Use of Apology and Contrition in Law Enforcement Crisis Communication

The Use of Apology 1

CONTRITION AND APOLOGY

The Use of Contrition and Apology in Law Enforcement Crisis

Communications a Case Study

Joe Vargas

March 19, 2008


Table of Contents

Abstract....................................................... 3

Introduction................................................... 5

Compton “120 Shots” Incident................................... 6

Law Enforcement and Apologia................................... 8

Historical Attitudes and Responses ........................... 8

What is a Media Crisis? ..................................... 10

Literature Review............................................. 11

Table 1 Benoit’s Image Restoration ...................... 14

Table 2 Coombs Crisis Responses ........................... 16

Liability and Apology ....................................... 17

The Role of Apology/Contrition .............................. 20

Discussion.................................................... 22

Examination of the Media Response to 120 Shots Incident ..... 22

Table 3 “120 Shots Crisis Strategies” ....................... 23

Conclusion.................................................... 27


Abstract

The area of crisis management has long been a contentious

and difficult arena for law enforcement leadership. With

today’s media capabilities the graphic visual imagery of police

work permeates the living rooms of the American public everyday.

Rarely a week seems to go by without a law enforcement agency

caught up in the throes of a media crisis. Given the historical

distrust of the media, law enforcement executives often resort

to a strict defensive apologia. They either quickly defend the

actions of the officers involved or decline to comment until

“further investigation” is completed {Lyon & Cameron 1999}. The

consequences for inadequate response can oftentimes be severe.

In many cases inadequate responses by police leadership has

resulted in significant organizational changes due to media

coverage and the subsequent public outcry and political pressure

{Surette 2003}.

Does current crisis communication theory regarding apology

and contrition apply to law enforcement? This case study will

look at a nationally televised incident, the “120 shots”

incident involving the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department and

Sheriff Lee Baca. The event had a high potential for negative

consequences for the agency. Sheriff Baca employed a strategy

consisting of acknowledgement, apology and transparency. These

strategies while well practiced in the private sector have seen


rare application in law enforcement circles. This study will

look at the responses of the Los Angeles Sheriffs Department as

reported in the media and provide an analysis of the use of

apology and contrition as a legitimate form of crisis

communication in a law enforcement setting.


Introduction

From the time we are young children we have been taught the

forms and concepts of apology. It is a social exchange that

helps us as a society to deal with the many interactions between

individuals and groups. Apology alleviates the tension caused by

perceived wrongs or inadvertent accidents. Failure to adhere to

this time honored social exchange can oftentimes escalate

existing conflicts. {Cohen 1999}

Apology alleviates conflict and heals relationships through

its restorative action. According to Shuman, “In the act of

apology the wrongdoer seeks to take the shame for the wrong and

to give the person wronged the power to forgive the wrongdoer.

The exchange of power is regarded as central to apology’s

restorative relational benefits. {Shuman 2000:3}”

Apology as a crisis response is important. Law enforcement

agencies must be extremely cognizant of its relationship with

its external stakeholders. This includes the community, media

and its law enforcement partnerships.

This case study of the May 9, 2005, Los Angeles Sheriff’s

Office “120 Shots” incident will examine the use of apology as a

legitimate response to crisis by a law enforcement agency.

According to crisis communications research the use of apology

is one possible response to organizational crisis however its

application in the field of law enforcement has not been


analyzed in any depth.

Compton “120 Shots” Incident

On May 9, 2005 deputies of the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s

Department (LASO) began the pursuit of a white SUV believed to

have been involved in a shooting in the City of Compton. The

deputies pursued the vehicle and ended up on a residential

street. During at attempt to take the suspect into custody 10

deputies exited their vehicles. The suspect backed up his

vehicle at which point the deputies reacted by firing a number

of shots at the suspect. The actual shooting lasted 18 seconds

with numerous deputies discharging their weapons. The incident

took place in a largely minority residential neighborhood. A

number of the shots penetrated walls into nearby residences as

families slept. At the conclusion of the episode the suspect was

injured and a deputy had been struck in his vest by friendly

fire. Two freelance news photographers captured the conclusion

of the pursuit and shooting on video. By the next day the video

of the shooting was being broadcast by every local station and

the national cable news networks. Local newspapers, particularly

the Los Angeles Times, covered the shooting and its aftermath as

well. The suspect was later determined to be unarmed and not

involved in the original shooting the officers were responding

to. The media and Sheriff Baca would describe it the next day as


a case of “contagious fire”. Contagious fires is described as,

“a mass reflexive response that spreads amongst officers in

response to a perceived threat ("Contagious shooting," 2008).”

The police action would become known as the “120 shots” incident

by the community and the media {Los Angeles Office of

Independent Review 2005}.

What made the incident unique in law enforcement crisis

communications was the response of Sheriff Lee Baca and the

involved deputies to the incident. Both Sheriff Baca and the

involved deputies expressed regret for the shooting and publicly

apologized. In a press conference arranged by the deputies and

their attorney terms of regret were expressed to the community.

