One need not look far to see evidence of the societal importance placed on ethics in criminal justice. Ethics has been a hot topic in the 1990s and promises to be equally important as we venture into the new millennium. Often, the issue of ethics in criminal justice is considered synonymous with police ethics. However, ethics touches all of the main branches of criminal justice practice as well as the academic realm. Due to the high profile nature of policing in our society, however, ethics is commonly connected with policing. Therefore, particular focus is given to this dimension in the following discussion. Within this essay the topic of ethics is addressed by first examining a general understanding of this concept. Second, a brief discussion of our societal concern over ethics and criminal justice practice is examined. Third, the discussion centers on selected scholarship in criminal justice ethics. Finally, some concluding remarks are offered.

Ethics And Ethical Issues: A Primer

According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, “ethics” is defined as (1) “a discipline dealing with good and evil and with moral duty” or (2) “moral principles or practice.” The first definition suggests that ethics is a discipline or area of study. This certainly has been the case when we examine the academic field of Philosophy. Criminal justice is, admittedly, a hybrid discipline drawing from many academic fields--one being Philosophy. Interestingly, a good portion of the published academic scholarship in criminal justice ethics is philosophical in nature and can be found in the journal Criminal Justice Ethics. The other part of the definition suggests that ethics is a combination of cognition (‘moral principles’) and behavior (‘practice’). Therefore, we might conclude that ethics is the study of the principle and practice of good, evil, and moral duty. As we consider the nature of criminal justice, and in particular policing, within contemporary society, the behavior of law enforcement officers is continually the target of ethical evaluation. The field of law enforcement has been under scrutiny during various historical epochs for behavior that has been called into question on ethical grounds. Whether it be search and seizure “fishing expeditions” prior to Mapp v. Ohio, the fallout from the Knapp Commission report (a la Serpico) or the latest instance of police misconduct to flood the media, essentially the concern is over conduct or behavior. Cognitive processes and the socialization that reinforces unprofessional and unethical conduct influence the onset and proliferation of undesirable behavior. Thus, while one must be concerned with psychological and sociological forces that help to produce police unprofessionalism and unethical behavior, we should not lose sight of the role choice has in police misconduct. One would be hard pressed to produce credible evidence to suggest that policing has not become more professional over the past several decades. It seems equally unreasonable to suggest that the entire field of policing is corrupt and permeated with graft. However, and as most readers will know, such an explanation has been offered. The venerable “rotten barrel theory”1 of police corruption suggests such permeation within a police department. As most readers know, the rotten barrel theory of police corruption suggests that unethical, and illegal behavior, not only occurs at the individual officer level but is pervasive enough within a police department that unethical conduct may be traced to top administrative officials. Another interpretation of police corruption is the “rotten apple theory.”2 This approach does not suggest that corruption and unethical conduct is so pervasive that it spreads to the highest ranks and throughout the organization. This approach, rather, suggests that there are a few “rotten apples” in a police department and inappropriate behavior is isolated to a few individuals. Police administrators have been keen on this explanation in the wake of police corruption because it avoids suggestion of wholesale departmental corruption, allows for a tidy response (e.g., fire the offending officer), and does not necessarily have to result in a tarnished image of an entire department. An additional form of police misconduct has also been identified. In addition to the rotten apple and the rotten barrel, there may also be a “rotten group theory” of police corruption. According to a 1998 report by the General Accounting Office on police corruption in the United States, “The most commonly identified pattern of drug-related police corruption involved small groups of officers who protected and assisted each other in criminal activities, rather than the traditional patterns of nondrug-related police corruption that involved just a few isolated individuals or systemic corruption pervading an entire police department or precinct.”3 Whether unethical behavior is systemic, small group, or individual, one cannot deny the importance placed on the intellectual process that allows such conduct to take place.

Concern Over Ethics: Can We Call It A Trend?

