Police misconduct is a long-standing problem in our criminal justice system. Examples include fabrication of evidence, high-pressure interrogations, bribery, and more. Now there’s a new way to corrupt the process: Conviction-oriented investigations. AND IT’S BEING ACTIVELY PROMOTED BY THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE.
Ethics codes require investigators to follow the evidence without bias or preconception. For example, the International Association of Chiefs of Police ethics code states, “The law enforcement officer shall be concerned equally in the prosecution of the wrong-doer and the defense of the innocent. He shall ascertain what constitutes evidence and shall present such evidence impartially and without malice.”[1]
FAIRNESS GOING OUT OF FASHION?
On May 29, 2019, the DOJ Office for Victims of Crime presented an online training session titled, “Law Enforcement Response: Approaching Your Work with a Trauma–Informed Lens.”[2] The session was conducted by retired sheriff’s deputy Marcus Bruning, described as a “nationally recognized expert, a 28 year veteran of public safety.”
Bruning did not state that the main objective of a criminal investigation is to obtain the facts and details of the alleged incident. Instead, the investigator’s main job, according to Bruning, is to avoid re-traumatizing the “victim” — ignoring the fact that in the event of a false allegation, the real “victim” is the person who is wrongfully accused.
CONVICTION-ORIENTED
Most troubling of all, Bruning advised law enforcement personnel to take a “conviction-oriented approach,” which means investigations should be carried out with an eye to “determining what elements of the crime must be proven and what will be challenged in court.” In essence, he argued to work the case from the position that a crime has been committed (because the “victim” says it did) and that the suspect committed that crime.
The main focus of courtroom testimony should be the feelings of the “victim” before, during, and after the alleged incident, Bruning insisted. This provides the prosecutor, jury, and judge “an opportunity to experience a traumatic event with understanding and without blaming the victim.”
DOUG WILDER, VICTIM OF A CONVICTION-ORIENTED INVESTIGATION?
On July 12, the Washington Post reported on former Virginia governor Douglas Wilder, accused of non-consensual kissing of a female. But Wilder said he was railroaded by a biased investigator who glossed over inconsistencies in the accuser’s testimony and excluded important exculpatory evidence from the investigative report.[3] In other words, the investigator cared more about getting a conviction than seeking out the truth.
The Center for Prosecutor Integrity asks persons to contact Attorney General William Barr and urge him to reject biased, “conviction-oriented” investigations. Because justice is at stake.
Citations:
[1] http://www.prosecutorintegrity.org/sa/ethics-codes/
[2]https://www.ovcttac.gov/ovcttac_assets/eblast/ExpertQA-Eblast-May-2019.HTML
[3] https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/former-va-governor-doug-wilder-says-claims-against-him-are-untrue-days-after-investigation-finds-he-kissed-a-20-year-old-student/2019/07/12/0c3286dc-a4b5-11e9-b8c8-75dae2607e60_story.html