U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Online Networking, Texting and Blogging by Peace Officers Part One-Impeachment, Policy & First Amendment Issues

NCJ Number
233398
Journal
AELE Monthly Law Journal Volume: 201 Issue: 4 Dated: April 2010 Pages: 201-209
Editor(s)
Wayne W. Schmidt
Date Published
April 2010
Length
9 pages
Annotation
This article addresses issues that have arisen due to the increased use of social media by law enforcement officers.
Abstract
The increased use of social media by law enforcement officers has created unique problems for law enforcement managers and executives. This article examines three primary areas where the improper use of social media could have serious implications for law enforcement and the courts: courtroom testimony impairment, policy implications, and first amendment issues. The article notes that criminal defense attorneys have challenged the credibility of police officers, exposed their biases, and revealed an alleged propensity for violence as a result of statements or comments made by the officer that were found on a social networking site. These statements and postings have also been used to question the officer's truthfulness. Several cases are cited that highlight this problem. The article examines the policy implications for public safety agencies regarding social media use by their employees. A list of 10 areas that should be addressed in any agency's social media policy, including social networking, blogging, email, and texting, is presented along with a discussion on the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) Policy on Social Media. The article also briefly touches on the first amendment issues that have arisen as a result of social media usage by public employees. The author notes that the content of a public employee's speech is protected by the first amendment only when they are speaking as a private citizen. Several cases are cited that highlight these problems. 15 notes