Jump to content

Contempt of cop: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
ChildofMidnight (talk | contribs)
43,041 edits
tagging as dubious. this is one point of view and its not how I read the source. I don't see it anywhere established that it's illegal or misconduct to arrest disruptive persons. Maybe it should be?
ChildofMidnight (talk | contribs)
43,041 edits
moving bit that has nothing to do with race. this article is a mess
Line 15: Line 15:
In ''[http://openjurist.org/259/f3d/1077/united-states-of-america-v-nolan-l-poocha United States v. Poocha]'', 259 F.3d 1077 (9th Cir. 2001), Judge [[Stephen Reinhardt]] wrote for the 2-1 majority that, "criticism of the police, profane or otherwise, is not a crime."</ref>
In ''[http://openjurist.org/259/f3d/1077/united-states-of-america-v-nolan-l-poocha United States v. Poocha]'', 259 F.3d 1077 (9th Cir. 2001), Judge [[Stephen Reinhardt]] wrote for the 2-1 majority that, "criticism of the police, profane or otherwise, is not a crime."</ref>
The [[United States Supreme Court]] ruled in 1942 that [[fighting words]] that "tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace" are not protected speech, but later cases have interpreted this narrowly,<ref name=SF>{{cite web |url=http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2001/08/08/MN191833.DTL |title=Swearing at police is criticism, not crime / Appeals court overturns 2 convictions |first=Bob |last=Egelko |format= |work=[[San Francisco Chronicle]]|date=2001-08-08|accessdate=2009-07-27}}</ref> especially in relation to law enforcement officers.<ref name="U.S.A. v. Nolan L. Poocha"/><ref>However, in 2004 the Supreme Court, without ruling on the merits, allowed a [[Montana Supreme Court]] ruling to stand that unprovoked profane utterances to a county deputy constituted fighting words. See:{{cite web |url=http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/news.aspx?id=13272 |title=Supreme Court won't hear dispute over cursing at cops |format= |publisher=First Amendment Center |accessdate=2009-07-27|quote=Today the justices declined without comment to review his appeal in Robinson v. Montana. Their refusal does not address the merits of the issue. By declining to hear Robinson's appeal, justices left undisturbed a Montana Supreme Court ruling that unprovoked utterances are not protected.}}</ref>
The [[United States Supreme Court]] ruled in 1942 that [[fighting words]] that "tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace" are not protected speech, but later cases have interpreted this narrowly,<ref name=SF>{{cite web |url=http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2001/08/08/MN191833.DTL |title=Swearing at police is criticism, not crime / Appeals court overturns 2 convictions |first=Bob |last=Egelko |format= |work=[[San Francisco Chronicle]]|date=2001-08-08|accessdate=2009-07-27}}</ref> especially in relation to law enforcement officers.<ref name="U.S.A. v. Nolan L. Poocha"/><ref>However, in 2004 the Supreme Court, without ruling on the merits, allowed a [[Montana Supreme Court]] ruling to stand that unprovoked profane utterances to a county deputy constituted fighting words. See:{{cite web |url=http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/news.aspx?id=13272 |title=Supreme Court won't hear dispute over cursing at cops |format= |publisher=First Amendment Center |accessdate=2009-07-27|quote=Today the justices declined without comment to review his appeal in Robinson v. Montana. Their refusal does not address the merits of the issue. By declining to hear Robinson's appeal, justices left undisturbed a Montana Supreme Court ruling that unprovoked utterances are not protected.}}</ref>

"Contempt-of-cop" has been called a form of "interactional discrimination" (i.e., [[discrimination]] against people more likely to "talk back" to the police, such as young black men in the U.S.).<ref>Coleman, [http://books.google.ch/books?id=pU-h7wulivMC&pg=PA136 136].</ref>


