Keeping an Open Mind about Ferguson

We really do need to keep an open mind about the events that took place in Ferguson, Missouri.

I recently made comments about the scrutiny that Officer Wilson and his department will go through following the shooting death of an unarmed black man in Ferguson.  I pointed out that Reverend Al Sharpton and others have made a rush to judgment about the officer and the Ferguson Police Department.  There had been a media feeding frenzy over the whole affair.  Most of the negative media attention has targeted the officer and his department.  However, over the last few weeks I have seen multiple social media reports (including unflattering pictures) about the past bad behavior of the victim.  Like the dark shadow that has been cast over the officer and his department, this equally tasteless reporting of the victim is unwarranted.

This type of reporting, whether through national news outlets or through social media, does nothing but polarize opinions and society.  It is geared to titillate and sensationalize with the idea to divide, stir contention, and sell copy.  Like the Reverend Sharpton who wants to try Officer Wilson in the court of public opinion, those who demonize the man who was shot are putting the man on trial in the court of public opinion.  It is blatantly unfair and uncalled for.  It is bad enough that money grabbing attorneys have lined up to claim their share of the spoils, but when media, whether national or social, stand to gain at the expense of others, then it is time to call for a time out and ask ourselves just exactly what our values are.  We should never succumb to the sensational as opposed to the rational.

Now in defense of attorneys, some of my best friends are attorneys.  There are many honorable, honest, and just men and women who have dedicated themselves to the needed profession of legal practice.  Not all lawyers are money-grabbers.  Not all attorneys slink in the slime of the shadows just waiting to pounce on the slightest perceived injustice.  To the contrary, most are dedicated to maintaining order in a chaotic world.  Yes, there are those who live in luxury, but the average attorney makes an average salary.  Many earn the salary of a police officer, which isn’t much of a return on a three-year investment in law school after finishing a bachelor’s degree.

© 2014 Gregory B. Talley

Officer Darren Wilson's Life Now

Note: This is a recovered comment from Facebook that I made on August 23, 2014.

August 23, 2014

Officer Darren Wilson’s Life Now (It’s long so put on your reading glasses.)

 Perhaps it would be beneficial to understand a bit of what is happening to Officer Darren Wilson as he awaits his fate. The threat of criminal prosecution is only one of the legal worries that he faces. He will undoubtedly face a civil wrongful death case and he will have to deal with the potential civil rights action. All of these actions will cost him more money than he will make in a lifetime. Some of the expenses may be covered by his department and the political subdivision where he works and if he belongs to some type of fraternal organization that insures officers, then that organization might pick up some of the tab. Regardless, Officer Wilson is merely a small fish in the money pool as Brown’s family attorney will go for the “deep pockets” where the money is located. To do this their attorney will go after Wilson’s training officer, supervisor, commander, chief, and the town/county board where he worked and ultimately the town or county itself. This sets up an interesting legal scenario as everybody will be looking to make sure that their own ducks have been lined up and already marching in a straight row. If not, there will be substantial finger-pointing. The training officers will say that they tried to teach Wilson, but he performed poorly and that they reported this to supervisors and administrators who failed to terminate Wilson’s employment while he was yet a probationary officer. Use your imagination and you will begin to understand how everybody who had anything to do with Wilson’s employment will be interested in their own interests and nobody else’s interest.

 Wilson’s life is going to be examined as though he was a fish carefully filleted and gutted exposing everything that he is, has been, and potentially could be. Some of you reading this have experienced an FBI background investigation and understand a little of what this is all about. I assure you that the background check for a Top Secret government clearance is a Sunday school picnic compared to what will be exposed in this investigation.

