When in Rome, Do As the Romans Do?
I was having an interesting debate with a couple of other officers last night. Apparently my department has an officer under investigation for going to a foreign country and hiring a prostitute. Now prostitution is legal in this other country but my department is still trying to hammer him for ethical issues.
I think that you should not be punished for going to another country and doing something that is legal there even if it is a crime here. After all, a society determines what should be forbidden or not. If my country/state/city feels that it should be illegal to sell beer on a Sunday but another county feels it is okay, well that is up to them and I am fine with it. The same goes for things such as prostitution, gambling, ect, ect...
Another officer disagreed and tried to argue that we signed up to enforce the laws of our jurisdiction and therefore are held to a higher standard. He said that if is wrong in his city then it is wrong for him anywhere. I had a hard time with this and asked what if our jurisdiction decided to legalize prostitution? Would it then be okay to go to a brothel? He grudgingly said he guessed it would be okay then.
I pressed him and asked if he ever goes to Vegas and gambles. He said he did and I pointed out that casinos are illegal in our area so I guess he should be punished for breaking the rules of where he works. I then pointed out that prostitution is legal in parts of Nevada. Since those areas have cops, is it okay for them to go out of country and solicit prostitutes since it is legal in the jurisdiction they work? According to his criteria, that would be okay right? If it is okay for a NV deputy, why not a cop from another city?
What do you folks think? It was an interesting debate and I am curious about that other people think.
32 bits of radio chatter:
I'll give you the hypothetical that I'm a taxpayer in your city. Assuming that, I would consider it none of my gosh danged business what this police officer does on their time and dime somewhere else in a case like this when their activity is not illegal.
I think that your oath was to uphold the laws of the jurisdiction you serve. Last time I checked, my city ordinances and state laws only apply within my city and state. If you want to go with the moral high road, that reasonably means that it's your job as an officer to uphold the law wherever you are.
If an officer was on a road trip and broke the local law someplace else I would find that problematic for his character, but if he's within the law wherever he is, then I fail to see the problem.
Those arguing that prostitution where it is legal is unethical but that gambling where it is legal is OK are internally inconsistent and forfeit the argument.
The US and GB started this trend by enforcing anti-bribery statues world wide. They can and have indited executives for bribes paid in foreign lands. The US has extended the child abuse laws over US citizens world wide. The US Marshall's service can and will arrest in Thailand for example for child prostitution.
Legally, I don't think there's a problem. If a cop went to Amsterdam and smoked a roach, it's his business.
But morally, it's a whole can of worms. How does this guy go out on the road and be all "now listen meow, these women are being exploited and you're only furthering the problem.." when he did exactly the same thing in another country?
I'm almost into an LEO job now and I just can't see how I'd have the moral authority to judge others for something I'd done myself, the only difference being I did it in the right country.
We have Federal laws that prohibit anybody (not just police officers) from engaging in child prostitution, even if it's legal in certain foreign jurisdictions. Similarly, it's illegal to bribe foreign officials even if it's expected or legal in their country.
We don't have similar laws covering prostitution involving adults, gambling, or smoking pot where it's legal.
As a police officer, I expect that you are subject to regulations prohibiting you from smoking pot in your city, in Amsterdam, or anywhere else. As a civilian, I could go to Amsterdam and smoke pot without subjecting myself to any legal problems.
If there aren't clear prohibitions against engaging the services of prostitutes where it's legal to do so, then your leadership is foolish at best to pursue this.
How old was the prostitute?
Legally I would say he's in the clear. And that is all that is anyone else's business. That is, in the current system we have now. Anything past that would be morals, and that is NOT the realm of legality but it is the realm of Religion. Moral Relativism aside- you have to have some "lawbook" that dictates what is and isn't "moral." Just like you have to have a lawbook that sets down civil laws. If society, or the civil system we have now, isn't going to go by the Religious "lawbook" then they have no right to appeal to it whenever they feel like it and say that the officer isn't being "moral." They forfeited that right.
