A tattoo by any other name
In the Press Enterprise, there's a column by Dan Bernstein about the decision of the members of the Riverside Police Department's Metro Team to wear tattoos on their upper arms. These tattoos allegedly depict a skull with a bandanna and reddish eyes. The first time I saw this emblem was on a tee-shirt worn by several Metro Team officers several years ago.
Say it with tats
While these tattoos may be in compliance with the police department's policy regulating body art, this certainly wasn't the wisest decision made by police officers in this department. The fact that this image is so wide-spread that Steve Frasher, the public information officer for the police department is displaying one on a mug to Bernstein, is even more interesting, as other law enforcement agencies dealing with this issue have put these tattoo emblems on display to varying degrees. It's said that the skull emblem worn by the Los Angeles Police Department's Rampart CRASH unit was on display for a while at the department's gift shop on a variety of items.
Needless to say, that's not the case these days. In fact, the city of Los Angeles later went to court to shut down a Web site that was selling products with the same insignia and others associated with LAPD divisions on them. The LAPD firmly stated that these products and the insignia they bore were not endorsed or sanctioned by that agency.
Okay, so one day it's perfectly fine to put them on display and even sell them. The next, they are removed and that police department had distanced itself from them. Like in Riverside, the tattoos themselves worn by the officers were not ever put on public display. News about their existence in the LAPD broke with the Rampart scandal.
Tattoos are commonly worn by both police officers and firefighters in this country as shown here. Most departments have policies in place addressing them and whether or not they can be visible or not.
However, the issue raised in Bernstein's column is a valid one. Suppose the Metro Team gets involved in an onduty shooting. This shooting especially if it was fatal, would then be investigated by multiple entities including the police department, the Riverside County District Attorney's office and the Community Police Review Commission. What would happen if during any one of these investigations or all of them the issue of Metro Team members sharing a common symbol in the form of a tattoo arose? What if there was civil litigation filed which featured these officers decision to share a common tattoo as a major point of contention?
Police officers particularly those working in special units get tattoos like this one as a means of bonding together into a cohesive unit. Articles on several divisions in the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department that also said they used tattoos to symbolize their unity stated that officers often would create a template of the tattoo design themselves and take it to the tattoo artist of choice to put it on the officers with other officers there to support them. Sometimes, this was after some drinking had been going on earlier. Each tattoo given to an officer was assigned a number and recorded in a ledger as a matter of record.
Whether it's the pain of the actual process itself or simply sharing something that is unique only to them, tattoos have enjoyed a great deal of popularity in police departments just as they have in various branches of this country's military, even as individual divisions like the U.S. Marines have recently passed restrictions on certain types of tattoos in certain body locations.
But they haven't been without controversy.
One problem with them that is often raised is that gang members get tattoos for similar reasons. Tattoos do not make people gang members, but in the case of police officers, misconduct or criminal activity committed by those with tattoos adds to that image of them being in that category. If you had a group of police officers who shared a common tattoo and they were engaging in the commission of crimes to promote their existence, what would they be called?
That's what creates concerns in the communities where these officers police. When you talk to members of communities that are predominantly Black or Latino on this issue, their responses to tattoos worn by police officers as a group are much different from those given by officers who engage in this behavior and the departments that employ them. Most often, it creates additional fear and concern in communities which often have strained relationships with police officers. And in other cities and counties numerous law suits were filed against law enforcement agencies when these tattooed officers were involved in shootings or alleged police conduct including excessive force and acted in ways no different than street gangs, which has added to the fear already experienced in those communities.
And there's been reasons for those fears as history has shown, even in two of Southern California's largest law enforcement agencies. There, you have had a squad or squads of police officers which were either unsupervised or poorly supervised and pretty much isolated and insulated. Add to that allegations of a shared tattoo usually involving a skull of some sort and then allegations of misconduct or even criminal activity among that squad and when all that becomes public, you have a scandal.
