, the crew manning Engine 14 declared a “mayday” during the fire after a collapse within the structure. Three firefighters were ultimately reported as line of duty deaths and one firefighter was transported to University of Maryland Hospital’s Shock Trauma unit with second- and third-degree burns in critical condition.

I confess I am no expert on firefighting or suppression but conversations with some trained firefighters have opened thoughts on questions that remain. Was this a preventable tragedy as an after-action review might show? Were best practices utilized? Were those on the scene aware that a previous fire at the exact same dwelling in 2015 resulted in firefighter injury?  Was this “bread and butter” vacant house fire taken too lightly as being a somewhat routine assignment, as about 15% of all structure fire calls in the city are at vacated buildings? What, if anything, could have been done differently to prevent tragedy?

It wouldn’t be a surprise if the abandoned vacant dwelling was being used as a drug house or clandestine housing for homeless. If trespassers sheltered there from the January cold, did a makeshift heat source get out of control? Of course, if law enforcement had found trespassers in advance of the fire, Baltimore State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby’s office would have rejected prosecution of any trespassing or drug charge. Too, is no one held responsible for compliance with securing, removal or renovation of vacant properties?

We often hear about the police department and how the city mismanages the budget for it. But the fire department is in the same boat and perhaps has it worse than the police department on any given day.

So talk is cheap, as it has been said. In the coming days and weeks there will be time to evaluate and implement corrective actions as necessary for safer tomorrows.

Reduced staffing, overworked personnel with police attrition rates that exceed retention and new hires, closed fire stations and heftier workloads for law enforcement, fire and EMS crews are a liability for governments who are open to lawsuits for culpability for employee injury and death resulting from the city’s negligence. More importantly, the city of Baltimore and all government jurisdictions owe their first responder heroes as safe of a work environment as is possible. Any policy or practice that runs contrary to that primary goal of safety leaves our first responders vulnerable to unnecessary harm and government morally and financially responsible for tragic consequences.

The ludicrous defund mentality must cease. The Fraternal Order of Police and Firefighters Union must insist that it instead is necessary to fund training and ensure adequate staffing and equipment procurement and availability to facilitate first response to emergencies that are as safe as possible with each and every call for service and alarm sounded. Nothing less is acceptable to our first responders, their families, and our communities who rely on these brave women and men each and every day and night.

May our heroes be protected; our families comforted, and may those paying the ultimate sacrifice rest in everlasting and eternal peace.

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

Memo To The Political Class: Do Something, Dammit

Calendar year 2022 begins much like it ended in 2020 and 2021. Police officers continue to be ambushed and gunned down in areas all across the nation and violent crime continues to surge not only in large urban cities but in suburban areas as well, and still elected officials continue to wring their hands as to what is causing it and how to mitigate it. 

In New York City in one week, two officers were killed in the line of duty while another two were shot and are expected to survive. In Houston, Texas, three officers were wounded in a shootout, with one dying. In Milwaukee, Wisconsin, my hometown, a sheriff’s deputy and a city of Milwaukee police officer were shot and are expected to survive. According to the National Gun Violence Archive, in the first 24 days of 2022, gunmen opened fire on cops 22 times, killing three. Another four officers have been ambushed in vehicle attacks. Even two police K-9s have died in the line of duty. According to the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund, 2021 was the deadliest year on record for law enforcement officer deaths.

There is no doubt that there is a correlation between the animus coming from Democrat elected officials, Black Lives Matter and Antifa and the assaults against police. These groups have turned police into villains. That steady drum beat of hate with little counter narrative from people other than myself on a national level has eroded the respect and trust for police. This vilification has manifested itself in the violence against police that we are seeing.

I have two remedies that could go a long way in restoring respect for police. Keep in mind that this hate for police didn’t start overnight and it won’t turn back in the other direction overnight, but if we enact public policies today, we can start the arduous path back toward a return on a focus toward officer safety. The first is for Joe Biden to stop with his inane idea of police reform and call for making it a capital federal offense for murdering a police officer with the death sentence handed out upon conviction. Also, there should be no more than a two-year window for the defendant to exercise appeals. This would ensure consistency nationwide, since some states currently do not have the death penalty.

The second remedy is for people in Congress and every state legislature to pass a resolution condemning any more hateful rhetoric toward police. Then we would have all of these two-bit politicians on record as to their position of support or non-support of police.

