
Washington D.C., Apr 7, 2017 / 03:02 am (CNA/EWTN News).- “Ultimately, this report is about the sanctity of all human life.”
This remarkable line opens up an international police group’s flagship document on how to improve incidents of officer-involved shootings and the kinds of non-armed crisis situations that take place regularly across the United States.
“The essence of policing is the preservation of life,” Chuck Wexler, executive director of the Police Executive Research Forum in Washington, D.C., told CNA.
“That’s why we exist; life is very precious, and we have to remind ourselves of that.”
This ethic of protecting human life extends even to the use of force in responding to incidents, Wexler argued: “Everything should be what we have to do to preserve human life – especially in the area of use of force.”
This principle, that human life is sacred has found itself at the core of PERF’s work as an independent research and policy organization that looks at best practices in policing, as well as assistance, education and advice for law enforcement agencies.
With the idea that “the sanctity of human life should be at the heart of everything an agency does” at the center of the organization’s 30 Guiding Principles on the Use of Force and training guide, the group is already revolutionizing the way police departments approach policies on force and the response to crisis situations.
Keeping everyone safe
The pro-life approach to police work is part of a years-long project undertaken by PERF, which has more than 2500 members from around the globe.
Wexler explained that the organization was inspired to readjust their recommended policies and training after high-profile cases of police violence in Ferguson, Mo., and elsewhere sparked a national conversation on the appropriate force.
“We needed to take a hard look at what we were doing,” he said.
It’s hard to capture the scope of the issue of police-involved shootings in the United States, because there is no data or source of official reports that’s collected on a national level.
FBI Director James B. Comey explained in a 2015 speech at Georgetown University that the federal agency can’t even investigate the issue because “reporting by police departments is voluntary and not all departments participate. That means we cannot fully track the number of incidents in which force is used by police, or against police, including non-fatal encounters, which are not reported at all.”
This means that any information available is at best unreliable, and hampers both investigating and addressing the issue, the director said.
In its report, PERF pointed to attempts by journalists at the Guardian and the Washington Post to help fill this void of data by documenting the number of people killed in officer-involved shootings in the United States. The Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank in Washington, D.C., also collects data on allegations of police misconduct, including shootings, at the National Police Misconduct Reporting Project.
PERF furthermore noted that according to the data collected by the Washington Post, nearly one-third of fatal police-involved shootings in 2015 could have a significant potential for de-escalation, either because the subject killed was mentally ill, unarmed, or armed with a weapon that was not a firearm.
Wexler was assisting colleagues in Scottish police departments when these issues rose to public prominence in 2014. It occurred to Wexler that these colleagues – most of whom are not armed in departments in the United Kingdom – still must respond to and stay safe when dealing with incidents involving weapons like bats or knives, without the option of deadly force.
“For me it was an epiphany,” Wexler said. He asked himself, “If they can do it, why can’t we?”
PERF had researchers spend time studying police tactics in Scotland as well as in special emergency units in New York City and other departments around the United States. While the organization’s later research made a point not to blame most of the officers at the center of these events, PERF reassessed the training and policies surrounding the use of force in challenging situations.
“It really got us to think about how to re-engineer use of force policy and training,” Wexler said.
The result of their research was a document outlining guiding principles on the use of force and a training guide to teach officers how to better diffuse situations where de-escalation is possible. The guiding principles document notes that in most non-firearm cases “the threat is not immediate and the officers will have options for considering a more methodical, organized approach,” and many lives have the potential to be saved.
All of this is about trying to de-escalate a situation, giving officers the tools they need to do that.
It is this potential for saving lives – and not only the lives of civilians who interact with the police – which is the focus of the revised guidelines and tactics. PERF’s research states that changing approaches to incidents can increase officer safety, too.
“Rather than unnecessarily pushing officers into harm’s way in some circumstances, there may be opportunities to slow those situations down, bring more resources to the scene, and utilize sound decision-making that is designed to keep officers safe, while also protecting the public,” the report states.
In its findings, the document emphasizes the sanctity of human life as well as administering life-saving aid, transparency in reporting officer-involved shooting, use of less lethal options, and promoting effective means of managing mental illness in crisis situations.
The documents also criticize “line in the sand” policies and other training and field tactics which they found escalated, rather than calmed, crisis situations not involving firearms.
Wexler also said the principles of proportionality and effective communication are key to protecting the lives of all involved.
“All of this is about trying to de-escalate a situation, giving officers the tools they need to do that,” emphasizing the importance of teamwork, tactical skills and crisis intervention. “What’s really important is the safety of the officer and the safety of the person you’re dealing with.”
From the church to the streets
These policies aimed at respecting the dignity of life are not just formulated in an abstract environment, but with feedback from around the world.
“We have consulted with literally hundreds of police officers and police departments. We met and studied best practices around the country,” Wexler said.
The research organization consulted with hundreds of police chiefs for over two years, and looked at countless case studies and reports to put together their findings and then their training program.
