Against the Police Advisory Board, editorials & articles, Times-Union, April 1965
Primary tabs
The year 1965 had by far the most column space with regards to the Police Advisory Board in both the Democrat & Chronicle and the Times-Union newspapers. For 1965, articles critical of the PAB from the Times-Union have been combined into single Rochester Indymedia articles divided by month. This is April 1965. The clippings can be found at the Local History Department of the Monroe County Library Downtown Branch.
While the Police Advisory Board became law on March 26, 1963 to address complaints against officers who used "excessive and unnecessary force" against civilians, the Locust Club police union did everything in its power to thwart it from actually accomplishing anything. Two injunctions were slapped on it by the court preventing it from conducting independent investigations and forwarding recommendations to the chief of police--it's primary functions. By the mid-1960s, new appointments to the board were needed to meet quorum in order for it to do its work. But neither Democrats nor Republicans appointed anyone to the board after it was found constitutional by the courts in 1969. It was then defunded and abolished in 1970 by the new Republican Party-lead Rochester city government.
The article below, "Citizens Group Hits Police Board," no author is named, was published in the Times-Union on April 2, 1965. It's a brief piece outlining a statement released by the group Citizens for the Abolition of the Police Advisory Board. The statement released by CAPAB says that the board is an "unhealthy restraint on law enforcement" and needs to stop its "Monday morning quarterbacking." The Times-Union writer agrees by making the statment that police do not racially discriminate except between "those who respect the law and those who brazenly violate it," which is why the board should go. It hampers police.
"Sibley Unconvincing On Need for Police Board," is a Times-Union editorial published on April 12, 1965. Public Safety Commissioner Sibley's "rationalizations" for the Police Advisory board are seen as "spoonfuls of sugar to help bad medicine go down." And what is the bad medicine? That police are "branded" with a "stigma of suspected brutality." This board is a "slap at policemen who deserve all the community support they can get." After all, the "majority carefully observe the limits of their authority," but are "lumped with a few bad apples."
"Review Board Is a 'Group Libel'," is a Times-Union editorial published on April 27, 1965. The editorial starts out talking about a "Policemen's Ball" where officers were recognized for "saving the lives of children trapped in a fire to tracking down a rapist." And then it turns against the city, calling the board a "second-guessing" review process. Apparently, the "overwhelming majority of Americans clear police of 'brutality'," so why have a board at all? Sure, a few might "abuse their authority," but there are "traditional police procedures" to correct for "errant policement." Frank D. O'Connor, a lawyer, said that with the board, police are presumed guilty while defendants are presumed innocent. But aren't defendants supposed to be presumed innocent? Hm. The editorial ends with a demand to abolish the board.
