Philly Police Scandal Needs Sober Analysis, Not Rev. Al’s Bullhorn
Philadelphia has been rocked by video of police officers beating black suspects on the street. A levelheaded investigation is needed, but Al Sharpton and his circus are coming to town.
Support Pajamas Media; Visit Our Advertisers
To the great relief of many New Yorkers, most especially those who were delayed in crossing the Brooklyn and Triborough Bridges last Wednesday, Al Sharpton now turns his attention to the city of Philadelphia.
Sharpton and about 200 of his followers were arrested in New York on Wednesday during a well-orchestrated “day of civil disobedience” protesting the acquittal of three NYPD detectives in the November 2006 shooting death of Sean Bell. The reverend’s merry band took to the streets and blocked traffic on two major routes into and out of Manhattan, snarling traffic and raising tempers in equal measure.
Those arrested had been previously designated, with cops from the NYPD cooperating in the spectacle by using bullhorns to direct people into their respective cadres: “Those who want to be arrested, over here; those who don’t want to be arrested, over there.” Several protesters were miffed, apparently, that they had been denied the opportunity to tell their children and grandchildren about the day they were bundled off to the jug in the company of the esteemed Mr. Sharpton. Such an honor is diminished, after all, when just anyone is allowed to participate.
But there is hope for those of Sharpton’s flock who failed to make the starting lineup in the home game, for the traveling squad is surely being assembled even now for the upcoming road trip down the I-95 to Philadelphia. It is there that a controversy has erupted, one seemingly tailor-made for Mr. Sharpton’s unique talents. Last Monday, as you must surely have seen if you’ve watched television news lately, several Philadelphia police officers pursued and arrested three men allegedly involved in a shooting. The arrest was captured on videotape from a hovering news helicopter, and the tape, as they often say, isn’t pretty. Twelve police officers and a sergeant have been removed from street duty pending an investigation of the incident.
“[The video] absolutely shows inappropriate behavior,” Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter said Thursday on ABC’s Good Morning America. “There is a way to take people into custody … and there [are] not acceptable ways of taking people into custody.” Thus has the incident moved from the world of police work to that of politics, and it will be political considerations as much as legal and tactical ones that determine what happens to the officers shown on the tape.
As is so often the case, the racial calculus in the arrest was quickly determined and publicized so as to maximize the potential outfall. The circumstances favor weeks and months of news coverage and lots and lots of righteous posturing by Al Sharpton: the three arrested suspects are black while all of the involved officers are white.
I’m no expert on how Philadelphia cops are instructed to handle such incidents, but it seems safe to say this one did not go down in a manner consistent with what is taught in the police academy. What the public is never told, however, is that these things very rarely go down as they’re taught in the academy. And it’s important to remember that video shot from high above the action cannot give the viewer a complete picture of what happened after the suspects pulled over. The investigation may reveal justification for everything the officers did.
But I doubt it.
Prosecutors and Philadelphia P.D. brass must now determine which of the officers strayed from the law and department policy and by how much. The limits of space prevent me from listing everything shown on the video that appeared to be inappropriate, but if I were running things in Philadelphia I know which of those cops I’d be going after the hardest, for it was they who set the whole ugly chain of events in motion. I base my opinions on viewing the videotape on television and reading the various news reports. I have applied the training and experience I’ve received over a long career with the Los Angeles Police Department, which I acknowledge may differ greatly from the training and experience of the involved officers.
It appeared to me that things were headed for a bad turn even before the suspects’ car came to a stop. The tape shows the suspects’ car pulling to the right and stopping adjacent to the rear of a parked semi-trailer. Stopped next to the semi-trailer, facing the oncoming suspects and pursing officers, is a police car containing two officers. These officers might argue, perhaps correctly, that it was they who forced the suspects to pull over where they did, perhaps preventing a prolonged pursuit and whatever litany of misfortunes that might have attended it. Even so, those officers made a poor decision in stopping where they did, risking a collision with the suspects’ car or other police cars had the suspect driver not stopped. And then those same two officers made things worse — and precipitated everything that followed — when they rushed the suspects’ car.
