(Dowler, 2002)
This study examined the effect that media consumption has on attitudes toward police effectiveness.
(Media consumption consists of hours of television viewing per week, regular viewing of crime drama and primary source of crime news).

General findings:

None of the media variables are significantly related to attitudes toward police effectiveness

Age, race, income, fear of crime, police contact satisfaction, and perceived problems in the neighborhood are significantly related to perceived police effectiveness

Age, education, perceived problems in the neighborhood, and fear of crime is significantly related to police effectiveness for respondents with no police contact

For respondents with police contact, levels of television viewing are positively related to police effectiveness; respondents who watch increased levels of TV are more likely to rate the police as ineffective

Public attitudes toward police are generally positive

Regular viewing of crime drama is not significantly related to perceived police effectiveness

Respondents who report a high number of problems in their neighborhood are more likely to give negative evaluations of police effectiveness

African Americans are more likely to give poor ratings of police effectiveness

Race, gender, age, education, residence, political ideology, socioeconomic status and police contact effect people’s attitudes toward the police

There is a mutually beneficial relationship between the police and the media (same result found in Welch article below*)
 The ‘measures of police effectiveness’ used for this study were:

Confidence in police ability to protect

Confidence in police ability to solve crime

Confidence in police ability to prevent crime

Police promptness

Police friendliness

Police fairness, and

Belief in the use of excessive force by police in their community.
(Welch et al. 1997)
 Crime is “news” because the way it is treated evokes a threat to society in a moral sense

Crime news is produced from the definitions and perspectives of the institutions and professional individuals who provide society with its definitions of criminality

Primary definitions of crime:

Are official, by state managers (law enforcement officials, politicians, criminal justice practitioners, prosecutors, defense lawyers) —they are mental products of crime. These people

establish the terms —the definitions and perspectives—of reference from which all discussion of crime emanates.

Secondary definitions of crime:

Are unofficial, by intellectuals (professors and non-academic researchers)

The ideology of crime in the news:

Is that it neglects the causal connection between social conditions & crime —it rarely involves a first-hand account of the criminal act itself. Instead, it ’s produced by these established definitions
(in both the cases of crime and ideas how to deal with it, the state managers were more ideological in this sense)

Conspiracy theory suggests that because the media are capitalist owned, journalists simply reproduce the dominant ideology of the political elite in their news coverage.

The findings/themes of this study were:
 There is a media bias toward street crime (it’s frequently covered more often, while white collar crime is almost completely neglected) —this is because the topics selected for the feature articles were ideologically filtered, thus reproducing a public image of lawlessness and an insinuation that street offences are more costly and dangerous (even though white collar crime costs roughly
50 times as much, and unsafe working conditions kill more than twice as many people)

The majority of statements confirmed that crime and fear is a problem = moral panic.
 Ie. “America’s #1 concern is crime. We’ve become a society of victims or people afraid of becoming victims” and “people come to think they’re in great danger because the media tend to spotlight middleclass victims.”

The relationship between the media & law enforcement agencies is mutually rewarding insofar as police officials help journalists produce their product (crime news) while law enforcement agencies benefit because as primary definers of crime they not only have the luxury of interpreting events first but also enjoy the opportunity to promote their institutional objectives and needs.
1.
Simplification — Events must be reduced to minimum # of parts, if too complicated risk losing audience
2.
Risk — Stories that highlight risk, even though murder, rape are crimes occur between acquaintances more of the focus placed on strangers
3.
Sex — Sells crime stories, over-reporting of crimes with sexual nature, distorts picture of crime
4.
Celebrity or High-Status — Obsession with celebrities that will be covered in news (whether victim or offender) i.e. Hugh Grant got caught with prostitute, wouldn’t usually be a big deal but blown up due to celebrity status
5.
Proximity — How close a story is to you, geographic nearness, national news won’t cover local crimes in the same way local news would
6.
Children — As victims more likely to be covered when murdered, going to be covered if they are offenders, young white females considered to be the most newsworthy victim
(Chermak 1995)

