Tony Ratphoumy
Ethical Credo-Dilemma
Fa22 CJS 375-01 Ethics and Professionalism in Criminal Justice
Metropolitan State University
Instr. Chuck MacLean
Introduction
As an individual, I am truly passionate about helping others, selfless service to the
community, resolving problems, and practicing compassion. I honestly believe that the
passionate commitment I see in my life can help others in my community by being able to do
things that would be ethically and morally right for others. Additionally, it is my long-term
personal and professional goal to uphold this passionate commitment to be my foundation for
making ethical and moral decisions. My passions have also encouraged me to pursue a degree in
the criminal justice profession as a law enforcement officer. I want to become a law enforcement
officer to (1) protect and serve my community, (2) promote a safer environment, and (3) help
those who cannot help themselves. Furthermore, being a law enforcement officer would obligate
me to perform my duties in ways that would best serve the people of my community and my law
enforcement peers.
My Ethical Credo
During my professional criminal justice career as a law enforcement officer, I will
always, with zero tolerance for wrongdoing and with a relentless pursuit of offenders, uphold the
law courteously and professionally never using force or violence that is not necessary, never
acting out of grudge or ill will, and never accepting bribes or gratuities. In addition, I will carry
out my fundamental duties of protecting and serving; safeguarding those in the community and
their property; protecting the innocent from deception, the weak from oppression or intimidation,
the peaceful from violence or disorder; and respecting the constitutional and statutory rights of
all to liberty, equality, and justice for all. Furthermore, I will ensure fair access for all, instill
public confidence and trust in the community I serve, provide safety and security, possess the
ability to work as a team, and practice objectivity.
The Ethical Dilemma
During my career as a law enforcement officer, I and others will face ethical dilemmas,
putting them in difficult situations where they must make decisions that could result in negative
consequences in either decisional outcome. For instance, a police officer, Officer Ratphoumy,
had just successfully graduated from the Minneapolis Police Academy and completed his FTO
training. Ratphoumy is a newcomer, who has very little experience as a police officer, and has
also been facing severe financial setbacks in his personal life, falling behind on bills, and not
having enough money to support his family. He has been consistently working overtime as a
police officer, but the payment has not been sufficient to meet his living demands or support his
family. He has very few friends on the force who are stationed in other precincts within
Minneapolis other than the 4th precinct in North Minneapolis. One day, Officer Ratphoumy was
patrolling in North Minneapolis when he heard from dispatch about a drug dealer in the vicinity
fleeing officers. Officer Ratphoumy joined in the pursuit. Ratphoumy caught up to and
apprehended the drug dealer before fellow officers. The drug dealer had $10,000 in a gym bag
that he was willing to offer Officer Ratphoumy if he let him get away. This situation has put
Officer Ratphoumy in an ethical dilemma because he is faced with a problematic decision where
if he made either decision, it could result in a negative outcome where he can get compromised
and be terminated, or risk missing the opportunity to help support his family and meet his
family’s living expenses.
If Officer Ratphoumy were to accept the bribe, he would be able to better support his
family and pay for living expenses and thereby overcome his recent financial hardships.
However, he would be violating his professional obligation and code of ethics as a police officer
who is sworn to serve and protect the community. Instead, Officer Ratphoumy would appear
corrupt and would let down his fellow officers and society by letting the drug dealer getaway.
Additionally, this may even risk his career as a law enforcement officer and promote unhealthy
habits that would result in him being a rotten apple on the force. If he were to go with the more
ethical approach of not accepting the bribe and arresting the drug dealer like he is supposed to,
he would be helping and upholding the law within the community and following his professional
obligations and code of ethics as a police officer, but at the cost of continuing to face financial
hardship and struggling to care for his family.
