NYPD Blues

In the popular ‘60s TV show “Batman,” Gotham City, which is the fictional name for New York City, had a police commissioner named James Gordon who had the difficult task of maintaining law and order and keeping the peace. Gordon relied on Batman and Robin, who were his duly deputized agents of the law. He had a hotline to immediately contact the dynamic duo. The mayor of Gotham City wasn’t mentioned. The police commissioner ran the department. That, however, is not real life for today’s big city police executives.

Once upon a time there was a clear line of separation between the political class and the police. The thinking was to keep politics from seeping into law enforcement. Political decisions in policing can lead to a mistrust of law enforcement agencies. With political interference, people begin to wonder if certain decisions on things like enforcement strategies are politically motivated. That day is over, however, as more mayors and city councils are exerting their influence over their police departments. In most cities, the mayor has the final say over the selection of a chief, superintendent or commissioner. That makes it very clear that the person chosen will be accountable to the mayor. In and of itself that is understandable, as a mayor is responsible for things going on in municipalities. Their political survival can rise or fall based on public safety. But how much kibitzing is too much? That is the dilemma for today’s police executive and city mayors.

Recently this reared its ugly head in Gotham City. NYPD Commissioner Keechant Sewell recently resigned after a year and a half in the position. She didn’t provide a reason for her departure, but according to one newspaper story, an unnamed source said that, “She was fed up and she was tired of being their puppet.” This was a reference to Mayor Adams interfering in day-to-day operations. The story indicated that Sewell’s relationship with City Hall deteriorated in recent months, and she felt constrained when making important department decisions even in the area of promotions where she, according to a source, had to run these moves past Adams. A follow-up news story said that a source told them that a third-grade detective was really running the department and that he had a direct line to Mayor Adams. Personnel decisions should be up to Sewell. That is untenable. I would talk to the mayor about it first and demand that it stop. Then I would move the shadow detective to a desk assignment. Then I would remind Adams that I was hired to run the NYPD and if he didn’t like that directness then dare him to fire me. With all the other problems New York City is facing, Adams doesn’t need this public relations disaster with the NYPD.

Personnel decisions are policy. It makes it clear what she wants done and how she wants it done. If the mayor makes the choice, then that person’s loyalty will not be to Sewell but to Adams. Another source said that her abrupt resignation caught the mayor off-guard. Really?

Let me make a few observations here. First of all, when she took the position, she had to know that she would be serving at the pleasure of the mayor. She should have known that she would not have complete autonomy. Adams, being a former NYPD commander, for sure wants to run the largest police agency in practically the entire world with a reported 55,000 members. It has been his dream. After becoming mayor, he created several new positions to oversee the NYPD. That in and of itself made it difficult for Sewell to run the agency without the sense that someone was looking over her shoulder.

Every New York mayor wants to run the NYPD, some less so and some more so. In fact, even former Commissioner William Bratton ran into personality clashes with then-Mayor Rudy Giuliani after awhile and the increasing friction led to his departure even with all the success they had driving down crime, violence and disorder. Personality clashes got in the way. Former Mayor Michael Bloomberg was less hands-on while former Mayor Bill DeBlasio was very hands-on. To be honest, it’s my thought that Adams wasn’t caught off-guard. He wanted her resignation. It’s better politically if she resigns rather than him firing the first female police commissioner of the NYPD. Also, in a city with the media coverage of New York, this continuing head-butting would eventually have their toxic and deteriorating relationship make its way into tabloid media sites. Nobody benefits from that, especially internally with the rank and file who become confused as to who is in charge and who they should show allegiance to. Some will even exploit it to get ahead. I give Sewell credit for resigning rather than waiting to be fired and claiming victim status.

Adams was asked at one news conference about his micro-managing, heavy-handed style to which he replied, “Let me be clear because this is important. The people of the city of New York elected one mayor, Eric Adams. That’s who they elected.” That tells you all you need to know about Adams’ personality. It is all about him. The people of the city of New York elected him to run the city in general, and in defense of Adams I must say that he is responsible for all city departments. A better style of leadership, however, is to appoint competent people to run specific agencies and then have the wherewithal to stay out of the way and let them do what they know how to do. Periodic staff meetings with department heads can keep Adams in the loop. Inevitably the mayor is responsible, and holding his appointees accountable is fine. Finding that sweet spot of trusting your staff is the challenge of effective leadership. Adams, it seems, has a long way to go in that area.

How does the saga for NYPD end? The “Batman” TV series episodes would always sign off by telling viewers to stay tuned. Same bat time, same bat station.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of America’s 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

GOOD NEWS? A Native Baltimorean Emerges as the New Police Commissioner

By: Joel E. Gordon

As a former Baltimore police officer, I have long advocated for promotions from within the department. I have referenced my belief repeatedly on this topic citing the need for someone already with their finger on the pulse of the city who could potentially have a head start on restoring faith to the department and the community as its commissioner. Was anyone listening? Perhaps that message has gotten through. Michael Harrison, who has led the Baltimore department through federal reforms for the last four years, is stepping down from his position.

Richard Worley, is a son of Baltimore and a 25-year Baltimore police veteran who had risen through the ranks to Deputy Commissioner of operations. Mayor Brandon Scott nominated Worley as interim Baltimore police department commissioner and said he intends to nominate him to the position permanently. Worley’s Baltimore roots, experience within the department and his approach to the broader community were of importance in the decision, the mayor said.

Harrison was hired as a reform Commissioner with a primary focus on consent decree implementation. He previously led the New Orleans Louisiana Police Department, where he worked that department toward compliance with its federal consent decree. Gun violence and staffing issues have been extremely troublesome during Harrison’s tenure in Baltimore.

Prior to his departure, Harrison became an issue during a police budget hearing, when City Councilman Eric Costello tried to get Harrison to say whether he intended to serve out the rest of his contract to March 2024. Harrison responded, saying that he serves “at the pleasure of the mayor” and in order to answer the question “I have to know where the mayor stands on that answer before I can actually answer the question.” Harrison said he had “said no to many opportunities that have come, but there may be a consideration that I may have to consider if it comes, if and when it comes, I may have to make that consideration.”

It didn’t take long for the truth on Harrison’s departure to be revealed. Mayor Scott said that after “numerous conversations over the past few weeks it became clear to both of he and Harrison that this was the right time to make this transition.” Harrison stated that he has no current offers and has not yet interviewed for any other jobs. “The first thing is for me is to breathe. The second thing is to make sure I’m here to help the new police commissioner get acclimated to the work.”

Harrison had largely lost the confidence of the city’s Fraternal Order of Police leadership and many in the community.

The Baltimore City Fraternal Order of Police responded via Twitter:

(Today), FOP3 learned that PC Harrison will be leaving @BaltimorePolice after 4 long years. The #1 responsibility of a PC is to protect its citizens from violent criminals today, tomorrow, and next week rather than to holistically plan for decades of social work. That is for others. How many have lost their lives from this failed approach? We know Acting PC Worley and we communicate well with him. It is our desire to continue to do so and we hope that he focuses on retention and recruitment because without those numbers increasing we cannot fulfill our first priority to protect our citizens.

Will the new police commissioner be a positive leap forward? Time is of the essence. Let’s all hope he is successful in his earned position.

Joel E. Gordon, Managing Editor of BLUE Magazine, 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

Where Is The Plan, Dammit?

So, the unofficial start of the summer season began with the observance of Memorial Day weekend. And like has happened for about the last five years, street violence in obscene numbers broke out in urban cities. Chicago has become the poster child for murders, nonfatal shootings and roving bands of youths taking over public spaces while tourists are attacked. In Chicago over the Memorial Day weekend, 52 people were shot, leaving 11 dead. In Milwaukee over the same Memorial Day weekend, 13 people were shot, leaving 3 dead. The following weekend had 46 shot, nine dead in Chicago and a one-year-old shot and killed after being struck by an errant gunshot during a gun battle in Milwaukee. Major news outlets basically ignored it. Over the past 12 months, 682 people have been murdered in Chicago and 489 have been Black, yet nothing from the NAACP or Black Lives Matter. The newly elected Democrat mayor had a busy weekend schedule and didn’t take the time to comment on the violence. It appears that the plan to address the violence is to not talk about it as in nothing to see here, move along. That is not an operational plan.

MoneyGeek, a personal finance technology company, listed the 15 most dangerous cities in America. They came up with the list by analyzing FBI crime statistics for 2021. Among those cities are the usual suspect locations: Chicago, St Louis, Baltimore, Detroit, Memphis, Cleveland, Oakland and Philadelphia. The state of Louisiana had 3 cities that made the most dangerous list. The common denominator with all these cities is that they all are led by a Democrat political class. The same people who supported, and in many cases did in fact defund police departments and passed no-bail legislation for most crimes including some serious felony offenses. MoneyGeek pointed out the economic impact of crime on cities and also pointed out that their information can help people learn about what to expect from visiting or living in those locations. This is what is referred to as quality of life issues.

This crime trend has been going on for at least the last 5 years. Drilling further down into the data shows more stunning information. More analysis from the site World Population Review on crime in 2018 showed a slight decrease in violent crime. They attributed the slight decline to a relaunch of Project Safe Neighborhoods, an initiative that, “brings together law enforcement, prosecutors and community leaders to develop comprehensive remedies for the most pressing crime issues.” Let me stop and expand on that. Notice that the emphasis was on attacking crime. Repeat offenders were identified, arrested, faced certain prosecution and incarceration. This was the same approach that led to the great crime decline of the late 1980s, and all throughout the following decade and into early 2000. Removing these actors from law-abiding society led to historic decreases in crime, violence and disorder all across he same cities that are currently experiencing out-of-control record numbers of crime, violence and disorder. What changed that led us to this current surge in crime? Criminal apologists went on their jihad against the criminal justice system. This was the same time frame that the War On Cops began in earnest. Many of the current class of George Soros-supported woke political activist prosecutors were elected to office in St. Louis, Chicago, Baltimore, New York and Milwaukee. This along with defunding police agencies and enacting no bail policies show that it is not a coincidence that most of these same cities are among the head of the class of most dangerous cities in America. This soft on crime approach is the antithesis of Project Safe Neighbor. But there is more.

The World Population Review analysis shows that the areas with the highest crime rates have poor housing conditions, large families with small incomes, failing schools, high poverty, bad health problems and homes with parents who have previously been in trouble with the law and that the motivation for violent crime has led to the formation of gangs. To put it bluntly, these are the characteristics that create ghettos. They are the result of failed urban policies. These urban pathologies nurture cultural dysfunction and cultural rot. This is what happens when your city has an over-abundance of single-parent homes, ineffective parenting, no work history, school failure, drug and alcohol abuse and questionable lifestyle choices by young people. Poverty becomes a lifestyle that leads to permanent membership in the underclass and government dependency.

This is why I point out that reducing crime, violence and disorder is a combination of elected officials creating better public policy along with more effective public safety efforts. Instead, these inept officials continue on the path of creating government dependency for a voting base and then thrust all of this chaos into the lap of law enforcement agencies to fix. I have incessantly pointed out that most of what we send police to deal with are not things police should be involved in in the first place. For instance, traffic enforcement, while necessary for the smooth flow of transportation, too often is used for revenue purposes. Many of the use of force and deadly force situations occur during a traffic stop. Then, after a police deadly use of force, these same incompetent city officials call for police reform instead of acknowledging that their own failure contributed to the conditions leading to a need for and over-reliance on law enforcement. Police reform is the low-hanging fruit and the most convenient thing for feckless politicians to reach for to keep the heat off themselves.

