Law Enforcement Discretion: When to Issue Warnings and When to Enforce the Law

As a seasoned law enforcement officer, the decision between issuing a warning and enforcing the law is not always cut and dry. This article explores a particular case where a friend was stopped and dealt with according to the principles of the law rather than personal relationships.

The incident occurred in the town of Newland, NC, during a period when deep snow forced many drivers to modify their usual driving patterns. The officer, who we will refer to as Officer A, was patrolling when he encountered a car nose-first in a snowbank, with the engine revving and tires spinning. The driver, a friend of another individual, was found to be under the influence of alcohol.

Context and Personal Relationships in Law Enforcement

Officer A has had a long career in law enforcement and has been known to issue warnings to those he knows, even when they are in the wrong. However, the situation at hand presented a unique challenge. Since the driver was under the influence of alcohol, a serious offense with significant implications, Officer A could not ignore the law.

Despite his personal relationship with the driver, Officer A recognized the importance of setting an example. The officers in the surrounding area often dealt with disruptive youth from the town, who frequently caused trouble. To ensure that this behavior was discouraged, Officer A decided to make an example of the intoxicated friend.

The Decision to Arrest

After assessing the situation, Officer A arrested the friend. The incident took place in a public area, and there were witnesses, including several local boys. This added another layer of importance to the decision, as it was crucial that the community saw Officer A enforcing the law impartially.

Officer A contacted the friend’s family and negotiated a fair arrangement. The condition was that the friend would see a doctor and attend Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) meetings. The officer did not administer a breath test, showing a reasonable concern for the friend’s life and well-being.

To further ensure accountability, Officer A asked the magistrate to allow the friend to sign his own bond, under the condition that he would appear in court and follow through on his commitments. This unique approach highlighted the officer’s integrity and fairness.

Consequences and Reflection

The decision to enforce the law had a lasting impact on both the friend and Officer A. The friend was left with a strong dislike for the officer, expressing his hatred both after the arrest and in court. However, the officer remained steadfast in his principles and, in the end, disregarded his loss of a friend.

The action served both the letter and the spirit of the law, ensuring that the friend would receive the proper medical and rehabilitation support. This incident also bolstered Officer A’s reputation as a fair and honest cop among the local boys, who were likely to take note of his decision-making process.

Selecting and Applying Discretion

Officer A’s experience highlights the complexities of balancing personal relationships with the principles of law enforcement. While it is important to treat every individual impartially and uphold the law, temporary friendships and personal connections can sometimes cloud judgment.

The story of Officer A reminds us that strict adherence to the law often requires personal sacrifice. While it is difficult to lose a friend over a principled action, the choice to maintain integrity and uphold the law is ultimately worth it.

For officers like Officer A, deciding when to issue warnings and when to enforce the law is a critical aspect of their role. Personal relationships should not influence the application of the law, while maintaining a level of discretion can lead to better community relations and a healthier working environment.

Keywords: police discretion, traffic enforcement, friend mistake