The suspects, after all, were believed to have been involved in a shooting. The proper course of action would have been for the pursuing officers to bring their cars to a stop behind the suspects’ car in such a way that allowed the officers to stay behind the cover of their car doors while directing the suspects, one at a time, to exit their car and lie prone in the middle of the street. It appeared that the four cops in the first two pursuing cars were prepared to do just that until their boneheaded colleagues rushed in and made a hash of things.
After finding themselves downrange from their fellow officers, those two cops should have removed themselves from the line of fire, either by staying in the car and driving out of the way, or by taking cover somewhere outside what would have been, had there been a shooting, the path of police bullets. Instead they ran into a potential crossfire, rushing a car containing three suspects they believed were armed. Having exposed themselves to danger in this manner, these officers gave their colleagues little choice but to rush in and go hands-on with the suspects as well. And it was one of those first two officers who can be seen kicking the driver suspect several times while other officers appear to be using more appropriate force.
Other officers, perhaps five or six, will come out looking almost as bad; some even managed to give the business to more than one suspect. Yes, we are reminded that emotions were running high after the shooting death of Sgt. Stephen Liczbinski, who was gunned down by bank robbers on May 3, but it is precisely in such circumstances that police supervisors must emphasize the need for cool heads and see to it that their officers act appropriately.
Sadly, Sgt. Liczbinski’s murder has now been overshadowed by the arrest of three hoodlums, all of whom will end up as celebrities when Al Sharpton brings his ‘No Justice, No Peace Brigade’ down the road to Philly.
“Jack Dunphy” is the pseudonym of an officer with the Los Angeles Police Department. The opinions expressed are his own and almost certainly do not reflect those of the LAPD management.
| Comment |  Digg This |
 del.icio.us |
 |
 |
 PJM Home |
29 Comments
Sharpton's a Hack:Good article, as usual. It is certain that nobody will take the tactical decisions into question, right, wrong, or indifferent. It is even more certain that Al Sharpton will not concern himself with the fact that these three people were involved in the shooting of a white officer. He is more concerned with keeping himself in the spotlight and lining his pockets with the loose change of the unwashed masses.
“There is another class of coloured people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs — partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do do not want to lose their jobs.” - Booker T. Washington
May 13, 2008 - 7:02 am Jack:What is it about “professional” do these police officers not understand?
I am all for law and order, but this sort of police methodology just isn’t going to win the hearts and minds of anyone….it was a disgrace and there just isn’t any other way to phrase it. But one thing should be pointed out, if criminals are allowed to present the context of why they did what they did, then police officers are going to be allowed the same priviledge….
There is no excuse for either party here.
May 13, 2008 - 7:10 am doublehack:The black community, especially young black males, are having a really tough time in Philly. 1 in 9 black males between 18-35 are currently in jail in the US overall…and it’s worse in Philly. The murder rate in the same group is phenomenal. The ignorant white cops had statistics like that floating in their minds, and happened to be especially scared and angry when this went down. Hooray, they all get to go to jail.
May 13, 2008 - 10:12 am mwl:Sharpton’s cried wolf so many times, why does anyone continue to pay attention? Perhaps an enterprising Philly reporter should take the opportunity to ask him about his role in the Jena hysteria.
May 13, 2008 - 12:05 pm Mark:Does anyone even care that this absurd website makes no distinction between pure opinion and real news?
And why would you take a story, which could have been about police ethics, and which concerns real people’s lives, and matters of life and death, and decide to turn it into a ham-handed, pathetically trite hit job against Al Sharpton?
There’s a certain kind of desperate envy to notice when people like you write “This guy’s a chump!” articles — if only you didn’t feel so threatened by a guy marching down the street.
May 13, 2008 - 1:44 pm P. Ami:@Mark,
I shouldn’t think it would take very long to realize that the whole website is a blog collective. If you want to familiarize yourself with the facts, most of the better bloggers will provide links to the “news” in their post. Primarily this site is a venue for people to debate the facts and express their take on events. I know it takes a little while to get used to new media but please do take that time and make yourself familiar with this return of the pamphlet as political media.