So what should happen? Two things. First, law enforcement executives need to continue to demand additional funding. The two sources I used for crime data point out that a lack of additional police funding is contributing to the increase in crime, violence and disorder. Additionally, these police executives need to demonstrate the courage to point out the failed urban policies and name names. Stop trying to cover for these incompetent mayors and city councils in an effort to save your job. What about the front-line street cops? They are the ones whose lives and careers are in danger.

And finally, come up with an operational plan to attack crime. I am seeing too many law enforcement executives who have gone down the rabbit hole of uttering catchy buzz phrases like “community partnering” and other abstract nonsense. These are social engineering experiments developed in schools of social welfare by people who have no real-life experience inside ghettos. These inane ideas don’t work. These experiments have transformed street cops away from being crime fighters and instead turned them into community ambassadors. Look at and copy the Project Safe Neighborhoods model.

Stop trying to fix the police. That is working on the wrong thing. Fix the ghetto instead.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of America’s 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

Maintaining Safety in the Topsy-Turvy World Around Us

By: Joel E. Gordon

Defense is defined as action(s) of defending from or resisting attack.

“Self defense is not just a set of techniques, it's a state of mind that begins with the belief that you are worth defending” - Rorion Gracie: Jiu-Jitsu Grand Master technical adviser for the 1987 movie Lethal Weapon.

Where the head goes the body will follow' is an athletic axiom that coaches teach.

A great memorable quote from the The Karate Kid, Part III (1989) movie - Thomas Ian Griffith as Terry Silver: "A man can't breathe, he can't fight."

New York City

Perhaps all of the above are what Daniel Penny, the 24-year-old Marine veteran who subdued a deranged lunatic on the F train in Manhattan was thinking.

According to witnesses, Jordan Neely, a thirty-year-old homeless man was pacing madly and throwing trash at passengers trapped in a sealed subway car with him. He said he did not mind “going to jail or getting life in prison” and was “ready to die.”

Many locals knew Jordan Neely. He liked to hang out in Times Square, where he would perform dressed up like Michael Jackson—the side slide, the crotch grab, and the moonwalk were his signature moves. Law-enforcement and public-health officials also knew him. He had been arrested more than forty times. From January 2020 to August 2021, he was arrested for public lewdness after pulling down his pants and exposing himself to a female stranger, misdemeanor assault for hitting a woman in the face, and criminal contempt for violating a restraining order. All three cases were dismissed.

He had a history of mental illness. Neely had been involuntarily hospitalized, at Bellevue, in 2021 but, like so many other patients, Neely walked out of the hospital and onto the street. For a while, he lived at a homeless shelter and ultimately, fell through the cracks.

There are believed to be more than two hundred thousand residents of New York City living with severe mental illness. Although not specific to then unknown background details pertaining to Neely, it was obvious to the trained Marine that Neely was a credible threat through observed actions and his overall demeanor.

The ex-Marine quietly stepped behind Neely and put him in a chokehold to hold him for the police and protect everyone on that subway car. In fact, Neely struggled so much that two other men had to help secure him. Neely died in the skirmish.

In response to his death, a lot of people held protests, demanding “justice” for the man making the threats. We’re supposed to be impressed that Neely hadn’t punched anyone on the subway car yet, that he was merely throwing garbage and threatening to hurt them?

Penny’s intent was to protect himself and every other innocent person in that subway car. So now he’s got to pay by being prosecuted for manslaughter by city of New York prosecutor Alvin Bragg?

Baltimore

A Baltimore City police officer shot a 17-year old youth upon reasonable suspicion that based upon training, the officer believed the youth to be armed. Baltimore is experiencing a marked increase in teen violence this year and is actively working, within constraints of a federal consent decree, to use techniques and units assigned to specially designated zones to curtail this alarming trend.

Investigators say the officer was interacting with the community sitting on a stoop talking to a resident when he saw the youth.

"I can't tell you what the officer saw but when they called it out they said the individual was characteristics of an armed person. That's why they started to approach him," said Rich Worley, Deputy Commissioner of the Baltimore City Police Department.

Police say the youth ran off and a foot pursuit occurred.

Investigators say the youth was found to be holding a gun and upon ignoring officers' commands to drop the weapon one officer fired more than one gunshot hitting the teen.

"Well at that point when they realize there's a weapon, they understand that it's a dangerous situation and they have a right to act," said Nixon.

But in Baltimore instead of gratitude that the threat of harm by the youth was stopped, the media focus has been on police training and what criteria were used in the initial assessment that the youth was exhibiting behaviors of being armed. Never mind the job being done to promote if not ensure community safety.

In our topsy-turvy world, results that impact in favor of the greater good are damned. When unlawful aggressors pose a threat, it appears that there are too many of the belief that those posing a threat have lives more worthy of defending than the safety, peace and lives of the rest of us.

As for me, I am grateful to those willing to stand among the protectors. Thank you for your service and sacrifice one and all!

Joel E. Gordon, Managing Editor of BLUE Magazine, 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

Wanting A Do-Over

At the height of the War On Cops attacks on the profession of policing, there was a move by public school officials to remove law enforcement resource officers from school. The result was inevitable. There has been an increase in student fights and weapons being brought to schools. Why did school officials think this was a good policy? Because they got caught up in all the hysteria based on the George Floyd incident, an incident that had no correlation to school safety. Major public policy change should never be made in an emotional state. A better policy approach is to wait until initial outcry subsides so people can think more rationally than emotionally. Next step is to put together a work group to provide several policy proposals based on an examination of the data and research. I like using what is called the logic model. It is based on asking three simple questions. First: Are you working hard? Second: Are you working smart? Finally: Are you working on the right thing? In other words, if you misdiagnose the problem you think you have, you will apply the wrong treatment.

An important step in policy options methodology is to discuss the potential outcomes of your decision. In other words, assess the pluses and minuses of each option and consider the unintended consequences of changing course. This step is always skipped and when it is, everybody is shocked about the result. I never am. In fact, I often predict it beforehand. Using this model, let’s analyze the misguided emotional-based policy of removing police from public schools. There is enough of a sample size of data to examine.

One news story reports dozens of cities nationwide are reversing course on removing police from schools. In one Nevada school district, a contract to have officers back in schools was renewed after public outcry when fights broke out along with reports of gang violence and bullying. In a New York school district, leaders from a teachers union are begging school officials to put officers back in schools after fights and gang problems arose. In California, an officer was put back into a high school after a student was stabbed to death. In Virginia, this same news story reports that a school superintendent recommended officers be put back in schools after an increase in student disciplinary violations. The National Association of Resource Officers reports that gun incidents in schools between August to October in 2022 tripled.

There are still some however who oppose returning to the original policy of having officers in schools even in light of the data that suggests that the policy change to remove officers from school was short-sighted and led to an increase of disciplinary-related incidents. In Milwaukee, Wisconsin, the Republican-controlled state legislature acted on reports of an increase in school violence in the state’s largest school district by inserting into the new budget several million dollars of funding to put officers back in public schools. This move is being resisted by school officials and other anti-cop groups however.

It’s important in this discussion to go back and look at other liberal social engineering experiments going on with school safety that contributed to this resentment of school resource officers. During former President Obama’s administration, he appointed a former superintendent of the Chicago Public Schools, Arne Duncan, as his secretary of education. Both immediately went to work dismantling policies that removed disruptive students from classrooms that utilized expulsions and suspensions as a student conduct control mechanism. Obama called his social engineering experiment the Rethinking School Discipline program. School districts were discouraged from calling police or reporting even serious safety concerns by students. Obama and Duncan were of the belief that removing disruptive kids from class unfairly targeted minorities. They threatened school districts that current disciplinary policies could constitute, “unlawful discrimination under federal civil rights laws”. Obama looked at everything through the lens of race. To him, the bogeyman of race lurked around every corner of life, even in school discipline policy incidents.

Recall what I said previously about police options methodology and an important step is to examine if your change may have unintended consequences. Large school districts got away from disciplining unruly students under the threat of not receiving federal funding from the Department of Education unless they adopted these soft on conduct policies . They replaced punishment for unwanted behavior with an inane idea of restorative justice. This focused on reasons why a student misbehaved. That is easy to determine in a few minutes. They misbehaved because they are unsocialized miscreants who are not disciplined at home and the behaviors they exhibit outside the classrooms are brought with them inside the classrooms. Schools became a threatening and anxiety-filled place to be for other students. Learning suffered, as well. Chaotic classrooms are not conducive for learning to take place. A child’s biggest challenge is to just survive the school day. Nice job, Barack.

Here is the dilemma for officers going back into schools. First, they must have the full support of the administration, parent groups and school board. These three entities must fight against the false narrative that having an officer in the school is a danger to children attending these schools. A one-size-fits-all policy won’t be sufficient, either. For example, larger urban public schools should be staffed with a minimum of two officers and maybe even three. Schools must return to policies that expel or suspend disruptive students. For officers taking these assignments, be advised that these are assignments fraught with peril. Be aware that if you have to use reasonable force to control a student, the video will go viral and an overzealous, politically active prosecutor may offer you up as a sacrificial lamb to appease the angry mob in this anti-police environment. If the force used is against a black kid, no matter how reasonable the force you use is the race baiters will come out from under their sewer covers. Have you seen some of the fights going on in school hallways? They are vicious. Some level of force will undoubtedly have to be used to quell the melee.

So, this is how we got here. It was a combination of bad ideas and bad policies. Personally, I would not volunteer as a school resource officer in an urban school district. It’s not worth it. But that’s your decision, not mine.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of America’s 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

HERE WE GO AGAIN

Like clockwork after the death of a black man at the hands of a white man, the race hustlers, hucksters and other opportunists leaped into action to prime the American public with their slogans and false narrative about the facts and circumstances surrounding the incident.

In case you haven’t heard about what happened on a New York subway train recently, although these days I don’t know how anybody could have missed hearing about it with the media’s 24/7 obsession with headline news every time a black guy dies and a white person is involved. The media and race hustlers have to be upset, however, that the guy who died didn’t do so at the hands of a white law enforcement officer but instead, a white Marine veteran will do for their insidious purposes. Here is what we know thus far. Jordan Neely, a 30-year-old, homeless black man who suffers from mental illness, was on a New York subway train. As people suffering from a particular from of mental illness will sometimes do, he was acting in a menacing fashion according to police officials and subway video. He was harassing passengers and making threats. A reporter on the same train described Neely as screaming in an aggressive manner but he hadn’t attacked anyone. I will add not yet, anyway.

Anybody who rides the New York subway system, and I have, can attest that these rides can be intimidating and filled with tension. For many New Yorkers, the subway is their only means of transportation. Imagine the anxiety they feel each time they go down on the escalator to the train platform to go to work, school or wherever they have to be. It’s dark and often time the smells are not aromatic as street people often use the platform like it’s a restroom. Seeing rats is not all that uncommon. The homeless have made it a refuge. In one story about the incident. one man said that the subway had become a gathering place for panhandlers like himself.

