When discussing incidents such as the murder of George Floyd at the hands of Derek Chauvin, it is common to hear the suggestion that the easy solution to the problem is to “get rid of the bad apples” which inhabit most police departments. Progressives, black activists, and their allies go further and describe the need to address the problem of “systemic racism”. Both are correct, but in my opinion, neither of these proposed solutions are broad enough to address the real problem which exists in law enforcement in our country. It is not enough for police officers to believe that somehow black men are more dangerous and/or have less of a right to be treated with respect than white men; to cross the line they have to have the personality traits to act on those beliefs. Since Chauvin is a prime example of someone who had both those beliefs and requisite personality traits, let’s start with him.
It is of course impossible for others to determine with any certainty what is going on in another human being’s mind at any particular place and time so we will never know what Derek Chauvin was thinking as he knelt on the neck of George Floyd until he died, and then continued to do so even after he was gone. Since Chauvin decided to take advantage of his 5th Amendment right to not take the stand in his own defense, we may never even know his side to the story. That’s no great loss since it would have been extremely unlikely that he would have been truthful anyway.
However, since many of us saw videotapes of the event from several perspectives we can at least form an informed hypothesis. We can combine our impressions of that event with what we can learn from his police department’s records, the statements of those who witnessed the event in person, the recollection of those who knew Chauvin before his arrest, and the opinions of experts who viewed the videos. We can then take all of that information to form an informed opinion of what this convicted murderer was thinking as he knelt on George Floyd’s neck for 9 minutes and 23 seconds.
While working as a Minneapolis police officer Chauvin accumulated 18 conduct complaints from the public. One resulted in two official reprimands. He received multiple oral reprimands for using a demeaning tone and derogatory language. In 2007 Chauvin was accused of pulling a woman out of her car during a traffic stop. Her crime – driving 10 miles an hour over the speed limit. He was reprimanded for using unnecessary tactics and not turning on his squad car video during the incident.
Before his arrest, Chauvin worked off duty on weekends and sometimes during the week as a bouncer at a dance club in Minneapolis for 16 years. The former owner, Maya Santamaria said in an interview that the patrons complained about him. He was quick to get “hardcore, and was uneasy with the crowds on “Twerk Fest Thursdays” which catered to black customers. “I’ve seen him in action and I’ve seen him lose it and I’ve called him out on it before,” she said. “I’ve told him it’s unnecessary and unjustified some of the ways that he behaves. He just loses it.” She went on to say that instead of breaking up fights he would mace the crowd and then call for police backup.
After watching the video, Chauvin’s wife of 10 years divorced him. That ought to tell us something about his character and how it affected their relationship.
During much of the time when he continued to put the weight of his body on George Floyd’s neck, Chauvin had his hands in his pockets, as nonchalant as he could be. While Floyd begged him for his life, to let him up so he could breathe, Chauvin showed no emotion whatsoever, seemingly totally uncaring about the agony he was inflicting on another human being. However, when Floyd’s body went limp and bystanders begged him to stop, instead Chauvin became momentarily agitated and pulled a can of mace from his belt and threatened to spray them. Then he continued to kneel on Floyd’s neck for over three more minutes.
Former FBI Assistant Director Tom Fuentes is now a vice president at Morris & McDaniel – a firm that does psychological testing for police applicants around the world. He analyzed the video of Floyd’s murder and offered this insight, “Start to finish, in that nine minutes you see a murder in progress,” Chauvin’s behavior told him Chauvin is a classic sociopath, exhibiting extreme narcissism. “You have someone who has no regard for anybody else. He has no regard for the subject he’s trying to arrest – no regard for the public at large, no regard to the reputation of his fellow officers that are with him at the scene, as well as the 800,000 police officers across the country. He doesn’t care about anybody except himself.”
Fuentes said that in the general population research shows about seven percent of people exhibit some sociopathic behavior, but in applicants for law enforcement that number jumps up to more than 40%. Fuentes said the key to stopping police brutality is preventing these types of individuals who seek out power over others from being hired in the first place. Of Chauvin Fuentes said, “This officer is a sociopath. He never should have been hired as a police officer. You cannot train a pit bull to become a French poodle. If you hire somebody with those kinds of character traits, they’re still going to have those character traits and they’re going to be a ticking time bomb on the streets.”
The part of Fuentes’s statement which should alarm us the most is his reference to the percentage of police force applicants who exhibit some sociopathic traits. Obviously, they are drawn to that kind of work. A bit later we will explore the very real possibility that once on the job, the nature of the law enforcement work itself with its exposure to gory scenes and the worst elements of humanity can tend to initiate and/or reinforce those traits in veteran police officers.
According to the Mayo Clinic website, Antisocial Personality Disorder (ASPD), sometimes called sociopathy or psychopathy (there’s no clinical difference between a sociopath and a psychopath) is a mental disorder in which a person consistently shows no regard for right and wrong and ignores the rights and feelings of others. People with antisocial personality disorder tend to antagonize, manipulate, or treat others harshly or with callous indifference. They then show no guilt or remorse for their behavior.
