Police Perpetrated Domestic Violence

What is Police Perpetrated Domestic Violence?

Defining Domestic Violence by Police Officers

Domestic violence is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon. It remains a global issue that continues to be reported in epidemic proportion.  Researchers have endlessly researched domestic violence in many ways: causation of domestic violence, dynamics of domestic violence, scope of the problem, the cycle of violence, the power imbalance between victim and batterer, the impact that domestic violence has on society as a whole; including statistics, cost of health care from injuries sustained by the victim (including mental health services), and rehabilitation for the offender, among other penalties. After decades of research, domestic violence still remains a global issue.

Domestic violence by police officers is yet another area of study and is considered a sub-population of abuse. What does that mean? With domestic violence being the general term for domestic violence, police perpetrated domestic violence (PPDV) is another term utilized to describe a particular culture who engages in domestic violence.  In this book we will examine the police culture and police officers who perpetrate domestic violence.

Police perpetrated domestic violence (PPDV) is defined as domestic violence perpetrated by a law enforcement officer.  The International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) defines domestic violence by police officers as follows: "Domestic Violence" refers to an act or pattern of violence perpetrated by a police officer upon his or her intimate partner not done in defense of self or others, including but not limited to the following: Bodily injury or threat of imminent bodily injury, Sexual battery, Physical restraint, Property crime directed at the victim, Stalking, Violation of a court order of protection or similar injuction, Death threats or death" (IACP 2002).
Further, the IACP defines an intimate partner as "An intimate partner of a police officer is any person who meets one or more of the following criteria: Is or was legally married to the police officer, Has a child in common with the police officer, Has or had a dating relationship with the police officer, Is specified as an intimate partner by state law, Is cohabitating or has cohabitated romantically with the police officer. Domestic Violence perpetrated by law enforcement is considered a sub-population of domestic abusers which contains cultural factors with the police culture. 

Statistics

Domestic violence by police officers continues to remain a health issue among police families and victims; and PPDV remains a problem within the law enforcement community. The psychology profession and research arena have struggled to provide interventions and strategies due to lack of cooperation by law enforcement agencies, and lack of evidenced based practice and empirical studies related to the police culture in relationship to domestic violence.  “Researchers have established that law enforcement officers consistently report using violence with their intimate partners, although the reported rates have varied. Klein and Klein (2000) found rates lower than that of the general population – around 5% – while other studies found much higher rates, up to 40% (Neidig, Russell, & Seng, 1992). Feder found 24% in 1997; Ryan found 10% in 2000; Gershon found 9% in 2000; and Johnson found 40% in 1991. While no precise rate of officer-involved domestic violence has been formally established, it is clear that officer-involved domestic violence exists and deserves careful attention (IACP, 2003b)” (Oehme & Martin, 2011).  

Research has revealed that domestic violence by the general population is underreported and domestic violence by police officers is believed to lack sufficient statistical data partially due to the police policing themselves; thus resulting in lack of data, and altered results as to how many police officers engage in domestic violence.

When a police officer is charged with domestic violence, the administration of the police department and Internal Affairs investigate the incident.  Many times, the department attempts to resolve the issue internally. What does that mean? This means that the police department may contact the victim, interview the victim, and tell the victim that they will handle it without going through the typical channels that a victim would normally go through if the perpetrator was not a police officer.

 Furthermore, another complaint among victims includes not receiving an official or formal complaint number. This is because the police report is not available in the records department and remains part of the individual officer’s personal file.  This can leave the victim vulnerable with lack of supporting documentation. When a victim goes to file for a personal protection order (PPO), supported documentation is essential. This is only one reason why documentation is vital.

The department will contact the officer involved in the DV incident and will remind the officer of professional conduct both on and off the job. The administration will often leave the officer with a warning and the officer who engaged in DV leaves the victim with a warning of their own (Not to call the department to report DV) and the violence escalates for the victim. The lack of responsibility by the department, the lack of accountability by the officer, in addition to lack of punishment imposed on the officer puts the victim, society and the law enforcement community in a precarious position.

A very important and powerful variable that may be partially responsible for the “lack of’s” is the federal law that may threaten the officer’s job when charging the officer. The Lautenberg Amendment to the control gun control act (1968), family violence act states that anyone convicted of domestic violence cannot carry a firearm. This puts the police officer in a precarious position since part of the officer’s tools includes a firearm.

