Statement Of Work Scope: The New York State Liquor: Fill & Download for Free

As with any behavior, there is no single cause, nor is there a single type of corrupt behavior engaged in by those who have become corrupt. Individual and systemic factors are contributory.Corruption DefinedThe definition of corruption may be limited by some to receipt of financial or other considerations in exchange for overlooking crime in some manner. Corruption can include "those activities regarded by society as illegitimate or seen by the power elite as contradictory to the logic of the system" (Jacek Tarkowski cited in Johnston, 1992, p. 160). Police corruption is an occupational crime within the institutions responsible for control of crime, and a form of "elite" deviance (Henderson & Simon, 1994).Punch (1985) provided a four-element definition of police corruption. With an added a fifth element, this definition guided the present study.I Straitforward Corruption: something is done or not done for some form of reward....II Predatory (Strategic) Corruption: the police stimulate crime, extort money and actively organize graft ...III Combative (Strategic) Corruption: 'flaking', 'padding', falsifying testimony, 'verbals', intimidating witnesses, buying and selling drugs, 'scoring' or 'burning' informants, and paying informants with illegally obtained drugs. ('Flaking' refers to 'planting' evidence on a suspect; 'padding' means to add to drugs or evidence to strengthen a case; 'verbals' is used in Britain to indicate where words attributed to a suspect are invented by a policeman to help incriminate him; 'scoring' concerns shakedowns where police take money, drugs or goods from suspects or prisoners, and 'burning' means revealing the identity of an informant). Most of these practices are involved in 'building a case' ... in which the major goal is to make arrests, obtain convictions, confiscate drugs, and get long sentences for criminals. It may involve accommodations with some criminals and certain informants but it is posited on using illicit means for organizationally and socially approved ends....IV Corruption as Perversion of Justice: lying under oath, intimidating witnesses, planting evidence on a suspect, etc.... It involves the perversion of justice largely in order to avoid the consequences of serious deviant behavior. (Punch, 1985, pp. 13-14)The fifth element is any abuse of power or authority—such as excessive force, theft while on duty, or other acts under color of law. The Knapp Commission (1974) (or the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Police Corruption and the City's Anti-Corruption Procedures, instituted in 1971) added other offenses to the list of corrupt practices, such as illegal wiretaps, financing of drug transactions, soliciting customers for drug traffickers, kidnapping witnesses, providing security for drug dealers, and offering to assist in murder of witnesses.The fifth element was added as a personal evaluation and in consideration of a dictionary definition of corruption that includes the following: "1. a changing or being changed for the worse; making, becoming, or being corrupt. 2. evil or wicked behavior; depravity" (Guralnik & Friend, 1968, p. 332). This definition is consistent with a statement by Jacek Tarkowski (cited in Johnston, 1992): "Also 'corrupt' are those activities regarded by society as illegitimate or seen by the power elite as contradictory to the logic of the system" (p. 160).The Mollen Commission (The Commission to Investigate Allegations of Police Corruption and the Anti-Corruption Procedures of the New York City Police Department), formed in 1992, seems to support this expanded definition of corruption by stating that "twenty years ago police officers took bribes to accommodate criminals ... today's corrupt cop often is the criminal" (Commission to Investigate Allegations, 1993/1995, p. 31).This is also consistent with the assumption of the researcher that acts of criminal justice personnel leading to their own incarceration are an aberration from the state of their moral and ethical behavior at the commencement of their criminal justice career, in other words, a change for the worse.The Mollen Commission described brutality and corruption as being on a continuum, “with brutality against citizens serving as a sort of ‘rite of passage’ toward corruption” (cited in Human Rights Watch, 1998, p. 46). Commission interviews indicated that brutality was often the first deviant act, and when officers were not subjected to negative consequences as a result of this deviance, it became easier for them to progress to other abuses of authority.This seems consistent with self-reports of criminal involvement in a sample of the general population that “suggest a clear escalation in the seriousness of criminal behavior over time” (Elliott, 1994, p. 12). “[T]he behavioral repertoire was [found to be] accompanied by an increase in offending rates for all types of offenses” (p. 13).Public definitions of police brutality can include perceptions of verbal abuse, unnecessary stops for questioning, display of weapons, or physical contact short of levels that could cause physical harm (Klockars, 1996). Current legal definitions hinge upon the finding in Graham v. Connor [490 U.S. 386 (1989)].In accordance with the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, “’[O]bjective reasonableness’ of a police officer’s use of force would be ‘judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight’” (cited in Klockars, 1996, p. 6). A single punch, or anything short of that, is not generally considered excessive.Worden (1996) differentiated between “excessive force” and “unnecessary force,” the former being more than reasonable force, and the later being where no force is reasonable. James Fyfe (1996) also subdivided excessive force.Extralegal violence—brutality—is “the willful and wrongful use of force by officers who knowingly exceed the bounds of their office.” Unnecessary force, by contrast, is the result of ineptitude or carelessness and “occurs when well-meaning officers prove incapable of dealing with the situations they encounter without needless or too hasty resort to force.” (Fyfe, 1996, p. 165)The IACP defines "excessive use of force" as "the application of an amount and/or frequency of force greater than what is required to compel compliance from a willing or unwilling subject" (Neubauer, 1999, p. 6). …Corruption TheoryCorruption has been conceptualized as having been based upon either affinity or affiliation. Affinity represents the predisposition of individuals to commit crime that exists prior to their being hired as police officers. Affiliation refers to the subjecting "of the honest police recruit ... [to] a dishonest police subculture" (Sherman, 1974, p. 192).A more common label for affinity has been the “rotten apple” theory, wherein the rotten apple taints the barrel of apples. Conversely, the affiliation theory is commonly referred to as the “rotten barrel” theory. The barrel is responsible for making the apples rot.The affinity/affiliation question points out the different levels of inquiry and theorization. Macro level examination focuses upon entire societies. Middle level, or intermediate, inquiry focuses upon organizations, and micro level involves individuals (Sherman, 1974). One example of macro-level impact is described as follows:Richardson put the police graft system in its proper perspective: the political and ethnic conflicts of a fast-growing pluralist society. On the ethnic level New York was a classic case of culture conflict, where the puritan morality of the original settlers was intolerable to the new immigrants. Laws prohibiting liquor sales, gambling, and prostitution were focal points for this conflict.Seen from the functionalist perspective, corruption was a means of easing the conflict and satisfying both sides. Politicians won the support of Yankee groups with rhetoric against vice, while maintaining immigrant support by giving the police a free hand to permit vice—in exchange for a price. But the police hand was so free that graft grew to be intolerable, although the Lexow commission [of 1894] was the first indication ... of how large it really was. After Lexow, police graft became more sophisticated and centralized, surviving investigations right up to the present. (Sherman, 1974a, p. 45)In 2000, Klockars, Ivkovich, Harver, and Hagerfeld published research based upon an