The Stakeholders
If Officer Ratphoumy were to accept the bribe and let the drug dealer go, the stakeholders
would be the community members who would be potential victims of drug usage/addiction, and
his fellow law enforcement officers, who could be his friends that follow the police code of
ethics and professional obligation, would also experience an ethical dilemma because of Officer
Ratphoumy’s decisions and actions to accept the bribe to let the drug dealer get away and evade
arrest. But the positive side would be that he now has money to better support and meet the
needs of his family and living expenses. However, if he were to do the opposite (right thing) by
not accepting the bribe and apprehending/arresting the drug dealer, he would have done
outstanding service for his community and to the Minneapolis Police Department. But the
stakeholders would then be him and his family, who already were experiencing negative effects
of financial strain, therefore leading Officer Ratphoumy and his family to continue to face
hardship to support themselves which will lead to collective strain.
Assessing Possible Courses of Action
In this ethical dilemma, a few possible courses of action(s) could be taken. The first
possible course of action (good) could be Officer Ratphoumy refusing the offer/bribe and
arresting the drug dealer. This is a good course of action because he is fulfilling his professional
obligations and code of ethics as a police officer while remaining loyal to his fellow police
officers and the police department. The only negative effects of this course of action are that
Officer Ratphoumy will continue to face financial hardship to support his family and pay his
living expenses. The second course of action (bad) would be Officer Ratphoumy taking the bribe
and letting the drug dealer get away from an arrest. This is a bad course of action because this
violates the code of ethics and professional obligations as a police officer and is disloyal to his
fellow police officers by letting that suspect get away. On the positive side of this bad course of
action would be that he now has $10,000 to better support his family and meet his living
expenses to remain comfortable until he can make enough money to support himself and his
family. Lastly, the third course of action (very bad) would be Officer Ratphoumy accepting the
bribe, but then also arresting the drug dealer and keeping the money. This course of action is
morally bad because Officer Ratphoumy just lied to that drug dealer and took his money and
arrested him. This looks bad because police officers are meant to be honest, even to the offender.
Even though he arrested the drug dealer, he is now withholding evidence that other officers could
have used to support their case to convict the drug dealer by using it to support his family and
living expenses, creating an ethical dilemma for his fellow police officer.
Assessing Value Conflicts
A few values conflicts occurred in this ethical dilemma scenario. Value conflicts I can
identify from the ethical dilemma were integrity versus dependability. In this case, Officer
Ratphoumy faced an ethical dilemma that left him with a challenging decision to make that
actions would result in a negative outcome, including conflicting values. If he arrested the drug
dealer, he is demonstrating integrity as a police officer by doing what is ethically and morally
expected. However, it goes against dependability for his family because they look up to him to
put food on the table and pay the bills around the house. If Officer Ratphoumy were to accept the
bribe and let the drug dealer get away, he is being dependable for his family because he now has
the money to better support his family and living expenses. This would uplift the collective strain
that Ratphoumy and his family had been experiencing. On the other hand, Officer Ratphoumy's
actions had gone against integrity, one of the critical values that a police officer lives by but just
violated. Additionally, he has broken the code of ethics and professional obligations as a police
officer by accepting a bribe from a criminal and turning a blind eye by letting the drug dealer get
away from an arrest. As police officers, integrity and dependability are critical values and
character traits that many police officers live by daily as they protect and serve the community. If
either of these traits is violated, you must put yourself and others around you at risk and fail to do
your job as a law enforcement officer. It also affects law enforcement officers' ability to exercise
their power and authority to effectively and properly uphold the law and treat everyone as they
should be treated.
Applying the Five Ethical Standards for Criminal Justice Professionals
Within this ethical dilemma scenario, some of the five ethical standards that were
violated were teamwork if Officer Ratphoumy were to accept the bribe and let the drug dealer
get away from arrest. He would have violated this ethical standard because he had failed to work
as a team to apprehend the drug dealer who was fleeing from his fellow officers. However, if he
did not go with that approach, it would have been ethically the right thing to do as a police
officer, but it would not be morally right for Officer Ratphoumy because he believed it would
have been right to accept the bribe and use that money to support his family and living expenses.