Important for police to not talk to the media unless required to do so, certain officers are trained to

Asymmetrical relations between reporters & policereporters always in inferior position, if can’t get info from police may be out of job, reporters can’t just walk onto crime scenes so must rely on police


Findings: P olice are considered to be ‘expert sources’, can comment about event immediately, people believe what officers say is believed to be a credible source, police decide which aspects are emphasized/downplayed, if an ongoing investigation they reveal as little as possible
Newspaper Beat Reporters: Certain people in the media are trained to deal with police, some are located in police headquarters (to easily establish relationships), get their info from 4 sources:
 Documents — Arrest logs, reports
 Telephone contact — With specific police sources
 Scanner — Monitor to discover breaking crime stories in order to arrive on the scene
 Spokespersons — Or gatekeepers from department, full-time press officers

Police typically identify who was involved, what occurred, the status of the investigation

Individuals from top level (chiefs, captain) have more active role when discussing
(Fillieule)
1.
2.
3.
4.
Antagonistic – Police, usually on orders from political authorities/ having been instructed to do so by their bosses, usually have a distinctly repressive and antagonistic attitude towards protestors, who are usually nonviolent demonstrators
 Seen as incongruent from what is happening
Opportunistic – Authorities working in a soft manner, waiting to take a stand


Usually in cases of private & property damage
Before the police take action, they wait & see what happens with the protestors, then decide
 what actions they should take
There are usually negotiations between protestors and police prior to protest – this is where we’ll be, this is our plan— police work with protestors to maintain order
Open Conflict
– Both protestors & police adopt a position of open conflict, making the other party aware that there is conflict
 This is usually done by leftist radical groups
Cooperative – Peaceful demonstrations based on mutual trust and cooperation
 Work with police during the actual process, not just ahead of time
(dellaPorta)
1.
2.
3.
4.
Cooperation – Based on collaboration between police and demonstrators
 Usually inconspicuous – police work during and before

The most peaceful demonstrations
 Mutual respect
Negotiation – Based on active police presence, mediating between demonstrators and nondemonstrators who will typically suffer disruption as a result of the protest
 Bystanders who are not involved will be there and will be affected
 Has police working with protestors and non-protestors
Ritualistic stand off – More aggressive police presence
 Often done at a distance
 An awareness that police are taking a more aggressive stance, but not doing it right in the mix of the protest
Total control – Massive presence/close involvement of police forces
 Extremely aggressive

1. Structural


Looks at the materials and inequalities that exist in a society in which the protest will occur
Ie. P eople who don’t have access to resources in the society we live in have, due to inferior chances or political impotence
2. Political/Ideological



Key political/ideological institutions react to the protesting groups
Influenced by those who have political power – the parties creating legislation
Prominent politicians, senior police, chiefs of police who enact certain legislation for police officers or certain policies
3. Cultural
 Deals with the contrasting ways of life that groups developed on the basis of shared material


 conditions
Social structure, subcultures, etc.
Give substance to members defining what they believe to be/how they fit into their society
Order may break down if outsiders try to remedy the situation
4. Contextual




Dynamic communication processes occurring that build up to an event
Can make it more or less conducive to order or disorder
Sometimes there are scores to be settled by either protestors or police
Could be dialogue between two parties, trying to come to common ground at how to fix the structural/ideological level
5. Situational

Deals with spatial properties that facilitate order or disorder with protests
 Certain physical properties can facilitate police surveillance

Some physical properties can allow demonstrators the freedom to leave the area; more conducive to order. If protestors cannot leave it is more likely to lead to disorder
 Order is more likely maintained when there is a low-key, soft-hat style of policing (police are not wearing riot gear – just walking around openly as regular police allowing protestors to be there
 Subjective – depends on how each party reads the other party, if protestors feel the police are being negative or abusive they will react negatively or vice versa
6. Interactional




Micro-level
Concerned with the quality of social interaction between police and protestors
Depending on how interaction is going, can lead to a riot or more dangerous situation
If protestors view tactics as being too unreasonable or violating their rights, they are more likely to engage in criminal activities (riots)
(Gillham & Marx)
1.
The Spill-Over/ F ly Paper Effect: When an action by either police or demonstrators affects the target group and others as well. An obvious case in policing is the inability of police to keep their tactics from affecting nonparticipants.
2.
Reciprocal and Neutralizing Effects: Here, the moves of one side lead to similar moves by an opponent (whether offensively, defensively, or both). They are joined together, however unwillingly, in a kind of hostile dance.

