Civil Liability: Holding Gov't Officials Accountable & Responsible - Essay Sample

Introduction

Civil liability requires that all officers serving the public must be accountable and answerable to the people they are serving at all times. The remedy of numerous civil cases is to hold all government officials, including the police officer accountable and responsible. Remedy exists in the form of a jury-mandated decision seeking to resolve the result of a dispute through the judicial ruling. The four primary types of civil remedies include fines, compensation, punitive remedy, and declaratory remedies. These remedies are intended to ensure justice is served, and the right punishment is administered. An example of a case that involved civil damages is the Ex-Fairfax officer Adams Torres vs. John Geer. Torres was to pay for the damages that he caused to Geer's family as a result of his reckless shooting.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Internal Affairs

Internal affairs in law enforcement are the agency that investigates claims of misconduct by police currently serving on the force. Because they are examining fellow officers, the department is isolated from the force-at-large and disclose to a prosecutorial board or the company's chief. Law enforcement officials ought to abide by the highest legal requirements. At times, mistakes will escalate to a degree involving a full disciplinary review and potentially extreme punishment. Several law enforcement departments are employing experts on internal affairs to figure out what went wrong and whether an officer is to a fault. Internal Affairs is a crucial element for preserving public trust in police departments and other fields in criminal justice, and internal investigators are intended to provide agencies with transparency.

In my opinion, internal affairs is not a good job for me because most internal affairs investigators are often viewed negatively and mocked by colleagues. Since law enforcement appears to be a close-knit organization, other officers of the department frequently mistrust those who are charged with investigating fellow officers. At the same time, ordinary citizens tend to suspect government investigations to cover up wrongdoing occurrences and to shield their own. This shows the hard work investigators have, and the lonely path they are taking. According to my career goals, I will love to associate with my fellow officers and the public. I do not want to create enemies while performing my official duties. The work description is wanting and tiresome.

Knapp Commission

In my opinion, Frank Serpico was a man who was doing his work as highlighted in his work description. As an internal affairs detective, he was tasked with the responsibility of exposing corrupt deeds inside the police department. He did a heroic act, but that was what he committed himself to do as a detective. Serpico was morally right to testify against fellow officers who were involved in corrupt acts. He risked his life to let the public know the truth, which made him a hero to the public and an enemy to his fellow officers. But he was just a man doing his job as an internal affairs detective.

Tennessee v Garner

The Tennessee v. Garner case is important in interpreting the federal policy since it sets the standard for a deadly police force. Such standards require that an officer should not shoot an unarmed fleeing criminal. Tennessee v. Garner prompted several law enforcement departments to amend their deadly force policy. Although others had previously put into place restrictions on the dangerous force policy. The Gamer decision made the difference in how often police officers shoot their guns since it emphasized circumstances where a police officer was permitted to fire their ammunition and situations where he or she was not allowed to shoot the criminal.

The perspective of the three dissenting judges was that when on duty, police officers sometimes have to take fast, spur-of-the-moment actions. They argued that the robbery and attack that occurs at home is linked to the burglary's already significant violence. The Tennessee legislation expresses the decision of the State legislature that such offenses that warrant the use of deadly force to safeguard the public from those who commit such crimes.

The Federal Policy on Shooting at Moving Cars

The Federal policy on firing at moving vehicles states that guns shall not be fired at a speeding car unless an individual in the vehicle is instantly endangering the policeman or another individual with excessive force by means apart from the vehicle. For this policy and section, the moving car of its own shall not impermissibly pose a threat that validates an officer's use of lethal force. An officer confronted by an oncoming vehicle shall step out of its way rather than discharging a firearm into it or any of its passengers.

Graham vs. Connor Case

Graham vs. Connor's case pleased most police officers because the U.S Supreme Court, the police's decision to use deadly forces, was to be analyzed under the 14th Amendment. The course claimed that the decision to as whether the police officer has used deadly force as required or not should be judged from the perspective of the police officer on duty and not with the benefits of an offender. This ruling gave the police powers to deal with criminals as they wished. Without the reasonableness, standard police officers can take the advantage to hurt people who are even harmless to the police and the society at large. The police officers were to weigh situations where they could use deadly force.