LAPD's Rampart Division, 1999
The Los Angeles Police Department became immersed in a scandal in the summer of 1999 which led to a pattern and practice investigation being conducted by the U.S. Justice Department's civil rights division. That scandal involved allegations raised by a disgraced LAPD officer, Rafael Perez that he, Officer David Mack and others in the Rampart Division's CRASH unit had been engaged in the commission of numerous acts of misconduct, excessive force, corruption and illegal conduct. Perez had been caught stealing drugs out of an evidence locker and agreed to provide information on the activities of other officers he worked with as part of a plea bargain.
The LAPD investigated the Rampart Division but then Chief Bernard Parks discouraged any probes of other nearby divisions including the 77th and Newton divisions where allegations of similar problems with CRASH units and shared tattoos were claimed.
Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley rode into his position promising to change the protocol his office would use for investigating similar allegations of misconduct by special police units. When the federal government came in to impose a federal consent decree in 2001, they imposed restrictions on the operations of the CRASH Teams and other special investigation units in the LAPD. One of those restrictions which the LAPD had trouble implementing involved monitoring the financial status of the officers in these units and keeping them properly supervised and accountable in terms of reporting acts of force below the lethal level. One of many reasons why the LAPD's five-year consent decree will soon be entering into its seventh year.
Rampart officers wore tattoos like the one below.
Rampart Scandal's Cast of Characters
Rampart Scandal's Chronology
Rampart Scandal: the transcripts from PBS Dateline
(excerpt, Dateline)
PETER BOYER: The LAPD was coming to believe it had a group of gangsta cops inside its ranks. The chief formed a task force to find out.
Det. MIKE HOHAN: We thought that inside the police department were a criminal gang in uniform.
Lynwood Vikings, 1990s
The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department is also no stranger to controversy involving decisions by its deputies to belong to different "groups" including the Lynwood Vikings and the Lennox Grim Reapers, among others. All of these "groups" of officers as they were called wore emblems symbolizing their membership to them tattooed most often to their inner calves or ankles, where they too could not be easily seen by the public.
These allegations and others led to several law suits filed against the county of Los Angeles as well as the investigation conducted by the Koltz Commission. One explanation given by that law enforcement agency for the origin of the Lynwood Vikings, who were deputies who wore the same tattoo on their ankle or inner calves, was that they were an intramural softball team.
Lake Town Bad Boys, mid-1990s
Closer to the Inland Empire, the L.A. Weekly wrote this article about former Riverside County Sheriff's Department deputy, Tracy Watson who was fired for beating two Latinos outside El Monte in 1996. It was rumored that Watson and several other deputies had lateraled from the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department.
(excerpt)
While the tape is compelling, there’s more to the story — the troubled history of one of the deputies. In a 1997 deposition, Watson admits that while stationed at Lake Elsinore Sheriff’s station three years earlier, he was part of a small clique of deputies who called themselves the Lake Town Bad Boys.
Known for being rough on the streets, at least two of the group’s members, including Watson, bore tattoos of a cloaked figure with a skull for a head, brandishing a gun. Watson was transferred to another department shortly after a supervisor questioned Watson and several others about the group, according to the deposition.
Watson faced use-of-force questions in at least four incidents before the taped beatings, including two shootings and one case where he was disciplined for hitting a suspect who was already under arrest. Watson’s attorney, Robert Padia, did not return the Weekly’s telephone calls. Watson was fired by the Riverside sheriff in August 1996. He now runs his own private-investigation firm.
This tattoo was apparently worn on the arm. One year, while at the Orange Blossom Festival, I saw a man in a tank top with this type of tattoo on his arm.
Accounts like these above are merely the more notorious ones of police officers who committed misconduct on the job, even breaking the law. And none of this activity was caused solely by the acts of officers going out and getting tattoos of a symbol adopted by them for bonding purposes. More important factors involved in these and other situations were poor training and supervision and also isolating these units from other divisions in the respective police departments, including the location of the headquarters of these units apart from those of other divisions.
