Police Suicide

Have you ever wondered what it would be like to be a police officer? They get to pull people over, wear a shiny badge, carry a weapon, and drive fast (Who can pull over the police?). Imagine being the person to make a big arrest on a bad guy who has been hurting many innocent people and YOU are the one who gets them off the street. Imagine going home to your husband and wife and telling them about the successful collar you made at work. What a validated feeling an officer must feel...


But on the flip side, have you thought about the responsibility it takes to carry a badge. The fact that people place their lives in YOUR hands. Having to chase a bad guy who is committing awful crimes and bringing those stories home to your family? Let me tell you, it is not all the glitz and glam. It is hard to be an officer. Sometimes the stress leads the officer to believe death would be a more peaceful place then his life on Earth...


 Police suicide is not as rare as most people would think. Since 1980, from the most accurate data we can review, researchers are concluding that police suicide has doubled. In the span of ten years a police suicide took place every year and that is just the reported cases. The topic is very "hush hush", ignored, protected, under reported, and so the research is slowed down and prevented by police officers themselves. Police often "take care of their own". Sometimes police suicide is covered up to protect the reputation of the victim, the profession, and to protect the victim's family.

Professionals say that a big step in preventing police suicide is to understand the root of the problem. Police often take on a sense of responsibility if a collar goes wrong. Thoughts that go through their heads are "I should have known better" or "It's my fault, it's my fault their walking on that charge". Sometimes people do not realize, officers too, that the police are still human. They are not Super Man and Wonder Women. Most do their job to the best of their ability and if things go wrong sometimes it is out of their control. This often leads to stress on the job.

Stress is a huge part of the job. Being in the public eye and having the responsibility to protect other people over yourself. The absolute terror in some of the situations police are put in can be unbearable. This stress also leads many overwhelmed officers to alcohol. Not being able to deal with the stress and not wanting to ask for help can lead to extreme decisions.

Researchers report that another reason for the uncommon rate of suicide is the accessibility to guns. 95% of police suicide involve their own work weapon. Easy access to a gun, overwhelming feelings of depression, alcohol; Not a good mix. However, professionals report that it can also be more of a symbolic thing. Because a gun to officers represents the "Life and death...ending of misery and protecting others", officers may view this for themselves as well.


Being proactive and getting help is the wisest action a police officer can take. Therapy is recommended for feelings of suicide, depression, or even just being stressed or disturbed by certain situations. Researches recommend that police agencies set up suicide prevention programs for police officers to cope with the daily job of policing. Hopefully this post opens your eyes to the vulnerability that police have and to the topic of police suicide which has been shielded for many years.



FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin
1995
The Mystery Within: Understanding Police Suicide by John M. Violanti

I'll see you in court!

    


     The law enforcement field is not just the police officers you may see on the street patrolling. There are four components to the criminal justice system: Law enforcement, prosecution, courts, and corrections. The public sees more of police or "law enforcement". The next department is the prosecution or district attorney's office. The district attorney's office are the people who build a case and press criminal charges against offenders. The Prosecution depends on police officers to write reports of crimes well so that they can press charges. If the police officers do not write a good enough report or contaminate a crime scene, prosecution may have no evidence to work with so they would not be able to put together a sufficient case to press charges.

     Courts and Corrections are the next two components in the law enforcement field. When there is enough evidence an arrest is made and charges are pressed against the offender. The court trial is carried out and in the United States everyone has the right to a speedy trial. However, nowadays since the courts can be super backed up that often can mean that the offender has to wait months for their court date. In the mean time if the judge feels the offender is not a flight risk and depending on the crime a bail is set. The bail can be extremely high but if bail is made the offender can go back home but must be in court on the exact day.

     Their are different types of courts depending on if it is a criminal law broken or a civil law dispute. Criminal court is done in an adversary system which means "innocent until proven guilty" or "beyond a reasonable doubt". This would be the court a person would WANT to be in because the burden of proof is on the plaintiff not the defendant. The laws broken here are mostly actions that endanger a society or harm others. The other type of court is called the Inquisitory system. An Inquisitory system of court is based on "preponderance of evidence" or "more then likely". These cases are like Judge Judy or Judge Mathis. People go here if it is a civil dispute like payment of property damage, divorce hearings, custody, etc.

Corrections is the final component of the law enforcement system. Corrections is the "punishment". It can be jail time, extended time in prison, parole, or probation.

Three Functions for Law Enforcement

Police have three functions for law enforcement. The three are called order maintenance, community service, and the actual law enforcement. The first of the three is called order maintenance and is basically maintaining order. I'll use the example of teachers. Teachers have to control a classroom everyday but they do not always give out detentions when a student is talking out of turn or does not have their homework. This is like police, they may not have to give out tickets or make arrests but they maintain peace by giving out simple warnings. This is why discretion is so important with police officers. They must have good judgment to do what is responsible.