Dr. Samuel Walker, a noted researcher into issues of police

accountability stated, “The apology to the community by the

officers involved in the incident represents an unprecedented

step in terms of acknowledging the impact of police actions on

affected communities {Walker 2005:2-3}.” This view was also

expressed in headlines from the Los Angeles Times, “Sheriff’s

New Tactic on Shooting: Contrition; Baca’s reaction to the

Compton barrage deflected anger and surprised activists” {Banks

& Winton 2005}. The response by the Los Angeles Sheriff’s

Department was carried by all local newspapers and television

stations. It was also broadcast nationally by most television

news channels. Rarely has apology and contrition been used to


such an extent within the law enforcement community as a means

of crisis communications. The apology itself became the major

theme of the news coverage.

This case study will examine the Los Angles Sheriff’s

Department’s response to this incident and how it compares to

past research in the area of crisis communications. It will also

look at the social concepts of apology and contrition and

compare this approach in the context of crisis communications

research.

Law Enforcement and Apologia

Historical Attitudes and Responses

With the advent of new technologies and the growth of the

mass media, law enforcement has had to respond to the genuine

public concerns regarding the dramatic images of police actions.

The growth of the Internet and handheld recording technology has

turned ordinary citizens into journalist and dramatically

changed the impact of the media. {Braunstein 2007}{Lovell 2001}

Police officials use the media as a conduit to address the

graphic and sometimes violent imagery broadcast into the public

living rooms on a nightly basis. As such the legitimacy of the

policing organization and its public support is dependent upon

the mass media {Lovell 2003}.

The public’s perceptions of the profession of law


enforcement can be impacted by frequent exposure to media. News

media is a primary source of citizen’s perception of the police

and thus a critical function of police leadership (Domanick,

2001). The coverage of a major event by the news media will

impact policies and procedures at the agency {Surette 2003}.

News reports will impact the publics perceptions of the guilt of

the officers involved in a given incident {Chermak et al. 2006}.

Negative perceptions of the officers will reflect on the agency

itself and create morale issues within the department. These

negative perceptions can also have budgetary consequences

{Police Executive Research Forum 2002}.

Many police officials in their attempts to manage the media

become disgruntled when they don’t succeed and the media becomes

the enemy {Domanick 2001}. Historically there has been a culture

where denial, justification and stonewalling were standard

responses to media coverage of volatile incidents {Wexler et al.

2007}. Law enforcement officials will oftentimes have a great

deal of respect for their own profession while harboring disdain

for journalist {Simmons 1999}.

A lack of public communication by senior police officials

through the media has itself become a story. In February of 2006

San Bernardino Sheriff’s Deputy Ivory Webb shot an unarmed

passenger the conclusion of a police pursuit. The shooting was

captured by a home video camera and broadcast nationwide. San


Bernardino County Sheriff Gary Penrod made the decision not to

give any public statements until all the facts were known.

During this 12-day waiting period there were several articles

and editorials in the Press Enterprise critical of the sheriff

for his failure to address the public through the media. {Gang &

McGavin 2006} {Macduff 2006}

In today’s environment police officials can no longer treat

the media as the enemy and in fact must become quite adept at

navigating the minefields of crisis communications. {Braunstein

2007} The public has a high expectation of police organizational

transparency. This cannot occur if there are strong cultural

prejudices towards the media. This becomes especially critically

important in response to potential crisis situations.

What is a Media Crisis?

A media crisis can be defined as, “A major occurrence with

potentially negative outcome affecting the organization, company

or industry as well as its publics, products services or good

name” {Fearn-Banks 2007:8}. This definition fits the criteria

for a media crisis within the profession of law enforcement.

Law enforcement media communications have a propensity, due to

the nature of the work, to engage in crisis mode. Police actions

and the circumstances under which they occur often attract media

attention and can create organizational change {Braunstein


2007}.

There is little doubt that media coverage of police

incidents does impact criminal justice public policy. Media

coverage of crime and media crisis does have an impact on

criminal justice policies and police procedures {Surette 2003}.

The internationally televised police beating of Rodney King led

to extensive federal oversight, dismissal of the police chief

and procedural changes within the entire LAPD {Lawrence 2000}.

In June of 2004 news copter footage of an officer striking a

suspect with a flashing led to LAPD adopting an equipment change

and replacing metal flashlights with plastic ones {Blankstein

2007}. Lovell describes this law enforcement organizational

behavior as reflexivity. “Police respond to media imagery by

either reforming their strategies or, more commonly, by taking

steps to alter their appearance {Lovell 2003:24}.” As such the

profession of policing adapts in response to media coverage of

events.

Literature Review

Apologia can include apology but is defined as “a response

to a social legitimization crisis in which an organization seeks

to justify its behavior by presenting a compelling counter

account of its actions {Hearit 1995}.”