Domestic Violence a Historical View

Police personality has been an interest to psychologists for decades; however, police psychology was not recognized as a formal discipline until the late 1970’s and early 1980’s; with police brutality at the forefront of interest to psychologists. Psychologists were interested in why some police officers abused citizens whereas other officers did not.  Another interest to psychologists was how police work affected the police officer’s overall well-being, including physical and mental health and family conflict.  There was very little interest in domestic violence within the police family during that era since domestic violence was considered "a private family matter." Family Violence was expected to be kept a secret and was commonplace among families. It wasn't until the feminine movement began to emerge during the 1970's that caught the attention of the criminal justice system, medical and mental health fields.  In fact, "until 1976, rape laws in all 50 states contained a Marital Rape Exemption specifically to prevent husbands who raped their wives from being charged with a crime" (RAINN, 2009). In addition, it wasn't until 1996 that marital rape was abolished as even being a crime. this meant that a man could legally rape his wife and it was considered to be a wife's marital responsibility to have sex with him when and if he wanted to engage in sexual activity. This is disturbing and reveals how very little domestic violence, including marital rape has evolved over the years. Since police family violence  is considered a sub-population of abuse, and adding the lack of information and societal views on domestic violence in general, in addition to the dynamics of police culture, training, and abuse, makes it more complex and changes the outcome for victims.

Domestic violence perpetrated by law enforcement is a foreign area of study for the scholarly arena. The limited research available on this topic has revealed that police officers possess many of the same personality traits that domestic abusers possess such as authoritarianism, coercion, manipulation, deception, psychological tactics, isolation, high rates of substance abuse, relationship issues, and a sense of entitlement are examples.  Police training adds to the complexity, power imbalance and overall dynamics within the individual officer’s relationship.  
Additionally, police officers are trained to control and subdue crowds and individuals. It is suggested that police training, tactics, techniques, in addition to police personality traits further enhance domestic violence within the police family.  Police officers learn to control situations during training and it takes a firm, assertive, authoritative demeanor to gain control over a person or situation. Police training skills used on the streets are often carried over into the home causing conflict and arguments, potentially resulting in domestic violence. “The competitive and controlling nature of many police officers leads them to want to win arguments rather than resolve problems” (Nicoletti & Spencer-Thomas, 2000).

The Police Personality - Personality Theory and Development

            Research has shown that personality development is a result of multiple factors and one theory is neither right or wrong in identifying how and why people develop certain personality traits. Foundational theorists such as Piaget, known for cognitive development; Freud’s psychosocial development theory, in addition to Freud’s Structural Model of Personality; Erikson’s Stages of Psychosocial Development and Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral Development; and Nature versus Nurture debate all provide well-formulated theories of personality development; however, it is an integrated theory that possess a better explanation for one’s personality and behavioral traits.

Integrated theoretical causes include a person’s biopsychosocial makeup and development to be responsible for personality development.  This includes individual life circumstances, experiences, genetics, environment, socioeconomic status, educational status, physical health, mental health, disability, cultural influence, race, gender, creed, religion, and occupational influence that are responsible for the way people think, decisions they make, how they feel and perceive the world and choice of lifestyle.   “Occupational environments can influence and shape perceptions and interpretations of events and situations” (Skolnick).

 It is suggested that individual personality traits along with police training constitutes the “Police Personality.” “Insight into the occupational environment of police officers can help to provide a more complete understanding of officer behavior and decision-making” (Skolnick).  

Police Personality

Personality structure among police officers is better understood when applying an integrated theoretical approach to personality.  Personality has been described to varying degrees in the literature. I have provided definitions of personality defined: "Personality is the entire mental organization of a human being at any stage of his development. It embraces every phase of human character: intellect, temperament, skill, morality, and every attitude that has been built up in the course of one's life" (Warren & Carmichael, 1930, p. 333). A second definition of personality is described as:  "An individual's pattern of psychological processes arising from motives, feelings, thoughts, and other major areas of psychological function. Personality is expressed through its influences on the body, in conscious mental life, and through the individual's social behavior." (Mayer, 2005).          Personality includes a person's thoughts, feelings, and behaviors to which make an individual unique. There are components of personality that pertain to all populations which include consistency, behaviors, thoughts, and feelings stimulated by psychological and physiological processes. For example, individuals possess consistent behaviors and traits across most situations. Additionally, it is suggested that our personality is a psychological phenomenon that occurs psychologically; and this phenomenon is influenced by a psychological response that effects how we respond to environmental stimuli. Furthermore, personality is not only seen in behavior, it is also evident in how we think, what we feel and how we engage in our personal and professional relationships and socialization. 

