The police have never been a particularly popular profession in the state of San Andreas, but recent months have given rise to a new wave of anti-law enforcement sentiment. The old cliche of “Who watches the watchmen?” has never been more relevant, and the people are demanding answers, oversight, and accountability. But the police, in collaboration with the Department of Justice, have cleverly crafted a system that allows them to ignore all of this and do as they please.
Perhaps this security is what has led to more and more allegations of police abuse, excessive force, and outright corruption from the public. Shout News has been undertaking an investigation of police malfeasance, and the last few months have painted a very clear picture of a police force both out of control and out of touch.
(Editorial disclosure: Becks Lawson is a former state representative and police administrative assistant.)
Protocol and procedure
The current stalemate between police and public started with a protest on the lawn of City Hall in October of 2023. The protest focused on demands that had to do with police treatment of criminals in custody, but it ignited a larger conversation with Governor Damien Key. Key came to an agreement with law enforcement high command to change the internal Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) around Internal Affairs reports.
This well-intentioned change was trumpeted as a step towards greater transparency, but in practice, it’s much more of a smoke screen. First, the SOPs are only visible to police; they cannot be reviewed by an external body, let alone enforced. But recent revelations have shown just how tough it is to actually file an IA. In February, Chief Julie Lee admitted that police do not have to identify themselves to the public with either name or badge number, and while it is “encouraged”, it cannot be enforced in any way.
Governor Key told Shout News that he has spoken with police about updating this policy. “I’ve been informed, on that note, [identification] has been added to SOPs as well,” Key told Shout News in a call, adding that Lee took the concerns “very seriously.”
At a March 10 legislative meeting, Speaker Joanna Poole further clarified that the police see “taking complaints and Internal Affairs as completely different processes,” elaborating that there have only been six Internal Affairs reports since the start of 2024. A member of the public may believe they are initiating an Internal Affairs process, only to have their complaint dismissed or result in a mere talking-to.
Poole explained that law enforcement command will only initiate IA reports for “cases of severe ethical violations or possible criminal actions,” and that the current attitude from command is “if it’s not broke, don’t fix it.” As such, several members of the public who believed that they had filed an IA report were mistaken, and did not realize their complaint would not be subject to the same processes. Whether this is a miscommunication or deliberate smokescreen is up to your interpretation.
Law enforcement did not respond to multiple requests for comment from Shout News.
Officers unchained
While the system may not be broken for law enforcement, the public may disagree. There are currently two civil cases open against the police regarding reckless driving — one is from Alexei Bones and Aleksander Olsen, another filed by Black Lotus Motorcycle Club. The latter suit alleges that a cadet, driving at over 100MPH with no sirens, slammed through the Black Lotus Public Ride.
The US Marshals have also begun an investigation into law enforcement and the Department of Justice, alleging that four individuals were charged with nine counts of first-degree murder in order to rack up a prohibitively high bail cost. The DOJ have since issued a statement to press which reads, in part, “The Department of Justice wants to acknowledge an incident involving an erroneous charge that was issued. […] It has been determined that the charge was issued due to an oversight and a thorough investigation has determined the charge was not issued in bad faith or with malicious intent.”
Further complicating the issue is that there is no core legislation that exists for the LSPD or the BCSO. The Department of Justice, Board of Medicine, Flight Administration, Rangers, and even the State Troopers have individual core acts that outline their rights and responsibilities. It is currently in the best interest of law enforcement to exist in this legal limbo, where they are so integral to daily life and established in case history that they cannot be struck down, but exist in a state so undocumented as to be effectively immune from expectations.
If our class of legislators were to craft core legislation for law enforcement that included oversight, accountability, and use of force protocols that were publicly visible, that might suggest one path forward for a better relationship between law enforcement and the people of San Andreas.
But until that bill is written, voted upon, signed into law by the executive branch, and enforced by law enforcement command, we cannot rely on such a solution.
Civil suits and action by the US Marshals, then, seem to be the main path forward for the public to express their displeasure with the police’s current actions. But one piece of legislation, the CLAM Act, acts as a major deterrent. The CLAM Act ensures that citizens only have 30 days to file a civil case against police. While this is understandable at first, consider that the police may not identify themselves, or stop after hitting a member of the public to share relevant information.
Shout News has spoken with members of the public who were unable to file their civil litigation against police due to not having sufficient information before the CLAM Act kicked in.
With a Special Election approaching, the topic of police accountability is likely to be revisited in the public eye over the coming days. It remains to be seen whether the system will continue on, unimpeded, or whether changes can be made to end a system of opacity and control.
Leave a Reply