Another ethical standard that Officer Ratphoumy violated was objectivity. He could have failed
this ethical standard by accepting the bribe and letting the drug dealer go because Officer
Ratphoumy has let his personality, feelings, and desires caused by his hardship get the best of
him while he is on duty which could have affected his decision making during the ethical
dilemma scenario. As police officers, they should always set their personality, feelings, and
desires aside that may conflict with or get in the way of their professional obligations of
conducting law enforcement tasks and duties that are supposed to serve and protect the
community that they serve. Lastly, public trust was also violated within the five ethical
standards. If Officer Ratphoumy were to have accepted the bribe from the drug dealer, the public
trust between law enforcement and community members would have been severely damaged.
Community members would have also perceived law enforcement officers as corrupt and
crooked who care more about their gains by accepting bribes from criminals rather than arresting
them for the greater good of the community. All these violations of the ethical standards affect
the social contract because it compromises the agreement that establishes moral and ethical
standards within society, especially for law enforcement officers who have a code of ethics and
professional obligations/expectations that are morally and ethically expected of them to make
and follow as the enforcer of the law. It also affects the
Determining the Best Course of Action
The best course of action and appropriate theory to apply in this ethical dilemma would
be for Officer Ratphoumy to refuse the bribe and arrest the drug dealer. This would be the best
course of action because he will be upholding his code of ethics as a police officer, his
professional obligations, and the five ethical standards and values. Additionally, this will not
jeopardize his law enforcement career by accepting the bribe to let the drug dealer getaway,
where another pursuing officer can use the drug money as evidence to further prove and justify
their arrest or conviction of the fleeing drug dealer evading arrest. Furthermore, it identifies the
moral facts/issues of accepting the bribe and letting the drug dealer getaway which could
jeopardize innocent bystanders, fellow officers, and himself. Another best course of action that
Officer Ratphoumy could follow is by bringing up his financial hardship and concerns to his
leadership/supervisory. Bringing this to their attention can help them be more aware of the
situation that Officer Ratphoumy is going through, and to be able to better help him and his
family seek the proper support and assistance to ensure the success that their officers’
issues/concerns are properly addressed and taken care of.
An appropriate theory to support this course of action would be Kohlberg’s Theory
(moral reasoning). This is the appropriate theory for this course of action because it justifies the
importance of not behaving in a certain way that would not be ethically or morally right,
especially if might violate the code of ethics and professional obligations as a police officer who
is supposed to uphold the law with integrity. Furthermore, this theory further justifies this course
of action because it outlines the moral facts/issues of the decision to accept the bribe and let the
drug dealer get away, leading to corruption and tainting the officer's virtue traits (rotten apple
within the police force) thereby making it morally and ethically wrong to accept the bribe and
letting the drug dealer getaway.
Potential Victims and Collateral Consequences
There would be no potential victims and collateral damage from this course of action
other than affecting Officer Ratphoumy’s family and himself financially. But the support and
assistance from his fellow officers to find support and assistance for Officer Ratphoumy's
financial hardship would help him and his family get a better quality of life, as well as ensure the
success of the officer. There would be no collateral damage inflicted from this course of action
because the drug dealer would be apprehended by Officer Ratphoumy and turned over to his
fellow officers who were pursuing the fleeing suspect, causing no harm/collateral damage of any
type to bystanders, other officers, or himself. The course of action is therefore a safe approach to
the ethical dilemma situation and upholds the five ethical standards, code of ethics, and
professional obligations of a law enforcement officer.
Conclusion
In conclusion, if Officer Ratphoumy were to accept the bribe from the drug dealer and let
him get away with it, it would violate one or more of the five ethical standards, would implicate
values conflicts, and would violate his code of ethics and professional obligations as a law
enforcement officer. If Officer Ratphoumy follows through with the best course of action of
refusing the bribe and apprehending the drug dealer, he would be upholding the law, the five
ethical standards, the code of ethics, professional ethics, and the officer's Ethical Credo.