by Susan E. Carr

Created on: November 08, 2009   Last Updated: November 09, 2009

"Within the Spirit of the Law" is a legislative statute. Following the "Spirt of the Law" but not the "letter" is accomplished by "exploiting" technicalities, loopholes and ambiguous language - sometimes useful when referring to inherent responsibilities that come under the code of laws, but that can be loosely interpreted or even misinterpreted. And just how does this apply to Police responsibility for their actions? It is all a matter of "interpretation".

Once a badge has been issued, it is accompanied with expectations and responsibilities, some of which are readily understood, some that can be seen as on the edge of what is and should be expected. Thus, the "Spirit of the Law" is sometimes the "foggy" area when it comes to police brutality and what determines this, and who does the deciding.

The current technological advancements have definitely provided the average citizen with the advantage of being able to document what they see going on around them, often by use of digitalized technology such as cell phones able to take pictures on the spot. This has also changed much about what we know and think we know, and gives the citizen the advantage when it comes to monitoring the actions of those such as the police.

However, the ability to be able to prove this is sometimes met with another intrinsic element and that is called the "Code of Silence". This is a protective shield that can and does deflect our ability to get to the bottom of what really happened.

In recent history, there have been many reported incidents of brutality in which the police have been involved. Most citizens are reluctant to judge their police as corrupt, and want to believe that they are protected, and it is likely that this is for the most part a correct assumption. It is also correct to acknowledge and to understand that in every large organization there are opposite and contrary elements likely in existence.

There are always those who will use their positions to their own advantage and who do not have the well being of the citizenship as their fundamental purpose. This is referred to as "abuse of power", something that has been increasingly more reported on in recent years.

But the question posed is "How to hold Police Responsible for their Actions?" The solution is really two-fold. First, legislation must come into play that does not allow for police to monitor themselves. Instead, an outside body should be delegated to make those judgements when it is found that police brutality is noted.

Second, each citizen must take responsibility to come forward when they witness incidents that are considered to be "police brutality" and be willing to take a stand against this. Sounds simple, but when one thinks deeply about it, it is not.

Inherent in the last suggestion is "fear" of retaliation. Is this a real fear one should have? Yes and no depending on who and what is involved in the circumstances.

In the final analysis, the real responsibility to ensure fair laws and fair play is within the society itself. As long as we are afraid to come forward, as long as we are afraid to report, as long as we remain apathetic towards something that is happening to someone else and not us, nothing can or will change.

Change only occurs when we are willing to make this a reality and are willing to take a stand. That means that each citizen is responsible to ensure that the "Letter of the Law" is maintained by every citizen, and that nothing else is acceptable.

Learn more about this author, Susan E. Carr.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.