We all want to believe that our police officers are beyond reproach. Big Boy Scouts, who uphold their oaths to be trustworthy, loyal, kind, honest, and the other traits of sainthood. But that may be asking a bit much, since they are human beings, with human frailties. Occasionally we must deal with an officer who allegedly violates departmental rules, and, by so doing, violates the public's trust.
If a cop spreads lies about a fellow officer, should he be removed from the force? Or should everyone, including the man he allegedly lied about, be forced to continue to work with him, and potentially trust him with their lives? Consider the case of fired Richland police officer Lee Matthews. Because there may be a union appeal, and legal proceedings, very little information has been released. As a result, residents are left with rumors and blogs. This misinformation is worse than not knowing anything.
What has been made public: Matthews was fired on November 12 for violating department rules. This began back in June, and Matthews went through several steps of discipline before he was dismissed. Police Chief Larry Cerami, Township Manager Steve Sechriest, and all three supervisors concurred. Matthews filed suit against the township, claiming that his firing was in retaliation for reporting the improper conduct of a fellow officer.
What has not been made public: Matthews, and that other officer, did not get along, and Matthews had asked that they not be on the same shift. He was told to work out his personal problems, and that the department could not accommodate everyone's special requests. Matthews then allegedly accused the other officer was having an extra-marital affair. His co-workers did not agree, and voiced their opposition. He was suspended. After another hearing, he was dismissed.
Normally, police officers are a tight-knit Band of Brothers, who rely on each other for their safety, and their lives. Each needs to believe that every other cop is there for them under the worst of circumstances. So it is expected that they would back their bro when he is accused of wrongdoing. But that isn't the case here. Department sources say that every single member supported the firing. They would have preferred that the matter be resolved privately, but when it was not, they all agreed with the decision.
The Police Chief Magazine, published by the International Association of Police Chiefs, discussed what types of lies might warrant dismissal. While it didn't deal specifically with one officer lying about another, it did conclude, "The willingness to betray basic principles of honesty attacks the very public safety that the person believes himself to be pursuing. A police officer who by malicious disregard goes beyond the limits of legitimacy is a threat to the public safety, since the officer may end up violating anybody's rights. In life, there are often second chances, and sometimes even more. In law enforcement, there are no second chances when it comes to the integrity of our officers and ourselves. In law enforcement, malicious deceptive conduct is untenable and cannot be tolerated at any level in the organization".
Maybe Matthews believes that the others will stand with him. Initially, they may say nothing, or give him seeming support, because they are all Police Association union members. But, if and when his lawsuit gets to the discovery stage, there is likely going to be a line of his ex-buddies testifying against him. Maybe Matthews just hopes that Richland's insurance company will settle the matter rather than fight. Unfortunately for him, he has already lost that battle. Rather than risk a settlement that will only encourage others to sue, the township hired its own attorney, who will not be making any offers. Matthews will have to prove his case, and, in the process, face the men he used to work with.
If Matthews' fellow cops testify against him, he can pretty well kiss his law enforcement career goodbye. No reputable force is going to hire an officer who disrupts his department, whether he wins or loses. Even if he can prove that he is telling the truth, and everyone else, for whatever reason, is lying, he will still carry the stigma of an officer who everyone saw a need to lie about. This would not only affect potential relationships with a new Band of Brothers, it will seriously harm his ability to serve effectively:
The most important trait for any police officer is his credibility. Cops not only have to be fair and honest on the street, they must be able to testify in court. Arrests mean little without convictions, and any half-decent defense attorney would rip apart the credibility of an officer whose brethren had challenged his honesty. Any department would probably see him as a liability.
It didn't have to end this way. Matthews had plenty of opportunity to avoid public controversy, and keep his career intact. He could have dealt with his personal issues privately. And, even at the end, he could have moved on voluntarily and quietly. But he has chosen to risk everything. Why?
My guess only: This started out as a small matter, and just escalated out of control. Those human frailties of anger and frustration got the better of Matthews, and he dug in his heels rather than compromise and apologize. Perhaps he was even surprised to find that he wasn't supported by the other officers. But when he found out that it was Lee against the world, he was stuck. It is hard to regain lost trust. And, as a third-generation law enforcement officer, he felt that he had to fight to the end, or his alleged wrongdoing would reflect on his father and grandfather.
The whole matter is unfortunate, and there is no winner. But at least Richland residents can take comfort that the men who respond to their calls are held to the highest standards.