Mass Surveillance Essay

Mass Surveillance Essay.

The affair began on June 17, 1972, when the local police arrested five men for breaking and entering into the Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate complex. The police found on the burglars a slush fund used by the committee for the re-election of the President Richard Nixon and listening devices. They look secrets agents more than burglars. As Washington is a federal district, the affair was charged to the F. B. I. Within hours after that, the F. B. I discovered a name of a C.

I. A officer in the address book of one of the burglars.

The officer was a member of a secret operative team charged by the President to protect confidential documents inside the white house. Although the burglary seemed to be an operation led by former employees of the White House in order to spy on Democratic Party elections plans, the FBI investigation was not going away. The case was covered by the head of F.

B. I Patrick Gray. Who was shortly before appointed by the President in place of J. Edgar Hoover (dead in May, 1972). The President had chosen his friend instead of William Mark Felt, the Bureau’s Associate Director, the second-ranking post in the F. B. I after Hoover.

At first, the case made a very little noise and seemed to be covered up. Nixon reelected for another four years in November 1972. He defeated McGovern, the democratic leader, with over 60 percent of the popular vote. Until end of 1972, when the two Washington Post journalists: Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein revealed the affair in public. They had been informed by an F. B. I whistleblower (he revealed himself in 2005 and he was William Mark Felt, the number two in the F. B. I at that moment). The affair was covered by many other media like Time Magazine, and The New York Times and they accused the President and his administration.

Who also accused the media of making wild accusations, putting too much emphasis on this story. Months later, the affair had a dramatic consequents and political repercussions, an investigation conducted by the Senate with democratic majority. It was revealed that President Nixon had a tape-recording system in his office and he had recorded many conversations. Recordings from these tapes implicated the president revealing that he had known about the affair and had attempted to cover up. After a protracted round of bitter court battles, the U. S.

Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the president had to hand over the tapes to government investigators, he ultimately handed over. Facing near-certain impeachment in the House of Representatives and a strong possibility of a conviction in the Senate, Nixon resigned the presidency on August 9, 1974. His successor, Gerald Ford, issued a pardon to him. The Watergate scandal resulted in 69 government officials being charged and 48 being found guilty like vice president, F. B. I head, C. I. A officers, and all members of president’s administration.

Mass Surveillance Essay

Miranda v. Arizona Essay

Miranda v. Arizona Essay.

Early in 1963, a 17 years old woman was kidnapped and raped in Phoenix, Arizona. The police investigated the case, and soon found and arrested a poor, and mentally disturbed man. The name of this man was Ernesto Miranda. Miranda was 23 years old when he was arrested. On March 13, 1963, Miranda was arrested based on circumstantial evidence linking him to the kidnapping and the rape. After 2 police officers interrogated him for 2 hours, he signed a confession to the rape charge. The form he signed included the following statement: “I do hereby swear that I make this statement voluntarily and of my own free will, with no threats, coercion, or promises of immunity, and with full knowledge of my legal rights, understanding any statement I make may be used against me.

” Miranda was not given a full and effective warning of his rights.

He was not told of his right to remain silent and his right to counsel. Miranda was found guilty of kidnaping and rape and was sentenced to 20-30 years imprisonment on each count.

During the prosecution, Miranda’s court-appointed lawyer, Alvin Moore, objected that because of these facts, the confession was not truly voluntary and should be excluded.

In the end of 1966, The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision written by Chief Justice Earl Warren, ruled that the prosecution could not introduce Miranda’s confession as evidence in a criminal trial because the police had failed to first informs Miranda of his right to an attorney and against self-incrimination. The Supreme Court of Arizona detailed the principles governing police interrogation. Arizona ruled that detained criminal suspects, prior to police questioning, must be informed of their constitutional right to an attorney and against self-incrimination.

Miranda v. Arizona Essay

Arming Teachers Essay

Arming Teachers Essay.

“The vast majority of teachers want to be armed with textbooks and computers, not guns,” said Kenneth S. Trump, President of National School Safety and Security Services, in response to the national discussion on arming teachers and school staff, and armed volunteers in schools.

Trump advises school districts against allowing teachers and school staff to be armed.

Trump says that while gun control and gun rights advocates typically seize on school proposals to arm teachers to further political agendas, his opposition to arming teachers and school staff focuses solely on implementation issues, not political statements and beliefs about rights to bear arms.

“School districts considering arming teachers and school staff with guns would take on significant responsibility and potential liabilities that I firmly believe are beyond the expertise, knowledge-base, experience, and professional capabilities of most school boards and administrators,” Trump said. He added that school board members, superintendents, principals, teachers, school safety experts, and public safety officials he has talked with around the nation consistently do not believe that educators and school support staff should be armed.

Trump, a 25-year veteran school safety expert who has trained and consulted with school and public safety officials from all 50 states and Canada, noted that school districts setting policy to allow teachers and school staff to be armed with guns would take on an enormous amount of responsibility and potential liability.

Trump says allowing teachers and school staff to be armed begs a number of questions:

Does the school board have appropriate and adequate policies and procedures governing the carrying and use of firearms by teachers and school staff?
What type of “use of force continuum” has the school district created for staff to use firearms? How does that stand up in comparison to such standards held for police officers and others who are armed and deployed in a public safety capacity?

What types of firearms (types of guns, caliber of weapons, etc.) are staff allowed to carry and not allowed to carry? Will staff carry their own personal firearms or school district-issued firearms? If the school allows staff to carry their personal weapons for the purpose of protecting staff and students, what responsibilities do school boards and administrators thereby assume for making sure the firearms carried are functional? Does the school district have regular “inspections” of staff firearms to make sure they are functional and appropriate to policy, and if so, who on school staff is responsible for that function and what is their level of expertise and training to make such decisions?

What type of firearms training does the school district provide on a regular, ongoing basis to those staff it authorizes to be armed with guns? Will the school district build and operate its own firearms range? Who on school staff is qualified to provide such training, operate a firearms range, etc.? Will firearms certification and recertification be added to the school district’s professional development training program each year?

What type of weapons retention training has been provided to staff who are armed and what steps have been taken to reduce risks of a teacher or staff member being intentionally disarmed by a student or other person, or for having a firearm dislodged from a staff member’s control when the teacher breaks up a fight in a cafeteria or hallway?

How is the district prepared to prevent and manage situations where teachers and/or staff members lose, misplace, or have stolen their firearms while on campus?
How will the school district manage an accidental shooting that could occur?
What is the impact of this type of board policy and practice on the school district’s insurance and potential legal liability posture? If self-insured, is the district able to handle potential lawsuit judgments against them for cases resulting from this practice? If insured by a private carrier, what is the insurance provider’s position and concerns, or will they even insure the district for such a practice?

Most importantly, what other options have we considered as school leaders? For example, if the school district is concerned about first responder response time from the community to the school, has the school district considered employing a school resource officer (SRO) or its own trained, commissioned and certified school police officer who is a school district employee, such as what is allowed in Texas, Florida and other states, and many other considerations.

Trump has long supported school districts having school resource officers (SROs) who are city or county law enforcement officers assigned to work in schools. He also supports properly organized and operated school police departments, which are in-house school district police officers that are trained, commissioned, and certified professional peace officers in school districts where state law allows districts to have such departments.

Trump says that the arming of teachers and school staff goes is a significantly different issue that goes beyond simply the issue of an individual’s right in a number of states to be licensed to carry a concealed weapon. Unlike an individual being trained and licensed under a state law to carry a firearm for personal protection at their home or on the streets, school districts that permit teachers and school staff to carry firearms on campus are in essence deploying those school employees in a public safety capacity to protect the masses with the expectation and assumption that they can and will provide a firearms-related level of public safety protection services to students and other staff. By tasking those employees with those responsibilities, Trump notes, the school district is also accepting responsibility and potential liability for implementation of such policies.

