Re: The Knapp Commission Report on Police Corruption: Commis
Posted: Tue Jul 22, 2014 10:41 pm
Chapter Thirteen: INTRADEPARTMENTAL PAYMENTS
According to every police officer who cooperated with the Commission, it was common practice for policemen to make payments to each other for services rendered, ranging from the payment of a couple of dollars for typing up arrest reports to the payment of hundreds of dollars for choice assignments.
In any large organization a certain amount of favoritism is bound to exist, but generally it does not progress to the point where favors are routinely bought and sold, as was the case in the Police Department. A likely explanation for intradepartmental gratuities is that the system permitted officers assigned to desk jobs to share in the profits realized by those in the more lucrative outside jobs. For example, as Officer Phillips explained, when a plaincothesman vouchered many thousands of dollars found in a raid, the officers at the precinct assumed that he kept back a goodly sum for himself and expected a tip of at least a few dollars. This practice wreaked a genuine hardship on honest officers, who had to payout of their own pockets to get things typed. The Commission heard numerous allegations of police officers paying other officers to handle routine work. In the course of the various investigations, investigators encountered considerable specific evidence of this practice, of which the following are typical.
Payment for Paperwork: Police duties often involve a good deal of paperwork, ranging from evidence vouchers, complaints and arrest reports, which must be filled out in special form with numerous copies, to requests for departmental recognition. Sergeant Durk told the Commission that it was standard practice, citywide, for an arresting officer to pay $5 to the desk officer and $2 or $3 to the clerical man for each gambling arrest. On the arrest of a prostitute, payments were $2 to the desk officer and $1 to the clerical man. When an arresting officer brings in evidence connected with an arrest, it must be vouchered, which in the case of a large number of bills means that the serial number of each must be listed -- obviously, a laborious process -- and the desk officer's assistant, who is called the 124 man, is given the job. According to Sergeant Durk, the 124 man was also given a couple of dollars to expedite matters.
When a police officer feels he has done an outstanding bit of police work, he will often put in a request for a departmental citation, which must be typed up in a special form. Patrolman Droge testified that it was customary for the clerical man to receive $5 for this service, but he pointed out that the clerical man "probably would type it up for you whether you gave him $5 or not, but it would certainly be expedited if $5 were included." However, he went on to tell of the first time he gave a request for recognition to a clerical man to be typed, when he had been on the force only six weeks and had not yet learned that the clerical man should be tipped: "When I handed in the scratch copy with no $5 ... there was no recommendation. There was no interview. It was never sent in."
Payment for Temporary Assignments: The roll call man in each precinct is in charge of making temporary assignments, designating men to fill in for others who are on vacation, out sick, or in court. He was routinely paid $5 or so by patrolmen in exchange for plum assignments, particularly for lucrative ones like riding in a sector car. Patrolman Phillips paid one roll call man $25 for a week's assignment to an unmarked car, and both Droge and Logan stated that the practice of paying for temporary assignments was a common one. Payments were also made for getting one's choice of days off and of vacation dates. Phillips testified that the roll call man in a busy precinct could make $200 a month in this way.
Payment for Permanent Assignments: The Commission heard numerous allegations from policemen that in some precincts, police officers bought permanent assignments from the administrative lieutenant for various amounts, commonly $500. Some officers were confident that lieutenants on occasion would split this money with precinct commanders.
The Commission also heard numerous unsubstantiated rumors that appointment as a detective could be bought for a price which ranged from $500 to $2,000. While working for the Commission, Patrolman Phillips at one point contacted a policeman serving as a high police official's chauffeur to discuss the possibility of buying his way into detectives. While wearing a transmitter, Phillips held several conversations with this patrolman, who told him that the usual price was $500, but that since Phillips had once been a detective and had been demoted, the price for him would be $1,000. The proposed transfer could not be pursued because it would have conflicted with Phillips' other undercover activities.
