[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 131 (Wednesday, August 2, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4720-S4721]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




           VERMONT POLICE CHIEF'S RESPONSE TO PRESIDENT TRUMP

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, Brandon del Pozo proudly serves as the 
chief of police in Burlington, VT--Vermont's largest city. He arrived 
in Vermont 2 years ago, after serving for nearly two decades with the 
New York Police Department, where he rose through the ranks and learned 
hard lessons on the streets of such a large urban center. One needs 
only to sit with Chief del Pozo for a short while to understand his 
commitment to community service and to community.
  So it comes as no surprise that Chief del Pozo grew alarmed when he 
heard President Trump recently tell a law enforcement gathering that 
police should not be ``too nice'' to those who are placed under arrest, 
seeming to suggest that police should go against the very policies that 
exist to protect against police misconduct. We cannot tolerate this 
kind of public comment and certainly not from the President of the 
United States. There is nothing the least bit humorous in any of this. 
In fact, President Trump's comments have undermined the efforts of 
police departments across our Nation to build trust within their 
communities at a time when that trust is most needed.
  As a doctoral candidate holding three master's degrees, Chief del 
Pozo is well studied in the rules of engagement. He is also a talented 
writer. In an essay he submitted to CNN, Chief del Pozo responded 
directly to the President's comments, writing: ``Policing requires 
dealing with the emotions cops are bound to feel when they witness the 
worst things one person can do to another. It is criminals who act on 
these emotions and attack other people. Restraint is what separates 
policing from vigilantism.''
  It is a viewpoint that is real, told through the eyes of an 
experienced street cop who works in reality, not reality TV. I ask 
unanimous consent that Chief del Pozo's full CNN essay be printed in 
the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                       [From CNN, July 31, 2017]

                 Trump on Police Brutality: Har Har Har

                         (By Brandon del Pozo)

       When I was a New York Police Department cop in East 
     Flatbush in 2000, I once rushed into an apartment building 
     with fellow officers on a call of an assault. We found a boy 
     in the hallway under attack. He was crying, and bleeding from 
     stab wounds inflicted by his mother's boyfriend. The boy ran 
     into my arms. Our sergeant confronted his attacker. He could 
     have shot the man. Instead, he fought him into submission.
       The boy had been stabbed because he had called the police 
     while the man was attacking his mother. She was lying on the 
     hallway stairs in a pool of blood. That her son had served as 
     a distraction was probably the only reason she survived. 
     ``You saved our lives,'' the boy sobbed. He hugged me. His 
     blood and tears wet my shirt.
       As the suspect sat there in handcuffs waiting to be led 
     away, I asked him why he had stabbed a child. ``Boy gotta 
     learn not to get in a man's business,'' he said. ``So now he 
     learned.'' A fury rose within me that nearly caused me to 
     shake. ``We should have shot you,'' I said.
       But we didn't shoot him, nor did we lay a hand on him once 
     he'd surrendered. Policing requires dealing with the emotions 
     cops are bound to feel when they witness the worst things one 
     person can do to another. It is criminals who act on these 
     emotions and attack other people. Restraint is what separates 
     policing from vigilantism.
       Now we have a President who appears to want police to 
     satisfy their primal urges. Either as a joke--as White House 
     press secretary, Sarah Huckabee Sanders has now suggested--or 
     as one of many true things that have been said in jest, 
     President Donald Trump addressed a roomful of officers on 
     Long Island on Friday and invited them to be ``rough'' with 
     their suspects. He advised them to be free with their hands 
     as they shoved arrestees into squad cars, to ``not be too 
     nice.'' His grin and his pause for an ovation erased any 
     uncertainty about his message.
       An elected official could only say what Trump said if he 
     didn't understand policing. People who've gained this type of 
     experience know the real possibility of a cop losing his 
     temper, how hard we have to guard against it, and how much it 
     would erode the trust we strive for between police and the 
     people they serve.
       It also seems like the President doesn't understand certain 
     things about America. There has been enough confirmed police 
     brutality here to send chills down the spine of a reasonable 
     person watching the President and a crowd of cops joke and 
     laugh about it. It's like laughing about the dire 
     consequences of inadequate health care, or the opioid crisis.
       It's also clear that President Trump has never had to fire 
     or arrest a police officer: The cop sits there in front of 
     you, replaying a moment in his mind, wishing he could take it 
     back. He put on the uniform to be one of the good guys, and 
     now he's on the opposite side of the table. He worries about 
     supporting his family.
       The way to get our officers to retirement safely, after a 
     satisfying career, is to lead them through policing's 
     cauldron. Excessive force could get them fired or arrested. 
     Making light of it is a failure of leadership.
       It was hard to watch a roomful of officers laugh and 
     applaud in response to Trump's remarks. The only charitable 
     explanation was that it indicated a sense of relief that the 
     President understood how vicious some criminals are and how 
     frustrating the work of bringing them to justice can be. The 
     more

[[Page S4721]]

     likely explanation is that the President has a talent for 
     bringing out the darker side of people, and this was another 
     example of it.
       What we witnessed will drive a deeper wedge between the 
     police and the citizens whose mistrust of them has grown. It 
     will cast doubt on legitimate uses of force.
       What troubles me the most about the President's remarks, 
     however, is the way they patronized police officers. He has 
     never held a wounded child in his arms or had to decide 
     whether to punch or shoot a man with a knife. He has never 
     had to race to the scene of a police shooting and choke on 
     his feelings as he hunts for a suspect with precision and 
     restraint. His remarks failed to take police work and its 
     hazards seriously.
       When I later served as a precinct commander in the Bronx, a 
     sergeant of mine was suspended because he stood there and did 
     nothing as he watched an officer slam a handcuffed suspect's 
     head into the street. A narcotics detective had been shot 
     during a scuffle with a drug crew, the responding officers 
     were blind with rage, and one exacted revenge. When a video 
     surfaced, the emotions didn't convey. It just looked 
     thuggish, like the cop was a criminal, too. By his own 
     account, it seems the President would also have been inclined 
     to stand there and do nothing. There are thousands of 
     American police chiefs who know what these situations 
     require. They want to protect their officers by leading them 
     in the right direction. We don't need the President joking 
     with them about giving in to their baser instincts.

                          ____________________