 Number One: His police career will be reviewed. FBI Agents will review his hiring. They will ask how he was tested for the position and the results of the testing and the validity of the metrics used to determine if Wilson was qualified for the job. They will review the credentials of those who hired him. They will look to see if he had any relatives or close friends who greased the skids for him to get the job. They will look to see if he was the most qualified applicant or the only qualified applicant or if certain required qualifications were overlooked. His pre-service, in-service, and specialized or advanced training will be scrutinized. Lesson plans will be scrutinized and qualifications of trainers will be reviewed and test results will be examined. His overall work record will be studied to include the use of sick leave and vacation time. His personnel record will be laid open for the purpose of determining what complaints (or heaven forbid-commendations) were made, who complained, the nature of the complaint, and the resolution of the complaint and then complainants will be interviewed. People he has arrested will be interviewed. Supervisors and co-workers will be questioned. His court record will be analyzed. Police reports he has written will be studied.

 Number Two: His personal life will be examined. His personal computer, if it hasn’t already been confiscated, will be confiscated. His work e-mail and personal e-mail will be retrieved. His cell phone records and probably his cell phone itself will be taken into evidence. Anything he has written in social media will be evaluated in terms of hidden agendas as well as outright biased or questionable communication. High school teachers and college professors (if he spent any time in college) will be contacted and interviewed. His financial records will be looked at for any anomalies. Too much or too little of anything will raise a red flag. Late payments or overdrafts will draw an eye of suspicion. Large deposits or withdrawals from accounts will be questioned. His friends, neighbors, and acquaintances will be questioned. If he has children in school, his behavior at teacher-parent conferences will be looked at. If he even thought about cheating on his wife, it will be discovered. His recreational use of alcohol will be measured. His own personal driving and juvenile records, if any exist, will be examined. Those with whom he associates will be contacted. And of course, if he ever used a racially insensitive or charged term, he will be toast. His religious views will be reviewed and if he attends a church, his attendance and adherence to church teachings will be examined. His membership in any organization, even if it is Rotary, will be noted.

 Number Three: Directly related to Wilson will be the investigation of his department. Who are the supervisors and administrators? What training and education do they have? How vigilant are they in performing their duties? What are their rules of conduct? What are the department’s mission, goals, and objectives? How do they measure compliance with those goals? What trends do arrests in the community show? What is the relationship of the police department with the community? If the department is accredited with an accrediting body (which it is), when was the last accreditation review? What was included in the accreditation review? Were there deficiencies and if so, what were they and how were they resolved? What documentation is there to show compliance with accreditation? It turns out that the Ferguson Police Department is in fact accredited through the Missouri Police Chief's Charitable Foundation (MPCCF) State Certification Program. You should know that accreditation is normally a three to five year process and normally requires at least one full-time person to assure that accreditation standards are maintained and documented. Many larger police departments will have an office staff that does nothing but accreditation compliance. Accreditation standards can easily fill a 100-200 page book. Department documentation of compliance fills several file cabinets.

 All of this is just the tip of the review iceberg. How would you hold up under this type of scrutiny?

© 2014 Gregory B. Talley

Ferguson Police and Racial Discrimination

Ferguson Police and Racial Discrimination

 

Preface

 

Before I begin, please understand that I am not defending Officer Wilson in the shooting death of the young black man in Ferguson.  None of us has all the facts.

 

Introduction

 

The Reverend Al Sharpton and others in their rush to judgment in the events that recently took place in Ferguson, Missouri, were quick to note that the Ferguson Police Department is racist.  Racism had to be behind the shooting of the unarmed black man and it had to be stopped!  Oh, that it could be so simple.  And of course now, as I earlier predicted, the Justice Department has begun a civil rights investigation into the Ferguson Police Department.  No doubt they will find complaints.  Every police department receives citizen complaints about police behavior.  The Ferguson Police Department acknowledges their complaints openly.  Everyone should keep in mind though that even if there is a finding that discriminatory practices are tolerated or even encouraged in this department, that does not mean that Officer Wilson holds those same prejudicial thoughts or engages in racially biased practices.  Also, even if there is a finding that Wilson engages in discriminatory practices it does not necessarily hold true that racial bias was a factor in this incident.