I’m wondering if you feel particularly threatened by how well organized and professionally presented this website is? Is that what confused you? Did you think that only the MSM can present its opinions in such a manner? The fact is that there is a grassroots movement of people who relate to events and political characters in a consistent manner. One such character is Al Sharpton. However heavy handed this particular piece seems to you, it cannot compare with the weight of Sharpton’s flawed influence on justice in this country. Who is being heavy handed here in comparing Sharpton with the ancient alcoholics who march up and down this street I work on, finding shelter and change sitting at the tables I bought and sit beneath the awning I installed on my store. Sharpton does as much good for this country as the bums do for my store. It just so happens that both march up and down streets and preach inanities, blaming the world for their condition.
May 13, 2008 - 3:18 pm yoyo:For a so called police officer to be talking about using car doors for cover makes me wonder if the other reporting in this “paper’ is of a similar low standard.
The suspects, after all, were believed to have been involved in a shooting. The proper course of action would have been for the pursuing officers to bring their cars to a stop behind the suspects’ car in such a way that allowed the officers to stay behind the cover of their car doors while directing the suspects, one at a time, to exit their car and lie prone in the middle of the street.
any lazy viewer of myth busters would know that car doors only provide cover in the movies. secondly there is no excuse for this assault. how hard is it for a large number of armed men to subdue a tiny group of men?
May 13, 2008 - 8:56 pm Jack Dunphy:This so-called police officer is aware, as people who spend their time watching television apparently are not, that most police cars today have ballistic panels in the front doors, and thus provide the cover I referred to in the column.
May 14, 2008 - 2:19 am Colleen:Sean Bell was “believed” to have a gun. If I shot someone I would sure as heck make up that I thought he was up to something bad.
May 14, 2008 - 5:40 am Amused Observer:What you have is a car full of guys that pulled over when asked to by the police, then getting the crap beat out of them. No mention in the story about if they found a gun in the car so I’m guessing not. If they had the police would have been sure to include that information prominately.
In the interest of full disclosure- my brother in law is a detective. I am not anti-police. I (We) are anti-bad police. Bad Cop make life harder for Good Cops!
Where is the simmering outrage over the injustice? Funny how you had endless indignation over the Duke Rape Case. Couldn’t string that DA up high enough, but if a black guy gets killed- oopsie, lesson learned!
And what pray tell is a just punishment for overzealous police officers that assault citizens? Or homicides that are the end results of mistakes in judgment made by police officers? Or common civil right violations similar to the “broken taillight” probable cause perjuries that occur?
It’s a tough job, no doubt, but lots of people have tough jobs, and before we hear the common refrain, there are lots of people with more dangerous jobs. Tugboat skippers who hit bridges often have their licenses and source of livelihood yanked. Why should police not be held accountable to the same degree, as any other citizen would be, especially when they kill or assault?
May 14, 2008 - 8:45 am david levavi:I don’t see Dunphy’s point. He plainly concedes that the police stop was less than “professional” and that the behavior of at least half the officers involved was “inappropriate”. Does Dunphy really expect Al Sharpton to ignore the event?
Al Sharpton is a respected community activist. A champion of black folk and a darling of the mainstream media. Sharpton’s narrative, like Jeremiah Wright’s is that nearly ten years into the Twenty-first century America is a hotbed of racial tension and anti-negro violence. Cops stomping black suspects gives Reverend Al an opportunity he doesn’t deserve.
Al has no trouble getting up a crowd with nothing better to do than carry signs and holler. And as his role in the Tawana Brawley case and the crown Heights riots demonstrate, Al needs no evidence to cry discrimination. Al Sharpton like Jesse Jackson and Louis Farrakhan is a talented provocateur and thug who has made a fortune from race baiting.
That’s why it is doubly infuriating when white cops take to stomping black suspects. It doesn’t express the sentiment or behavior of most Americans and it feeds the false racist narrative of seditious opportunists like Reverend Al.
Dunphy needs to recognize that black provocateurs and undisciplined white cops are two separate problems. Sharpton is every bit as bad and worse than Dunphy’s contempt for him suggests. But Sharpton is an independent operator. The cops are our representatives.
