Category: Criminal Justice

The purpose of this paper is to get a better understanding of issues related to wrongful convictions. Peer-reviewed articles and books on this subject matter will be reviewed and analyzed. The most attention is devoted to such aspects as preventive measures. Suggestions that could help to resolve current problems are also provided.

Individual Project

Introduction

It is imperative to mention that the prominence of wrongful convictions in a topic that is frequently discussed by scholars and has led to many disagreements. Many investigators and judges were incompetent in some situation in the past, and it has caused many tragedies. The judicial system in the United States is focused on the improvement of current approaches because its weaknesses are recognized.

Discussion

One of the recent studies suggests that close to 4,1 percents of individuals sentenced to death are innocent (Gross, O’Brien B., Hu, & Kennedy, 2014). The real numbers cannot be known, and it is nearly impossible to take all of the factors into account, but such figure is statistically significant and should not be overlooked. Another research suggests that the number of such incidents is approximately ten thousand each year in the U.S. (Huff & Killias, 2010). It is possible to argue with the instruments utilized to conduct a study, but such results also should be acknowledged. The situation becomes particularly problematic when death penalties are involved, and it is an enormous problem from the perspective of ethics. Moreover, public’s trust in the judicial system is also affected. Results of one of the studies indicate that an enormous percentage of participants believe that the system needs to be reformed (Zalman, Larson, & Smith, 2012).

The complaints are justified because some of the cases are truly shocking, and the lack of competence demonstrated is quite worrying. The primary issue that should not be overlooked is that investigators are not punished in case of misconduct. Moreover, their rewards are dependent on the number of cases that they manage to solve, and convictions also play a vital role (Jones, 2012). Therefore, this leads to a particular kind of behavior. Also, many individuals are forced to plead guilty because the punishment that they have to deal with if they lose a trial is enormous. Eyewitness identification procedure needs to be altered because it has many weaknesses. Some complications occur during a custodial interrogation, and an individual may make inappropriate claims when being restrained. Such aspects as communication barriers should be respected, and every person should be provided with necessary information regarding their rights. Background information collected by offender processing units also can be vital, and must be analyzed.

Innocence Protection Act of 2011 is crucial, and its primary objective is to ensure that innocent people are not affected. The introduction of new technologies played a vital role, and the use of DNA testing has improved the accuracy of such courts significantly (Siegel & Worrall, 2012). The access to this technique is vital because it may help to produce new evidence that could have an impact on the case. The presumption of innocence is also paramount and protects individuals that did not commit the crime (Schmalleger, 2012). Investigators are trying to determine if a person’s behavior is reasonable. A rational choice theory is often applied, and it is focused on potential benefits that could have motivated an offender. Social learning approach is also appropriate, and associated people should be interviewed (Akers, 2013). However, the current system needs to be improved, and various perspectives should be acknowledged. For instance, every citizen may request additional testing if he or she believes that he was unfairly prosecuted. Communication patterns between criminal justice institutions should be improved. A court system is the most problematic component that needs to be revised because it is responsible for most of the decisions. Barriers that could prevent appeals also should be eliminated, and it is complicated because of correctional agencies that treat views all individuals that entered the facilities as guilty. Competence levels of attorneys should be assessed quite often to ensure that their behavior is appropriate, and they are aware of latest policies. A person that has proved his or her innocence should go through an acquittal. Charges must be dismissed without any delay, and compensations should be provided.

It is suggested that torture is the primary method utilized to get confessions in China, and this situation is unacceptable. Several provisions were quite helpful, but other alterations are also required (Jiahong, 2014). The situation in Canada is also quite problematic because of the lack of consistency across all the regions. One of the aspects that should be highlighted is that the investigation of related claims is only conducted by the government, and it would be reasonable to involve an independent agency. A twenty percent rate suggested by one of the studies is not acceptable, and much more attention should be devoted to accuracy (Grossman & Roberts, 2011). The problem also affects the United Kingdom, and it is not surprising because appropriate measures are not taken in some cases. For instance, one of the studies suggests that Criminal Case Review Commission did not use DNA testing on numerous occasions to minimize the expenses. The authors suggest that the justice system should utilize all available techniques to guarantee the reliability of convictions (Naughton & Tan, 2010).

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is possible to state that wrongful convictions are problematic across the globe. The primary reason is that some of the techniques are quite outdated, and policymakers are reluctant to make significant changes because the system has been established over many years. However, it is entirely possible that the number of such cases is going to reduce in the future if appropriate policies are introduced and modern technologies are utilized.

References

Akers, R. L. (2013). Criminological theories: Introduction and evaluation (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.

Gross, S. R., O’Brien B., Hu, C., & Kennedy, E. H. (2014). Rate of false conviction of criminal defendants who are sentenced to death. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(20), 7230-7235.

Grossman, M. G., & Roberts, J. V. (2011). Criminal Justice in Canada: A Reader (4th ed.). Toronto, CA: Nelson Education.

Huff, C. R., & Killias, M. (2010). Wrongful conviction: International perspectives on miscarriages of justice. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

Jiahong, H. (2014). Wrongful convictions and exclusionary rules in China. Frontiers of Law in China, 9(3), 490-505.

Jones, J. A. (2012). Wrongful conviction in the American judicial process: History, scope, and analysis. Student Pulse, 4(8), 1-3.

Naughton, M., & Tan, G. (2010). The Right to Access DNA Testing by Alleged Innocent Victims of Wrongful Convictions in the United Kingdom? The International Journal of Evidence & Proof, 14(4), 326-345.

Schmalleger, F. J. (2012). Criminal justice today (12th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson Education.

Siegel, L. J., & Worrall, J. L. (2012). Essentials of criminal justice (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.

Zalman, M., Larson, M., & Smith, B. (2012). Citizens’ attitudes toward wrongful convictions. Criminal Justice Review, 37(1), 51-69.

Criminal justice system reforms and other legal measures in the US have resulted in the creation of programs and specific laws that are fundamental to the improvement of child protection. This essay selects the enactment of Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act and International Parental Child Kidnapping Act from the study by Karmen (2016) and searches for evidence of the success of the provided measures to assist in the location of missing children.

The enactment of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act mandates that the FBI have to enter information regarding a missing or kidnapped child in the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) records in less than two hours after receiving notification from the police. In the majority of states, the adoption of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act improved the registries greatly (Lytle, 2015). Since its enactment, it has demonstrated enhancement of child protection as many criminals of child sexual assault have been prosecuted under its directives thus resulting in the reduction of such acts. The application of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act demands every person found guilty of any sexually related offense to seek registration as a sex criminal for later posting on the internet where everyone can see. This has caused one person to be sentenced to life imprisonment for failing to register and taking advantage of his being homeless and lacking a constant physical address.

Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act offers effective measures that help in finding missing children through such things as the establishment of a countrywide database that entails collection of DNA evidence and record for easy tracking of offenders. The use of Global Positioning System expertise could also result in the easy tracing of criminals. The provision of law enforcement officers with sufficient resources under the Act enables them to find criminals of offenses against children and prosecute them successfully. Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act increased the compulsory minimum imprisonment term to 25 years for the offense of abducting a child and 30 years for sexual assault (Lytle, 2015). These measures prevent would-be criminals from engaging in such acts and ensure justice for victims.

The International Parental Child Kidnapping Act is useful in enhancing child protection and offering successful measures to help in finding missing children (Karmen, 2016). It is vital to assist child victims of parental kidnapping as they could be at a high risk of missing school and developing lasting psychological challenges such as mood changes, sleep disorder, violent conduct, eating problems, and nervousness to mention a few. If the child victims of parental kidnapping grow into adulthood and do not find valuable help, they could struggle with such things as identity, interrelations, and family matters.

In an effort of ensuring child protection, the International Parental Child Kidnapping Act outlaws cases of one parent removing their children from the US or keeping them in other nations with the aim of hindering the custodial rights of the other parent. For instance, a couple could have a daughter in the US and after a marital dispute, the mother moves with the child to a different nation with the purpose of keeping her away from the father with no intention of ever returning. The Act offers successful measures of locating kidnapped children and convicting the offenders as a way of preventing such actions (Karmen, 2016). Under the Act, any parent found guilty of such a crime could spend up to three years in prison. Moreover, the return of a kidnapped child to the US is usually reached through negotiation where the United States Department of State works with foreign representatives and law enforcement officers to realize successful outcomes.

References

Karmen, A. (2016). Crime victims: An introduction to victimology (9th ed.). Boston: Cengage Learning.

Lytle, R. (2015). Variation in criminal justice policy-making: An exploratory study using sex offender registration and community notification laws. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 26(3), 211-233.

The Case of Johnson

After her arrest, Johnson is charged with numerous offenses against the Drugs Misuse Act 1986 (Qld), including trafficking, production, possession (drugs, substances, things, suspected property, etc) and permitting the use of place. She is also charged with manufacturing offenses against the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth), the Weapons Act 1990 (Qld) (s50), and against the Criminal Code 1899 (s340(1)(b) serious assault). Shortly after her arrest, she is brought before a court and makes an application for bail.

Johnson knows that the evidence against her in relation to most of the charges is strong. Johnson decides to plead guilty after hearing the prosecution evidence at the committal hearing. Her lawyer negotiates with the prosecution about the exact charges to be included in the indictment and eventually her case is committed to the Supreme Court for arraignment and sentence.

Whether the court should grant Johnson bail or not

In my opinion, I think that Johnson should be granted bail, in spite of the numerous cases against her. The Bail Act 1980 states clearly the several conditions under which a defendant may be granted bail. The court has to consider several conditions before granting bail. For example, the seriousness of the case in question is a factor to be considered. If the court finds that the defendant has been supplying drugs to minors, the mentally handicapped, to persons under rehabilitation, or to people who have no knowledge that they were consuming drugs, under these circumstance, the crime is considered grievous and bail may not be granted. Otherwise, the court may grant bail even without the defendant depositing money as security. It would largely depend on the seriousness of the case (Mirko and Kenneth 158). In the case of Johnson, we are not told if she was supplying the drugs to minors or mentally challenged persons and neither do we have any evidence that the drug users never knew what they were consuming. The assumption here is that of a willing buyer vs. willing seller and as such, I am of the opinion that Johnson should be granted bail.

Secondly, if in the opinion of the court, a defendant is seen to endanger the lives of others or will interfere with the evidence if granted bail, then the court will not grant bail. The welfare of the public is paramount and always given a lot of weight when deciding to grant bail or not. Since in this case we are not given any evidence that Johnson would pose a security problem to members of the public or will interfere with the evidence, I am of the opinion that Johnson should be granted bail. All the evidence gathered is with the police and Johnson will not in any way interfere with it.

The act also says that whenever it is not practicable to obtain sufficient information for purposes of making a decision as to whether to grant bail or not due to lack of time, the defendant may be remanded without bail, until such time as when the court has the time. If Johnson, for instance, was brought to court late in the afternoon, she could be remanded until the following day. In this case, we are not told whether the court was sitting late in the afternoon and the assumption is that it was early in the morning and therefore Johnson should be granted bail. Furthermore, the courts should always have ample time to decide if to grant bail or not before the end of any day.

The strength of evidence against Johnson will also determine if the court will grant her bail. From the case, we are told there is strong evidence against her. Despite this, the background of the defendant will also determine whether she will be successful in applying for bail. We are not told the history and circumstances or the environment that Johnson is in, or whether she has a criminal record, or not. Since there is no other criminal record in the past, I am of the opinion that Johnson should be granted bail.

Possible differences indiscretion about bail if Johnson was already on bail and awaiting trial for another indictable offense

Johnson’s case would be totally different if she was already on bail. The Bail Act 1980 subsection 16(3) states clearly the circumstances under which the court may refuse to grant bail. If the defendant were already on bail, and found to have committed the same offenses, she would not be granted bail again. If Johnson were already out on bail, she would be remanded straight away until her case is heard and determined in court.

The Case of Macintosh

Macintosh is charged with trafficking, supply, and possession offenses both against Queensland and Commonwealth Acts (Drugs Misuse Act 1986 (Qld), and the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth). He is also charged with an offense of serious assault (s340 Criminal Code 1899 (Qld)) for stamping on the arresting police officer’s foot. He is released on bail upon his own undertaking (s11 Bail Act 1980).

An ex-officio indictment

According to the Legal Services Commission of South Australia, Ex- officio indictment is a situation where even if no committal hearing has taken place or if a magistrate has found at a committal hearing that there is insufficient evidence to put a defendant on trial, the director of public prosecution may in exceptional case, file a special indictment (called ex-official indictment) against a person and that person must then stand trial in the normal manner in the district or supreme court.

Because of his confession, the evidence against Macintosh is quite strong. Prior to his committal hearing, his rather inexperienced lawyer advises him to consent to the prosecution proceeding by way of an ex-officio indictment. His matter is listed in the Supreme Court for trial.