 

Discussion

 

Commentators have correctly noted that the predominately black community of Ferguson (67%) is policed by a predominately white department.  Only three of the 54 or so police officers in that community are black (about 5.5%).  Reverend Sharpton and others point to that statistic as evidence of racism.  There are three primary flaws in this reasoning.  First, in order for there to be more black officers on a department, more black men and women must apply for those open positions. Secondly, in order for the black men and women to be hired on police departments they must meet minimum hiring standards, which in most police departments is a high school diploma, a background clear of criminal wrongdoing, and reasonably good health.  Thirdly, Sharpton and others assume that they can read the minds of others.  I’ll not discuss the third flaw. 

 

I.

 

Let’s begin with high school education rates.  According to Education Secretary Arne Duncan, a record 80% of students graduated from high school in 2102.  Nationally, black students had a 69% graduation rate.  Eighty-nine percent of Missouri white students graduated from high school while 73% of black Missouri high school students graduated: rates well above the national norm (governing.com).  Moving on to higher education, of students graduating from college in the 2011-2012 school year, nationally 73.7% of the associate degrees went to whites while 10.9% went to blacks; of bachelor degrees awarded, 77.5% went to whites and 9.0% went to blacks.  The U.S. Census Bureau estimated that 77.7% of the 2013 U.S. population is white and 13.2% is black (quickfacts.census.gov).

 

For various reasons that are well beyond time and space here, blacks already find themselves at an education level disadvantage.  When you consider the fact that more and more police departments are requiring at least two years of college, blacks self-eliminate from the competitive hiring applicant pool.

 

By now, some of you are on the same page with me, but others are beginning to think that I am merely making excuses to justify racist practices.  Please bear with me as I am well aware that population distribution is not the (only) factor at work here.  However, you should know that there is a long-standing and continuing debate in law enforcement circles about the need for higher education in the profession.  Some even wonder if policing is a vocation rather than a profession.  My comments here are not about this debate, but I should point out that policing has become even more technical and legalistic since a published article I wrote over 20 years ago about the need for higher education for those entering the law enforcement profession.  Meanwhile, one must ask if we should require police to be able to read, write, and speak the English language in order to effectively communicate on paper, with the public, over police radios, with government and industry officials, and in court.  Should police be able to do simple arithmetic or even more complex math to understand how breathalizers or police radar and laser speed monitoring devices work? Should we require police to be able to take precise measurements at crime and accident scenes when it is impossible to use a tape measure?  Would police benefit from being able to communicate in a second language such as Spanish in an ever increasing Hispanic population in the United States?  Would police and the public benefit from police being able to communicate with the deaf?  Should we expect police to use critical thinking and problem-solving skills in such mundane tasks as interacting with the public, crime-solving and crime prevention?  These are the skills, knowledge, and abilities that are at work in our post-secondary institutions of higher education.

 

II.

 

I have gone beyond the reach of my initial intent, but the above comments are relevant to the question of alleged racism as they point to a glaring problem in hiring minorities, which goes to my second point, which is self-selection.

 

Any person making a career choice must weigh the pros and cons of career paths.  Indeed, in many cases the choice is not between two or more good options, but is often a choice of lesser options, if any.  Sometimes, the best scenario is between a good or bad options, but often it is either no choice or a choice between two or more poor options.  Police jobs are highly competitive in many markets.  No longer is a police job a poor option or a last choice.  Policing has moved from the job that you took when you got out of the military because that was the only thing you were suited for, to the job you sought to move to in order to get off the assembly line, and finally to a career that positions  you to assume a white collar profession.  People now actually self-select policing and corrections careers. One must actually “want” the job and not look at it as a default paycheck.

 

I’ve made some anecdotal observations that have caused me to do some further research.  As I taught criminal justice on the college level I saw black students again and again enrolling in college to play sports – primarily basketball.  Education was secondary to sports for many of these first-time students.  Please note that I said “many”, which means that there were others who were there for the education and truly excelled in their studies.  Unfortunately, these students were outnumbered by the students who came to play basketball.  In working with these students who came to play basketball I found that class schedules had to be arranged around practices and away games.  Classes also had to be relatively easy and there had to be a sufficient number of credits in the course schedule to make the student a full-time student.  (The same considerations for class schedules had to be made for white student athletes.)  What I discovered was that most of these black students would have an abysmal first semester and would be placed on academic probation and would be academically dismissed after the second semester.  We can have all sorts of discussion as to why these students made the choices they made and why they failed, but the bottom line is that these students made career choices (and not just sports) early on by choosing an option that appeared desirable but in all candor was a poor choice.  They chose career paths they believed and/or had been led to believe were optimal for them. 

