Police Accountability

Police Accountability
Students Name
Institutional Affiliation
Date
Police accountability
Every American organization whether government, private or non – profit, they have to be accountable. The American accountability policing is thus an essential tool in ensuring that every individual or entity is held accountable for its conduct. The NYPD is one of such departments that through effective policies and practices are held accountable for its actions in the achievement of the NYPD goals and objectives like Lawfulness and legitimacy. The accountability of the police officers is one of the most effective tools in ensuring that the NYPD reduces the levels of crime through promoting legitimacy and lawfulness in the country. It’s through police accountability that the community can work hand in hand with the police in ensuring crime reporting is effective, and other lawfulness disciplines are maintained. There are many police accountability procedures that have adopted and are being implemented by the law enforcement agencies especially the NYPD to ensure effectiveness. The procedures include the establishment formal agency policies that relate to on the application and use of police authority, performance evaluation of the police officers, the use of early intervention systems, and investigation of police misconduct and the supervision of police officers. This research paper specifically addresses the policies that have been adopted by the NYPD when using police authority in the New York, its efficacy and implementation.

Even today new methods have adopted as it pertains to the use of police authority especially force usage where the police officers report and document the force that they have used during and after an arrest as a requirement. The paper looks at the several elements of policy authority, and the practices involved that cover the use of deadly force, less lethal force policy, the practices for the NYPD deployment of canine units, the policy and procedures for vehicle pursuits, the policies and the practices for traffic enforcement and the elimination of racial profiling.
The use of deadly force is one of the most highly notifiable incidents of accounting for the police conduct. There are procedures and policies set in place that regulate deadly force utilization by the NYPD officers in line with the standards of Department Of Justice. Through the attorney general in 19995, the U.S Department of Justice issued the official US policy concerning the application of deadly force by the police officers that serves even the NYPD officers. The first policy and practice concern the permissible uses where the police officers can only use deadly force when its judged to be necessary where the police officer has the reason to believe that without the use of the force there will be imminent danger that may result to death on the police officer or the persons next to the action (“Attorney General October 17, 1995 Memorandum on Resolution 14 (Attachment) | AG | Department of Justice”, 2016). In this regard, the NYPD can use deadly force on fleeing suspects where the suspect might have committed a crime that might have resulted in death or injury to another person’s and t the escape of such a suspect in custody might pose an immediate injury or death danger to the police officer or other persons. Through the NYPD Patrol Guide, the policies and procedure for the use of force are laid out. For example the Patrol Guide §203-11 Use of Force, the guide permit he officers to use the amount of force necessary to enforce arrest. The PATROL GUIDE §203‐12 DEADLY PHYSICAL FORCE is in conformity with the DOJ report on the use deadly physical force by the NYPD officers if the application of the force is indeed necessary when a person poses an imminent threat or danger like death or greater injury to others. Due to the sensitivity on deadly force application, the NYPD has a document form that requires all officers using deadly force during an arrest to document the incident in the police document (peters & Eure, 2015).
To promote accountability in the police department, then police authority on deadly force utilization is implemented through the mandatory filing of the deadly force document where the police officers are obligated to give evidence and explain the incident where they had no choice but to resort to deadly force like the discharge of weapons during action. Moreover, the NYPD officers undergo vigorous training whereby they are trained on how and when to use deadly force so as to promote police accountability. The training enables the police officers to ensure accountability force usage where they have to be responsible for their conduct. Moreover, the policy is implemented through the institution of disciplinary action where the officers who are found to have violated their conduct have disciplinary action brought against them to ensure police integrity in NYPD. The policy is effective in that the cases of massive police shooting have been on the decline. Through the Memphis report about the Memphis police department of 1992, the restrictive policy on deadly force authority by the officers has led to decline in reported deadly force use by the police officers characterized by the reduction in racial disparity in regard to the persons that had been shot and killed (Fyfe, J. J. 1979). The bureau of justice statistics clearly support the restrictions on the use of force as it reduced the number of those killed due to excessive force by half and nationally the racial disparity issue on police deadly force use resulting to death significantly reduced (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2001). As such, it is clear to assert that the adoption of the policy on the restriction of officers from deadly force use by the policies set by the NYPD guide and the DOJ greatly reduced the use this force on unnecessary cases thus promoting the accountability of the NYPD. The accountability of the police has been promoted in that the police are obligated to clearly document the use the force. There is the need for the NYPD to clearly establish a centralized system that reports and documents the deadly use of force by the NYPD officers (“New NYPD Use of Force Guidelines Announced | NYPD News,” 2016).