organizational theory of police corruption “which emphasizes the importance of organizational and occupational culture” (p. 1). They presented officers from 30 different departments with 11 hypothetical situations and asked them to rate the levels of seriousness, whether they would report these incidents, and their support for punishment for each situation. In the more serious scenarios (e.g., stealing from a crime scene, bribery, or excessive force), most officers indicated that they would report violations by a fellow officer. However, “substantial differences in the environment of integrity” (p. 2) were observed among the different departments.In comparing one high-scoring department (all scenarios were considered to be more serious violations relative to other agencies) to one low scoring department, it was found that the high-scoring department’s officers expected more severe discipline and would be much more likely to report violations by fellow officers. These characteristics of a department’s officers are said to provide a description of a department’s “culture that encourage its employees to resist or tolerate certain types of misconduct” (Klockars et al., 2000, p. 7).In 1997, a survey was administered to criminal justice students at Florida State University oriented toward determining values and expectations (Brand, 1999). Thirty-one percent said that they would not leave a party where marijuana was in use, 28% believed that a person with a felony arrest record should not be excluded from being hired as an officer, and about 18% believed that it may be acceptable for an officer to lie. Police will undoubtedly reflect the culture that surrounds them, as suggested by the writings of C. Wright Mills (cited in Henderson & Simon, 1994).Causes of corruption can best be described as being the result of an intricate matrix of potential actions and interactions impacted by numerous inputs (societal, organizational, biosociological, and psychological). Both middle-level and micro level aspects of corruption will be examined for cause-and-effect clues in the following review, in recognition of their apparent interrelatedness. In particular, the elements of conflict, control, differential association, interactional, neutralization, opportunity, rational choice, strain, symbolic interaction theories, and stress will be examined with sufficient depth that the criminality causation elements they propose can be inferred to exist for the purpose of this study.Ideology figures into criminological theory and corruption theory, from Marxism on the left to Lombrosians on the right, particularly when politicians attempt to establish policy (Henderson & Simon, 1994). Karl Marx (1818-1883) was a classical conflict theorist who deplored exploitation of the masses by a limited number of power-wielding elites. Classical criminological theory began with Cesare Lombroso (1835-1909), an Italian physician apparently influenced by Darwinism, who theorized that criminals were evolutional throwbacks, and who believed in biological determinism (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990).Henderson and Simon (1994) stated that conservatives generally embrace anomie and liberals generally embrace affiliation causation. A dichotomy generally equivalent to the affinity/affiliation theory described above.Henderson and Simon (1994) characterized the Christopher Commission as "liberal" based upon the suggested improvements in minority concerns. Conservative and liberal perspectives both lack sociological perspective, according to Henderson and Simon. Also lacking is an attempt to show the interconnection among macro, intermediate, and micro levels.Theories of occupational crime may have some relevance, but police corruption is a unique subcategory—crime within the institutions responsible for control of crime—and a form of "elite" deviance. Henderson and Simon (1994) proposed a synthesis of theoretical perspectives to account for this subcategory based for the most part upon the theory of C. Wright Mills (1917-1962).Mills stressed social structure (macro level composition, interrelationships, significance of the parts, etc.), historical epoch (cultural ascendancy or decline, what is considered historically significant, characteristics of change, etc.), and biography (roles of the individual, impacts of family, culture, and institutions, etc.).One important attribute of Mill's model is that institutions actually select and shape social character. This is because success in institutional settings ... requires that people, as role players, accept (internalize) the “expectations of institutional leaders” (elites). (Henderson & Simon, 1994, p. 34)Alienation was an important concept to Mills for understanding the structure of behavior; and it can occur at macro, intermediate, and micro levels (Henderson & Simon, 1994). Two types of alienation were identified: inauthenticity and dehumanization. Inauthenticity exists when outward or acknowledged appearances are stated in a positive manner, while the known situation is negative. A macro example would be the coupling of sexual images in advertising with alcohol or cigarettes.In a police department, alienation could be characterized by the Mollen Commission finding that anticorruption efforts were focused more on preventing disclosure than identifying and eliminating corruption (Commission to Investigate Allegations, 1993/1995). The consequence of this form of alienation is dehumanization (Henderson & Simon, 1994).Victor Bernard (cited in Henderson & Simon, 1994) argues that dehumanization is the result of a disconnection of mental concepts from one another and "unconscious denial, repression, depersonalization, isolation of effect, and compartmentalization" (p. 36). Dehumanization is a defense mechanism to internal and external stressors achieved through blinding oneself to the humanity of another.There are two types of dehumanization. The first is self-directed, wherein one mutes emotion and becomes robot-like. This can be a response to anxiety caused by being a powerless part of a bureaucracy. The second is object-directed, wherein one lessens the humanness of another through negative labeling and stereotyping, a self-protection against feelings of guilt and shame. "These two types of dehumanization are mutually reinforcing; reducing one's feelings for other people lessens one's feelings for the self, and lessening the humanness of one's self-image limits one's capacity to relate to others" (Henderson & Simon, 1994, p. 36).Consistent with alienation theorization is neutralization theory (Henderson & Simon, 1994). Guilt feelings that tend to prevent crime can be minimized by rationalizations learned previous to crime commission. Deviant groups commonly construct guilt neutralizing terminology and strategies, such as shifting blame to the victim, dehumanizing the victim, professing loyalty to the group that sanctions or condones the crime (following orders), and condemning the condemners (soft on crime).Henderson and Simon (1994) criticized neutralization theory as deficient because of an intentional disregard for the effects of cultural and societal norms. They pointed out that cultural patterns of crime have been shown to exist.Drawing from Mills and control, differential association, and neutralization theories, Henderson and Simon (1994) made the following theoretical statements:1. Criminal behavior is widespread in American society, including within the criminal justice system. It is widespread because it is often learned, tolerated and/or encouraged within the organizational contexts that make up criminal justice agencies....2. Only a tiny percentage of such crimes are explained by extreme behaviors of abnormal personalities.... The behavior and the ideologies that justify and excuse them are part of an organization's cultural value system.3. Crime as caused by the inability of immature individuals to delay gratification is a widespread occurrence, so widespread that it is part of the American character....We are not saying that human nature is evil.... We are saying that people are born innocent and relatively "blank" concerning their criminal propensities, and that criminal behavior is a socially acquired attribute. (Henderson & Simon, 1994, pp. 34-35)Sherman (1974c) wrote that it is appropriate to begin corruption causes and effects theorization with a simple model. He chose to "treat police corruption simply as a