Police Personality Traits

Understanding basic concepts relating to personality will help to identify police personality and whether certain personality traits are responsible for the high rate of domestic violence within law enforcement.  Typical personality traits possessed by police officers include authoritative, suspicious, aggressive, assertive, dominance, conservative, isolation, entitlement, manipulative, deception, risk taking, thrill seeking, controlling, solidarity and cohesion among the profession to be among the most common. 

Skolnick has labeled the police personality as a “working personality” of police that is influenced by police culture and environment.  “The working personality of police is shaped by the need to establish one’s authority, the ever-present threat of danger, and the need for efficiency. The working personality influences the behavioral responses of police officers, providing a unique way to study and understand police behavior. The isolation police experience from the public serves to strengthen police solidarity and the working personality of officers” (Skolnick).

Skolnick describes the working personality as comprising of two principal variables, danger and authority resulting in a third personality variable trait suspiciousness (Skolnick). Police officers are trained to recognize “normal” in order to be able to discern situations or suspects who may be suspicious or dangerous. For example, police officers are trained to take notice of their neighborhoods where they patrol in order to identify and spot things that are out of the ordinary for that particular neighborhood. In addition, constantly scanning surroundings for danger and suspicious activity helps the officer to identify the potential for danger; however constant hyper-vigilance can affect the police officer’s overall mental well-being. Hyper-vigilance becomes habit on duty and off duty.

Another personality trait of police officers is conservative traits. Police officers feel safe and secure with consistent behaviors and acts because unpredictable behavior or acts can cost them their life. Without consistency and what the officer perceives as “normal” puts the officer on edge and heightens their threat of safety and security.

Moreover, Skolnick describes the fine line between friendships and isolation that often develops between police officers and ordinary citizens “A policeman’s work makes him less desirable as a friend, since norms of friendship implicate others in his work. Accordingly, the element of danger isolates the policeman socially from that segment of the population which he regards as symbolically dangerous and also from the conventional population with whom he identifies” (Skolnick). This belief and identification builds the solidarity among law enforcement.

Additionally, authority reinforces the isolation between officer and ordinary citizens. The paradoxical personality traits of police officers may be responsible for being accused of hypocrisy due to their own risky thrill-seeking behaviors. It is suggested that the kind of person who responds well to danger is also a person who does not always uphold a high moral code. Responding to danger requires risk, aggressiveness, assertiveness, deception and creativity.  Living by a high moral code does not always allow for these behaviors.

Additionally, police officers are skilled at manipulation and utilizing coercion to elicit information. This may require the officer to lie to a suspect to elicit a confession for example, and lying is not a trait of someone who holds a high moral standard resulting in further isolation and encourages solidarity among law enforcement. Police officers who are skilled at manipulation and deception not only make effective officers, but utilize these tactics to abuse, coerce, intimidate, harass, hurt, and manipulation their intimate partners and the criminal justice system.

Police Culture and Training

            Research has suggested that police culture plays a significant role in domestic violence perpetrated by police officers. Police culture has been in existence since its establishment in 1829 by Sir Robert Peel who launched the first paramilitary modeled police organization in London, establishing the London Police Department (Uchida 2010; Stevens 2008)” (Cochrane, 2008). “The paramilitary hierarchical chain of command intended to promote respect for authority, building camaraderie among those in uniform, and emphasizing ethical behavior from all officers would establish the foundation of police culture and influence that is still in existence today” (Uchida 2010; Black 1991) (Cochrane, 2011).

