The inconvenient truth about Schenectady and other police

Today's Gazette has an interesting Page One story which begins as follows: "In almost every respect, the city had a more effective police department a decade ago. From 1998 to 2000, according to FBI data, the police had a better solve rate for nearly every serious crime than it did in the three-year period from 2005-07. They also solved a greater number of cases back then — a surprising figure since crime has increased 17 percent since that time. And they did it with fewer people. The detective division had just 19 people — 16 fewer than it has today."
So what's going on? The police spokesman doesn't know, and a couple of implausible theories are floated. Then comes this: "But others say the real problem is one of morale. Some officials believe police worked harder a decade ago, before a series of scandals tarnished the department’s reputation. In 2000, the FBI began to investigate reports that some police were taking drugs from dealers and giving them to informants. By the end of that year, two officers were indicted on drug distribution and extortion charges. There was more to come. In 2002, four officers went to federal prison and another committed suicide at the department headquarters during the federal probe."
In fact, there is a connection to that particular scandal, but it's not raised by anyone quoted in the story. Of the four officers who went to prison, two, Mike Hamilton and Nick Messere, were among the best cops in the department. Hamilton routinely made far more arrests than anyone else.
And that is what explains the otherwise mysterious statistics in today's Gazette. Cutting corners, i.e. by "taking drugs from dealers and giving them to informants," contributed to very effective police work.
But anyone who says that will be asked if that means you endorse illegal activity by police. Because politicians and prosecutors don't want people to indignantly ask them that question, the truth goes unmentioned. People may not even admit it to themselves, living in denial.
The four cops in that scandal were pursued by a leather-jacketed young federal prosecutor, Daniel French, who soon after switched sides to take up criminal defense work, and also represented Evident Technologies, one of the beneficiaries of Joe Bruno's largesse. Then Attorney General Andrew Cuomo got French appointed last year to the state's Public Integrity Commission, which prompted some hand wringing about possible conflicts of interest. Maybe French is now advising Cuomo on Schenectady police matters, which the attorney general has been disastrously mishandling. The police chief who had turned a blind eye to the tactics of Hamilton, Messere and the other cops was Greg Kaczmarek, who then retired and became involved in drug dealing. The Kaz's post-retirement activity was a genuinely appalling scandal that was prosecuted by Cuomo's office, which proceeded to treat the ex-chief with extraordinary leniency (especially when compared to French's merciless persecution of Hamilton and Messere, whose sentences were more than twice as long as Kaczmarek's). In a separate, minor case, Cuomo has been coming down too hard on some street cops in Schenectady.
When people watch a good TV drama like "The Wire," they can appreciate the moral complexity of police work. But not in real life, apparently. A decade ago, when the Schenectady Metroplex Authority was only just getting started, the city was in very tough shape and its future seemed in the balance. There was a permanent fiscal crisis, with crime threatening to spin out of control. Public officials were not inclined to scrutinize too closely the tactics of officers like Hamilton who were solving major violent crimes and locking up bad guys. They were keeping the lid on.
But if you want an opinion, here's what a commenter known as wmarinic said about the Gazette story: "Back 10 years ago the Police had the support of the Mayor and City Council and the public was willing to help in an investigation rather than hinder it."

Comments

[Molly]

So what's your solution? Make it legal for cops to distribute drugs to informers? You can't turn a complete blind eye, because it opens up the possibility for serious corruption within the department. Say you support cops distributing drugs to informers, because it provides good information and enables the arrest of violent criminals. What if those same police officers start taking the drugs themselves? Or if one or two become corrupt, and start selling the drugs? Such a process would have to be heavily monitored, and thus endorsed by the state.