dependent variable—as effect not cause" (p. 2). However, he pointed out the complexity of the issue by asking: "Why are there different kinds and extents of police corruption in different communities, and in the same communities at different points in their history?" (p. 3). Sherman proposed a sociological theory of police corruption containing the following propositions that are identified as independent variables, or more likely, interdependent or covariant:COMMUNITY STRUCTURE1. There will be less police corruption in a community with little anomie, in terms of corrupters and corruptees.2. There will be less police corruption in communities with a more public-regarding ethos.3. There will be less police corruption in a community with less culture conflict.ORGANIZATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS4. A punishment-centered police bureaucracy will have the least corruption, a representative pattern will have more, and a mock pattern will have the most. [In a representative pattern there is enforcement of and obedience to rules to which workers can contribute. A mock pattern exists when action is only taken due to bad publicity.]5. There will be less corruption in a police agency having leadership highly reputed for integrity.6. There will be less organized police corruption when there is less work group solidarity.7. The less gradual the probable steps in a corrupt policeman's moral career, the less the ultimate 'seriousness' (self-defined) of the grafting.8. The greater the policeman's perception of legitimate advancement opportunities, the less likelihood there will be of their accepting corruption opportunities.LEGAL OPPORTUNITIES9. A decrease in either the scope of morals laws or the demand for the services they proscribe, while holding the other constant, will reduce police corruption opportunities (also the converse).10. An increase in either the scope of the regulative law or the economic incentive to violate it, while holding the other constant, will increase corruption opportunities (also the converse).CORRUPTION CONTROLS11. There will be a greater perceived risk of apprehension for corruption in police agencies that have an internal investigation unit.12. There will be proportionately less undiscovered corruption in police agencies that have an internal investigation unit using proactive methods.13. Controls will decrease corruption only when they can avoid amplifying the corruption's extent or methods.14. Less corruption will go undiscovered in a police agency watched by a vigorous and uncensored news media. (Sherman, 1974c, pp. 31-32)A study conducted by Herbert W. Eber, presented in 1991 at the annual meeting of Multivariate Experimental Psychology, as reported by Lorr and Strack (1994), administered a Clinical Analysis Questionnaire to about 15,000 police officer candidates to determine personality characteristics. The most distinctive finding was that personality profiles “were characterized by a strong pattern of self-discipline or Control, Tough Poise, and low Anxiety” (p. 200).Hyams (1990) conducted a study in which he hypothesized that police officers having unethical attitudes would be found to have higher narcissism (or selfism), and have a perception of their policing role as being more oriented toward arrest than service. In this study involving police officers from one West Coast agency, this hypothesis was confirmed; in addition, he found that[t]hose who are officers out of the academy, with higher levels of narcissism, a role perception oriented more toward arrest and apprehension and higher levels of dedication were found to have less ethical attitudes. (Hyams, 1990, p. 89)In 1998, Chamberlin, using Hyams’ police ethical attitudes instrument, conducted an experiment wherein this instrument was administered to treatment and control groups (pretest), followed by an 8-hour in-service training session on ethics for the treatment group. Six to eight weeks later, the instrument was again administered (posttest).The treatment group was found to show no difference in ethical attitudes between the pretest and the posttest. However, the control group was found to have “significantly increased their scores in the ethics, selfism, and role scales,” an indication of a tendency to have a more positive view of unethical behavior (Chamberlin, 1998, p. 82). Chamberlin does make a cautionary statement that because of the necessity of an “extended training effort and repeated testing, the probability of threats to the internal validity of the study due to history [outside influences such as the known focus of the testing] and maturation [gaining in knowledge over time] were significant” (p. 54).Sherman (1974b) used symbolic interationist theory to explain the existence of police corruption. The corrupt cop appears to have a moral view that differs from the view held prior to becoming an officer, and differs from the morality of his family, thus showing divergence and conflict of views.The school stems from the early work of George Herbert Meade, who saw life as a “conversation of significant symbols,” a process in which one continually defines and redefines one's self as a result of interacting with others. In this school of thought, police bribe-taking is to be explained as an individual process of becoming for each policeman, not as a static or “pressured” result of larger community structure. (Sherman, 1974b, p. 172)Consistent with the findings of the Mollen Commission cited earlier, wherein it is stated that unchecked excessive force is a precursor to corruption, Sherman (1974) indicated that corruption of a police officer is gradual and is characterized by the stages of contingencies, moral experiences, and apologia.Contingencies are circumstances or problems which a person must face, often for purely accidental reasons. The moral experience is a reaction to contingencies, often involving decision of action, that alters the "framework of imagery" in which a person evaluates himself and others. The moral experience is a benchmark between the stages in a moral career, which usually culminate (for the deviant) in an apologia: a distorted image of one's life course that brings it into alignment with the basic values of his society. (Sherman, 1974, p. 194)"Mills argued that people often experience their everyday, private lives as 'a series of traps'" (Henderson & Simon, 1994, p. 35). By this, he meant that people are unaware of how their behavior is unavoidably shaped by their immediate environment. Empirical evidence indicates that as violence-prone officers engage in subsequent confrontations, those confrontations are of increasing intensity (Babcock, 1998).Taylor and Braswell (1978) stated, "All police officers violate departmental rules and regulations and sometimes criminal statutes; it is inherent in their discretionary powers" (p. 177). They quoted a former officer as saying, "It's like a spider web, you're drawn in toward the center" (p. 177), with the center being the point where you have engaged in enough corrupt behavior that you must look the other way when a fellow officer takes another step outside the boundaries.In a similar vein, M. David Ermann (cited in Henderson & Simon, 1994) believed “that white-collar deviance takes place incrementally by merging normal administrative behavior with wrongdoing" (p. 28). In addition, new employees go along with behavior they find present upon their arrival, particularly in organizations that are results oriented. "Organizational crime also frequently occurs in instances where corporate employees are socially and spatially mobile, where they do not consider themselves part of the community in which they live" (p. 29).Biosociology/DemographicsOne consistent finding of research is that males are responsible for substantially more crime than females, “and this conclusion does not depend on the method of measurement (official or self-report), or time period and it seems to hold wherever the matter has been studied by criminologists” (Gottfredson & Polakowski, 1995, p. 68).Both Walsh (1995) and Goldsmith (1991) reported that physiological differences between male and female brains result from differences attributed to hormones and hormone ratios. Increasing testosterone levels in either sex increases assaultive behavior and decreases nurturing behavior, while estradiol decreases assaultive behavior and increases nurturing behavior. Progesterone also increases nurturing