Abstract
The rules of ethical conduct should be followed by all police officers. All the officers are required to comply with these guidelines notwithstanding their position, rank, or location. The case State v. Steele is an example of police misconduct, which has provoked a clash of opinions in society. The police officer used his official position for personal benefit and showed rudeness and impropriety about the citizens while forcing them to perform actions they were reluctant to make. This case has revealed the need for reinforcement of ethical behavior in all the power structures.
Introduction
It is worth noting that the rules of ethical conduct apply to all police officers inclusively. Every police officer is obliged to comply with these rules regardless of their position, special rank, or location. Also, the objectives of the police are to serve the society and to protect the rights and freedoms of citizens, to combat crime, and to support public safety and order based on ethics and human values (Hayes, 2015). Nevertheless, history had revealed the cases when police officers violated not only the rules of ethical conduct but also the integral rights of citizens. The case State v. Steele is an example of police misconduct, which has provoked a clash of opinions in society. The purpose of this paper is to review and analyze this case and to evaluate the implications of this misdemeanor.
Details and Implications
In the year 2009, Julian Steele was investigating several robberies in the neighborhood under his inspection. After one of the robberies, the police came to the conclusion that Alicia Maxton might somehow be involved or linked to these crimes, and Steele started an investigation on this assumption. He found out that the woman had three children and he tracked them down. He forcefully took one of her sons to the police department where he interrogated the young man and forced him to make a false confession in the robberies and recorded what Alicia’s son said (State v. Steele, 2013). After that, he tracked the woman down and made her have a sexual affair with him under the pretext that he was the only one who could help her son (State v. Steele, 2013). Apart from that, before the contact with the mother, the police officer persuaded the school not to inform her that the boy was taken to the police station. Also, when the case started unraveling, the man tried to justify his misconduct stating that he never believed the child was the perpetrator and everything he did was to make the mother confess that she was the actual robber. Apart from the unethical attitude towards the woman, he broke the law several times persuading the school to break its regulations and interrogating a minor without letting him know his rights.
Code of Conduct and Ethical Responsibility
According to the code of conduct, the police officer has no right to restrict the freedom of a person unless there are legal grounds, which has been violated by Steele. Moreover, the police are obliged to explain to the detainee his or her rights and to provide an opportunity to use the service of legal counsel, which was also disregarded by him. The police must inform the third party of their detention. Under no circumstances, law enforcement officers can subject individuals to torture or intimidation and force to engage in sexual or other illegal contacts (Neudorfer, 2014). Most importantly, the police are not allowed to use their official position for personal benefit and to show arrogance, rudeness, impropriety about the perpetrators of the crime, the suspects, or any other persons. The ethical responsibility of police officers on duty includes the obligation to ensure the due attitude and respect for the detainee and any other person (Girod, 2013). Applying coercive measures to the perpetrator is possible only in cases stipulated by law, which was not the case for Steele. Therefore, he has broken several rules and violated people’s integral rights.
Evaluation and Conclusion
The police misconduct has provoked a clash of opinions since many people questioned whether Alicia Maxton was forced to has a sexual affair with the officer. Many people assumed that she was decent enough to know the legal procedures and she was aware of the fact that her contact with Steele would not make any difference for her son’s case (Lynch, 2013). Apart from that, this occurrence has undermined the trust of the neighborhood residents in the police department and resulted in negative perceptions of it.
Steele should be subject to discipline regarding the following aspects:
- intimidation;
- abduction;
- sexual battery;
- rape;
- extortion.
Unfortunately, there could be no recommended course of action for Steele since, after the imprisonment, he could no longer work as the police officer. However, the general guidelines for the officers after minor misconduct include control over their behavior, feelings, and emotions, not allowing personal sympathies or antipathies to influence official decisions (Cox, Marchionna, & Fitch, 2015). The police must approach all the citizens equally regardless of their professional or social status. Moreover, each officer should adhere to the official style of behavior based on self-discipline, which will be expressed in professional competence.
References
Cox, S., Marchionna, S., & Fitch, B. (2015). Introduction to policing. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Girod, R. (2013). Police liability and risk management. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Hayes, S. (2015). Criminal justice ethics. London, UK: Routledge.
Lynch, T. (2013). The case of officer Julian Steele. Web.
Neudorfer, K. (2014). Sexual exploitation and abuse in UN peacekeeping. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
State v. Steele, 138 Ohio St.3d 1, 2013-Ohio-2470. (2013). Web.