Whether it would have been more beneficial for Macintosh to have a committal hearing or not

To some extent it would be more beneficial for Macintosh to plead guilty to his case rather than denying and allowing the case to drag on for long, sometimes for several months. In a committal hearing both the defendant and the prosecutor are allowed to express themselves, the prosecution have to provide strong evidence linking the defendant to the crimes. On the other hand, the defendant is allowed to defend himself against the allegations of the prosecution (Moles para. 3). Macintosh is sure the prosecutor has strong evidence against him and therefore it does not help much to continue with the committal hearing, which could drag on for months or even years. By admitting to his case, this could convince the magistrate that he is a reformed person and therefore get a lenient sentence. Although he is facing different charges of possession of guns, trafficking and assault, all of which carry severe sentence, by accepting the guilt of all these offences means that he is remorseful of his behavior. The law always assumes the defendant innocent until proven guilty, if Macintosh goes on denying the charges, when finally the ruling is made, the sentence could be severe. By pleading guilty does help.

According to Hedgecock versus the Republic 29^th September, 2007 in the Darwin Supreme Court, Hedgecock was charged with unlawfully cultivating cannabis; this is a crime with a maximum penalty of 25 years imprisonment. Hedgecock finally received a fully suspended nine months imprisonment, mainly because he pleaded guilty to the charges. Besides, he was found to have cooperated fully with the police, had good work history and respected by his employer and had good prospects of rehabilitation too. The judge observed that he had not intended to use the drug for commercial purposes (Kenny 185). Although pleading guilty to a charge may be helpful, there are other factors that are taken into consideration in determining the case, the history and the behavior of the defendant at the time of arrest and thereafter will play a very critical role in the final judgment. Pleading guilty is not automatic that it will be helpful to the defendant. Macintosh stamping on the foot of the arresting police officer is a fact that he may have resisted arrest. Also since Macintosh is facing multiple charges seems to imply that he has a criminal tendency. Pleading guilty to charges may help Macintosh to get a lenient sentence.

Works Cited

Bagaric, Mirko and Arenson, Kenneth J. Criminal Law in Australia: Cases and Materials. NewYork, NY: Oxford University Press, 2004. Print.

Kenny, Graham. An Introduction to Criminal Law in Queensland and Western Australia. Australia: Lexis Nexis, 2008. Print.

Moles, Roberts. Independence and Accountability of the Director of Public

Prosecutions: A Comparative Survey (n.d.). 2011. Web.

Introduction

The ultimate goal of criminal justice is to deal with various offenses that affect human welfare. Leaders in criminal justice should conduct numerous researches, think critically, and develop viable solutions that can improve the living conditions of more people (Ramirez, 2008). Many national and global agencies have been using the most desirable strategies to deal with the major crimes affecting humanity (Drudge, 2015). Despite such efforts, some issues make it hard for leaders in the criminal justice system to have peaceful nights. The major issues that call for immediate attention are presented below.

Key Issues in CJA Today

The connection between drug use and crime is a critical concern for many leaders in this field. Over 70 percent of criminals test positive for illegal drugs such as marijuana and cocaine (Drudge, 2015). Drug use has remained a major problem for the criminal justice system. New studies have shown a link between substance abuse and crime. Consequently, the number of crimes has increased significantly over the past three decades.

Juvenile offending has become another major issue affecting the United States. More youths and adolescents are committing new crimes every single day. The incarceration rate has increased significantly in the United States. Some analysts and humanitarian groups have argued that minorities are affected the most by this malpractice. The other major issue in criminal justice is violence against innocent women (Ramirez, 2008). In 2015, the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) indicated that around 1.3 million females were assaulted by their partners annually (Drudge, 2015).

Prioritizing the Issues

It has been hard for many professionals in criminal justice to prioritize most of the above issues. This is the case because the above key problems affect communities differently. For instance, drug abuse and crime have been observed to affect the lives of many people in some states and not others. However, the problem of crime remains the leading issue in different parts of the globe. In the United States, crime is a major challenge that forces the government to incur numerous expenses in an attempt to deal with it (Drudge, 2015). The level of crime has been associated with the increasing use of illegal drugs.

The second priority should be on the number of youths committing crimes in the country. Experts have been focusing on the best approaches to dealing with this problem. For example, some professionals have supported the use of restorative justice (Doyle, n.d.). Scholars believe that proper measures should be put in place to punish these juveniles. The outstanding fact is that more youths are committing a wide range of crimes than ever before (Drudge, 2015). That being the case, the criminal justice system must consider the most desirable approaches in an attempt to deal with this issue.

The rate of incarceration within the past decade has been unprecedented. The number of people engaging in various crimes or using illegal drugs has been on the rise (Garrison, 2009). This level of incarceration affects the targeted individuals and their respective family members. The government spends over fifty billion dollars to support these inmates (Drudge, 2015. This fact explains why new measures are needed to address this issue.

Violence against women is the other issue that should not be taken lightly by the criminal justice system. This is the case because women deserve care, support, and empowerment. Although this is not the first key issue for the criminal justice system, it should be wise for criminal justice leaders to support more women (Garrison, 2009). These measures will play a positive role in addressing the issues affecting the lives of many community members.

Effects on the Criminal Justice Profession

The criminal justice profession is usually guided by the changes experienced in different communities. For instance, criminal justice professionals will focus on the major issues affecting more individuals in society. The current focus has been on the use of illicit drugs and crimes. This is the case because the two constitute the major challenges affecting many American communities (Ramirez, 2008). That being the case, the government must identify new measures and initiatives that have the potential to minimize crimes in society.

Future professionals in the field of criminal justice will be focusing on the best initiatives to deal with the increasing number of youth offenders. These professionals must identify new measures to support these young ensures and encourage them to engage in productive activities. Criminal justice is a profession that should be guided and informed by evidence-based facts obtained from different communities (O’Connor, 2015). The duties of the system are to minimize crime and ensure more people live in secure communities.

The criminal justice system is currently facing numerous challenges in its effort to deal with these key issues. Experts are undertaking new researches to identify new strategies that can address these problems. The government is forced to incur numerous expenses to support the welfare of the growing number of inmates (Ramirez, 2008). The criminal justice professionals will, therefore, continue to change by the issues experienced in different communities.

References

Doyle, A. (n.d.). Informational interviewing. Web.

Drudge, B. (2015). Facts encyclopedia, crime and law enforcement. Web.

Garrison, A. (2009). The influence of research on criminal justice policy making. Professional Issues in Criminal Justice, 4(1), 1-14.

O’Connor, T. (2015). MegaLinks in criminal justice. Web.

Ramirez, F. (2008). Juvenile delinquency: current issues, best practices, and promising approaches. GPSOLO, 1(1), 1-13.