Media reports of police misconduct pepper us whenever there is an incident of alleged misbehavior or corruption. It might be the nightly newscaster reporting on the Rodney King incident at the start of the 1990s. It could be the recent case of the Philadelphia Police Department officers viewed on tape kicking a downed felony crime suspect at the birth of the twenty-first century. Whatever the instance, the topic of ethics and ethical behavior within the criminal justice profession grabs headlines. The media likes to report on such “ethical misadventures” because it sells. Some of the public, and powerful leaders, use such instances to legitimize their negative attitudes toward police. The police loathe the “bad press” in the wake of their self-perception of “doing good” for the community. The media might be the only winner in the wake of police misconduct. However, the public loses and so do the fields of policing and criminal justice, in general. Even the academic field of criminal justice loses because policing is so closely linked in the public mind to it. I am reminded of this reality when recalling my flight back from the 1991 Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences meeting in Nashville. As plane passengers do, I began a conversation with the person seated next to me. We engaged in the typical small talk of “where are you from?” and “where are you going?” When my fellow passenger heard that I was returning from a “criminal justice” meeting, his response was immediate and unequivocal. He said, “Why are cops such jerks?” The conversation occurred in the wake of the Rodney King incident, and he was referring to the behavior of the L.A. police officers captured on tape. Admittedly taken aback, I was speechless. Part of the reason was personal, given my experiences in the field as a practitioner and those of close family members and friends. The other part of my speechlessness was professional and social scientific in nature, given how astounding it was to find a person willing to generalize so broadly from one highly celebrated incident. This seemingly innocuous exchange had an indelible impression on me. It made me think about the impact the field of criminal justice might have in the topic of ethics. There is little doubt that real world events and their impact on the collective conscience influence the academic field. In fact, one could reasonably argue that societal events drive research agendas and define, to some degree, what is popular to investigate criminologically and what is not. Ethics may be no exception. For instance, the Rodney King incident, one might argue, had a tremendous impact not only on the practical dimensions of policing and police-community relations but also on the academic field of criminal justice. For instance, the book jacket for Above the Law: Police and the Excessive Use of Force, by Jerome Skolnick and James Fyfe, has a frame from the Rodney King video just below the title. The impact goes beyond one book, however. Using 1991 as a pivotal year, given that the Rodney King beating occurred then, the author decided to conduct a computer search for articles on ethics in criminal justice. The findings, albeit not scientific, are interesting nonetheless. Using Periodical Abstracts, an on-line search method at my institution and offered through the university library, a search was conducted for “criminal justice” + “ethics” comparing the years 1986-1990 to 1991-1999. What I wanted to find out is this: Were there more publications in criminal justice ethics prior to Rodney King or after? Since the incident occurred relatively early in 1991, that year was placed in the “post-Rodney King” group of years. From 1986 (the first year the index covers) through 1990, there were 28 “hits” or publications on criminal justice ethics. From 1991 through 1999 there were 152 publications. Admittedly, the “post” period encompassed nine years and the “pre” period contained only five years. However, it is still rather telling that such a difference exists. Only time will tell if the aforementioned suggests a tr

Ethics And Criminal Justice Practice

In addition to the Rodney King case, there have been many other instances in which law enforcement officers have been found in ethically compromising or illegal positions. Every major city police force in the United States has experienced some form of unethical or illegal behavior within its ranks. Some of the situations in recent history have involved drugs and drug units. A few examples are listed below: • A 1998 report by the General Accounting Office cites examples of publicly disclosed drug-related police corruption in the following cities: Atlanta, Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit, Los Angeles, Miami, New Orleans, New York, Philadelphia, Savannah, and Washington, D.C.4 • On average, half of all police officers convicted as a result of FBI-led corruption cases between 1993 and 1997 were convicted for drug-related offenses.5 • A 1998 report by the General Accounting Office notes, “...several studies and investigations of drug-related police corruption found on-duty police officers engaged in serious criminal activities, such as (1) conducting unconstitutional searches and seizures; (2) stealing money and/or drugs from drug dealers; (3) selling stolen drugs; (4) protecting drug operations; (5) providing false testimony; and (6) submitting false crime reports.”6 • A 1998 report by the General Accounting Office notes, “Although profit was found to be a motive common to traditional and drug-related police corruption, New York City’s Mollen Commission identified power and vigilante justice as two additional motives for drug-related police corruption.”7 • As an example of police corruption, the GAO cites Philadelphia, where “since 1995, 10 police officers from [the] 39th District have been charged with planting drugs on suspects, shaking down drug dealers for hundreds of thousands of dollars, and breaking into homes to steal drugs and cash.”8 • In New Orleans, 11 police officers were convicted of accepting nearly $100,000 from undercover agents to protect a cocaine supply warehouse containing 286 pounds of cocaine. The undercover portion of the investigation was terminated when a witness was killed under orders from a New Orleans police officer.9 Part of the fallout from a major finding of unethical or illegal behavior within a police department is a call to “clean up” the agency. As a result, departments in the aftermath of such an embarrassing situation might become more open to citizen review panels, pledge to re-examine their internal affairs division, require officers to participate in “ethics training,” or reinforce the importance of “ethics codes.” The concept of citizen review panels has been in existence for several decades; the first panel may have been formed in Philadelphia around 1958. Citizen review panels, sometimes also called civilian review boards, are in place in some jurisdictions for the purpose of assisting with the investigation of citizen complaints that police officers within the jurisdiction engaged in the unfair treatment of civilians. Review panels can help to build or repair strained police-community relations. However, officers sometimes respond to such efforts with a defensive posture and resentment over “civilians trying to tell them how to do their job.” A department might also pledge to examine its own internal affairs division, the policy and procedure for investigating complaints and cases against officers, and typical responses to officers who have violated departmental policy and/or who have violated the law. It is important to note from the outset that a police department internal affairs division runs the risk of being considered “suspect” from officers and a community’s citizenry alike. Officers can view internal affairs or “I.A.” as the “enemy” and a division that is bent on punishing officers who are risking their lives on the streets every day. From the community, there might be the perception that the police department cannot possibly take on the task of investigating itself. At the very least, this cannot be done “ethically.” Thus, I.A. can find itself in a no-win situation.

