BY DAN VALENTI

PLANET VALENTI NEWS AND COMMENTARY

(FORTRESS OF SOLITUDE, THE WEEKEND EDITION NOV. 9-11, 2018) — Law enforcement and policing are two related but different activities. Ideally, they work together in a complementary, apolitical fashion. In practicality, that is often not the case. Where Berkshire County proceeds with respect to this “similar difference” remains to be seen in light of the just-concluded district attorney’s race and how if will affect local policing. We know that right now, the two are twain and haven’t met often as measured by the growing crime and violence, especially in North Adams and Pittsfield. Consider:

The Pittsfield Police Department: Currently, a divided fiefdom ruled by Chief Mike Wynn. There are two main factions within the PPD, with politics often a key part of personnel deployment. Morale is low. That’s how you diminish the effectiveness of a force.

The D.A.’s office: Staff are nervous. Paul Caccaviello won’t be asked to stay, and some of his staffers will be told to pound pavement. Those that remain are understandably antsy. Andrea Harrington’s reset button will be a “start over” loaded with questions … and agita.

The Sheriff’s Department: Tom Bowler backed the wrong horse for D.A. Word from the inside is that Harrington will essentially shut Bowler out of Pittsfield investigations as political fallout of the Ruberto-Bianchi (aka DelGallo-Wojtkowski) Machine Wars, fought by proxy in the D.A. race.

The State Police: A member of one of the local SP Command Staffs Harrington will try to freeze the staties by employing troops on an ad hoc basis. Goodbye 7 North Street. Hello barracks.

The Courthouse: This is probably the county’s most stable element in the criminal justice system. We have good judges, generally, but often the interactions with the other branches, notably the police, come off “chippy” — a product of the area’s notorious love of and penchant for cliques and protection of turf.

These divisions exemplify the distinction with which we began this piece.

———- 000 ———-

“Law enforcement” refers to the actions of people whose job it is to enforce terms spelled out in the legislation that governs the definitions of criminal conduct, because, above all, “crime” is a legal not moral concept. Law enforcement administers consequences decided by the courts to those who violate a community’s safety standards as defined by statute. On the other hand, “policing” involves the strategies employed by civil paramilitary groups (police department, sheriff’s office, state police) to fight crime through prevention when it can and arrest when it must.

Law enforcement relies on compulsory compliance, same as good parenting. If you steal the cookies, you get sent to your room. Likewise, if you break the law and get caught, you pay the price. Policing depends more on the citizen’s voluntary adherence. No one can force you NOT to steal, rob, assault, of kill another. You must decide to obey the laws that prohibit such actions. Too much failed policing and prosecution stems from the misguided notion that laws can legislate the actions that stem from the human heart.

Obviously, the common element that binds these two entities — law enforcement and policing — is the cooperation of citizens. Without that, there’s nothing to be done, as we routinely realize with the proliferation of shootings and gun play, to cite one example. If people obey the law, they won’t have to deal with the criminal justice system. In law-abiding communities, policing is a Norman Rockwell beat cop sitting on a stool at Joe’s Diner, listening to the runaway little boy (and yes, we know in the actual painting the guy is a state trooper). In cities such as North Adams and Pittsfield, unacceptable numbers of people ignore the law and act on their antisocial impulses, freezing authorities in helplessness. Whether criminals do it out of ignorance or intent should make no difference, something THE PLANET hopes the incoming district attorney and her “new approach” understands.

———- ooo ———-

THE PLANET writes of the ideal in these two related areas of criminal justice. As we all know with the rise in crime in Berkshire County but particularly its two cities, the way you draw it up on the flip chart and the way it translates into action have become shockingly separate. North Adams and Pittsfield have earned the filthy distinction of crime’s top rank among the Commonwealth’s 351 cities and towns, and that became perhaps the top issue in the D.A. race.

The spotlight blazed upon this race reflected the area’s concern that crime, particularly violent crime and drug abuse, has risen dramatically and well past the mediation of authorities to deal with it The scariest part of this is that the rise has not peaked. Bottom line, it will be the job of incoming district attorney Andrea Harrington to lead the effort to cap the gusher. It would be unrealistic to expect her to institute Utopia, but no one’s asking for Utopia. For her first term, bringing the ascent to a halt and allowing the gravitas of law enforcement and policing to bring it back the other way. Yo can liken it to throwing a ball in the air. The ball will be in three states. It will rise, it will fall, and exactly half way between the two, it will enter that eerie microsecond where it is doing nothing.

That’s Harrington’s first priority: Not prosecuting all crimes all at once, but adopting that “new approach” she mentioned in the campaign to bring about that apexic microsecond where crime “does nothing.” THE PLANET interpreted her philosophical “selective approach” to law enforcement in this light. In the spirit of giving a newcomer to office a reasonable benefit of the doubt and a honeymoon that will last longer than microseconds, we saw her sifting out categories of crime as an attempt to bring about the apex.

She made campaign promises that were controversial, including her position on dealing with the drug epidemic. More power to her. Will her lenient approach to drug users have any impact on people’s free-will decision to shoot up, cook, snort, inhale, and otherwise consume to nasty stuff? We shall see.

She won’t be able to do it alone.

Have a great weekend, everybody.

—————————————————————————————————

“The public interest depends upon private virtue” — James Wilson.

“OPEN THE WINDOW, AUNT MILLIE.”

LOVE TO ALL.

The views and opinions expressed in the comment section or in the text other than those of PLANET VALENTI are not necessarily endorsed by the operators of this website. PLANET VALENTI assumes no responsibility for such views and opinions, and it reserves the right to remove or edit any comment, including but not limited to those that violate the website’s Rules of Conduct and its editorial policies. PLANET VALENTI shall not be held responsible for the consequences that may result from any posted comment or outside opinion or commentary as provided in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act and this website’s terms of service. All users of this website — including readers, commentators, contributors, or anyone else making use of its information hereby agree to these conditions by virtue of this notice. When PLANET VALENTI ends with the words “The Usual Disclaimer,” that phrase shall be understood to refer to the full text of this disclaimer.