Solidarity among law enforcement has come to be known as “The Blue Wall” and is not only commonplace among law enforcement but expected among the profession. The solidarity and strong sense of loyalty, lack of monitoring within the law enforcement culture; ultimately results in the police policing themselves. The lack of policies in place in addition to the absence of enforcement of laws and policies within law enforcement has made domestic violence among law enforcement difficult to challenge, treat, and resolve. 

Research reveals the level of lethality involved in domestic violence by police officers as the most lethal form of domestic violence.  This may be due to the accessibility of weapons and training.  Additionally, police officers work within the very system where the victim will report the abuse and attempt to seek justice. The solidarity reaches far beyond the police department. It reaches into the judicial system where judges often side with the police officer. Judicial bias is common among police officers who engage in domestic violence and charged with the crime. It is suggested that working within the same system, the criminal justice arena, members of that system also feel the same sense of loyalty, preventing victims from seeking necessary actions to protect themselves from the abuse; such as obtaining a personal protection order. 
Personal protection orders are often denied by judges as a result of a federal law, The Lautenberg Amendment to the gun control act and family violence act (1968). This law prohibits any person convicted of domestic violence from possessing firearms including a police officer.  "A law enforcement officer with such a conviction cannot carry a gun" (Allen, Hibler, & Miller 2000). This poses a significant threat to the officer's position since carrying a gun is part of the tools of the trade of police work. Other professions do not have the same threat of a potential loss of employment when charged with domestic violence. 

 Police culture also influences victim assistance and response to the domestic violence complaint. It is suggested that as a result of the officer’s position and working within the criminal justice system where domestic violence is charged as a crime within the general population; is voided when the batterer is a police officer. A lack of cooperation by the police department in prosecuting the police batterer, in addition to domestic violence that is often covered up due to police cultural influence, the police policing themselves,  judicial bias, fear of liability within the police department and the Lautenberg amendment to the gun control act are all factors that are considered when charging a police officer with domestic violence. “In one study by Sgambelluri it is suggested that policing encourages and attracts individuals with characteristics associated with authoritarianism and many domestic abusers possess this same trait.

 Although policing may enhance or influence attitudes and behaviors to abuse, in itself policing does not cause domestic violence. It is the attitudes, behaviors and police training that can further enhance an abuser’s tactics on the victim” (Sgambelluri 2000).

Police Training and Tactics

            Police training and tactics begin early on, as early as the pre-employment phase. Police officers are trained to tell the evaluating psychologist and the Oral Review Board exactly what they want to hear, and not what they would actually say if they were telling the truth. This poses a question as to whether police departments across the country are hiring genuine well-adjusted police officers who are suited for the police profession.

With appropriate coaching and training, police candidates are being passed off as “Competent” or fit for duty when these individuals may not be psychologically fit.  “In studying domestic violence by police officers, it is important to determine whether the increased levels of domestic violence among law enforcement are due to characteristics of the individual officer; such as personality, background; conditions of the job itself or an interaction between the two” (Aamodt, 1998).  Alternatively, research suggests that it is both individual personality traits along with police culture and training that constitute the police personality.

            Common police training tactics used to perpetrate domestic violence by a police officer include utilizing departmental assets to harass, stalk, abuse, coerce or intimidate the victim; such as driving by the victim’s house to let her/him know that they are watching them; utilizing databases to obtain information on the victim and the victim’s friends and family; or putting taps on the phone of the victim; and utilizing other officers to further intimidate the victim and to cover-up misconduct. Other tactics include using physical control maneuvers that will not leave marks on the victim, arresting the victim, and twisting the truth to make the victim look like the problem.

Creative Report Writing 101

Police officers are responsible for writing police reports and they know how to write a police report to their advantage in order to press charges against the victim. For those unfamiliar with domestic violence tactics used by police officers many may not believe a police officer could get away with doing this; however, it is a common tactic used in domestic violence by police officers or in excessive force cases. Police officers use this same tactic to write a police report to reflect a more different view of what actually happened when the officer or a fellow officer engages in police excessive force in an attempt to blame the excessive force as being necessary to subdue an alleged offender. This may be true in some cases. The offender is often surprised to see that the police report does not reflect the actual events that occurred. The same is true of police officers who engage in domestic violence and the police are called. Many times fellow officers will go along with their co-worker, the off-duty officer who perpetrated the domestic violence that resulted in the police being called, and the officers who arrive at the scene will write the report to benefit their fellow colleague.  Not all police officers will go along with the program and the officer will be arrested.