“We would not be recommending something if we didn’t think it would work, and we’ve seen enough cases in the United States and in other countries where some may already be doing it or are in the process of implementing it.”
One of the other sources Wexler and PERF president, Scott Thompson, consulted in putting together the report was the archbishop of the largest city in the United States, Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York.
“The person who we thought would really be interested in this concept was Cardinal Dolan in New York,” Wexler recalled. “We went to see Cardinal Dolan because we thought our principles, and in particular that principle, would be very significant to him.”
Cardinal Dolan was elected as the chairman-elect of the U.S. Bishops’ Committee on Pro-Life activities beginning his term as chair in 2015.
“We had a really good meeting and he really understood and embraced” the core principle of protecting life, Wexler said. “It was something he could be very supportive of.”
There has been pushback from a lot of the major organizations.
PERF mentioned that Cardinal Blase Cupich of Chicago has also lent his support in helping the group’s training programs for the Chicago Police Department.
While the police policy guidelines have been met with support among the hundreds of departments who worked with PERF, the organization’s focus on prioritizing the sanctity of the lives of all persons involved in police incidents has not been without controversy.
“There has been pushback from a lot of the major organizations,” Wexler acknowledged.
When PERF first released its guidelines in March 2016, it was met with harsh criticism from both the International Association of Chiefs of Police and the Fraternal Order of Police.
“We cannot reasonably expect law enforcement officers to walk away from potentially dangerous situations and individuals in the hope that those situations resolve themselves without further harm being done,” the organizations said in a joint response to PERF’s initial report.
A year later, however, national police organizations have started to adopt consensus principles that echo many of the ideas emphasized by PERF.
In a document laying out “National Consensus Policy” on the use of force, released in January 2017, 11 national police organizations – including the FOP and IACP – emphasized the importance of de-escalation policies, “reasonably prudent” responses, and less-lethal force. The policy also asks that departments around the country openly state that the “policy of this law enforcement agency is to value and preserve human life.”
While Wexler said he could not comment on these adaptations, he did say the shift in focus to emphasize the dignity and value of all lives – even in the most challenging situations – is a “difficult” shift in perspective: “The changes we’re recommending are probably some of the biggest changes in police tactics that we’ve seen in 25 years.”
And the size of the policing community in the United States – more than 18,000 departments – only adds to the challenge.
Still, while the values and emphasis in police policy might still face some debate, PERF’s training and concrete policies have met with wide acceptance.
“We’ve had no pushback from our training,” he said, pointing to the hundreds of departments who have come to their training workshops in New Orleans, Baltimore, and Los Angeles.
With this support in the year since putting out the guidelines and what they’ve seen in the research process, Wexler is confident that they can create a culture that defends the sanctity of human life in all aspects of its police work.
“I’m optimistic that in five years, this will no longer be controversial,” Wexler said. “This will be the way people handle these situations.”
[…]
Connell makes a powerful argument. Civil lawful reasoning doesn’t remove the principle of absolute privacy in confessing sins to a priest. The transaction is between man and God and falls under divine jurisdiction.
If the seal were permitted to be removed, under any circumstance [once removed the seal is no longer inviolable in any instance] the penitent would in effect be making his confession to the world. That impedes the freedom for the penitent to confess and avoid scandal or reprisal. State would have the legal right to investigate and obtain access to all confessions.
Do you mean Listecki? Connell is the one advocating for violation of the Seal.
No. What I’m saying is that Connell, a former canon lawyer makes a strong civil law argument for breaking the seal, which I follow up with reasons why it would be detrimental to justice and the sacrament of penance – which is why Archbishop Listecki justly censured him.
I grew near the city where the horrific case of a young girl who was raped and murdered on her way to school in March of 1964 occurred.
In the spring of 2022, a young man with a forensic genealogy business that began as a hobby, solved the case by use of DNA with almost perfect certainty (the chance of an error was something like one in seven trillion) and the perpetrator, 23 in 1964 escaped civil justice by dying suddenly at the age of 38 in 1980.
He had another charge brought against him by an adult woman which he received a rather lenient sentence (some records were lost) included testimony from the victim that during the course of the assault, she thought he might kill her.
I cite this for multiple reasons.
First, I am familiar with such a situation where the perpetrator may have confessed. It is possible, as he was provided a Catholic burial according to newspaper obituaries. As much as it upended the community; it seems the gravest of injustices that he was not brought to temporal justice to offer her family that small and inadequate consolation, so I can understand the desire for apprehension by any means possible. We are reminded the ends do not justify the means.
Second, this case actually involves a worse crime than abuse-murder. As bad as taking a child’s innocence is-taking his or her life is even worse. Surely, if one demands the violation of the seal, so does the other. If anybody is stupid enough to think that Connell’s position is anything more than a prelude to compelling (not allowing) priests to be state agents for all manner of sins that involve “compelling state interest”, I hope that they cease driving immediately.
