Policing in the United States

¶ … Individuals Who Changed Policing in the United States

Ernesto Miranda -- Criminal Defendant

In 1963, Ernesto Miranda was arrested in Phoenix, Arizona on suspicion of rape based strictly on circumstantial evidence in the form of a description of the assailant's car and a partial license plate furnished to the police by the brother of the victim (Schmalleger, 2009). While in police custody, Miranda was interrogated for two hours without the presence of an attorney during which he was informed that he had been positively identified. He was then identified in person by the victim after which he confessed and signed a written confession of guilt to the rape charge. Later, his court appointed attorney objected to the prosecution's introduction at trial of the written confession on two specific grounds: First, it violated the defendant's right under the Fifth Constitutional Amendment against compelled self-incrimination. Second, it violated his rights under the Sixth Constitutional Amendment to be represented by legal counsel in connection with any criminal charges brought by the state. The case was eventually decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1966, in a ruling that overturned the conviction and laid out specific rules that have governed American police arrest and interrogation procedure ever since (Schmalleger, 2009).

Since the Miranda decision, the prosecution may not introduce evidence of confession extracted from criminal defendants unless they are first advised of their Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights (Schmalleger, 2009). That rule fundamentally changed American policing in that it had previously been very common for police to use aggressive interrogation tactics to extract confessions from arrestees in their custody. Today, virtually all arrestees are advised of their right to remain silent, of their right to request the presence of an attorney, and of their right to a court-appointed attorney if necessary before being questioned in police custody. Police generally comply with those requirements because the penalty for failing to do so is exclusion at trial of any evidence adduced improperly (Schmalleger, 2009).

Frank Serpico -- NYPD Police Officer 1960-1972

At the time that Frank Serpico served as a New York City Police Department (NYPD) police officer, corruption was rampant throughout the entire police department, the first and largest police department in the United States (Delattre. 2006). That corruption existed at all levels of the department from the street to the office of the Police Commissioner. Patrol officers routinely extorted bribes or stole money and drugs from criminals, even returning the drugs to the street by selling them to other dealers. Those types of practices were standard operating procedure to such a degree that police officers (like Fran Serpico) who refused to participate became social exiles among their fellow officers out of suspicions that they could not be trusted (Delattre, 2006). After trying unsuccessfully to report the problems to superiors, Serpico eventually contributed to a New York Times report detailing police corruption in New York City (Delattre, 2006; Schmalleger, 2009).