Dunphy needs to ignore Sharpton and concentrate instead on an apparently widespread and entirely unwarranted sense of entitlement among policeman. I have heard seasoned inner-city teachers complain about the daily challenges they face and I can only imagine the tenfold frustrations experienced every day by policemen.
But there is just no excuse for kicking and stomping a suspect when when he’s down on the ground and covering his head in a fetal crouch.
May 14, 2008 - 3:37 pm David:It aint Hoyle. It aint American.
What he’s saying is that the cops involved acted inappropriately, but Sharpton’s rhetoric won’t help solve the problem of how much they should be punished. Sharpton’s grandstanding will merely muddy the waters and lead to more “Occupying Army” verbiage that leads to even more tension between the police and the civilian population.
May 15, 2008 - 6:56 pm Ricky:Where ever and when ever YT people show their complete and utter true feelings toward Black people by unwarranted and illegal police beatings and killings it always boils down to being Al Sharpton’s fault or Jessie Jackson’s fault or Martin Luther King’s fault. Its never the fault of White Racist America, never!
May 16, 2008 - 4:36 pm Steve McKay:Today’s police officer watches too much “Bad-Boy, Bad-Boy” TV. They create their enemies by the way they treat people, not “Black People” but all people. They should not face the same punishment as civilians for the identical offense, but harsher penalties. Why? Because that’s exactly why people run from the police. They are afraid of them, period. Police officers are, in the public’s eye, people with big guns and others tools that inflict pain, and are all too ready to use them. Color is irrelevant when it comes to police brutality. It should not be tolerated. As a former police officer, I never treated people like this “new breed of officer” does. It’s shameful and potentially deadly.
May 17, 2008 - 8:13 am Amused Observer:I concurr whole heartedly with Steve McKay’s post. I only wish I could have stated my position as well. I always look forward to Jack Dunphy’s writing and find much to admire about his common sense. I do feel though that he has never honestly addressed the issues that McKay so clearly brings to light. I wish Dunphy would forthrightly comment on this subject. It is the underlying foundation upon which much animosity and resentment between civilians and thier public servants, the police rests.
May 18, 2008 - 11:32 am I.M. Copper:Steve McKay and the blogger who calls himself Amused Observer have some valid points. However, if you fine men know more than one person whom has run from the police “because they are afraid,” I would seriously suggest getting new friends, go back to school, and get a full-time job. I dare say the vast majority of Americans do not run from the police or fear them. Your respective locale may vary slightly depending on the crime rate, but a vast majority of law-abiding people, Black or White, do not fear the police. In fact, they may even appreciate the police.
I sense anger and resentment in some of the comments and it is understandable especially when race is factored into this mess. I opine this police act was ugly and some of the actions by the officers may be illegal. Maybe this act could be about the suspects, their actions, the officer’s actions, what was going through the officer’s minds, and the objective fact that it appears to point that these officers and the supervisor certainly made crucial mistakes in judgment that were in full view of the public. Do you have a job or career that allows for such hyper-scrutiny? It’s doubtful. If you do have such a career, I opine it took more than GED or high school diploma to be hired.
This fiasco is far from over. More to come.
May 19, 2008 - 12:06 pm cwldoc:Having watched the video, it is a gross understatement to say that “some of the actions by the officers may be illegal.” There was a clear attempt to cause serious injury or death, but these individuals are considered to be above the law. Instead of being charged with a crime,they are being “disciplined” or “retrained.”
May 19, 2008 - 5:02 pm mouser:Now that any cop can go free for shooting a person 50 times, I would run from the police in a second. They’re all a bunch of criminals with the legal right to shoot. And it appears that’s why they become cops. They’re all on some kind of power trip because in reality they feel powerless. Mr I.M. Cooper just doesn’t get it. Or maybe he’s a cop too!!
May 19, 2008 - 9:53 pm joe:it seems to me that every time a black person is involved in some kind of crime and they get busted it is all ways racist .im not sying it was right to beat any one but white people get beat to by cops also . it just isnt brought out as much .
May 20, 2008 - 12:38 am Dave Joyner - Atlanta:I wonder what would happen if 18 white cops beat three white men like that and it was caught on tape. It is not uncommon to see this happening to blacks, but I cannot remember a time when anyone white was beat like that with no obvious provocation.
May 20, 2008 - 2:46 am shanna:I heard Mayor Nutter say only 4 officers acted inappropriately. We must have been looking at different videos. He said the men were moving and had to be restrained. I saw the man taken out of the passenger seat with his hands in the air and he laid on the ground and then the kicking and beating began. I find it hard to believe anybody could remain still while being beaten and kicked like that.
I also witnessed the video tape and read Mr. Dunphy’s article. I found the tape as many did disturbing and sad. I live in Philadelphia and that tape does not represent most of the Police Officers that work to protect us. Given the situation of the fear we all have come to live with there has to be a better solution. I agree these officers should be terminated but also want to commend the thousands that go out every day to protect us and never get the thanks. The correct story was these men did try to kill and then fled. This city has seen more guns and violence increase and the criminals seem to run the city not the people. I know there is no easy answer but the fear needs to stop. God Bless the good officers and there families and God Bless us. We are fighting a war right here in our own country…do you want to volunteer.
May 20, 2008 - 5:01 am Amused Observer:To the commenter who calls himself I.M. Copper,
Thank you for acknowledging the validity of some of the points I raised. Perhaps you might care to address some of those points instead of casting aspersions upon myself, my friends, my educational achievements and place in our economic sphere.
A quick glance at McKay’s post by anyone with adequate reading skills clearly indicates that he is an experienced older former LEO. A former LEO who is disgusted by unprofessional behavior of current practioners of his former profession.
Society has placed a
great deal of trust and power in the hands of police officers. McKay believes to be worthy of that trust police should be held to a higher degree of accountability when they break the law.
The primary question remains, what are suitable consequences for public servants who violate our trust by abusing the power placed in thier hands?
You opine that perhaps the Philly officers were illegal. Let us assume for a moment that you are correct, that this example of pulling citizens out of a car and beating and kicking them is illegal, is a crime. Plainly put, that these officers are indeed criminals. What is suitable punishment for criminals who violate society’s trust? Should police be held accountable for thier actions or are they above the law they are hired to uphold?
Perhaps after we discuss suitable punishment for criminals shielded by a badge we can address suitable consequences for the negligent officers whose incompetence results in homicide. What should we do with trained professionals who kill by accident?
I have no fear of law abiding police officers who do not commit assaults or homicides. I willingly place my trust in men who uphold the law, the
May 20, 2008 - 7:59 am mouser:Constitution and do not perjure themselves. But respect is hard earned and easily lost. I truly wish all police were worthy of respect and trust.
shanna,
There are no “good officers” as you call them. They all want desperately to shoot there guns because they have such small penis’. And you really shouldn’t bring God into this. I would guess that you’re just naive or clueless.
May 20, 2008 - 8:10 pm mouser:According to Amused Observer there are “law abiding police officers”. I doubt that.
May 20, 2008 - 8:12 pm I.M. Copper:Amused Observer rightfully brings up the Constitution and the issue of respect and trust. All public officials, especially the police, must earn and keep the trust of the public they serve. When they violate the trust willingly, not accidentally or in the course and scope of their employment, but take deliberate steps to violate the trust, there must be repercussions. There have been and there will continue to be consequences. Careers have been lost, professional lives destroyed, disgraced officers will be labeled racists, and indictments are looming.
The Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution reminds us that equal protection under the law and due process are rights for all persons. This amendment seems poignant due to some of the comments I have read of late. For police officers that have broken the law, there is no greater violation of trust and that is why the District Attorney (DA) and/or the US Attorney (USA) are likely to weigh in on this case.
In weeks to come mitigating and aggravating evidence will be presented. The reported and sustained injuries of the three suspects will have an influence on which entity may try the case, or if the case is tried at all. If the case goes, it doesn’t take a genius to deduce the four officers that were recommended for dismissal are the likely to be the future defendants.
More to come.