First of all, it is necessary to distinguish between burglary, theft, and criminal trespass following the New Jersey Code of Criminal Justice. Section 2C:18-2 provides the following elements of burglary: entering structures closed to the public without a privilege, remaining in a structure surreptitiously, and trespassing in areas where it is prohibited explicitly (Justia, 2020). In addition, burglary implies trespassing to commit another offense (Justia, 2020). Theft is consolidated in Section 2C:20-2, which grades the crime; however, there is no need to trespass to commit theft (Justia, 2020). Sections 2C:20-3, 2C:20-4, and 2C:20-5 define specific theft types — theft by unlawful taking or disposition, deception, and extortion, respectively (Justia, 2020). Finally, Section 2C: 18-3 defines the unlicensed entry of structures, which may transition to burglary.

In the provided case police officer was called to investigate a break-in in the warehouse. Therefore, the officer did not commit an unlicensed trespass, as their presence on the crime scene was justified. The officer’s actions cannot be classified as burglary since their presence was legal, and they did not intend to commit an offense before arriving at the warehouse. As such, the police officer committed theft, most fitting under the Section 2C:20-3 definition, because they did not use deception or threats. Nevertheless, the officer unlawfully took the movable property of the victim, which is enough to grade their actions as at least a third-degree crime.

In this case, I would file the following charges against Joe Jones. First, I would qualify his actions as a robbery of the first degree. According to Section 2C:15-1, robbery is a first-degree crime if, in the course of committing the theft, the actor attempts to kill anyone or purposefully attempts to inflict serious bodily injury (Justia, 2020). Joe Jones swung a baseball bat at Maria after she refused to give him the money; a baseball bat strike can inflict a serious injury or even kill.

Secondly, I would charge Joe Jones with manslaughter, a crime of the second degree. His strike missed Maria and killed Tim, who was walking by her side. Jones’s action cannot be classified as Section 2C:11-3 Murder since he had no intention to cause death on purpose. In addition, he did not commit aggravated manslaughter since his actions do not fall under subsection a. of Section 2C:11-4 (Justia, 2020). However, his swing of a baseball bat falls under the definition of Section 2C:11-4, subsection b., paragraph 1, because Jones recklessly killed a person in an attempt to rob Maria (Justia, 2020). Overall, Joe Jones should be charged with first-degree robbery according to subsection b. of Section 2C:15-1 and second-degree manslaughter as per Section 2C:11-4, subsection b., paragraph 1.

In the described case, the defense attorney’s argument will not prevail due to provisions of Sections 2C:14-2 and 2C:14-7. First, the attorney claimed that sexual assault charges should be dropped because Jane did not resist. However, Robert would still be guilty of aggravated sexual assault according to paragraphs 4 and 5, subsection c. of Section 2C:14-2 (Justia, 2020). First, he was armed with a gun and threatened Jane to go inside the barn. Second, Jane did not resist at any point of events, but she also did not give affirmative and freely-given permission for intercourse. Part of the attorney’s argument, which mentions Jane’s short skirt and low-cut blouse, would not be admitted per subsection e. of Section 2C:14-7 (Justia, 2020). Overall, the defense attorney’s argument has no chance to prevail, as it lacks any reasonable legal basis.

Reference

Justia. 2020 New Jersey revised statutes: Title 2C – The New Jersey Code of Criminal Justice. Web.

Introduction

The first exercise focused on the major issues affecting the criminal justice administration (CJA). The next activity was to interview one of the supervisors in the criminal justice system. The interview was aimed at understanding the measures undertaken to address such issues. During the interview, the supervisor indicated clearly that the same issues were being addressed by the law enforcement team. The supervisor identified crime, increased drug use, incarceration levels, violence against women, and juvenile delinquency as the major issues in the enforcement area (O’Connor, 2015).

The interviewee indicated clearly that the CJA was undertaking several measures to handle the above issues. For example, the supervisor argued that the criminal justice department was embracing the use of modern technologies to improve security in the country. The approach was expected to deter crime and unearth the channels used to traffic illicit drugs (Garrison, 2009). The respondent indicated that the CJA was working with community members to deal with crime.

The supervisor indicated that new measures were being considered to achieve the best results. Parents, teachers, and guardians were being encouraged to monitor the behaviors of different children. This strategy was observed to produce positive results.

The exercise outlined some of the initiatives embraced by the department to deal with the key issues affecting the criminal justice system. For instance, the government was using restorative justice to reduce the number of youths in different prisons. The department was using reintegration programs and support systems to address the problem of juvenile offending.

The increasing level of incarceration in the country is unprecedented (Ramirez, 2008). The CJA is currently working with different stakeholders to deal with this problem. Many experts have argued that more minorities are imprisoned than the majority of whites. New measures are therefore being considered to ensure every law enforcement officer acts ethically.

Violence against females has become a major problem in the country. According to the supervisor, new ideas have been implemented in an attempt to deal with the vice. For example, the CJA encourages members of society to report different forms of domestic violence. Women were also advised to avoid abusive males and report every form of violence to the relevant authorities (Drudge, 2015).

Finally, the supervisor outlined several changes that were being considered for implementation within the next ten years. The criminal justice system was planning to support the construction of more restorative centers (Drudge, 2015). Such centers would be used to guide and reshape the behaviors of many youths. The department was planning to use various campaigns to promote the best parenting styles. The agency was planning to encourage more community members to engage in policing activities (True, 2012). The supervisor believed strongly that such campaigns would minimize the number of crimes in the country.

The leaders at the criminal justice system were collaborating with policymakers to ensure every person is tried fairly. Modern informatics and technologies were being put in place to detect crime and produce useful exhibits. The department was liaising with different research institutions to strengthen the use of DNA and biometrics. The government was expected to undertake new measures to streamline the immigration process. Such measures were aimed at destroying the channels used to smuggle illicit drugs into the country (Doyle, n.d.). Such strategies were expected to play a positive role in addressing the key issues affecting the country’s criminal justice system.

Interview

Targeted Interviewee

The purpose of the interview was to understand and analyze some of the major issues affecting the country’s criminal justice system (CJS). To get accurate and reliable information, I decided to interview one of the supervisors at the CJS department. I selected the individual because he had a better understanding of the major issues and challenges that affected many communities in the country. Additionally, I strongly believed that the supervisor was aware of the major strategies that were being considered in an attempt to deal with the problem of crime in the country (Drudge, 2015). That being the case, my choice of the interviewee played a critical role in making the study successful.