However, I would suggest to you that Connell is NOT making a “strong case”, because one cannot be made. Furthermore, his vow was to the Church and its mission to save souls, not to the state and its mission to apprehend, try and sentence the guilty.
And then there’s the effect of such a thing. Once the seal is broken, confession will become self-incrimination and the sacrament will be discarded to an even greater degree than it is now-it won’t stop abuse, but it will prevent absolution of what must be among the gravest of sins, even though I doubt such criminals avail themselves of confessional candor with any regularity.
“The transaction is between man and God and falls under divine jurisdiction.”
And the GOD that I serve – Father, Son & Holy Spirit – would instruct the one confessing to criminal molestation of a child or vulnerable adult:
“First go and inform the police so as to enable this offense to be dealt with under legal jurisdiction – I will accompany you to make it easier for you – after that I will give you absolution, for the sake of your soul.”
Unwillingness to face the horrendous personal & social consequences of their actions indicates a lack of true sorrow and contrition, justifying the withholding of absolution until they have a genuinely Catholic change of heart.
Attempting to absolve one who is manifestly not contrite is:
(1) ineffective for the sinner’s soul, and it contaminates the confessor’s soul;
(2) an encouragement to the sinner to engage in repeated criminal offending.
Matthew 5:24 – “. . go and be reconciled with your brother or sister first, only then come and present your offering to GOD.”
Ever seeking to hear & lovingly obey King Jesus Christ; blessings from marty
Connell is advocating for something truly evil, under the guise of helping those who were abused. Plus, he’s causing confusion and division among Delaware’s Catholics. He should just be completely defrocked. His compelling argument is a danger to the faith.
Justice, the protection of children, and the veil of confession can all coexist. Outside the confessional in the courtroom, Pope St. Peter was feared by the people.
Acts of the Apostles 5 Ananias and Sapphira.
A man named Ananias, however, with his wife Sapphira, sold a piece of property. He retained for himself, with his wife’s knowledge, some of the purchase price, took the remainder, and put it at the feet of the apostles. But Peter said, “Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart so that you lied to the holy Spirit and retained part of the price of the land? While it remained unsold, did it not remain yours? And when it was sold, was it not still under your control? Why did you contrive this deed? You have lied not to human beings, but to God.” When Ananias heard these words, he fell down and breathed his last, and great fear came upon all who heard of it. The young men came and wrapped him up, then carried him out and buried him…
The Blessed Mother told the Fatima seer children that Archangel Michael will bring with him a transparency of actions on earth. In Acts of the Apostles, we see Ananias and his wife trying to lie to St. Peter in the courtroom. By the end of their testimony, St. Peter, all his flock, and we the readers, have a clear and transparent view of Ananias and Sapphira’s true actions.
Matthew 18 outlines Jesus Will to His Catholic Leaders on the use of Catholic Anathema to protect the innocent, when personal, civil and Church litigation does not work.
Matthew 18:17 Fraternal Correction
“If your brother sins [against you], go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have won over your brother. If he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, so that ‘every fact may be established on the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ “If he ignores them, refer it to the church . If he ignores even the church, then treat him as you would a Gentile or a tax collector. I assure you, whatever you declare bound on earth shall be held bound in heaven, and whatever you declare loosed on earth shall be held loosed in heaven.”
Matthew 18:5
“Whoever welcomes one such child for my sake welcomes me. On the other hand, it would be better for anyone who leads astray one of these little ones who believes in me, to be drown by a millstone around his neck, in the depths of the sea. What terrible things will come on the world through scandal! It is inevitable that scandal should occur. Nonetheless, woe to that man through whom scandal comes! If your hand or foot is your undoing, cut it off and throw it from you! Better to enter life maimed or crippled than be thrown with two hands or feet into endless fire. If your eye is your downfall, gouge it out and cast it from you! Better to enter life with one eye than be thrown with both into fiery Gehenna.
What I hear, Jesus in Matthew 18 and the Holy Spirit in Acts 5, telling us, is that Pope Francis has to pull out Jesus’ sword of Catholic anathema to protect our children in our present child molester scandal. Pope Francis has to auto-anathematize all child molesters, and those clergy who aid and abet them, until they confess their crimes against children to civil prosecutors, judges and juries.
Bravo to Archbishop Listecki! Finally, a high churchman with a spine. If a priest cannot commit to such a basic church principal as the sacredness of the seal of confession, he should be removed from the priesthood. Nobody approves of the abuse of children. However this is not an excuse to destroy the principle of the seal of confession. To do so would be to destroy one of the basic founding pillars of the church. Would that all of our high churchmen could act so decisively.
Connell did far worse than the men who Pope Francis excommunicated or removed from office.
Connell should lose all his faculties and his pension. Since his first loyalty is to the state; let him become their dependent.
Absolution should be contingent upon penance. The penance for such outrageous crimes should require another ‘confession’ to legal authorities.
Shawn: Should this apply for all sins where a civil law has been violated?