Tags
Normally I write fairly tongue-in-cheek posts, but this week’s events have left me in a more somber mood, so today I’ll try to be less ironic than usual (but I can’t promise I won’t be more cynical.) Today I want to talk about instances when the police abuse their power. Unless you have been living in a cave, you have probably heard about rogue former Los Angeles Police Officer Christopher Dorner, who reputedly killed several police officers, and family members of former police colleagues, in retribution for perceived slights.
I do not condone Dorner’s actions, but what concerns me even more is the results of the massive manhunt conducted by LAPD and other Southern California law enforcement agencies. Based on media reports, it seemed that law enforcement officers (LEO’s) were more interested in avenging their slain comrades than in pursuing justice for all (including for Dorner himself, who still had due process rights.)
Exhibit one is the shooting of three innocent citizens by Torrance, California police officers. In two separate incidents, officers misidentified vehicles similar to those owned by Dorner. Instead of stopping the vehicle and approaching the drivers to identify the occupants, the officers began shooting at the vehicles, riddling them with bullets. Unfortunately, the victims were two women in one truck, and a young white male in another truck. Obviously neither matched suspect Dorner’s description as a 270 pound black man.
Exhibit two is the final confrontation between Dorner and LEO’s in a cabin in Big Bear, California. Dorner was chased into an unoccuppied cabin, where he holed up and began a shootout with pursuing officers. During the initial firefight, one LEO was killed and another wounded. The apparent response by law enforcement was to use some sort of pyrotechnic device that started a fire in the cabin. Dorner apparently shot himself in the head before being consumed by the flames.
San Bernardino County law enforcement leaders made public statements that they had not purposely lit the fire in the cabin. Unfortunately, this seems to be contradicted by audio tapes of the LEO’s on scene discussing “burning” Dorner out and reports of dropping “burners” into the cabin prior to the conflagration. Note to San Bernardino sheriff: People have police scanners and cell phone cameras these days and they are always recording. Probably not a good idea to deny things before you listen to the recordings.
Now please don’t misunderstand. I normally trust law enforcement officers to be more honest and upstanding than the average citizen. I know several former and current LEO’s and I consider them my friends. I also realize that LEO’s are human. Fear for one’s life is a very strong emotion. Rage at threats against innocent family members is also something difficult to control, so who could blame the police for shooting first and asking questions later?…….Well, me for one.
I hold police officers, judges, and even lawyers to a higher standard. (I know, the bar for lawyers must be pretty low…but joking aside….No.) All three are in positions of power to uphold our system of justice. Without the balance of each of them, injustice prevails. Imagine a world without police officers to enforce the laws. Now imagine a world with police officers that can charge you with a crime and there are no lawyers to defend you. Now imagine a world without judges, where the police who enforce the rules don’t have to justify their evidence to a judge to get a search warrant or an arrest warrant. None of those societies are ones I’m interested in living in. They have been tried in places like communist USSR and Nazi Germany. Those places were not known for their fair and impartial justice systems.
As a society we have believed in the idea that everyone is innocent until proven guilty since the beginning of our nation. My time as a prosecuting attorney led me to believe that most of the people who the police choose to charge were guilty of something. I based this on the often long arrest histories of many of the defendants, and the often self-incriminating statements they made in court.
Additionally, I think the difficulty of getting a “beyond a reasonable doubt” conviction in court would stop most law enforcement officers from making unwarranted charges. Despite my prosecutor biases however, I always considered the danger of wrongly convicting an innocent person when I took a case. I was diligent in ensuring that all of the law enforcement investigation was done in an appropriate (constitutional) manner and I made sure not to cut corners when establishing the elements of the crime. I didn’t always win convictions, but I felt I had done justice, win or lose.
Unfortunately, for the mistaken truck shooting victims, and for Mr. Dorner himself, the system seems to have failed. Deadly force should only be used to subdue a suspect when no other viable options exist. The U.S. Constitution ensures that every citizen has a right to due process of law before the state deprives one of life, liberty or property. (I will discuss the implications of due process including Miranda Warnings in future posts.)
The mistaken truck victims were deprived of property and nearly deprived of their lives by officers who took an oath to protect them. The officers could have waited behind their vehicles, guns drawn if they felt in fear of their lives, until additional officers arrived to control the scene. Instead they began shooting at the back of the vehicles without confirming the identities of the drivers and passengers. As much as I want to give the officers the benefit of the doubt, all I can conclude is that they did not wish to take Dorner alive. I have to argue that the officers are innocent until proven guilty, but the elephant in the room here is, “will they face any criminal charges?” If not, then the obvious question is: Was Dorner right? Is there a blue line (double standard) in Southern California law enforcement?
Mr. Dorner died before he could have a trial where he could express his side of the story. The evidence points to an inexcusable murderous rampage against innocent people that Mr. Dorner executed in a rational (not mentally incompetent), premeditated manner. The unanswered question here is, who started the fire in the cabin? Did police tear gas grenades start the fire? Did law enforcement know of the likelihood of a fire starting when they lobbed the gas canisters into the cabin? There seem to be more unanswered questions here than answered ones. The only thing for sure is that Mr. Dorner did not get his day in court on these charges.
I suspect many people will respond to this by asking about the constitutional rights of the people purportedly murdered by Dorner. I would explain that the Constitution does not protect you from murder by other citizens; it protects you from your government. Dorner may have been guilty of murder, but not of civil rights violations because he was no longer an officer. And for those of you who say the police would have been right to burn him out rather than risk any more officers’ lives I ask this: why is an officer’s life more worthy than anyone else’s and what if you had been in that cabin with Mr. Dorner as an innocent bystander? I don’t know what immolation feels like but I bet it isn’t pleasant.
As a former officer however, I suspect Dorner knew the only likely outcome of this inevitable manhunt, and his reported writings appear to confirm that understanding. I wonder if in his wildest dreams though he envisioned officers committing so many inexplicable civil right violations during a manhunt that only seems to confirm Dorner’s diatribe. I think that now that it is over, the police have some questions to answer. I hope the public will demand those answers and not let this be swept under the rug.
Despite the justice system’s best intentions, abuses of power do occur and that is why we all must be hyper-vigilant in our scrutiny of the people who have sworn to protect us. To quote a famous graphic novel, “Who watches the Watchmen?” The difference between a democracy and a police state is who controls the police. I still like to think that the police are responsive to the needs of the people and truly are here to protect and to serve. Unfortunately, instances such as what occurred during the Dorner manhunt make that an open question.
What we do know is that two ladies, in a shot-up pick-up, had been delivering newspapers in the predawn hours to make a living. They now have a lawyer who is filing suit against the police officers. In that department I suspect there is a dawning realization of the consequences of their actions. There will likely be a strong desire to come to a large financial settlement with the victims. I doubt the ladies will need to deliver papers ever again, and the city of Torrance may be looking for new tax revenue to pay the bill. In this case, I think you can finally thank God for attorneys.