 

Now, for the research, which is not exhaustive here, but is reflective of what is out there and is illustrative of my point.  This is not a dissertation. 

 

Research by Cynthia Gordy of the University of Central Florida showed that of the 2011 NCAA men’s basketball tournament teams, only 59% of the black players graduated compared to 91 percent of the white players.  Richard Lapchick in reviewing the 2011-2012 bowl bound college football teams found that less than half of the black football student athletes graduated from college while all the schools graduated more than half of their white student athletes.

 

Now consider a study by the Clark Science Center of Smith College for the next part of the discussion.  In 1949 there were no black NBA players.  In 1958 the proportion of blacks in the NBA was proportionate to the general population and in 1998 77% of all pro basketball players were black.  Lapchick (University of Central Florida, The Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sports, 2013) reported that 13% of professional basketball players in 2012 were white and 76.3% were black.   According to the Clark Science Center, similar figures are found with the NFL.  The first black football player in white professional football showed up in 1946.  Proportion equality of blacks and whites in professional football to the general population was reached in 1960.  By 1998 65% of all professional football players were black.  Lapchick (University of Central Florida, The Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sports, 2013) reported in 2012 that 30.1% of NFL players were white and 66.3% of NFL players were black.  Now, if you return to the fourth paragraph that I wrote here, you will see that the U.S. Census Bureau estimated that 77.7% of the 2013 U.S. population is white and 13.2% is black (quickfacts.census.gov).

 

Now, not every young black man wants to be a professional basketball or football player; however, professional sports serve as an unrealistic allure to many of these youth.  A good research project would be to determine what percent of their respective racial backgrounds of young white men and young black men want to pursue professional sports as a career.  Frankly, focusing on professional sports may distract us from the real discussion here, which is to ask why young black men and women are self-selecting preparation for other professions, professions they see as more beneficial to them than policing.  Do they see policing as inherently discriminatory against their race?  If so, wouldn’t a better option be to work toward employment in policing in order to serve as a catalyst for change in prejudicial practices?  Do they see other career paths as more promising?  Is there a greater allure to other careers than the “prestige” of law enforcement?  Is it possible that young black men (and women) have a sense of hopelessness?  If so, is it justified?  If it is justified, then there are deeper societal problems than what goes on in a police department and we should not be pointing a judgment finger at police as the problem but pointing the finger at policing merely as a symptom of the problem.  Until sufficient research is conducted into these areas of interest, we will not know, but in the meantime we do know that many young black men and women self-select out of pursuit of policing careers in spite of the fact that police departments actively recruit minorities and women. Just because they self-select out does not mean that any police department or any police officer demonstrates racial prejudice. 

 

Conclusion

 

Meanwhile, it is safe to say that there are two primary reasons why we don’t see more minorities in law enforcement.  Many simply do not meet minimum hiring requirements.  There could be any number of reasons for this including a racially prejudiced educational system.  Many who could meet the minimum hiring requirements self-select out of policing careers for what appears to be more enticing and lucrative pursuits.  Stating that the police department is the source of discrimination completely misses the bigger point as to why.  If there is discrimination then we should address the culturally systemic issues rather than say that the police are the problem.  Biased policing is a symptom of the problem, not the problem. There is no doubt that there are police departments and police officers who engage is racially discriminatory practices, but to assume that a police department has not met its presumed quota of minorities because it is racially biased is simply ludicrous.  Making such assertions without requisite evidence can only add to hostility and even stimulate and create racially discriminatory practices where there once may not have been any.