The Scholars Weigh In

As mentioned above, a large portion of the academic scholarship in criminal justice ethics is philosophical in nature. However, a few academicians have attempted to examine ethics in criminal justice empirically and quantitatively. When discussing scholarship in criminal justice ethics, a few names immediately come to mind including James Fyfe, Herman Goldstein, Victor Keppeler, Carl Klockars, Joycelyn Pollock, Lawrence Sherman, Jerome Skolnick and Sam Souryal. This is certainly not an exhaustive list, and we cannot possibly survey all of the literature in this field here. However, I would like to spend a few moments discussing two major studies funded by NIJ. The studies are The Measurement of Police Integrity by Klockars, Ivkovitch, Harver, and Haberfeld,12 and Police Attitudes Toward Abuse of Authority: Findings from a National Study by Weisburd and Greenspan.13 Both studies were published in May of 2000. While the two studies do not represent the entire literature on police ethics, both studies are national in scope, recent and empirical. The Klockars et al. study used 3,235 police officer respondents from 30 police agencies within the United States. The respondents were given 11 vignettes describing various types of possible police misconduct. In response to each vignette, officers were asked to answer six questions intended to measure “...the normative inclination of police to resist temptations to abuse the rights and privileges of their occupation.” While the results indicate vast differences from agency to agency regarding the “environment of integrity,” one finding is consistent with the protections afforded members of the police subculture. The survey revealed that most officers would not report a fellow officer who was engaged in “less serious” types of misconduct (e.g., running a security business on the side, receiving free meals and gifts, or even leaving a minor traffic accident while under the influence). What this suggests, even though the survey revealed little tolerance for what was defined as “serious” police misconduct, is that there is a culture of acceptance within police ranks for some forms of misconduct. While such conduct is typically referred to as “grass eating” (less serious forms of police misconduct) as opposed to “meat eating” (more serious forms of police misconduct), many members of society would find the behavior unacceptable. James W. Birch, in Reflections on Police Corruption,14 makes an interesting observation regarding such behavior. He states that the public creates an environment for “grass eating” that makes it difficult not to accept the “discount” or the free meal. It would appear that there may be a different definition of what constitutes “misconduct” depending on whether a person is a member of the police subculture or an outsider looking in. The second NIJ study, by Weisburd and Greenspan, entitled Police Attitudes Toward Abuse of Authority: Findings From a National Study, is the result of the Police Foundation’s national telephone survey of over 900 officers from various agencies across the country and addresses police attitudes concerning excessive force. The results indicate that the majority of respondents believed it was not acceptable to use more force than was legally permissible to effect control over a person who had assaulted an officer. However, respondents reported that “... it is not unusual for officers to ignore improper conduct by their fellow officers.” Other findings suggest that the majority of officers/respondents believed that serious instances of abuse were rare and that their department maintained a “tough stand” on police abuse of citizenry. What about possible solutions to the problem of police abuse? Officers report two fruitful avenues for addressing police abuse. First, it was reported police administrators could have an impact on the occurrence of police abuse by “taking a stand” against abuse and through better supervision. Second, officers believed that training in ethics, interpersonal skills and cultural diversity would be effective in

Toward a Conclusion

It is difficult to conclude this discussion because there is so much more to say about ethics in criminal justice. However, I will attempt to make a few concluding observations. First, ethics is an important area within criminal justice practice and scholarship since criminal justice practitioners, especially the police, are continually under scrutiny. Therefore, the discipline has an obligation to remain interested in this topic and to promote the study of ethics. Second, scholars can be of assistance to practitioners by studying the sociological and psychological forces that impact ethical and unethical behavior. There is much academia can offer criminal justice agencies in the form of research within organizations and training pertinent to ethics. Third, unethical behavior is the result of a conscious decision making process to abuse one’s authority while in a position of public trust. However, one must still take into account social forces that help to perpetuate, excuse, and justify unethical behavior. Fourth, there has been a proliferation of ethics scholarship in criminal justice since the Rodney King case but there is a need for more research of an empirical nature much like the two studies profiled in this essay. While qualitative and philosophical literature is important to our understanding of ethics in criminal justice, there is a need for additional research of a quantitative nature. With more study of ethics and ethical dilemmas faced by police, we might better understand the dynamics that propel officers into the dark side of policing and the factors that serve to justify misbehavior.