Professor Andrew Goldsmith delivers the 2024 Liberty Lecture
The event was attended by students, staff, and external guests, all keen to hear insights on issues of public trust in police and the growing role of technology in shaping police practices.
On Wednesday 30 October 2024, the School of Law and the Centre for Criminal Justice Studies welcomed Professor Andrew Goldsmith, Matthew Flinders Distinguished Emeritus Professor at Flinders University, to deliver the annual Liberty Lecture on the topic ‘Police Accountability, Legitimacy and Trust in Uncertain Times’.
About Professor Andrew Goldsmith
Professor Goldsmith is a leading expert in criminology, policing, and public trust, with an extensive career spanning academia and legal practice. Trained initially as a lawyer, he spent several years in legal practice before turning to academia. His academic career includes positions at Warwick University, Monash University, Brunel University, and Flinders University. Goldsmith’s research interests focus on organised crime, corruption, cybercrime, and policing. He is a Fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences in Australia and co-edits the ANZ Journal of Criminology.
The shifting landscape of police accountability
In his lecture, Professor Goldsmith discussed the historical development of police accountability issues over the past fifty years, including a comparative analysis of policing in the UK, Australia, Canada and the United States. His presentation was structured around three key themes: visibility, vulnerability, and vincibility – the challenges that the police face in maintaining public trust and legitimacy in an increasingly complex and digital world. Goldsmith began by reflecting on the early years of his interest in policing, tracing his fascination with police work back to childhood, and recalling his first encounter with the British police in Leeds during the Yorkshire Ripper investigation. This personal narrative served as a backdrop to his broader examination of how police accountability has evolved, particularly in response to technological and societal shifts.
The 1970s and 1980s marked a crucial period: the revelations of police corruption, notably the case of police misconduct in the Toronto gay bathhouses in the 1980s, highlighted the need for external oversight mechanisms. Goldsmith recalled his own role in editing ‘Complaints Against the Police’, which explored the new need for civilian oversight and greater transparency in policing. This period, he argued, laid the foundation for the debate on the need for independent bodies to hold police accountable, particularly in instances where the police themselves were seen as untrustworthy.
The impact of technology on policing
Professor Goldsmith then discussed the role of technology in reshaping the relationship between police and the public. He explored the rise of digital technologies, particularly cameras and smartphones, which have enabled individuals to document police actions. The case of Rodney King in 1991, in which a civilian filmed the beating of a man by Los Angeles police officers, marked a change regarding police accountability. What followed this was the development of a ‘new visibility’ in policing, where every police interaction could be recorded and scrutinised.
This new visibility has had mixed consequences for police legitimacy. Whilst it has empowered the community to hold the police accountable, it has also increased the pressure on police forces to justify their actions at a time when there is a particular focus on the police. Goldsmith noted the case of Ian Tomlinson, who died during the 2009 G20 protests, where 14,000 pieces of video evidence were submitted to investigators. This example further highlights the challenges of dealing with an abundance of digital data from the public. This flood of information, he argued, is consuming police resources and complicating efforts to provide accurate accounts of police conduct.
Police vulnerability and vincibility
The lecture also explored a new sense of vulnerability among the police. According to Goldsmith, this vulnerability is not just a reflection of public mistrust but also the result of increasing risks faced by police officers in the field. The widespread use of social media and the internet has further compounded this sense of vulnerability, as events in one part of the world – such as the killing of George Floyd in the US – have the power to trigger a public reaction and change perceptions of the police in other jurisdictions, including Australia and the UK.
Finally, the concept of ‘vincibility’ was a central theme. Goldsmith noted the increase in targeted attacks against police officers, including situations where police became the targets of violent protests. This shift in public perception, he argued, presents an increasing polarisation of social and political views. Goldsmith used the recent incident in Harehills in Leeds, where the police became the target of the protests, as an example of this new vulnerability. Situations like this put further strain on the relationship between the police and the communities they serve.
Responding to uncertainty
In his conclusion, Professor Goldsmith reflected on the future of police accountability. One of his recommendations drew on Jonathan White’s idea of the need for a ‘shared narrative’ between police, government, and the public – an effort to bridge the gap caused by social polarisation and political unrest. He emphasised the importance of slowing down decision-making processes, advocating for more deliberative democracy in areas of policing and criminal justice. This, he argued, would help counter the ‘emergency politics’ that often fail to provide long-term solutions.
Goldsmith also suggested reassessing the scope of police responsibilities, particularly in the context of over-criminalisation and law enforcement in addressing social issues that might be better dealt with by other institutions.
Finally, Professor Goldsmith argued that there are areas of policing, particularly those areas of ‘risky powers’, that can be shared with others to direct and help the police. This is a collective effort which should involve politicians, community engagement, and a more critical approach to the role of the police. As Goldsmith said, “We can talk about social division, and we can see polarization, but what is fraying is any sense of shared narrative, and something needs to be done”. The police can do their best at the level they operate, they can stress their impartiality, they can depoliticise, but they need support from others.
This article was written by Nina Herzog.