Temporal and Spiritual Peace

There are two kinds of peace in this world.  The most visible type of peace is temporal peace, when nation and nation are not at war with each other or when individuals live together in harmony.  I think we would all like to see that.  Well, many of us would like to see that.  Unfortunately in the world right now there are forces at work that disturb and disrupt temporal peace.

 

The other type of peace is spiritual peace.  While it may come as a result of being content with who you are and what your station in life is, there is a deeper spiritual peace that comes as a result of knowing that your life is in harmony with God.  This requires that we first know what His will is and then doing His will.  The Savior came to bring peace but not as the world knows it (John 14: 27).  In bringing peace He clearly acknowledge that there is and will continue to be tribulation in the world. However, He overcame the world (John 16: 33).

 

Likewise, there are two types of war: temporal war and spiritual war.  They are opposites of peace, and their author is the same.  He who pushes greed, gluttony, lust, sloth, lust, envy, and pride is the author and administrator of both temporal and spiritual warfare.  Just as there are temporal hotspots across the globe the author of spiritual warfare is running rampant and is in our own back yards, perhaps even in our own homes.

 

There are no “holy wars”.  There is nothing holy about war.  It is dirty, disgusting, and repulsive. That said, I for one will stand for our God, our religion, our freedom and our peace and I pray for liberty so long as a band of Christians remain to possess this land.

 

Make no mistake.  I pray for both temporal and spiritual peace.  I pray that there will be temporal peace for all of humanity, but more importantly I pray for spiritual peace for myself and all the children of God.

 

Militarization of Police

 

Even I am a bit concerned.

Returning home from our two-week trip we visited Mammoth Cave National Park and the Statute of Liberty. Now, I’ve heard and read a lot recently about what amounts to the militarization of police. Ho Hum. At least “Ho Hum” until I experienced it. Both parks had park police walking around in full tactical gear. I saw the same thing on road patrols. It didn’t bother ...me per se, but I could see how people would be alarmed. I guess what troubles me most is the shift in policing. And while I am sure that these guys are well trained, I didn’t see a great deal of “seasoning”, or what we used to call “stick time”. Having knowledge and ability is dangerous unless you have sense, and sense comes with experience. Lots of experience.

I know times are different. 9/11 changed everything, but I think it is time to rethink and roll back a bit. We do not live in an internment camp. Getting on an airplane anymore is a task in and of itself, but moving the security lines into the general population is contrary to living in a free society.

Regards,

Greg

Terrorism

 

The terrorists are winning. In fact, they may have already won. The fact is that most people don't understand the objective of terrorism and those who do understand its objectives have willingly, though unwittingly, played into their hands.

ISIS, al qaeda, and other terrorists organizations fully intend to raise their flags over the White House, but they know they will never be able to do so by... militarily invading, not with an armed force up against the might and power of the United States Military. Their goal is to let it happen from within. And, it is working. That is not to say that there won’t be attacks on U.S. soil as I am sure there will be. In fact, I think you can count on it.

The attacks of 9/11 were not intended to inflict an immediate fatal blow to the economy or the military and leadership of the United States. Even if their intent was to fly a plane into the Capitol they realized that our government has too many layers to simply collapse by taking out a building full of congressmen. To the contrary, terrorists know full well that any attack against the United States and its people will result in a full-court press to stop terrorist aggression. They depend upon our might and our strength to work against us.

We value liberty and defend freedom, but we also have this overwhelming desire to be secure. What they understand and what we have failed to grasp is that there is a delicate balance between freedom and security and as we employ greater methods of security the more those freedoms will melt away. This is exactly what has happened. Consider TSA screenings at airports; requiring passport documents to cross back into the United States from Canada and Mexico, two countries that have had open borders for law abiding citizens for decades; security screenings of the public at certain national monuments; the militarization of state and local police with surplus military equipment; warrantless NSA prying into personal communications; criminalizing the telling of lies to the FBI; reporting of bank transactions of more than $10,000 to the federal government; and constant surveillance of any movement you make outside your home. And, how do we as citizens of a free society feel about it? Perhaps we are willing to tolerate bits and pieces, but as the bits and pieces grow they will become a mountain. We are comfortable with the camel sticking its nose into the tent. However, are we comfortable when the camel is in the tent and we are outside in the cold?

