2
Abstract
Dishonesty in law enforcement agencies is a major and very controversial topic. Within this
topic, this issue of whether an officer should be terminated for dishonesty is often discussed.
Research has shown that while there are few jurisdictions that have a public policy enforcing
termination for dishonesty, there are inter-agency policies which address the issue of dishonesty,
and provide consequences for lying. Policies and enforcement vary from agency to agency. The
need for public policy requiring the termination of law enforcement officers when caught being
dishonest is an overdue necessity. Having policies within an agency is not enough, and has not
had the desired effect as would public policy. This issue important in order to maintain the
credibility of law enforcement agencies as a whole, improve public relations, and to overall serve
and protect.
Keywords: Dishonesty, policy, law enforement
3
Final Paper
Honesty is the best policy. This old adage is commonly used and referred to when discussing
dishonesty. It is commonly taught at a young age that in order to be considered a “good person”,
honesty should always be the final choice. This lesson can be applied to almost any facet of life,
but in regards to law enforcement, it is one of the most important conversations to be had.
Honesty in law enforcement agencies should not only be a choice, but a requirement. While the
efficiency of law enforcement agencies require a high level of honesty from all employees, from
personnel to the police chief, it is especially important for officers to maintain a high level of
integrity in their positions. “An officer’s job is a position of trust and the public has the right to
the highest standard of behavior from those they invest with the power and authority of a law
enforcement officer…Dishonesty is incompatible with the public trust” (Wilkinson, 2014).
Public policy should reflect the standards to which law enforcement officers are held, regardless
of the situation or circumstances, and include the required termination of officers who are
dishonest. When the very ones who are responsible for enforcing the public policies and laws
cannot be trusted, what can be done?
It is Simple, but is it Fair?
The term “fair” can be defined in several different ways. Per the Merriam-Webster dictionary,
“fair” is defined as, “marked by impartiality and honesty; free from self-interest, prejudice, or
favoritism; conforming with the established rules” (Merriam-Webster, 2014). In many
jurisdictions, it is outlined for an officer during their recruitment, what will be expected of them.
One of these many things is honesty and integrity. An example of this is the Sacramento Police
Department’s General and Professional Conduct agreement that each officer is trained on and
required to sign and agree to. In this agreement, the officer agrees to “respect and protect the
4
rights of individuals and perform their services with honesty and integrity” (Sacramento Police
Department, 2017). The agreement includes the disciplinary action that will be taken against any
officer who does not comply with the agreement, including termination. In respect to the
previously mentioned term “fair”, it is beyond fair to hold an officer accountable to the rules by
which their employment is governed. Law enforcement agencies should conform to the rules in
which have been created. Law enforcement agencies and the government hold citizens to this
same standard, with even more severe consequences. A person can be arrested for lying to a
police officer, lying in court, or lying during an investigation. So it is it fair to simply terminate
an officer for lying? Yes, especially if the consequence was understood beforehand.
The Effects on Personnel and the Agency
With a policy in place that would require the termination of an officer who has been found to be
dishonest, law enforcement agency personnel may be affected in some ways. For an officer who
was found to be dishonest in one situation, he may have been a great and upstanding officer in
many other situations. Should an agency lose the officer over one incident of dishonesty? Yes.
As a leader, several questions may arise that may not have adequate answers. Has this officer
ever lied before? Is this just the first time the officer has been caught? If the officer has lied
before, what were the inherent consequences of the lie? Will they lie again? While the officer
may be exemplary in other areas of the job, lack of integrity and honesty casts a dark shadow
over all of those attributes. Furthermore, as explained in the article Should Police Officers Who
Lie Be Terminated as a Matter of Public Policy?, “…proven record of dishonesty prevents him
from useful service as a law enforcement officer. To require his reinstatement to a position of
great public trust in which he cannot possibly serve violates public policy” (Spector, 2008, p. 1).
Once that lie has been discovered, the officer is no longer of use to the agency, and compromises
5
the credibility of the agency as a whole. As seen in the court cases such as Brady v. Maryland
and Giglio v. United States, it is the duty and obligation of the prosecutor to disclose any
exculpatory evidence to the defense. “This includes information that may be used to impeach the
credibility of government witnesses, including law enforcement officers” (Judge, 2016). Is it
effective for our agency to employ a police officer who has lost credibility to testify in a court of
law?
Author’s Conclusion
In the article, Spector comes to the conclusion that there is a need for public policy that would
require an officer to be terminated in the face of dishonesty. He explains that the benefits of said
policy would improve law enforcement agency credibility in the public eye, more successful
prosecutions, and fewer liability cases. He also discusses the idea that such a policy will help
with the “code of silence” issue that is seen in many law enforcement agencies (Spector, 2008, p.
3).
Policy Recommendation
It is recommended that a policy be put into place with very clearly defined rules that prohibit
dishonesty in any form within the law enforcement agency – except that for investigative
purposes. In these cases, the investigator or officer must have prior consent and good cause. The
policy should not only apply to officers, but to all staff within the law enforcement agency. Also,
the policy should include that dishonesty is a no-tolerance issue, and that termination will be the
result above all circumstances.
6
References
Judge, L. (2016). Disclosing officer untruthfulness to the defense: Is a liars squad coming to your
town? The Police Chief, 1–5.
Merriam-Webster. (2014). Merriam Webster’s collegiate dictionary. Merriam-Webster.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fair
Sacramento Police Department. (2017). General orders - general and professional conduct.
https://www.cityofsacramento.org/Police/Transparency/General-Orders
Spector, E. (2008). Chief’s counsel: Should police officers who lie be terminated as a matter of
public policy? Police Chief Magazine, 1–3.
Wilkinson, A. (2014). Truth or consequences: Choose the road that avoids career disaster. 1–5.
EBSCO Host. https://www.law.berkeley.edu/files/Honesty_is_the_Best_Policy.pdf
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