May I present a link to the best treatise on the subject I have ever read (by a, sadly, now retired blogger):
http://www.theothersideofkim.com/index.php/essays/45/
"..[T]he basic tenets of religious precept are critical to the proper functioning of society-- it’s why I as an atheist sent my son to a parochial private school, and why our two homeschooled kids have always been held to rigorous standards of behavior. Children have to be drilled in the basic concepts of behavioral restriction-- theft is wrong, killing is wrong, etc.-- and the instruction is easier to do with religion, but not impossible without it.
Ditto manners. Our kids are all constantly drilled on manners and need for such. Rudeness and other such manifestations of poor behavior are punished on the spot. This doesn’t mean that our kids are shrinking violets [pause for derisive laughter], but it does mean that they get on extremely well with almost everybody, and are popular both with other kids and with their parents.
Where we have screwed up as a society, is in the lapse of both religious precept and manners—which results in ever-expanding laws to deal with all the exigencies which were once covered by religious and mannered proscription—and which is also why more lawyers graduate from college each year than the year before. "
Strictly speaking, legally he did no wrong, what he did may have been bad manners (depending on the company he keeps), and depending on his personal convictions it may have been morally wrong.
I think it depends entirely on your AO and what the departmental code of ethics says. Most have a section in there about 'conduct unbecoming an officer' that can get you any punishment from a slap on the wrist to fired.
How does the department treat its code of ethics? Almost every one I have ever heard of has something in it about not accepting gratuities and not interfering with police action for personal reasons (ticket fixing in all its forms, from the blatant to the subtle), yet those activities persist in one form or another and are commonly accepted as OK.
Most departments have a strict code of ethics and then are lax about enforcing it until a situation becomes a public outrage or is personally offensive to a member of the brass.
Strictly speaking, a code of ethics is just the moral values of a group codified on paper. If how you act dosent match what you chose to hold forward as your moral stance that...in effect...makes you morally bankrupt.
It would be far better if the "code of ethics" for a department were either unspoken or at most a single page.
The department I used to work for had the head of IA read us the entire Code of Ethics in academy word for word. It was over 20 pages, double spaced. I dont remember much of it at all.
I do remember the values that were taught to me by my senior officers...what was acceptable and what was not. I found their lessons to be far more instructive and useful (even outside the world of LE) than anything in that abomination of a code.
Personally? I think what the officer did was wrong, but not because of some stupid codified morals that no one cares about. Its wrong because I get the feeling he did it as a way of acting out. The fact that he did it and then went bragging about it to the people at his department says he was trying to flaunt the rules. Hes the same guy that would smoke pot in another country if it was legal, even though the department forbade it...just cause he could.
I get the feeling that hes the risk taker that does stupid things that make some seasoned officers not want to work with him, and this foreign fling is just a symptom of that deeper disease.
To Anon@3:27 - Be careful how you think about police interaction. You are not a judge, you point out potential violations of the law and judge decides if an actual violation exist. Being handed a badge gives you no extra moral authority to judge another person more so than you already posses.
He didn't break any laws, so just what seems to be the issue? Heck, it's even legal in parts of our own country.
This is yet another example of why many consensual crimes - including prostitution, gambling and drugs - should be regulated rather than prohibited. "Ain't Nobody's Business if You Do" by Peter McWilliams is a free book available online that explains the difference between consensual and non-consensual crimes.
One hopes that law enforcement agencies will eventually wake up at some point and begin focusing the majority of their considerable resources on non-consensual crimes. The status quo harms the public and, as shown in this example, is harmful for police officers as well.
Morals follow you, while the law remains attached to the jurisdiction. My opinion is that a person's moral decisions are their own business. I suppose that if the department had officers sign a pledge to observe "their" laws at all times, they might have standing. But I expect such a contract would quickly be shot down in court.
I think it's ridiculous to enforce OUR laws in other countries. Let's see, when we had a federally mandated (blackmailed) 55mph speed limit, we should have expected our citizens and especially our cops to drive 55 in Germany on the Autobahns??? Or face a speeding ticked back home? Or consequences at your job??? There are A LOT of things that may be illegal in one place but not in another.
I've encountered many women who say they'll never date a man unless he's got a six-figure salary. How is this any different than a woman who will blow you for twenty? After all, the legal definition of prostitution, in most states, is the exchange of sex for money.
Just curious, how in the world did this officer's "moral lapse" get discovered? He should have kept that little skeleton buried deep in his closet.