All it takes is a single spark. It might not be the first spark, but eventually a spark like that which has touched off in Ferguson will make it all come undone. More likely than not, there will be several sparks that will unravel the fabric of our society one thread at a time. One must wonder what the true protestors are really protesting. Yes, they protested the death of a young black man at the hands of the police, but listen carefully to what they are saying. For starters, they are complaining about the military tactics and equipment adopted by the police. On the other hand, they want all police equipped with body cameras. On the one hand there is too much intrusion and on the other hand they want more. They are terribly conflicted within their own ranks. It is this confusion, the stepped up security measures by government, and our own resistance that can lead to the overthrow of our government as we once knew it 50 years ago.

There is more. There is much more. Indeed there is a conspiracy but it is offshore and it is working and most of us don't even know it. And, as I like to ask, Therefore, What?

Has anybody besides me noticed that the "Ferguson Incident" has turned into a three-ring circus?  The media have inflamed the public with impassioned (and unproven) adjectives, lawyers have already smelled the sweet aroma of cash payouts and have begun trying their cases in the public, the governor stepped into a local problem that will probably be a political nightmare for him in the future, a state police captain is playing both sides of the isle and can't do any better at quelling the rioting and looting than the local police can, and we now have three autopsies in play.  (The state police captain should be fired.)  The local police have been criticized for pointing out the fact that the "victim" had just committed a strong-armed robbery and that in the process of talking to Brown, the officer just happened to put two and to together.  The President has interjected his rhetoric, Sharpton is busy stirring the pot, 40 FBI agents who depend upon state and local police to work with them rather than against them are interviewing witnesses who have already made up their minds as to what happened, and local and visiting thugs are looting and pillaging the village.  Protest leaders assert that protestors are not armed, nor are they throwing rocks, bottles, and Molotov cocktails at police while TV cameras catch it all in the background.  Now the National Guard has been called in.  Of course the police have already been militarized so nobody will be able to tell the difference between the police and the Guard.  And since the Guard will be there on a peace-keeping mission they, too, will be armed with their M-16's while they are decked out in full body armor.  Oh, and let us not forget that the local police are now resentful of the state police and the FBI and the Justice Department.  Meanwhile, the officer involved in this circus has already been convicted of murder and the Attorney General is weighing in.  Excuse me?

The victim's mother today called for peace.  Came the question: "How can peace be restored?"  Her answer: "Justice."  And how can justice be obtained, she was asked.  "Be fair.  Arrest and try the officer."  Left unsaid was, "Then hang him in the public square."

First of all, peace does not assure justice, and anybody who holds to the stupid slogan of "no peace, no justice"  or "no justice, no peace" is a fool.

I believe that it is doubtful that justice will ever be served in the "Ferguson Incident".  First of all, they are courts of law, not courts of justice.  We've learned that we get closer to justice through rule of law than by mob-think or any other system, but it it isn't perfect.  I think it is doubtful that we will ever know exactly what happened and if somebody figures it out, half the population will reject it, so it really doesn't matter.  There will be no such thing as a fair trial, which incidentally, the officer is also entitled to should criminal charges ever come his way.  And, in the event he should ever be vindicated by clear and convincing evidence (which he does not have to do under the Bill of Rights--it's called reasonable doubt and he doesn't have to prove anything), his career is over.  He will be lucky to get a job as a parking lot attendant.

I don't know if the officer is guilty of criminal wrongdoing or not.  The only facts we have are lay opinions and prejudiced agendas and soon-to-be conflicting theories by pathology experts.  I'm not sure if this is a railroad or a circus.  Perhaps it is a circus on a railroad.  Police have another term for what is going on, and in this case it is very appropriate.  I will not repeat it here, but trust me, it aptly applies.