3.
Escalation Effects: Through a rough moving equilibrium, escalation extends the level of confrontation rather than leading to the desired goal.
4.
Non-enforcement Effect: Involves escalation as a result of under-enforcement. Aware of the possibility of unwanted escalation, police may have allowed some laws to be broken by the more moderate demonstrators, hoping they would exercise control over more serious violations.
5.
Excitement Effect: Dramatic action by one or both sides may attract opponents, allies, and bystanders to identify what is going on.
6.
Role Reversal Effect: Demonstrators may police themselves while police do nothing or are themselves disorderly.
7.
Strange Bedfellows Effect: The complexity of issues being struggled over may lead to unexpected alliances. Groups whose interests are typically incompatible may find common ground, or at least set aside differences long enough to oppose a common opponent.
8.
Secrecy Effect: Because of the need to prevent infiltration or revelation of sensitive information, protesters and police work to hide certain information from each other — yet secrecy can prevent the flow of information from and to members as well.
9.
Prior Reform Effect: In response to infiltration of protest groups in the 1960s, Seattle adopted one the nation's most stringent restrictions concerning police gathering of intelligence information about protest groups.
10.
Value Conflict Effect: The structure of a democratic society legitimates conflicting values through law.
(Gillham & Marx)

Nov. 29 th - Dec. 3 rd , 1999

Enormous protest movement in response to WTO meetings/discussions that were about to happen at the Seattle Conference Center
 First event was “direct action” in which thousands of well-trained activists engaged in acts of civil disobedience,

Second event was a march and rally of unions, various environmental groups, and various religious groups against the WTO (also to be peaceful)

The Sheraton Assault: Thousands of protestors blocked the streets, sidewalks, and the Hotel doorways in order to block the WTO delegates from participating in their discussions

The protestors had previously agreed to follow four rules during their demonstration: 1) No violence, verbal or physical, 2) No weapons, 3) No illegal drugs or alcohol, and 4) No property damage

Although they were peaceful, police were overwhelmed by the number of people and took drastic action against them, so wearing full body armor, tried to disperse the crowds by jabbing/pushing people with their batons and spraying people with pepper spray

These measures were mostly ineffective for the protestors in the main area as they were prepared with gas masks, cloths to cover their eyes/mouth, etc.

Police continued to spray protestors, threw smoke/concussion grenades, and fired rubber bullets and bean bags

These actions significantly angered the crowd

Both parties felt betrayed by one another/ that they had each broken promises that were agreed upon at the meetings prior to the protest

A small number of people then started vandalism, etc. out of anger


Most of this disorderly behaviour (breaking windows, graffiti, throwing things at police) only started after excessive use of force was displayed by police who should have instead simply made arrests

There were cases of verbal abuse to innocent protestors, ie. “fuck off lady”

One WTO delegate was going towards protestors with a gun, the protestors tried to take him out, and police took action on THEM instead of him (pepper spray), he got away

By late afternoon, there were 30-45,000 people in protest downtown

There were still to be 25-50,000 others joining soon-after for the march

Some dumpsters caught fire due to tear gas/ smoke grenades

At 3pm, construction workers went to work boarding windows to avoid looting from happening

People at this point were pushed out of central DT and upwards toward Capitol Hill

By 7pm, police again wanted to disperse this crowd so they unleashed chemical irritants and concussion grenades as well as gas in the Capitol Hill area.

