The Wilmington morning star., 1947-10-11
DelimitatiOn Needed

DO111t11G CxO1k ANSAuAu
The necessity of a delimitation of types
of charges of police misconduct to be at
tended to by the Chief of Police and more
serious matters deserving impartial con-
sideration and open hearings by the City
Civil Service commission has appeared
here recently.
In two instances of misconduct, the
Chief, using his judgement and supported
by the City Manager, dealt with the Of
ficers involved.
But was his treatment of the cases in
keeping with the seriousness of the COM
plants against the men?
Some may think SO, others may not.
! Under the Civil Service law, the Chief
may Immediately suspend an offending
member OF his department for a maximum
Of 80 days, provided he files a written
complaint of the charges" with the city
Manager and a copy is made available to
the suspended man. The officer is entitled
to a hearing before City council. If this
body does not sustain the action, then the
ISuSDG1luGu 1llClllDCl o1ld11 pS AiA111lS0AoGStJ
relnstated. :"
In either of the recent cases, the head OF
the department could have ordered a maxi
mum penalty of 80 days suspension for each
of the men
He could have discharged either officer,
who would nave had the right to appeal
to the Civil Service commission for an
open hearing in defense of the complaint
lodged against him. We believe this would
have been better for the city and depart
ment than the manner in which the matters
were handled.
In the event the charges preferred are
sustained by the commission, it, in the
exercise of its discretion" may discharge
the officer from the department. If the COM
missions decision is otherwise, it can re-
turn him to the force.
And, according to the law, any decision OF
the commission shall be subject to review
bv the New Hanover county Superior court.
There are many infractions of the de-
partment's rule with ould be delt with
by the Chief through his maximum authorl-
ty of a months suspension. These offenses
would be comparable to those, committed
by members of military forces and either
punishable bv the unit commander or a
summary court martial.
There are other breaches of conduct
which should be taken before the Civil
Service commission. These, we say by way
of comparison, would, if occurring IN the
armed services, demand a general court
martial.
But who is to say into which class this or
that offense within the Police department
shall fall?
Apparently the Chief, and the City Mana
ger are the only ones.
Therefore, the time appears for an effort
to make some distinction. When is an Of
ficer's offense serious enough for him to be
subjected to removal from the rolls OF the
department.? Under the procedure now be-
ing followed, it is left entirely to two men.
They are responsible and conscientious Of
ficials. But they ave no guide other than
the facts, as uncovered by them, in each in
dividual case.
Wouldn't it be better if there was some
definition between minor and major mis-
behavior?
We think so.
Some standards could be established
through conferences between the City coun-
ell and the Civil Service commission WITH
of course, the Chief and City Manager active
participants in these deliberations and draft
ing of a definite policy. Past examples OF
misconduct could be considered in prepar-
ing a scale of departmental "misdemeanors
and felonies."
Such an arrangement would be more bene-
ficial to the city and the welfare and morale
of the department than the one now fol-
lowed. That statement is not a d~isparaglng
reference to the judgement of either the
or City Manager, who are directly
responsible for the forces conduct. But it IS
time to decide which complaint shall be
delt with by them and which should go to
the City council, the Civil Service commits
sion OF Superior court. "