Reasons for Choosing the Supervisor

Several reasons explain why I decided to interview the above supervisor. To begin with, the individual had the responsibility of connecting different departments and agencies in the criminal justice system. This means that the supervisor had a better understanding of the major challenges that affected American society (True, 2012). After contacting the individual for the first time, he indicated clearly that he was available for an interview. It was, therefore, necessary to interview him because the other officials were unavailable or busy. The most outstanding thing is that the targeted interviewee presented meaningful information that can be used to analyze the issue of crime in the country. This fact shows clearly that the interview was successful.

Questions Asked During the Interview

One of the best strategies for getting quality information from an interview is through the use of appropriate questions. During the interview, several questions were considered to get quality information. The first question focused on the unique roles and objectives of the country’s criminal justice system. This question was considered to examine whether the department was acting within its objectives. The second question focused on the major challenges and issues that continued to affect the country.

From a personal perspective, this was the most important question during the interview because it was aimed at outlining the major issues that were making it hard for the department to realize its goals (O’Connor, 2015). The purpose of the third question was to explore some of the initiatives used by the criminal justice system to deal with the identified issues. Finally, the interview was aimed at understanding the major policies and campaigns used by CJS to improve the level of security in every part of the country.

The outcome of the Interview

The targeted interview was successful because the supervisor managed to outline the major issues that were affecting the country’s criminal justice system. According to the respondent, issues such as juvenile delinquency increased the incarceration of citizens from minority groups, and violence against females was given priority by the CJS (O’Connor, 2015). The interviewee also indicated that new measures were being considered to address these criminal justice issues. Members of the community were also being sensitized and encouraged to implement new programs in an attempt to address the above problems.

The interviewee gave me various documents to support his responses. This discussion, therefore, shows clearly that the interview was successful. This is the case because the exercise presented meaningful findings. The individual was ready to be interviewed again.

References

Doyle, A. (n.d.). Informational interviewing. Web.

Drudge, B. (2015). Facts encyclopedia, crime and law enforcement. Web.

Garrison, A. (2009). The influence of research on criminal justice policy making. Professional Issues in Criminal Justice, 4(1), 1-14.

O’Connor, T. (2015). MegaLinks in criminal justice. Web.

Ramirez, F. (2008). Juvenile delinquency: current issues, best practices, and promising approaches. GPSOLO, 1(1), 1-13.

True, J. (2012). The political economy of violence against women. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Introduction

The criminal justice system is designed in such a way that it brings together different players to identify offenses and punish culprits. This model remains critical since it addresses human disagreements while providing fairness to all. The pronouncement of penalties remains an evidence-based approach intended to deter individuals from committing similar crimes in the future. Policymakers and legislators provide laws and guidelines that allow the system to function in an impartial and seamless manner. However, some skeptics have indicated that most of the existing penal codes are problematic and incapable of presenting befitting punishments to offenders under specific circumstances. This report examines most of these gaps and offers supportive arguments for the insights Alexander and Ferzan present.

Problem Statement

The American penal code outlines progressive laws aimed at analyzing and punishing offenders engaging in criminal activities. The proposed forms of penalization are intended to deter future acts, incapacitate the targeted criminals, rehabilitate, or even deliver restitution. These measures are essential since they have the potential to deliver safety and security to the greatest number of citizens. Unfortunately, some challenges exist in the manner in which the system provides the intended punishment. The emerging issue revolves around the move to focus on the final harm associated with an offense and the intentions the offender had in his or her mind. Analysts have indicated clearly that the current model ignores the motives of the offender while relying mostly on the outcome to adjudicate and offer final punishment (Alexander & Ferzan, 2009). This problematic issue forms the basis of the discussions and analyses presented in this report.

Defending Alexander and Ferzan

In the chapter, “Only Culpability, Not Resulting Harm, Affects Desert”, the authors focus on the theory of culpability to present their views and arguments. According to Alexander and Ferzan (2009), such “a framework sets forth not only the necessary conditions for blameworthiness and punishment but also the sufficient conditions” (p. 171). This assertion guides them to acknowledge that the current American law remains unacceptable or incorrect. The penal code has evolved in such a way that it only allows the system to blame offenders based on the nature of the eventual result or outcome. This reality would dictate the most appropriate punishment for the identified wrongdoer.

The issues of intention and choice present a strong reason for challenging the present state of affairs. Alexander and Ferzan (2009) assert that the decision a person makes has the potential to either harm or protect others. The choice arising from such a deliberation becomes a desert basis for committing a specific offense. People will tend to focus on a specific goal and then act accordingly to achieve the aims. In most cases, offenders will begin by considering an idea (Alexander & Ferzan, 2009). The approach will lead to a choice that forms the foundation of a given action. These attributes explain why the authors rely heavily on these notions to establish the best ground for their subsequent arguments and insights.

The concept of causation has attracted attention of many philosophers and legal scholars in the past. In the chapter, Alexander and Ferzan (2009) present Michael Moore’s assumption to link causation to morality. Specifically, it becomes clear that causation remains a powerful element that is capable of guiding ethical and moral principles. The authors are convinced that the present models of the penal code fail to focus on the overall process of choice or causation (Alexander & Ferzan, 2009). It is evident that any action is a product of a specific decision someone made before its occurrence. During this critical stage, an individual can chose to pursue a specific action or abort it.

These two scholars believe that the criminal law tries to capitalize on the results of a specific act. Alexander and Ferzan (2009) believe that the whole idea of causation without necessarily taking the issue of choice seriously is a practice that has little or no consequences. While focusing entirely on the outcome of a specific act, the investigators question where the offender gets the courage and room for pursuing the recorded “results” or outcome. Under the American penal code, it remains quite that human emotions and feelings have taken center-stage when it comes to the process of punishing such offenses (Alexander & Ferzan, 2009). Experts in criminal justice systems would tend to analyze the results as the most important moral desert.

In simple terms, it becomes quite clear that humans have developed a tendency of feeling guilty with the outcome is unacceptable. For example, the occurrence of harm and death appear to present a compelling reason for condemning and punishing. This outcome becomes the primary guiding principle for the wider criminal justice process and the overall process of issuing sentences. The example of the Satanic Cult is plausible since Alexander and Ferzan (2009) rely on it to explain how the intention of pursuing a specific act matters. This notion is founded on the initial risk of a specific motive and its potential towards causing harm. Based on such arguments, these scholars remain convinced that people’s intuitions bear much weight even if the eventual outcome does not result in much harm.