The use of less-lethal force
Many police departments in the different states have different and varying policies about the use of force. The NYPD to have its written policies concerning the authority on police force use. The use of force policies legitimizes the action taken by the police officers where they justify when and how to use force and events that are not justifiable in thaw use of force. Force use, therefore, recognizes the legitimate use of less lethal force. The less lethal force means the adoption of weapons that are not lethal to the person being arrested. The weapons include the use chemical sprays, pepper spray, the use of impact projectiles and the electroshock weapons. There are practices set in place that govern the conduct of the NYPD officers to promote accountability on the weapons use. The NYPD provides individual policies and practices on how to use and the rational for the use of the weapons (LESS LETHAL FORCE, 2004).
The NYPD Patrol Guide through its section (PG 203-11), sets out the police practices that ensure police accountability where in the scene where the police are involved, the officer primary role is to handle the incident in such a way that ensures that he or she has established an immediate firearms control, there is minimum usage of force and lastly ensure that in the control of de-escalation of an incident he should employ the use non-lethal alternatives to control the incident. Through the NYPD Patrol Guide, the section clearly gives the practices under which less –lethal force can be applied. The NYPD Patrol Guide §212‐117 establishes the practices and policies to be followed in the utilization of Conducted Energy Devices. These are commonly called, Tasers. The guide specifically classifies this as a less-lethal force where it says that the weapon can be used to supplement the officer in physically subduing a suspect otherwise the officer might be forced to use lethal force. The effective use of CED makes it be compared to the other devices like the pepper sprays due to its application at close range. Moreover, the guide strictly stipulates that it is prohibited to use the weapon as a form of punishment or a way of bullying someone and such weapons cannot be used during scenarios where one is passively resisting arrest. The guide, therefore, sets out the practices under which the weapon can be used hence promoting the accountability of the NYPD officers (peters & Eure, 2015).
Moreover, the NYPD patrol Guide §212‐95 also sets out the practices and policies for the usage of the Pepper Spray Devices. The section also sets out the policies and practices set up during an officer’s documentation on the use of such devices. The policies set forth include; the officers can only use the spray if he or she believes usage of such a device is necessary so as to arrest a resisting suspect. Moreover, its applications for the self-defence of the officer or the defence of other persons from unlawful force. Also, the set policy strictly stipulates that the force can be applied so as to take emotionally disturbed persons into police custody. The Patrol Guide specifically shows the efficacy of the usage in that it says that it reduces or eliminates the essence of physical force needed for an arrest or put a person under custody. Moreover, it says that the usage will reduce the threat of injuries to members and other suspected criminals in getting them under custody. The injuries might be as a result of physical restraint Hence the best alternative for such kind force. Its policy also specifies spray is not to be used in the police incidences that do not need the use of any physical force (peters & Eure, 2015). However, it also specifies that it can be used in situations where the arrest or restraint will not be possible in the event of use of physical presence or the application of any form of verbal commands. The implementation on the use of the non-lethal force in a way that promotes accountability involves the training of the NYPD personnel on how and when to use such devices. Moreover, its implementation involves the development of documents and reports where the NYPD officers are required to report the incidents and the situations when they had to use such devices and the resulting impact. However, the NYPD should institute a centralized system where the filing of the document force usage is put together with its database. Its use is efficacious in general in that it has greatly reduced the number of injuries that are attributed to police arrests especially about individuals who are resisting arrests and those in kneeing restrained in custody (National Institute of Justice, 2010).
The deployment of canine units.
There are few policies and practices that govern the deployment of canine units. Most US Department police have their policies that guide the deployment of canines units. However, these policies are set in conjunction with an understanding with the U.S department of justice (“Memorandum of Agreement, United States Department of Justice And The District Of Columbia And The D.C. Metropolitan Police Department | CRT | Department of Justice”, 2016). The NYPD has its canine unit known as the K9 unit that aid in various incidents like the detection of drugs and narcotics, control of crowd among other activities. Through the department of justice, the k9 improves its operations like better handler- controlled alert curriculum. The NYPD policies ensure accountability in that it sets limitations on off-leash canine deployments, the conducting of searches and other situations or incidences that might cause risk of bites to a suspect mainly on searches being conducted inn commercial buildings. The NYPD policy requires the approval from and the immediate supervisor before the unit is deployed. If the supervisor is unavailable, then the unit can seek the permission of the officer at the scene before the deployment of the canines. Moreover, there is a loud and clear announcement in a deployment area informing of the impending deployment of a canine thus advising a suspect on the need to surrender or remain still if the canine approaches him or her. Also, the canine handler through the NYPD policies and practices must ensure that he does not allow the canine to bite the suspect unless the suspect poses an immediate danger to the handler or the rest of the citizen in the incident. Also, the policy requires that in the circumstance the canine is given the command to go and bite a suspect or arrest him by use of a bite when the handler gets a chance, he has to call off the dog so as to safely release it because an average person will struggle on such occasions. As such the policy prohibits the biting of non –resistant suspects. In the event of a bite or injury, medical care should be the primary focus. The NYPD also requires a canine risk management system to manage bite ratios. The implementation of the canine unit to achieve police accountability involve the setting up of units from the commander of the canine unit, the trainers, the unit commander, the operational commander and the overall unit. The implementation of the policies also counts on the training of the dogs according to their specializations. They include the traffic dogs, narcotic dogs, police dogs, patrol dogs and the transfer dog and the explosive dogs (“K9 Unit Policy & Procedure Manual”, 2016). The training of the officers on the handling of the dogs, how to deploy them is one of the most effective ways of following up on these policies. The efficacy of these policies through the implementation in achieving accountability in the police is shown through the accurate reporting of the incidences when the handlers have to release the dogs on suspects, the policies efficacy have been shown when the dogs effectively control crowds, detect narcotics without the violation of the set rules and practices set by the force. Its efficacy is also shown when the police are held accountable for every action they take when thy handle the dogs where they explain every action they take and in the case of any violations then disciplinary action is undertaken.