Buying Medical Discharges: The Commission received several allegations that in the past police officers have bribed certain police surgeons to certify that they were permanently disabled, making it possible for those officers to retire early and receive all or part of their pensions. One doctor, a former police surgeon who has been retired for twenty years, told the Commission that surgeons took such kickbacks when he was in the Department, and that he believed the practice still to be in existence. The Commission was unable to corroborate these allegations.
A number of high-ranking police officers have in recent years received disability retirements only to take civilian jobs as arduous as those they left. Officers who retire with disability pensions, who later get paying jobs, may technically have their pensions reduced or eliminated. However, an officer at the Pension Unit told the Commission that this is never done -- a policy which might encourage fraudulent disability retirements. This practice is, of course, not necessarily the result of bribery.
An encouraging sign that current attitudes may be better than those reported in the past was the action of the current chief surgeon who, when serving as a police surgeon in late 1970, turned in a patrolman for attempting to bribe him, and the patrolman was suspended without pension.
Sale of Information: Patrolman Phillips testified that police officers would on occasion sell each other information to be used in blackmailing criminals. This most often happened among plainclothesmen, when one of them had information on a criminal outside his jurisdiction, in which case he would sell the information to another plainclothesman who had jurisdiction, and the plainclothesman who had bought the information would then use it to make a score.
On one occasion, Phillips reported to the Commission that he had just been approached by two plainclothesmen who used an illegal wire recorder to bug pay telephones in an effort to get information on gamblers. When they had the information, they would threaten the gambler with arrest and score him. In this fashion, the officers had obtained information on a bookmaking operation outside their division and were seeking to sell it to Phillips. Under Commission surveillance, Phillips bargained with them about buying the information and about buying recording equipment from them. Since the Commission's investigation was drawing to a close the deals were never consummated.
Comments
Payments like those made to the clerical man, roll call man, desk officer, and the 124 man (the desk officer's assistant) should be easier to eliminate than corruption on the street because they take place in the station house in full view of many supervisory officers, and because the amounts are usually small.
The practice of buying assignments poses a more serious and difficult problem, but one which the Department's announced policy of accountability could go a long way toward solving. The commander of a precinct is directly responsible for the assignment of his men, and where the commander is both honest and conscientious the problem need not arise.
According to every police officer who cooperated with the Commission, it was common practice for policemen to make payments to each other for services rendered, ranging from the payment of a couple of dollars for typing up arrest reports to the payment of hundreds of dollars for choice assignments.
In any large organization a certain amount of favoritism is bound to exist, but generally it does not progress to the point where favors are routinely bought and sold, as was the case in the Police Department. A likely explanation for intradepartmental gratuities is that the system permitted officers assigned to desk jobs to share in the profits realized by those in the more lucrative outside jobs. For example, as Officer Phillips explained, when a plaincothesman vouchered many thousands of dollars found in a raid, the officers at the precinct assumed that he kept back a goodly sum for himself and expected a tip of at least a few dollars. This practice wreaked a genuine hardship on honest officers, who had to payout of their own pockets to get things typed. The Commission heard numerous allegations of police officers paying other officers to handle routine work. In the course of the various investigations, investigators encountered considerable specific evidence of this practice, of which the following are typical.
Payment for Paperwork: Police duties often involve a good deal of paperwork, ranging from evidence vouchers, complaints and arrest reports, which must be filled out in special form with numerous copies, to requests for departmental recognition. Sergeant Durk told the Commission that it was standard practice, citywide, for an arresting officer to pay $5 to the desk officer and $2 or $3 to the clerical man for each gambling arrest. On the arrest of a prostitute, payments were $2 to the desk officer and $1 to the clerical man. When an arresting officer brings in evidence connected with an arrest, it must be vouchered, which in the case of a large number of bills means that the serial number of each must be listed -- obviously, a laborious process -- and the desk officer's assistant, who is called the 124 man, is given the job. According to Sergeant Durk, the 124 man was also given a couple of dollars to expedite matters.
