New York police force being purged of laxity

Press, Volume CXI, Issue 32706, 8 September 1971, Page 15

New York police force being purged of laxity

(By

TOM WICKER.

of the "New York Times,” through N.Z.P.A.)

NEW YORK, Sept 6. When Patrick Murphy was a young New York City policeman, he used to hear from cynics in the locker room the saying that “the job is only good for time or money.”

Now that the gentle-voiced but exceedingly tough Murphy is commissioner of the city's 31,000-man police force, he has taken dead aim on that attitude and “New York’s finest” are not likely to be the same again.

It is not just corruption itself, although the latter-day evidence of police complicity in the spreading drug traffic makes corruption a, more vital question than once it might have been. Most police graft over the years has been tied to the kind of “crime” for which there was considerable public

demand—gambling, prostitution, loan-sharking—and the “cop on the take” could always persuade himself, with some logic, that he was only permitting the public to have its way, with little harm done to anyone but the “suckers” and “Johns.”

There is considerable public demand-for narcotics, too, but few policemen could believe there is no harm in letting that flourish.

LAXITY - CORRUPTION Nevertheless, the evidence of police involvement in New York and elsewhere, is sufficient to lend a new and dangerous dimension to the old question of police corruption.

Even so, Mr Murphy—who showed lest week that he means business by relieving some commanders, promoting others, for example a new chief of patrol over the heads of 72 seniors—has more in mind than corruption itself, serious as it is. A thoughtful and confident man, with long-experience-as a police official .in New Yom, in Washington, in ' Detroit 'and in the Justice 1 Department, Mr Murphy is ! determined to root out the ' attitude of official laxity that ' permits good police work to 'be undermined.riot just by ' corruption, but by ineffectiveness, ineptitude, unconcern, ignorance and brutality. Sitting in his sombre redi curtained office in New York, , Mr Murphy talked about his : intentions near the end of one of his recent hectic days. The “time or money” attitude, he said, permeated too much of police work. ■ A patrolman on the beat, who learned to “beat time"

by sleeping on the job, hiding out in a movie theatre, loafing in bars and cafes, developed an attitude that stayed with him. Later, as a detective or a sergeant, instead of “beating time,” it might come easy to take a gambler’s pay-off or some other form of graft. And in both cases, his basic attitude would be that it didn’t really matter, noone was really hurt—and besides, everyone was trying to beat the system, why not a poor policeman? But a patrolman asleep in his squad car at 2 a.m. might be a more dangerous matter than some other patrolman accepting a small bribe. The community and the innocent could be more exposed to violence and disorder by “cooping”—New York police jargon for sleeping on the beat.

And a precinct or squad commander enough affected by the pervasive “time or money” attitude hot to move against “cooping" or conniption might well be lax enough to permit other forms of sloppy work, or brutality, or ineffectiveness in dealing with crime and disorderliness. ' CHANGES AT TOP So Mr Murphy’s spectacular recent move was notable for two things besides his evident determination. First, after his wellpublicised insistence on rooting out corruption, he actually relieved 'a number of commanders for allowing “cooping.” It is clear that he is really after lax and inefficient commanders, because where “cooping" can be found it is not hard .to suppose that corruption and other evils could flourish, too. ~ Second, police sources say that the word is out among the rank-and-file that whatever else Mr Murphy is doing, he is at least acting against “the brass” rather ’ than on the cop on the beat, i That is precisely what the i commissioner is doing, and snot merely for morale puri poses. t He knows that the tough > and efficient commanders he r intends to have will not -tolerate corruption or , “cooping,” or ineffectiveness, or callous and brutal beha- • viour.

Once every police official is made directly accountable for the behaviour of each man he commands, and accepts that accountability, Mr Murphy is convinced that most of these problems will diminish rapidly and the substantive struggle against

crime will be greatly advanced—he hopes most notably in the narcotics field.

NATIONAL EXAMPLE

Mr Murphy’s crusade against corruption, therefore, is a good deal more than that —although few things are more important than the respect of lawmen themselves for the law.

Taking place in the nation’s largest city and communications centre, led by one of its ablest and most prestigious police officers, with the enthusiastic support of a mayor who may yet be a Presidential candidate, New York might -put police corruption and all it signifies—lax administration, ineffective enforcement, loss of public confidence, the spread of the drug traffic, terror in the streets—high in the national consciousness. And what that promises is a new national sense that improving the professionalism of policemen—the leadership and training they get, the management and discipline of police activities, the concentration of police resources on the proper targets—will attack crime far more successfully than any number of repressive laws.