Legislation: the following day, the DT area was declared a ‘no-protest zone’ and it was declared illegal for any non-police personnel to acquire a gas mask.

1972 —It came to the attention of the public that there was extreme corruption within the NYPD

Enacted the commission, revealed by Frank Serpico, who had said his fellow officers were engaging in corruption

Because he came forward and broke the code of silence, there were threats on his life ( this was made into a movie titled ‘Serpico’ (Al Pacino))

They made arrangements with criminals to get money for them, to get off the hook, bribes

It was said that an internal commission should exist in all precincts —also undercover informants in all precincts, no one would know except internal affairs so they can do constant investigation

Once this was developed, 100s of officers arrested —reason for former unknown was code of silence

A commission on the LAPD in response to trends during the 1980s-1990s and specifically, the Rodney
King beating

Formed in 1991, named after Warren Christopher

4400 lawsuits had been filed against the police – 41% were filed by African Americans (who only made up 13% of the population)

Found that there was a significant amount of force being used against the public

He said that it was a management issue; management was at the heart of the problem

Statistics showed that the LAPD was racist; these activities were common when dealing with African
Americans

The commission was created to conduct 'a full and fair examination of the structure and operation of the LAPD, including its recruitment and training practices, internal disciplinary system, and citizen complaint system

Was created in recommendation of a new standard of accountability; ugly incidents would not diminish until ranking officers knew they would be held responsible for what happened in their sector, whether or not they personally participated.

1994 — Again, investigated corrupt NY officers

Formed by former judge Milton Mollen


Specifically officers who were working with drug dealers — taking, dealing, to make money selling narcotics

The code of silence was still the reason for former quiet

They wanted an outside watchdog group, bu t found that it wasn’t as successful as having internal affairs

At the time, officers refused to testify against other officers

The commission wanted to treat them as any other drug dealer

Those that did come forward to testify were pariahs in the department —received life threats, and no one would talk/associate with them

Fleeing Felon: A law that permitted officers to shoot and kill someone actively fleeing from committing a felony

When the provision, applicable to dangerous criminals fleeing for the purpose of escaping arrest, was first introduced, it applied only to the most serious crimes, most of which were punishable by death
— the felons were almost always sentenced to be executed, which is why it was acceptable for police to shoot them to death when they were caught in the first place.

Only in the USA did this reasoning stand because Canada does not have the death penalty

Nowadays, police are to use discretion with this rule and only use as much force is necessary (Ie. Not reasonable to shoot and kill a fleeing shop-lifter)

When a group of civilians are brought together to review instances of alleged police misconduct

Aim: to ensure police accountability

Popular with the public

The police are resistant to it as they deem it their area of expertise, and say it compromises certain police operations that need to be secret

They exist to take disciplinary action, to identify patterns of wrongdoing by officers who frequently receive complaints, to demonstrate police credibility, and show the public that their concerns are taken seriously.

5 alternatives for dealing with police-citizen complaints:
1.
In-house model — The police take care of it all
2.
Externally supervised in-house model — The police take care of it, then it is all reviewed by an individual external to the police
3.
Police investigation with independent adjudication model —The police investigate but the adjudication is in the hands of someone else
4.
Independent investigation with police adjudication — The investigation is done by a specific employed individual and then the final decision is in the hands of the police
5.
Truly independent model — The entire procedure is carried out externally to the police.

The model of dealing with complaints in Toronto can be categorized as number 3.

To assess misconduct —at our disposal (not the best)

To assess police relations and productivity as well

Issues —police who are the most active are the most likely to receive complaints, whether deviant or not, simply because they have the most interaction


Minority population less likely to file complaints

Citizen definitions —they define misconduct more broadly or narrowly than police

The results of investigations into citizen complaints can fall into four categories:
1.
Sustained complaint — The complaint is justified
2.
Un-sustained complaint — In the opinion of those making the decision, the complaint cannot be sustained as either true or false
3.
Unfounded complaint — The complaint did not occur as alleged by the complainant
4.
Exoneration — The allegation is found to be true but the officers behaviour is considered to be justified (legal within organizational policy)