Other problems included staffing special units not on set criteria but on political connections with those officers holding higher rank in the department as happened in the case of a special investigations unit in the Chicago Police Department, as depicted in the book, Brotherhood of Corruption, written by former officer, Juan Antonio Juarez which should serve as a cautionary notice to police departments and communities. Staffing special units with officers who have prior disciplinary records including some that are rather extensive and chronic, has also been cited as causes in scandals which have arisen with special units in departments across the country. In several cases around the country, officers were put in special units because they had a high number of complaints filed against them when they were patrol officers and it was a way to make them less visible.
So the tattoos themselves aren't the only issue in cases like the above and others like them, and if the officers are properly trained and supervised and the accountability mechanisms are put in place and working, they might never be a problem in term of incidents that impact the public.
But tattoos in this context are not necessarily harmless either, especially in terms of the perceptions they elicit from the communities that may be separate or in line with the actions of the officers. They're definitely a sign that something's going on, whether innocuous or not, that remains to be seen. In this case, they may also serve as an unfortunate litmus test that at least with some elements of the police department, there's still much that needs to change in its underpinnings if the image of a grinning skull is seen as a unifying image among officers, as it apparently has been in other places.
What's done can't be undone, the officers had the right to get the tattoos, the tattoos are in compliance with departmental policy. They have made their choice and it is their choice. Whether those who haven't gotten them will go out and get them remains to be seen. It's hoped that they give it a great degree of thought first before taking any action.
But is this situation a good thing? Probably not, even if the intention of these officers was simply to form a more cohesive unit. And while Bernstein took some comfort from the fact that the tattoos apparently aren't visible to the public, in the cases listed above they weren't either until these scandals broke. And why aren't they visible? Some hints to that were included in Bernstein's column. The officers apparently preferred it that way.
(excerpt)
"It (tattoo inspection) touches on some personnel matters," explained Capt. Pete Esquivel. "If it were visible, it would be fair game."
About all the RPD has to say about the tats is that they are hidden and, of course, not sanctioned by the department.
What exactly is meant here, by "fair game"? That they could be subjected to being banned by the department? By the same department that apparently has coffee mugs with a similar design?
That seems a bit odd. You can have a little skulls and bandanna representing the Metro Team to go with your latte but officers in that division can't wear it on their bodies unless it's out of sight. Was their objection to the tattoos, and the earlier tee-shirts, but not the coffee mug?
Both displays of the same insignia in different places do serve a useful purpose. They may provide a useful barometric check for where this department is at from top to bottom, as time will tell and if the city attorney's office is happy with them, then there's no reason for the city government to complain about it and City Manager Brad Hudson probably won't be pulling Asst. City Manager Tom DeSantis from his assignment of supervising the shelving of books in the city's libraries to inspect biceps, triceps and calves belonging to the department's officers. What the community thinks of things has never mattered to the city anyway and if the mindset is there, it might as well be put on display.
It's disturbing and the communities may not complain about it in public, but they'll certainly be talking about it because they've talked about this topic in the past. Stories have long circulated about rogue officers running around, often wearing the same tattoos in this city as they probably have in every other city. It's disturbing to see that at least so far, the tattoos do exist. Hopefully, the department has the tools in place and the right attitude to assure that it goes no further than that and if it ever does, then it will respond quickly.
It's unfortunate that this has happened, but it's another reminder that the process that began seven years ago is and must be an ongoing one. It also serves as a reminder that not all the movement will be forward, that there will be steps backward as well. Unfortunately, this reality check probably won't be the last one.
Say it with tats
While these tattoos may be in compliance with the police department's policy regulating body art, this certainly wasn't the wisest decision made by police officers in this department. The fact that this image is so wide-spread that Steve Frasher, the public information officer for the police department is displaying one on a mug to Bernstein, is even more interesting, as other law enforcement agencies dealing with this issue have put these tattoo emblems on display to varying degrees. It's said that the skull emblem worn by the Los Angeles Police Department's Rampart CRASH unit was on display for a while at the department's gift shop on a variety of items.
