Police officers in NSW are obligated to uphold the utmost ethics, integrity, and professionalism in order to serve the community. Their conduct is under constant scrutiny by the public, media, and fellow officers. It is imperative for police to consistently exhibit excellence in every action and decision they make.
In the Lane Cove Break and Enter case study, the ethical actions and decisions made by Senior Constable Cullen and Constable Black will be analyzed. This essay will also address the roles and functions of police in regards to ethics and how they should approach these responsibilities. Additionally, the use of discretion and the importance of reporting misconduct and corruption will be discussed. According to Webster’s online dictionary, ethics is defined as a “motivation based on ideas of right and wrong” (n. d.). Essentially, ethics involves our personal values and morals, and categorizing them as right or wrong, good or bad.
The role and function of police in society is to maintain order, prevent and detect crime, enforce the law, provide social services, and protect life and property (PPP123 Team, 2010, Pg. 8). It is crucial for police to perform these functions ethically. Fortunately, they are guided ethically by legislations such as the ‘Oath of Office’ and the ‘Statement of Values’ as well as policy such as the ‘Code of Conduct and Ethics.’
Senior Constable Cullen and Constable Black encounter a routine break and enter case in the Lane Cove area. The location seems to be a wealthy neighbourhood. Upon accepting the job, Senior Constable Cullen expresses frustration with affluent individuals, which violates point four of the Code of Conduct and Ethics. According to this rule, members of the NSW Police Force must treat everyone with respect, courtesy, and fairness (Rowcliffe, et al. 2010, Pg. 22).
Senior Constable Cullen expresses disbelief and frustration to his partner after speaking with the homeowner, remarking, “You must be joking. An iPod? Look at this place. They can afford to lose an iPod. This is a waste of my time. I bet you $100 that his partner is a guy.” These comments reveal that Senior Constable Cullen does not align with the values upheld by the NSW police force. By making these statements, he demonstrates a lack of respect and courtesy towards the victim, as he judges him based on his wealth and insinuates that he may be homosexual.
Senior Constable Cullen unfairly treats the victim because he believes that wealth means being able to afford losing an IPOD. It is important to note that these views do not align with those of the NSW Police Force. Therefore, Senior Constable Cullen must fulfill his responsibilities in a morally upright manner by following the guidelines established by the Code of Conduct and Ethics. If I were in Senior Constable Cullen’s position, I would make sure my personal thoughts do not affect my interactions with others so that I can effectively carry out my duties within the prescribed guidelines and maintain ethical behavior.
A police officer’s greatest tool is discretion, which is granted to them when they take the Oath of Office and become a Constable. This power of original authority is inherent to every action and decision made by a police officer. These decisions are independent and cannot be delegated by anyone else. Chief Justice Griffiths expressed this idea in Enever v R (1906) by stating, “The powers of a constable are exercised by virtue of his office and cannot be exercised on the responsibility of any person but himself.”
According to Settle (1995, Pg. 168), a constable has original authority rather than delegated authority. Discretion is exercised based on both common law and legislation. Legislation also specifies situations where discretion cannot be used. An example of this can be found in section 99 of LEPRA 2002, which states that a police officer “may, without a warrant, arrest a person if…” However, section 99 (4) clarifies that a police officer who arrests under this section “must…”. The key terms here are ‘may’ and ‘must’, where ‘may’ allows the use of discretion as permitted by legislation.
According to PPP123 Team (2010, Pg. 25), when ‘must’ is utilized, there is no room for discretion. This implies that a police officer’s use of discretion must always be a legal choice and should always have justification. Simply put, police discretion allows us to make judgement calls in various situations where our authority allows us to do so. The purpose of having discretion is to ensure that we uphold the intent of the law, not just the literal wording (PPP123 Team, 2010, Pg. 22). This is because not all laws can cover every possible situation while still maintaining fairness and practicality.
In society, not everyone intentionally or maliciously breaks laws, so not all laws are always enforced. This is when discretion plays a role. For example, if a driver is caught going 5km over the speed limit on a deserted country road, the officer may use discretion and give the driver a warning. On the other hand, if the driver is going 5km over the speed limit in a school zone at 3 in the afternoon with many children present, it would be more appropriate for the officer to use discretion and issue an infringement notice.
Both situations are valid and justifiable uses of discretion. However, in the given case study of Lane Cove break and Enter, Senior Constable Cullen displays an inappropriate and unethical use of his discretion. The particular area of concern is the physical force employed on the young person. As Senior Constable Cullen approaches the youth, he forcefully pushes him against the fence. As per sections 230 and 231 of LEPRA 2002, police possess the power to employ reasonable force when carrying out their responsibilities or effecting an arrest.
The word ‘reasonably’ provides police officers with the authority to apply force that is suitable for a given situation. However, in this particular case, Senior Constable Cullen has employed excessive force because we are informed that the youth has ceased running and is no longer resisting. Therefore, Senior Constable Cullen’s use of force is not lawful within his discretionary powers and can be considered an unethical action. Personally, if I were in Senior Constable Cullen’s position, I would refrain from using any force to apprehend the youth since he is no longer attempting to escape and is not offering any further resistance to being arrested.