“There is a huge difference between having trained, certified and commissioned law enforcement officers who are full-time, career public safety professionals that are armed and assigned the duty of protecting students and staff versus having teachers, custodians, cafeteria workers and other non-public safety professionals packing a gun in school with hundreds of children,” said Trump.

Arming Teachers Essay

Police Officer Job Description Essay

Police Officer Job Description Essay.

Police officers in cooperation with the general public are in front line to fight and prevent criminal activities. The officers respond to the needs of the people in the community. With the use of technology, the officers should be able to gather enough information that can help in the prosecution of offenders. The police officer is required to carry out some specific duties as directed by the shift sergeant, as a way of maintaining and enforcing laws. The officer has to investigate complaints, ensure order is maintained, help people, and identify criminals.

Identifying problems associated with enforcing law, conflict resolution, and assisting the public whenever need be are also part of the officer’s duties. You will also be called to carry out some activities that require physique such as containing violent people or animals, and be able to run fast when responding to distress calls. The supervision for the officers is carried out in a general form (Higher Education Careers Professionals, 2008).

Essential duties As an officer, there are essential duties you have to perform, but there are other duties that you might be required to carry out as well.

The main duties include detecting and apprehending those who act against the laws. The officer will be required to take necessary steps incase of physical hazards and law breaking activities by criminals. You are also required to take necessary actions whenever there are distress and emergence calls (LS/TB/JO, 2006). While on shift, you will be required to carry out investigations on issues that might occur during the period, and come up with the best action to take. As an officer, you have to reassure the community of their safety by ensuring frequent presence.

In all these, you will be required to write a report indicating all activities that took place while on shift. Finally, you have to complete a departmental report that will have to be forwarded to the relevant authorities (Higher Education Careers Professionals, 2008). Minor duties may include; carrying out a review on reports about the incidences occurring while on duty, giving testimony about such incidences, and finally, you will be required to carry out any duty assigned by the supervisor. Education, Ability and Skills

Applicants must be at least high school graduates, but priority will be given to college graduates. The applicants should not be less than 21 years of age. The applicants should exhibit the ability to identify problems and come up with sound solutions from analyzing all the available alternatives. In case of unexpected situations, you should show the ability to respond very quickly and swiftly. There are different working conditions which you must have the ability to work in all of them. In case of emergency, you must have the ability to work with the patrol car, and must be able to get in and out of it easily.

There is a physical and agility test that all the applicants must be able to pass during their graduation. With the increased technological use, you need to have knowledge of computer usage and cameras. Applicants must be able to communicate fluently both verbally and written means, to the departmental members and the entire public (LS/TB/JO, 2006). In general, the duties of the police expose the officers to the challenging tasks and diverse activities. After serving as a police officer for sometime, one is entitled to rise to the other specialized areas like the Criminal Investigation Department (CID).

Police Officer Job Description Essay

Police Patrol Essay

Police Patrol Essay.

Section 1 – Introduction

Indeed, the safety and prosperity of local communities is dependent upon, in large part, a prevention of criminal activity.  It is in safe communities that businesses grow and prosper, people bring their families to live, and others like to visit.  With this in mind, the classic way to ensure that communities are free of crime is through the use of police patrol.  It is the police presence that has typically kept crime in check (Sklansky).  However, the financial cost of police patrol often makes such protection quite difficult to put into action.

  In this research, the cost of police patrol will be examined through the discussion of the following article:

Farrell, Graham, Erin Lane, Ken Clark, and Andromachi Tseloni. “What Does the World Spend on Policing? [*].” International Journal of Comparative Sociology (2001): 59.

Conversely, alternative methods of crime prevention, aside from the use of the conventional police patrol will be examined through the discussion of this article:

Rubin, Herbert J. “Economic Partnering with the Poor: Why Local Governments Should Work with Community-Based Development Organizations to Promote Economic Development.

” International Journal of Public Administration 23.9 (2000): 1679.

Additional sources will be cited where necessary to ultimately make the point that while police patrol is important, it is costly, and there are other methods/resources that can be tapped into to complement the effectiveness of police patrols without exceeding budgets or overextending the ability of small police forces to accomplish what they need to accomplish.

Section 2 — The Main Points of the Two Articles

Farrell, Graham, Erin Lane, Ken Clark, and Andromachi Tseloni. “What Does the World Spend on Policing? [*].” International Journal of Comparative Sociology (2001): 59.

The main point of this article are that internationally, in small and large nations alike, the total amount of money spent on policing and crime prevention totals in the hundreds of billions of dollars, and with that, the question of whether or not that money is well spent.  Additionally, the article discusses the role of civilians in the process of preventing crime, which reduces the burden on the conventional police patrol.

Rubin, Herbert J. “Economic Partnering with the Poor: Why Local Governments Should Work with Community-Based Development Organizations to Promote Economic Development.” International Journal of Public Administration 23.9 (2000): 1679.

In close relation to the first article, this article makes the point that among other governmental organizations, local police agencies should work with community-based, civilian organizations to achieve the goal of fighting crime, which is one of the main reasons for the existence of police patrols themselves.

Section 3 – Comparison and Contrast of the Two Articles

The two articles chosen for this research do in fact possess similarities and differences which, ironically, all contribute to making the point that police patrols are effective and necessary, but would not be effective, and indeed cannot be effective, if they are overburdened by too much work for too few officers, or if the police organizations are unduly restrained by a lack of economic resources.

First, the Farrell article weighs the cost of police patrol against the results that are obtained for the money that is spent.  Far from saying that police patrols are ineffective, the article says that overburdened police patrols are ineffective, and therefore, in lieu of money that does not exist, police patrols should be aided by community/civilian resources whenever possible.

Following on the heels of the first article, the Rubin article makes the very important point that local police agencies, if faced with a lack of funds, should work more closely with community organizations in order to achieve effective crime prevention and apprehension of criminal offenders after the fact.

In a roundabout way, both articles do in fact make the same point; if police patrols are to be effective in the future as they have been in the past, they will need some help.  The answer is not to overextend patrols or to cut them due to underfunding, but rather to collaborate more closely with the community for the mutual benefit of both.  The modern police force faces challenges that those of the past did not; increasing need for diversity in police forces, additional personnel because of the increases in crime, and population increases make the scope of the traditional police patrol much more complicated and expensive than ever before (Sklansky).  Also significant is the huge cost of the processing of criminal cases in courts of law due to the increasing complexity of criminal law (Frodsham)

Section 4 – Conclusion

Based on the analysis of these articles and accompanying additional resources, the conclusion has been reached that police patrols are very effective, if and only if they are either properly funded or if they are assisted by civilians and community organizations in the absence of adequate funding.  Therefore, in conclusion, police patrols should be continued, and should be supported by communities if they are to continue to properly function.

You may also be interested in the following: police patrol thesis

Police Patrol Essay

Picking Cotton by David Graves Essay

Picking Cotton by David Graves Essay.

Abstract

This story is about two people, two victims of crime. Two people that suffered from circumstance and circumstantial evidence. Ronald Cotton and Jennifer Thompson are these two people. This story is about the way circumstantial evidence convicts and the way DNA exonerates.

Ronald Cotton and Jennifer Thompson are living the ultimate human story. It is one of error, recognizing it and being redeemed. Ronald Cotton and Jennifer Thompson were living in Piedmont North Carolina during the crime. Anyone who has lived there in the past twenty years knows their names, but probably not their entire story.