If he didn't break any laws in the country he visited, then, no, he shouldn't be prosecuted.
Although prostitution is illegal in the UK, several large cities turn a somewhat blind eye. In my city, street prostitution was "tolerated" in a particular area for a while, but repeated complaints from the local populace put an end to that. Now the police are going after the buyer rather than the seller, which seems fair enough. Sex for sale is still tolerated in massage parlours, where at least the girls are safer. If a police officer was caught using such services, then hell mend him (or her). If they went to Amsterdam and bought sex, then that's up to them!
Its pretty obvious that the brass has it in for this officer.Impossible to prove what he/she did on vacation.
My advice to the accused:
Admit nothing.
Deny everything.
Demand proof.
I personally do not see prostitution as a crime.If it is regulated like it is in Nevada and Rhgode island then you reduce the seedy side of un-regulated prostitution.
Thailand is a great place to vacation!
JL:
On the one hand there is a damn good argument that being in ANY other country, YOU are an "ambassador" for OUR nation, after a fashion.
I spent some time talking with members of Holland's parliament back in the late 70s, and I carried myself as a REPRESENTATIVE of the USA (even as a "civvie" there), showed proper respect for others from their lands, and received like treatment.
On the other hand, if it's OK to do something in another land, and you "feel the need" to DO it, it should be fine, BUT... always consider any consequences that could occur, before you jump into the "deep end" of the pool.
Many times, if you're arrested in ANOTHER country, it can often be far worse than here.
Anon 3:27 makes a good case about MORALITY.
It becomes a personal "balancing act", and only that particular person has to sleep with that at night...no on else.
It's a "conscience" thing.
(and which "head" rules one's body)
Good points made all around.
Stay safe
I would venture to say that the legalities have nothing to do with this case. What it's about is that many police departments hold their officers to higher moral standard than your average citizen. There are probably rules stating that officers, on or off duty, should not engage in conduct or activities that may reflect poorly on his/her badge or department. I believe prostitution, legal or otherwise, would fall in this category. This is not a matter of imposing morals on others, but a police department protecting it's reputation and that of it's officers.
The argument can be reduced to absurdity in either direction. Traffic laws differ from state to state, and laws about beating your spouse vary from country to country. It's pretty clear that you follow the laws of the jurisdiction in one but not the other.
Another interesting variation not mentioned here yet is drug use in other countries (or perhaps soon in different states.) What if a police officer smokes pot in Amsterdam? Why is that not OK?
And how about age of consent? It does vary from state to state. Of course anyone old enough to be a police officer should have no business investigating that particular shifting borderline morally speaking, but legally speaking it should probably not be an issue.
There does seem to be a difference in consensual and non-consensual violations (age of consent falling into a definitional combination of both,) and there does seem to be something vaguely troubling about someone who would boast about violations that were safe in one area but not another. Although even there there might be a difference between boasting that you went 130mph on the Autobahn and boasting that you stopped at a brothel while there.
They both might attention to one's judgment, perhaps in different ways, and judgement is an important factor in hiring and promoting peace officers.
They've started random drug testing in my old force in the UK. The question was asked about taking dope in Amsterdam, we were told it would probably still be regarded as a disciplinary matter if you tested positive and could show you had been to that wonderful city. The fun part of life is gradually being eroded. To those taking the moral high ground what about all the officers you KNOW are sleeping with someone elses spouse, I would say that if far more unethical than hiring a prostitute.
Conduct unbecoming an officer. Agencies have a legal right to project a certain professional image. It is not unreasonable to expect officers to behave a certain way, regardless of whether their actions are technically legal where they are.
Some agencies in this country prohibit tobacco use, on and off duty. Regardless of whether you think that's right, it was a condition of employment and officers can be fired for violating it. We agreed to norms of professionalism and behavior when we pinned the badge on as well.
If you want to be a pot head or hire women for sex then this isn't the career for you.
Roanoke Cop nailed it.
Let me just add that there is a difference in perception between how society views zoning issues and how society views breaking "moral codes".
It would be illegal for me to open a car repair shop in a residential neighborhood. But nobody would look down on me if I opened a car repair shop in a district that was zoned for commercial use.
That might seem off topic, But really I think the only reason that gambling is not legal just about everywhere is because people view it as a zoning issue.