A more realistic scenario described by victims goes more like this: The police officer physically assaults the victim but doesn’t leave any marks. The victim calls the police and the offender laughs at her telling her “who do you think they’ll believe you or me?” This infuriates the victim even more and the victim calls the police. The police arrive and when the victim tells her side of the story, the officers ask to see if there are any physical injuries. The victim lifts her shirt to show the officers only to realize that there aren’t any marks, and if there are marks, they are lighter than the pain the victim is feels. The offending officer tells his fellow officers “She was coming at me with a knife, what was I supposed to do let her stab me?” Then the victim is arrested for felonious assault.  Police officers, society, and juries will typically believe a police officer over an alleged offender most of the time. Juries often believe that an offender is making up stories to avoid incarceration or other punishment by the court. The above example was an actual domestic incident between an actual victim and her police officer boyfriend.

Playing the Crazy Card

One of the most disturbing tactics among domestic violence by police officers is attempting to make the victim look crazy. Although this is common among all domestic abusers this tactic can have serious consequences for the victim. Common statements made by all domestic abusers in all populations may include: “She’s crazy: she’s bi-polar; she always does this on her period; she always acts like this once a month (referring to her menstrual cycle); she is emotionally unstable; I am worried about her, she has been acting very irrational lately; I’m not sure what to do anymore, I love her, but I can’t take her mental instability; look at her, look how she is behaving” and so on.

Even more devastating and harmful to the victim is to have the victim psychiatrically evaluated under false pretenses. This is done when the abuser, a police officer, states that the victim, his significant other, has threatened to commit suicide or harm him. Fellow officers are then called to the house with a petition to have the victim taken to a psychiatric hospital. What makes this more devastating to the victim is that the hospital rarely questions a police petition. The hospital realizes that if a patient is brought in by the police, then they must be in severe distress. According to Melton et al. “The jurisprudential basis of criminal law is the “police power,” which authorizes the state to protect the community and to “ensure domestic tranquility” (Melton et. al., 2007).  Additionally, “civil commitment states the terms describing the grounds for intervention such as “mental disorder,” a “need for treatment”, or is dangerous”. Police offices can and do write in their reports that their victim meets one of the criteria mentioned as an abusive tactic to control, humiliate, abuse or cover up the abuse that the perpetrator inflicted by making it appear as if it is the victim who is “mentally ill” or “mentally unstable.”

A common scenario involves the victim being taken to the hospital in handcuffs by the very officers she has eaten dinner with at family gatherings. They are the friends of her batterer, a police officer. She is embarrassed, humiliated, confused, angry, and traumatized. When she arrives at the hospital, the victim is rambling on trying to tell the nurse that she isn’t crazy and that her husband is a police officer and he did this to her. The victim is in extreme panic, her speech is pressured, she is crying hysterically. She is afraid at what will happen if they commit her. Everyone is afraid of the unknown, especially being admitted to a pysch unit of a hospital. The victim’s attempt to plead with the hospital staff that she is not crazy while she is crying, or yelling obscenities, and telling them the police did it only reinforces the police petition. The victim is in shock and her speech may be in incoherent.  

The nurse will do the initial assessment and medication is often recommended to calm the victim down. In an actual case, the nurse began to give the victim an injection of an anti-psychotic, Haloperidol. The victim was aware of patient rights and the right to refuse treatment. She refused the medication. The nurse was surprised at the patient’s request. The patient asked why she was being given this drug and the nurse responded by telling the victim that the police report stated that she was bi-polar. The victim was further traumatized. She had never had such a diagnosis; however, after this event, she was treated for Post-traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) as a result of the emotional and physical abuse.

This tactic has serious consequences on the victim’s overall mental health, in addition to her overall credibility in the event that she has to call the police again for help. The victim will be less likely to call the police for help in the future. This will have a significant impact on the power and control that the abuser has on the victim. He knows that she is afraid to call the police in the future because he tells her that her credibility is shot, and everyone already thinks she’s crazy.

This tactic can also have serious consequences on the victim if she is going through a divorce and fighting for custody of the children. Any medical or legal document can have an impact on any situation and the police batterer understands this.