In 1984, Jennifer Thompson was 22 when a man broke into her house and raped her. As the man assaulted her, she studied and memorized his face, as well as his voice, and everything she could about him. Jennifer’s intention was to survive, and when the assault was over, she wanted to put him in prison for the rest of his life for what he did to her.

After Jennifer was treated for her injuries she helped the police draw a composite sketch of the man who raped her.

The Police Department of Alamance County had never seen a victim so composed, so determined and so sure. Just a few hours after her horrifying ordeal, after the emotionless doctor swabbed her vagina for semen samples at the hospital, Jennifer sat down at the police station with Detective Mike Gauldin. “The first comment I remember her making was that, “I’m going to get this guy that did this to me.” She said, “I took the time to look at him. I will be able to identify him if I’m given an opportunity,” Gauldin remembered her saying (Hansen, 2001). She began combing through photos, trying to help come up with a composite of her rapist. The sketch went out, and tips started pouring in. One of those tips was about Ronald Cotton. Three days after the rape, Detective Gauldin called Jennifer in to the police station to do a photo lineup.

Detective Gauldin lay six photos down on the table. The Detective said that Jennifer did not immediately identify a photo from the photo lineup. She took her time and studied each picture carefully. “I can remember almost feeling like I was at an SAT test. You know, where you start narrowing down your choices. You can discount A and B,” Jennifer said. She picked out Ronald Cotton’s photo. Cotton heard the news from his mother’s boyfriend. He told me, “Ron, the police are looking for you.” And I said, “For what?” And he told me, “For rape.” And I said, “I haven’t committed such a crime like that,” Cotton said (Finkelstein, 2009). Ronald Cotton gave Detective Gauldin a very detailed account of where he was, and who he was with that night. As it turned out the statement that Ronald Cotton had given to the Detective was false. He later realized that he had gotten his weekends mixed up. By this point it was too late.

His honest mistake gave them more reason to think that he was lying, and if he was lying about his whereabouts on the night of the rape, what else was he lying about? The day he went back to the police station to clear his name, was August 1, 1984. He did not get the chance. He was arrested. Ronald Cotton was not going to get to leave. He was getting locked up, and days later he was put in a physical lineup. “I’m number five,” Cotton remembered. “I was very scared, nervous. I was so nervous, I was trembling. I felt my body just shaking” (Finkelstein, 2009). A week later, Jennifer sat across a table from six men that were holding numbered cards. She picked No. 5. And with the words, “That’s my rapist, Detective Gauldin,” she changed another’s existence as well as her own forever.

On August 1, 1984, Ronald Cotton was arrested for the rape that had been committed against Jennifer Thompson. In a week-long trial, the jury heard about Cotton’s faulty alibi, his clothing that matched Thompson description, and a piece of foam found on her floor that seemed to come from one of his shoes. And most powerful, they had heard from Jennifer Thompson. In court, when she was asked if she recognized her rapist, she had named Ronald Cotton. “She called my name, pointed a finger. And that’s all, that’s all it takes, it seemed like,” Cotton said, “It felt like someone pushing a knife through me” (Hansen, 2001). Her testimony was extremely powerful. Even Ronald Cotton could feel the jury sympathize with her. He himself even sympathized for her. In silent terror, he watched as the system labeled him a rapist. He was only 22 years old, and the world that he had foreseen and dreamed about, all his plans were over now for a crime he did not commit.

The Prosecutor’s evidence at trial was all circumstantial evidence; however they had an eyewitness, Jennifer Thompson. The Defense Team had Ronald Cotton’s alibi, which was supported by family members. They tried to allow the jury to hear the evidence about the second rape victim that night, but the jury was not allowed to hear that evidence, or to hear that the second victim failed to pick Cotton out of photos that the police had showed to her, as well as the police lineup. The prosecution based its case on several points and used circumstantial evidence to obtain their conviction. These included; photo identification by one of the victims, police lineup identification made by one of the victims, a flashlight in Cotton’s home resembled the one used by the assailant and rubber from Cotton’s tennis shoe was consistent with rubber found at one of the crime scenes. “It took the jury just 40 minutes to reach a verdict: guilty on all counts.

“He was sentenced to life and 50 years. That was when Jennifer Thompson realized the justice system worked. Ronald Cotton was handcuffed, shackled, and taken to North Carolina’s Central Prison. He was just 22 years old. “You know they say grown men don’t cry, but it’s a lie you know. I grabbed my pillow many times and hugged it, wishing I was hugging my mom, my dad, sister, brother. Wish it didn’t have to be this way,” said Ronald Cotton (Finkelstein, 2009). On Jan. 17, 1985, Ronald Cotton was sentenced to life in prison. Ronald Cotton was convicted by a jury of his peers of one count of rape and one count of burglary. As Ronald Cotton was lead off to prison he said, “I say the truth will come to light and the Lord knows I am an innocent man. Someday, somewhere, the truth is going to come out in my case.” While he was in prison, Cotton spent his days and nights writing letters to lawyers, newspapers, and to anyone who would listen to him.

He would do anything to get a new trial. Ronald Cotton tried to believe what his father kept telling him – which was, “that someday justice would prevail”. Then it happened. One day as he watched a new inmate being brought in, he had a strange feeling come over him. He wanted to know more about him, who he was, where he came from, so Cotton approached him. “I said, ‘Excuse me. You look familiar. Where are you from?” He told Cotton, “I’m from Burlington.” Cotton told him, “I am too.” I told him that, “You kind of resembling the drawing of a suspect in a crime in which I’m falsely imprisoned for. Did you commit this crime?” And he told me, “no, I did not,” remembers Cotton (Finkelstein, 2009). Cotton understood immediately why he felt the way he did upon seeing the man for the first time.

He thought of the composite drawing when he saw the inmate. The inmate’s name was Bobby Poole, and he was serving consecutive life sentences for a series of brutal rapes. He also started working in the prison kitchen too. “The stewards were calling me Poole instead of Cotton,” Cotton said. People were constantly mistaking the two men for each other. During many of the years he spent in prison, Cotton actually knew who the real rapist was. The two bore a striking physical resemblance to one another, and to the police sketch of Thompson’s attacker. While in prison a fellow inmate heard Poole going around bragging to other inmates that Cotton was doing some of his time for a rape that he had committed. Eventually an inmate told Cotton that he’d heard Bobby Poole admit to raping Jennifer Thompson and the other woman that night. Ronald Cotton was in prison for this rape, a rape that he was convicted of, and the rape that sentenced him to life plus fifty years, a rape that he did not commit.

Ronald Cotton was full of rage. He was angry. Cotton hated Poole. He decided to make a blade out of a piece of metal. He was going to kill him. Cotton told his dad of his plans and Cotton’s father begged him not to. “Put your faith in God,” his father said. “If you kill Bobby Poole, then you really do belong behind these bars” (Finkelstein, 2009).So Cotton eventually threw his blade away and his plans to kill Bobby Poole. Cotton’s attorney filed an appeal. On appeal, the North Carolina Supreme Court overturned Cotton’s 1985 conviction because the second victim had picked another man out of the lineup. The trial court had not allowed this evidence to be heard by the jury. An appeals court had ruled in Cotton’s favor stating that evidence relating to the second victim should have been allowed in the first trial. Ronald Cotton had won himself a new trial, and his heart filled with hope. The new trial began in November 1987.