These are quality of life issues that can negatively affect experiences in public spaces. Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani hired a head of the New York transit police named William Bratton. When Bratton took over as head of the Transit Authority before becoming head of the NYPD, he made it his mission to clean up the New York subway system. Many of his Broken Windows theory principles were tried and developed by cleaning up the subway. His order maintenance tactics were based on stopping the nuisance-type activities happening on subway platforms like public urination, panhandling, and turnstile jumping. He drove the perpetrators of disorder out of the subway and chased them above ground. Subway rides became less intimidating.

With Mayor Giuliani and Commissioner Bill Bratton gone, the emphasis on quality of life enforcement by police has gone away and been replaced by tolerance for disorderly behavior. The NYPD has been defunded and officers are retiring at a pace outdoing hiring. Not only is crime rising on the streets of New York but down in the subway as well. This is the backdrop of the Neely incident.

Tired of the menacing behavior of Neely, Marine vet Daniel Penny approached Neely and got him in a headlock to restrain him. Two other passengers joined him to assist by holding Neeley’s arms. Neely struggled as the three restrained him. When they got to the next stop, Neely was no longer moving and he was later pronounced dead. The medical examiner ruled the death a homicide due to a compressed windpipe. I do not have all the facts but from what we know thus far we can reasonably make some observations. As a former homicide investigator with the Milwaukee Police Department, I have attended autopsies. Ruling a death a homicide gets people all worked up. There is no need to come unhinged hearing that. Homicide is a manner of death. The others are suicide, natural causes and undetermined. Just because a death is ruled a homicide does not automatically mean that someone is criminally liable for that determination. That gets to the cause of death. In this case, it was a collapsed windpipe as opposed to a gunshot wound, stabbing, overdose or it could be accidental. This investigation is ongoing. However, in my experience as a trained homicide detective, I could easily advise the prosecutor that this was nothing more than an accidental death.

Now let’s get to the actions of the Marine vet. We cannot reasonably expect common citizens to do things in a manner that we would expect say a trained law enforcement officer in the area of arrest tactics like decentralizing someone. A Marine is trained in survival skills. It becomes instinctive. A headlock to subdue somebody with his trained skill set is not unreasonable. Any cop will tell you that some people suffering from mental illness can possess superhuman strength when struggling. I have dealt with it myself. It can take several people to control someone who is violently struggling. Unfortunately, the prosecutor reviewing this is the politically active race baiter Alvin Bragg. He will have a hard time finding a jury pool that isn’t aware of what is going on in the streets of New York. They are tired of reading, hearing and experiencing the rising crime, violence and disorder and policies like no bail for repeat offenders. Bragg’s office, according to one study, has tossed out 69% of criminal cases. Neely, by the way has a rap sheet with 42 arrests. So, these people remain on the streets. Couple that with delayed police response to calls for service and with fewer police on the streets, we see people being more inclined to handling things themselves. They have no other choice. It’s either defend themselves or become crime victims.

When government cannot fulfill its most important responsibility of securing the personal safety of citizens, then it must allow the individual to play a role in protecting themselves. When this happens, prosecutors cannot look at what a better outcome should have been in making a determination. Often times, when citizens engage in these incidents it won’t end perfectly. That doesn’t make it criminal.

The remedy is not to tell citizens not to defend themselves or charge them criminally because it was not a textbook takedown or maneuver to subdue someone. The answer is to restore police resources, empower them and get rid of bad urban policies like no bail and decriminalizing abhorrent behavior. Then people might be willing to rely on police to protect them in public spaces instead of doing it themselves.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of America’s 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

When Will Cities Stop The Bleeding?

As I read the latest on how crime and violence have overtaken urban cities, I am reminded of an element of crime that most elected officials are not. I continually state that crime is like water or wildfires. They seek their own levels. You can only put up so many sandbags along swollen riverbanks to keep rising water from flooding land. It’s like with basements. Keeping water out will always be a challenge. At some point, it will find its way in unless you continually make adjustments and water will inevitably find a way in. Wildfires occur in the same areas every year, yet effective maintenance of dry areas rarely occurs because eco-wacko environmentalists won’t allow it. The same can be said about criminal apologists. They don’t want perpetrators locked up.

  Crime and violence have many of the same properties as water and fire. It is a constant challenge to keep crime under control. Crime will occur at levels and rates of a community’s tolerance for it. Effective urban policies along with effective policing strategies with a goal of suppression, prevention and prosecution of unwanted behavior are the sandbags to keep things under control. Constant maintenance is required. Who gets in the way? Soft-on-crime social engineers who erroneously believe that deeply ingrained criminal behavior can effectively be eliminated with behavior modification strategies that do not allow a role for punishment for unwanted behavior. Political neglect in the area of crime control allows it to bleed into surrounding fertile territories. And it is now spreading.

  We are now seeing reports of lawlessness beginning to affect the business community. Retail giants Walmart, Walgreens, Target Department Store, Macy’s, Best Buy and Whole Foods have reached a point of no return. All these chains have announced they are closing stores in Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, Milwaukee and other cities. Other stores in Florida and New York malls have shut down for the same reason. They can no longer absorb the millions of dollars in losses due to thefts and other acts of disorder that are threatening their employees and their customers.

These dollar amounts in terms of losses are staggering. It is reported that retailers lost $94.5 billion in 2021 from theft and inventory losses. Target reported losing over $400 million in profits last November and is expecting to lose a total of $600 million by the end of this year due to organized gangs stealing merchandise from their stores. Retail stores are always challenged by outside forces like finding reliable employees and providing goods and services at affordable prices that customers want to purchase. When customers no longer feel that it is safe to venture into areas overtaken by crime, violence and disorder, or if prices rise to offset thefts, it hurts the bottom line of retail stores. That also makes it harder to find reliable employees.

All these stores have a successful business model that thrives in more livable areas surrounding these urban jungles. Yes, I call them urban jungles. These areas are out of control because the social order has collapsed around them. These retail outlets have made many adjustments over the last ten years in an attempt to remain profitable, but to no avail. They have begged city officials for help in suppressing and preventing crime. Their pleas have fallen on deaf ears. In the case of Chicago stores, outgoing Mayor Lori Lightfoot has blamed the businesses for not doing a better job of safeguarding their property as organized gangs of shoplifters clear entire store shelves of property and then walk out. Thieves no longer even feel a need to run out knowing that store employees are ordered not to intervene and that by the time police even respond, they will be long gone, just walking away.

Things are compounded because urban policies have for all intents and purposes decriminalized retail theft and public spaces have been surrendered to large bands of roving out-of-control youths, creating a climate of fear around retail areas. Getting state prosecutors to actually charge anybody with criminal offenses is nearly impossible. George Soros-funded state prosecutors are throwing out not just lower level classes of  crimes but serious felony charges as well forcing law abiding people and retailers to wave the white the white flag of surrender. In Milwaukee County for example it is reported that woke District Attorney John Chisholm has not charged 60% of felony cases brought to his office.

  The water has overtaken the proverbial sandbagging attempts to keep it away. Where crime, violence and disorder seemed to be contained within certain sections of neighborhoods, it is now seeping into the business community. For cities to be successful, it requires the five elements that make up a community complimenting each other. You have to have a base of functioning middle-class families that work and pay into supporting the city through taxes, a strong business sector that provides services and jobs, a role for the church to provide moral guidance, successful K-12 schools to provide future employees and a small role for government. This model is failing, however, due to several factors.

  Many large urban centers are in the early stages of decay. This is caused by middle-class families fleeing. Replacing this void are people who require more government assistance. As a result, they are not paying into city operations and are a drain on city services. The K-12 public education systems in these areas are failing in their mission to educate children. Churches are empty and are losing their influence on family life. Businesses are now finding it harder to remain profitable and forced to lay off employees. The role of government is taking on a larger footprint. That is not good nor is it the proper role for government, not to mention that it results in more unnecessary regulation, higher taxes and costs for city services. Government needs to stick to funding effective public safety and providing better public schools along with infrastructure services. Right now, they are trying to do it all and they are failing miserably.

 So, what do we do? First, we get everybody back into their proper lane or role in this equation of how to run a city. The highest priority of any level of government is to secure the personal safety of citizens. Police need to be properly funded back to pre-defunded levels including inflation-adjusted numbers. Police executives need to come up with effective order maintenance strategies with stretch targets with metrics and be held accountable for results. Crime levels have to decrease, or mayors have to replace these law enforcement executives. Police need to reclaim public spaces so law-abiding citizens can return to enjoy them. The business community’s demands for safer areas to remain profitable have got to be addressed and met. K-12 public schools have to return to their original mission of educating students to be able to provide an educated workforce to compete for the jobs of the 21st century. This is the proper role for government. Businesses need an educated workforce to find employees. Families have to become functional and shun lifestyles that lead to abhorrent behavior by young people. The church needs to reclaim its influence in helping distressed families. Once cities become successful in their primary role, the other entities stand a better chance of succeeding.

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: Moving Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

OFFICER SAFETY: Is Tombstone Courage the expectation in a world of compartmentalized thinking?

By: Joel E. Gordon

When someone uses a compartmentalized thought process, they look at a subject with a narrowly focused “tunnel vision” and fail to see the whole picture. In psychology, compartmentalization is recognized as an unconscious psychological defense mechanism used to avoid cognitive dissonance or the mental discomfort and anxiety caused by a person's having conflicting values, cognitions, emotions, beliefs, etc. within themselves.

Compartmentalization allows these conflicting ideas to co-exist by inhibiting direct or explicit acknowledgment and interaction between separate compartmentalized self-states.

Compartmentalization may lead to hidden vulnerabilities in those who use it as a major defense mechanism.

With that in mind, I almost entitled this column “what happened to officer safety.”

I have often been critical of law enforcement “experts” with little or no street credentials who have been actively involved in attempting to redefine “modern” policing. Much of this began to take hold in earnest from within law enforcement when the Police Executive Research Forum first released its best practice recommendations, seven years ago, a part of its CRITICAL ISSUES IN POLICING SERIES "30 Guiding Principles- Taking Policing to a Higher Standard." Here in synopsis form for your own “critical” review:

POLICY

1. The sanctity of human life should be at the heart of everything an agency does.

2. Departments should adopt policies that hold themselves to a higher standard than the legal requirements of Graham v. Connor. Agency use-of-force policies should go beyond the legal standard of “objective reasonableness” outlined in this 1989 U.S. Supreme Court decision.

3. Police use of force must meet the test of proportionality. In assessing whether a response is proportional, officers must ask themselves, “How would the general public view the action we took? Would they think it was appropriate to the entire situation and to the severity of the threat posed to me or to the public?”

4. Adopt de-escalation as formal agency policy.

5. The Critical Decision-Making Model provides a new way to approach critical incidents.

6. Duty to intervene: Officers need to prevent other officers from using excessive force.

7. Respect the sanctity of life by promptly rendering first aid.

8. Shooting at vehicles must be strictly prohibited.

9. Prohibit use of deadly force against individuals who pose a danger only to themselves.

10. Document use-of-force incidents and review your data and enforcement practices to ensure that they are fair and non-discriminatory.