According to the website, antisocial personality disorder signs and symptoms may include:
- Disregard for right and wrong
- Persistent lying or deceit to exploit others
- Being callous, cynical, and disrespectful of others
- Using charm or wit to manipulate others for personal gain or personal pleasure
- Arrogance, a sense of superiority and being extremely opinionated
- Recurring problems with the law, including criminal behavior
- Repeatedly violating the rights of others through intimidation and dishonesty
- Impulsiveness or failure to plan ahead
- Hostility, significant irritability, agitation, aggression or violence
- Lack of empathy for others and lack of remorse about harming others
- Unnecessary risk-taking or dangerous behavior with no regard for the safety of self or others
- Poor or abusive relationships
- Failure to consider the negative consequences of behavior or learn from them
- Being consistently irresponsible and repeatedly failing to fulfill work or financial obligations
One thing became evident as I read a large number of articles on the subject. There are many different levels of antisocial personality disorder and the ASPD symptoms may vary in magnitude from one person to the next. Many of the worst cases can be found among the hardened criminals who inhabit our prisons. However, many others with these traits who have been raised in good environments which taught them the value of good interpersonal behavior can function normally within our society while hiding how they really feel about others. In fact, having some of the ASPD traits, if they are kept mostly hidden by high functioning individuals, can actually be useful in achieving success in some professions.
According to a Dec 9, 2019 Forbes article, “The Psychopathic CEO”, 4% to as high as 12% of CEOs exhibit psychopathic traits, according to some expert estimates, many times more than the 1% rate found in the general population and more in line with the 15% rate found in prisons.” The article goes on to say that “people with psychopathy crave power and dominant positions, experts say. But they are also chameleons, able to disguise their ruthlessness and antisocial behavior under the veneer of charm and eloquence.” Remember, one of the ASPD traits is “uses charm or wit to manipulate others for personal gain or pleasure.”
It is easy to see why high functioning sociopaths (psychopaths – same thing) might be attracted to police work. If you crave “power and dominance” and are “arrogant and have a sense of superiority,” but don’t have the other attributes which might offer you the opportunity to be the boss of hundreds of people, where better to satisfy those cravings than wearing a uniform, a badge, and a gun. If you enjoy risk-taking or dangerous behavior, the life of a police officer may look very attractive to you. If you tend to “disregard the difference of right from wrong” and are prone to try to get away with “intimidating others” you may initially think that police officer can make their own rules. If you often feel “hostile, irritable and prone to agitation, aggression or violence” you might tend to believe that police officers are less likely to be penalized for the resulting behaviors.
Given the tendency of the wrong type of person to be attracted to police work, 90% of the police departments have their potential recruits take phycological tests along with follow-on in-person psychological screening designed to identify individuals with traits that would be unacceptable in police work. However, remember also that 10% of the police departments still don’t do phycological screening and that many veteran officers in other departments came on board before such screening became widely used.
What should be more concerning is that some studies have found that psychopathic traits are likely to grow stronger in police officers overtime. This is somewhat understandable since our law enforcement officers are often exposed to horrific situations, criminals, and the lowest levels of humanity which the rest of us don’t have to deal with. To survive in that environment, they have to develop tough skins and have a tendency to become more callous and cynical over time. In like manner, they may well develop a sense of superiority, become irritable, hostile, and more prone to use violence to do their jobs. As a result, they become adept at using charm, wit, and/or lying and deceit to cover up their bad behavior.
In addition, developing these psychopathic traits may in some limited ways make officers more effective in their everyday work. They might help them to disengage themselves mentally from dealing with criminals and the dregs of society. They may also help them with accepting the dangers of the job, dealing with the horror of accident scenes, handling the guilt that comes from having to shoot someone, etc.
So we are dealing with a situation where individuals with sociopath traits are naturally attracted to police work and may already be on the job either because they applied before psychological testing became the norm and/or because their departments are not yet using such tests. In addition, those traits appeared to be reinforced and expanded in police officers as they gain more experience, even in officers in whom those traits were not strong to begin with. As former FBI Assistant Director Tom Fuentes indicted, this is a recipe for disaster.
Some may believe that systemic racism is the sole problem, but I disagree. First of all, I would argue that those officers with strong sociopath traits are more likely to view people of color as lesser human beings and those traits make them much more likely to act on those beliefs. Police officers who don’t have those traits are far more likely to treat everyone with the respect they deserve. Even officers with prejudices ingrained during their upbringing or other circumstances are much more likely to always act in a professional manner if they are free from sociopathic traits. So while systemic racism in police departments across this country is highly problematic, the distorted mental makeup of some of their police officers might be an even greater problem.
So what to do about this situation? Obviously, phycological testing along with follow-up evaluations by specially trained psychologists/psychiatrists must become standard by every police department in order to weed out applicants as best we can who are not suited for police work. In addition, any indications of mistreatment of any member of the public by police officers must be treated seriously by those in authority in order to eliminate the “bad apples” (those who have developed sociopathic traits) before the worst happens. The individuals identified as potential should be subjected to additional psychological testing and evaluations to determine if they are still fit to continue their work in the public. In addition, police disciplinary records must be made available for public scrutiny to ensure bad behavior and/or lack of corrective action are not swept under the rug.
We may not ever totally eliminate racism in our police departments; such sentiments are far too easy to hide from the view of others. However, what we can do our best to eliminate from police work those who are most likely to act on those sentiments.
Cajun (Rick Guilbeau) 6/7/2021