Ronald Cotton was retried, this time for both rapes and burglaries, because the second victim had decided that now Cotton was her assailant. The witnesses would get a look at Bobby Poole, who was subpoenaed by Cotton’s lawyer. They would hear the evidence from prison informants, about him admitting to these two crimes. The informants would tell their compelling stories about the rapes that they had heard Poole so proudly boast about, the story that the public did not know. They would tell the story that the real rapist told them. Things the rapist would only have known. Cotton was excited, even confident, the trial began to look as though it was going his way. Finally, Cotton thought, he would be set free, he would be exonerated, and finally everyone was going to see the truth. He was not the rapist. However he had forgotten the power of Jennifer Thompson. Back on the stand, Jennifer Thompson was as confident as ever. She looked directly at Poole and then she looked directly at Cotton.

He was fifteen feet away from her and he could still feel the hatred in her heart that she had for him. Ronald Cotton is the man who raped me, she told the jury. It was not Bobby Poole. The Prosecution and defense asked her, Are you sure? And confidently she said, Yes, I’m sure. The second victim was less convincing, but she also pointed to him, too. Cotton’s lawyers called Bobby Poole to the stand with Thompson sitting right there. It was the moment Cotton had been hoping for. They tried to trigger her memory, by allowing her to see him up close, by allowing her to hear his voice. It was Cottons last hope, but nothing; she was too convinced that Cotton had raped her. So they tried to get him to break, but he did not. He denied the rapes and with that he sealed Ronald Cotton’s fate. An innocent man was living inside the shell of a convicted rapist. It was all over for Cotton. Cotton knew it; he knew that he would be convicted. The court fell silent as Ronald Cotton was sentenced again.

He was convicted of both rapes and two counts of burglary. This time an Alamance County Superior Court sentenced Cotton to two life sentences plus fifty-four years. Ronald Cotton was convicted twice by eyewitness testimony. Seven more years went by, and then everyone in Central Prison was riveted by a big news story: the trial of O.J. Simpson. Cotton’s big break came in 1995 while he was watching the O.J. Simpson trial on television. “I would get my radio and put my earplugs in, and go outside, and sit in a corner,” Cotton said. There, he’d listen to the trial. He was intrigued by something he’d never heard of: DNA. The Attorneys and investigators kept talking about DNA evidence, something he had never heard of before. DNA was still in its infancy when he received his convictions and it was not used in his trial. He got an idea and he contacted his new attorneys. In 1994, the chief appellate defender had requested that two new lawyers take over Cotton’s defense.

Richard Rosen, a professor at the University Of North Carolina School Of Law, agreed to represent Cotton. He wrote to his new attorney, law professor Rich Rosen. Rosen warned him that there probably wasn’t any evidence left to test, and if there was, DNA could cut both ways. “Understand if the DNA comes back and shows that you did this crime, whatever legal issues we have don’t make any bit of difference. You’re going to spend the rest of your life in prison,” Rosen said. Cotton told him “to go with it” (Finkelstein, 2009). The lawyers filed a motion for appropriate relief on the grounds of inadequate appeal counsel. The lawyers also filed a motion for DNA testing that Cotton had been so adamant on getting. DNA testing was granted in October 1994. Packed away on the shelves of the Burlington Police Department was 11-year-old evidence from the two rapes that night.

In the spring of 1995, the Burlington Police Department turned over all evidence that contained the assailant’s semen for DNA testing. Luckily, Burlington Police Detective Gauldin had preserved the biological material in the case, although there was no legal requirement for it to be maintained. Inside one of the rape kits was a fragment of a single sperm with viable DNA. The samples from one of the victim’s was too deteriorated to be conclusive, but the samples from the other victim’s vaginal swab and underwear were subjected to PCR based DNA testing. They were able to recover one tiny sample of sperm from the rape kit that had been used to treat Jennifer Thompson 11 years earlier.

The DNA sample showed no match to Cotton (Celizic, 2009). At the defense’s request, the results were sent to the State Bureau of Investigation’s DNA database, containing the DNA patterns of convicted violent felons in the North Carolina prison system. The state’s database showed a match with the convict who had earlier confessed to the crime. There was enough DNA in the sample to prove Cotton was innocent and Poole was guilty. Then, under questioning by Detective Gauldin, Poole confessed to both rapes. In May 1995 when the official DNA results were reported, the prosecution joined Rosen in a motion to drop all charges. Judge McLelland granted the motion. Cotton was officially cleared of all charges on June 30, 1995 and he was released from prison in July 1995. And just like that, Cotton was a free man. Cotton received a gubernatorial pardon based on innocence the following month. In July 1995, the governor of North Carolina officially pardoned Cotton. Cotton had served 10.5 years of his sentence.

Cotton began the difficult task of beginning a new life. When he was first released from prison 17 years ago, Cotton’s first job was with the DNA Company that conducted the tests that exonerated him. He now works for a company that makes insulation. He’s been married for 15 years and has a 14-year-old daughter. They live in a house paid for with restitution money from the state of North Carolina: $10,000 for each of the 11 years he spent in prison. Jennifer Thompson has also moved on. She is married and has three children. She and Cotton talk often. “He is an amazing human being. He has been a real good teacher for me.” He has helped me so much. Ron has taught me about forgiveness, and healing, and faith” (Hansen, 2001). Ronald Cotton and Jennifer Thompson are now friends.

In fact, they’ve written a book together: “Picking Cotton: A Memoir of Injustice and Redemption.” They sometimes travel together giving talks about the ways memory can deceive us, and they are working to change the way police conduct photo lineups (Connors, et al, 1998). They are also a testament to the power of the human spirit. When DNA evidence ultimately proved that another man committed the rape and Cotton was freed, Thompson was consumed by guilt and shame. However, Cotton talks about in the book that they wrote together, that he had long since forgiven her. “I couldn’t carry on serving my time in the prison system holding grudges and thinking about retaliating against a person that made an honest mistake. I had to proceed on in life regardless,” he told Vieira (Hansen, 2001). When I found out that I was going to be released from prison I was shocked. I almost did not believe it. “It was like a dream come true. I couldn’t believe it,” Cotton told Vieira.

“The warden of the penitentiary called me in his office and told me I was going home tomorrow. I told him, “Please don’t pull my leg, it’s already long enough.” But it was true. I finally went home to be with my family and loved ones. The day I had prayed so hard for had finally come and it was not just in my dreams (Hansen, 2001). To jurors the point of the finger identifying a perpetrator is damaging evidence and mistakes can be made. However, now there is one type of evidence that’s even more persuasive: DNA.

There have been 235 people exonerated by DNA in this country and now a stunning pattern has emerged: more than three quarters of them were sent to prison at least in part because an eyewitness pointed a finger – an eyewitness we now know was wrong (Torneo, 2009). Jennifer Thompson-Cannino and the man she mistakenly put in prison, Ronald Cotton is a tale about pain and redemption — and the tricks that memory can play on people with the best of intentions. “This can happen to anyone. And hopefully it does not happen to them,” Cotton told Vieira (Hansen, 2001). One of the most amazing things that have come out of this injustice is the most unlikely of friendships. He was sentenced to life in prison for a rape he did not commit by a woman who he now calls his friend. The two of them are truly inspiring, and the two of them were both victims.

