Evening star., 1952-09-07
Browbeoting the Police

Browbeoting the Police
Senator Neely has read some alarming
implications" into the fact that committee of
police officials recently censured Captain John
B. Monroe because of certain testimony he gave
70 the Nicely crime subcommittee
The West Virginia Senator further says that
upon the reconvening of Congress he will urge
the Senate District Committee which he heads.
ito give this vital matter immediate and thor
ough consideration"
The threat implicit in this is plain enough,
and because the threat has been made it may be
instructive to look at the facts.
In 1948 Captain Monroe was lieutenant in
the fourteenth precinct He had row with the
commanding officer of that precinct, Captain
William T. Murphy. over gambling arrest.
Conflicting inferences might be drawn from
testimony given the Senate committee Captain
Monroe said he was cursed by his superior for
making the arrest, that sergeant and corporal
who helped him were assigned to school-crossng
duty, and that he was ordered not to make any
more such arrests without first advising Captain
Murphy He also testified he had refused to give
the captain the name of the informant who told
him about the gambler. The net effect of this
was to invite suspicion that Captain Murphy
was conniving with gamblers and that he could
not be trusted.
This was fatty denied by Captain Murphy
He said his interest was in seeing to it that his
Subordinates made lawful arrests that would
stand up in court. He denied any association
with gamblers and said the sergeant and corporal
were assigned to School-crossing duty because
they were needed to protect the children. He
also said it was not unusual to do this The
facts are that there was not the slightest proof
he had ever associated with gambler, and,
significantly, that the case against the particular
gambler in question was dismissed in court on
the ground that he had been unlawfuly arrested
and the evidence illegally seized. Il pj0oE
This testimony could be Interpreted either
favorably or unfavorably to Captain Murphy
But Committee Counsel Arnold Bauman went
even further. While Captain Monroe was on
the stand, this exchange occurred:
Mr. Bauman-Captain Monroe want to
ask you generally what the widespread feeling
in the Police Department is what the feeling
was as to what was likely to happen II you
arrested a gambler who worked for certain
hackers.
Captain Monroe-weI the rumor that
the man would be transferred. I have never
been transferred that way.
Mr.. Bauman-Was that general 1eellng
In the department?
Captain Monroe-That is the more or less
general feeling in the department. Sergeant
Beach was transferred. OF course. he requested
it. and Corporal Smith was transferred. was
Mr. Bauman-And do you know whether it
was generally the attitude of police officers who
didn't want to get transferred to stay away from
these numbers places, particularly when they
had the reputation Of being under the jurisdic-
ton of certain hackers?
Captain Monroe-Well, don't know that,
whether they would stay away from them or not.
Mr.. Bauman-In any event, the general feel
ing was that If you made such an arrest involving
certain individuals. that you would more than
likely be transferred to an undesirable assign
ment?
Captain Monroe-Probaby would get an
undesirable assignment
Mr.. Bauman--I have no further questions.
It was on the basis Of this particular testi
rnony that Captain Monroe was censured, and it
is hard to see the alarming implications in that
fact True, he was answering questions put to
him by Mr.. Bauman But the testimony, tending
to blacken the reputation of Captain Murphy,
was based on the rankest sort of rumor and
gossip There was not trace of fact in it,
Captain Monroe did not then, nor has he since,
named single policeman who was transferred
for arresting any gambler.
This is the kind of testimony that evokes
anguished outcres when used as has sometimes
been done to suggest that some one iSa Com
munist or Communist sympathiZer 1t is curious
that no such reaction develops when police
officer Is being smeared.
The fact Of this matter is that the censure
was based on painstaking investigation Of
testimony given before the Nicely committee by
a number Of police officers. The report Of the
committee Of assistant superintendents who
made the investigation was approved by the
District Commissioners. It might be good
thing for the District Committee to look thor
oughly into this whole business. # it does.
Senator Nicely is apt to discover that in this
instance there is much more to be alarmed
about in the shabby sort of testimony that was
developed and accepted by his crime committee
than in the censure of Captain Monroe.