11. To build understanding and trust, agencies should issue regular reports to the public on use of force.

12. All critical police incidents resulting in death or serious bodily injury should be reviewed by specially trained personnel.

13. Agencies need to be transparent in providing information following use-of-force incidents.

TRAINING AND TACTICS

14. Training academy content and culture must reflect agency values.

15. Officers should be trained to use a Critical Decision-Making Model.

16. Use Distance, Cover, and Time to replace outdated concepts such as the “21-foot rule” and “drawing a line in the sand.”

17. De-escalation should be a core theme of an agency’s training program.

18. De-escalation starts with effective communications.

19. Mental Illness: Implement a comprehensive agency training program on dealing with people with mental health issues.

20. Tactical training and mental health training need to be interwoven to improve response to critical incidents.

21. Community-based outreach teams can be a valuable component to agencies’ mental health response.

22. Provide a prompt supervisory response to critical incidents to reduce the likelihood of unnecessary force.

23. Training as teams can improve performance in the field.

24. Scenario-based training should be prevalent, challenging, and realistic. In both recruit and in-service programs, agencies should provide use-of-force training that utilizes realistic and challenging scenarios that officers are likely to encounter in the field.

EQUIPMENT

25. Officers need access to and training in less-lethal options.

26. Agencies should consider new options for chemical spray.

27. An Electronic Control Weapons deployment that is not effective does not mean that officers should automatically move to their firearms.

28. Personal protection shields may support de-escalation efforts during critical incidents, including situations involving persons with knives,baseball bats, or other improvised weapons that are not firearms.

INFORMATION ISSUES

29. Well-trained call-takers and dispatchers are essential to the police response to critical incidents.

30. Educate the families of persons with mental health problems on communicating with call-takers.

Although not without merit, the fallacy in these recommended guidelines is that officer safety concerns appear to be secondary to public perception concerns of police actions taken. Top of mind awareness to officer safety must be front and center when implementing best practice techniques and training.

While de-escalation of volatile situations, when possible, can be conducive to officer safety, these techniques can also become counterproductive to officer safety in real world scenarios. Maybe the Police Executive Research Forum should do more to enlighten all the “Monday morning quarterbacks” who wish to review life and death decisions officers must make under duress and in the heat of battle.

What’s next? Disarming police as already implemented by some.

Joel E. Gordon, Managing Editor of BLUE Magazine, 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

There Is A Big Difference

I want to make something clear. There has been an attempt by left-wing media and Democrat politicians to twist the meaning of the call to defund the police and try to intimate that conservatives calling to defund the Federal Bureau of Investigation is the same thing and I am not going to let them get away with it. I find it incredible and disingenuous for these cop-hating people on the left to suddenly leap to defend the FBI after years of attacking the courage, commitment, honor and sacrifice of local police. Some even went so far as defending the Black Lives Matter calls to abolish local police and without any evidence to support the lie that cops are racist.

A recent news report points out that, “Congressman Jim Jordan and other Republicans used to be hysterical about defunding the police. Gone are the days in which Republicans whine hysterically about Democrats and the drive to defund the police.”

I am one of those people on record for calling that the FBI not just be defunded, but abolished. Now let me make the case and explain the difference.

First, it is important to distinguish between the two entities. The FBI is not a police agency. They are an investigative agency. Other than a few who work on task forces with local police, the overwhelming majority of agents are information gatherers. They don’t make arrests without the permission of a United States Department of Justice attorney. Their reports are not heavily scrutinized before going to a grand jury looking for an indictment. From the onset of an arrest by local cops, every aspect is reviewed along the way. Any slight misstep with the arrest or in collecting evidence will get the case thrown out before it ever sees the inside of a courtroom. There is a distinct difference. More on that later.

Additionally, FBI agents do not keep the peace, patrol neighborhoods or come into contact with citizens on a daily basis. The FBI gets to operate in anonymity. They get to hide what they are doing behind the label of their work being classified as top secret or confidential. They don’t wear body cameras that are used by media to know exactly what they are doing 24-7. My point is not to summarily dismiss what their role as information gatherers is, but do not ever mistake or compare what they do as policing. It’s not. It’s not even close.

Back to my previously mentioned comment about FBI agents not having everything they do in investigations being closely scrutinized. I have detailed instances as to why it should be more than just defunding the FBI before today. In one previous column here I wrote, imagine the NYPD, Chicago Police of the LAPD being accused of a long-standing pattern of breaking their own rules on investigations, illegally using informants and undercover agents to spy on politicians, journalists and religious leaders who are engaged in constitutionally protected activities. Let’s say that a local police agency was found to be engaged in the unauthorized use of physical surveillance on people not accused of a crime in 28, yes 28 cases in a one-year period. And what if a local police agency audit found that its department broke its own rules 747 times on sensitive intercepts of electronic communications and that corrective measures did not stop the illegal activity? To be more specific, that is a violation of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. And not one person in the FBI was held accountable.

The American people have no use for a law enforcements agency that operates illegally or in the shadows. At the end of the day, all a law enforcement agency has is its integrity. With the awesome power and authority the FBI possesses, they can ruin and destroy lives. Once they have you in their crosshairs, they force you to plea bargain mainly because you run out of money trying to defend

yourself. I know people who this has happened to. Local police don’t have that kind of authority. Everything that a local cop does is scrutinized. They can’t classify their work as top secret. They don’t get to heavily redact reports they have to release through the Freedom of Information Act or at the exculpatory phase of due process.

People have asked me if calling for abolishing the FBI is too extreme and what we would replace the FBI with. The FBI has become a corrupt runaway bureaucracy. Their behavior has become reminiscent of the Nazi’s Stasi or brownshirts. They do not feel accountable or answerable to congressional oversight. Every time Director Christopher Wray appears before a congressional committee to testify and the answers would embarrass the Bureau, he cites confidentiality and that the release of that information would compromise national security or an ongoing investigation. It’s a lie. Congress is our watchdog on these unelected bureaucracies.

The FBI has a culture problem, and it has been corrupted to the point of not being worth being saved. Simply changing directors hasn’t helped change the Bureau’s out-of-control culture. Agents are coming forward as whistleblowers to detail the culture of corruption. They are telling of being met with retaliation internally for doing so. The FBI culture of corruption is anathema to a functioning republic. It is a threat to the very democracy that many Democrat politicians like to talk about. This is beyond a one-off or a few bad apples. It is agency-wide. It’s up, down and across the spectrum. It is beyond fixing. It’s time to abolish it. Start over. We won’t miss much in the interim. In fact, we will be more secure in our our persons, houses, places and effects as written in the U.S. Constitution.

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: Moving Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

THE MISSING PIECE

With crime and violence rates surging all across America, people are in search of ways to stem the record number of murders, aggravated assaults (non-fatal shootings) robberies, auto thefts and carjackings. The number one solution being offered to this by policy makers is to throw money at it in the form of social engineering projects like so-called second chance programs, job training and behavior modification programs for career criminals. These are not novel, never-before-tried efforts. These are the same old attempts that have never had much impact previously.  They instead are the same warmed-up leftovers from the past rebranded as new and improved. Renaming something that did not work before gives it no better chance of working the second time around.

Public safety is the first and highest priority of all levels of government. Federal, state and local governments have a vested interest in reasonably securing the personal safety of citizens. A long time ago, we allowed the individual citizen to provide for their own safety. Citizens were their own arbiters of how to carry out justice. People at one point in our history then agreed to turn this over to the government for more consistent and just application of the law. From that point forward, turning our safety over to the government made a crime a violation against society, not the individual. The government would handle this through state prosecution of criminals. It generally works. At least it did up until recently.

The leftists have co-opted our criminal justice system and have bastardized the law. They have decriminalized unlawful behavior that we once considered abhorrent and unacceptable in a civilized society. This same insidious bunch convinced many that our criminal justice system was inherently racist. They refer to jails and prisons as oppressive and with a hidden objective of enslaving black people. It is called the new Jim Crow.

As if that wasn’t bad enough from outside the criminal justice system, now they have infiltrated inside the system.

As you know, the criminal justice system is composed of four elements. It starts with the police who begin the process by an arrest, then it moves to the prosecution stage, then onto the courts. The final player in this system is corrections. In order for this process to be successful in keeping society safe, the entities involved have to each perform their role competently and consistently. It doesn’t solely matter how many people are arrested by police. At any point in this process, an arrestee can be processed out of the system for any number of reasons. I have no problem if there is a better more reasonable way of dealing with an arrest short of a criminal charge being issued and/or a person being sentenced to jail or prison. It’s not a rubber stamp. Prosecutors and judges do have discretion. That discretion currently is being abused. This has turned into a one-size-fits-all. Criminal history no longer matters. Career criminals are given the same leniency as a first-time offender. Even if a person is charged with an offense, there is an over-reliance on probation with no time served. Additionally, serious charges are watered down to misdemeanors and other included charges are dropped in exchange for a plea bargain. These options create what we call the revolving door of criminal justice. Repeat criminals are not deterred from engaging in the same behavior if they are not adequately punished for their criminal behavior. They see that the justice system will not adequately stop them, so they conclude there is no incentive to stop.

The biggest area of the failure of the criminal justice system today is in prosecution. In order for a system to work, each component therein must do its part. I like to use the analogy of a car engine. Let me ask you what the most important part of a car engine is. The answer is the part that isn’t working, because if any one part of the engine isn’t working, the car won’t start of run properly. We’re seeing that with the prosecutors offices all across the United States. Here is some stunning data to emphasize how bad things have become.

Several years ago, billionaire socialist businessman George Soros started a project to weaken America by attacking our criminal justice process. He spent millions on an effort to elect state prosecutors and district attorneys who are called woke. They ran on platforms of pledging to not charge criminals. This is their idea of criminal justice reform. They set policies of no bail for persons arrested even for serious offenses. These two elements have destroyed communities’ efforts to keep crime under control. They have been on this jihad for several years now. We are seeing the success of their mission to weaken America. 

New data is rolling in on several Soros-supported state prosecutors’ efforts to live up to their campaign promise of going soft on crime. A study done by the Manhattan Institute shows that 69% of criminal cases reviewed for prosecution by the New York City prosecutor’s office have been tossed out. This is up from 44% in 2019. They refuse to issue charges. Let that sink in. Sixty-nine percent. At the same time the study points out that felony arrests by police have fallen by 14% when shootings rose by 102% and murders rose by 51%. To deny a correlation here is to deny reality. There is no doubt that police have become frustrated with the prosecutor’s office not charging suspects. Why should they bother?  And it is not only in New York. In Milwaukee, Wisconsin, a news report details that 60% of felony cases that are forwarded for prosecution are not charged. Additionally, 80% of misdemeanor charges are dropped. The elected district attorney, John Chisholm, another woke politically active prosecutor, has previously professed his allegiance to decriminalizing unlawful behavior. All of this is anathema to what was being done to control and prevent crime in the ‘90s. Order maintenance strategies were enacted that had all four components of the criminal justice system working together and complimenting each other. Arrests were up, as were prosecutions. Courts handed down longer periods of confinement and guess what? We experienced historic record lows of crime and violence. Imagine that.

