NCJ Number
126937
Journal
Deviant Behavior Volume: 11 Dated: (1990) Pages: 61-73
Date Published
1990
Length
13 pages
Annotation
This article discusses the various circumstances when police officers lie, when this lying is expected, and when it is not. The two most common circumstances of lying are to avoid organizational discipline or criminal or civil liability and to "fluff up" evidence to make a more convincing case.
Abstract
The article states that lying and other deceptive practices are an integral part of the police officer's working environment. For example, police officers need to create false identities for undercover work, to make false promises to hostage takers, and to use techniques of interrogation which require deception and even outright lying. Police academies teach the impropriety of perjury and the need to record all incidents fully and accurately in all official reports; however, the officer soon learns from his peers that police lying is the norm under certain circumstances. The article then analyzes the taxomony of police lies; what is accepted lying and what is tolerated lying. Deviant police lies are then discussed in terms of support of perceived legitimate goals and of illegitimate goals. Perceived legitimate goals usually occur to "put criminals in jail," prevent crime, and perform various other policing responsibilities. Lies in support of illegitimate goals are told to effect an act of corruption or to protect the officer from discipline or liability. The effects of lying, accepted or not, overall are also discussed as well as how an organization should deal with the reality of police lies. The development and enforcement of a code of ethics and value statements for the organization are seen as crucial in creating a moral environment and in developing acceptable behavior by employees. 20 references (Author abstract modified)