More complaints are filed against younger, less experienced officers

Depending on the police job, the complaints vary; Ie. officers working in traffic violations receive more complaints than those in police-citizen contacts

The most common complaint was failing to act in accordance with police contact, followed by threat or verbal abuse, and physical abuse/force

Approx. 5% of complaints result in some sort of disciplinary action

Most complaints are deemed to be unfounded or unsubstantiated
 The ones that are sustained are usually dealt with by ‘counseling’, where the officer concerned receives advice from a superior.
Social Learning Theory (Chappell & Piquero, 2004)
 Police have a unique job that allows them opportunity for deviant behaviour that most people don’t have; they enjoy more freedoms/access to crime; they ’re allowed to speed, use force, seize property— opportunities

Misconduct levels: Accepting gifts/rewards , Opportunist theft (taking jewelry while at the scene of a robbery, blame it on original thief), and Force

Basic assumption —we learn to commit crimes in same way we learn conforming behaviour, process either leaves to deviance or authority
1.
Differential association —you learn from primary peer group/family
You learn crime from other criminals that you are in close proximity with
Transmits information, an d belief that it’s ok to break the law
2.
Definition s —Shared definitions of conduct, what is acceptable and not
3.
Differential Reinforcement
— Through subculture or peers, behaviour accepted through rewards from peers, if they say it’s ok, we all do it, it’ll be fine but they could also say that’s not right, not how we do things —can be approval or disapproval
4.
Modeling — We learn how it’s done through other people, through watching peers & family

494 officers from the Philadelphia PD were the sample

Independent variable —5 hypothetical variables, included both conforming & deviant behaviours—asked what they’d do, and what their fellow officers would do

Ie. have you ever accepted small gifts, meals, stolen jewelry, money from wallet, used excessive force

Findings

Lengths of tenure & gender
—people with more time on force/males had more complaints


Especially with using excessive force, those who considered it not serious, more likely to have complaints, but theft less bad, less complaints (definitions)

Officers who anticipated less punishment, more likely to have complaints.
1.
Discriminatory acts —Based on sex, race, class
2.
Noble cause corruption – doing something bad for a good cause – planting evidence on a guilty man, illegal searches
3.
Self-interested corruption – using their police position to secure personal gain
4.
General misbehaviour –violate institutional codes of conduct – breaking the rules set by your own department – may not be a violation if you were in a different department
5.
Crime
– OUTSIDE of policing – they should still be accountable under the law. This is when they are off duty.
6.
(Mis)use of force – only supposed to use as much force as necessary—this is when they use excessive , illegal, brutal, deadly, or improper force
7.
Failure to respond/protect (under-policing)
– happens in high poverty areas to ethnic minorities—ie.
Not answering calls, not taking threats seriously
1.
Bad Apple Theory —

When there is misconduct, it is the result of one isolated individual(s)
 It’s because of those officers & them alone—once they get fired, everything will be back to normal

Attributing the problem to individual pathology —that person is corrupt, uses excessive force because of something inside them, not because of the police force

Skolnick & Fyfe say, yeah sometimes there are bad apples, but usually 20 or more or the whole team contributes by not doing anything to stop the behaviour, so it’s a rotten bunch. Bystanders almost worse than corrupt cops themselves.
2.
Subculture Explanations —

Th e binary moral order is part of it, that it’s police vs. public, corruption is a result of the subculture
 You’re relying on the solidarity of your fellow officers to fight crime, the solidarity comes along with the code of silence, that you protect each other —this leads to issues of corruption, you know you’ll be protected because the code of silence
- Also because of socialization, they are special/different than civilians, only ones allowed to use force —they have internalized the belief that they’re above the law, they can apply but don’t need to abide
3.
Structural Explanations
– because of how policing is structured—based on your performance, how many arrests you make, how many criminals you bring in, etc.
-Can lead to over-zealous policing, including issues of misconduct
-The impossible mandate of trying to live up to expectations —public, job, law enforcement, etc. leads to cutting corners
-Noble cause corruption —planting evidence on someone, trying to please the public and get the job done
-Experience and the type of police officer allows that opportunity
—vice cops more prone to misconduct because they deal with prostitutions, drugs, gambling —more access/opportunity. The structure of their job & the experience it allows sets up that network for them to commit crime

