Christopher Dorner: Will Killings Finally Spark Debate On State Of Police Force?

I don’t envy the life of a police officer. Those brave few who put on a uniform everyday to protect and serve innocent citizens are surrounded by an unsympathetic public, violent criminals, desperate victims, bloodthirsty lawyers, and the daily possibility of being killed on duty. It is an unfathomable burden and responsibility, and all too often officers who display great fortitude and diligence have their reputations tarnished by corrupt and sadistic colleagues.

Christoper Dorner is still at large. His calculated killing spree is a campaign of vengeance against those officers he believes mistreated him. Many facts came to light in the last few days, and the familiar public specter of one of America’s most notorious police departments has returned. The LAPD has been quick to paint Dorner as a deranged killer, claiming he’s delusional and has a history of emotional instability. They’ve offered up the unimaginable reward of $1,000,000 to aid in his capture, and have been so aggressive in their desire to kill him that they’ve shot at innocent civilians mistaken for the ex-cop.

Despite the cycled narrative, there seems to be some discord in the public perception of Dorner’s case. America has had to endure a lot of senseless gun violence lately. Last July, James Holmes indiscriminately fired at moviegoers in Aurora before strolling outside to wait for the police. Months ago, Adam Lanza mercilessly shot at school children in Newton before taking his own life. But Christoper Dorner’s calculated plan of vengeance targets specific police officers, forcing the public to ignore their knee jerk temptation to dismiss him as a lunatic, and ask one simple question: why?

Those who have read Dorner’s manifesto might be surprised by the overall lucidity of his words. In it, Dorner claims to have been fired for crossing the "blue line" – an unofficial code of silence among all officers to protect their colleagues, even in the presence of illegal activity. He accuses the LAPD of sustaining a culture of corruption, perjury, and racism. He illustrates a legal system whose laws have been purposely designed to target and imprison poor minorities over menial drug offenses. He describes officers who relish the opportunity to shoot suspects, and laughingly text each other pictures of the corpses. Even though the LAPD has been quick to claim the "Rodney King" days are long behind them, it is still far too easy to come across shocking stories of police brutality, sexual assaults, and murder.

This is where Dorner stands apart from the other incidents of violence which have plagued this country. He has committed heinous acts of murder, but significant portions of the public perceive him to be an intelligent individual who was wronged by the police and driven to his breaking point. No one would excuse his abhorrent crimes, but some citizens have been spurned to raise the familiar battle-issues of police ethics and conduct. By targeting a ‘corrupt’ police force, Dorner is trying to paint himself a hero. The unfortunate dysfunctions and failures of our society allow for many people to buy into that narrative. His base of support speaks to our larger societal problems. 

In 1971, Frank Serpico testified against his fellow officers and exposed widespread corruption throughout the NYPD. More recently, Officer Adrian Schoolcraft sued the NYPD after they dragged him to a mental asylum for secretly recording his superiors as they instructed officers to cook the books and arrest innocent people to fudge their crime stats. Serpico and Schoolcraft have joined forces to bring police corruption to light. 

Serpico: “This is the way they do it…they make you a psycho and everything you do gets discounted. But I told Adrian just to tell the truth as he knows it and to be himself. When you tell the truth, they can't do a damn thing to you.”

Their actions are valiant, virtuous, and self-sacrificial. They never stooped to the level of the officers they testified against, but they also garnered far less press coverage. Dorner is a calculating murderer who decided that his cause justified any actions. His killing of a policeman’s daughter is especially unforgivable, given that she is one of the unarmed innocent people he swore to defend. The unfortunately irrefutable fact about Dorner’s method, however, is that it will certainly garner far more media coverage and bring the LAPD under far more scrutiny than Serpico and Schoolcraft could ever have done.

If only in the sense that we will have to have an honest conversation about police forces in this country, Dorner has had his victory.

Bloody Diamonds

       Alcohol is often praised as a recession-proof industry. In times of economic woes, we spend what little money we have to drown our sorrows. In times of great fortune, we celebrate generously with imbibed cheer. Libation, in all its forms, has permeated civilizations for millennia, interlaced in song, dance and feast....so in a very human way, the product's consistency makes sense. There is, however, another industry displaying the same economic invulnerability, and yet offering none of the same rationale: Diamonds!

       Despite what the Tiffany's receipt might suggest, diamonds have no inherent value. They are far more abundant than we are led to believe, and they cannot be resold at even a fraction of their purchase price. For inexplicable reasons, our modern culture continues to celebrate their supposed rarity and glamour. Many men have fallen on the uphill battlefield of questioning this social norm. How did this mineral gain a monopoly on representing love? At what point did romance become synonymous with a stone dug from the earth? The history of the diamond industry is riddled with brutal corruption, brilliant ad campaigns and the slick corporate maneuverings of one of the world's most deplorable cartels. As more of my dear friends commit to loving marriages, I thought I'd offer an uninvited and thoroughly unappreciated look into the blood-spattered lineage behind this industry's success.