When a police officer feels he has done an outstanding bit of police work, he will often put in a request for a departmental citation, which must be typed up in a special form. Patrolman Droge testified that it was customary for the clerical man to receive $5 for this service, but he pointed out that the clerical man "probably would type it up for you whether you gave him $5 or not, but it would certainly be expedited if $5 were included." However, he went on to tell of the first time he gave a request for recognition to a clerical man to be typed, when he had been on the force only six weeks and had not yet learned that the clerical man should be tipped: "When I handed in the scratch copy with no $5 ... there was no recommendation. There was no interview. It was never sent in."
Payment for Temporary Assignments: The roll call man in each precinct is in charge of making temporary assignments, designating men to fill in for others who are on vacation, out sick, or in court. He was routinely paid $5 or so by patrolmen in exchange for plum assignments, particularly for lucrative ones like riding in a sector car. Patrolman Phillips paid one roll call man $25 for a week's assignment to an unmarked car, and both Droge and Logan stated that the practice of paying for temporary assignments was a common one. Payments were also made for getting one's choice of days off and of vacation dates. Phillips testified that the roll call man in a busy precinct could make $200 a month in this way.
Payment for Permanent Assignments: The Commission heard numerous allegations from policemen that in some precincts, police officers bought permanent assignments from the administrative lieutenant for various amounts, commonly $500. Some officers were confident that lieutenants on occasion would split this money with precinct commanders.
The Commission also heard numerous unsubstantiated rumors that appointment as a detective could be bought for a price which ranged from $500 to $2,000. While working for the Commission, Patrolman Phillips at one point contacted a policeman serving as a high police official's chauffeur to discuss the possibility of buying his way into detectives. While wearing a transmitter, Phillips held several conversations with this patrolman, who told him that the usual price was $500, but that since Phillips had once been a detective and had been demoted, the price for him would be $1,000. The proposed transfer could not be pursued because it would have conflicted with Phillips' other undercover activities.
Buying Medical Discharges: The Commission received several allegations that in the past police officers have bribed certain police surgeons to certify that they were permanently disabled, making it possible for those officers to retire early and receive all or part of their pensions. One doctor, a former police surgeon who has been retired for twenty years, told the Commission that surgeons took such kickbacks when he was in the Department, and that he believed the practice still to be in existence. The Commission was unable to corroborate these allegations.
A number of high-ranking police officers have in recent years received disability retirements only to take civilian jobs as arduous as those they left. Officers who retire with disability pensions, who later get paying jobs, may technically have their pensions reduced or eliminated. However, an officer at the Pension Unit told the Commission that this is never done -- a policy which might encourage fraudulent disability retirements. This practice is, of course, not necessarily the result of bribery.
An encouraging sign that current attitudes may be better than those reported in the past was the action of the current chief surgeon who, when serving as a police surgeon in late 1970, turned in a patrolman for attempting to bribe him, and the patrolman was suspended without pension.
Sale of Information: Patrolman Phillips testified that police officers would on occasion sell each other information to be used in blackmailing criminals. This most often happened among plainclothesmen, when one of them had information on a criminal outside his jurisdiction, in which case he would sell the information to another plainclothesman who had jurisdiction, and the plainclothesman who had bought the information would then use it to make a score.
On one occasion, Phillips reported to the Commission that he had just been approached by two plainclothesmen who used an illegal wire recorder to bug pay telephones in an effort to get information on gamblers. When they had the information, they would threaten the gambler with arrest and score him. In this fashion, the officers had obtained information on a bookmaking operation outside their division and were seeking to sell it to Phillips. Under Commission surveillance, Phillips bargained with them about buying the information and about buying recording equipment from them. Since the Commission's investigation was drawing to a close the deals were never consummated.
Comments
Payments like those made to the clerical man, roll call man, desk officer, and the 124 man (the desk officer's assistant) should be easier to eliminate than corruption on the street because they take place in the station house in full view of many supervisory officers, and because the amounts are usually small.
The practice of buying assignments poses a more serious and difficult problem, but one which the Department's announced policy of accountability could go a long way toward solving. The commander of a precinct is directly responsible for the assignment of his men, and where the commander is both honest and conscientious the problem need not arise.