In response to law enforcement media crisis departments


have for the most part relied upon standard responses that can

be described as defensive or apologia. Using Benoit’s model of

image restoration we can categorize them into five approaches:

denial, evading responsibility, reducing offensiveness,

corrective actions and mortification. {Benoit 1995}{Table 1}

Denial is quite simply a response centered on the idea that

the action never occurred or if the event did occur “we” were

not to blame.

Evading responsibility is the second category. This can

entail “we did it” but only after provocation or the situation

occurred by accident and not any specific intent.

Reducing offensiveness is another strategy that is

utilized. Within this there can be bolstering which focuses on

past accomplishments; minimization or “it’s not as bad as it

looks”; differentiation; comparing the action to other less

negative actions, “It looks like this but is actually this” and

lastly transcendence, or appealing to a higher value. Benoit

uses the example of a police officer that plants evidence

because it is the only way to protect society from a dangerous

criminal {Benoit 1995:78}. Attacking the accuser is another form

of transcendence. An example from the law enforcement construct

would be producing the extensive criminal record of the suspect

in an officer involved shooting. Reducing offensiveness can

include using the explanation of aberrant behavior. “It’s not


us, it’s just this one officer behaving inappropriately.”

Corrective Action

Corrective action in order to be considered an effective

image restoration strategy must make the audience feel steps

have been taken to correct the problem and more importantly that

it will not happen again {Benoit 1995}. Changes in policy,

disciplining of employees and other actions that the media

reports reassures the public that the action will not occur

again.


Table 1 Benoit’s Image Restoration

William Coombs in his research incorporates many of the

Strategies Examples

Denial

• Simple Denial

• Shifting the blame

The action never occurred and if it did we are not to blame.

Evasion of Responsibility

• Provocation

• Defeasibility

• Accident

• Good intentions

We were provoked into action.

We acted based on what we knew.

This was an act of god.

We were trying to do the right thing.

Reducing the offensiveness of the event

• Bolstering

• Minimizations

• Differentiation

• Transcendence

• Attack the accuser

• Compensation

Look at our record

It’s not really that bad.

Others have done far worse.

There are bigger issues.

The other guy is responsible.

We will cover all harm done.

Corrective Action

We will fix anything that is broken.

Mortification Sincere apology.


strategies put forth by Benoit and adds to them coming up with a

list of eight crisis response strategies. {Coombs & Holladay

2002}{Table 2}

1. Attack strategies are aimed against the individual or

group making the accusations or creating the crisis. 2. Denial,

like Benoit’s, is there is no crisis. 3. Excuse is an attempt by

the crisis manager to minimize fault for the crisis event. 4.

Victimization is an attempt to communicate to the stakeholders

that “we” are a victim as well. 5. Justification is when the

crisis manager minimizes the actual damage inflicted by the

event and the need for the action to have occurred. 6.

Ingratiation occurs when the crisis manager reflects on the past

accomplishments of the organization and praises the stakeholders

for their support. 7. Corrective action occurs when the crisis

manager works to prevent a repeat of the causes of the crisis

and repair the damage done. 8. Apology is just that, a full

acceptance of responsibility for the crisis and a request for

forgiveness from the stakeholders.

Care must be taken when “individualizing” police actions in

a crisis. If the public already perceives the problems to be a

“systemic” problem within the policing organization the response

will hold little value. While police officials described the

Rodney King incident as aberrant behavior, the larger public

image of the department spoke to just the opposite (Lawrence,


2007).

Table 2 Coombs Crisis Responses

Strategies Examples Attack An attack on the accuser in which the crisis

manager confronts the group or persons that claims a crisis exists

Denial The crisis manager claims there is no crisis

Excuse The crisis manager attempts to minimize organizational responsibility for the crisis

Victimization The crisis manager reminds stakeholders the organizations is a victim of the crisis

Justification The crisis manager attempts to minimize the perceived damage.

Ingratiation The crisis manager praises stakeholders and reminds them of the past good works done by the organization.

Corrective Action

The crisis manager tries to prevent a repeat of the crisis and repair the damage done.

Full Apology The crisis manager publicly accepts responsibility for the crisis and requests forgiveness from the stakeholders.

While both Benoit’s and Coombs strategies can be

synthesized or combined in response to crisis, there is yet

another area that impacts stakeholder response and that is prior

reputation. What your agency has done in the past in regards to

crisis and the general strength of your organizational

reputation will impact how the current crisis is perceived by

stakeholders {Payne 2006} {Lyon & Cameron 2004}. Coombs research

“showed that a history of similar crises intensified the


reputational threat of a current crisis even when the crisis

arose from the victimization of the organization or from an

accident, rather than from the organization’s intentional acts

{Coombs 2004}.” Agencies routinely respond to potential crisis

situations. The public observes these responses through the

media coverage. How a department’s response is reported sets the

groundwork for public perceptions of future crisis responses

{Payne 2006}. As the agency responds to crisis the public brand

these reactions and defines the agencies reputation. These

“reputational assets” serve to bolster the organizations ability

to respond and endure a media generated crisis {Coombs 2004}.