Accountability of the police is based on the premise that the state has a duty to provide a fair and equitable police service to the public. They are accountable in at least 4 ways:
1.
Administratively : They must be fiscally accountable, and able to justify the use of resources and personnel and prove they provide an efficient and effective service.
2.
Politically : They must adhere to the RCMP Act and provincial Police Acts, and must follow the guidelines stated by local police boards, police commissions, and elected officials.
3.
Legally : Must uphold and enforce the criminal law while recognizing the existence of civil rights
(maintaining their individual rights by not abusing the powers vested in them).
4.
To the community : The police should not work in isolation and should work with communities to set agendas and priorities for policing. A vast amount of budgeting comes from the local community, so police have a responsibility to these jurisdictions.
Holding them accountable wh en they are deviant: Consists of invoking a “Code of Conduct”, the deployment of
Internal Affairs Units, the formation & overview of Civilian Review Boards, the use of criminal courts, and civil liability procedures.

The likelihood that a negative outcome can occur; economic, social, mental, etc.

Anything that can be calculated

Very different than 100 years ago

Risk used to be thought of in positive terms; no longer the case

Risk is hypothetical in nature; does not actually exist

It is about the future, something that has yet to happen; possibilities

Decisions are made on premise that past determines future
 Use math & statistics to calculate, ie. “risk of 60% that you’re going to die from this disease ”

Risk management dominates society
…?
1.
Identify the risk: frequency of exposure, verity of losses (Org’s use own data, history… ie. Hospitals use previous lawsuits complaints, pay-outs, liability claims, etc., and learn from them)
2.
Explore methods: How to handle exposure to identifying risk through reviewing policy, procedures, training, supervision
3.
Choose appropriate treatment & response: Could be changes to policy, supervision, etc.
—anything to reduce exposure to risk or liability incidents. Making changes in department or organizational policy
4.
Implement the strategies: Treatments, changes
5.
Evaluate: Continuous evaluation of performance

Police are no different, they are an organization


Risk management in policing is locking people up before the actually commit a crime
Ericson & Haggerty (1997)
 Police occurrence reports have dozens of fixed choice categories, then there’s space for narrative

Police spend little time dealing with crime

One officer reported one indictable arrest a week, one conviction every 9 months

Extremely rare for an officer to encounter a serious crime in progress; may encounter a burglary in progress once every 8 years, otherwise it’s reactive policing
Feeley & Simon (1994)

Actuarialism: Making calculated decisions based on prediction/data sets

Sentencing based on probabilities, risk

Not the actual person John Doe, but look at his characteristics and use this to make general decisions

If you want parole, that gets determined based on your risk of re-offending

Who you are, which type of offender (they categorize you)
 More likely to arrest if you have drugs or alcohol in your system because then you’re more likely to commit more serious crimes.
When a company/institution used to be responsible for something but don’t want to be anymore, so they put it back on individuals.

Ie. A car accident —you are now expected to report it to a collision center, police don’t come to you anymore

They expect you to make better decisions for yourself.

Police actually work as knowledge workers (though we see them as crime fighters); day to day, they manage large amounts of data

Laptops in police cruisers to make data available on demand
 External demands; gov’t agencies, insurance companies, private companies, researchers—may need the info so it must be accurate

Officers now required to have computer skills; education is an important part of the skills that police bring to their job

In the 60s, police would go to scene, fill-out booklet (everything was hand-written) and then give to superiors

On an annual basis the data would be compiled into spreadsheets, kept in file cabinets

By the 90s, their responsibilities in this area is 5 x more exhaustive because of the demand for more data