This version of a criminal justice system is broken. The broken part of the engine is at the prosecution stage. Until that part functions properly, nothing that the police do will control prevent and deter crime. This philosophy by prosecutors basically eliminates the courts and corrections phase. These cases never see the inside of a courtroom or end up before a judge although courts have become dysfunctional too. The ironic part of all of this is that prosecutors’ offices are asking for more money in their budgets whining about a lack of resources.

 Somebody in a legislative body that approves budgets or in the media needs to ask the question begging to be asked. More money for what?

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

Brooke Jenkins: A San Francisco Treat?

I don’t want to get too excited too soon, but several news stories out of San Francisco could indicate a pendulum swing out of the district attorney’s office with the election of Brooke Jenkins to lead the prosecutor’s office. You may recall the food dish called Rice-A-Roni-the San Francisco Treat commercials. That jingle came to mind when reading about the new DA in San Francisco. She was elected after the disastrous reign of Chesa Boudin, the cop-hater extraordinaire who was swept into the district attorney’s office with the help of George Soros, who funded progressive prosecutor candidates all across the country who campaigned on using the office as a platform for political activism. Boudin then set about creating policies that would go soft on career criminals and instead emphasized the targeting of law enforcement officers for malicious prosecution.

Some background on Jenkins is noteworthy. She was appointed interim district attorney by liberal San Francisco Mayor London Breed in 2022 after former DA Boudin was successfully recalled. There is no doubt in my mind that the ultra-lefty liberal Mayor Breed chose the centrist Democrat Jenkins because he was undoubtedly feeling the heat from constituents about out-of-control crime that might impact his own re-election bid. Reports are that Jenkins campaigned for the recall of Boudin after she herself resigned, citing constant chaos and turmoil internally that led to many other assistant prosecutors leaving the office. She ran on a tough-on-crime platform. That usually won’t get you elected in the city by the Bay, but residents have had a change of heart after the failed progressive polices of Chesa Boudin led to a surge in crime that other large urban areas experienced after electing woke chief prosecutors. Jenkins also claimed that she resigned because her then=boss Boudin’s leniency on criminals was making San Francisco less safe.

Her biography indicates that she has an undergrad degree from the University of California at Berkeley, a radical leftist academic institution going back to the ‘60s. She also holds a law degree from the University of Chicago. That is where the infamous Saul Alinsky, author of the primer Rules For Radicals, a book he dedicated to Lucifer (Satan himself), was a law professor. He was a socialist and is considered to be the architect of the modern radical or progressive leftist movement. Think of how many current lawyers have had their minds poisoned by him. The University of Chicago was also where Barack Obama taught law. That gives you an idea of the kind of lawyers that school produces. That school does not produce law school graduates who seek employment at conservative law firms or end up being a balls-to-the wall prosecutor. That is a red flag for me about Jenkins, but I will hold that in abeyance for now.

Several early moves are encouraging, as she reorganizes the office to her liking, and are hopefully an indication of how she will govern the office. According to the Washington Examiner newspaper, Jenkins is described as a “centrist Democrat”. Personally, I didn’t know those still existed as the Democrat Party has been hijacked by the radical left wing fringe of the party. They have excommunicated the centrist wing of their cabal. Only full-throated socialist progressives are allowed. Another encouraging sign is that Jenkins has applied for a waiver to the city’s sanctuary city designation so she can arrest two people suspected of a violent crime who may have fled the country. Currently, city laws prohibit the prosecutor’s office from working with federal Border Patrol officials or from the Department of Homeland Security. Jenkins in a statement said, “We won’t let dangerous criminals evade prosecution simply by leaving the United States.” She continues, “What we can’t allow in San Francisco are for people to commit heinous crimes like murder and child rape and then just be able to flee our jurisdiction and avoid prosecution.” The crime in question occurred in 2009 for heaven sakes. It was for domestic violence murder and the suspect in that case had warrants out for child sexual abuse. Boudin could have gone after that guy, too, but he let his politics get in the way and override what was in the best interest of residents of San Francisco.

That brings me to several cases involving law enforcement officers that caught my eye. A SFist news reports that Jenkins announced that she will be dropping manslaughter charges against San Francisco Police Officer Chris Samayoa in what is described as the first-ever case filed against an officer for an on-duty homicide. The officer had only been on the street for four days when he fired shots at a suspect during a carjacking incident. Jenkins said of this case that, “It appeared that the case was filed for political reasons and not in the interest of justice. I cannot pursue this case out of political convenience. Given the conflicts that have arisen, the evidentiary problems and the complete lack of good faith surrounding the filing of this matter, we cannot ethically proceed with this prosecution. Therefore, it is our intention to dismiss the charges made.” That is a wow moment. Many prosecutions against law enforcement today are made to achieve the same political ends: anti-police activism. It is refreshing that this DA, in San Francisco no less, has the courage and morals to put her own political interests aside to achieve the interest of fair and impartial justice. Officer Samayoa is not out of the woods yet as the case has been handed over to the State Attorney General for further review. In light of Jenkins’ strong statement against prosecution, it will be difficult for the state of California to proceed. An attorney for the officer called Boudin’s filing of this case as, “nothing short of reckless irresponsible and politically motivated”.

Another decision by Jenkins is also noteworthy as she reshuffles the priorities of her office. She has cut the number of prosecutors and investigators assigned to a police accountability unit from six down to two. She cut the number of investigators in the unit responsible for investigation police abuse from six down to four. This unit was originally created under former DA George Gascón and was continued under her predecessor Boudin.

Critics of the policy shift in the office of San Francisco district attorney claim these moves signal that Brooke Jenkins will look the other way on complaints of officer misconduct. No, it doesn’t. She didn’t completely shut down the unit. What it signals to me is that in an office facing a surge in street violence and limited prosecutors, she is re-prioritizing her efforts to crack down on career criminal thugs raining holy hell on San Franciscans who have had enough of Boudin’s criminal coddling policies. Jenkins answers to them, not the editorial pages of the San Francisco Chronicle and other left-wing news sources. Her constituents will let her know how they feel about it as she is up for re-election this coming November. I’m betting that they will like a return to law and order and a better quality of life.

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

THE LESSON OF MEMPHIS: THE CONTENT OF OUR CHARACTER’S ARE MOST IMPORTANT

I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. - Martin Luther King, Jr. (1963)

(In my effort to resist any rush to judgment and in the spirit of due process and "innocent until proven guilty" I have been reticent to comment on the Memphis case involving the death of Tyre Nichols as recorded in the viral video beating he received at the hands of five Memphis police officers. As facts continue to be exposed it is my most sincere hope that justice is served for all involved. But the question remains …)

How have we strayed so far away from Dr. King’s wise, open-minded philosophy? The ‘LEFT’ today says we need to hire Black cops to police Black neighborhoods. In reality, color shouldn’t matter … how about hire cops with great moral character? The goal should be good, law-abiding cops — irrespective of race. All five officers charged in the beating and deaths of Tyre Nichols in Memphis are Black, as is Tyre Nichols, but this isn’t about race but rather it is about character and standards.

Did the Memphis PD lower standards to hire these cops for “diversity” and/or because cops are now maligned as “systemically racist” — resulting in early retirements, fewer applicants and therefore lower hiring standards to maintain manpower?

According to a source within the Memphis PD, not all of the five charged officers were hired through the customary PD structured hiring process. City leaders felt the existing process was too strict and kept certain individuals from getting jobs at the department. City leaders then began their own hiring process and pushed new hires into the agency bypassing the rigorous and time-tested background requirements and testing procedures in place at the department in order to fill vacancies. “They would allow just pretty much anybody to be a police officer because they just want these numbers,” said Alvin Davis, a former lieutenant in charge of recruiting before he retired last year out of frustration.

The department phased out requirements to have college credits, military service or previous police work. All that’s now required is two years’ work experience — any work experience. The department also requested state waivers to hire applicants with criminal records. And the police academy even dropped timing requirements on physical fitness drills and removed running entirely because too many people were failing.

Many young officers, before ever working with more experienced colleagues, were assigned to specialized units like the high-crime strike force involved in Nichols’ arrest. It was reported that some young officers who transferred back to patrol didn’t even know some basics such as how to write a traffic ticket or respond to a domestic call. “They don’t know a felony from a misdemeanor,” Davis said. “They don’t even know right from wrong.”

Police Director Cerelyn Davis, who took over in June 2021, has said supervision of less experienced officers is an urgent need, questioning why a supervisor failed to respond to Nichols’ arrest despite a policy that requires a ranking officer to go to the scene when pepper spray or a stun gun is used.

According to an Associated Press report, of the five officers now charged with second-degree murder in Nichols’ beating, two had only a couple of years on the force and none had more than six years experience.

One of the officers was a former tight end on the Bethel University football team and appeared to have had at least one arrest, according to files from the Peace Officers Standards and Training Commission, a state oversight agency. But the date and details of the case had been redacted.

The section for arrests in the agency’s file for another officer who worked at a Shelby County Corrections facility before joining the force was also redacted from the state records. He was sued for allegedly beating an inmate there, which he denied, and the case was dismissed because papers had “not been properly served.”

This is not about training any more than it is about race but it is about character, mindset and decency as prerequisite qualities in the evaluation of those under consideration for hire. At its core it’s not a police culture issue but criminal culture one. By opening the hiring process to those who are potentially a product of the inner-city drug gang culture, where the value to human life is often seen as diminished, it would seem the lower hiring standard increases the chance for bad decisions, incompetence and misconduct.

“I asked them what made you want to be the police and they’ll tell you it’s strictly about the money,” Davis said, adding that many recruits would ask the minimum time they would actually have to serve to keep hiring bonus money. “It’s not a career for them like it was to us. It’s just a job.”

Why the superficial diversity goal of “cops who look like the community,” especially if it means lowering standards? Why should it be a benefit to hire, promote, assign or retain officers from an expanded pool based upon gender, skin color or cultural diversity rather than being based upon candidates of the highest personal character, skill set and potential for success? To maintain integrity and fair and just application of our laws by those given the responsibility for enforcement merit, above all, must be our primary guide.

Joel E. Gordon, Managing Editor of BLUE Magazine, 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

Memphis Blues

I am on the Board of Directors for the Crime Prevention Research Center, a research-based organization that focuses on crime prevention and how anti-gun policies actually contribute to a rise in crime. The director of the research center is John Lott, a Ph.D specializing in economics. He has published numerous peer-reviewed studies on crime and violence. I mention this to give credibility to his findings. They are free of partisan political findings and that is important to where I am going in this column.

Lott recently published a study that shows that 1% of U.S. counties are responsible for 42% percent of America’s murders. Let that sink in. The study points out that these worst 31 counties, the 1%, are mainly urban centers with about one-fifth of the nation’s population and they alone accounted for 42% of the country’s homicides. There is more. Lott’s research shows that the worst 5% of U.S. counties accounted for 73% of all murders in the U.S. And get this finding. A total of 52% of U.S. counties reported zero homicides. Lott used FBI data and relied on public uniform crime reports to crunch the numbers.