Well-developed reputational assets create a “halo effect”

that aids in the resolution of the crisis in the minds of the

audience {Lyon & Cameron 2004}. How your agency is perceived

before the crisis will have significant impact on how well your

messages are received during the crisis.

Liability and Apology

If research shows apology as a legitimate response to

crisis, especially when there is in fact culpability, why aren’t

more agencies doing it? Research suggests that leaders may be

prone to overestimate the costs of an apology and underestimate

the benefits. This is often due to fear of litigation and

liability {Kellerman 2006} {Cohen 1999}. Liability or the fear


of liability can be the primary barrier to apologizing {Cohen

1999}.

Police chiefs have liability as a central concern for many

of the day-to-day decisions they make. Whether from internal or

external environments police chiefs must continually tread with

caution. In a study by Vaughn of Texas police chiefs it was

found that over 53% felt that fear of being sued made it

difficult to do their job {Vaughn et al. 2001}. Common belief is

that any efforts to apologize for incidents of police misconduct

can be perceived as an admission of responsibility. Yet in a

2006 article in Police Chief Magazine entitled, “Should Law

Enforcement Agencies Apologize for Mistakes?” the author cited

the benefits associated with apologizing when there is obvious

culpability (Wright, 2006).

In today’s over-litigated American society there are two

strategies that crisis communicators will take. One is a public

relations approach where the goal is image restoration or the

legal approach, which is seen as attempt to protect the

organization financially. Most managers will option to take the

legal route and depend on attorneys to guide them through a

crisis {Hearit 2006}. Attorneys however are concerned with

litigation that may in fact require years before resolution is

established. In the mean time the law enforcement agencies image

is being formed by the public’s interpretation of their response


to the crisis {Benoit 1995} {Coombs et al. 1996} {Coombs &

Holladay 2002}{Payne 2006}.

While concerns for liability are real there is a framework

for apology within tort law. “A review of formal (black letter)

and common law indicates that apologies generally do not

constitute evidence of guilt and that, in fact, they sometimes

have positive consequences for the apologist {Patel & Reinsch

2003:1}.”

Some states such as California have enacted laws that allow

for the use of apology. The Evidence Code instructs that

expressions of sympathy and benevolence are inadmissible as

evidence.

Evidence Code Sections 1160 states that:

1160. (a) The portion of statements, writings, or

benevolent gestures expressing sympathy or a general

sense of benevolence relating to the pain,

suffering, or death of a person involved in an

accident and made to that person or to the family of

that person shall be inadmissible as evidence of an

admission of liability in a civil action. A

statement of fault, however, which is part of, or in

addition to, any of the above shall not be

inadmissible pursuant to this section. {California

Evidence Code 2007}

There is a difference between apology and admission of

fault and framing a response. Differentiating between the two


can require superior communication skill sets. Apologies can

also provide evidence in civil cases that can help mitigate

civil outcomes {Patel & Reinsch 2003}. Apology is seen as

addressing the emotional distress of the victim and possibly

reducing future punitive damages at the time of litigation

{Shuman 2000}.

When it is clear cut that there is significant culpability

on the part of the organization, not acknowledging fault can

have both serious financial and reputational consequences. The

more people assess the cause of the crisis on the organization

the higher the damage to the organizations image {Coombs et al.

1996}. The responses to crisis that take into account the

consequences to reputation as well as the legal ramifications

can be especially difficult. The loss of reputation and public

confidence can be as significant as any legal exposure

{Fitzpatrick & Rubon 1995}.

Areas to consider when dealing with a crisis include; an

apology can have positive consequences; a carefully worded

expression of sorrow and benevolence does not create legal

liability; when culpable an apology may help to reduce

organizational liability and restore its reputation {Patel &

Reinsch 2003}.

The Role of Apology/Contrition


Coombs, Benoit, Lyon and many other researchers have

identified apology as strategy to utilize in crisis

communications. The acts of apology and contrition have its

foundation in the very root harmonious social existence.

Apology separates the insult from the hurt and moves

towards relational healing. Failure to apologize can lead to

escalated conflict {Cohen 1999}. Apology creates an environment

where reputation can be managed and the crisis is removed from

the headlines much sooner {Coombs & Holladay 2002}. Full

disclosure is advocated by crisis communications researchers as

a practical response to crisis imagery when accompanied by an

apology {Hearit 2006}.