behavior, indicating more than mere coincidence regarding the differences of these hormones in males and females (Walsh, 1995).Booth and Osgood (1993) conducted research that attempted “to establish the strength of the relationship between testosterone and adult deviance, and second, to elucidate how testosterone fits into a larger pattern of social factors linked to adult deviance” (p. 94). The study involved a sample of 4,462 veterans who were found to be representative of the male population in the United States. Their findings concerning testosterone and deviance indicatea moderate and significant relationship (t = 6.43). The magnitude of the relationship is comparable to that of race in this analysis and also to relationships commonly found between deviance and such demographic factors as race, social class, and gender in other studies. Thus, we have firm evidence that there is a relationship between testosterone level and adult deviance. This relationship is strong enough to be of substantive interest, but it is not so strong that testosterone would qualify as the major determinant of adult deviance. (Booth & Osgood, 1993, p. 102)Our analysis yields good evidence that higher levels of testosterone are associated with adult deviance largely because they predispose an individual toward weak social integration and toward juvenile delinquency, and those are factors that considerably increase the likelihood of adult deviance. (Booth & Osgood, 1993, p. 105)Primate studies have shown that “testosterone increases to meet demand” and decreases “when submissiveness is deemed the path of least resistance” (Walsh, 1995, p. 86). It could be inferred that those assuming the role of law enforcer, who must also adopt the trappings (i.e., gun, badge, power to arrest, etc.), will show increased testosterone production. It is also known that as males age the production of testosterone decreases and hormonal ratios favoring nurturant behavior increase.Elliot (1994), in analyzing results of a National Youth Survey, wrote that not only is there a gap between male and female serious violent offending; female offending peaks earlier in adolescence, declines more steeply during adolescence, and the gap between male and female offending widens with age. The difference between males and females became 4 to 1 at age 21 in this self-report survey, with differentials being significantly higher in official record studies (more than 8 to 1).Gottfredson and Polakowski (1995) related that “[t]he relationship between age and crime is one of the most significant and well established general correlates in the field of criminology” (p. 68). Late adolescence and early adulthood stages account for a "vastly disproportionate amount of crime" (p. 69).The Christopher Commission found that just over 2% of Los Angeles police officers accounted for a disproportionately large number of citizen complaints (Independent Commission, 1991/1995). Lersch and Mieczkowski (1996) conducted a study to test this phenomenon and to determine if there are characteristics shared between officers with higher numbers of complaints, in effect testing the rotten apple theory (affinity theory). They also examined characteristics of complainants and complaints to determine if patterns existed.Lersch and Mieczkowski (1996) reviewed 682 allegations against 274 officers. "A small group of 37 officers, or about 7 percent of the sworn personnel, accounted for over one-third of the total number of complaints filed over the three-year period of analysis" (p. 37). The repeat offenders were all male, and "significantly younger and less experienced than their peers," and they were "more likely to be accused of violent and non-violent harassment resulting from a proactive contact" (p. 37).Babcock (1998) examined "the relationship between individual police officer characteristics, situational factors and the incidence of violent police-citizen encounters" (p. iv). He studied 117 officers in a department numbering about 350. Babcock also found that younger and less experienced officers had a significantly larger number of use-of-force incidents. "The group data suggested that as the number of use-of-force incidents per officer increased, so did the level and severity of violence inflicted by the officer" (p. 246).The age related findings of Lersch and Mieczkowski (1996) and Babcock (1998) were consistent with the findings of Burton et al. (1994/1997), who also reported that age was significantly related to nonutilitarian crime (not providing economic reward).Girodo (1991) conducted a psychological assessment of 271 undercover drug agents, with the purpose of correlating deviant behavior with personality dimensions. Among other findings, he determined that drug and alcohol abuse and disciplinary problems increased as undercover experience increased, somewhat contrary to the age-related findings cited earlier in this paper.Disinhibition was the significant predictor of risk for corruption in nearly half the agents … Disinhibition, however, did not predict risk for corruption among the best ... [person-environment] fit notwithstanding their obtaining the highest ... [disinhibition] scores of all. Their risk for corruption, while not particularly high, was best accounted for inversely by scores on the trait of Disciplined Self-Image. Finally, the High Extraversion-High Neuroticism agents produced the largest risk for corruption index; their higher scores on Experience Seeking and Neuroticism, would appear to be a poor combination.... The personality traits associated with corruption risk were impulsivity, emotionality, and undisciplined self-image. When these were found together, as in the Extraverted-Neurotic, we also found an increased risk for drug/alcohol abuse and disciplinary problems. (Girodo, 1991, pp. 368-369)Psychological theory has been unable to shed much light on the actions of individual officers, according to Worden (1996). Attitudinal studies, including Worden’s work, have indicated only a weak correlation between use of force and outlooks on human nature and “moral attitudes toward coercive authority” (p. 26). Organizational and social factors were shown to have a greater impact upon behavior. However,A larger body of evidence has accumulated on the relationship of officer’s behavior to their background and characteristics—race, gender, length of police service, and especially education. Officer’s educational backgrounds have been the subject of a number of studies, and although this research has shown that education bears no more than a weak relationship to officer’s attitudes ... and no relationship to the use of deadly force ..., it also indicates that college-educated officers generate fewer citizen complaints.... [O]n most behavioral dimensions the differences [between men and women] are negligible.... [B]lack officers ... are more likely to use deadly force ..., but these differences can be attributed to ... duty assignments.... Finally, analyses of officer’s length of service indicate that less experienced officers ... patrol more aggressively, ... are more likely to make arrests, ... and use deadly force. (Worden, 1996, p. 27)In research by Robert Friedrich (cited in Worden, 1996), published in 1980, the explanations of the use of force were characterized as having three contributory aspects—individual, situational, and organizational—were subjected to analysis. Friedrich found marginal correlation only regarding situational aspects. Provocative acts of a low-class, intoxicated, felon were most likely to evoke the use of force. Officer characteristics were not found to be significant.The GAO noted that police officers “lacking in experience and some higher education were considered to be more susceptible to involvement in illicit drug-related activities" (United States General Accounting Office, 1998, p. 4). Brown and Campbell (1994) concluded that response to stress is related to “personality, and life experiences, as well as variables such as age, gender and family history” (p. 19).StressGary Hankins (cited in Sulc, 1995), an official with the Fraternal Order of Police, related that "[p]olice officers die younger, suffer more injuries and stress-related disabilities than the average American ... [and] have high rates of alcoholism, divorce and suicide" (pp. 80-81). Hankins contended that stress inherent to criminal justice positions exceeds that of most other occupational groups. Corruption has been