Next, I want to turn toward the continued escalation of violent crime across America. It is predicted that the upward trend in street violence that we have seen in both 2020 and 2021 will continue. For a snapshot, five people were shot, killing one, in Washington D.C.; three people were gunned down in Chicago including an 8-year-old girl, and six people were found shot execution-style in a Milwaukee residence known for drug activity. In Philadelphia so far this year, there have been 90 carjackings after 750 carjackings in 2021. Milwaukee saw a record year in car thefts with over 10,000 incidents. In New York, subway crimes of homicides and rapes doubled in 2021. Just because the calendar year turned from 2021 to 2022 does not mean that cities get to start at zero in reporting as if all the crime that happened the previous year and all of the victims it claimed didn’t happen. As I said earlier here, these are trends that will continue if not abated. 

The most startling thing to me is that there has not been one law enforcement executive who has put forth a comprehensive plan or strategy to combat this street violence. All I hear from the feckless city officials and police executives are platitudes. They express concern, condolence and calls for the violence to stop as if on that command alone the perpetrators will change their behavior and turn over a new leaf. They talk about looking for root causes and reinvesting in cities, which is code language for spending million more in taxpayer dollars that will lead to nothing. Police executives continue to embark on the fool’s errand of community policing. They erroneously believe that regaining and rebuilding trust with minority communities will lead to lower rates of crime. This whole community policing craze was first spawned in early 1980. We have spent billions trying to rebuild trust to no avail.  This is foolhardy. Besides, the law-abiding people already trust and respect you. Get a clue.

Nothing will build trust in minority communities faster than showing them that you can keep them safe from the criminal element. Nothing will build community trust faster than to show business owners that you will protect their property from thefts and burglaries. That means suppressing crime. Business owners watching their businesses looted and then set on fire during a riot doesn’t instill community trust especially after front-line cops were given stand down orders. Neither does a mother finding out that her child was killed after being struck by an errant bullet in a drive-by shooting.

Restoring trust starts with going after and harassing known criminals. Leave everybody else alone. If an officer does not know who the perpetrators of disorder are, and who the career criminals are on his or her beat, then they aren’t worth a damn as a cop. Notice that earlier here I mentioned that 6 people were found shot execution-style in a “known” drug house. My first thought was, if the people living in that neighborhood knew it was a drug house, then why didn’t police? And if police did know, what were they doing to shut it down? It has always been an important element of successful policing to know your beat, up and down, inside and out. In fairness to front-line officers today, they do not have the resources nor the time since the defund police movement to effectively dedicate themselves to routine patrols and surveillance ops, and even if they do make an arrest, George Soros-funded prosecutors are not prosecuting criminals.

Here the plan for any police executive who wants to become the next Bill Bratton of law enforcement executives. Here is the plan for any city mayor who wants to become known as America’s Mayor a la Rudy Giuliani.

Reinstate broken windows policing. All police activities will have one objective: crime reduction. Focus on order maintenance activities. If you do not know what that is then get a copy of Bratton’s book titled, TURNAROUND: How Americas Top Cop Reversed the Crime Epidemic. Read it, study it. Copy what he did. Come up with a written comprehensive crime reduction strategy. Come up with a plan to succeed. The plan has to have measurables so you can track how well you are doing or not doing. The stuff that is yielding results, do more of. The stuff that isn’t, do less of. Have a solid information-sharing process. Information needs to move up, down and across the entire agency. Your resources are finite. Let the mayor know what you are doing. If he doesn’t approve, then go rogue and do it anyway. Dare him to fire you for trying to restore law and order in all the chaos. Let the local media know what you are doing ahead of time. Notify community stakeholders. You’ll need their support. Let the city council know and tell them you’ll need more resources. Tell them to reverse no-bail policies so you can keep repeat offenders locked away. Team up with state probation and parole offices for a full-court press against the scumbag criminals with home and vehicle searches. Notify the local United States Attorney that you’ll need grant money to lighten the load on property and business taxpayers and that you are sending career violent offenders to be prosecuted at the federal level for more certainty in prosecutions and longer sentences.  

Now that you have informed everybody of what is coming down, execute the plan. Hold commanders accountable for results. Check on their progress frequently. Forget that community policing initiative BS. Am I clear?

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of Americas Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

Live by the sword; die by the sword?