==Racial aspects==
==Racial aspects==
"Contempt-of-cop" has been called a form of "interactional discrimination" (i.e., [[discrimination]] against people more likely to "talk back" to the police, such as young black men in the U.S.).<ref>Coleman, [http://books.google.ch/books?id=pU-h7wulivMC&pg=PA136 136].</ref> The [[Seattle Post-Intelligencer]] conducted a study in 2008 in that city, and found that "African-Americans are arrested for the sole crime of obstructing eight times as often as whites when population is taken into account."<ref name=PI>{{cite news |url=http://www.seattlepi.com/local/353020_obstructmain28.asp |title=Blacks are arrested on 'contempt of cop' charge at higher rate |first1=Eric |last1=Nalder |first2=Lewis |last2=Kamb |first3=Daniel |last3=Lathrop|format= |work=[[Seattle Post-Intelligencer]] |date=2008-02-28|accessdate=2009-07-26|quote=The P-I treated an obstructing arrest as "stand-alone" if that was the only charge or if all other charges were for closely related offenses, such as resisting arrest. The number of black men who faced stand-alone obstructing charges during the six-year period reviewed is equal to nearly 2 percent of Seattle's black male population.}}</ref> The [[New Jersey Attorney General]] also found a significant number of "contempt-of-cop" cases while investigating [[racial profiling]] by the [[New Jersey State Police]], and concluded that "improper attitude and demeanor" of officers toward the public was a nationwide problem.<ref name=NJ/>
The [[Seattle Post-Intelligencer]] conducted a study in 2008 in that city, and found that "African-Americans are arrested for the sole crime of obstructing eight times as often as whites when population is taken into account."<ref name=PI>{{cite news |url=http://www.seattlepi.com/local/353020_obstructmain28.asp |title=Blacks are arrested on 'contempt of cop' charge at higher rate |first1=Eric |last1=Nalder |first2=Lewis |last2=Kamb |first3=Daniel |last3=Lathrop|format= |work=[[Seattle Post-Intelligencer]] |date=2008-02-28|accessdate=2009-07-26|quote=The P-I treated an obstructing arrest as "stand-alone" if that was the only charge or if all other charges were for closely related offenses, such as resisting arrest. The number of black men who faced stand-alone obstructing charges during the six-year period reviewed is equal to nearly 2 percent of Seattle's black male population.}}</ref> The [[New Jersey Attorney General]] also found a significant number of "contempt-of-cop" cases while investigating [[racial profiling]] by the [[New Jersey State Police]], and concluded that "improper attitude and demeanor" of officers toward the public was a nationwide problem.<ref name=NJ/>


==Terminology==
==Terminology==

Revision as of 21:07, 28 July 2009

You must add a |reason= parameter to this Cleanup template – replace it with {{Cleanup|reason=<Fill reason here>}}, or remove the Cleanup template.
 "Contempt of cop" is law enforcement jargon in the United States[1][2] for the extralegal "offense"[3] of disrespect by citizens towards police officers.[4] The phrase is often used in connection with police misconduct[dubious – discuss] (e.g., false arrest or police violence)[5] solely as a reaction to such disrespect,[6] rather than for any legitimate law enforcement purpose.[7]

Forms of "contempt-of-cop"

The problem may stem from a type of "occupational arrogance" wherein certain police officers think they are in no way to be challenged or questioned by the public.[8] From such officers' perspective, "contempt of cop" may involve perceived and actual challenges to their authority, including a lack of deference, disobeying instructions,[9] expressing interest in filing a complaint against the officer,[7] or flight from the police.[10] The situation may be exacerbated if other officers witness the contemptuous behavior.[11]

Charges such as the "trilogy" of disorderly conduct, resisting arrest, and assaulting an officer may be cited as official reasons for a "contempt-of-cop" arrest.[7] Obstructing an officer or failure to obey are also cited in "contempt-of-cop" arrests in some jurisdictions, particularly as a stand-alone charge without any other underlying crime.[12][13]

Legality of "contempt-of-cop" arrests

In the United States, freedom of speech is protected under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, so simply being verbally abusive to a police officer is not in itself criminal behavior.[14][15][16][17][18] The United States Supreme Court ruled in 1942 that fighting words that "tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace" are not protected speech, but later cases have interpreted this narrowly,[19] especially in relation to law enforcement officers.[18][20]

"Contempt-of-cop" has been called a form of "interactional discrimination" (i.e., discrimination against people more likely to "talk back" to the police, such as young black men in the U.S.).[21]

Racial aspects

The Seattle Post-Intelligencer conducted a study in 2008 in that city, and found that "African-Americans are arrested for the sole crime of obstructing eight times as often as whites when population is taken into account."[12] The New Jersey Attorney General also found a significant number of "contempt-of-cop" cases while investigating racial profiling by the New Jersey State Police, and concluded that "improper attitude and demeanor" of officers toward the public was a nationwide problem.[8]

Terminology

"Contempt-of-cop" is derived by analogy from contempt of court, which unlike "contempt-of-cop" is an offense in many jurisdictions.[14] The term "contempt-of-cop" was already in use by the 1960s.[5][22] It has also been referred to as "flunking the attitude test".[23]

In crime writing and works about police misconduct, it has become something of a cliché to sardonically refer to "contempt of cop" as the worst possible crime.[24]

See also

References

  • Baruch, Rhoda (2007). Creative Anger: Putting That Powerful Emotion to Good Use. Praeger. ISBN 0275998746. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  • Cashmore, Ellis (1991). Out of Order?: Policing Black People. ISBN 0415037263.
  • Coady, C. A. J. (2000). Violence and Police Culture. Melbourne University Press. ISBN 0522847889. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  • Coleman, Clive (2000). Introducing criminology. Willan. ISBN 1903240093. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  • Collins, Allyson (1998). Shielded From Justice: Police Brutality And Accountability In The United States. Human Rights Watch. ISBN 1564321835.
  • Lawrence, Regina G. (2000). The politics of force. University of California Press. ISBN 0520221923.
  • Shapiro, Steven R. Human rights violations in the United States: A Report on U.S. Compliance With the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. American Civil Liberties Union, Human Rights Watch. ISBN 1-56432-122-3.
  • Steverson, Leonard A. (2007). Policing in America: A Reference Handboo. ABC-Clio. ISBN 1598840436.
  • Walker, Samuel (2005). The new world of police accountability. Sage. ISBN 1412909449.