       In the mid 1800s, diamonds were an actual rarity mined solely in India and Brazil. The global supply could be measured in a few pounds and they were donned by Monarchs or Aristocrats as frivolous symbols of stature. In 1870, an unimaginably vast bounty of diamonds was discovered in South Africa. Tons of the gems were being pulled out of the ground, signaling a potential flooding of the market and diminishment of the stone's value.

       Sensing the untapped opportunity before them, several mining companies joined into a conglomerate, establishing a virtual monopoly in South Africa called "the De Beers Mining company". By 1888 De Beers controlled all production and distribution of diamonds coming out of South Africa. They created international syndicates, which many other diamond claim holders and distributors soon joined (quickly realizing the profit potential of faking scarcity and fabricating high prices.) By 1902, De Beers controlled over 90% of the world's rough-diamond production and distribution. When Ernest Oppenheimer took over control of the company in 1927, he established exclusive contracts with buyers and suppliers, essentially making it impossible to deal in diamonds outside of De Beers.

       The formula remained the same for much of the 20th century: an auxiliary of De Beers would buy diamonds from various sources, De Beers would then decide how many diamonds they'd like to sell (and at what price), and finally buyers would cultivate the market hubs in cities like New York, London or Antwerp. All the while, De Beers continued to amass a stockpile measuring in the tons, hidden away in their vaults. It was during the 1930s depression, however, that the company utilized their boldest and most successful tactic.

       Wanting to turn America into their next big market, De Beers met with advertising agencies to form a battle strategy. Their aim? To convince consumers that "Diamonds = Love". To romanticize the stone, the campaign sought to change the public's idea of how a man (successfully) courts a woman. They engaged the fledgling film industry, and covered movie idols (the paragons of mass audience romance) in their product. Magazines and select publications were flooded with stories that reinforced the idea of diamonds representing an indestructible devotion. Conspicuous photographs of celebrity's bejeweled fingers splashed across news pages. Fashion designers promoted the "rising trend" of diamonds on the radio. Even the British Royal Family was convinced to wear diamonds over other jewels, under the assertion that it could greatly aid an industry in which Great Britain had a controlling interest in.

       By 1947, the campaign had forged a psychological necessity across several classes and markets, forming a near overnight "tradition". Those who could not afford a ring, chose to defer the purchase rather than forgo it altogether. It became a common notion, that one's devotion was measured by the size of the engagement ring. The now immortal De Beers tag line: "a diamond is forever" was cemented in the common psyche. Diamond sales continued to skyrocket, as De Beers exported the campaign to a number of new countries, creating multi-billion dollar profits.


       Meanwhile, behind the scenes they utilized any and all tactics to ensure control over the flow of stones in the market. If a new discovery of diamonds threatened De Beers' autonomy (like the large Siberian mine of the 1950s) the company simply bought the entire inventory, continuing to channel the world's supply through a restricted funnel. When countries like Israel or Zaire attempted to protest or challenge the monopoly with diamonds of their own, De Beers would flood the market with similar products from its stockpiled inventory and drive down demand. The only threat to their dominance was the potential discovery of a giant new untapped source, outside of their control. To that end, De Beers used their colonial connections to weave discoveries of diamonds in Africa into the fold of their cartel, also bringing Russia into the conglomerate and turning a blind eye to the warlords and slavers who savaged the lands, brutalized their people and fed the company's ever brimming vaults.



       This is the hidden history of the Diamond invention. They are a fabricated fantasy, born of the greed of one tyrannical syndicate which has dictated the price for decades. Consumers have been fooled into perpetuating the idea that these abundant pieces of carbon are somehow unique symbols of esteem...tokens of wealth and romance. De Beers propogated this illusion of scarcity to become one of the most successful cartels in the history of commerce. Almost any other commodity has fluctuated in response to economic conditions, but diamonds have steadily advanced upwards in price since the 1930s. People continue to wear them, or hoard them in safes as "family heirlooms". The most painful irony is, none of them could be sold for even a tenth of their original purchase price. The diamond market relies on consumers never parting with their rings or necklaces or earrings. That way, only the distributors can dictate value. It is a sad, cyclical delusion which costs lives, corrupts nations and materializes our affections.

**** Postscript****

       I am not without romance or an appreciation for symbolism. So for those looking for a token of their courtship and affection, please consider one of the many alternative stones, which display the same glittering, enduring beauty... but are free of the inherent blood cost or price fixing trickery. Some options for your convenience listed below, happy holidays: