Constants Identified as Causes of Corruption
Before it is possible to consider ways in which police corruption may be prevented, it is important to understand what may contribute to police corruption and what makes it possible. Scholarly literature is rather consistent in identifying key issues in the development of corrupt practices within police organizations and the officers that work at them. Discretion on the part of police officers is a constant that has been identified as a contributing cause of police corruption.
Police officers have considerable freedom to exercise discretion when determining whether or not to enforce particular laws in particular situations. This considerable amount of discretion creates an opportunity for such decisions to be influenced by possibilities of material or financial gain (Newburn, 1999). Another aspect of discretion that can possibly lead to corrupt behaviors and decisions concerns the existence of internal and external conflict about the goals of policing. These conflicts occur when groups within the police organization adopt goals that are different of the organization. In these instances, pressure from the group may lead to corrupt decisions being made to accommodate the group as opposed to the organization. Low levels of supervision for police officers create added opportunities for officers to engage in corrupt activities. Police officers assigned to uniform patrol and undercover assignments are frequently dispersed throughout a jurisdiction, and not subject to direct supervision. This autonomy and freedom allows them to ignore or excuse policies and procedures they do not agree with. More importantly, it is believed, there is a degree of acceptance regarding policy and procedure violations which is embraced due to the existence of discretion and low levels of supervision while performing their duties (Banks, 2013). In the more extreme forms of corruption, such as the use of excessive force, the low levels of supervision may actually be exploited for the gain of the officer. It is in relation to these types of police services, which are often the most secretive that accusations of corruption are most common. Linked again to the discretion available to police officers, and also to the limited degree of supervisor oversight that is possible in much policing, there is a third factor – low public visibility. Much of what police officers do is only visible to the person or people with whom they are immediately engaged. Perhaps more importantly, the police have considerable access to ‘private spaces’ where they cannot be observed at all: premises and domestic dwellings that have been burgled; buildings where there is reason to believe a crime may be committed (Punch, 2000). It is has been argued that bribery and other forms of corruption for financial gain is a far from unexpected outcome given the fact that police officers and many other public servants are inadequately paid for the job they do. Low pay is frequently cited as a cause of a lack of integrity for people in all positions, particularly in societies where material objects are highly valued but salaries are low (Westmarland, 2005). However, even in societies where police officers are …show more content…
Community tolerance, or even support, for police corruption can facilitate a department’s becoming corrupt (Newburn, 1999). The public may inadvertently legitimize corruption on the part of the agency. Community tolerance of small scandals and periodic lapses in judgment by officers may, encourage police departments to view their corrupt practices as legitimate and therefore allow these types of actions to go …show more content…
An example of this type of activity is Pollo Tropical Restaurant and Chipotle offer half priced food to emergency services workers, including police officers and fire fighters. Some individuals are reluctant to define gratuities as a corrupt practice but argue that they act as a stepping stone to corruption. It can be argued that corruption can stem from a gradual deterioration in behavior, beginning with small, seemingly innocuous, actions such as accepting gifts and gratuities (Prenzler, 1995).
Lastly, the most common identifiable form of corruption within law enforcement is, Noble Cause Corruption. Noble cause corruption can be defined as corruption committed in the name of the ends justify the means, or corruption that occurs when police officers care lose sight of the oath they took to uphold the law. Examples of noble cause corruption are, planting or fabricating evidence, lying on reports or in court, and generally abusing police authority to make a charge
Before it is possible to consider ways in which police corruption may be prevented, it is important to understand what may contribute to police corruption and what makes it possible. Scholarly literature is rather consistent in identifying key issues in the development of corrupt practices within police organizations and the officers that work at them. Discretion on the part of police officers is a constant that has been identified as a contributing cause of police corruption.
Police officers have considerable freedom to exercise discretion when determining whether or not to enforce particular laws in particular situations. This considerable amount of discretion creates an opportunity for such decisions to be influenced by possibilities of material or financial gain (Newburn, 1999). Another aspect of discretion that can possibly lead to corrupt behaviors and decisions concerns the existence of internal and external conflict about the goals of policing. These conflicts occur when groups within the police organization adopt goals that are different of the organization. In these instances, pressure from the group may lead to corrupt decisions being made to accommodate the group as opposed to the organization. Low levels of supervision for police officers create added opportunities for officers to engage in corrupt activities. Police officers assigned to uniform patrol and undercover assignments are frequently dispersed throughout a jurisdiction, and not subject to direct supervision. This autonomy and freedom allows them to ignore or excuse policies and procedures they do not agree with. More importantly, it is believed, there is a degree of acceptance regarding policy and procedure violations which is embraced due to the existence of discretion and low levels of supervision while performing their duties (Banks, 2013). In the more extreme forms of corruption, such as the use of excessive force, the low levels of supervision may actually be exploited for the gain of the officer. It is in relation to these types of police services, which are often the most secretive that accusations of corruption are most common. Linked again to the discretion available to police officers, and also to the limited degree of supervisor oversight that is possible in much policing, there is a third factor – low public visibility. Much of what police officers do is only visible to the person or people with whom they are immediately engaged. Perhaps more importantly, the police have considerable access to ‘private spaces’ where they cannot be observed at all: premises and domestic dwellings that have been burgled; buildings where there is reason to believe a crime may be committed (Punch, 2000). It is has been argued that bribery and other forms of corruption for financial gain is a far from unexpected outcome given the fact that police officers and many other public servants are inadequately paid for the job they do. Low pay is frequently cited as a cause of a lack of integrity for people in all positions, particularly in societies where material objects are highly valued but salaries are low (Westmarland, 2005). However, even in societies where police officers are …show more content…
Community tolerance, or even support, for police corruption can facilitate a department’s becoming corrupt (Newburn, 1999). The public may inadvertently legitimize corruption on the part of the agency. Community tolerance of small scandals and periodic lapses in judgment by officers may, encourage police departments to view their corrupt practices as legitimate and therefore allow these types of actions to go …show more content…
An example of this type of activity is Pollo Tropical Restaurant and Chipotle offer half priced food to emergency services workers, including police officers and fire fighters. Some individuals are reluctant to define gratuities as a corrupt practice but argue that they act as a stepping stone to corruption. It can be argued that corruption can stem from a gradual deterioration in behavior, beginning with small, seemingly innocuous, actions such as accepting gifts and gratuities (Prenzler, 1995).
Lastly, the most common identifiable form of corruption within law enforcement is, Noble Cause Corruption. Noble cause corruption can be defined as corruption committed in the name of the ends justify the means, or corruption that occurs when police officers care lose sight of the oath they took to uphold the law. Examples of noble cause corruption are, planting or fabricating evidence, lying on reports or in court, and generally abusing police authority to make a charge