identified as a reaction to stress (Winter, 1993).In 1973, Haney, Banks, and Zimbardo (1973/1981), psychologists at Stanford University, conducted an experiment wherein “normal” college students were randomly selected as either guards or prisoners for a prison simulation. The planned 2-week experiment was terminated after less than half that time due to unexpectedly high levels of stress, and even distress in some cases, on the part of prisoners.Interactions between guards and prisoners were typically hostile and negative, with guards displaying increasing levels of aggression and authoritarianism. Haney et al. (cited in Maxfield & Babbie, 1998) concluded that their "results are ... congruent with Milgram who most convincingly demonstrated the proposition that evil acts are not necessarily the deeds of evil men, but may be attributable to the operation of powerful social forces" (p. 191). "Moreover, since both prisoners and guards are locked into a dynamic, symbiotic relationship which is destructive to their human nature, guards are also society's prisoners" (Haney et al., 1973/1981, p. 68).The reference to Milgram above concerns an experiment wherein subjects were directed to administer what were in fact simulated electrical shocks to an experimenter's confederate. The device manipulated by the subject was marked to purportedly indicate severity of the shock up to “severe,” while no shock was actually administered.The level of shock the subject was willing to give upon command of the experimenter was the primary dependent variable. Unexpected findings included "the sheer strength of obedient tendencies manifested" and "the extraordinary tension and emotional strain" on the subjects when they complied with orders to inflict high shock levels (Milgram, 1963/1981, pp. 33-34).This reference to stress induced by inflicting punishment is significant to the researcher, and is a stressor not specifically listed as applicable to police in relevant literature. "As former Chief Justice Earl Warren has said, the policeman is more powerful than the President. Only the policeman has the power to deprive an American of his liberty" (Sherman, 1974c, p. vii).Shooting, even shooting at, someone in the line of duty can readily be identified as a traumatic event. Arresting a father and mother while restraining their grieving 4 year-old, particularly when the crime involved is mala prohibida versus mala in se (prohibited by law versus a crime such as murder that is bad in and of itself), can also be an enduringly stressful event, as the researcher can personally attest.This is stress of punishment infliction as opposed to stress from the potential of personal injury at the hands of an arrestee. It would seem easily verifiable that most arrests are for transgressions of the former (mala prohibida). For more than one reason, an arrest—even if one does not fear for one’s own safety—can be stressful.Moreover, “ever-present danger lies in taking an action that is judged improper” (Waddington, 1999, p. 14). A judgment made in haste will be reviewed at leisure through official channels, as well as by a society as a whole.Brown and Campbell (1994) reported that it is “well documented that high levels of stress among employees, whether induced at work or by personal problems, can reduce productivity” (p. 1). Selye (cited in Winter, 1993), a stress research pioneer, stated that law enforcement is "one of the most hazardous professions, even exceeding the formidable stresses and strains of air traffic control" (p. 253). However, Brown and Campbell relate that empirical support for this position is not consistent.Winter (1993) defined stress as "the awareness of potential threat, or in other words [in the context of police corruption], awareness of the potential for a comprehensive change in one's core structures," such as experienced by a newly hired police officer (p. 254). Brown and Campbell (1994) offered three definitions of stress. The first was a model wherein an external factor causes “some degree of physical or psychological discomfort” (pp. 14-15).The second was a process that relies upon Selye’s General Adaptation Syndrome. This included:· The initial alarm reaction. The “fight or flight” response [from exposure to a threat] ... which ... includes physiological changes preparing the body for “fight or flight.”· The stage of resistance. The period during which the person adapts to external stressors and symptoms of stress improve or disappear.· The stage of exhaustion. [I]f the stressor is sufficiently severe or prolonged ... symptoms reappear and the end result is death. (Brown & Campbell, 1994, p. 15)The third definition labeled stress as an interactive variable and accounted for variations among individuals (Brown & Campbell, 1994). Stress is caused by the individual’s perception of his or her inability to respond to circumstances.Brown and Campbell (1994) suggested a more detailed approach that distinguishes between stressors, perceived stress, and ascribed stress. Stressors are direct or indirect circumstances within the environment. Perceived stress is a subjective assessment of those circumstances, and ascribed stress is an objective assessment of those circumstances.Cause-and-effect relationships between stressors and an individual’s reaction are difficult to establish. “Some personal or social characteristics may both predispose an individual’s exposure and at the same time also mitigate or exacerbate adverse consequences” (Brown & Campbell, 1994, p. 5). “The accumulation of evidence ... does indicate that stress levels within the police do play a significant role in absenteeism and wastage through early retirement” (p. 10), and “some research has indeed shown that the police tend to exhibit higher rates of stress-related disease, higher suicide rates and higher divorce rates” (p. 13).United States and British police “listed poor and insensitive supervision, unreasonable workload, shift work, personal safety and volume of paperwork as the most significant sources of stress at work” (Brown & Campbell, 1994, p. 14). However, “police work” being somewhat non-specific, it must be noted that “[r]ank, role, gender, ethnicity and sexual orientation result in some distinctive patterns of stress experiences” (p. 167).For Winter (1993), police stress lies in problems encountered with administrative procedures and legal proceedings that lead torole ambiguity and role conflict (e.g., between the roles of community servant, as exemplified in the stereotype of the general British Bobby, and crime fighter and between the requirement to enforce the law and the procedural constraints imposed on the officer by that same law). (Winter, 1993, p. 254)Kirkcaldy (1993) conducted a study of police stress involving 42 officers from several countries attending a stress. The police officers studied showed a higher level of internal control than the general population, and they "were more likely to be stressed in terms of organizational structure and climate ..., home and work interface ..., and relationships with other people" when compared to the general British population (p. 386). Though not stated in the article, it may be fair to assume that these were not run-of-the-mill patrol officers on this junket to Germany. Whether or not the sample population is representative of the population of street-level officers could be questioned.Violanti and Aron (1993) found that police organizational stressors (court decisions, regulations, nonparticipation in job decisions, disagreeable duties, discipline matters, etc.) were 6.3 times more likely to cause distress than was "police work." This study was conducted in a large New York department and consisted of 103 respondents who submitted a self-report survey.Similarly, Kirkcaldy, Cooper, and Ruffalo (1995) conducted a study of 49 officers in one Illinois town (the size of the department is unknown), and determined that these officers found "factors intrinsic to the job" to be lesser stress producers than "organizational structure and climate" (p. 700). Kirkcaldy et al. observed positive correlation between both psychological and physical illness and stress. In addition, they observed a significant negative correlation between perceived stress and job satisfaction. They recommended providing counseling and coping strategies to enhance self-control.Carona (1998) conducted a study having as its hypothesis the expectation that police departments