The PoliceUnit 2

Police and SocietyChapter 5

City Police Forces in the U.S.

From colonial times to 1800s citizens volunteered to enforce the law in most American cities

1844: NYC formed a 24-hour professional police dept.

By 1870 most citied followed in NYCs footsteps

Need for law enforcement on the frontier led to the est of the first state police force: Texas Rangers

City Police Forces in the U.S.

Today state law-enforcement agencies include: highway patrol, bureau of narcotics, fish and game

dept and civil defense bureaus

Federal gov’t has developed agencies as well: IRS: tax evasion ATF: alcohol, tobacco, firearms DEA: drugs

Most federal agencies can only investigate federal law violations

Most law enforcement in U.S. is handled by state and local police

Policing Today U.S does not have a national police

agency More than 40,000 local, state and nat’l

agencies: each with own special function and laws

Example:Sheriff’s Deputy Local Police

Patrols counties to enforce county ordinances and state law

Patrols a town/city to enforce state and city criminal laws

Policing Today Police do more than “fight crime”

Control traffic, respond to medical emergencies, social work, ect

Duties have become more dangerous complex in recent years due to: Availability of dangerous weapons More critical news media and general

public Budget problems

Local Police Departments can range from 1 person (rural) to over

40,000 (NYC)Large Departments Small DepartmentsLarge cities employ almost a quarter of all officers with budgets that reflect their size (NYC spends almost $4 billion annually on its department)

Organized with military-type structure and operating procedure

Cannot offer services 24 hrs- 7 days like larger departments so they must do work that would normally be done by special units elsewhere

On the Job Each department has different shift patterns

Ex: 10 hrs day/ 4 days wk OR 12 hrs day/3 days wk

Police work is growing more complex- need to know criminal law, collect evidence, understand forensic science, mediate disputes, ect

All depts require applicants to have a hs education but 30% of all officers belong to depts that require some form of college education

On the Job Other requirements:

minimum age of 21 no criminal record pass entrance exam and drug, physical and

mental tests good physical condition

About 2/3 of all officers belong to unions Raise salaries, improve working conditions

and put grievance procedures in place

Minorities and Women 1972’s Equal Employment Opportunity Act banned

public employers from discriminating based on origin, religion or gender Many depts sued under the act

By 2007 more than one-quarter of all police officers were minorities

Women made up 12% of all police

Argument is that women are not strong enough for police work BUT studies show they make just as many arrests as men

Methods and Investigations

Chapter 6

Community Policing 1930-1960s: police departments went

through reforms that left them more disciplined and professional Training, more education and background checks

By 1950s police began to rely on squad cars, radio and other technology- move away from beat cops (walking through neighborhoods) Gave way to motorized rapid response: approach

the relies on radio to direct police cars to emergency calls

Community Policing By 1980s many people were criticizing rapid motorized

response Felt it left police too far from the community and created “us

and them” feeling

Cities began to experiment with different systems Beat patrols, horseback, bicycle Neighborhood Watch Program: local residents watch over

community and make police aware of problems developing

Main point for new programs: get officers to think about patterns of crime rather than single radio calls Visible continuously in a community & work to win local

cooperation

Community Policing This new type of policing was called

community-oriented/problem-0riented policing

Three basic ideas 1. Strengthening the community: make people aware and

concerned about their communities

2. “Broken Windows” theory: police should find out what bothers a community and focus on solving the problems (if a car has a broken window and is left on the street it shows neglect and the other windows will be broken)- police need to be proactive

3. Problem-oriented policing: stresses problem solving (instead of trying to catch graffiti artists, organize neighborhood group to paint out the graffiti and discourage tagging)

Critics of Community Policing

Some doubt that the drop in many cities crime rate can be attributed to community policing because crime has dropped everywhere

Communities need to choose between motorized rapid response or community policing-cannot have both because it would cost too much

Many police see community policing as social work that takes away from making arrests and solving crimes

The Crime Scene Patrol officers are almost always the first to arrive at a crime

scene Pursue suspects Make arrests Interview victims and witnesses Secure the scene

If the crime is serious or warrants further investigation, detectives will be called in Take statements from witnesses Note conditions at the time of the crime Photograph/videotape scene Mark and seal evidence to be sent to crime lab

Each new person who takes custody of a piece of evidence must date and sign it to est. a chain of custody

Informants Network of informants can give an officer intelligence

about what is going on in the criminal community Most are low-level criminals involved in “victimless crimes”:

drugs, gambling, prostitution

Informants commonly used to obtain search warrants by providing the “probable cause” needed

Some informants paid in cash while others have charges against them dropped

As a professional courtesy many police agencies agree not to arrest each others’ informants

Informants Critics condemn the use of informants

because: They are criminals and have questionable reliability Say whatever the police want them to say Do not make good witnesses at trials b/c juries

tend not to believe them Informants do not want to testify b/c seen as

“snitch”

Most police defend the use of informants as a necessary evil but the practice must be closely controlled to prevent abuses

Forensic ScienceChapter 7

The Origins of Forensic Science

Forensic science applies scientific investigation to the law

Earliest known text on using medical procedures to investigate crime appeared in China in the 13th ce