The second function of law enforcement is community service. It is important that the ones who are protecting the people are also caring people who want to help others. It is important to understand the relationship that the police have to maintain with the community. The police depend upon the community for assistance for example, neighborhood watch. The relationship between "boss and community" should always be worked on. Police do not just need to worry about making arrests and pulling people over, they have to care beyond the law.


Law enforcement is the third function for law enforcement (and most obvious!). This is the job of enforcing laws that come from legislature, or federal or state and so on down the line. Also constitution and courts. Order maintenance and law enforcement may seem alike but they are different. Sometimes one may need to just maintain order without having to give tickets or make arrests. This is why discretion becomes important in these situations.


Do you think you possess the discretion to make responsible decisions if you were a police officer? Why do you think maintaining order and law enforcement get confused?

Do the crime, pay the time...

Punishments vary for different types of crimes, severity of the crime, location, and all around scenario. Different types of punishments are incapacitation, retribution, rehabilitation, and deterrence.
Incapacitation is the amputation of body parts. This punishment is not used in the United States for the most part. It is used in other countries and a punishment for crimes such as stealing or rape. The body part that "correlates" to the nature of the crime is cut off. If a person is caught stealing, the offender may have his hand chopped off so the crime will not be repeated. Or if one is found guilty of rape, the rapist would be castrated. Castration of rapists have been done in the United States on voluntary basis.



Retribution is pay back or revenge. Example is when a son kills a daughter of another family. The daughter's family may retaliate and kill a member of the son's family in the name of their daughter. It also is used in civil court (Think, Judge Judy!) for property damage. If a person destroys a car, instead of actually replacing the car, the offender would just give money to replace the broken parts. It is often used in civil court cases or with unreported crimes between private parties.


Rehabilitation is a punishment that is really controversial. It is designed to help the offender change paths or "fix them". Helping the offender realize their faults in hope that they can change. Some wholly believe that it does not work and others say it changes their lives. Of course if a criminal does not want help themselves they obviously will not be able to change. Rehabilitation is taken by criminals with drug problems and even rapists.


Another type of punishment that can be considered controversial is "detterrence". It is giving one offender a punishment in order to deter others from committing that same crime. Motto: "If it's bad enough, they won't do it!". Death penalty is an example. Many people would not want to lose their lives so the thought process is that the person may think twice about committing murder.
What punishments do you believe are most effective?

CRIMES!

I believe as humans everyone as some type of moral compass. That voice inside our heads that tell us 'This is definitely wrong' or 'You can get away with it'. There must have been a moment in your life when you heard of someone's actions and just knew that was wrong. There are three classifications of crimes: felonies, misdemeanors, and infractions.
Felony crimes are actions that are universally deemed as wrong. Felonies include first and second degree murder, hate crimes, forcible rape, arson, armed robbery, aggravated assault, white-collared crimes etc. Felonies are punished by time in federal prisons. An example of a felony is the Scott Peterson Trial. Scott Peterson was found guilty of murdering his wife and unborn baby. He was given the death penalty. In every country and culture I can possibly think of, murder is wrong.
Apart from felonies, misdemeanors would be next on the "crime totem pole". Misdemeanors are lesser crimes that are still considered wrong but are not violent crimes. Misdemeanors could be public intoxication, fighting, property damage, etc. Punishments for misdemeanors vary from state to state. Because the laws are different in every state, the punishments for these crimes are served in state prisons (as opposed to federal prisons or jail).
Infractions are the least of crimes. They are mostly used by state and local laws since federal laws pertain more to serious crimes. Infractions do not generally have a victim. These types of crimes are actions like public nudity, prostitution, gambling, or driving without car insurance. Infractions are hardly ever punished with jail or prison time. Infractions are mostly punished by a fine or probation.
Crimes are not always clear cut, there can be grey areas. For example, the Johannes Mehserle trial. The officer Johannes Mehserle shot an unarmed civilian, Oscar Grant, in Oakland, California. He claims that it was an accident, he reached for his taser and instead grabbed his gun. It was a controversial subject. Many people said the officer committed murder and should be punished and others believed that Mehserle really made a mistake. He was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter. Yes, it was murder, but was it a crime? This case sheds light on the difference between a tragic mistake and a violent crime. Who really knows what was going through Mehserle's head.
Who is someone to say that one committed a crime? Can a crime be justified in any way?

(Left) Oscar Grant, (right) Johannes Mehserle