If You Have Issues Viewing Or Accessing This File Contact Us at NCJRS.Gov
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. ! i t ~CJFRS OCT 14 !980 ACQU~511Ylt,Ol~5 This is an authorized facsimile and was produced by microfilm-xerography in 1980 by UNIVERSITY MICROFILMS INTERNATIONAL Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A. London, England 79-14,727 PEREZ, Douglas Werner POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY: A QUESTION OF BALANCE. University of California, Berkeley, Ph.D., 1978 University Microfilms Intern ational 3oo..z.b.o~,, A°oA,~o,. M, ,,,o, 30/32 Mortimer St., London W1N 7RA, England ® Copyright 1978 by DOUGLAS WERNER PEREZ All Rights Reserved INFORMATION TO USERS This was produced from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction. !. The sign or "target" for pagesapparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". if it was possible to obtain the missing page~s) or section, they are spliced into the f'dm along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure you of complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark it is an indication that the film inspector noticed either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, or duplicate copy. Unless we meant to delete copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed, you will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photo- graphed the photographer has followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps, if necessary, sectioning is continued again-beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. For any illustrations that cannot be reproduced satisfactorily by xerography, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and tipped into your xerographic copy. Requests can be made to our Dissertations Customer Services Department. 5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases we have f'dmed the best available copy. ;o ~EO~-ORO ;~0 ',%~. LO,~O().~ ','.'C IR 4EJ. E ~,.~(';L AND PLEASE NOTE: Pages xxxvi and 468 are missing in number only. Text follows. Filmed as received. UNIVERSITY MICROFILMS INTERNATIONAL. Police Accountability: A Question of Balance By Douglas Werner Perez A.B. (L~iversity of California) 1970 DISSERTATION Submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in Political Science in the GRADUATE DIVISION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY Approved: , ; ~ -- , ... A~.~..~...2:.~:~-,:~:i~ ....... ./:/.~.~,j..~ -~. Chairman U J Da{e" "" ..~~. I~...~ ~_~.~...:.~../(4.../~< ... ............ ~]~E f~C~.;'~q~ ,~- ~;L,~.,,,~R~rlr D" 9., 1978 ............ .............. ,. % POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY: A QUESTION OF BALANCE Douglas W. Perez Berkeley, 1978 TO: Sandy Muir Friend, Compatriot, Teacher When I see Sandy light up a classroom and the minds of his students, I am reminded of the words Alcibiades used to describe another great teacher, Socrates~ "When I listened to Particles and other fine orators, I thought: They speak well. But nothing like this happened to me, my soul was not thrown into turmoil I was not enraged at myself for living so like a slave...He is the only man who ever made me feel ashamed." Sandy's intellectual power is so great, his confidence so apparent that he makes his students question their own values and capabilities without attacking their individual worth. He is as disturbing as he is lovable. And thus, he is the cons~ate teacher. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This study was completed under a CETA Project grant, developed by Jim Newman, Personnel Director for the City of Oakland, and George Hart, Oakland Chief of Police. I trust that the content of the work amply illustrates the ticklish nature of police review and of police discipline. Because of the emotional and political import of this sub- ject, it took courage and integrity for these men to open up their citizen complaint process to an academician's scrutiny. I am eternally indebted to each for the oppor- tunity to work on the problem of police accountability from the "inside". Chief Hart deserves the respect of the people of Oakland and of his policemen for his intelligent, sensitive, and honest approach to police review. His deeply felt con- fidence in the people of his City and in his patrolmen is epitomized by the total freedom of access which he has allow- ed this project. I am also greatly indebted to many other men who have allowed access to review organizations throughout the country. Jim Casey, Pete Meredith, Fred O'Hearn, Kit Perrow, Odell Sylvester, and Joe Rodrigues were each instrumental in open- ing up their review systems for study. In doing so, they all have indicated not only a confidence in their own systems, iii but an interest in the potential development of new know- ledge. This study could not have been undertaken without their