Development of photography in the 19th ce allowed police to retain prints of people they arrested

Ultraviolet, infrared and laser photography are used to examine documents thought to be fraudulent or forged

The Origins of Forensic Science

Fingerprints are the most famous method of the forensic scientist 1685 anatomy professor Marcello Malpighi

recognized intricate patterns of the skin

1910- Thomas Jennings was the 1st person in the U.S to be convicted due to fingerprint evidence Infamous bank robber John Dillinger burned

his own fingertips with acid to avoid capture

The Origins of Forensic Science

Advances in classification of blood types and bodily fluids have helped with identifying DNA at crime scenes

Advances in medicine, biology and chemistry

enabled the growth of toxicology: the study of alcohol including drugs and alcohol in a person’s body

World’s first crime lab appeared in France in the early 20th ce by physician and criminology professor Edmond Locard

Police and The LawChapter 8

Criminal Procedure Deals with procedures for arrests, trials

and appeals

Sets out rules for processing someone through the criminal justice system

Criminal procedure comes from: Federal and state statues U.S. and state constitutions

Criminal Procedure & the Supreme Court

U.S. Supreme Court often decides whether particular criminal procedures meet U.S. constitutional standards of the Bill of Rights

14th Amendment: due process clause No state shall “deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due

process of law”

In a series of landmark cases beginning in the 1960s, the Court applied almost all the rights found in the 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments to the states After the 1960s the rights of criminals and defendants expanded and the

Court began to restrict prior decisions

This tension on the court reflects the tension between the two goals of the criminal justice system: Protecting society from criminal AND protecting the constitutional rights

of those being processed

Law of Search and Seizure 4th Amendment: prohibits unreasonable searches and

seizures and requires any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause

All police searches, seizures of evidence and arrests must comply with this amendment Supreme Court has ruled that illegally seized evidence may

not be used at trial

Determining whether a search or seizure is legal comes down to two basic questions: 1. Has a governmental search or seizure taken place? 2. If so, was the search or seizure reasonable?

Has a Search and Seizure Taken Place?

To be a search or seizure under the 4th Amendment it must: Be done by a gov’t employee or agent Fit the court’s definition of a search or seizure

Did a gov’t employee or agent conduct the search or seizure? If the police requested your neighbor to break into your house to

take evidence from a crime , then your 4th Amendment protections would come into play b/c the neighbor is considered an agent of the law

If the neighbor just broke into your house and took evidence without anyone asking and turned it over to the police it can still be used against you in court BUT your Fourth Amendment rights were not violated▪ BUT that person would also face burglary charges and could face a civil

lawsuit

Has a Search and Seizure Taken Place?

Was it a search or seizure as defined by the courts?

Katz v. U.S. (1967): defined a search as any gov’t intrusion into something that has a reasonable expectation of privacy

This privacy interest covers examples such as houses, yards, garages, apartments, diaries, briefcases and mail

Has a Search and Seizure Taken Place?

BUT, there is no reasonable expectation for things in plain view 4ft tall marijuana in front of a window and seen

from the road

If the officer climbed a 8ft fence and then saw the plant, a search has technically taken place

Court has decided there is reasonable expectation of privacy for open fields and abandoned property

Has a Search and Seizure Taken Place?

BUT, there is no reasonable expectation for things in plain view 4ft tall marijuana in front of a window and seen

from the road

If the officer climbed a 8ft fence and then saw the plant, a search has technically taken place

Court has decided there is reasonable expectation of privacy for open fields and abandoned property

Is the Search or Seizure Reasonable?

After a court determines that a search or seizure has taken place, it must determine whether it was reasonable 1. Was the search or seizure conducted

pursuant to a valid warrant? 2. If not, does one of the court-recognized

exceptions to the warrant requirement apply?

Was the Search or Seizure conducted pursuant to a valid warrant?

Warrant: court order issued by a judge authorizing a search, an arrest, or a seizure of evidence Must specifically describe place to be searched and items or

persons to be seized

Before issuing a warrant a judge must receive evidence presented under oath. The evidence must show that there is probable cause to believe that: a crime has been or is about to be committed AND the person, place, or thing to be searched or seized is related to

that crime

Once warrant obtained, police must carry out the search promptly- usually within 72-96 hours depending on the state

Was the Search or Seizure conducted pursuant to a valid warrant?

Many states allow police to execute warrants only during daytime hours except in special cases

Police must normally follow the knock-and-announce rule Must announce their presence before entering Can be skipped if reason to believe the fugitive is hiding out, a

threat of violence exists or evidence is being destroyed

Many jurisdictions will allow police to forcibly enter when no one will let them in

Once the property is seized, officers must prepare a list of what was take for the courts

The Motor Vehicle Exception Police officers who have legitimately stopped an automobile

and who have probable cause to believe contraband is concealed somewhere within it may conduct a warantless search of the vehicle

In addition, police may search every part of the vehicle and its contents that may be concealing what they are specifically looking for Ex: Probable cause to believe that illegal aliens are being

transported in a van will NOT justify a warantless search of a suitcase in the van

Motor vehicle exceptions are granted for the fact that if law enforcement were to wait for a warrant, a vehicle could easily be moved and evidence could be concealed or destroyed

Stop and Frisk 1968 the Supreme Court decided in Terry v. Ohio

that a brief stop and frisk does not require probable cause but does require reasonable suspicion: evidence that would make an experienced police officer suspicious

Examples: REASONABLE: Bob runs out of a dark alley at 3 am. Police

stop and frisk him- feeling a large metal object in his pocket. They pull out a gun.

