Jean Charest | Allcoppedout's Blog

This, in effect was a literature review in 1999. The following is the bullet-pointed conclusion:

police corruption is pervasive, continuing and not bounded by rank;
any definition of corruption should cover both ‘financial’ and ‘process’corruption, and should
acknowledge the varying means, ends and motives of corrupt activities;

the boundary between ‘corrupt’ and ‘non-corrupt’ activities is difficult to define,
primarily because this is at heart an ethical problem;
police corruption cannot simply be explained as the product of a few ‘bad apples’;
the ‘causes’ of corruption include: factors that are intrinsic to policing as a job;
the nature of police organisations; the nature of ‘police culture’; theopportunities for corruption
presented by the ‘political’ and ‘task’ environments’;and, the nature and extent of the effort
put in to controlling corruption;
some areas of policing are more prone to corruption than others;
although there are many barriers to successful corruption control,
there is evidence that police agencies can be reformed;
reform needs to go beyond the immediately identified problem;
reform must look at the political and task environments as well as the organisation itself;
reform tends not to be durable; and
continued vigilance and scepticism is vital.

This is from 2002/3 and describes some British police corruption. There is a large literature. with

little sign of linking corruption with bad work from the “users” point of view, or the evasion of

this through hapless statistics. – giving up, the page editor has gone haywire.

Allcoppedout's Blog