The outlined insights present a unique dimension for analyzing the nature of the American penal codes and how they fail to promote justice under some circumstances. Alexander and Ferzan (2009) show conclusively that “an actor who acts culpably has his punishability fixed by that culpable act alone, regardless of whether it produces a harmful result” (192). Analysts would need to examine the motive and intention that compelled the wrongdoer to behave in a specific manner. The researchers acknowledge that most of the emerging malpractices or choices that eventually result in harm are risky in nature. This means that the individual’s desert remains fixed. The person has already made the decision to act in such a manner while expecting specific outcomes or consequences in the end.

The application of moral principles could help shed more light on this debate. Alexander and Ferzan (2009) present different viewpoints to show conclusively that any action intended to harm is a manifestations of the wrongdoer’s final choice. The notion reveals that the person has settled to unleash the mentioned act with the aim of contributing to a given risk. It would now be clear that the outcome is already in the wrongdoer’s mind. When something unforeseeable occurs to prevent this form of harm, it would still be valid and right to identify the person as culpable (Alexander & Ferzan, 2009). The assertion is that the individual has already decided to act in a specific manner that has clearly identifiable risks.

The authors go further to compare and contrast the events and actions that result in injury or death and others that do not. While the criminal justice system appears to be interested on the harm itself, Alexander and Ferzan (2009) take a different path to show how the wrongdoers in the two scenarios remain culpable. The argument is that such individuals would have both decided to engage in specific conducts that are proxies harm. Possible disruptions and facilitations that might emerge notwithstanding, it will remain clear that the intent is already defined and capable of causing great harm. These analysts, therefore, believe that such an emerging argument needs to become the guiding principles to improve the existing penal codes in this country.

The hypothetical example of an individual who is planning to visit a specific home and maim or kill the available children will be culpable and should receive the much needed punishment. The outstanding message that jurists should not focus primarily on whether there are children in such a domestic setting or not. The motive is already there and the individual has chosen to pursue such a path (Alexander & Ferzan, 2009). The example goes further to indicate that the breakdown of such a criminal’s car is not a reason not to condemn the individual. The fact that he or she has not managed to arrive at the intended home and commit murder should not become the basis for sentencing and punishing the individual. The important approach would be to affect the fact that the individual is already culpable and has decided to commit a crime irrespective of the external forces that could emerge.

The outstanding message from the researches and findings of these two professionals in that a paradigm shift is necessary in the American criminal justice system. The current model is biased since it tries to condemn and provide punitive measures to only those whose intentions have fruited and eventually led to deaths or injuries. They carefully present powerful ideas and case scenarios to guide the reader in order to appreciate how choices bear as much weight as the final results. In the presented examples, it becomes clear that actors begin by identifying specific actions that are capable of fulfilling their personal interests. By deciding to act in such a manner, Alexander and Ferzan (2009) are convinced that the would-be wrongdoer is already decided to pursue a specific action. His or her culpability would remain unquestionable. Consequently, those involved in issuing punishment would need to examine the decision-making processes and the choice formulation.

Based on these notions, it would become quite clear that a person who already has a motive to kill, maim, or injure, and starts the process of achieving the intended actions is guilty. Such an individual has already pursued a dangerous path irrespective of the obstacles and unpredicted events that could occur along the way. With all factors remaining constant, chances become high that the wrongdoer will achieve the targeted outcomes and injure the selected victims (Alexander & Ferzan, 2009). It is this kind of foundation that compels these investigators to support the issuance of the most appropriate punishment to these actors. Such a move would become an effective form of deterrence and bring sanity to the criminal justice system.

The current state of affairs tries to present a scenario whereby only those whose missions succeeds become more deserving of the pronounced judgment. The approach remains problematic and allows planners and criminals to continue pursuing their goals for the longest time possible until results are recorded. The provision of less punishment to those whose actions fail to maim or kill continues to encourage more criminals to pursue their heinous acts (Alexander & Ferzan, 2009). When the criminal justice system considers this argument, it will be easier to identify the choice and intention as powerful attributes for punishing offenders. The precedent will create room for additional measures capable of making the process more progressive while helping protect more lives in this country.

The emerging proposition will allow professionals to focus on the defendant’s mental state (mens rea) and analyze the risks he or she set for the targeted victims. This approach will would allow the jury to gauge what the individual had planned to do and the possible consequences (Alexander & Ferzan, 2009). The strategy will ensure that there is a distinctive separation of the intention and the outcome, thereby allowing the courts to pronounce the most appropriate punishment.

Conclusion

The above discussion has revealed that a problematic issue continues to undermine the effectiveness of the American criminal justice system. The existing penal codes support the pronouncement of strict punishments to wrongdoers whose actions have led to death or injuries. The existing professionals in different courts ignore the initial decision-making processes and choices of criminals. The emerging argument is that the choices and intentions should be studied separately and becoming the basis for issuing judgment. The consideration of this approach will present a paradigm shift and help prevent more people from offending or making decisions that can put lives at risk.

Reference

Alexander, L., & Ferzan, K. K. (2009). Crime and culpability: A theory of criminal law. Cambridge University Press.

Prosecution bears the burden of proving that substances of offence are methamphetamine, and its precursor pseudoephedrine, according to three counts of charges against Roberts. To prove these substances, the prosecution requires scientific evidence from a recognized laboratory to test and analyse the chemical composition of these substances lest they are other chemicals not stated in the charges. Hence, scientific evidence will confirm whether substances of offence are methamphetamine and pseudoephedrine, thus rule out any contention regarding the nature of the substances. Furthermore, scientific evidence will prove that each substance of offence weighed above 0.75kg, which is the threshold quantity for commercial purpose. After determining the identity of the substances and their quantity through scientific means, the prosecution needs to inform the jury that these substances are border-controlled drugs as stipulated in Criminal Code Act 1995, under s314.4.

To prove that Roberts had the drugs, prosecution needs to link Roberts with drugs in containers. In this case, prosecution needs to provide circumstantial evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that containers that contained drugs were his luggage. To convince and persuade the jury to confirm charges against Roberts, prosecution should present transit records, which link Roberts to containers and demonstrate that containers were in transit to a certain destination. The transit records will not only link Roberts to the containers containing drugs, but also prove that he was transporting them to a specified destination, which is tantamount to importation of border-controlled drugs. Leader-Elliot argues that, prosecution has both persuasive and evidential burdens as criminal responsibilities of proving faulty and physical elements of an offence (5). Thus, through circumstantial evidence, prosecution will provide sufficient evidence that will enable the jury to understand circumstances under which Roberts contravened the law by importing border-controlled drugs in commercial quantity.