By: Joel E. Gordon

Quote by Baltimore City Prosecuting Attorney Marilyn Mosby in July of 2021 about one of the many criminal complaints she has brought involving Baltimore City Police Department members: "These indictments demonstrate our commitment to ensuring one standard of justice for all - regardless of one's race, sex, religion, or occupation."

Marilyn Mosby, who rose to national prominence in 2015, has been a frequent target for criticism of violent crime in Baltimore since her failed prosecution of the officers she charged in the death of Freddie Gray after he was arrested by the Baltimore police. She was accused of prosecutorial overreach for charging the officers. None were convicted of any criminal wrongdoing. Since that time, she has continued to earn a reputation for criminally charging police officers while protecting law breakers.

In June of 2020, Mosby dismissed more than 600 pending criminal cases and announced that her office would no longer prosecute many misdemeanors for crimes she deemed low-level, including drug possession, prostitution, trespassing and select other offenses.

Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan called the Baltimore state’s attorney a “big part of the problem” with skyrocketing violent crime in that city. “We have a prosecutor in Baltimore City who refuses to prosecute violent criminals and that’s at the root of the problem,” Hogan said.

In fact, if you are charged with a violent crime in Baltimore, there’s a one in four chance your case will be dismissed.  Mosby released that data in a recent letter to the governor, who ordered a review of her office

But that is not the only claim to fame attributable to Mosby, who is now facing four counts of federal charges of her own alleging perjury and making a false statement on loan applications for two separate properties in Florida.

From unpaid federal taxes and a tax lien to using campaign dollars for personal use, Mosby has a history of questionable financial dealings and hasn’t always been transparent about information pertinent to their ethicality.

Federal prosecutors have been investigating the anti-cop state’s attorney and her husband, Nick Mosby, who is president of the Baltimore City Council, subsequent to a Baltimore inspector general report in February of 2021 that brought into question the state’s attorney’s travel, gifts and personal businesses.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) subpoenaed all of the couple’s financial records including their tax returns, bank statements, credit card statements, loan documents and canceled checks, The Baltimore Sun newspaper reported.

Mosby is accused of lying about experiencing COVID-related hardship on an application where she asked to withdraw $40,000 from her Baltimore City retirement account. The indictment claims that she did not actually have any financial hardship due to coronavirus, as required.

She is also charged with making false statements to influence a mortgage company, in connection with homes in Florida. She allegedly failed to disclose that she owed "significant amounts of federal taxes."

Calls are growing for Mosby to temporarily step aside or resign, as she is under indictment facing the four federal charges.

Mosby said she is innocent and she intends to fight these charges. "I have done nothing wrong," she said at a news conference. Mosby says she will not be distracted from doing her job as city state's attorney and is strongly refuting the federal charges against her.

While criminal defendants are always certainly considered to be innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and to a moral certainty, federal indictments are to be taken seriously. Data published by the Pew Research Center in 2019 highlighted how federal prosecutors have a 99.6% conviction rate. To put those numbers in perspective, U.S. attorneys filed 79,704 cases in 2018. Of those, only 320 resulted in acquittals.

In the meantime, Baltimore remains a city in crisis under siege. Mosby, who considers herself a “progressive change agent”, must not escape accountability for her own actions, business dealings and contributions to the increases in lawlessness within the city of Baltimore.

Will this indictment lead to ineligibility for her to continue to serve as the state’s attorney for Baltimore city? Let’s hope that justice will be served honestly, swiftly and decisively and for the common good of Baltimore’s merchants and law-abiding citizenry who need relief from a rapidly deteriorating environment currently devoid of actionable policy shifts resulting in a return to a better, safer and more desirable Baltimore.

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

An LA Tragedy

The following happened on December 23, 2020. Experienced officers know how this goes down. Police received multiple calls regarding a man in a Los Angeles area Burlington retail store. The 911 calls ranged from a man with an object that might be a bicycle lock who was attacking customers to one where the man in question had a gun.

Suffice it to say that this investigation has a long way to go and not all the information and facts are available, but we can make some observations and comments based on the post-incident news conference conducted by the LAPD Chief that I watched and listened to. He released the body cam video and 911 calls that came in and walked the media through the incident. Yes, it was pandemonium at the scene. People could be heard screaming in the background of the calls to the dispatcher. Others had barricaded themselves in locked offices and others frantically fled the store. Police were dispatched with a patchwork of what information was available at that time. This is par for the course in law enforcement. Cops have to work in the environment of the unknown. And they do a damned good job of it. That comes with experience.