assistance. Within these various organizations, many practitioners have lent their cooperation to this comparative effort. I must thank these street policemen and review system per- sonnel for taking time from their worh days to reflect upon the issues of accountability which appear on these pages. Though a very limited list, I would like to specifically thank Bob Cancilla, Joe Colletti, Nolan Darnell, Roy Fox, John Gackowski, Peter Hagberg, Wanda Hutchinson, Ron Leon, 5111 Moulder, Dick Rainey, Jim Simonson, Mike Stamp, and Dave Sylstra for their ideas and criticism. My debt to them and to their fellows is more than they may know. I also acknowledge the tremendous contribution made to the study by three "intellectual dilectants" Dan Carter, David Leonard, and David Richman. Though neither practitioners nor students of police review systems per se, these men have shared with me reflections upon organizational life which have greatly illuminated the work. I would also like to thank the Survey Research Center at Berkeley and in parti- cular, Selma Monsky and Steve Rosenstone for their method- olical advise. Three men who are experts in the field of administra- tive regulation helped me considerably with their unique talents for analysis and writing. Jerry Skolnick first posed for me the idea of doing a comparative study of police re- iv view systems. Bob Kagan showed me a problem with my ini- tial analytical framework and helped me to solve it. And of course, there has been Sandy. Constant in his enthusiasm and flawless in his analysis, Sandy Muir's guid- ance has directed me far beyond what this study has pro- duced. It was he who first interested me in studying the police, some ten years ago. And as the reader will soon discover, his development of the policeman's experience with coercive power is critical to this study. He is without question, the finest teacher I have ever known. This work can be dedicated to none other. The support of my wife, Jeannie, has been crucial to the study's completion. She has tided me through those rough times in such an enterprise when one feels that it all might never fall into place. For her patience, criticism, faith, optimism, and love, there could be no substitute. To all of them go my deepest thanks. Doug Perez Berkeley, August, 1978 v TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Introduction vii - xxxvi Part I: The Problem of Police Accountability Chapter One: Accountability ................ 1 - 18 Chapter Two: Social Influences Upon Police Behavior ...................... 19 - 42 Chapter Three: The Police Experience ....... 43 - 66 Part II: The Limits of Regulation Chapter Four: Non-Administrative Regulation 67 - 90 Chapter Five: The Limits of Administrative Regulation ................... 91 - 115 Chapter Six: Legal Limitations ............. 116 - 128 Part III: Review Systems in Operation Chapter Seven: Criteria of Evaluation ....... 129 - 159 Chapter Eight: Non-Centralized Control ...... 160 - 196 Chapter Nine: Internal Affairs .............. 197 - 258 Chapter Ten: Civilian Review ................ 259 - 309 Chapter Eleven: Hybrid Review Systems ....... 310 - 359 Chapter Twelve: The Ombudsman .............. 360 - 398 vi PAGE Part IV: Implications Chapter Thirteen: Comparative Review Systems .............. 399 - 423 Chapter Fourteen: What Have We Learned About Police Accountability? 424 - 455 Chapter Fifteen: Conclusion ............... 456 - 466 Methodological Note .............................. 467 - 487 Bibliographical Essay .......................... xxxvii - xxxxiv Appendix A Table I XXXXV Table II XXXXVi Table III XXXXVii Appendix B XXXXViii - XXXXXii vii INTRODUCTION A concern for the accountability of governmental actors is endemic to American political institutions. Indeed, account- ability as a concept is integrated into the social fabric of America. This study compares various methods of reviewing alleged abuses of power by public agents. " Specifically, it focuses upon street policemen as political and legal actors needful of review. We will examine five different types of administrative review systems in six police departments, as instruments for increasing accountability. The nature of the police function requires that a great deal of discretion and power be entrusted to these actors. The emotional impact of what policemen do is such that their mal- practice is always topical, always a source of public debate and concern. Thus, the police present particularly fascinating issues for the student of administrative accountability. They are extremely difficult to monitor through externally imposed regulator~ mechanisms. Concomitantly, self-regulating social- izing processes within the police subculture are particularly effective in controlling police behavior. Professional solid- arity and norms of conduct are tremendously important to the street policeman.