References
Celizic, M. (2009, March 10). She sent him to jail for rape; now they’re friends. In NBCNEWS.com. Retrieved November 27, 2012, from http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/29613178/ns/today-today_news/t/she-sent-him-jail-rape-now-theyre-friends/ Connors, E., Lundregan, T., Miller, N., & McEwen, T. (1998). Convicted by Juries, Exonerated by Science: Case Studies in the Use of DNA Evidence to Establish Innocence After Trial. Institute for Psychological Therapies. 10. Retrieved November 5, 2012, from http://www.iptforensics.com/journal/volume10/j10_3_6_8.htm Finkelstein, S. (2009, July 12). Eyewitness: How Accurate Is Visual Memory? In CBSNEWS. Retrieved November 28, 2012, from http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/03/06/60minutes/main4848039_page6.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody Hansen, M. (2001). Forensic Science: Scoping out eyewitness Ids (Master’s thesis). April Retrieved November 5, 2012, from http://nersp.osg.ufl.edu/~malavet/evidence/notes/thompson_cotton.htm Thompson-Cannino, J., Cotton, R., & Torneo, E. (2009). Picking Cotton: Our Memoir of Injustice and Redemption. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press. Retrieved November 5, 2012, from http://www.pickingcottonbook.com/splash.html

Picking Cotton by David Graves Essay

Police Organizational Structures Essay

Police Organizational Structures Essay.

Organizations are entities of two or more people who cooperate to accomplish an objective. (Peak, Policing America, 2012). A police department structure must be parallel so that this way its structure can be effective in completing the overall goal of protecting and helping the public. Over the years police agencies have followed a traditional structure but by the passing of years the structure is starting to evolve. Traditional police structure Traditional structures are based upon principles such as “specialization, Hierarchy of offices, rules and regulations, technical competence, official activity demands the full working capacity of the official and the office management following exhaustive stable written rules.

These principles allow the structure to work efficiently. With that said “most police organizations are based on a traditional pyramidal quasi-military structure” (Peak, Policing America, 2012).in where all those principles are present shows an inverse relationship between rank and the number of personnel allows the structure from anyone having too much of authority. this is called the hierarchy rank which allows an organization to have a chain of command.

for example from the base of the pyramid up the base is supervisor then mid-level managers and the top is administrators the higher you are on the pyramid the more responsibility you have.

So in the chain of command the supervisor would report to mid-level managers and the mid-level managers would report to the administrators. Basically this structure in the past a police officer would be hired and would be able to get promoted through political favoritism it didn’t matter if the person was qualified or not because they attained he job through political favoritism. Evolving organizational police structure Organizational police structure has changed over the years as technology is changing, some of the things that have changed or in other words evolved from the traditional police structure is that in efforts to prevent corruptions they have got rid of some rules and policies this also helps to prevent “red tape”.

Now instead of having a centralized organization the evolved structure has been decentralized. This means “Cities were divided into precincts, and precinct-level managers often, in concert with the ward leaders, ran precincts as small-scale departments by decentralization combined with primitive communications and transportation gave police officers substantial discretion in handling their individual beat” (Moore, 1988) basically in the evolved structure the hiring of all personnel was not left to change they look for qualified managers, supervisors and administrators and after they are chosen they recruit qualifying officers. What do these both structures have in common?

Police Organizational Structures Essay

Drug Courts Essay

Drug Courts Essay.

Abstract

In order to understand the importance of drug court programs, it is important to learn what prompted the program. Before the first drug court was established in 1989, the United States has endured three drug epidemics that had profound consequences on the criminal justice system. Drug court programs intends to reduce substance abuse among offenders with addiction by providing treatment to eligible participants. Drug courts are effective in reducing recidivism among offenders after completing the drug court program.

Drug courts are criminal justice programs that are arranged to change substance-abuse offenders from original court proceedings to a more refurbished environment, according to the National Association of Drug Court Professionals (Gallagher, 2012).

Since the formation of the first drug court in 1989, drug courts have become a very important part of the adult and juvenile correction system. The therapeutic court model was also developed during this time, and is now considered a valid component in American Criminal Justice. Drug courts are considered therapeutic because it focuses on substance abuse treatment rather than incarceration (Neal, 2010).

However, in order to apprehend the essences and reason for drug courts, it is important to know the circumstantial evidence and policy behavior that led to the evolution and profound explanation supporting it.

During the late 1800 and 1900s the United States had suffered through three drug epidemics, with serious consequences to the criminal justice system (Roper, 2007). When pharmaceutical companies began promoting products with heroin, cocaine, and codeine as drinks, pain relievers, and cough suppressants, in 1825 it started the first epidemic. Until it became noticeable that opiate addiction was becoming universal, physicians then turned to cocaine; which they believed was a non-addictive cure. Soon after, it was estimated that 250,000 Americans, 1 in 300, were addicted to opiates in 1900, and 200,000 was addicted to cocaine.

By the end of the first epidemic congress had passed the Harrison Narcotics Act of 1914, and other laws that would control the import of opium and products. Not long after, the government also passed ordinance against opium dens and cocaine joints (Roper, 2007), causing President Taft to double his effort a war on drugs. Rehabilitation clinics that were funded publicly was established, however there was very little facts known about addiction or how to treat it. Heroin had become illegal in the United States in 1925, therefore leaving half of the prisoners in the federal penitentiary violators of the narcotic laws.

Between the years 1950 and 1970 the second drug epidemic stretched across the United States. As heroin use trickled from the inner city, into middle class homes, superstars began making music about the pleasure of using marijuana, LSD, and cocaine, establishing a counterculture, towards mainstream society (Roper, 2007). It was then when the federal and state governments reacted with the laws that would prohibit drug distribution possession, and use of any drugs (Roper, 2007). The expansion of law enforcement agencies and drug task forces were formed. 2-to-5 year sentences for first-time offenders, and 5-to-10 years for second-time offenders.

President Eisenhower declared a second war on drugs in 1954, and increased the mandatory minimum sentences for drug possession. During this time there was an increase demand for drugs that fueled the supply, causing European partners to join teams with oriental suppliers of opiates, while South American farmers swamped the United States with cocaine. The Bureau of Drug Abuse Control and The Bureau of Narcotics and Drugs were created and President Nixon declared drug abuse to be the number one domestic concern (Roper, 2007), and created the U.S. Drug Enforcement in 1973.

The last drug epidemic started around 1980 with the reappearance of cocaine as a poplar relaxation drug and a new way to use it by smoking, known as free basing. The growing knowledge about addiction revealed that cocaine was very addictive, especially if it was inhaled. Drug trafficking became a $7 billion business in Florida in 1980. The inflow of alien drug users caused criminal drug activity to expand in Florida (Roper, 2007).

Law enforcement and the Judicial System had all they could take in arresting and putting drug offenders away in Dade County (Roper, 2007). Florida and the court penal systems was unable to handle the overflow of convicted drug offenders. Judges meant to handle criminal offenses became annoyed with sending the same drug offenders to jail over and over. Judges began refusing to cooperate further in drug cases, even deciding to resign from office instead of giving offenders mandatory minimum sentences.

Prosecutors and judges came up with the idea of joining the coercive power of criminal justice system with rehabilitative treatment; which was found to be effective in reducing drug use. The first drug court began in 1989 in Miami, Florida, and as a result, drug courts have grown rapidly. Drug courts were created with the purpose of going above the retributive punishment and focusing on the addiction problem itself (Fulkerson, 2009). Treatment, counseling, and acupuncture, along with educational and vocational programs were offered to offenders. By 1999, drug courts were operating throughout the nation (Roper, 2007).

There is limited eligibility for drug courts. There are only certain groups of drug-using offenders that can partake in drug courts. The reason for these limitations is to ensure that those nonviolent offenders known to be responsive to substance abuse treatment participate (Armstrong, 2003). Every drug court require that offenders have not been charged with violent crime whatsoever. Some drug courts have firm requirements that excludes anyone with a certain amount of prior convictions. Upon entering the drug court program participants is required to attend seven weeks of orientation education. Part of the orientation session is conducted individually, while the rest are conducted in groups (Logan, Williams, Leukefeld & Minton, 2000).