Forms are now computerized, gathers enormous amounts of data; hundreds of offence reports combined form aggregate, usable information.
1.
The role of the police should be that of peace officers

2.
The police should adopt a strategy of police consultation
3.
The police should become proactive & identify local crime & disorder problems
4.
A problem-oriented policing strategy should be adopted
5.
The police need to tackle the underlying causes of problems
6.
There should be more inter-agency cooperation between the police & other service delivery agencies
7.
Police personnel should act as information managers who engage in ‘interactive policing’
8.
Tactics should be developed to reduce fear of crime
9.
Police officers should be encouraged to become career generalists rather than specialists
10.
There should be greater management decentralization
11.
There should be a change in the organizational structure from the hierarchal para-military model
12.
The police should become accountable to the community.
Objectives of CP
1.
Greater police legitimacy and public acceptance —By drawing on the support of various community groups, including ones that have been critical of them in the past, police hope to project a better image and adopt a more responsive, accountable, and inclusive model
2.
Increased police accountability — To the citizens they serve through more collaborative and consultive practices
3.
More efficient use of police services through changes in organization and management — By utilizing community resources and collaboratively sharing responsibilities, focusing on problem solving, directed patrol, and call prioritization, etc.
4.
Increased effectiveness through innovation — By adopting strategies that address the underlying problems of crime instead of simply reacting to crime
5.
Decreased fear of crime and public safety — Increasing police visibility; foot patrols, mini-stations
6.
Increased job satisfaction and officer productivity — Allows officers more autonomy, limits bureaucratic supervision and control, promotes positive, non-confrontational contact between citizens & police
CP Programs

Community Consultative Committees

Advisory committees

New to Canada (within the decade)

To facilitate the police-community partnership in dealing with issues of crime & disorder through a consultative process

Members of the community meet with the police agency on a regular basis and have input into policing

They work on identifying problems, allocating resources, developing tactics to solve crime/disorder, and set police priorities

Mini-stations

To decentralize police service and offer a local police presence
 They undertake activities that relate to the community’s needs, ie. offer details about
Neighbourhood Watch, have a drop-in facility

Usually staffed by volunteers, but police come in to make phone calls, write/receive reports/provide advice

Crime Prevention Programs

IE. Neighbourhood Watch, Operation Identification, citizen patrols, Crime Prevention through
Environmental Design (CPTED), etc.

SARA Model
 To reduce levels of crime and increase citizens’ perceptions of safety by reducing fear or crime
A problem-oriented approach implies that the police develop a systematic method for examining & handling the issues the public expects them to address. There are 4 stages to the process:
1.
Scanning : Looking for & identifying possible problems, being specific, and collecting detailed data.
2.
Analysis : Understanding the problem’s cause, scope, and effects, and researching the problem from other perspectives.
3.
Response : Acting to alleviate the problem —a broad search for solutions.
4.
Assessment : Determining whether or not the response worked —a thorough evaluation is required.
1) Innovation- 1979-85
ISSUES:

Rising crime rates; peak crime rates were in the 70s (highest homicide rate is 1975 or 6)

Racial tensions & war; from blacks; civil rights movements, aftermath. From the Vietnam war, a lot of protest & civil unrest

Skepticism; a lot towards police and state; seen as defective, had excessive power and weren't using it

Urban decay; nothing being maintained, urban environments crumbling, nation state didn't care about people, poverty

Bureaucracy & centralization; police power-trips, horrible public relations, people would complain & get caught up in tons of red tape
So the solution: CP

Started off in large urban areas as test cases as response to all of the above

Seemed to be extremely successful

Decided to go on & expand into the future
2) Fusion- 1987-94

Already had been established, minimally applied, minimally evaluated

Now they're really using it; did seem to work

Actually brought value to departments

Change brought a lot of resistance from veteran cops who didn't like change

Needed more funding, increasing attendance; wanted to create a whole community unit

Idea was to expand on existing programs, more $$

Broad emphasis on improved qual. of life

Less fear, crime, disorder

This was all how they diffused CP once already established
3) Institutionalization- 1995-present

