The More Things Change…
By Jim Conley • Jan 30th, 2008 • Email This Post to a Friend •
Print This Post
• Email this author
Here is the 1992 so-called citizen’s complaint investigation by Brookline Police resulting from a 1992 field interrogation of Arthur Conquest. Though Conquest never made a formal complaint, Brian Sullivan, the deputy town administrator at the time, initiated the process on the basis of an “open letter” written by Conquest.
Here’s a passage from Sergeant W.D. Ellis that, given recent events, must be part of the second-to-none training Brookline’s officers receive:
It appears, as Conquest’s letter affirms, that he went beyond reasonable questions to those who stopped him. That he attempted to intimidate, badger, criticise [sic], stereotype, blame, coerce and even prevent Brookline police officers from legitimate, necessary and routine response to a serious crime recently perpetrated nearby. His railing against those officers only served to heighten initial suspicion and observation of him. Conquest’s unreasonable harangue against Brookline police prolonged what I believe was a routine field interview…
First of all, the rape that served as the reason for the stop occurred on Cottage Farm Road. Conquest was stopped on School Street (across from the library) 12 hours after the incident. And the statement is eerily reminiscent of the opinion column the Brookline police officer’s union penned to accuse Conquest of aggravated arrogance.
And since when is asking questions of police - especially on the basis of a suspected felony - beyond reasonable? And who gets to decide what’s reasonable?
As I said in a post of many months ago, policing is a tough job and we should be grateful to those who do it well. But, there are those on the force who have yet to fully appreciate that the uniform does not give them absolute immunity from the laws and constitutional provisions that protect the innocent.
Helping officers to appreciate the limits of their power is the job of the police chief and the Brookline selectmen. They don’t get it. And that’s why we need a civilian police review board.
Update: So as to avoid any confusion, Conquest’s “open letter” was not a citizen’s complaint request. He never sent it to the Brookline Police. But it’s clear that as far back as 16 years ago, an internal investigation at BPD is nothing more than assembling police statements to justify their acts and blaming the complaint for any harm suffered.
I hear that there’s more than a good chance that the May town meeting will feature a proposal to institute a civilian police review board in Brookline. And that’s why the selectmen have assembled a sham review committee that will report back to them “after Labor Day.”
Update (2): I appear to have misread the police report, the stop was not 12 hours later but less than two hours later than the attack.
Jim Conley is publisher of On Brookline.
Email this author | All posts by Jim Conley
PROCEDURAL JUSTICE
I have made earlier comments on this subject. I do hope that the panel of experts to be appointed explore this.
Sgt. Ellis’ passage suggests quite a bit of sensitivity on the part of BPD. There is a First Amendment issue involved with incidents such as this. For those interested in this aspect, take a look at “Digitus Impudicus: The Middle Finger and the Law” by Ira P. Robbins available via an abstract at:
http://ssrn.com/abstract=982405
This article is lenghty, running 81 pages. In discussing the 1974 Lewis v. New Orleans U.S. Sup. Court decision (415 US 130), the author states, at page 51:
“Although the majority opinion declined to decide whether police officers should be held to a higher standard than the average citizen when faced with verbal criticism or offensive speech, Justice Powell addressed the issue in a concurring opinion. In Powell’s view, a ‘properly trained officer’ should exhibit a higher degree of self-restraint than an average citizen would exhibit in similar circumstances, meaning that the officer should be less likely to react violently to offensive language or criticism.”
Let’s see. If the rape suspect were white, in a town that has a lot more whites than African Americans, how many whites would the BPD have questioned as suspects that were riding bikes some distance and some hours from the time of the rape? Is there a suggestion that because there are only a small number of African Americans in Brookline, it is appropriate to stop them in a dragnet? Why that might be called profiling.
And what is there to understand about criminal procedure when you’re innocent and stopped by the police, especially if you’re an African American in Brookline? What would you do if you were in a similar situation, bend over?