Drug court programs require that participants meet the conditions of the drug court, that include regular drug testing, participation in drug treatment, and regular court appearances (Franco, 2011). The drug court program is voluntary. Those who choose to participate in the program are often required to sign an agreement or contract that requires the agreed-upon terms of participation. Defendants who abide by the courts requirements receive encouragement, while those defendants who do otherwise can be sent to a range of graduated sanctions. Sanctions can include additional drug testing requirements, some incarceration, and more time of participation in the drug court program. Repeatedly violating the courts requirements can result in the removal from the program and sentenced for the offense on post-conviction drug court programs, or put back on the original criminal court docket for trail for the original offense if the drug court program is a deferred prosecution program.

Participants are also required to adhere to certain rules while participating in the drug court program. Drug courts participants are required to obtain and maintain a full-time job throughout the program, unless they are a full-time student, or told by a doctor that they are physically or mentally unfit for full-time employment. If participants are unable to find jobs on their own, services are provided by the drug court staff to assist them (Logan, Williams, Leukefeld & Minton, 2000). Those participants with less than a high school degree or GED and those without jobs or unable to work are required to work on enhancing their educational skills. Participants are also required to dwell in or find housing approved by the court. This type of living space can create soberness efforts, because it is often hard for participants to remain in their old using context. They are encourage to reduce the contact with old friends, places, and habits (Logan, Williams, Leukefeld & Minton, 2000).

Judges are very involved in monitoring participant progress. Participants are required to appear frequently at status hearings before the judge (Franco, 2011). Participants are required to enter substance- abuse treatment where they will submit their urine test, so the court can determine that they are staying away from drug use. Treatment provided in drug court programs can be a flexible length, and participation requirements can run between 8 to 16 months long. Substance abuse treatment consist of a number of services for example, detoxification, outpatient substance-abuse treatment, going to support group meetings such as Alcoholics Anonymous or Narcotics Anonymous, and inpatient drug treatment. Drug court programs make sure participants are regularly going to treatment and receiving reports from treatment providers about participants’ progress. Participants who miss court hearings, fail to go to treatments, have an enormous numbers of positive urine test, or are arrested while participating in the drug court program, sanctions can be imposed by the judge.

Drug courts are believed to affect an offender’s drug use and criminal behavior through the actions and impact of the court and participation of the offender in authorized drug and alcohol abuse treatment (Wilson, Mitchell, & Mackenzie, 2006). Those offenders involved in drug use are managed in a traditional way by the criminal justice system and are referred to drug treatment. Treatment compliance seems to be a major problem with this population; which hinders successful outcomes of the drug court program. Drug court structure was designed to use the power of the judge to address the problem.

The issue within the drug court treatment is whether forcing someone with a substance-abuse problem into treatment will really help them. Some argue that the only way the treatment will be effective is if the abusers enter the treatment at their own free will (Wilson, Mitchell, & Mackenzie, 2006). The empirical evidence has failed to support this argument, for example Farabee review of evidence on effectiveness showed that allowing the criminal justice system to force drug abusers into treatment does not undermine the drug court program effectiveness (Wilson, Mitchell, & Mackenzie, 2006). The program seeks to protect what is at best interest of the offender.

Drug courts programs also have effects on cost. There have been a few in depth studies done on the long-term costs and the help of drug courts that have been conducted. Some of the reason is because it has been hard to obtain the costs and costs offsets in a normal drug court environment based on local budgets. Even though some cost studies have shown positive cost benefits, there is little information on whether or not it benefits the local budgets such as, the court system, district attorney, or the sheriff (Carey & Finigan, 2004). Every time a participant has contact with the program a transaction occurs. When a participant appears in court, has a drug test done, have public defender time, use court facilities money is being used. Drug courts affect cost because any criminal justice related incurred by the drug court program can directly affect a citizen, either by tax-related reasons, or the outcome of being a victim of a crime caused by a substance abuser (Carey & Finigan, 2004).

Although some state drug courts differ from one jurisdiction to another when it relates to the structure, scope, and target populations; drug courts all have the same primary goals. Drug courts primary goals are to reduce recidivism, incarceration, and substance-abuse among participants, also to rehabilitate participants so it can improve their chances of successfully re-entering society by offering social services like employment, job training, education, and housing assistance (Franco, 2011). Drug courts are known to be one of the most reliable and effective strategies for reducing recidivism and criminal activity among participants in the drug court program, also providing a replacement for incarceration.

There were times when critics argued that drug courts might not reduce recidivism or relapse among offenders who abuse drugs any more than traditional interventions such as, incarceration, parole, or probation. There have been numerous program evaluations conducted over the years, where the findings were varied by the drug courts themselves. It is hard to determine if drug courts do reduce recidivism, criminal victimization and cost related to criminal adjudication and incarceration. Drug courts do not normally monitor the sobriety of the participants after completing the program, therefore it is hard to determine the long-term effects of drug courts on recidivism, or any other factors that highlight criminal offending (Franco, 2011).

Drug courts were evaluated based on three types of analyses. The process of operation was the first analyses, which examined and described the details of the drug court program and whether or not they were being implemented. For example, the number of people participating, referrals to treatment, and those graduating from the drug court program (Franco, 2011). The second analyses was cost-savings estimates, this compared the cost of drug courts services with the skipped costs of adjudication, incarceration, and criminal victimizations (Franco, 2011). Impact evaluation, the third analyses compared the effectiveness and effect of drug court programs on lives of participants with the outcome of offenders who went through the traditional courtroom process, by looking at factors such as recidivism, substance-abuse, and employment (Franco, 2011).

To define the effectiveness of drug courts on recidivism, outcomes of two different treatment based drug programs, which included a 30-month follow up session. The study examined the outcomes of drug court graduates and those participants who did not graduate (Wilson, Eggers, Mitchell, & Mackenzie, 2012). This would determine if the involvement in drug court treatment would affect the number of arrest, duration to arrest, or the types of crimes committed during the first follow-up period.

It has been found that those who participate in drug court programs have lower recidivism rates than those who do not participate (Wilson, Eggers, Mitchell, & Mackenzie, 2012). However, it does vary depending on the type of drug court; for example, adult drug courts, juvenile drug courts, or drug courts for DWIs. Adult drug courts are found to be more effective in reducing recidivism, whereas juvenile drug courts have small effects in reducing recidivism because juveniles offer services to high-risk offenders and adult drug courts excludes those types of offenders (Wilson, Eggers, Mitchell, & Mackenzie, 2012). It is also found that drug courts with fewer harsh populations are more effective in reducing recidivism. Programs that only allowed non-violent offenders to participate in the program had larger chances of reducing recidivism (Wilson, Eggers, Mitchell, & Mackenzie, 2012).

According to the analyses of clients arrest rates who participated in the drug court program, found that participating in the program greatly reduced criminal behavior among offenders. Criminal behavior was presented to be much lower for clients who participated, when observation groups were exercised (Spohn, Piper, & Martin, 2001). Evaluations that compared post-program recidivism for those who completed drug courts and observation groups founded much lower recidivism rates. It was also found that the people who participated in drug courts were more likely to obtain employment while participating after graduation (Spohn, Piper, & Martin, 2001). For example, in a Delaware adult drug court, 79% of drug court graduates had jobs full or part-time, in school, or both compared to 62% of those who did not graduate.