It is safe to say that where the homicides are follows other FBI Part 1 categories of crime. Those would be rapes, aggravated assaults (non-fatal shootings), robberies and burglaries. Add to that a heavy occurrence of cultural rot and dysfunction that contributes to black underclass crime, things like ineffective parenting, absent fathers, school failure and questionable lifestyle choices like young people joining gangs and drug and alcohol use. Then lay over that a soft woke criminal justice system and policies like no bail and an over-reliance on probation and parole instead of using jails and prisons to hold crooks accountable that at least temporarily takes them out of circulation. Most of the violent crime occurs in very localized areas of these counties-that being large cities. This also where a heavy police presence occurs and is required. More police, citizen and criminal interaction will naturally occur in order to keep crime and violence in check for safer neighborhoods. That means more traffic stops, more field interview stops and more arrests. More human interaction leads to the potential for more conflict. Much of the police use of force is the result of someone not complying with an officer’s lawful commands.

Now I am going to bring the Memphis Police Department into this along with every other high-profile police use of force incident-Mike Brown, Eric Garner, Freddie Gray and George Floyd. They are all different but there are some common threads to them. First of all, let’s remove the Memphis police incident involving Tyre Nichols out of this but there too there is a variable about Memphis where we can use the city of Memphis in my thesis. If the other cases are anomalies, then the Memphis case is a super anomalies. Maybe we can even include the George Floyd case as a super anomaly. What I mean by that is you cannot use those as a reason to support the police reform movement. Although the Memphis officers are entitled to a presumption of innocence, those cops appeared to be behaving badly and with bad intentions. In the other cases I mentioned, the cops performed according to law and policy.

First of all, it is important to point out that rarely does a police/suspect criminal interaction or arrest end in the use of force and even more rarely does it end in a use of deadly force. However, every time one occurs, the cop-hating crowd yells for police reform and the Democrats yell for passage of the misguided police reform George Floyd bill that is fortunately stalled in Congress. The things contained in the bill and all the other recommendations at the local level will do absolutely nothing to reform policing because it works on the wrong things. Even police executives get it wrong asking for more money for training and equipment. These are not training issues. These recommendations focus solely on police.

No amount of additional training or resources will change anything about policing, although hiring more police would be a better start.

So why does the change that people call for in policing not result in any real change? We just went through this ritual of trying to change the police during the Obama administration. He convened a panel to make recommendations after the police use of force in Ferguson, Missouri, Eric Garner in New York and Freddie Gray in Baltimore. They produced a set of recommendations called 21st Century Reform of Policing, to make policing better. Nothing changed after these police uses of force. And nothing will. In the problem-solving approach there is this thing called the logic model. It asks 3 questions: Are you working hard? Two, are you working smart and 3 (most critical) are you working on the right thing? The reason nothing changes is because in focusing on police, politicians and cop haters are working on the wrong thing according to the logic model. They may be working hard and it’s questionable if they are working smart, but they are definitely working on the wrong thing.

John Lott’s research mentioned previously is exactly what politicians should be working on. The answer to less police use of force is to enact policies that lower crime rates. Memphis and Shelby County is one of the most violent places in America according to a 24/7 Wall Street survey using FBI data. Here is more sobering data about Memphis. In Memphis, residents have a one in 40 chance of being the victim of a violent crime. The national rate is 1 in 148. In Memphis, crimes per square mile are 156. The national average is 26 crimes per square mile. You can take out Memphis and insert any large city in an urban county like Los Angeles, St. Louis, New York, Chicago, Milwaukee and you will find similar data.

Less use of jails and prisons as a crime control tool has increased violent crime in these areas, as has things like no bail policies and an over-reliance on probation and parole. Woke prosecutors not charging career criminals is causing more crime. Urban pathologies like a broken family structure is causing more crime. More crime increases a higher need for police. More police interaction increases the potential for police to have to resort to using force on uncooperative people. The answer is not to retrain police, it is for elected city and county leaders to enact polices that will get crime under control. That is the heavy lifting for them, however, and so it is easier for them to go for the low-hanging fruit of trying to fix the police.

Memo to politicians: For fewer incidents of police use of force, fix the ghetto. It’s the crime, stupid. Leave the police alone.

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

In The News…Again

Periodically there are several newsworthy incidents that occur at the same time that beg for comment and as a result it causes me to cover several stories in the same column. The first such incident might sound familiar.

Los Angeles Police Department Chief of Police Michel Moore is the latest law enforcement executive to capitulate to the cop-hating crowd by issuing a departmental order that bans the display of the Thin Blue Line flag at public events and in police station lobbies. The LAPD joins a growing list of departments whose chief executive refuses to stand strong against an evil movement. Other departments that previously did it include the Milwaukee Police Department, the Niles, Illinois Police Department, the University of Wisconsin Police Department, the Chardon, Ohio, Police Department and the Golden Minnesota Police Department. Yes, here we go again. Wokeness wins out. This is an act of cowardice at a time when morale is at all-time low among front-line officers. Here was an opportunity for Moore to display strength and support for the 9,000 men and women who put on the uniform of the city of Los Angeles to protect and serve. Instead, Moore genuflected and paid homage to a domestic terrorist mob because they claim that the U.S. flag with a blue line as one of its stripes is offensive. My initial thought was who complained and how many people complained and who are they? This is a United States flag we are talking about. The description of the complaint in an article by the news service, NewsNation, was that the flag was, “a symbol of far-right ideology and white supremacism” is repulsive. Moore said that displaying it in the lobby of police stations can be divisive and calls it a tool of extremism. This claim by Moore is putrid.

This is boilerplate language that every law enforcement executive who abandons front-line officers uses in their statement as to why they are banning what is a sacred symbol. They all have said the same thing and used the same excuse. They talk about building more trust between citizens and police. That useless endeavor has been going on since the ‘60s with no marked improvement. There has been no improvement in certain communities because this is a political construct where left-wing agitators don’t ever want trust to happen. It is a perpetual grievance tool.

This flag represents the line between good and evil. It represents the service, the courage, the commitment and the sacrifice officers display when they go out to protect and serve. Many law enforcement executives have forgotten where they came from. This is reprehensible. It’s a disgrace. That thin the blue line is the only thing that protects law-abiding citizens in a civil society. No one else does. Politicians can’t be counted on to be that force.

The people behind this move are nothing more than the mask of Black Lives Matter. Chief Moore associates the flag with the Proud Boys group. He’s lying. That’s a convenient excuse. Moore is unfit to lead front-line officers. He has abandoned the first rule of servant leadership, which is to put yourself second. He should focus instead on lowering crime rates and improving the quality of life in the ghetto that has become Los Angeles. He should focus on getting his officers more resources. But that is heavy lifting. To the officers of the LAPD, know this. Moore doesn’t have your six, as they say. You are on your own.

A second story of a law enforcement agency succumbing to wokeness emanates out of Madison, Wisconsin. A story from a news source Empower Wisconsin indicates that information put out by police about a carjacking incident failed to indicate the race of the perpetrator in the suspect description even though it was known. Department Public Information Officer Stephanie Fryer told Empower Wisconsin that, “it would have to be super descriptive and necessary to solve the crime for race to be included.” What the hell does that mean? She further indicated that including the race in the suspect description could fit so many different people and that it could lead to jumping to conclusions. What? She said that after talking to community activists that the Madison Police Department wanted to be mindful, “that releasing the race of a suspect could lead to targeting of some audiences and people in our community.” What? This is garbage and they know it. Here again I will ask, what community activists. They are nothing more than criminal apologists. Enablers. The same ones who want police defunded, no bail and jails shut down. That Madison police executives are kowtowing to these agitators is downright despicable.

This is ludicrous. You could say the same thing about releasing the gender or height and weight of the suspect or even the clothing. Listing the race among other indicators actually narrows the field of potential people police might want to stop and question. Clothing and facial hair are also important and relevant information to give out not only to officers but to enlist the help of the public in capturing the perpetrator. Now it’s the opposite. Our country is definitely upside down.

This policy actually increases the possibility that cops will be unnecessarily stopping white, Hispanic and Asian people who might be wearing similar clothing that the suspect was wearing. Is that what we want, to be harassing people who definitely weren’t involved? Is that the equity left-wing activists are trying to achieve?

The former police chief from the Madison Police Department, Mike Koval, who is not in favor of the policy, issued the following statement. He said, “Crime fighting, criminal investigations and law enforcement require facts and, often the public’s help. The facts may be inconvenient but in Madison the victims of serious violent crime are frequently people of color and the suspects they describe are just as frequently people of color.” Can I get an Amen please for what former Chief Koval told the news source?

Let me comment on this policy change. Is this about keeping crime under control or is it about social engineering experiments? Do they want to catch crooks or not? Do they want to reduce crime victimization or not? Police officials are always begging for the public’s help in solving crime, but then won’t give them all the pertinent information that is known about suspects by police at the time. This makes policing a one-way street and it makes you wonder why law-abiding citizens should even get involved in helping. And what about identifying the suspect in court? Is the race of the suspect relevant then? Have these idiots thought about the ramifications of these misguided woke policies?

God help 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

Think And Do It Fast

A tragic case that recently occurred in the state of Louisiana serves as a cruel reminder for police officers about their skills necessary in situations that are tense, uncertain and rapidly evolving. That is language used in a U.S. Supreme Court landmark case Graham v Conner on the use of force. Suffice it to say that when an officer is engaged in a high-speed pursuit, they are attempting to seize an individual making this a constitutional Fourth Amendment issue as well. The reasonableness of the seizure must be considered. Let’s do a refresher because this was avoidable, as a 42-year-old Addis police officer has been charged with multiple counts of negligent homicide and a count of negligent injury in connection with a fatal crash during a high-speed pursuit.

High -speed pursuits are an activity that brings a lot of issues into play. Officers know from their training that they must process a lot of information quickly in their spatial environment. There is an advantage to conducting high-speed pursuits on a rural highway and on a urban interstate because on most interstates and rural highways there are no pedestrians and no cross traffic. Time of day, weather conditions, other traffic in the area are just a few of the things that must be considered. Is the fleeing suspect known or can he be taken into custody at a later time?

Driving a vehicle is a skill. High-speed driving is even more of a skill. A skill is something that has to be continually practiced in order to get good or great at it. Unfortunately, officers don’t get to practice high-speed driving but for a few times a year, usually at in-service recertification. The practice is done on a controlled course. Some agencies use video simulators that are more interactive and lifelike. It is still not enough to do it once or twice a year. To give you some perspective, let’s look at another skill: golf at the professional level. I pick golf for a particular reason. A lot of things go on in a golf swing. There is the backswing, turning of the hips and shoulders while keeping your head down. Then on the forward swing, club head speed comes into play, keeping your head down and bringing the hips back around for the ball strike. All of this has to happen at the same time and in a few seconds. A golfer doesn’t get to think about all of this individually. A golfer has to be aware of where they are on the course. Distance to the hole and where the hazards are in the golfer’s head has to be figured in. Now let me be clear. Before you ask how this has anything to do with what an officer faces in high-speed pursuits, go back to what I said about driving being a skill and that to become proficient at a skill it has to be continually practiced to become not just good but great at it. Most people know who professional golfer Tiger Woods is. In the prime of his career, he was the best golfer on the planet. I use him as an example of being great at a skill. It is reported that at his peak he was hitting 5000 golf balls a day to perfect his skill. Practice, practice, practice your trade. No other professional golfer was doing that, and it is why he was nearly unbeatable. Sure, if a golfer makes an error in the swing, the result is a bad shot. A golfer gets one shot at it. They can’t take bad shots back. There are no do-overs at the professional level. I consider law enforcement officers to be professionals due to their certification and training. They, too, do not get do-overs in those circumstances that are tense, uncertain and rapidly evolving.