The vehicle pursuits
Most vehicle pursuits by the NYPD are risky processes or actions that pose immediate danger both to the police office and those being pursued. Moreover, the other civilians along the scene of such actions are in the danger of accidents and other risks like the discharge of weapons during pursuits. The use of the motor vehicle can substantially be considered as a use of force where the action leads to the death and the injury of the person being pursued or other civilians. The NYPD must be accountable for motor vehicle pursuits through the following of the procedures and policies set by the NYPD.
The NYPD clearly lays out the procedure and its official policy on how the vehicle pursuits are to be conducted. Firstly, the officer is required to initiate a vehicle stop when feasible. The officer should determine the necessity of starting and continuing with a vehicle pursuit by giving consideration to the nature of the offence, the time of the day, the weather condition, his familiarity with the area and the capability of the vehicle he or she is using. Also, the NYPD requires the officer to give notice to the dispatcher when the pursuit commences and provide information regarding his location, the vehicle type; the offense committed and the license plates. It’s the responsibility of the officer to maintain contact with the dispatcher radio. The officer should inform the dispatcher if the vehicle being pursued changes direction or if he or she has lost pursuit (NYPD VEHICLE PURSUITS, 2016).
Moreover, the NYPD policy requires the officer to terminate the pursuit if necessary and ensure he or she has notified the supervisor of the pursuit. The policies are implemented through the establishment of a system of checks to promote accountability. The implementation involves training of the officers on how to conduct pursuits like the distance required where one has to be behind five cars during the pursuit. Training enables the officers to be accountable in that they know when and how to initiate a pursuit without violating the conduct of the police department. Moreover, the implementation involves the establishment of the vehicle pursuit report (pd371-153). The pursuing officer must fill in this report and submit it to the commanding officers, precinct originating pursuit to promote accountability. The commanding officer must receive and ensure he or she endorses the report of the pursuit while at the same time issue a statement regarding disciplinary action. To promote police accountability, the policy is implemented through the establishment of the procedure and ways for disciplinary action where in case the officer has violated the policies and the guides set forth disciplinary action or charges are brought against the said pursuant officer. The restrictive policies adopted by the NYPD forbids the ramming of the vehicle being pursued, the driving of vehicles alongside the one being pursued and the establishment of road blocks. The efficacious nature of this policies has been seen in that they have led to a high decline in accidents and injuries numbers caused due to police pursuits. Any studies conquer with this in that they support the restrictions on police pursuits since it has reduced the severe consequences like death, injury, accidents that are inflicted to both the police officers and the civilians during such incidences (NYPD VEHICLE PURSUITS, 2016).
Accountability during Traffic enforcement and Racial Profiling.
Traffic enforcement majorly involves vehicle stops along the roads by the NYPD officers. In this regard cases of racial profiling have been reported where blacks are being harassed along the roads by the officers. There are no specific rules set forth governing the conduct of police car stops, but to date, conversations are recorded during such stops. The implementation of the NYPD policies on good traffic enforcement has been and is being conducted through efficient training and new policies on the procedures of traffic stops have been put in place. The NYPD through its patrol guide General Regulations Procedure No.203-35 has set out practices that prohibit any form of racial profiling. The section clearly states that vehicle stops or any other form of traffic enforcement must be done according to the standards set by the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S Constitution specifically section 11 and 12 of the New York State Constitution. The New York City Administrative Code Policy, therefore, prohibits profiling of people with bias like color or race. The traffic enforcement officers should not be motivated color or race when enforcing the traffic laws (NYPD DEPARTMENT POLICY PROHIBITING RACIAL PROFILING AND BIAS – BASED POLICING, 2016).
