|
NY COP FORUM JULY 1999
QUESTION:
Much has been made of the "blue wall of silence" that serves to shield corrupt cops.
With all revelations of the Knapp Commission, the Mollen Commission, and the recent Louima Case in New York, does the record support such a "wall of silence"?
FEEDBACK:
"I
believe the 'blue wall of silence' does exist to a certain extent. They can keep some things quiet and get away with it. There are the times when something extreme happens (like the Louima Case) at which
point, the 'wall of silence' will be broken. Who would risk losing their own job just to save the next guy?"
huneebear8@aol.com
"...the term blue wall of silence takes on many
meanings. We should go beyond the way the public sees it and concentrate on ways of working within the departments in the form of stress recognition, detection and treatment.
Most of the situations that the press blows out of proportion involves various undiagnosed stress problems...."
Topcopdoc@msn.com
EDITORIAL COMMENT:
The "blue wall
of silence" that many journalists and members of the media like to use in their police reporting may have become merely a literary device. Why? Because of the fact that the police are unable to
maintain such a code of silence.
First, the NYPD has experienced numerous investigations of corruption.
We all remember the Knapp Commission of the "70s, and the Mollen Commission of the '90s. These investigations weren't just reported in the newspapers, but were seen on national television. The star witnesses at these investigations were not victims of crime or police corruption. They were police officers.
The police officers who gave graphic and detailed testimony at these investigations of police misconduct provided the commissions with the evidence that sent police officers to prison and disgrace.
Some of those police officers were compelled to give their testimony in order to bargain for more lenient treatment.
This has become an effective tool in the fight against police corruption. The offer of leniency in return for testimony against fellow officers is the standard procedure for the prosecution.
Federal
prosecutors showed the way to deal with corruption in their virtual destruction of organized crime families by undermining the code of silence that historically was the pride of the criminal world.
The worst sin that a member of the organized crime family could commit was that of violating the concept of "omerta".
To be a "rat" or "squealer" was the lowest that a member could
sink to. The consequences were unthinkable.Yet, some of the most well known members of the underworld have given testimony against their fellow organized crime heads.
How did this come about?
Until recently, there was a great difference between Federal penitentiaries and State or local correctional facilities. The perception was that doing time in a Federal facility was like a "country-club". That has changed with the volume of arrests by Federal authorities. The Federal institutions have filled up with many groups of differing racial and national backgrounds. The same jungle atmosphere of the "survival of the fittest" now reigns in Federal lockups as well as those in the State facilities. The strongest and meanest rule the turf in the prison population.
Prior to the changes in the prison population, organized crime could assure that its members could "do the time" as well as being able to "do the crime".
When a member of organized crime was sent to prison, he could be assured of protection from abuse from other members of the prison population. When he served his time, he came out prison and resumed his life as a respected member of the organization. He had kept the faith; he had kept his silence and abided by the sacred oath of "omerta". Today, organized crime families can no longer guarantee that protection.
Today, being sent to prison is for some, a fate worse than death. The atmosphere that exists within the prison systems has become little more than a hell on earth for the individual.
The warehousing of the most violent and ruthless elements of society in overcrowded prisons has spawned the seeds of destruction for the future.
The prison system is of such a hellish nature, that it
overcomes any sense of loyalty to the organized crime code. Fear of prison life is greater than fear of vengeance by organized crime. Thus, the plea-bargains to obtain either no time or much less time
inside prison.
Imagine the welcome that former police officers receive in the prisons today. If organized crime members suffer at the hands of the gangs in jail, what hope would a disgraced cop have
behind bars? Needless to say, when a police officer is faced with the prospect of time in jail, the so-called wall of silence often comes crumbling down.
Police departments today are very unlike those
of a few decades ago.
The civilianization of the NYPD and other large police departments has attenuated the isolationist and siege mentality that seemed to permeate departments years ago. The presence of civilian employees of both sexes in sensitive locations such as central booking, arrest processing centers, and stationhouses is believe to have had a positive influence on the conduct of sworn police personnel. The civilians were representatives of the community, and they kept that idea central in the minds of the officers. It is a fact that civilian employees have reported misconduct.
The NYPD and other large departments have self-monitoring systems in place by which police officers can report corruption anonymously and thereby avoid the stigma that goes with such reports.
The
conclusion seems obvious when the fearful prospect of prison, together with the presence of non-sworn civilians in police facilities, and the anonymous reporting of corruption by the police themselves is considered,
that the "blue wall of silence" is no longer a reality.
CaptainReuss@Verizon.net
Copyright ©
1999 Edward D Reuss
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FORUM QUESTIONS
|