Needless to say, that's not the case these days. In fact, the city of Los Angeles later went to court to shut down a Web site that was selling products with the same insignia and others associated with LAPD divisions on them. The LAPD firmly stated that these products and the insignia they bore were not endorsed or sanctioned by that agency.
Okay, so one day it's perfectly fine to put them on display and even sell them. The next, they are removed and that police department had distanced itself from them. Like in Riverside, the tattoos themselves worn by the officers were not ever put on public display. News about their existence in the LAPD broke with the Rampart scandal.
Tattoos are commonly worn by both police officers and firefighters in this country as shown here. Most departments have policies in place addressing them and whether or not they can be visible or not.
However, the issue raised in Bernstein's column is a valid one. Suppose the Metro Team gets involved in an onduty shooting. This shooting especially if it was fatal, would then be investigated by multiple entities including the police department, the Riverside County District Attorney's office and the Community Police Review Commission. What would happen if during any one of these investigations or all of them the issue of Metro Team members sharing a common symbol in the form of a tattoo arose? What if there was civil litigation filed which featured these officers decision to share a common tattoo as a major point of contention?
Police officers particularly those working in special units get tattoos like this one as a means of bonding together into a cohesive unit. Articles on several divisions in the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department that also said they used tattoos to symbolize their unity stated that officers often would create a template of the tattoo design themselves and take it to the tattoo artist of choice to put it on the officers with other officers there to support them. Sometimes, this was after some drinking had been going on earlier. Each tattoo given to an officer was assigned a number and recorded in a ledger as a matter of record.
Whether it's the pain of the actual process itself or simply sharing something that is unique only to them, tattoos have enjoyed a great deal of popularity in police departments just as they have in various branches of this country's military, even as individual divisions like the U.S. Marines have recently passed restrictions on certain types of tattoos in certain body locations.
But they haven't been without controversy.
One problem with them that is often raised is that gang members get tattoos for similar reasons. Tattoos do not make people gang members, but in the case of police officers, misconduct or criminal activity committed by those with tattoos adds to that image of them being in that category. If you had a group of police officers who shared a common tattoo and they were engaging in the commission of crimes to promote their existence, what would they be called?
That's what creates concerns in the communities where these officers police. When you talk to members of communities that are predominantly Black or Latino on this issue, their responses to tattoos worn by police officers as a group are much different from those given by officers who engage in this behavior and the departments that employ them. Most often, it creates additional fear and concern in communities which often have strained relationships with police officers. And in other cities and counties numerous law suits were filed against law enforcement agencies when these tattooed officers were involved in shootings or alleged police conduct including excessive force and acted in ways no different than street gangs, which has added to the fear already experienced in those communities.
And there's been reasons for those fears as history has shown, even in two of Southern California's largest law enforcement agencies. There, you have had a squad or squads of police officers which were either unsupervised or poorly supervised and pretty much isolated and insulated. Add to that allegations of a shared tattoo usually involving a skull of some sort and then allegations of misconduct or even criminal activity among that squad and when all that becomes public, you have a scandal.
LAPD's Rampart Division, 1999
The Los Angeles Police Department became immersed in a scandal in the summer of 1999 which led to a pattern and practice investigation being conducted by the U.S. Justice Department's civil rights division. That scandal involved allegations raised by a disgraced LAPD officer, Rafael Perez that he, Officer David Mack and others in the Rampart Division's CRASH unit had been engaged in the commission of numerous acts of misconduct, excessive force, corruption and illegal conduct. Perez had been caught stealing drugs out of an evidence locker and agreed to provide information on the activities of other officers he worked with as part of a plea bargain.
The LAPD investigated the Rampart Division but then Chief Bernard Parks discouraged any probes of other nearby divisions including the 77th and Newton divisions where allegations of similar problems with CRASH units and shared tattoos were claimed.
Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley rode into his position promising to change the protocol his office would use for investigating similar allegations of misconduct by special police units. When the federal government came in to impose a federal consent decree in 2001, they imposed restrictions on the operations of the CRASH Teams and other special investigation units in the LAPD. One of those restrictions which the LAPD had trouble implementing involved monitoring the financial status of the officers in these units and keeping them properly supervised and accountable in terms of reporting acts of force below the lethal level. One of many reasons why the LAPD's five-year consent decree will soon be entering into its seventh year.
Rampart officers wore tattoos like the one below.
Rampart Scandal's Cast of Characters
Rampart Scandal's Chronology
Rampart Scandal: the transcripts from PBS Dateline
(excerpt, Dateline)
PETER BOYER: The LAPD was coming to believe it had a group of gangsta cops inside its ranks. The chief formed a task force to find out.
Det. MIKE HOHAN: We thought that inside the police department were a criminal gang in uniform.
(excerpt, Dateline)
PETER BOYER: Perez said CRASH cops had their own code and their own logo, a skull with what is known as the "dead man's hand," aces and eights, even special plaques for shooting suspects.
RAFAEL PEREZ: We give plaques out when you get involved in shootings. If the guy dies, the card is a black number two, and if he stays alive, its a red number two.
UNIDENTIFIED PROSECUTOR: Is it more prestigious to get one that's black than red?
RAFAEL PEREZ: I'm assuming so. I mean, yeah. I mean, you know, the black one signifies that the guy died. The red one means that it was a hit, but not fatal.
RICHARD ROSENTHAL: And his allegation was that there was a culture within CRASH which involved basically using excessive force against gang members, perjuring themselves against gang members, and covering up their own misconduct.
RAFAEL PEREZ: There's a thing called "being in the loop," "being involved." I would say that 90 percent of the officers that work CRASH, and not just Rampart CRASH, falsify a lot of information. They put cases on people. And I know that's not a good thing to hear, but there's a lot of crooked stuff going in with LAPD, especially LAPD specialized units.
Lynwood Vikings, 1990s
The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department is also no stranger to controversy involving decisions by its deputies to belong to different "groups" including the Lynwood Vikings and the Lennox Grim Reapers, among others. All of these "groups" of officers as they were called wore emblems symbolizing their membership to them tattooed most often to their inner calves or ankles, where they too could not be easily seen by the public.
These allegations and others led to several law suits filed against the county of Los Angeles as well as the investigation conducted by the Koltz Commission. One explanation given by that law enforcement agency for the origin of the Lynwood Vikings, who were deputies who wore the same tattoo on their ankle or inner calves, was that they were an intramural softball team.
Lake Town Bad Boys, mid-1990s
Closer to the Inland Empire, the L.A. Weekly wrote this article about former Riverside County Sheriff's Department deputy, Tracy Watson who was fired for beating two Latinos outside El Monte in 1996. It was rumored that Watson and several other deputies had lateraled from the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department.
(excerpt)
While the tape is compelling, there’s more to the story — the troubled history of one of the deputies. In a 1997 deposition, Watson admits that while stationed at Lake Elsinore Sheriff’s station three years earlier, he was part of a small clique of deputies who called themselves the Lake Town Bad Boys.
Known for being rough on the streets, at least two of the group’s members, including Watson, bore tattoos of a cloaked figure with a skull for a head, brandishing a gun. Watson was transferred to another department shortly after a supervisor questioned Watson and several others about the group, according to the deposition.
Watson faced use-of-force questions in at least four incidents before the taped beatings, including two shootings and one case where he was disciplined for hitting a suspect who was already under arrest. Watson’s attorney, Robert Padia, did not return the Weekly’s telephone calls. Watson was fired by the Riverside sheriff in August 1996. He now runs his own private-investigation firm.
This tattoo was apparently worn on the arm. One year, while at the Orange Blossom Festival, I saw a man in a tank top with this type of tattoo on his arm.
