LAPD Rejection Over Racial Joke Raises Questions

Randy Mehringer grew up the son of a career cop and couldn’t wait to button up the blue himself.

He took entrance exams at the Los Angeles Police Department before graduating from the University of Arizona, and later became a reserve officer--finishing third in his Academy class--to boost his chances of hiring on. So far, the 27-year-old west San Fernando Valley resident has logged more than 2,000 hours at Rampart Division, earning him praise in the police union’s newsletter and a guest spot on the television show “Cops.”

Now Mehringer’s childhood dreams have been busted, apparently because he repeated a not-so-funny joke about last fall’s “Million Man March” to some friends at the gym. He admitted the incident when asked about racial jokes by an LAPD interviewer, and last month a rejection letter arrived saying that Mehringer had failed to meet department standards of “respect for others” because of his “racially derogatory comments.” Mehringer said the joke was the only racially related behavior he mentioned.

“There seems to be a problem somewhere if the criteria for selecting a police officer is never having told a joke about a protected class,” said Bud Mehringer, a 28-year LAPD veteran and Randy’s father. “We’d better find another labor pool. We’d better go to Venus or Mars, because you’re not going to find them on this planet.

“Are we looking for perfect human beings? Or are we looking for good officers?” Bud Mehringer added. “There has to be a balance here.”

*

With the unprecedented expansion of the LAPD in full swing, and sensitivity about racism on the force heightened by the O. J. Simpson double-murder trial, City Hall leaders and bureaucrats are adamant that weeding out people with prejudice is a key component of police recruiting. But Mehringer’s case--and a handful of similar stories in which jokes, years-old financial woes or teenage drug experimentation resulted in rejection letters--have politicians wondering whether they have gone too far.

Mehringer has appealed his rejection, and plans to testify about his situation at a special meeting of the City Council Personnel Committee on Monday morning in which members will consider hiring a panel of psychological experts to review the police recruitment process. The committee seized on the issue after hearing complaints from rebuffed candidates and reviewing the department’s high rejection rate.

LAPD and Personnel Department officials would not estimate how many candidates are disqualified in connection with telling racial jokes, but 59% of the candidates who make it to the background investigation stage are disqualified, many under the categories of “mature judgment” or “respect for others,” code words for potential bias. Currently, city officials must recruit 1,200 to 1,500 candidates to fill each 80-member Police Academy class, a staggering ratio that leaves some wondering if quality people are being turned away.

“We need to be very careful that we’re not going overboard . . . that it doesn’t turn into a witch hunt,” said Councilwoman Laura Chick, who is a member of the Public Safety and Personnel committees. “It’s part of our national culture that these kinds of jokes are told. Until in a much bigger way we take on the task of raising the public’s consciousness that this is not OK, I’m not sure that it’s an effective way to screen out for LAPD.”

But this is a tricky issue, particularly in light of the department’s recent history, including the 1991 beating of Rodney G. King, the riots that followed the first jury verdict in that case, and last fall’s nationwide airing of racist comments by now-retired LAPD Det. Mark Fuhrman.

“All of us want to make darn sure that we don’t have Mark Fuhrman again,” said Councilman Mike Feuer, Chick’s colleague on the Public Safety panel. “If I had to err on one side or the other, I would err on the side of assuring that we don’t have people with bigoted views in the Police Department. . . . With all the people out there, why would you take a chance on [a person who told racial jokes]?”

Councilman Mark Ridley-Thomas, an African American who is a member of the Public Safety Committee, agreed, noting that “one of the most insidious forms of racism is communicated through humor.”

At a Personnel Committee meeting last week, however, Councilwoman Jackie Goldberg wondered whether the LAPD might be setting an impossible standard, and in an interview Friday, Police Protective League President Cliff Ruff agreed.

“That’s McCarthyism at its ultimate. We’re in the era of being politically correct,” Ruff said. “There has to be some legitimate quality control as to who may harbor bias and prejudice as opposed to who may have heard or told a joke.”

Indeed, even Mayor Richard Riordan has been caught making questionable quips.

As a Recreation and Parks commissioner, Riordan made fun of his own ethnic group, implying at a public meeting that the Irish drink too much. After his election in 1993, he was criticized for repeating a Richard Pryor sex joke about African Americans.

*

“It’s a good thing that good jokes aren’t a prerequisite for being mayor,” said Riordan’s assistant chief of staff, Steve Sugerman. But implying that racial jokes are a valid issue for recruiters to address, he added, “LAPD recruitment is not a joking matter.”