Footnotes

  1. ^ Baruch et al., 140.
  2. ^ Walker, 55.
  3. ^ Mac Donald, Heather (2009-07-24). "Promoting Racial Paranoia". National Review Online. Retrieved 2009-07-26.
  4. ^ Steverson, 300.
  5. ^ a b Lawrence, 48.
  6. ^ Walker, 52.
  7. ^ a b c Collins, 51.
  8. ^ a b Farmer, John J., Jr.; Zoubek, Paul H. (1999-07-02). "New Jersey Final Attorney General Report on racial profiling". State Police Review Team. Retrieved 2009-07-27.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  9. ^ Shapiro, 119.
  10. ^ Walker, 153.
  11. ^ Page, Clarence (2009-07-26). "Obama's Henry Gates-gate". Real Clear Politics. Retrieved 2009-07-26. Maybe so, but, according to Crowley, Gate[s] was yelling at him in front of his fellow police officers. In long-standing police-civilian etiquette, that's 'contempt of cop.' You disrespect the police officer, the officer has ways of showing you that he has a longer billy club.
  12. ^ a b Nalder, Eric; Kamb, Lewis; Lathrop, Daniel (2008-02-28). "Blacks are arrested on 'contempt of cop' charge at higher rate". Seattle Post-Intelligencer. Retrieved 2009-07-26. The P-I treated an obstructing arrest as "stand-alone" if that was the only charge or if all other charges were for closely related offenses, such as resisting arrest. The number of black men who faced stand-alone obstructing charges during the six-year period reviewed is equal to nearly 2 percent of Seattle's black male population.
  13. ^ Wilham, T.J. (2008-11-25). "N.M. cops can't arrest for 'refusing to obey'". PoliceOne.com. Albuquerque Journal. Retrieved 2009-07-27.
  14. ^ a b Rochman, Bonnie (2009-07-26). "The Gates Case: When Disorderly Conduct is a Cop's Judgment Call". TIME. Retrieved 2009-07-26.  'In contempt of court, you get loud and abusive in a courtroom, and it's against the law,' says [Jon] Shane, now a professor of criminal justice at John Jay who specializes in police policy and practice. 'With contempt of cop, you get loud and nasty and show scorn for a law enforcement officer, but a police officer can't go out and lock you up for disorderly conduct because you were disrespectful toward them.' The First Amendment allows you to say pretty much anything to the police. 'You could tell them to go f--k themselves,' says Shane, 'and that's fine.'  {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help)
  15. ^ Writing for the Court in City of Houston v. Hill, 482 U.S. 451 (1987), Justice Brennan said, "The freedom of individuals verbally to oppose or challenge police action without thereby risking arrest is one of the principal characteristics by which we distinguish a free nation from a police state." — 482 U.S. 451, at 463
  16. ^ In Duran v. City of Douglas, 904 F.2d 1372 (9th Circuit, 1990) the Court held that giving a police officer the "finger" was protected speech. Writing for the Court, Judge Kozinski said, "But disgraceful as Duran's behavior may have been, it was not illegal; criticism of the police is not a crime."
  17. ^ Lower courts have not always been consistent, however, considering some speech to constitute fighting words. See, e.g., David L. Hudson Jr. "Fighting words". Nashville, TN: First Amendment Center. Retrieved 2009-07-26..
  18. ^ a b In United States v. Poocha, 259 F.3d 1077 (9th Cir. 2001), Judge Stephen Reinhardt wrote for the 2-1 majority that, "criticism of the police, profane or otherwise, is not a crime."
  19. ^ Egelko, Bob (2001-08-08). "Swearing at police is criticism, not crime / Appeals court overturns 2 convictions". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved 2009-07-27.
  20. ^ However, in 2004 the Supreme Court, without ruling on the merits, allowed a Montana Supreme Court ruling to stand that unprovoked profane utterances to a county deputy constituted fighting words. See:"Supreme Court won't hear dispute over cursing at cops". First Amendment Center. Retrieved 2009-07-27. Today the justices declined without comment to review his appeal in Robinson v. Montana. Their refusal does not address the merits of the issue. By declining to hear Robinson's appeal, justices left undisturbed a Montana Supreme Court ruling that unprovoked utterances are not protected.
  21. ^ Coleman, 136.
  22. ^ Cashmore, 180.
  23. ^ Coleman, 136.
  24. ^ See, e.g., Jeffrey Goldberg reviewing New York's Finest in the September 17, 2000 New York Times: "[The officer] was simply giving voice to one of the immutable beliefs of the New York City police officer, that "contempt-of-cop", as it is called, is the worst crime of all"; Coady et al. at 94: "Those who defy or challenge police authority are punished for failing the 'attitude test' and committing the worst crime of all—'contempt of cop'"; or Barbara Seranella's novel No Man Standing (2003), at 18: "It was more of a power thing, daring you to commit the worst offense: Contempt of Cop."
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Contempt_of_cop&oldid=304750243"