There is also a difference between taking responsibility

and taking the blame. Sincere concerns for injury, regret and

acknowledgement of anger are all lesser forms of apology to one

extent or another {Weeks 2003}. Full apologies, on the other

hand, have three basic processes. A full apology includes

acknowledgment of the offense, acceptance of responsibility,

expression of regret, and a promise not to repeat the offense

{Kellerman 2006}. Apology has therapeutic effect in that it

helps to reduce anger and the desire to see the wrongdoer

punished. Apology creates the framework for forgiveness and the

ability to move forward {Shuman 2000}.


Discussion

Examination of the Media Response to 120 Shots Incident

Sheriff Baca’s response to the 120 shots incident and the

subsequent media coverage demonstrated the use of several media

crisis response strategies advocated by Benoit and Coombs and

other media scholars. This approach uses a synthesized matrix of

responses (Payne, 2006). Application of these strategies is

derived from direct quotes in media coverage of the events from

the Los Angeles Times and television broadcasts.

Evasion of Responsibility-Provocation-Excuse

Quotes from news interviews

“Mr. Hayes was not unarmed. Mr. Hayes had a several

ton vehicle he was using. (UPN News, 2005)”

“They shoot because they perceive a threat on the

ground as does the airship overhead that this individual is

dangerous and he’s attempting to kill them (KCAL 9 News,

2005)”.

Through thier attorney at the press conference the deputies

actions are explained as being precipitated by the suspect and

his driving of the vehicle in a manner that was a threat to the

deputies.


Table 3 “120 Shots Crisis Strategies”

Corrective Action

Quotes from the Los Angeles Times

“Baca said Friday that he had pushed for quick resolution

to his deputies’ case…” {Covarrrubias & Andrew 2005}

Less than 12 hours after the shooting: “I know there were

too many shots fired. I don’t need an investigation to tell

me that.” {Blankstein 2007}

“120 Shots” Crisis Strategies Examples

Evasion of Responsibility, provocation Excuse

Officer’s attorney in media interviews explain the suspect was armed with a vehicle as a weapon. The officers believed they were dealing with an armed suspect.

Compensation Sheriff Baca tours the shooting scene with a risk management employee writing checks for damages.

Corrective Action

Accelerated investigation by the Office of Independent Review. Discipline of the officers within one month of the event. Change in the department shooting policy within one month of the incident.

Mortification/Apology Apologies were delivered by the deputies involved at a press conference. Sheriff Baca expresses regret for the deputies’ actions at community forums and media interviews.


“In the minds of all of us, delayed justice is no justice

at all.” Quote by Sheriff Baca {Covarrrubias & Andrew 2005}

Timeliness of response to crisis is critical to image

restoration and crisis management. Bad information and

corrective action to address it must be dealt with in an open

and transparent environment {Coombs 1999}. Corrective action

impacts the public psyche by dealing with assumptions that the

problem that led to the event has been dealt with {Hearit 1995}.

Quick corrective action also helps to reestablish legitimacy

with the public {Veil 2006}.

In this incident corrective action was timely at

“unprecedented” rates. The speed with which the follow-up

investigations were conducted was the subject of media attention

and also specifically addressed in the review submitted by the

County of Los Angeles Office of Independent Review (OIR). OIR is

civilian organization with oversight of the Los Angeles

Sheriff’s department.

“Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca took a month to

investigate and discipline the deputies who fired 120 shots

into a Compton neighborhood. But nearly one year after a

Los Angeles police officer was video taped beating a cars-

chase suspect with his flashlight in another part of the

Compton, the LAPD has yet to determine what, if any,


discipline he and other officers involved should receive

Los Angeles Times (Covarrrubias & Blankstein, 2005).”

Corrective action such as the change in policy took place

within thirty days. An article in the Los Angeles Times compared

the response of the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department to that of

the Los Angeles Police Department in terms of timeliness. In

another high profile incident involving the Los Angeles Police

Department it had been over one year and no action had been

taken. Once again the positive perception created in the publics

eyes through the media was one of timeliness.

Compensation

“The next afternoon, Baca began walking door to door in

Compton, tallying bullet holes and offering apologies.”

{Blankstein 2007}

Compensation along with apology and mortification reduce

the offensiveness of an event {Benoit 1995}. A claims adjuster

from the County of Los Angeles accompanied Sheriff Baca on his

tour of the community the day after the incident {Los Angeles

Office of Independent Review 2005}. The presence of the claims

adjuster was broadcast in both the print and television media.

Making good on damages is seen as the highest form of

accommodative strategies in crisis responses {Coombs et al.


2006}. Compensation is seen as reparation for real damages while

the actual use of apology address the emotional duress suffered

by the victims of the event {Vines 2007}.

Apology/Mortification

“we’re not here to twist it, we’re not here to sugarcoat

anything, we’re here to tell it exactly like it is—the

good, the bad and the ugly.” Sheriff Baca {Blankstein 2007}

“These fine deputies that stand with me today wish to offer

their unqualified and sincere apology to those who reside

on Butler [Avenue]…”

Deputies’ attorney Gregory Emerson {Banks & Winton 2005}

“When have you had a peace officer come out through a

representative model and say I’m concerned, I have a sense

of feeling about this. I want you to know that I don’t feel

good about this. This has never happened in this county.