I would ensure that I do not abuse my power and authority but instead use it lawfully and appropriately for the situation. The modern policing culture has both positive and negative aspects. Unfortunately, corruption and a code of silence fall into the unethical category (Findlay, M. 2004, Pg. 106-8). Corruption and misconduct are significant problems within any organization, particularly within the NSW Police force. They have become a major ethical dilemma that the force must address.
However, reporting misconduct may pose a greater and more immoral issue compared to corruption. Those who choose to remain silent or adhere to a “code of silence” regarding their colleagues’ misconduct may be considered more unethical and corrupt themselves. According to Webster’s online dictionary, misconduct refers to actions that violate moral or civil laws. While not all instances of misconduct are intentionally corrupt, it is crucial to report and address all forms of misconduct appropriately.
Officers take the Oath of Office, swearing loyalty to the Crown and upholding oath values. When officers ignore misconduct, they harm their loyalty to the Crown and compromise themselves. They are just as guilty and wrong as those who committed the misconduct. Clause 49 of the Police Regulations Act 2008 mandates officers to report misconduct and corruption.
The code states that a police officer must report any alleged misconduct or misconduct they believe has occurred, if it is a criminal offense or policy breach. Item 10 of the Code of Conduct and Ethics also requires employees to report misconduct by other employees of the NSW Police Force. In the case of the Lane Cove break and enter, Constable Black’s actions or lack thereof suggest a strong adherence to the code of silence.
Constable Black fails to take any action to prevent the unethical behaviors of Senior Constable Cullen after accepting the job. She remains silent when he makes inappropriate comments, does not intervene when he shows excessive force, and lets the youth go without any formal action. Perhaps the most concerning omission by Constable Black is her failure to stop Senior Constable Cullen from keeping the IPOD for himself. This is highly unethical because the purpose of their attendance at this job is to address a theft, yet they have now become the thieves themselves.
The case study does not mention whether Constable Black reports the misconduct or not, but it can be inferred that she will ignore the misconduct and not report it. This makes her equally responsible for the theft as her partner. By remaining loyal to Senior Constable Cullen in a misguided manner, she is violating NSW Police policy and jeopardizing her own employment. If I were in Constable Black’s shoes, I would have intervened when Senior Constable Cullen made those initial comments.
I would have advised him to approach each job without bias or prejudice. I hope that a simple reminder would have changed his thought process and made him reconsider his approach. This could have led to him behaving ethically. I would have definitely intervened to stop his excessive use of force and prevent him from stealing the IPOD. Additionally, I would have made sure to report his misconduct, as he has clearly violated the morals and ethics that I will strive to uphold in my future role.
Senior Constable Cullen and Constable Black have engaged in several unethical decisions during the Lane Cove break and enter incident. This essay has examined and addressed these choices, while also underscoring the legislation and policies of the NSW Police Force that these officers have violated. Furthermore, this essay has underscored the importance of ensuring accountability for all police officers. It is imperative for law enforcement to adhere to the guidelines outlined in legislation, such as the Oath of Office and Statement of Values, as well as in policies like the Code of Conduct and Ethics.
To summarize, this essay has discussed the decisions made by the police officers who handled the Lane Cove Break and Enter case. Through an examination of the regulations and policies of the NSWPF, it is clear that multiple breaches have occurred. It is vital for law enforcement to acknowledge accountability for their actions. The presence of legislation like the Oath of Office, Statement of Values, and Code of Conduct and Ethics policy holds great significance as these principles should guide all conduct to uphold legality and guarantee public safety.
Reference
The following sources contain information related to police culture, police malpractice, prospects for change, challenges for police and Australian communities, police informers, negotiation, power, and professional ethics:
– Findlay, M. (2004). Cop culture, police malpractice and prospects for change. In Introducing policing: Challenges for police and Australian communities. UK. Oxford University Press.
– Rowcliffe, V. Grooters, Sgt R. Clowry, K. (2010). ADPP Session 2 Readings [Internal Study Mode] Goulburn: Charles Sturt University.
– Settle, R. (1995). Police Informers: Negotiation and Power. Leichhardt, NSW: The Federation Pass.
– The PPP123 Team (2010). Professional Ethics [PPP123 Study Guide] Goulburn: Charles Sturt University.
– Unknown. (n. d.). Definition: Ethics. In Webster’s Online Dictionary.
Retrieved September 27, 2010, from http://www. websters-online-dictionary. org/definitions/ethics? cx=partner-pub-0939450753529744%3Av0qd01-tdlq&cof=FORID%3A9&ie=UTF-8&q=ethics&sa=Search#922. Unknown. (n. d.). Definition: Misconduct. In Webster’s Online Dictionary. Retrieved October 10, 2010, from http://www. websters-online-dictionary. org/definitions/misconduct? cx=partner-p ub-0939450753529744%3Av0qd01-tdlq&cof=FORID%3A9&ie=UTF-8&q=misconduct&sa=Search#922. Legislation Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 Police regulation Act 2008