Other findings from a bivariate analysis, found that drug court participants were less likely than felony arrestees, however more likely than those forced to participate to be arrested or convicted in a 12-month follow up period (Spohn, Piper, & Martin, 2001). Those participating in drug courts are known to have considerably fewer amounts of arrest than traditional adjudicated offenders. Recidivism after drug court programs can also be determined by the offenders’ age, gender, and prior criminal record. Older offenders who participated in drug court programs are less likely than young participants to be rearrested for either misdemeanor of felony. However, females are less likely than males to be rearrested (Spohn, Piper, & Martin, 2001).

Drug courts also show effectiveness in cost savings. Drug courts happen to bring about savings in jail cost, particularly for pretrial detention (Steven, 1998). It was found that drug courts saves money in probation supervision, police overtime, and many other criminal justice system costs. There has been a substantial long-term cost savings because of the drug court programs (Steven, 1998).

Drug court programs could be more effective if the program targeted more high-risk offenders to have better outcomes for reducing recidivism. Society expects high-risk offenders to commit crime, therefore targeting those high-risk offenders with substance abuse problems might result in better results than low-risk offenders. Drug courts should also being utilizing practices like relapse prevention treatment that would help offender after drug treatment in situations where they might consider using again.

Drug court programs could be more effective if they did not have such a strict eligibility requirements. Although requirements differ in some drug courts, most require that participants have no serious prior convictions, perhaps reducing some of the requirements and welcoming all types of offenders could increase the effectiveness of recidivism rates after completing the drug court program.

Another study suggest that congress should consider coming up with a support system of accreditation for drug courts (Franco, 2010). “Accreditation is often used to ensure the quality of services provided by a wide range of institutions” (Franco, 2010). Having accreditation makes sure that rules, procedures, content, and services are being met by the participants. This would help make drug courts more effective because it will ensure that participants are getting the proper drug treatment they need to complete the program. Accreditation can also encourage the drug court program to improve their services if needed.

In conclusion, drug court programs have evolved since its first drug court in 1989. As of today drug courts are implemented in more than 275 jurisdictions in the United States. Drug courts are put into place to provide treatment to offenders who have some kind of substance abuse problem (Franco, 2010). Drug courts have become very important to the adult and juvenile correction system. Drug courts have shown to be very effective in reducing recidivism rates among offenders who participate in the program, they have also shown to reduce cost in other criminal justice agencies.

References

Armstrong, A. (2003, Fall 2003). . DRUG COURTS AND THE DE FACTO LEGALIZATION OF DRUG USE FOR PARTICIPANTS IN RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT FACILITIES. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 133-168. Carey, S., & Finigan, M. (2004). A Detailed Cost Analysis in a Mature Drug Court Setting: A Cost-Benefit Evaluation of the Multnomah County Drug Court. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 315-338. Franco, C. (2010). DRUG COURTS: BACKGROUND, EFFECTIVENESS AND POLICY. Journal Of Current Issues In Crime, Law & Law
Enforcement, 19-50. Fulkerson, A. (2009). The drug treatment court as a form of restorative justice. Contemporary Justice Review, 353-267. Gallagher, J. R. (2012). A Policy Analysis Framework for Drug Courts. Southwest Journal Of Criminal Justice, 2-16. Logan , T., Williams, K., Leukefeld, C., & Minton, L. (2000). A Drug Court Process Evaluation: Methodology and Findings. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 369-394. Mitchell, O., Eggers, A., Wilson, D., & Mackenzie, D. (2012). Assessing the effectiveness of drug courts on recidivism: A meta-analytic review of traditional and non-traditional drug courts. 60-71. Neal, R. (2010). The state of the drug court: A systematic and critical analysis of drug court evaluations. 6. Roper, G. F. (2007). Introduction to drug courts.

Spohn, C., Piper, R., & Martin, T. (2001). Drug courts and recidivism: The results of an evaluation using two comparison groups and multiple indicators of recidivism. 149-176. Steven, B. (1998). Research on drug courts: a critical review. 1-26. Wilson, D., Mitchell, O., & MacKenzie, D. (2006). A systematic review of. Journal Of Experimental Criminology, 459-487.

Drug Courts Essay

Writing Proficiency Exam Paper Essay

Writing Proficiency Exam Paper Essay.

Many factors can cause stress in our communities. These factors range from the result of violence in schools to the proliferation of social media tools, such as Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter. Stress affects people in different ways. Some ways can drive a community apart while others can bring them together. This paper will provide evidence to show it is possible for communities to take action, adapt to changes in positive ways and reduce stress.

Taking Action

Action can take many forms.

Action can be physical, verbal, or silent. In recent years, protesters took to the streets in opposition to the government bailout of Wall Street. The protesters assumed the name of the 99 Percent. The 99 Percent marched through the streets shouting down the Wall Street bankers, but their main weapon was not the megaphone, it was ‘silent occupation.’ Soon, this action became known as Occupy Wall Street. The goal of the Occupy movement was to show the wealthy bankers that they were not going to get away with their crimes and get a free handout from the taxpayers.

As a result, the politicians on Capitol Hill listened and began to implement a wider set of reforms and consumer protections.

Communities can accomplish similar changes.

One of those ways is to leverage current forms of technology. Social media tools like Twitter have the power to spread news quickly. Community groups can use Twitter to organize grass-root actions, such as marches, and to keep members connected by quickly sending updates and detailed meeting notes instantly. Recently, a local community organized an effort to force their local government to reinstate a local sheriff who was fired due to their sexual orientation. The local movement shamed the city council and the sheriff was rehired within weeks.

Adapt to Changes in Positive Ways

It is possible for communities to adapt to stressors in positive ways. In my opinion, a person has the power to choose how they want to react to certain stimulus. So, if an individual has this power, why not a community? For example, if someone were to spit on the local mayor, this technically constitutes an assault. The mayor could call the sheriff and have the man arrested and jailed; however, the mayor could first try to talk with the individual to come to an understanding of the person’s issues. Afterwards, the mayor should have him arrested; otherwise, others may be motivated to follow suit with the spatter. The mayor demonstrated an act of compassion by choosing to talk and mostly likely earned a few points with the constituents. My point is that if one person can adapt positively to factors of stress, a community can choose to take action in positive ways as well.

Reducing Stress

Turning negative stress into a positive outcome can be challenging but not impossible. Communities can be very complex. One reason is that communities are comprised of many individuals, each with their own thoughts, values, and ethics. If an act of violence were to take place at a local school campus, some individuals might choose to hide and wait it out. However, others may believe the best action is to fight fire with fire and take the to the streets like vigilantes.

In my opinion, both of these reactions will lead to a great amount of stress because they are reactions based upon fear. A better way to react would be to put trust in the local authorities. The local authorities are better trained to handle crises. Another way to avoid or reduce stress would be to shut off the television or computer. Turning off these devices would minimize the stress of constant news updates that would only serve elevate fear.

Conclusion

In closing, this paper set out to address the issues communities face when faced with negative factors. School violence and stress caused by social media are common issues dealt with across the country. How we choose to react to these issues can affect our local communities for the good or in bad ways. Parents could decide to pull their children out of school. Angry fathers could act out violently and take matters into their own hands. Constructive alternatives are available.

The local police department can invest in better infrastructure and communications networks. They can also improve communication with the surrounding communities to build confidence in their ability to respond during emergencies. Communities can build a stronger bond by choosing to look at stressful factors in positive ways and increase their understanding of how they can prepare and respond during periods of high stress.

Writing Proficiency Exam Paper Essay

Police Abuse Essay

Police Abuse Essay.