Since it is difficult to prove that Roberts intentionally imported the drugs, the prosecution needs reliable evidence that will prove beyond a reasonable doubt he was truly importing or intending to import the drugs in question. This proof is essential because Roberts might have been unaware that the substances he was importing were border-controlled drugs. Therefore, to prove that Roberts was aware that the drugs he was transporting were border-controlled drugs, prosecution requires a reliable witness who witnessed seizure of contraband drugs. In this case, potential witness can be a clearing officer who examined the contraband containers and questioned Roberts if it were his luggage. If Roberts attempted to bribe, or bribed clearing officer, so that his luggage could pass the clearance point, then it implies that he was aware that his luggage contained border-controlled drugs, which he intended to import to a given destination. According to Leader-Elliot, prosecution must prove that a defendant intended to import a given drug and prove recklessness to establish whether a defendant was aware of substantial risk posed by possession of border-controlled drugs (8). Thus, a witness is going to provide substantial evidence that will enable the jury to confirm charges against Roberts.

To corroborate scientific, circumstantial and witness evidences, the prosecution needs to examine financial transactions of Roberts to prove that he was truly trafficking dangerous drugs according to the third count of charges. Hence, forensic account is necessary to scrutinize Roberts’ accounts by examining his financial transactions. The essence of forensic examination is to find out if Roberts’ financial accounts have any transactions with foreign accounts or dummy companies, which have probable link with drug traffickers. In this case, prosecution evidence must prove beyond any reasonable doubt that forensic evidence of money transactions that are in Roberts’ accounts links him to other international drug traffickers. Practically, forensic analysis must demonstrate that Roberts’ accounts have several transactions with foreign accounts without legal business transactions to prove transfer of funds because, Roberts may be having international businesses that he conducts using his accounts. Moreover, forensic study needs to differentiate his legal and illegal business transactions for the jury to make a fair judgement of the case.

The jury is in a position to understand prosecution evidence fully because, the prosecution has used varied and credible evidences to support charges against Roberts. Regarding the first and the second count, prosecution has provided potential evidence to the jury in terms of scientific, circumstantial, witness, and forensic examination of financial transactions. Scientific evidence from laboratory analysis shows that the substance of the offence was chemically methamphetamine and its precursor pseudoephedrine. The chemical composition of substances of offence should be indisputable in order to provide the basis for charging Roberts as per the charges. Moreover, scientific evidence ascertained that the drugs were more than 0.75kg, which is a threshold weight of determining commercial quantity of drugs. Thus, scientific evidence provided chemical identity and quantity of the drugs, hence confirming the charges that the substances were border-controlled drugs and were in commercial quantity.

Furthermore, prosecution provided circumstantial evidence that undoubtedly links Roberts to containers containing the drugs as transit records are credible exhibits. With regard to intention to import and recklessness, the witness confirmed that Roberts was aware of contraband drugs in his luggage as he attempted to bribe his way out of clearance. On the third account, forensic examination of his accounts confirms that Roberts was trafficking dangerous drugs since he had numerous transactions with foreign accounts that are not part of his legal business. Thus, the jury is in a position to discharge its duty properly since, prosecution has provided compelling evidence that warrants confirmation of charges despite the fact that Roberts did not make any admissions.

The society does not need to consider alternative to the jury system in this case because drug trafficking is a serious offence that has immense significance to the nation. According to Department of Justice, drug trafficking is a serious criminal offence that fall in the category of murder, burglary and assault, which are effectively dealt under criminal law because they are offences against community (7). Legally, such offences are ‘indictable’, and therefore, require determination by a jury system. Given criminal nature of drug trafficking, jury system has the capacity to assess charges and give fair verdict that reflects different opinions of judges rather than a verdict issued by a single judge who is prone to biases and external influences.

For the jury to understand prosecution evidence, I suggest that the prosecution should present background information of Roberts in terms of his businesses and business collaborates so that the jury can get a glimpse of Roberts’ influence as international businessperson. Background information is critical because it forms the basis of understanding Roberts as either potentially innocent or guilty of committing criminal offences of drug trafficking. Moreover, prosecution needs to provide scientific evidence from credible laboratory and use credible witnesses who have firsthand information regarding contraband drugs. Credibility of evidence is going to give the jury confidence in analysing incriminating evidence and subsequently issuing a verdict because evidences are comprehensible.

Works Cited

Department of Justice. “Western Australia’s Court System: Student Resource Book.” The Government of Western Australia, 2001: 1-59.

Leader-Elliot, Ian. “Elements of Liability in Commonwealth Criminal Code.” AIJA Magistrate’s Conference, 2001: 1-16.

The emergence of English common law in the period of the reign of Henry II had the biggest impact on the development of the criminal justice system in the United States (Jones and Barett 31). It allowed the establishment of a centralized court system with the judges appointed directly by the king. They determined the severity of punishment for the behavior that was deemed illegal thereby creating a body of common law (Jones and Barett 31). Later it began to rely on the doctrine of precedent or stare decisis. This doctrine allowed judges to interpret new cases and apply a law according to previous legal decisions (Jones and Barett 31).

The first settlers brought over the English common law to American shores during the colonial period (University of Cincinnati par. 2). However, it was mainly based on religious principles and was highly informal in its practice, often relying chiefly on oral testimony (Chamelion and Thomas 6). A common law became a part of the American legal code. Gradually, numerous modifications were introduced to it to make it more uniform and standardized so that even average citizens would be cognizant of their duties and responsibilities. Nonetheless, many settlers distrusted the common law system, because they saw in it an oppressive influence of the Catholic Church (IIP Digital par. 7). Consequently, both the states and the federal government developed statutes—written codes defining crimes and penalties for them—thus standardizing and formalizing the law (Jones and Barett 31). In the words of Professor Bibas, “criminal justice moved from a common-sense, public moral judgment to a technical, hidden, opaque process. It was no longer about communal expressions of justice and deserved punishment, but about speedy professional triage of threats” (Bibas 28). Moreover, criminals no longer were seen as those who had committed a sin against God, but rather they were treated as those who preyed on communal and societal cohesion (Bibas 15).

In the wake of the American Revolution (1775-1783), government size and its powers were substantially diminished. The state legislatures had a close control of courts, preventing the development of independent judiciary and sometimes even abolished some of them over unpopular decisions (IIP Digital par. 8). According to Neubauer, with courts declaring some of the legislative actions unconstitutional and thereby contributing to the “conflict between legislative and judicial power… the courts gradually emerged as an independent political institution” (Neubauer 93). After Civil War (1861-1865), numerous courts were created to respond to the increasing needs of rapidly growing industrialized areas for resolving complex legal disputes. As a result, new courts such as small claim, juvenile and domestic relations courts emerged (IIP Digital par. 8).