May 20, 2008 - 10:57 pm Steve:Interesting reading the comments on this thread. What surprises me is that it didn’t generate into the usual hatefest. I’d like to make a make a couple of points first it’s a whole different world today’s criminals are much more likely to be violent and be feed from popular culture on a steady diet of hate the police in music and films. A fine example is mouser and his posts. On the other hand please don’t say in the good old days people were never treated badly. Thirty years ago events like this would have been much more common and accepted. Today cops are under an unprecented amount of scrunity were events like this are far less common. Also law enforcement receives more training and are held higher standards then ever before.
May 21, 2008 - 7:54 am Amused Observer:I.M. Copper acknowledges the existence of the Constitution and the need for repercussions for police who are criminals. He mentions willful wrongdoing but skirts the issue of negligence. An honest mistake that causes no great harm is not a reason to fire someone. However a pattern of mistakes is perhaps a reason to closely examine someone’s suitability for a specific job.
Serious mistakes are another thing all together. We hold pilots, boat skippers, and truck drivers to quite high standards. After an accident occurs drug and alcohol tests are administered. Honest errors in personal judgment by well meaning people that cause harm to life or property often mean an end to an otherwise successful career. I suggest that the power placed in the hands of police officers by society is worthy of close scrutiny.
I am interested if he could opine on the case of Art Tesler. Mr. Tesler was convicted for his part in the homicide of an elderly lady in Atlanta. Negligence and a series of “mistakes” led to the homicide of a little old lady who valiantly defended herself when attacked in her home. Officers committed perjury to obtain a search warrant and then under color of an illegal warrant broke into her home. A court later determined a conspiracy existed amongst the officers involved to plant evidence and have another criminal give false testimony in an attempt to cover up their mistakes. Perhaps their claims of good faith that they identified themselves as police officers prior to attacking this brave lady should be taken with a grain of salt.
Perhaps I.M.Copper has an opinion of what has been described as “The Thin Blue Line.” Characterized as somewhere between an unwillingness to testify against fellow officers to outright perjury and tampering with evidence. It is certainly the perception of many that this exists. The case in Atlanta certainly does little to dispel this notion. That same perception is going to taint this case in Philly. Where is the trust, the respect? Why should we believe the police?
May 21, 2008 - 8:20 am I.M. Copper:Tesler and the Atlanta Narcotics unit is a perfect example of official corruption, perjury, and a colossal police leadership failure. That easily qualified as a gross violation of the public trust by a bad of thugs with badges, and the worst aspect is that without the death of the elderly, it may not have come to light. It is clear those narcotics officers were willful in their violation of the public trust and their direct actions resulted in at least one unlawful homicide. What should be done with them? They should be fired, tried in court, and if found guilty, jailed. No question about it.
There does appear to be a subtle difference between the Atlanta officers and the Philadelphia officers. Both qualify as violations of the public trust. The Atlanta officers were on the wrong side of the law from the start and it appears that unit comprised itself of corrupt liars that fabricated probable cause for search and arrest warrants, perjured themselves to Court officers for the sake of arrests and convenience. The story line in Philadelphia seems quite different. The Atlanta officers did not find themselves in a high-speed pursuit with armed shooting suspects and then reacted to what they observed. I am not defending the actions of the Philadelphia officers because as I have previously written I believe the actions of some were illegal. But the difference is clear to me. In Atlanta, an innocent elderly woman was killed by the police and that was the result of Tesler and his units’ premeditated malfeasance. In Philadelphia there was a high-speed pursuit with shooting suspects it appeared there was a free-for-all at the end of a pursuit where suspects were unnecessarily hit, struck with batons, kicked, etc. It is clear there was official misfeasance, but the degree of actual injury to the suspects is relevant. The Philadelphia violation of trust is evident, but to me it is slightly less than Atlanta because of the actual damage caused, the end result is that it does not appear to have resulted in serious injury or death to the suspects that were struck by the officers.
Therefore, even though the violation of trust is evident in both cases, just and sober reflection by police management and the Courts are necessary for the respective branches of government to ensure that public officials are responsive to their oaths of office so public trust can be restored. When there is evidence of the violations, as in both cases above, there should be action taken by police leaders, district/county attorneys, and if necessary, the Federal legal system.
May 21, 2008 - 12:48 pm