The police stop requires the officers to report a dispatcher whenever a stop has been initiated. The officer is required to report the nature of the stop and to activate his audio and the video recording as a way of promoting accountability in the department. Moreover, the NYPD enforces police stops through the road checkpoints. Vehicle checkpoints are conducted mostly during emergency circumstances but must be accompanied through the filing of the vehicle checkpoint forms to ensure accountability. The NYPD policy requires a motorist to be warned of the checkpoints through the establishment of signs and traffic cones. The NYPD must ensure that every vehicle stop is done by its patrol guide and that traffic enforcement is conducted with written places that prohibit the profiling of people (NYPD VEHICLE CHECKPOINTS, 2016). Although there are no clearly set out policies, that govern car stops and racial profiling. The use of the policy on the used video and audio connection during car stops helps in the control of such profiling. The efficacious nature of the policy helps in the reduction of the incidences of racial profiling, and that disciplinary action is brought against an officer accused of racial profiling during car stops evidenced by the audio conversation.
Accountability is very important in ensuring confidence in the NYPD. The individual officers must be held accountable for their conduct and actions whenever they use their authority. The use of police authority must be done in accordance with laid down policies. The use of authority with regard to the deadly force application by an officer must be justifiable in that it should be done when protecting himself or herself from direct injury or death. Moreover, the authority to use less lethal force must be by the set NYPD policies and that its use must be the only way necessary to restraint or make an arrest. The use of these devices must clearly be reported, and the officer issues a report justifying why he or she had to use such weapons. The NYPD has the K9 unit hence its deployment of the canine unit must do in accordance with the policy set forth and that any violation leading to injury due to canine bites must be followed up by disciplinary action. The department has set up policies that control vehicle pursuit with the sole aim of ensuring police accountability. There are rules that prohibit ramming of vehicles or being alongside the vehicle being pursued. These policies have reduced the number of NYPD accidents significantly. The police use of racial profiling has been significantly reduced through the restrictions set on the control of car stops and checkpoint rules hence promoting police accountability. Although there are no clear guidelines on some issues on police authority like a clear definition of a lethal weapon and when to use it, the steps taken on policies to promote police accountability have been efficacious hence reduction of injury, death and accidents and more so increased confidence in the NYPD.
References
Attorney General October 17, 1995, Memorandum on Resolution 14 (Attachment) | AG | Department of Justice. (2016). Justice.gov. Retrieved 17 November 2016, from https://www.justice.gov/ag/attorney-general-october-17-1995-memorandum-resolution-14-attachmentBureau of Justice Statistics. (2001) (1st Ed.). Retrieved from https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/ph98.pdfK9 Unit Policy & Procedure Manual. (2016). Strategic Management. Retrieved 17 November 2016, from https://bookstrategic.wordpress.com/2012/08/09/732/LESS LETHAL FORCE. (2004) (1st Ed.). Retrieved from https://aclum.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/reports-less-lethal-force.pdfFyfe, J. J. 1979. “Administrative Intervention on Police Shooting Discretion: An Empirical Examination.” Journal of Criminal Justice 7 (4):309-323.
Memorandum of Agreement, United States Department Of Justice and the District of Columbia and the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department | CRT | Department of Justice. (2016). Justice.gov. Retrieved 17 November 2016, from https://www.justice.gov/crt/memorandum-agreement-united-states-department-justice-and-district-columbia-and-dc-metropolitanNational Institute of Justice. (2010) (1st Ed.). Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/233280.pdfNew NYPD Use of Force Guidelines Announced | NYPD News. (2016). Nypdnews.com. Retrieved 17 November 2016, from http://nypdnews.com/2015/10/new-nypd-use-of-force-guidelines-announced/NYPD DEPARTMENT POLICY PROHIBITING RACIAL PROFILING AND BIAS – BASED POLICING. (2016) (1st Ed.). Retrieved from https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/ccrb/downloads/pdf/investigations_pdf/pg203-25-dept-policy-prohibiting-racial-profiling.pdfNYPD VEHICLE CHECKPOINTS. (2016) (1st Ed.). Retrieved from https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/ccrb/downloads/pdf/investigations_pdf/pg221-16-vehicle-checkpoints.pdfNYPD VEHICLE PURSUITS. (2016) (1st Ed.). Retrieved from https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/ccrb/downloads/pdf/investigations_pdf/pg221-15-vehicle-pursuits.pdfPeters, M. & Eure, P. (2015). Police Use of Force in New York City (1st Ed.). Retrieved from http://www1.nyc.gov/assets/oignypd/downloads/pdf/oig_nypd_use_of_force_report_-_oct_1_2015.pdf