Accounts like these above are merely the more notorious ones of police officers who committed misconduct on the job, even breaking the law. And none of this activity was caused solely by the acts of officers going out and getting tattoos of a symbol adopted by them for bonding purposes. More important factors involved in these and other situations were poor training and supervision and also isolating these units from other divisions in the respective police departments, including the location of the headquarters of these units apart from those of other divisions.
Other problems included staffing special units not on set criteria but on political connections with those officers holding higher rank in the department as happened in the case of a special investigations unit in the Chicago Police Department, as depicted in the book, Brotherhood of Corruption, written by former officer, Juan Antonio Juarez which should serve as a cautionary notice to police departments and communities. Staffing special units with officers who have prior disciplinary records including some that are rather extensive and chronic, has also been cited as causes in scandals which have arisen with special units in departments across the country. In several cases around the country, officers were put in special units because they had a high number of complaints filed against them when they were patrol officers and it was a way to make them less visible.
So the tattoos themselves aren't the only issue in cases like the above and others like them, and if the officers are properly trained and supervised and the accountability mechanisms are put in place and working, they might never be a problem in term of incidents that impact the public.
But tattoos in this context are not necessarily harmless either, especially in terms of the perceptions they elicit from the communities that may be separate or in line with the actions of the officers. They're definitely a sign that something's going on, whether innocuous or not, that remains to be seen. In this case, they may also serve as an unfortunate litmus test that at least with some elements of the police department, there's still much that needs to change in its underpinnings if the image of a grinning skull is seen as a unifying image among officers, as it apparently has been in other places.
What's done can't be undone, the officers had the right to get the tattoos, the tattoos are in compliance with departmental policy. They have made their choice and it is their choice. Whether those who haven't gotten them will go out and get them remains to be seen. It's hoped that they give it a great degree of thought first before taking any action.
But is this situation a good thing? Probably not, even if the intention of these officers was simply to form a more cohesive unit. And while Bernstein took some comfort from the fact that the tattoos apparently aren't visible to the public, in the cases listed above they weren't either until these scandals broke. And why aren't they visible? Some hints to that were included in Bernstein's column. The officers apparently preferred it that way.
(excerpt)
"It (tattoo inspection) touches on some personnel matters," explained Capt. Pete Esquivel. "If it were visible, it would be fair game."
About all the RPD has to say about the tats is that they are hidden and, of course, not sanctioned by the department.
What exactly is meant here, by "fair game"? That they could be subjected to being banned by the department? By the same department that apparently has coffee mugs with a similar design?
That seems a bit odd. You can have a little skulls and bandanna representing the Metro Team to go with your latte but officers in that division can't wear it on their bodies unless it's out of sight. Was their objection to the tattoos, and the earlier tee-shirts, but not the coffee mug?
Both displays of the same insignia in different places do serve a useful purpose. They may provide a useful barometric check for where this department is at from top to bottom, as time will tell and if the city attorney's office is happy with them, then there's no reason for the city government to complain about it and City Manager Brad Hudson probably won't be pulling Asst. City Manager Tom DeSantis from his assignment of supervising the shelving of books in the city's libraries to inspect biceps, triceps and calves belonging to the department's officers. What the community thinks of things has never mattered to the city anyway and if the mindset is there, it might as well be put on display.
It's disturbing and the communities may not complain about it in public, but they'll certainly be talking about it because they've talked about this topic in the past. Stories have long circulated about rogue officers running around, often wearing the same tattoos in this city as they probably have in every other city. It's disturbing to see that at least so far, the tattoos do exist. Hopefully, the department has the tools in place and the right attitude to assure that it goes no further than that and if it ever does, then it will respond quickly.
It's unfortunate that this has happened, but it's another reminder that the process that began seven years ago is and must be an ongoing one. It also serves as a reminder that not all the movement will be forward, that there will be steps backward as well. Unfortunately, this reality check probably won't be the last one.
posted by Five Before Midnight | 12:15 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home