When officers arrived, you can imagine what they found. People running around like chickens with their heads cut off. That’s understandable. What happened in the early moments is important. I’ll get to that shortly. Officers are trying to slow everything down, collect as much information as they quickly can and then process what they know and what they don’t know in order to make decisions as to how to proceed. To take language from the Supreme Court case Graham v Conner on officer use of force, “Things happen under circumstances that are tense, uncertain and rapidly evolving.”

Here are just a few of the unknowns that these LAPD officer had to quickly consider. Are there people injured and in need of medical treatment? Where in this large retail store is the suspect? Is he armed? Does he have hostages? Is the suspect high on drugs, intoxicated or mentally deranged? Where have customers barricaded themselves?

Officers came into contact with the suspect, who had a large metal bicycle type lock in his hand. Keep in mind that one of the calls that came in said the suspect was armed with a gun. He was commanded to drop the object in his hand. He did not comply. One of the officers made a decision to deliver rounds from his firearm at the suspect who undoubtedly posed a threat. Whether he should have used another level of force from the force continuum is a decision the officer on the scene gets to make and just like from the Supreme Court on officer use of force decision cited earlier in this column, it advises not to review these from the lens of 20/20 hindsight. It also says that in an objective test of reasonableness, the officer’s decision to use force has to be judged on the facts known to officers at the time, and what they learn later is irrelevant, which is why I took the time to lay out the case. One media report from CNN pointed out that the officer fired shots at a suspect who did not have a gun. I took to social media to call this uninformed goof out, reminding him that the Supreme Court case on officer use of force does not say that officers can only use deadly force if the suspect is armed with a gun. It asks under the objective test whether the officer faced a reasonable threat and if the force used by the officer was reasonable under the circumstances. It’s not a subjective standard of what somebody else would have done.

The suspect died after being shot. But it doesn’t end there. A 14-year-old girl who was in a store dressing room was shot as one of of the rounds fired by the officer pierced through a dressing room wall and struck her in the chest. Anybody who has used a retail store dressing room knows that the walls are nothing more than drywall. Drywall is not by itself going to stop a round from a firearm. She died at the scene in her mother’s arms. My initial thought was, “Oh, crap,” except I used an expletive.

This was nothing more than a tragedy, a terrible unfortunate tragedy.

Now, what to do about the 14-year-old unintended victim. Under most state laws, there are what is called defenses to prosecution. Those include mistake-an honest error, necessity- an act to prevent something worse from happening, adequate provocation-circumstances that deprive a reasonable person of self-control and finally privilege-immunity give to a person because of their position. In my opinion and based on my experience of having investigated police use of deadly force incidents, privilege and necessity should be taken into consideration in the death of the 14-year-old. She was obviously not the intended target of the officer. Sure, officers should take into consideration other people in the area, but that cannot be the overriding consideration. Other things have to be considered as well. Civil court using tort law is the proper place for this tragic case, not criminal court.

As for the review of the case, there are about four tribunals which will look at this officer use of force, including civilian review boards. That is too many. What if the determinations come into conflict, then what? You have to wonder about the objectives, especially with inexperienced on law or police tactics of civilian review boards and who sits on those boards.  Then there is the politics that will undoubtedly seep in here. The officer is black and the 14-year-old is of Hispanic descent. It didn’t take long for carnival barker Al Sharpton to insert himself into the situation. He lives in New York. This happened in California. California is not without its own political exploiters. He became the self-anointed family spokesman. It is guaranteed that with this clown involved, he will turn this into a situation about race.

There is another issue that needs to be pointed out here. The last few years have been filled with cop-haters and politicians, although I repeat myself, suggesting that social workers and mental health professionals be sent to cases where some deranged person is involved instead of police. How would that have turned out in this circumstance? I can tell you right now that people educated in social work or mental health experts are not clamoring to be used on these calls for service. They are being offered up as sacrificial lambs. It sounds like a good idea, but it’s foolish and not well thought out. Truth be told, they do not want any part of dealing with this danger.

We will have to keep an eye on this review. It is sure to garner national interest.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of Americas Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com