having high-quality stress-relief programs would have fewer losses to sick leave, fewer resignations, fewer vehicle accidents, and fewer sustained excessive force complaints. Carona discovered no significant correlations in this research. However, it was determined that departments with longer running stress programs had "fewer sustained excessive force complaints" (p. 27).One possibly confounding variable that was apparently not addressed by these studies of stress in police (Kirkcaldy, 1993; Kirkcaldy et al., 1995; Violanti & Aron, 1993) could be the traditional stoicism expected of authority figures, and how this could be affected by self-reporting of police officers through under reporting perceptions of stress caused by intrinsic factors.As stated by Brown and Grover (1998), "Police officers are taught to respond personably rather than personally to their operational duties, to project strength and authority, to deal with events without displaying emotion and put the requirements of the work before their own emotional needs" (p. 181). This phenomenon has also been described as the “cult of masculinity” (Waddington, 1999, p. 11).Brown and Grover (1998) studied police officers and the role moderating factors have on coping and distress when stressors are present. One finding was that those exposed to both high and low levels of stress show the greatest levels of psychological distress when they lack social support, have high negative attitudes concerning emotional expression, and low just world beliefs. Those with low just world beliefs "perceive the threats as being in excess of their capacity to cope," making them unable to assimilate and integrate stressful experiences (p. 181). Also assumed in the definition of low just world beliefs was a feeling of low control on the part of the officer.A Gallup survey of randomly selected workers indicated that "the most common cause of workplace anger ... [is] the actions of supervisors or managers" (Wuensche, 1999, p. 1D). The next most anger-producing circumstances were, respectively, "irritating co-workers" and "dealing with the public" (p. 1D). Donald Gibson (cited in Wuensche, 1999), a Yale University School of Management professor, stated, "In an environment where you think people are satisfied with their jobs, there is a sort of undercurrent of anger and resentment aimed at the workplace that could potentially lead to the kinds of explosions or rage we have seen" (p. 1D). The rage Gibson refers to was that found in "normal" jobs, as opposed to police work.PrejudiceResearch on prejudice disclosed that those who perceive that they have been subjected to prejudice "reported more aggression, sadness, anxiety, and egotism" than those not perceiving such prejudice (Dion & Earn, 1975/1981, p. 281). Winter (1993) reported what appears to be an analogous perception of prejudice when he related that "there is evidence that police officers perceive the public and the press as construing them more negatively than is in fact the case," citing five studies (p. 254). The GAO (1998) also reported that “officers’ dissatisfaction with how they were viewed and treated by the people of the community” has been cited as a factor contributing to corruption (p. 9).The 1968 Kerner Commission examination of the New York police indicated that minorities perceived the police to "symbolize white power, white racism and white repression" (cited in Human Rights Watch, 1998, p. 40). The Christopher Commission surveyed a sample of Los Angeles police officers and found that about 25% of them believed that racial prejudice toward minorities exists and negatively impacts police community relations (Independent Commission, 1991/1995).In 1992, the St. Clair Commission examined excessive force complaints against the Boston Police Department and found that "50 percent of complainants in the sample group were African-American, while 26 percent of Boston's population was African-American" (Human Rights Watch, 1998, p. 41). Worden (1996) related that “empirical evidence confirms that minorities are in fact, overrepresented among the human targets at which police shoot …, but it also indicates that minorities are overrepresented among those whose actions precipitate the use of deadly force by police” (p. 25).The results of a reciprocal negative interchange between police who perceive prejudice from minorities and minorities who perceive prejudice from police, each feeding the negative spiral of the other, should not be overlooked in the search for corruption causes.The Mollen Commission reported in 1993 that the "us versus them" police attitude was particularly strong in minority neighborhoods and contributed to a divisiveness that "makes many police officers feel isolated from, and often hostile toward, the community they are meant to serve" (Commission to Investigate Allegations of Police Corruption, 1993/1995, p. 33). The Mollen Commission further reported that the us versus them attitude was "present wherever we found corruption" (p. 33).The GAO (1998) determined that a “commonly identified factor associated with drug-related corruption was a police culture that was characterized by a code of silence, unquestioned loyalty to other officers, and cynicism about the criminal justice system” (p. 4). These characteristics reportedly promote corruption while impeding its detection and control.Paradoxically, the structures of occupation that Durkheim predicted would function to strengthen them as autonomous, professional associations working for the common good (helping to clarify and maintain the value system of the broader society) are often "turned inward." That is, in criminal justice agencies (for several historic, political, economic, and social reasons) professional particularity, the cult of the individual, and extreme social solidarity reflected in a quasi-unification of all authority levels generates the unanticipated consequences of a high degree of corruption and graft in all components of the criminal justice system in virtually every region of the United States. (Henderson & Simon, 1994, p. 102)One aspect of neutralization theory, consistent with the us versus them characteristic, states that "subgroups take on a culture of their own that has been termed 'groupthink'" (Henderson & Simon, 1994, p. 30). One groupthink outcome is that prerationalized criminal acts are agreed upon before their commission. "Those objecting to the proposed ‘policies’ are often criticized by other group members, and, if they persist in their criticism, are threatened with ostracism from the group or firing" (p. 30).Reference: Robb, D. L. (2002). An investigation of self-control and its relationship to ethical attitudes in criminal justice personnel. Doctor of Philosophy Dissertation, Walden University. An Arbor, MI: ProQuest. (UMI No. 3036984)Also see: https://www.quora.com/Do-people-who-become-police-officers-generally-change-and-if-so-do-they-become-more-self-centred/answer/Dan-Robb-2

Corruption TheoryCorruption has been conceptualized as having been based upon either affinity or affiliation. Affinity represents the predisposition of individuals to commit crime that exists prior to their being hired as police officers. Affiliation refers to the subjecting "of the honest police recruit ... [to] a dishonest police subculture" (Sherman, 1974, p. 192).A more common label for affinity has been the “rotten apple” theory, wherein the rotten apple taints the barrel of apples. Conversely, the affiliation theory is commonly referred to as the “rotten barrel” theory. The barrel is responsible for making the apples rot.The affinity/affiliation question points out the different levels of inquiry and theorization. Macro level examination focuses upon entire societies. Middle level, or intermediate, inquiry focuses upon organizations, and micro level involves individuals (Sherman, 1974). One example of macro-level impact is described as follows:Richardson put the police graft system in its proper perspective: the political and ethnic conflicts of a fast-growing pluralist society. On the ethnic level New York was a classic case of culture conflict, where the puritan morality of the original settlers was intolerable to the new immigrants. Laws prohibiting liquor sales, gambling, and prostitution were focal points for this conflict.Seen from the functionalist perspective, corruption was a means of easing the conflict and satisfying both sides. Politicians won