Bill Violante, deputy mayor for public safety, agreed with Chick that racial or gender jokes should not be a litmus test for LAPD recruits, but that they should trigger further scrutiny of a candidate’s attitudes and past behavior.

“It’s important to understand: ethnic jokes are not funny, any derogatory comments are not tolerated in the workplace,” Violante said. “But you have to look at the entire candidate.”

LAPD and Personnel Department officials who oversee recruiting said they do exactly that. They would not comment, however, on individual cases.

Before the background investigation, candidates must fill out a 21-page form that asks about prior behavior--everything from “Have you committed a homicide?” to “Have you discriminated against someone based on race or gender?” In the subsequent interview, officers probe further, often using questions such as “Have you ever laughed at or told a racial joke?” as an entree to a candid discussion about prejudice, according to Pat Patterson, chief of the Personnel Department’s public safety division.

“There is no absolute bar to somebody because they’ve either told or listened to a racial joke,” Patterson said. “But there’s just absolute zero tolerance for this type of stuff in the Police Department. What we try to do is determine whether this is indicative of some deep-seated, deep-held beliefs, attitudes, stereotypes.

“Do I think it’s perfect?” Patterson said about the recruitment process, then broke out laughing. “I think there are probably things that could be improved, but it’s something we’ve tried to improve on a weekly and monthly and annual basis for years and years and years. It’s not perfect yet.”

Just ask Randy Mehringer, who scored a 98 out of 100 points on his oral exam and worked nearly for free for the LAPD for two years without anyone complaining of his attitudes, then was rejected for full-time work after admitting he’d told a bad joke. The joke about the “Million Man March” implied that many African Americans are unemployed.

“I was stunned. It doesn’t seem like a reason,” Mehringer said. “My work history has proven I’ve never had a problem with the way I treat people. I can’t think of anybody who can say they’ve never told a joke. There should be a screening process, but there are some things that go overboard.”

Several LAPD veterans have written to the Personnel Department to protest Mehringer’s rejection.

Sgt. George Hoopes, Mehringer’s former supervisor at Rampart, describes him as a “much-coveted partner” and “peer favorite.”

“I am a minority member of our department and have been sensitive to minority issues,” Hoopes wrote. “[Mehringer’s] character was cut from the highest moral and ethical fabric . . . he harbors no hidden animosity for any minority group. It would be an appalling injustice if his dreams and a family tradition ends solely on the basis of one incident.”

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Making the Grade

The Los Angeles Police Department has found that it must recruit 1,200 to 1,500 candidates for every class of 80 that enters the Police Academy. With the city’s unprecedented expansion of the police force in full swing, that means the city must recruit about 18,000 candidates a year. Here’s are the tests recruits undergo, along with the percentage that pass each phase, according to a city Personnel Department study completed in 1995:

* WRITTEN EXAM: (76%) A multiple choice portion that tests literacy and an essay to measure writing ability.

* INTERVIEW: (91%) A three-member panel consisting of a police officer, a city of Los Angeles Personnel Department employee and a member of the public conduct the session, emphasizing a candidate’s “interpersonal effectiveness and sense of connection to the community.” Scored on a 100-point scale, this test determines the rank on the eligibility list.

* MEDICAL / PSYCHOLOGICAL: (63%) State-required health tests.

* PHYSICAL: (85%) Equipment-based measures of basic abilities such as strength, endurance, flexibility and agility.

* PSYCHOLOGICAL INTERVIEW: (88%) Personnel Department handles this, focusing on stress tolerance, sensitivity to cultural diversity and flexibility to handle various work situations.

* BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION: (41%) Another interview, with an LAPD representative, plus an examination of work history, financial records and personal references. Candidates might be disqualified for racist, sexist or homophobic behavior.

*

The largest percentage of candidates, 59%, are ousted in the background investigation stage, in which the LAPD and city Personnel Department examine nine characteristics. Here are the percentages of candidates disqualified in each category:

* Respect for the law: 22%

* Honesty: 33%

* Mature judgment: 8%

* Respect for others: 9%

* Employment record: 10%

* Military record: 1%

* Financial record: 18%

* Driving record: 3%

* Use of drugs/intoxicants: 19%

NOTE: Total exceeds 100% because some candidates are disqualified in more than one category.

Source: City Personnel Department