And this speaks well for the integrity of these deputies.”

Sheriff Lee Baca. {Metcalf 2005}

Sincerity is an important element of crisis apologia. The

apology offered must be seen as emotionally sincere and in

keeping with the gravity of the event {Wagatsuma & Rosett 1986}.


The actions of the involved entities must also be seen as an

effort to reconcile with the offended parties and not just an

attempt to avoid the media spotlight {Hearit 2006}. In the more

complex field of social exchange the demonstration of contrition

must occur in order for the community to move forward {Hearit

1995}.

Apologies for the incident were reported by the media as

being issued by both Sheriff Baca and the deputies involved. The

use of apology was itself the headline and lead byline in both

the newspaper and television coverage. Local television stations

and nationwide news networks such as CNN focused on the

apologies as part of their headlines {Banks & Winton 2005} {NBC

News 2005} {Metcalf 2005}. Such prominence in the headlines

reinforced the messages and added to the impact of the response.

In the media reports from the very beginning there did not

appear to be any attempt by Sheriff Baca to utilize a defensive

strategy. This would have included justifying the actions of the

officers,

Conclusion

“And the Compton Shooting which had been videotaped by

a freelance cameraman and replayed for days on the national

news began fading from public consciousness {Blankstein

2007}.”


The Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department response in this

particular incident was seen as highly unusual and progressive.

Dr. Samuel Walker in a paper prepared for the National Institute

of Justice on the event, identified several areas he considered

significant in regards to the “120 shots” incident. These

included; rank and file officers apologizing to the community; a

speedy revision of LASO shooting policy and the disciplinary

actions against the deputies was both speedy and transparent

{Walker 2005}. In this case the significant coverage of the

responses to the incident are validation of the impact of the

use of apology and contrition.

Crisis management in law enforcement is undergoing a period

of change. Technology and media saturation are changing the

media environment and the way it reports police actions

{Braunstein 2007} {Lovell 2001}. Admission of errors and

organizational transparency are valued as ways of developing

trust and respect in the community {Wexler et al. 2007}.

Apologies and statements of contrition are being used with more

frequency by law enforcement executives. It is understood by

many law enforcement executives in today’s society policing

requires compassion and transparency {Wexler et al. 2007}.

Police culture is changing in response to the images portrayed

in the media. The theory of cultural reflexivity as described by

Lovell states, “...policing is both a reaction to, and an


influence on, media imagery {Lovell 2003:24}.” The use of

contrition and apology is an example of law enforcement adapting

to today’s news media saturated environment.

Crisis communication theory supports the use of apology as

a legitimate response to crisis. In this case the apologies were

described as unprecedented by the news media, researchers, and

the civilian oversight board {Los Angeles Office of Independent

Review 2005}{Walker 2005}. Further study is needed to understand

how apology impacts internal stakeholders. This is particularly

true in law enforcement where an apology by the Chief or Sheriff

can be construed as giving in to political pressure. Police

labor organizations have concerns that law enforcement

executives might be too quick to bend to political pressure.

Succumbing to political pressure and public outrage can have its

consequences.

Internal civil liability is has to be an area of concern.

Swift corrective action such as discipline of employees in order

address public concerns can backfire. Several recent high

profile cases make internal civil liability an area for

significant exposure. Lawsuit settlements paid to officers for

what were considered “knee jerk” reactions to a crisis is a

“landmine” police executives have to be cognizant of. The Los

Angeles Police Department lost a federal civil rights suit filed

by three officers disciplined in the Rampart Scandal. The


judgment was for $15 million dollars to paid to the officers

{Glover & Lait 2006}. The City of Inglewood lost a judgment of

2.1 million dollars filed by two officers seen on video

allegedly beating a motorist {Morin & Malnic 2005}. In both

cases there were allegations of law enforcement executives

succumbing to public outcry and political pressure to respond to

the highly publicized events. The resulting punitive action was

significant and in at least one case was more than was paid to

the alleged victim of the abuse.

As the complex world of news reporting in the digital age

continues to evolve so must the law enforcements response to a

media crisis. Given the findings of crisis research, apology and

contrition must be considered as possible responses when dealing

with a crisis. Apology restores legitimacy to the organization

and creates a climate where participants can look forward rather

than looking back. Wary of civil exposure law enforcement

executives can artfully tread where they have feared before.

Expressions of regret and benevolence along with corrective

action can only work to improve the image of law enforcement in

the community at large. In the end creating a transparent

organization that is well adapted to today’s changing news media

environment.


References

Banks, S., & Winton, R. (2005, May 22). Sheriff's new tactic on

shooting: Contrition; Baca's reaction to the Compton

barrage defelected anger and suprised activists. Los

Angeles Times (Los Angeles), Home Edition, sec. A-1..