Police brutality is the excessive, unreasonable use of force against citizens, suspects, and offenders. A study showed that most citizens complained against police officers because of the use of profanity and abusive language towards them, the use of commands to move on or get home, stopping and questioning people on the street or searching them and their cars without probable cause, the use of threats to use force if not obeyed, prodding with a nightstick or approaching with a pistol, and actual use of physical force or violence itself for no reason at all.

Police brutality causes a lack of communication between minority groups and the police department and a lack of trust because of previous run-ins with brutality.

In some cases police brutality runs over into an officer’s personal life as well. There have been several cases where an officer is arrested due to domestic violence and leads to an investigation of their work life. Most of the time there are cover ups, when domestic disputes occur so that the department does not get negative coverage if the incident was to get out, (2002, November).

Ethics are considered a structure for most departments in the United States.

There are several bad apples that get greedy and are cocky at times and think that they cannot be touched if they do wrong. Police departments around the U.S. have several issues with corruption, misconduct, and brutality. Most of the time these issues are covered up so that, these officers do not give the departments bad names and people do not trust them and they, are having more crime on their hands instead of defeating the crime. In recent years, police actions, particularly police abuse has come into view of a wide, public and critical eye. While citizens worry about protecting themselves from criminals, it has now been shown that they must also keep a watchful eye on those who are supposed to protect and serve.

This paper will discuss the types of police abuse prevalent today, including the use of firearms and recovery of private information. I will also discuss what and how citizens’ rights are taken advantage of by the police. Some measures necessary to protect ourselves from police taking advantage of their positions as law enforcement officers with greater permissive rights than private citizens. All citizens must take affirmative actions from physical brutality, rights violations, and information abuse. Members of the police force are government officials who enforce the law and maintain order. They are engaged in dangerous and stressful occupation that can involve violent situations that must be controlled. In many of these confrontations with the public it may become necessary for the police to administer force in order to take control of the situation.

As unfortunate as it may seem however, police officers are injuring and even killing people through the use of excessive force and brutal treatment. In regard to police abuse, there will be many officers who feel that their job of fighting escalating street crime, gangs, narcotics violations, and other violent crimes is difficult already, to such an extent that worrying about excessive policy for abuse behavior will only further decrease their ability to fight crime effectively, efficiently, and safely.

This abuse must be monitored so that police do not forget who they are serving; not themselves, but the public. This means that even the criminals, who are a part of the public, have certain rights, accurately identified as civil rights. One of the main police abuse problems is physical brutality. I think that there should be some kind of written policy that would restrict physical force to the narrowest possible range of specific situations. For example, there should be limitations on the use of hand to hand combat, batons, mace, stun guns and firearms.

However, limiting policies actions will bring much debate, especially from police officers and administrators themselves. Many feel that their firepower is already too weak to battle the weapons that criminals have out on the streets, thus limiting their legality of gun use will not only endanger them, but the innocent bystanders who must endure the hierarchy gun power creates in the benefit of criminals. In simple terms, corruption in policing is usually viewed as the misuse of authority by a police officer acting to fulfill personal needs or wants. For a corrupt act to occur, three distinct elements of police corruption must be present simultaneously: Misuse of authority, Misuse of official capacity, Misuse of personal attainment, (Kornblum 1976: p 71).

It has been said that power inevitably leads to corruption, and it is yet to be recognized that , while there is no reason to suppose that policemen as individuals are any less fallible than other members of society, people are often shocked and outraged when policemen are exposed to violating the law. Not only should officers use brutality in very limited situations, I think that it would help requiring officers to file a written report after any use of physical force, regardless of how seemingly insignificant. Although, if every incidence of police abuse was requested to be reported, how many actually would be? Maybe only those serious enough, as depicted in new guidelines, would make it, leaving some space for officers to exert pressure without crossing serious and abusive policy. Another good tactic to control police brutality is to establish a system to identify officers who have been involved in an inordinate number of incidents that include the inappropriate use of physical force.

The incidents should then be investigated. For those offices who are frequently involved in unnecessary police brutality, they should be charged, disciplined, re-trained, and offered counseling. If such treatment proves ineffective, officers who violate abuse standards should be brought up on review before an administrative board made up of citizens and police officials. Officers will most likely ask, “Is identifying abusive officers a form of prejudice? The police officer is there to serve and protect the public who pays his or her salary. The officer should then be subject to any investigations into his or her abusive actions on the job.

Yet even if internal policy and external government supervision is successful, it is difficult to say how the ethics of police officers will affect abuse policy as they are based on personal background and upbringing that have little to do with the issue at hand. While there are specific solutions to brutality and rights abuse, there are also some general solutions that could be implemented before the problems even arise. For example, there should be changes in police officer training. Some communities have demanded their officers receive higher education. However, there is no proof that well-educated officers rely less on abuse and more on departmentally sound investigation techniques.

The length of training of police personnel should be increased, as has been the recent trend throughout the years. “The average length of police academy programs has more than doubled, from about 300, to over 600 hours; in some cities, 900 up to even 1200 hours has become the new rule.” (Silverman 1999: p 124) As the time devoted to training has increased, the institutions should also stress the importance of the growing trends in criminal activity so that they are prepared to deal with them. These include such areas as race relations, domestic violence, handling the mentally ill, and so on.

This will, in turn, enable operations run more smoothly, hopefully avoiding police abuse problems in the future. Methods must be implemented which effectively deal with police who tend to cross the line, from simple situations to serious firearm use or prejudice. Some of the solutions, particularly the policy changes, will be met with controversy and will be difficult to implement. Keeping track of police actions is the next step in self-protection. There have been thousands of reported incidents of police misconduct in the countless cities throughout the nation, and probably thousands more that transpire without any mention. Law enforcement officers in the United States have been granted powerful authority to assist them in serving and protecting the people of this country.

Many of them use their authority to uphold their duties with honor and integrity. However, the abuses of these powers are taking place with more and more frequency. The police scandals that have surfaced within the past decade have been multiplying. If drastic measures are not taken to restore the integrity of the United States Law Enforcement, chaos will permeate throughout the nation. As citizens begin to lose their trust for law enforcement, they will gradually lose their trust in the “system”.

While the threat of a world war has diminished, the violence on the streets across America has increased at a dramatic rate. Police are forced to face this violence and are sometimes caught up in the same violent and abusive cycle whole trying to fight it. Citizens realize that there are limits as to what a police officer can do. To make society a safe place for both citizens and officers, it is imperative that they work together for a comprehensive checks and balances system.

The United States Constitution guarantees certain rights for everyone, and is the very backbone of this country. If these rights are to be ignored, either through permissive laws enacted by law enforcement against private citizens, or through a lack of maintenance of existing protective legislation, private citizens; which means the entire country, will become paralyzed. Because of this, the opportunity and freedom which this country is built on must be enforced, and those charged with doing so must not abuse their power.

References

(2002, December) Police Corruption, http://www.iejs.com/policing word-slash-word

police_corruption.htm

(2002, November) Addressing police misconduct, http://www.usdoj.gov

(2002, November) Police brutality: the cop crimes homepage for law enforcement and government

corruption, http://www.copcrimes.comword-slashwordhomepage.htm

Alpert, Geoffrey P., Dunham Roger G. Police Use of Deadly Force. Washington D.C.: Police

Executive Research Forum, 1995.

Chevigny, Paul. Police Power. Toronto: Random House, 1994.

Cohen, Henry. Brutal Justice. New York: John Jay Press, 1980.

Kornblum, Alan N. The Moral Hazards. New York: D.C. Heath, 1976.

Silverman, Eli B. NYPD Battles Crime. Boston: Northeastern Univ. Press, 1999.

Police Abuse Essay