This is where an officer engaged in a high-speed pursuit can be compared to any other activity that is considered a skill. To the detriment of our officers, they are not allowed to practice high-speed driving over and over and over. They get one shot at getting it perfect and when they don’t get it perfect, deadly consequences can ensue like in Louisiana. The officer’s actions in Louisiana left two young people dead and another clinging to life after the officer ran through a red light without stopping and struck an uninvolved vehicle as he pursued a fleeing vehicle. The officer was just arrested and charged with negligent homicide. The easy thing to do here is to talk about the terrible loss of life and move on. I won’t do that. That is not second guessing, it’s leadership. Every officer in America needs to be made to stop and think about the ugliness that happened here. Bad and sometimes fatal outcomes have happened before in high-speed pursuits and will undoubtedly happen again. I don’t want it to happen to you or to innocent people driving down the street. So let’s use this as a refresher about high-speed pursuits. Sometimes, catching a fleeing suspect is just not worth it. Sometimes it is better to live to see another day. That is a decision the officer on the scene gets to make. I respect that.

The District Attorney who charged the officer stated that takedown red and blue lights and sirens do not give an officer the authority to run red lights. I’ll add that officers must use due regard for the welfare of others when conducting high-speed pursuits. That means completely stopping at red lights to look for oncoming traffic. They must take into account all the things I mentioned earlier in this column about their spatial environment. I know it’s a lot. The time to think about that is now, not after a disastrous outcome. In other words, what else is going on beside a fleeing vehicle? Like a professional golfer, an officer only gets one chance at getting it right. This Louisiana officer does not get a do-over. Here is the result: This officer’s career is over and he may end up in prison. Two teenagers are dead, and another critically injured. Two families are left to deal with shattered lives.

Agencies all across America need to use this as a case study. Why? Because in the age of budget cuts, the first thing that get axed in budget reductions is usually money budgeted for training. As far as I am concerned, that is malfeasance. In addition to the officer’s life being negatively altered, the city will pay millions in civil damages. Every law enforcement officer and agency needs to think about this today. Let this sink in as you begin your next tour of duty.

Sheriff David Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of Americas Sheriff LLC, 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

BALTIMORE’S CHANGING OF THE GUARD

By: Joel E. Gordon

I don’t know about you but I am tired of watching government entities seemingly going in two opposing directions at the same time with detrimental results to “we the people.”

For instance, why would the Federal Reserve continue to raise interest rates to dampen the supply of money only to have Congress, at the behest of the Biden administration, pass massive spending bills flooding our economy with extra funds spent spiking inflation even further against a goal of inflation reduction?

A similar phenomenon has occurred in the city of Baltimore. When Baltimore Police Commissioner Harrison was hired on the heels of implementation of a Federal Consent Decree, his primary mandate was one of reform and Consent Decree compliance, not one of crime reduction. As recently as April of 2022, a 10-page policy directive of the Baltimore police was implemented, in keeping with many non-prosecutorial policies of now-former State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby, discouraging officers from charging individuals with lesser “quality of life” offenses.

While allowing for some officer discretion by beat officers, who have their fingers on the pulse of the communities they serve, the directive requires that “Members shall seek and receive approval from a permanent-rank supervisor prior to arresting an individual for a Lesser Offense (unless) specific, time-sensitive circumstances make it not practicable to obtain permission.”

LESSER OFFENSES:

·         Loitering 

·         Misdemeanor Trespassing 

·         Public Urination/Defecation 

·         Disorderly Conduct (including Disturbing the Peace)

·         Obstructing or Hindering an Officer

·         Open Container 

·         Littering

Additionally, Mosby refused to prosecute prostitution offenses and certain drug offenses.

As soft on crime policy reforms took hold in a focus on reform versus enforcement, crime and homicide numbers continued to spike and a shift in political focus emerged.

As a result, newly elected Baltimore State’s Attorney Ivan Bates has rescinded his predecessor’s policy on prohibiting low-level arrests, arrests for prostitution and drug offenses telling police at his swearing-in they always have the right to enforce "any and all laws on the books" & to “use the tools in your toolbox to do the job." Bates said the safety of people who live in the city is paramount, adding that, “We cannot afford to play politics with prosecutions.” His acclamations were met with cheering and applause. While not proposing mass incarcerations, a new era of enforcement and accountability is unfolding.

To complete the changing of the guard, new leadership must be put in place at the top levels of the Baltimore City Police Department with new orders and directives. A new balance between Consent Decree reforms and enforcement of the law and crime reduction must be achieved to best serve the good, law-abiding citizens of Baltimore. The days of many of the unnecessary Consent Decree-driven mandates working against officer and community safety must come to an abrupt end.

To be fair, the political landscape has changed as political constituencies become angrier over violations to their safety. The current police commissioner is being asked to do something that he was not hired to do and seems ill-prepared to achieve. Did anyone really believe that the Federal Consent Decree would be conducive to reduction in crime?

With soft on crime and hard on enforcement Marilyn Mosby out and a more rational Ivan Bates in, the changing of the guard has seemingly begun. As Victor Davis Hanson has said, we must “Change the past to control the present to dictate the future.” How long before Police Commissioner Michael Harrison and his sycophants are replaced to complete a necessary transition? It must be sooner rather than later. Time is of the essence.

Joel E. Gordon, Managing Editor of BLUE Magazine, 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

Kenneth Walker III: Louisville Slug

The city of Louisville, Kentucky is home to great things and traditions like Churchill Downs and the Kentucky Derby, Mint Julep cocktails, where Louisville Slugger baseball bats are made and it’s the home of boxing legend Muhammad Ali. I have been to Louisville a number of times. It’s a great city. At least it used to be.

Lately, Louisville has been in the national spotlight for some not-so-flattering reasons. The most prominent has been the deadly use of force by Louisville police that led to the death of Breonna Taylor. Although she was collateral damage, it was through no fault of the Louisville police. To refresh your memory, Louisville police were conducting a narcotics-related search warrant on the residence where a known drug dealer was known to live at or stay. The officers had permission from the court to execute it as a no-knock search if necessary. I find it necessary to remind you of these facts because to this day the media continues to put out fake news about this event. The media continues to peddle the lie that this was a botched raid. It was not. They continue to write that police did not knock and that they were at the wrong address. The police say that they did knock and even of they didn’t knock, they had prior consent from a judge to conduct a no-knock if necessary. The media likes to omit that a miscreant inside the residence with Breonna Taylor fired a shot through the door as police were about to enter.

There are some other things that the media continues to promote. They say that the suspect had a permit to be armed. So what? Every concealed carry class in America emphasizes that you have to use extreme caution when shooting at somebody. In other words, know what you are shooting at. Suspect Kenneth Walker III fired shots through a door after hearing the door being breached. He claims he “thought” they were intruders. Police officers were on the other side. Let’s give Walker the benefit that he did not know it was the police. What difference does that make? What if it had been the FedEx delivery person or the landlord? It could have been somebody there for a legitimate reason. Would these shots fired by him have been excused if he killed somebody? I think not. Walker was initially charged with a crime, but those charges have been dropped. A police officer who had outer perimeter containment fired shots into the building after hearing other shots emanating from inside. True, he did not know what he was shooting at other than hearing the sound of shots. He thought officers were under assault. It was a spontaneous reaction. Not smart but hardly a felony. He didn’t get the benefit of the doubt at shooting blindly like Walker III did. The officer was charged with wanton endangerment for “blindly firing 10 shots” into the flat where Taylor lived. His shots did not strike Taylor, but one shot went through a wall and into another occupied building next door. If that is wanton endangerment for blindly firing as the prosecutor pointed out, then why was the charge against Walker III dismissed? The officer was subsequently acquitted by a jury, which he should have been. This was a malicious prosecution by a cowardly district attorney trying to appease the angry mob of cop haters who rioted, looted and set fire to the city for several days. When cops are shot at, returning fire in self-defense is a reasonable response.

But it gets better … or should I say worse.

Recently, Louisville officials settled a lawsuit filed against the city by Kenneth Walker III for a violation of his civil rights. Walker was awarded $2 million as a settlement. That’s right. I did not misspeak. Walker’s reckless actions of firing blindly through a door triggered this whole series of events that led to Breonna Taylor’s death, the charging of a police officer, riots that ultimately ensued and the firing of numerous police officers. And he walks away with $2 million and the dismissal of his criminal charges. This is insanity, pure and simple. What the hell kind of country are we living in? Apparently one where the cops are the bad guys and the criminals are the good guys. This is nauseating. The media continued its false narrative reporting here, too. The Wall Street Journal, usually a reputable source, in its headline wrote that, The City of Louisville has settled lawsuits by Kenneth Walker III, who was there when police fatally shot Ms. Taylor during a raid in 2020. That’s it? Walker was just there? He wasn’t just there. The headline should have been written to say that Louisville settles lawsuit against the suspect who first blindly shot through a door at police, triggering a series of events that led to the death of Breonna Taylor. Why is that so hard for the media to do? Tell the truth. It won’t hurt. The story also points out the case was one of several in 2020 that contributed to protests across the country. Protests? How about riots, looting and burning of businesses owned by people who had nothing to do with the Taylor incident or any other police-related use of force?

After the settlement was announced the city did not respond for comment. Probably out of embarrassment for capitulating to Walker. Walker’s attorney commented that, “While this tragedy will haunt Kenny for the rest of his life, he is pleased that this chapter of his life is completed.” Yeah, I bet he is. He shot at police, got Breonna Taylor killed, got his criminal charge dropped and walks away with $2 million. I bet a lot of criminals today are asking, where does one sign up for that?

Louisville police made some unforgivable mistakes in this incident. Policing isn’t perfect. That is not an excuse. It’s reality. Better supervision would have helped. Walker not firing first would have helped, too. But that officers had their careers ended, the city burned and that slug Kenneth Walker III walks away $2 million richer is the real tragedy here.

Sheriff David Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of AmericasSheriff LLC, 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

Whose Side Are They On?

By: Joel E. Gordon

I am increasingly feeling as though trust in the Federal government and its agencies is like trying to hold on to a debunked once common belief that the earth is flat.

In 1992 congress passed the JFK Records Act mandating the release of ALL documents relevant to his assassination by 2017. It’s now five years past the deadline and 3% of the documents are still secret. Ask yourself, what could be so bad that they still refuse to tell us the truth?

Could it be that in his book They Killed our President Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty, the former CIA operative known as “X,” has valid belief in Federal law enforcement involvement in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy? His theories were the basis for Oliver Stone’s controversial movie JFK where it suggests a coup d'état at the highest levels of government, revealing the elite power base he believes controlled the U.S. government, implicating members of the CIA, the Mafia, the military-industrial complex, Secret Service, FBI, and Kennedy's vice-president and then president Lyndon Baines Johnson as either co-conspirators or as having motives to cover up the truth of the assassination. .

