Police Discretion

Police Discretion

Bill Piersol

About six months ago I was with my wife in our minivan rolling down a hill on a wide-open divided four lane highway in Southwestern Pennsylvania. At the bottom of the hill, I noticed a police officer parked under an overpass, and as I passed him, I noticed him start moving and then he did a U turn and started in my direction and turned on his blue lights.  Sure enough, he got up behind me, and I pulled over.  He came over to my window and asked me if I knew why he stopped me, and I said, "I guess I was speeding." He said I was doing 66 in a 55.  As I was pulling out my license, he asked me what the other ID was in my wallet, and I said it was a retired military ID card. He asked for it, and after he had given it back to me, he said, "have a nice day" and walked back to his car.  I was the beneficiary of his discretion.  Now I'm not a chronic speeder but back a few years ago I received a couple of tickets, so I know what's it like also to get rung up for a speeding ticket.  So it brings up the question is police discretion good, bad, or somewhere in the middle.

In the performance of his or her duties, a police officer can exercise a high degree of discretion (Banks, 2013).  Discretion though is generally exercised within parameters - including what the police officer's peers would generally approve of (consistent with the rules), and two, those that fall within community norms.   If it falls outside those two, it could be improper use of discretion,  or even  illegal (LaFrance, 2011).   Proper use of discretion includes what is the best use of an officer's time (Banks, 2013).  Depending on the issue, a verbal warning could make sufficient impact while keeping the officer on the street instead of in the precinct doing paperwork.  There are instances of discretion though that are immediately subject to review - i.e. use of deadly force.  Use of deadly force is explicitly covered in written police policies and rules (Albrecht, 2011).  Those policies and rules will be used when answering the question "Did the police officer have to shoot that person."   In other circumstances, the officer will have more leeway in using discretion.  This might include how to deal with a youthful offender.   Depending on the nature of the criminal activity, whether it be a minor delinquency or something more major, the police officer may decide not to arrest a juvenile due to the consequences of an arrest.  Some police agencies facilitate discretion options by making arrangements with other agencies in which a juvenile may be referred to instead of being arrested  (Schulenberg and Warren, 2009).

Most citizens, and police officers, believe that police should have wide latitude in utilizing discretion (Banks, 2013).  I agree with that within the limitations of what most people would consider appropriate; i.e. very limited discretion on when to use deadly force or not.  Discretion has to be applied in a way that appears fair across the board - it should not appear to be inconsistently applied.   Police need to know what their overall objective is in regards to public safety, and be empowered to make decisions that are in alignment with that while allowing them to exercise discretion when it makes sense.  Their actions though are under a microscope, so they need to be able to defend their decisions to their peers, their supervisors, and to the public.

                                                                            References

Albrecht, J. F. (2011). Examining police discretion and the use of firearms involving the New York City police department. Pakistan Journal Of Criminology, 3(2/3), 1-10.

Banks, C. (2013). Criminal justice ethics: Theory and practice (3d. ed.).  Thousand Oaks, CA:  SAGE Publications.

Schulenberg, J. L., & Warren, D. (2009). Police discretion with apprehended youth: assessing the impact of juvenile specialization. Police Practice & Research, 10(1), 3-16. doi:10.1080/15614260802128609