the support of Yankee groups with rhetoric against vice, while maintaining immigrant support by giving the police a free hand to permit vice—in exchange for a price. But the police hand was so free that graft grew to be intolerable, although the Lexow commission [of 1894] was the first indication ... of how large it really was. After Lexow, police graft became more sophisticated and centralized, surviving investigations right up to the present. (Sherman, 1974a, p. 45)In 2000, Klockars, Ivkovich, Harver, and Hagerfeld published research based upon an organizational theory of police corruption “which emphasizes the importance of organizational and occupational culture” (p. 1). They presented officers from 30 different departments with 11 hypothetical situations and asked them to rate the levels of seriousness, whether they would report these incidents, and their support for punishment for each situation. In the more serious scenarios (e.g., stealing from a crime scene, bribery, or excessive force), most officers indicated that they would report violations by a fellow officer. However, “substantial differences in the environment of integrity” (p. 2) were observed among the different departments.In comparing one high-scoring department (all scenarios were considered to be more serious violations relative to other agencies) to one low scoring department, it was found that the high-scoring department’s officers expected more severe discipline and would be much more likely to report violations by fellow officers. These characteristics of a department’s officers are said to provide a description of a department’s “culture that encourage its employees to resist or tolerate certain types of misconduct” (Klockars et al., 2000, p. 7).In 1997, a survey was administered to criminal justice students at Florida State University oriented toward determining values and expectations (Brand, 1999). Thirty-one percent said that they would not leave a party where marijuana was in use, 28% believed that a person with a felony arrest record should not be excluded from being hired as an officer, and about 18% believed that it may be acceptable for an officer to lie. Police will undoubtedly reflect the culture that surrounds them, as suggested by the writings of C. Wright Mills (cited in Henderson & Simon, 1994).Causes of corruption can best be described as being the result of an intricate matrix of potential actions and interactions impacted by numerous inputs (societal, organizational, biosociological, and psychological). Both middle-level and micro level aspects of corruption will be examined for cause-and-effect clues in the following review, in recognition of their apparent interrelatedness. In particular, the elements of conflict, control, differential association, interactional, neutralization, opportunity, rational choice, strain, symbolic interaction theories, and stress will be examined with sufficient depth that the criminality causation elements they propose can be inferred to exist for the purpose of this study.Ideology figures into criminological theory and corruption theory, from Marxism on the left to Lombrosians on the right, particularly when politicians attempt to establish policy (Henderson & Simon, 1994). Karl Marx (1818-1883) was a classical conflict theorist who deplored exploitation of the masses by a limited number of power-wielding elites. Classical criminological theory began with Cesare Lombroso (1835-1909), an Italian physician apparently influenced by Darwinism, who theorized that criminals were evolutional throwbacks, and who believed in biological determinism (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990).Henderson and Simon (1994) stated that conservatives generally embrace anomie and liberals generally embrace affiliation causation. A dichotomy generally equivalent to the affinity/affiliation theory described above.Henderson and Simon (1994) characterized the Christopher Commission as "liberal" based upon the suggested improvements in minority concerns. Conservative and liberal perspectives both lack sociological perspective, according to Henderson and Simon. Also lacking is an attempt to show the interconnection among macro, intermediate, and micro levels.Theories of occupational crime may have some relevance, but police corruption is a unique subcategory—crime within the institutions responsible for control of crime—and a form of "elite" deviance. Henderson and Simon (1994) proposed a synthesis of theoretical perspectives to account for this subcategory based for the most part upon the theory of C. Wright Mills (1917-1962).Mills stressed social structure (macro level composition, interrelationships, significance of the parts, etc.), historical epoch (cultural ascendancy or decline, what is considered historically significant, characteristics of change, etc.), and biography (roles of the individual, impacts of family, culture, and institutions, etc.).One important attribute of Mill's model is that institutions actually select and shape social character. This is because success in institutional settings ... requires that people, as role players, accept (internalize) the “expectations of institutional leaders” (elites). (Henderson & Simon, 1994, p. 34)Alienation was an important concept to Mills for understanding the structure of behavior; and it can occur at macro, intermediate, and micro levels (Henderson & Simon, 1994). Two types of alienation were identified: inauthenticity and dehumanization. Inauthenticity exists when outward or acknowledged appearances are stated in a positive manner, while the known situation is negative. A macro example would be the coupling of sexual images in advertising with alcohol or cigarettes.In a police department, alienation could be characterized by the Mollen Commission finding that anticorruption efforts were focused more on preventing disclosure than identifying and eliminating corruption (Commission to Investigate Allegations, 1993/1995). The consequence of this form of alienation is dehumanization (Henderson & Simon, 1994).Victor Bernard (cited in Henderson & Simon, 1994) argues that dehumanization is the result of a disconnection of mental concepts from one another and "unconscious denial, repression, depersonalization, isolation of effect, and compartmentalization" (p. 36). Dehumanization is a defense mechanism to internal and external stressors achieved through blinding oneself to the humanity of another.There are two types of dehumanization. The first is self-directed, wherein one mutes emotion and becomes robot-like. This can be a response to anxiety caused by being a powerless part of a bureaucracy. The second is object-directed, wherein one lessens the humanness of another through negative labeling and stereotyping, a self-protection against feelings of guilt and shame. "These two types of dehumanization are mutually reinforcing; reducing one's feelings for other people lessens one's feelings for the self, and lessening the humanness of one's self-image limits one's capacity to relate to others" (Henderson & Simon, 1994, p. 36).Consistent with alienation theorization is neutralization theory (Henderson & Simon, 1994). Guilt feelings that tend to prevent crime can be minimized by rationalizations learned previous to crime commission. Deviant groups commonly construct guilt neutralizing terminology and strategies, such as shifting blame to the victim, dehumanizing the victim, professing loyalty to the group that sanctions or condones the crime (following orders), and condemning the condemners (soft on crime).Henderson and Simon (1994) criticized neutralization theory as deficient because of an intentional disregard for the effects of cultural and societal norms. They pointed out that cultural patterns of crime have been shown to exist.Drawing from Mills and control, differential association, and neutralization theories, Henderson and Simon (1994) made the following theoretical statements:1. Criminal behavior is widespread in American society, including within the criminal justice system. It is widespread because it is often learned, tolerated and/or encouraged within the organizational contexts that make up criminal justice agencies....2. Only a tiny percentage of such crimes are explained by extreme behaviors of abnormal personalities.... The behavior and the ideologies that justify and excuse them are part of an organization's cultural value system.3. Crime as caused by the inability