Benoit, W. L. (1995). Accounts, excuses and apologies: A theory

of image restoration strategies. Albany, NY: University of

New York Press.

Blankstein, A. (2007, March 30). Bright idea makes police beam;

at the LAPD's behest, at Torrance firm creates a high-

powered flashlight that is too small and light to be used

as a weapon. Los Angeles Times (Los Angeles, CA), Home

Edition, pp. pg B-1.

Braunstein, S. (2007). "The future of law enforcement

communications "Policing 2020: exploring the future of

crime, communities and policing (Schafer, J. A., Ed.)

(Chapter 5). U.S. Department of Justice, Police Futurists.

Retrieved January 6, 2007, from

http://www.policefuturists.org/pdf/Policing2020.pdf.

California Evidence Code. (2007). State of California.

Chermak, S., Mcgarrell, E., & Gruenewld, J. (2006). Media

coverage of police misconduct and attitudes toward police.

Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies &

Management, Vol. 29(No. 2), 261-281.


Cohen, J. R. (1999). Advising clients to apologize. Southern

California Law Review, 72, 1009-1069.

Contagious shooting. (2008, February 24). Retrieved March 16,

2008, from Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Contagious_shoot

ing&oldid=193796511>.

Coombs, T. W. (1999). Information and compassion in crisis

responses: A test of their effects. Journal of Public

Relations Research, 11:2, 125-142.

Coombs, T. W. (2004, July 1). Impact of past crisis on current

crisis communication: Insights from situational crisis

communication theory. Journal of Business Communication,

Vol. 41(No. 3), 265-289.

Coombs, T. W., Fediuk, T., & Holladay, S. J. (1996).

Communication and attributions in a crisis; an experimental

study in crisis communication. Journal of Public Relations

Research, 8 (4), 279-295.

Coombs, T. W., Fediuk, T., & Holladay, S. J. (2006, March 1).

Further explorations of post-crisis communication and

stakeholder anger: The negative communications dynamic

model. Paper presented at the 10th International Public

Relations Conference, South Miami, Florida.

Coombs, T. W., & Holladay, S. J. (2002, November 1). Helping

crisis managers protect reputational assets: Initial tests


of the situational crisis communication theory. Management

Communication Quarterly, Vol. 16(No. 2), 165-186.

Coombs, W. T. (1998). An analytic framework for crisis

situations: Better responses from a better understanding of

the situation. Journal of Public Relations Research, pp.

177-191.

Coombs, W. T. (2006, December 4). The protective powers of

crisis response strategies: Managing reputational assets

during a crisis. Journal of Promotion Management, pp. 241-

260.

Covarrrubias, A., & Blankstein, A. (2005, June 11). Different

speeds for wheels of discipline: Contrasts in how the

sheriff and LAPD dealt with two high-profile cases show the

difficulty of quickly resolving misconduct allegations. Los

Angeles Times (Los Angeles,Ca), Home Edition, p. B.1.

Domanick, J. (Editor). (2001, December 1). Covering police in

times of crisis (USC Annenberg Institute for Justice and

Journalism) (J. Domanick, Ed.). USC Annenberg institute for

Justice and Journalism.

Dowler, K. (2003, October 2). Media consumption and public

attitudes toward crime and justice: The relationship

between fear of crime, punitive attitudes, and perceived

police effectiveness. Journal of Criminal Justice and

Popular Culture, pp. 109-126.


Fearn-Banks, K. (2007). Crisis communications a casebook

approach. Mawah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Fitzpatrick, K. R., & Rubon, M. S. (1995, Spring). Public

relations vs. legal strategies in organizational decisions.

Public Relations Review, p. pp 21(13).

Gang, D. W., & McGavin, G. (2006, February 9). Sheriff stays

behind scenes. The Press Enterprise (Riverside, ca), Inland

Edition..

Glover, S., & Lait, M. (2006, February 10). Three Rampart

scandal officers get $15 million; They win their federal

lawsuit claiming false arrest by the LAPD and malicious

prosecution. A juror cites a lack of 'any hard evidence.'

Los Angeles Times, Home Edition, p. B.1.

Hearit, K. M. (1995, Summer). Mistakes were made: Organizations,

apologia, and crisis of social legitimacy. Communications

Studies, 6.

Hearit, K. M. (2006). Crisis management by apology. Mawah,New

Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

KCAL 9 News (Reporter). (2005, May 13). (J. Garza, inews

network). Los Angeles,Ca. (KCAL 9 NEWS 2:00 PM). (660

words).

Kellerman, B. (2006, April 1). When should a leader apologize-

and when not? Harvard Business Review, Vol. 84(No. 4).

Lait, M., & McGreevy, P. (2007, May 27). Police chief defends


his criticisms: In a taped message to officers. Bratton

takes responsibility but says he will not make excuses for

comments on police action. Los Angeles Times, Home Edition,

p. B.3.

