More thoughts on police accountability in Nashville | Marrow in the wind | Nashville News

I received a lot of comments on last week's article about the police situation here in Nashville, mostly along the lines of, “Well, we have to have the police” and “So you're saying we don't have no need for laws. or rules or…”

I just want to clarify that I don't know what to do. All I know is that right now the conversation is at an impasse. For me, too, the conversation hits a wall: “Well, we have to have the police. » I'm not here to advocate for abolishing the police, but I'm also trying to think about these things without letting the conversation stop at these apparent dead ends.

Let's go back. How about we start with something we all agree on: something is wrong with the police. We experienced it last week: a decade of police officers themselves speaking to the city about a culture of sexual harassment, racial bias and favoritism, and how it leads good cops to leave their jobs. We have the “Driving While Black” report, which shows that there is enormous racial bias in city traffic stops. And now we have reports of whistleblowers publishing more of the same.

I would argue that at the root of the problem is the fact that Nashville hired a person who apparently kept silent about an innocent man in prison to run the Office of Professional Responsibility. This is not just an attack on the director of the OPA, Kathy Morante, but rather an accusation against [here I’m waving my hands in all the directions] all that. How “participated in a secret meeting in which a number of us decided to keep silent about the fact that we knew an innocent person was in prison because it would be too embarrassing to tell the truth” Wasn't she immediately disqualified when she applied for this position? It should surprise no one that OPA was apparently pleased when the state Legislature undermined community oversight of policing in this city — not when the department's own director took office after keeping a secret that ruined an innocent person's life.

This takes place in the 2024 entry in the annals of “you knew I was a scorpion when you picked me up”. When police abolitionists tell you that the system works the way it's supposed to (hence why they want to tear down the system), that's the kind of thing they mean. Nashville may say it wants a fair and just legal system, but everyone who was at that meeting to keep this guy in prison went on to have good jobs. They were protected and rewarded. And one of them is the standard bearer of professional responsibility within police departments. So that’s what the system wants – for police and lawyers to prioritize protection from embarrassment over transparency that might reveal injustice – because that’s what it rewards. And so here we are.

I have an idea, or rather a thought experiment. This involves Sheriff Daron Hall. Am I still holding a grudge from the time he spoke to a hate group 15 years ago? Of course. Would I be more likely to vote for a piece of moldy bread than for him? Yes. My opinion of Daron Hall is “pbthbpthbpth”. But do you know what Hall is used to? Be accountable to the public. You know what Hall doesn't have? Annual scandals coming out of his department.

Back then – back when Nashville had city government, not metropolitan government – ​​the sheriff was traditionally a corrupt shit who called elections for politicians and ran rural Davidson County like Boss Hogg. He was as powerful and equal as the police chief of Nashville. But when Nashville was consolidating, we didn't need two separate but equally powerful police units in the same territory. So we dismantled the sheriff's office. Now he runs the jail, provides courthouse security, picks up bulk trash, and… well, I'm sure, other things.

But what happens if we bet on the wrong horse? What if, instead of making the Nashville Police Department the primary law enforcement unit, we made it the Sheriff's Department? We could have.

I heard the mayor during the inaugural episode of City Cast: Nashville. (I don't know how often this podcast will turn into City Cast: the Chris Crofton fan club of the Nashville scene, but it's already happened once, so, you know, it's worth listening to if you're a Crofton fan.) He called the police an institution that must endure. And maybe that’s the case. But we also have another law enforcement team in the city: the Sheriff's Department. Is it worth considering moving the police to the sheriff's department? Or maybe just move the Office of Professional Responsibility to the Sheriff's Department? Is there a way to use the law enforcement officer, who seems to run his department with little scandal, to help alleviate the usual scandal in the police department?

Or do we think Sheriff Hall is more motivated to keep his side of the street clean, so to speak, because he is an elected official? And if so, does that suggest we should consider making the police chief an elected position? Again, I don't know. But it is worth asking whether, even if the police must persist, should they persist like this?