reply to post by Frogs
I haven't done the actual research to provide accurate percentages, and don't want to derail the thread, but can only offer what I know from my
exposure to various departments across the US.
Corruption varies more among individuals, or groups of individuals, than it does across entire departments with any consistency. But some departments
have more of those individuals (or groups), than other departments, usually depending on size or location.
When small departments become larger departments they will need to seek to be more efficient in response times so they will usually break up the
department into substations, (or precincts for example), and place them in various parts of the city/ county based on the demand for calls for service
(people calling 911/ high crime areas).
Creating those substations requires them to hire more cops to fill the holes. With more new cops comes the need for more supervisor position
promotions. If they rush that whole process, a substation has potential to quickly be filled with substandard new cops and supervisors (or very little
supervision), that can ultimately lead to a growth of corruption.
In conjunction with substations or precincts , if the city/county also has a slim budget to fund the police department they will not attract high
quality recruits to fill those positions. What person with good skills and charming personality in their right mind would want to sign up for a crap
job with crap pay just to be cussed out and shot at everyday? Not many, so they get what they pay for, substandard applicants who could be potentially
be a subject of corruption. Such as this example in the OP.
Many departments are well aware of this phenomena and go to great lengths to keep their police, policed up, by attracting solid recruits with
attractive pay and benefits, thorough background investigations, polygraphs, drug testing, higher education and so on. Those departments have very
strict policy when it comes to rules and regulations in regard to conduct becoming an officer. Incentives, believe it or not, for those reporting
violations among other officers in their departments.
I know that may sound like being a 'rat' to offer incentive to officers who report the wrong doings of another officer, but when they are hired, they
come in knowing that there is that understanding, ( i.e. if one should do any extra 'thumping' on the bad guy in my presence, don't expect me to lie
and cover your ass in an internal investigation, it's not worth my family's food on the table.)
The sad fact is, there are awesome police officers and police departments out there, and there are some that just make you want to scream when their
screw-up is splattered far and wide by the main stream media. That effect of expounding on only police screw ups, and not so much of their everyday
good deeds, easily gives the general public the feeling that every cop is corrupt, and that is so unfair to the good ones that go their entire careers
without a single complaint and many rewards.
edit on 31-1-2013 by Lonewulph because: (no reason given)