Lawrence, R. G. (2000). The politics of force: Media and the

constructions of police brutality. Los Angeles,CA:

University of California Press.

Los Angeles Office of Independent Review. (2005, Summer). The

May 9, 2005 Compton shooting (Los Angeles Office of

Independent Review). Los Angeles,Ca: Office of Independent

Review (30).

Lovell, J. S. (2001). Media power & information control: A study

of police organizations & media relations., National

Institute of Justice Reference Service, Washington, D.C.

Lovell, J. S. (2003). Good cop/Bad cop: Mass media and the cycle

of police reform. Monsey, New York, U.S.A.: Willow Tree

Press Inc.

Lyon, L., & Cameron, G. T. (1999). Fess up or stonewall? an

experimental test of prior reputation and response style in

the face off negative news coverage. Web Journal of Mass

Communication Research, 1(4). Retrieved January 16, 2008,

from http://www.scripps.ohiou.edu/wjmcr/vol01/1-4a.htm.

Lyon, L., & Cameron, G. T. (2004, July 1). A relational approach

examining the interplay of prior reputation and immediate


response to crisis. Journal of Public Relations Research,

Vol. 16(No. 3), 213-241.

Macduff, C. (2006, February 14). Facing the cameras. Press

Enterprise (Riverside, ca)..

Metcalf, N. P. (Reporter). (2005, May 14). Interview with Nancy

Pappas Metcalf [CNN live Saturday]. CNN (5145 Words).

Morin, M., & Malnic, E. (2005, January 19). Taped punch costly

to city. Los Angeles Times, Home Edition, sec. B.!.

News, N. B. C. (2005, May 10). Today show (P. Alexander,

Reporter). In M. Lauer (Anchor), Los Angeles county police

shoot 120 shots into vehicle, Sheriff Lee Baca

[Transcript]. NBC. (915 Words).

Patel, A., & Reinsch, L. (2003, March 1). Companies can

apologize: Corporate apologies and legal liability.

Business Communication Quarterly, 66(Number 1), pages 9-25.

Payne, L. L. (2006). Synthesizing crisis communication and

reputation management: An experimental examination of

memory. Journal of Promotion Management, 12 (3/4).

Police Executive Research Forum. (2002, November 30). Media

relations and police budgeting: A successful equation

(Police Executive Research Forum) (C. Karchmer, Ed.).

Washington,D.C.: Author.

Shuman, D. W. (2000, February 1). The role of apology in tort

law. Judicature, 83.4.


Simmons, H. (1999, June 1). Media, police and public

information: From confrontations to conciliations.

Communications and the Law, 21.2, 69(1).

Surette, R. (2003, November 2). The media the public and

criminal justice policy. Journal of the Institute of

Justice and International Studies, pp. 39-52.

UPN News (Reporter). (2005, May 13). Transcript. Los Angeles,CA.

(UPN News 13 11:00 PM). (339 Words).

Vaughn, M. S., Cooper, T. W., & V. Del Carmen Rolando. (2001,

January 1). Assessing legal liabilities in law enforcement:

Police chiefs' views. Crime Delinquency, 47(1), 3-27.

Veil, S. (2006, March 11). Mayhem in the magic city: Corrective

action in a communication train wreck M.W.DiStaso (Ed.),

(pp. 571-581). 10th International Public Relations

Conference. South Miami, Florida.

Vines, P. (2007). The power of apology: Mercy forgiveness or

corrective justice in the civil liability arena. The

Journal of Law and Social Justice, Vol. 16(No. 1), pp 1-51.

Wagatsuma, H., & Rosett, A. (1986). The implications of apology;

law and culture in Japan and the united states (Number 4,

Vol. Vol. 20, pp. 461-498).

Walker, S. (2005, January 3). What real police accountability

looks like: The "120 shots" incident and the Los Angeles

Sheriff's Department response. Police Professionalism


Initiative, University of Nebraska. Retrieved January 3,

2007, from

http://www.unomaha.edu/criminaljustice/PDF/120shots.pdf.

Weeks, H. (2003, May 19). "The art of apology." Harvard

Management Update.

Wexler, C., Wycoff, M. A., & Fischer, C. (2007, June 1). "Good

to great" policing: Application of business management

principles in the public sector (Police Executive Research

Forum, p. 55). Washington, D.C.: Police Executive Research

Forum.

Winton, R. (2005, May 22). Through lawyer. deputies issue

apology for firing hail of bullets: An unarmed suspect and

an officer were wounded when more than 100 rounds were shot

at the end of the car chase in Compton. Los Angeles Times

(Los Angeles, CA), Home Edition, p. B.3.

Wright, K. J. D. (2006, February 1). Should law enforcement

agencies apologize for mistakes? The Police Chief, Vol. 73.

Documents

Use of Apology and Contrition in Law Enforcement Crisis Communication