In his book, Colonel Prouty backs this belief up with his knowledge of the security arrangements at Dallas and other tidbits that only a CIA insider would know (for example, that every member of Kennedy’s cabinet was abroad at the time of Kennedy’s assassination).

Fast forward to our current era of skepticism over the veracity and motives of current Attorney General Merrick Garland’s Department of Justice. Is there truly a “Deep-State” elite power base controlling the U.S. government? Does what once seemed implausible both past and present now seem to be even more likely?

For example, the United States Secret Service has repeatedly changed its position about whether it is in possession of records related to the investigation of Hunter Biden’s gun, reportedly disposed of in a dumpster in Delaware. The Secret Service suddenly said it now located over 100 records, totaling over 400 pages.

“The Secret Service’s changing story on records raises additional questions about its role in the Hunter Biden gun incident. One thing is clear, Judicial Watch’s persistence means the public may get records that the Secret Service suggested didn’t exist,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

Now the Secret Service is still maintaining no record of visitors to President Biden’s Rehoboth Beach Delaware home? Under what circumstances will they be forced to come clean on that obvious issue which cannot be truthful in the absence of gross incompetence?

I remain curious as to the justification of the FBI raid on Donald Trump’s Mar-a-lago residence over alleged concerns over ‘sensitive’ documents while the property was being protected by the Secret Service. Is it the position of the FBI that the Secret Service was incapable of safeguarding property or maintaining logs of activity at the property?

And what about the 51 former intelligence officials, who sounded the false alarm of “Russian interference?” Using the institutional weight of their former roles affording them security clearances, they signed the disingenuous letter to apparently attempt to bolster the past FBI false hypothesis claiming that material from Hunter Biden’s laptop published by the New York Post “has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.”

The Department of Justice and FBI actions pertaining to investigation of President Donald Trump are well documented (FISA abuses, Christopher Steele dossier, etc.) and are ongoing as the search for criminal culpability continues even when based upon debunked ‘evidence’ or potential ‘fruits of the poisonous tree.’ Some of the current ongoing investigations:

· The DOJ’s Mar-a-Lago classified documents investigation

· The Justice Department investigation into January 6

· The Georgia election investigation

· The Congressional Trump tax reviews

Despite past and the numerous already active investigations, in addition to the DOJ appointment of a special counsel, the Jan. 6 select House committee voted to refer former President Donald Trump to the Department of Justice for criminal investigation and potential prosecution for trying to overturn the 2020 election. The criminal referral of Trump accuses him of obstructing an official proceeding, conspiracy to defraud the government, and inciting or assisting an insurrection.

EQUITY: The quality of being fair and impartial

As many obvious criminal actions go unpunished, many times without prosecution, others are targeted looking for charges that could be brought, is it any wonder that a large number of the American public has understandably lost faith in equal treatment and application of the law?

In a culture currently being consumed over EQUITY, where is the justification for these and other actions? Can the DOJ, NSA, CIA, DHS, DOE, Secret Service, FBI and other government agencies be trusted? Is the revelation of accusations of corruption at our highest levels of government clear and convincing to you as being exposed through the Twitter Files and elsewhere? Are the right individuals in charge to protect our freedoms and live up to their sworn obligation to adhere to our Constitution and Bill of Rights? Who is really in charge? Is collusion to suppress truth at unprecedented levels? You decide.

Joel E. Gordon, Managing Editor of BLUE Magazine, 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

November 2022 Midterm Election Results Postmortem

Before I go into my analysis of the just-concluded midterm election, although concluded might not be the appropriate term since there are still many races that have not been decided, I have to bring people up to speed on a gruesome statistic. Last week, I saw the latest figure on police suicides for 2022. It stands at 121 according to a Salute the Blue Instagram post. To put this number in perspective, the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention says that 13.93 per 100,000 people died by suicide in 2019. The Ruderman Foundation, a philanthropic organization that focuses on people with disabilities, reported that in 2017 the rate of suicide among police officers was 17 per 100,000 people. They have not released an updated report for 2019. That is staggering. I challenge you to name another profession that could have this kind of suicide rate per 100,000 that would escape calls for research to address the crisis or congressional hearings of federal mental health agencies on why they aren’t dedicating research to this phenomenon. Here is something else to ponder. According to a story on this crisis in the USA Today newspaper this is, “an issue that has plagued first responders for years, yet very little has been done to address it.” The story goes on to point out that, “Researchers say they have not seen sufficient efforts and programs aimed at promoting awareness of first responders mental health and preventing suicide.” I point this out because this problem will fade into people’s consciousness if it isn’t kept front and center in the public discourse, and I am going to do my part to keep it there.

Now let’s get into what happened with voters in the midterm elections. For the last six months, you could not escape media coverage of the midterm elections. All the polling about the surge in crime and violence that was occurring mainly in urban centers suggested that this was near the top of voters’ concerns. You couldn’t escape seeing media video of vulnerable human beings being violently attacked by predatory criminals who were left to freely roam subway systems, retail areas and neighborhood streets. These were career violent offenders who continued to evade punishment and even when arrested were quickly freed to continue to engage in their violent behavior. They were the benefactors of what has become over the last few years a lenient criminal justice system. Policies that favored the criminal over the law-abiding were put into place by elected officials, including prosecutors who were elected with the money of billionaire George Soros who financed and put into place an infrastructure designed to go soft on crime. Locking violent repeat offenders away was labeled the new Jim Crow system. What a crock of horse manure. A few of the criminal apologist prosecutors are Kim Fox in Chicago Cook County, former Baltimore County State Attorney Marilyn Mosby, Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascon, Manhattan/New York City DA Alvin Bragg and Milwaukee County DA John Chisholm. Even after the surge in violent crime, elected officials in these states foolishly, carelessly and recklessly continued to enact criminal=friendly laws and policies. Let’s look.

The state of Illinois recently passed a law outlawing bail for most offenses, including some violent offenses, even after Chicago experienced increases in homicides, aggravated assaults and most misdemeanors like auto thefts and shoplifting. California recently passed what it called the Racial Justice Act. This bill was signed into law by Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom. The law provides for previously convicted criminals to petition to vacate judgments or reduce charges in cases in which a person’s race ethnicity or national origin played a part in if they were charged with more serious crimes or sentenced more severely than others who were similarly situated. Suffice it to say that just the filing by a convicted criminal, one who already received due process, will be considered prima facia evident of disparate treatment based on race under this act. This is another example of a career criminal escaping culpability.

So, with all of this as the backdrop, then why did that not seem to transfer into bigger Republican wins in the 2022 midterm elections? After all, the Democrats are the party of defund the police and traditionally the GOP has been supportive of police at the state, local and federal level. The answer is, no drum roll necessary, I simply do not know. I won’t sit here and act like I have the answer. I was both surprised, disappointed and disgusted. I can however offer some unscientific guesses. Maybe we have been in this crime surge for so long that it has become part of the urban landscape. People might be numb to it. Maybe voters feel that politicians haven’t figured it out up to now and they won’t. Call it apathy if you will. I call it a quiet resignation. If this is the case, then it is one of the tragic byproducts of the War on Cops.

So, what do we do, where do we go from here? Quitting and giving up is not an option. Not as far as I am concerned. That would be the ultimate insult to those who have given their lives protecting their communities. It would be a slap in the face as well to those who currently serve and protect. We have a saying in this profession that we utter at every line of duty death and during police week in May that, we will never forget. Now is the moment of truth. It’s time to prove it. Keep fighting.

Sheriff David Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of AmericasSheriff LLC, 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

Amid the Insanity: Are chickens coming home to roost?

By: Joel E. Gordon

The inexplicable Pennsylvania vote to elect a diminished pro-criminal candidate named John Fetterman to the U.S. Senate notwithstanding, the unsustainable pro-criminal policies of the progressive left are showing signs that some of those very ideologies may be beginning to falter. I must start by saying that we wish ill will to no one; law, order and safety remain among our top priorities. We in law enforcement have never wavered from that position, but now that some of the biggest contributors to the erosion of our civil society have personally felt victimization, have the chickens come home to roost?

Hypocrisy is evident from sea to shining sea A progressive member of the Seattle Washington City Council who has been a vocal critic of law enforcement amid the "defund the police" movement is criticizing police for not sufficiently pursuing reports of multiple instances of feces being thrown into her yard.

Seattle City Councilmember Kshama Sawant, a self-described socialist, sent a letter to police in Seattle claiming they were "failing to investigate" what she says are six separate instances of a “politically motivated person throwing feces into her yard"

"There is obviously a glaring inconsistency between this approach and the way in which former Mayor Durkan, after a peaceful Black Lives Matter protest was held a short distance from her mansion, was provided with a 24-hour stakeout for a full year," Sawant wrote in her letter, suggesting she deserved police protection as a result of the incidents. "As a socialist City Councilmember who has participated in Black Lives Matter protests, I am being told that my case of six threatening incidents involving human excrement doesn’t merit even a serious investigation, let alone protection."

Did she actually think that her realized wish to “defund the police” would have no consequences? Consequences like fewer officers? And that those they do have left on the force have nothing more important or pressing than to investigate her poop-thrower? Perhaps she should call a counselor or a social worker to handle this?

So-called "squeegee kids" who shake down drivers to pay them for "cleaning" their windshields are becoming more bold, committing crimes such as assault and robbery. This past summer, a Baltimore, Maryland, city man was shot five times and killed by one.

The federal judge overseeing the Baltimore Police federal consent decree called officers and reported that a pair of squeegee workers gave him the middle finger, spat on his car and wrote “racist” in suds on the windows.

No property was damaged, no one was injured, and neither squeegee worker was charged in the incident, according to police. But U.S. District Court Judge James K. Bredar and his wife’s run-in with squeegee workers, and the ensuing police response, has renewed the focus on squeegeeing and raised questions about the necessity of having law enforcement respond to certain situations. Progressives have now called into question Judge Bredar’s suitability to continue ensuring compliance with consent decree mandates now that he has personally felt victimized.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said that she did not regret threatening to punch then-President Donald Trump on January 6, 2021, if he came to the Capitol, “That’s right,” Pelosi told MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell when asked to address her comments about Trump on January 6. “I would have punched him out. I said I would have punched him out. I would have gone to jail. And I would have been happy to do so.”

When Pelosi was condoning her willingness to commit an act of violence against a U.S. president, she probably never imagined that her husband Paul Pelosi would become a victim of a violent attack in their family home committed by an illegal alien. While much remains unknown in secrecy about further details of the vicious attack, suffice it to say that it surely must feel different being a willing perpetrator than being a victim.

There are a multitude of other examples of the failure of progressive policies. Since the concept of rights without a view toward responsibility has taken further hold the results have been both predictable and inevitable.

As time goes on and more of the “elites” and their families fall prey to the violence being perpetrated largely due to ill-advised bail policies, release of criminals, illegal criminal aliens running freely at-large and reduced consequences, the return to law and order should progress in a more orderly way. Let’s just pray that, in the meantime, the cost to human life and suffering has as minimal an impact on all of us as possible until sanity returns.

Joel E. Gordon, BLUE Magazine Managing Editor, 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