Effect on Leadership Role with His Officers

Sheriff Jones’ priorities influence his leadership behavior and the conduct of the other officers. His leadership style would resemble a transactional model as discussed in the management module. This leadership approach is premised on the idea that a quid pro quo occurs between a leader and his followers (Scott & Byrd, 2012). In such a case, the leader specifies the conditions under which the subordinates must work, and the subordinates perform what is expected of them. Moreover, his leadership role could be affected by his junior officers since his actions will directly influence their beliefs, attitudes, and values. It is believed that subordinates could significantly affect the Sheriff’s leadership of his people .and the judiciousness with which he uses his coercive authority. Such an influence could generate greater congruence between the officers’ attitudes and the Sheriff’s expectations hence increase the consistency between the officers’ attitudes and behaviors.

Effect on His Interaction with another Agency

The sheriff is actively involved in obstruction of justice following a murder investigation by a colleague. He is knowingly covering up for the perpetrator, and he must be held accountable for what happened. His interaction with the FBI would not be honest since he has to lie to the FBI and offer false statements as part of the serious investigations into the case. Instead, he should have served as an example to other officers within the department that the FBI must be given full cooperation in such issues. However, the Sheriff deliberately misled the FBI investigations and the jury although he is a sworn law enforcement officer. His actions were expected to be honest, and the other agency should not tolerate anything less. Therefore, ignoring police...
...

The Sheriff consciously omitted some details to cover up for the perpetrator. The Sheriff must be charged with filing a false incident report with the intention of hindering the FBI investigation, making a false statement about the incident and obstruction of justice by giving false statements to the FBI investigators. Such crimes could earn the Sheriff a maximum of 20 years in prison for giving wrong information with the intent to hinder FBI investigations and at least another ten years for obstruction of justice (Scott & Byrd, 2012).

Effect on Community Relations and Cooperation with the FBI

Sheriff Jones’s behavior would have a great impact on community relations and community cooperation with the FBI. One impact that his behavior would have is that the community’s public trust and respect for the department would reduce significantly. Any misconduct by a Sheriff, especially discrimination based on race reduces the community’s confidence in the honesty, integrity, and fairness of the Sheriff’s department and the police institution as a whole. In this case, the Sheriff has been found guilty of various ethical offenses like consciously omitting some details to cover up for the perpetrator. This will result in the miscarriage of justice, and the community will be uncomfortable working with him in future. The Sheriff must be charged with filing a false incident report with the intention of hindering the FBI investigation, making a false statement about the incident and obstruction of justice by giving false statements to the FBI investigators. Instead of inspiring confidence among community members in the department, the Sheriff convinced the public that it is not only possible but also easy to buy the police. I must say that the Sheriff’s actions damaged the community’s trust in the…