Numerous riots between ethnic, racial, and religious groups led to the creation of a professional police force. Initially, it was not sufficiently disciplined, and officers lacked proper training for the job (Bibas 15). However, at the end of the nineteenth century, police transformed into a highly standardized and professional force (Bibas 15). With the rise of public offenses without a distinct victim, such as violations of alcohol law, there was an increased need for professional prosecutors. Likewise, states formed public defender’s offices “to ensure that no innocent man may suffer or a guilty man escape” (as cited in Bibas 16). At the same time, incarceration as a form of modified corporal punishment seriously changed. Legislators no longer saw devil’s temptation as a main cause of crime; rather they deemed families and associates of criminals responsible for their wrongdoings. A new penitentiary system was established to isolate offenders from “their criminogenic environments and to instill new, law-abiding habits and discipline” (Bibas 20).

The creation of the modern criminal justice system was a slow and gradual process of turning English common law into the set of highly efficient agencies we know today.

Works Cited

Bibas, Stephanos. The Machinery of Criminal Justice. New York: Oxford University Press, 2012. Print.

Chamelion, Neil, and Thomas, Andrew. Essentials of Criminal Law. New York: Pearson Education, 2009. Print.

IIP Digital. History and Organization of State Judicial System. 2008. Web.

Neubauer, David. America’s Courts and the Criminal Justice System. Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing, 2006. Print.

Regoli, Robert, John, Hewitt, and Marie, Maras. Exploring Criminal Justice. Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Learning, 2013. Print.

University of Cincinnati. The Evolution of the American Justice System. n.d. Web.

Notably, the history of police officers and their relationship with minority groups has been negative. Holmes and Smith (2018) state that tensions between police and civilians have always occurred in U.S. cities, particularly in low-income minority neighborhoods; the relations demonstrate long-standing racial and ethnic disparities and animosities. Citizens are concerned about a lack of police security and violent policing practices, whereas police are worried about protecting themselves from behavioral and attitudinal risks posed by residents.

Minorities, in particular, experience the negative consequences of race-based policing. Holmes and Smith (2018) argue that conflicts between police and civilians represent many Black and Hispanic residents who have developed a deep suspicion of the criminal justice system, primarily seen in their interactions with police. Occasionally, charges of police misbehavior, such as the tragic killings of Black individuals at the hands of police in Baltimore, Maryland, and Ferguson, Missouri, spark public unrest (Holmes & Smith, 2018). According to a survey by ArchCity Defenders, a legal defense charity, eighty-six percent of car stops in Ferguson featured a black driver, even though black people compose just sixty-seven percent of the city’s 21,203 citizens (Levy, 2014). The black community’s persistent low-level harassment has become the primary point of interaction between most black citizens and the criminal justice system; the threat of physical violence always accompanied relations.

One of the significant tensions was the Jack in the Box shooting. Two officers opened fire at two unarmed black men in 2000; the incident remains noteworthy for the black population in North County, the predominantly black municipality of St. Louis County located north of St. Louis (Levy, 2014). Additionally, residents there assert that they are often assaulted by mainly white police personnel. Holmes and Smith (2018) claim that there is a relationship between race/ethnicity, neighborhood features, and excessive force; minorities frequently perceive police behavior toward them as insulting. The research demonstrated police usage of profanity and racial insults toward citizens (Holmes & Smith, 2018). For instance, verbal assault and harassment may be a routine method of operation in minority areas, and residents, especially young men, often react aggressively. Thus, the tensions between police and minorities continue to happen, thus breaking citizens’ trust.

Bias-based policing is at the root of the problem of hostile police-minority relations. According to Najdowski et al. (2015), Blacks believe they will confront stereotype threats when they face police officers, which might transfer into an actual feeling of danger in genuine interaction. The authors also propose that stereotype danger may turn into suspicious-looking conduct. When deciding what measures to take, such as whether to arrest, police rely mainly on suspect behavior. Najdowski et al. (2015) suggest that the possibility that stereotype threat influences acts that police routinely regard as suspicious has consequences for interpreting why police officers target Blacks as suspects significantly more frequently than Whites. Innocent Blacks who are treated like criminals owing to “stereotype-threat-induced” conduct are in danger of wrongful conviction (Najdowski et al., 2015, p. 477). Many people in underprivileged communities feel that the police are unconcerned about the issues of crime and social disorder that they face on a daily basis (Holmes & Smith, 2018). Moreover, they are apprehensive about aggressive policing methods such as racially-based searches and the use of excessive physical force.

Consequently, the community-policing strategy requires problem-solving measures to be adapted to the individual needs of the specific neighborhood. Adams (2014) emphasizes that when contrasted to a more prosperous sector of the town, an inner-city area afflicted with open drug sales on the street corner and gangsterism will necessitate different enforcement techniques. Tackling inner-city drug and gang issues may include not only enforcement but also educational and intervention measures (Adams, 2014). Encouragement of continual engagement of police offices with religious institutions and the community is a vital step in improving police-minority relations (City of Phoenix, 2016). Essentially, the African-American church has long been recognized as a significant source of social organization and management among African-Americans; it was one of the first and most visible tools for developing social support networks and authority (Adams, 2014). Hence, the church would assist police officers operating in predominantly African-American communities in getting to know local church leaders and soliciting their assistance in developing solutions to community concerns.

It is critical to collaborate with the community to create a train-the-trainer project. It will mobilize citizen volunteer groups to train the community, particularly children, teenagers, and young adults (City of Phoenix, 2016). For minor violations, police are advised to pursue least-harm alternatives such as warnings and fines rather than incarceration. Based on the City of Phoenix (2016), the police department should measure and report the amount of trust, tolerance, accountability, and responsibility monthly. Significantly, each time an officer draws a weapon on a person, paperwork or report and aggregate statistics should be demanded (City of Phoenix, 2016). Hence, the police department should collect, store, and analyze statistics on all officer-involved fatal and non-fatal shootings, as well as any fatalities in custody.

References

Adams, T. F. (2014). Police field operations (8^th ed.). Pearson.

City of Phoenix. (2016). Community and police trust initiative recommendations. Web.

Holmes, M. D., & Smith, B. W. (2018). Social-psychological dynamics of police-minority relations: An evolutionary interpretation.Journal of Criminal Justice, 59. 58-68. Web.

Levy, P. (2014). The trials of Ferguson. Newsweek Global, 163(10). Web.

Najdowski, C. J., Bottoms, B. L., & Goff, P. A. (2015). Stereotype threat and racial differences in citizens’ experiences of police encounters. Law and Human Behavior, 39(5), 463–477. Web.