Police Ordered to Tone Down Their @%*&!

Responding to citizen complaints of foul-mouthed law enforcement, the police chief in this laid-back Northwest city has told its 950 officers to not cuss so much in the line of duty.

The directive, which says officers must “self-report” each time they use a swearword on the job, took effect Jan. 1. Those found guilty of unnecessary swearing would face counseling and -- in extreme cases -- official reprimand.

Other departments around the country ban obscene language by officers, but few if any enforce the policy, Portland officials said. The intent of the new policy, they said, was to curtail the overuse of bad language by police in Portland, one of the only major cities nationwide to allow its officers to use curse words as a law-enforcement tool.

An integral part of the new directive -- and the most controversial aspect -- is the order for officers to report every instance in which they swear while on duty. Neither the Portland Police Bureau nor its officers have figured out how to record and track the information.

Police Chief Derrick Foxworth said the directive, read aloud at roll calls, simply calls for professional behavior. But the local police union described the policy as frivolous and distracting. Most officers, one union official said, intend to ignore it.

“With everything going on in this city -- drug-dealing, gang violence, homicides -- we’re having a discussion about officers using profanity,” said union president Robert King, a 13-year police veteran. “We find that troublesome.”

King said there are situations when using swearwords can be an effective tactic. Officers must routinely deal with hard-core criminals, drunks and drug addicts, and sometimes, King said, “Saying ‘Please put the gun down,’ won’t work.”

Last month, two police review groups identified officers’ use of swearwords as a major complaint of the public.

The joint report by the Citizen Review Committee and the Independent Police Review Division, part of the city auditor’s office, said that from Jan. 2, 2002, through June 11, 2003, citizens made 63 complaints with 94 allegations of obscenity. In the opinion of the review groups, those constituted “large numbers.”

In four of the cases, the officers were disciplined. In 11, supervisors had formal counseling sessions to help the officers handle future encounters without swearing.

The report made several recommendations, most of which the police chief adopted.

The policy now is included in training sessions; swearwords can be used only in “exceptional” and “very limited” circumstances, or if an officer is quoting someone else; and officers must report instances when they swear on duty.

“I’m very proud of that report,” said Richard Rosenthal, director of the Independent Police Review Division.

Rosenthal, a former Los Angeles County deputy district attorney, was involved in the prosecution of Los Angeles Police Officer Rafael Perez in the Rampart Division scandal. He moved to Portland in 2001.

“People in Portland have high expectations of police officers,” Rosenthal said. “Are they too high? Some people would say yes. We thought this was an excellent opportunity to take an issue that was on the public’s mind and address it with some specific recommendations. The officers should know what’s expected of them.”

The major point of aggravation for officers is the part about self-reporting. Police spokeswoman Cheryl Robinson said the bureau had not determined how to do that. It’s unclear whether a separate report should be filed for every instance of profanity, or whether the cussing should be included in routine incident reports.

At the Central precinct in downtown Portland, a “joke” report form has circulated among officers. It includes a check list of four-letter words with a box by each one. The top of the form reads: “I said these bad words today.”

The police bureau’s policy on swearwords has evolved over nearly three decades. A directive in 1976 banned swearing altogether. That policy was revised in 1989 and again in 1999 -- the last change allowing officers to use swear words as a tool to defuse violent situations. Racial epithets are banned without exception.

The review groups found that Portland was unique in allowing swearing as a police tactic.

Of the 26 police departments across the country -- including San Jose, New Orleans and Charlotte, N.C. -- surveyed by the groups, none had policies that allowed such use of language by their officers as a control tactic. Four had no policy, and 22 explicitly banned swearing.

The report indicated that perhaps because of the 1999 amendment that allowed limited use of swearwords in specific situations, Portland officers came to rely too heavily on such language.

Some officers on duty one recent afternoon in the Central precinct were dismissive when asked about the directive. One smiled and said, “Welcome to Portland.” One bicycle officer said he was a former Bible student and didn’t mind the change. A few responded with four-letter words.

Leo Painton, a 26-year veteran of the police bureau, called the directive silly. He doubts it will have any impact on the way officers conduct themselves in dangerous situations. The policy, he said, is tantamount to telling soldiers in the heat of battle not to cuss at the enemy.

He described one incident in which he swore. It was a raid on a house occupied by a drug-dealing biker gang. Inside, officers found a cache of high-powered weapons and a methamphetamine lab.

As the search proceeded, the main suspect hurled a barrage of four-letter words and tried to disrupt the search. Painton said he repeatedly told the suspect to sit down and stay out of the way; but when the suspect persisted, Painton told him to get his [expletive deleted] in the chair.

“It was only then he realized I was serious,” Painton said.

Whether that instance would be considered acceptable under the new directive wasn’t clear to him, but Painton said he would probably do it again under similar circumstances.

The officer called the directive “a solution in search of a problem.”

Another officer, Scott Westerman, said there was a bright side.

“You hear about all the scandals and corruption in other departments. Here the No. 1 complaint is swearing?” Westerman said. “If that’s all we have to worry about, I don’t mind.”