UNREASONABLE: Same scenario but instead of a large metal object they feel a plastic bag. When they pull it out it was marijuana. Because of the nature of the object it cold not have been a dangerous weapon

Is an Anonymous Tip Grounds for Reasonable Suspicion?

Florida v. J.L. (2000) “On October 13, 1995 Miami-Dade police received an anonymous tip

that a black male wearing a plaid shirt was standing near a bus stop carrying a gun. The two officers who responded found three black males, one of which, J.L., a 15 -year-old, was wearing a plaid shirt. After frisking him, the officers did find a firearm. J.L. was charged with carrying a concealed weapon without a license. At trial, he moved to suppress the gun as evidence, arguing that the frisking performed by the officers was illegal under the 4th Amendment.

the Court concluded that the anonymous tip did not meet the minimum requirements to perform a warrantless search. Also indicated that an anonymous tip must posses a moderate level of reliability, including "predictive information" that offers police a "means to test the informant's knowledge or credibility." An accurate description of a person without a reliable assertion of illegality or description of the crime in question, as was the anonymous tip in this case, does not meet this standard.”

What About Running From the Police?

Illinois v. Wardlow (2000) “Sam Wardlow, who was holding an opaque bag, inexplicably fled an

area of Chicago known for heavy narcotics trafficking after noticing police officers in the area. When officers caught up with him on the street, one stopped him and conducted a protective pat-down search for weapons because in his experience there were usually weapons in the vicinity of narcotics transactions. The officers arrested Wardlow after discovering that he was carrying handgun. In a trial motion to suppress the gun, Wardlow claimed that in order to stop an individual, short of actually arresting the person, police first had to point to "specific reasonable inferences" why the stop was necessary.

The Court held that the police officers did not violate the 4th Amendment when they stopped Wardlow, because the officer was justified in suspecting that the accused was involved in criminal activity and, therefore, in investigating further.”

Do People Have to Identify Themselves?

Hiibel v. Nevada (2004) “Larry Hiibel was arrested and convicted in Nevada state court

for failing to identify himself to a police officer who was investigating an assault. Nevada, and many other states, has a law that requires a person to tell an officer his name if asked. Hiibel challenged the conviction, claiming it violated his 5th Amendment right not to incriminate himself and his 4th Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches.

 The Court ruled that the search did not violate the 4th Amendment because it was based on reasonable suspicion (the police officer was investigating the assault, and Hiibel was nearby) and involved only a minimally intrusive question (his name). It also did not violate the 5th Amendment because Hiibel never argued that telling the officer his name would actually incriminate him of any crime.”

Interrogation and Confessions 5th Amendment: unless you agree to talk to the

police, they may not force you to answer questions about a crime they think you committed

The Supreme Court did not apply the Fifth Amendment to the states until 1964

Miranda Rights require police to read suspects in custody their rights before any interrogation

To be in custody, a person’s freedom must be significantly restrained People stopped briefly are not in custody- traffic stops

The Exclusionary Rule Created by the courts to compel police to respect

the constitutional rights of subjects

Under the rule no illegally obtained evidence may be presented in court to convict a defendant whose constitutional rights have been violated

The exclusionary rule is based upon two theories: Judicial integrity: courts are supposed to uphold the law Deterrence: excluding tainted evidence is the only

effective way to prevent police abuse of constitutional rights

The Exclusionary Rule Dollree Mapp was convicted of possessing obscene materials after an

admittedly illegal police search of her home for a fugitive. She appealed her conviction on the basis of freedom of expression. Ohio code: “No person shall knowingly . . . have in his possession or under his

control an obscene, lewd, or lascivious book, magazine, pamphlet, paper, writing, advertisement, circular, print, picture . . . or drawing . . . of an indecent or immoral nature. . . . Whoever violates this section shall be fined not less than two hundred nor more than two thousand dollars or imprisoned not less than one nor more than seven years, or both.”

The Court brushed aside the First Amendment issue and declared that "all evidence obtained by searches and seizures in violation of the Constitution is, by [the Fourth Amendment], inadmissible in a state court."

Mapp had been convicted on the basis of illegally obtained evidence. This was an historic -- and controversial -- decision. It placed the requirement of excluding illegally obtained evidence from court at all levels of the government. The decision launched the Court on a troubled course of determining how and when to apply the exclusionary rule.

The Exclusionary RuleOpponents Supporters

Hampers the fight against crime because criminals can escape conviction if cases with ‘tainted’ evidence are rejected

Motion to suppress evidence based on the exclusionary rule rarely succeeds

Procedures are required by the Constitution and help the police to follow it