of immature individuals to delay gratification is a widespread occurrence, so widespread that it is part of the American character....We are not saying that human nature is evil.... We are saying that people are born innocent and relatively "blank" concerning their criminal propensities, and that criminal behavior is a socially acquired attribute. (Henderson & Simon, 1994, pp. 34-35)Sherman (1974c) wrote that it is appropriate to begin corruption causes and effects theorization with a simple model. He chose to "treat police corruption simply as a dependent variable—as effect not cause" (p. 2). However, he pointed out the complexity of the issue by asking: "Why are there different kinds and extents of police corruption in different communities, and in the same communities at different points in their history?" (p. 3). Sherman proposed a sociological theory of police corruption containing the following propositions that are identified as independent variables, or more likely, interdependent or covariant:COMMUNITY STRUCTURE1. There will be less police corruption in a community with little anomie, in terms of corrupters and corruptees.2. There will be less police corruption in communities with a more public-regarding ethos.3. There will be less police corruption in a community with less culture conflict.ORGANIZATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS4. A punishment-centered police bureaucracy will have the least corruption, a representative pattern will have more, and a mock pattern will have the most. [In a representative pattern there is enforcement of and obedience to rules to which workers can contribute. A mock pattern exists when action is only taken due to bad publicity.]5. There will be less corruption in a police agency having leadership highly reputed for integrity.6. There will be less organized police corruption when there is less work group solidarity.7. The less gradual the probable steps in a corrupt policeman's moral career, the less the ultimate 'seriousness' (self-defined) of the grafting.8. The greater the policeman's perception of legitimate advancement opportunities, the less likelihood there will be of their accepting corruption opportunities.LEGAL OPPORTUNITIES9. A decrease in either the scope of morals laws or the demand for the services they proscribe, while holding the other constant, will reduce police corruption opportunities (also the converse).10. An increase in either the scope of the regulative law or the economic incentive to violate it, while holding the other constant, will increase corruption opportunities (also the converse).CORRUPTION CONTROLS11. There will be a greater perceived risk of apprehension for corruption in police agencies that have an internal investigation unit.12. There will be proportionately less undiscovered corruption in police agencies that have an internal investigation unit using proactive methods.13. Controls will decrease corruption only when they can avoid amplifying the corruption's extent or methods.14. Less corruption will go undiscovered in a police agency watched by a vigorous and uncensored news media. (Sherman, 1974c, pp. 31-32)A study conducted by Herbert W. Eber, presented in 1991 at the annual meeting of Multivariate Experimental Psychology, as reported by Lorr and Strack (1994), administered a Clinical Analysis Questionnaire to about 15,000 police officer candidates to determine personality characteristics. The most distinctive finding was that personality profiles “were characterized by a strong pattern of self-discipline or Control, Tough Poise, and low Anxiety” (p. 200).Hyams (1990) conducted a study in which he hypothesized that police officers having unethical attitudes would be found to have higher narcissism (or selfism), and have a perception of their policing role as being more oriented toward arrest than service. In this study involving police officers from one West Coast agency, this hypothesis was confirmed; in addition, he found that[t]hose who are officers out of the academy, with higher levels of narcissism, a role perception oriented more toward arrest and apprehension and higher levels of dedication were found to have less ethical attitudes. (Hyams, 1990, p. 89)In 1998, Chamberlin, using Hyams’ police ethical attitudes instrument, conducted an experiment wherein this instrument was administered to treatment and control groups (pretest), followed by an 8-hour in-service training session on ethics for the treatment group. Six to eight weeks later, the instrument was again administered (posttest).The treatment group was found to show no difference in ethical attitudes between the pretest and the posttest. However, the control group was found to have “significantly increased their scores in the ethics, selfism, and role scales,” an indication of a tendency to have a more positive view of unethical behavior (Chamberlin, 1998, p. 82). Chamberlin does make a cautionary statement that because of the necessity of an “extended training effort and repeated testing, the probability of threats to the internal validity of the study due to history [outside influences such as the known focus of the testing] and maturation [gaining in knowledge over time] were significant” (p. 54).Sherman (1974b) used symbolic interationist theory to explain the existence of police corruption. The corrupt cop appears to have a moral view that differs from the view held prior to becoming an officer, and differs from the morality of his family, thus showing divergence and conflict of views.The school stems from the early work of George Herbert Meade, who saw life as a “conversation of significant symbols,” a process in which one continually defines and redefines one's self as a result of interacting with others. In this school of thought, police bribe-taking is to be explained as an individual process of becoming for each policeman, not as a static or “pressured” result of larger community structure. (Sherman, 1974b, p. 172)Consistent with the findings of the Mollen Commission cited earlier, wherein it is stated that unchecked excessive force is a precursor to corruption, Sherman (1974) indicated that corruption of a police officer is gradual and is characterized by the stages of contingencies, moral experiences, and apologia.Contingencies are circumstances or problems which a person must face, often for purely accidental reasons. The moral experience is a reaction to contingencies, often involving decision of action, that alters the "framework of imagery" in which a person evaluates himself and others. The moral experience is a benchmark between the stages in a moral career, which usually culminate (for the deviant) in an apologia: a distorted image of one's life course that brings it into alignment with the basic values of his society. (Sherman, 1974, p. 194)"Mills argued that people often experience their everyday, private lives as 'a series of traps'" (Henderson & Simon, 1994, p. 35). By this, he meant that people are unaware of how their behavior is unavoidably shaped by their immediate environment. Empirical evidence indicates that as violence-prone officers engage in subsequent confrontations, those confrontations are of increasing intensity (Babcock, 1998).Taylor and Braswell (1978) stated, "All police officers violate departmental rules and regulations and sometimes criminal statutes; it is inherent in their discretionary powers" (p. 177). They quoted a former officer as saying, "It's like a spider web, you're drawn in toward the center" (p. 177), with the center being the point where you have engaged in enough corrupt behavior that you must look the other way when a fellow officer takes another step outside the boundaries.In a similar vein, M. David Ermann (cited in Henderson & Simon, 1994) believed “that white-collar deviance takes place incrementally by merging normal administrative behavior with wrongdoing" (p. 28). In addition, new employees go along with behavior they find present upon their arrival, particularly in organizations that are results oriented. "Organizational crime also frequently occurs in instances where corporate employees are socially and spatially mobile, where they do not consider themselves part of the community in which they live" (p. 29).Reference:Robb, D. L. (2002). An investigation of self-control and its relationship to ethical attitudes in criminal justice personnel. Dissertation Abstracts International, 62 (12), 4343. (UMI No. 3036984)