Police Prison?

[Kirkhill]

Ex-cop: Verdict in Floyd case, others show cracks in blue wall. Here's what has to change.

Locking up abusive or incompetent officers is necessary, and may finally lead to changes in police culture that will prevent misconduct, tragedy

www.usatoday.com

This story caught my eye. Or at least the headline did.

Spurious thought emerged.

The Police are not military. They are civilians.
They don't have a separated code of justice and system of courts. Nor should they have.

But should they have their own national prison and system of brigs?

One of the problems with charging and convicting a police officer is that they will end up mixing with their unhappy clients.
Is it unreasonable to suggest this may encourage their mates to cut them some slack because of the risk of cruel and unusual punishment?

A police version of Fort Leavenworth perhaps?
Or a return to Depot in Regina for some refresher training?

 

[lenaitch]

As headline-worthy as they are, I can't believe the numbers would justify the cost. In the US, unless it was a federal conviction, each state would have to have their own facility. I don't think you can argue that they should exist under the civilian justice and court system but not the same penal system.

 

[dapaterson]

A police officer found to having wilfully perjured shroud be put in the general population.

"Pour encourager les autres"

 

[lenaitch]

A police officer found to having wilfully perjured shroud be put in the general population.

"Pour encourager les autres"

If you can't be a shining example, then at least be a dire warning.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Well you have the military prison which apparently is under utilized, so have it at least as an alternative they can elect for.

 

[Furniture]

Maybe my understanding is a bit off, but I thought the idea of modern policing is that the police are civilians, civilians with a job that involves enforcing the law, they aren't supposed to be separate from civilians, with special rules and whatnot.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

Police officers are Civilians who are given authority to make sure every other Civilian follows the rules. Military members are Civilians who are there to defend other Civilians against other armed aggressors.

Military prisons are used for offences committed while actively defending the civilian populace against other armed aggressors. Civilian prisons are for civilians who break the rules within civil society. A police offer who commits a crime within said society are still civilians.

To establish a Police Prison is to codify the poisonous belief that police officers are a separate class within society. A "sheepdog" is still a member of the herd, and should be seen by the sheep as such. A solider going to Club Ed for being an idiot while in uniform is one thing, having a criminal going to "special prison" because he used to hold a trusted position within society, is entirely unpalatable in my eyes.

 

[Kirkhill]

Police officers are Civilians who are given authority to make sure every other Civilian follows the rules. Military members are Civilians who are there to defend other Civilians against other armed aggressors.

Military prisons are used for offences committed while actively defending the civilian populace against other armed aggressors. Civilian prisons are for civilians who break the rules within civil society. A police offer who commits a crime within said society are still civilians.

To establish a Police Prison is to codify the poisonous belief that police officers are a separate class within society. A "sheepdog" is still a member of the herd, and should be seen by the sheep as such. A solider going to Club Ed for being an idiot while in uniform is one thing, having a criminal going to "special prison" because he used to hold a trusted position within society, is entirely unpalatable in my eyes.

I agree with the principle. It is the practice that bothers me.

The death penalty and corporal punishment are both beyond the pale in Canadian society. And yet if you put a police officer into general population then he or she risks both. Both fall into the "cruel and unusual punishment" area. Alternately isolating them on their own is also cruel and unusual punishment.

The purpose of this exercise was to find a punishment regime that the police officers themselves would accept so that they would be willing to subject themselves and their fellow officers to it without cruel and unusual risks.

 

[dapaterson]

Ontario has a police act that no longer applies after retirement for offences committed while serving.

The usual situation is for the accused to stretch out the process on paid leave of absence, then retire the day before the hearing.

Not a system that inspires public confidence.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Ontario has a police act that no longer applies after retirement for offences committed while serving.

The usual situation is for the accused to stretch out the process on paid leave of absence, then retire the day before the hearing.

Not a system that inspires public confidence.

I could use the same line on you military folk.

 

[dapaterson]

Military personnel remain subject to the code of service discipline even after release, for acts committed while subject to the CSD.

So "I'm releasing, can't charge me" is not a thing anymore.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

So my haircut wasn't right can follow me to civi land??

 

[dapaterson]

Depends on when you left. If it was before the NDA was amended, you're clear

If it was after, then possibly.

That said, Bill C77 once implemented will materially change the military justice system, replacing summary trials with summary proceedings, and making numerous other changes...

 

[lenaitch]

Ontario has a police act that no longer applies after retirement for offences committed while serving.

The usual situation is for the accused to stretch out the process on paid leave of absence, then retire the day before the hearing.

Not a system that inspires public confidence.

Given that it is specific regulatory employment law, few should be surprised. When the most serious sentence that a hearing officer can impose is dismissal, and all of the lesser sentences involve things like forfeiture of rank, pay, accrued time credits, etc., continuing jurisdiction would be rather redundant.

I only gave it a quick read, but although I couldn't find a specific 'loss of jurisdiction' statement in the RCMP Act, it appears that its most serious sentence is also dismissal so it would seem, by implication, it is similar.

 

[brihard]

Given that it is specific regulatory employment law, few should be surprised. When the most serious sentence that a hearing officer can impose is dismissal, and all of the lesser sentences involve things like forfeiture of rank, pay, accrued time credits, etc., continuing jurisdiction would be rather redundant.

I only gave it a quick read, but although I couldn't find a specific 'loss of jurisdiction' statement in the RCMP Act, it appears that its most serious sentence is also dismissal so it would seem, by implication, it is similar.

The RCMP Code of Conduct is found within the RCMP Regulations, under the RCMP Act. Jurisdiction over RCMP code of conduct matters is lost if a member discharges. Potential penalties are anything from minor forfeiture of pay and leave, demotion, reassignment, ordered to receive certain treatment or medical care, all the way up to suspension, ordered resignation, or forced discharge. There's no custodial sanction. For low level stuff there's no right to be represented by counsel or other representative, but these matters are also limited in the punishments that can be meted out.

This process is separate from any criminal or other statutory charges, and of course if a Mountie is charged with something criminal, they can't dodge that by resigning.

Interestingly, and perhaps uniquely, there's a provision in the RCMP Superannuation Act and Regulations whereby a member who is compulsorily retired for misconduct or who resigns and is subsequently convicted of an indictable offense that would have constituted misconduct had they stayed in, can lose some or all of their pension benefits and only get a return of contributions. Anecdotally I've heard of this being exercised a bit more frequently in recent years.

 

[dapaterson]

That's fascinating, there are no such stipulations in the CFSA or its related regulations. Perhaps parallel amendments are in order, we could dub them The Williams changes.

 

[brihard]

That's fascinating, there are no such stipulations in the CFSA or its related regulations. Perhaps parallel amendments are in order, we could dub them The Williams changes.

Indeed. CAF could definitely use it. In the RCMP superannuation act and regs, search the word ‘misconduct’ and you’ll find the sections quickly.