Editorial: State trooper’s self-audit lacks transparency

The Pennsylvania State Police ruled all but 1 percent of its shootings justifiable.

How did the department arrive at those results? It evaluated and audited itself.

Of the at least 120 intentional shootings that State Police fired in the line of duty since 2008, the department determined only one was “improper,” according to data obtained by PublicSource, a nonprofit investigative news organization serving western Pennsylvania.

Most of the data the force provides is similarly self-evaluated, self-reported and — potentially — biased.

It’s great that Pennsylvania State Police set out to review its action, but for the audit to reach its full potential to restore community relationships, the organization should have used a third-party agent. If there is truly nothing to hide, an outside investigator wouldn’t find anything, and we would all feel safer.

While the force does follow a set of procedures to prevent biased evaluation, the process remains internal.The department requires State Police outside the chain of command of anyone involved in the shooting — State Police that are still part of the force — to handle and monitor internal investigations. This still leaves room for bias.

When the state force self-evaluates its performance, it relinquishes the opportunity to reassure the community. Two-thirds of Americans don’t believe police departments nationwide did a good job holding officers accountable for misconduct, equal treatment of racial groups and use of the right amount of force, according to a USA TODAY/ Pew Research Center poll conducted in August 2014. 

In Pennsylvania’s case, the obtained data not only relinquishes community investment, but also stands in stark, questionable disparity to a review of Philadelphia’s police force performance.

In late March, the U.S. Justice Department released a report on the use of force by the Philadelphia Police Department, concluding that the department had “serious deficiencies” in its use of force policies and insufficient oversight of investigations.

In light of this report, Pennsylvania State Police Department should have also turned to outside examination to highlight issues difficult to discover through internal evaluation. For the Pennsylvania Police Department to consider a shooting “improper,” it must fail to meet guidelines set by the force or the law. It is dangerous to self-evaluate performance based on self-ascribed guidelines. How strictly the guidelines are set, enforced and evaluated will determine the agency’s performance — a process rife with bias.

We are all too old to be afraid of the dark, but that doesn’t mean we like to reside in it. The more information we have about police force in our state, the safer we will feel.