Procedural Justice July 2013 Voiceover 00:00 This is The Beat, a podcast series that keeps you in the know about the latest community policing topics facing our nation. TeNeane Bradford 00:08 Hello and welcome. My name is TeNeane Bradford, and on behalf of the COPS Office, I’d like to introduce to you Chief Michael Davis from the Brooklyn Park (Minnesota) Police Department. Chief Davis is here today to discuss institutionalizing procedural justice in police departments. Chief Davis, what is procedural justice in the context of policing? Michael Davis 0:29 Well, it really has two meanings, and it really goes back to the work of Tom Tyler and Tracey Meares, both from Yale University, and this notion of police legitimacy, which is the context of—which means that if individuals in the community accept the authority of police is valid, then folks are more willing to cooperate with police and be really a resource for the police department. So, I mean, it’s just better for overall service. Procedural justice is a derivative of police legitimacy; it’s how you accomplish police legitimacy. So looking at it from a service perspective, it really is the aspects of each individual contact that these officers make with individuals in the community. And so, there are really four components to it, and this is the perception that the individual who is participating in police action has of the officer that they’re dealing with. The first is voice. Do they have voice in what’s going on? Second is neutrality. Do they feel the officer is neutral in their stance, in the way they’re administering police services? Quality of service—is there a high quality of service? And lastly is the whole experience—does it really promote the sense of trust in the police? And so the notion of procedural justice is the acceptance of the police as legitimate through the quality of each interaction, with the four things I just mentioned. So in the context of police service, that’s what it means. Bradford 01:54 So do procedural justice and community policing differ? Davis 02:00 Community policing really is—it’s more of an amorphous concept. You ask chiefs what community policing is, you’ll get some 10 somewhat similar answers. But it really ranges, depending upon the organization, where they’re at, their specific goals, you know, the issues in the community. Procedural justice is a finite, if you want to call it, theory, alright. It really cuts to—doesn’t matter if you’re policing a community of a thousand people or a million people. It’s about the quality of each individual interaction and the acceptance of the individual who is being dealt with by the police, either at a traffic stop or a subject stop, in a way that leaves them with a sense of validity and the way in which the officer approached the call or approached the traffic stop. So there is difference. Now, I have seen that one does compliment the other. In this case, if you have an organization that is, by the way they practice their work, more procedurally just or leaves folks with that impression, your ability to execute community policing initiatives goes up. And so it really is about understanding the distinction between the two. Bradford 03:07 In what ways does the Brooklyn Park Police Department seek to enhance the level of procedural justice among community members? Davis 03:14 Well, first I think that, first and foremost, we structure our organization in ways that create ownership on behalf of police officers as they go about doing the work. You know, the term geographic policing has bannered about now for a decade and a half or so. And what it means for us is that officers take ownership. They actually own the conditions that contribute to crime and disorder where they do their work. And they understand—through what we teach them, through our expectations as a management staff to our officers—that it’s about you as the individual officer owning this piece of property and all the issues there within, working with the community in a way that leverages their talents, that leverages their strengths, that really looks to see the community as a resource—not just an entity to be served but also a resource to be utilized to increase the level of social capital. And so we structure the organization to accomplish that. Second, I think it’s important to create offline opportunities for officers to have contact with residents in the areas in which they serve. What I mean by offline is, if the only time that officers interact with the community is when they’re administering police services, dealing with people in crisis, or a traffic stop or subject stop, that gives officers and the community a limited view of the community, so to speak. Because we all know that the police, even in the busiest year, are dealing with only a small group or percentage of that community. And so, by offline, it’s about creating opportunities for officers to interact with citizens and residents at meetings, creating different events through the police athletic league, or having different types of events. An example would be: the city of Brooklyn Park has one of the largest Liberian populations in the country. And one of the things that we’ve done to increase the level of coactivity between our officers and our Liberian communities, we had a series of different sporting events. So for the past five years, we’ve had female Liberian residents and female police staff kickball games. And then recently, about a year and a half ago, we had the first Liberian men and police staff soccer game. Now, these types of events create offline opportunities to build understanding. So really it’s a layered approach; it’s the way we do our work, but it’s also the opportunities that, I think, we provide as a leadership team for individual officers to have a better understanding of the people they’re serving. Bradford 05:46 From these efforts, how has the Brooklyn Park Police Department been more effective in crime reduction? Davis 05:52 Well, these things are inextricably linked. When you look at leveraging community, most crimes are solved because the community notifies us that a crime has occurred, and witnesses come forward and say, “I’m willing to take part in the process of investigating this crime and seeing justice served.” And so, if you think about it in that context, having the trust and really the community seeing the police as legitimate are essential. And so what we’ve seen really is our crime reduction efforts tethered to officers being more effective in communicating and leveraging the resources in their individual sectors. I mean these things have been huge. And so there’s story after story, there’s reduction after reduction, that we’ve seen throughout the city just within the past couple of years by leveraging these resources in ways that we haven’t done before, focusing in on how we approach individuals on the street, and really getting officers who understand that each individual contact matters and that you’re really promoting the brand every time you go out there. As a member of the Brooklyn Park Police Department, you’re speaking for the city of Brooklyn Park and us as a community and us as a department. And so, we have a business interest. We’re in the business of reducing crime. We have a strong business interest in seeing that our folks that we serve see us as more legitimate. Bradford 07:19 How would police chiefs know that their efforts to promote procedural justice are working? Davis 07:25 Well, there are a couple things. I mean there’s a low-hanging-fruit saying, “Well, the number of complaints is down and so forth.” I really look to the level of cooperation that we’re seeing from the community, the level of community members stepping forward and wanting to be involved. If they see us as a legitimate entity, then folks are going to be much more willing to be part of the processes that reduce crime and victimization in their community. I mean, that is what it’s about. And so what we’ve seen is really exponential increases in these small geographic areas of community members looking to step forward and take part where they weren’t perhaps before, and that’s the biggest indicator. And that goes back to the business case. Our job is to reduce crime and also, and as important, the fear of crime. You can only do that with the cooperation of the community . You’ll be notified of crime and solve crimes if in fact you have a strong, robust relationship with a community. And so this is how we get there. There’s no edict I can send out; there’s no good speech I can send or I could make in front of community members to get them to see us as more legitimate. It is about the quality of those interactions. And so it’s really through this approach, by placing officers in a position to do their best work and by enhancing these relationships with event after event, initiative after initiative, that’s created this higher level of cooperation in these communities. And it’s really panned out with lower levels of crime. Bradford 08:53 Chief Davis, thank you so much for your time and expertise. Davis 08:58 Thank you. I appreciate it. Voiceover 09:00 The Beat was brought to you by the United States Department of Justice, COPS Office. The COPS Office helps to keep our nation’s communities safe by giving grants to law enforcement agencies, developing community policing publications, developing partnerships, and solving problems. Voiceover 09:16 The opinions contained herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. References to specific agencies, companies, products, or services should not be considered an endorsement by the authors or the U.S. Department of Justice. Rather, the references are illustrations to supplement discussion of the issues.