I know lots of people who are gamblers. But I don't know anyone who argues that we should allow commercial gambling in our area.
People who like to gamble know the types of social problems that surround commercial gambling joints. And by and large they don't want those problems in their cities even though they enjoy doing it. They would not find a police officer a hypocrite who shut down such joints in their towns even as they went to gambling joints far off places where it is legal because that is the same way they live.
Granted, there are still some out there who believe that gambling is evil everywhere. But there is also people who think that about beer. In both cases they don't really expect cops to live by their code.
But prostitution is different. You can argue that it should not be different until you are blue in the face. As a practical matter it does not matter what you think should be. What matters is what is.
And unless your city is a lot different then my city I can tell you that any cop known to use prostitutes even as his force was arresting johns in the city would seriously effect his forces reputation.
Look at it this way, most (all?) forces bar visible tattoos even though they are legal to have in every state in the union. They do this because they realize that image is a key part of a cop's authority.
And you are not going to keep that authority if it becomes widely known that you have john's on the force.
Good arguments in the comments section for and against the Officer's actions.
The big question is, who "ratted" out the officer?
Ok JLC:
The maker of Taser stun guns is advising officers to avoid shooting suspects in the chest with the 50,000-volt weapon, saying that it could pose an extremely low risk of an "adverse cardiac event."
The advisory, issued in an Oct. 12 training bulletin, is the first time that Taser International has suggested there is any risk of a cardiac arrest related to the discharge of its stun gun.
But Taser officials said Tuesday that the bulletin does not state that Tasers can cause cardiac arrest. They said the advisory means only that law-enforcement agencies can avoid controversy over the subject if their officers aim at areas other than the chest.
I believe we have too many laws. Maybe this was the result of an attempt to legislate common sense, ethics, and morality? I don't think you can effectively legislate those things, one either has them or they don't.
That said, I signed an ethics statement upon becoming an LEO. It goes beyond just strictly observing laws, it is about doing what is right. I believe history shows that our country was founded on Judeo-Christian principles, so I base my outlook on that. I think that the founders interpretation of those principles were very libertarian.
Good blog post, got me to thinking.
Excellent comments...
OneTime - I know those woman.. and they are idiot's! They are also the same woman that are lonely and unhappy and cheat on their husband's. They usually don't even know how to boil an egg.
For me... I would never have married a man that didn't have a job or solid work background. Work ethics is way to high on my list of being a turn on. No matter the job - Just love it and do it well!!
Anonymous 3:27 and Roanoke Cop - Right on!
-Dispatcher
Differentiating between zoning issues and moral codes is not as easy as some would assume. Speed limits is a good example, as I assume most people would say that a person should be governerned by the laws wherever they are at, rather by those where they are from.
But the arguments for lowering the speed limit may include more than gas conservation. Driving fast is considered by many to be dangerous. If your jurisdiction has mandated slowing to 20MPH around schools, then shouldn't you observe this rule even in a place where they allow a faster speed? After all, killing a child (vehicular manslaughter) is certainly more than just a zoning issue.
I suspect that most people's idea of where to draw the line between moral codes and zoning codes depends a lot on their own personal moral position.
A key question would be whether the hooker was hot.
Seriously, how would they find out about this unless he opened his big mouth about it. I'm assuming it's a he.
Anonymous 8:59 - I thought this was a discussion about officers engaging in questionable activities where it's legal, not about tasers. Either you accidentally commented on the wrong post, or you're being a rude threadjacker. Hopefully the first explanation is the correct one.
Yeah well most cops are speeding when they pass me by. That is one of the most basic laws to enforce, and they break it all the time. To think that cops are held to a higher standard is a insult to everyone who is'nt because no one is better than another. Another one of those basic ideals that they constantly crap on.
First, I believe that going to a prostitute is deeply morally wrong for innumerable reasons, no matter the legality. That said, I am astounded that there exists a cop who actually had to pay for it. In my experience, any guy in a uniform has more willing, unpaid volunteers than he could possibly handle. Most will even bring a casserole. There is "More To This Story", as they say.
"There is "More To This Story", as they say."
Anyone want to bet on whether or not this "more to the story" involves the prostitute's age?
Post a Comment