Now taught in training

Written in policies, codes

Hasn't been saved just for urban centers; also now being implemented in small towns, rural communities

Cops now hired who specifically just deal with CP

Race: DWB (Driving While Black)

Based on racial profiling, blacks driving a vehicle

Intent: police are looking for drugs usually, but they use other excuses in order to search the vehicle

Research: African Americans feel they are stopped more often than other races (and they are)

In Ontario, blacks were 2x as likely to be stopped by police, and 7x more likely to be stopped for no reason —police claimed there was no racial profiling

Age & social class do not protect blacks from police stops

RIDE programs not included because everyone is stopped

73% of those arrested for traffic violations were black, while that was only 14% of the overall drivers
Why it Matters
(Harris, 2010)

Impact on the innocent
—however, sec. 8 of the Charter prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures; if i t was done illegally, it won’t shouldn’t hold up in court

Rational Discrimination —a problem

Distortion of Legal System

Deep Cynicism: Among blacks about fairness and legitimacy of law enforcement and the courts. They have less respect for police/the courts, which can make them more susceptible to be arrested.

Effect on Guilty: While the innocent pay a direct price, there is also a greater impact on the lives of those who are found guilty when unfairly searched or stopped. They tend to be harsher on blacks then other races. Usually imprisoned for non-violent drug offences (not routine)

Expansion of Police discretion: P olice need to have discretion, but we shouldn’t target certain groups over others

Sentencing: Distorts sentences that blacks receive – Ie. Longer sentences than whites for the same crime, blacks are more likely to go to prison in general than whites.

Distortion of Social World – distorts the reality of the criminal justice system and the reality that we live in

Undermining Community-Based Policing — makes relations strained instead of better. If we are socialized to believe that police are not there to serve and protect, then the people stop trusting in police or the institutions.
Police-Race Relations (Historically)
 America’s experience with police-race relations can be traced back to 1619 when slaves came from
Africa

Slave patrols helped control slavery (checked if the slaves were stealing, would chase runaways, etc.)

With the end of the Civil War, slave patrols ended
 The federal gov’t passed legislation to protect Blacks from abuse, including by the police

Legislation began giving Blacks rights; outlawing slavery, giving former slaves citizenship, gave voting rights to males

Whites and Blacks were to be separated in public places, on public transportation, etc. (backed by the
Supreme Court)

Police in the Southern States were given the responsibility of enforcing these laws (called ‘Jim Crow’ laws)

Other groups have also been discriminated against/verbally and physically abused in US history:
Mexican Americans (in the Southwest), the Japanese (in the West), the Jews, and to some extent the
Italians

Members of minority groups were often not allowed to be police officers


Throughout US history, cooperation between minorities & police was non-existent; the 1960s were a low-point

Police did not provide protection to Blacks, or even treat them as human beings

Thus, without question, minorities had extremely negative attitudes towards police in the 1960s.
 Research in the 1960’s shows that these are the 2 nd most disliked clientele by police in the USA
(replicated in 70s,80s and early 90s); police tend to dislike this community

Subculture of policing is very masculine – draws on stereotypical machismo – instills negative attitudes toward gay men

Consequences – over-policing of sexual acts of gay men in public (indecency laws). Police sometimes lose cases because it was entrapment. Police are aiming to control sexual behaviour that is not heterosexual.

Victimization – high in this population

Reporting – ¾ of hate crimes fail to be reported to police – usually because of the belief that it will not be well-received by police. They fear secondary victimization from police officers.

Hate crimes – low rate of reporting, high attrition rates because of police disinterest (it is not investigated much). Police often victimize this community as well. ¼ of victimization against
LGBT is by police.

Domestic violence: police have a reputation for taking it less seriously than they would for heterosexual couples. Less likely to report because they know this

Gender: women are marginal

Police: when police try to be proactive and work with LGBT – they focus on gay males, not on lesbian women. They are marginalized within the system

Victimization- higher reports of non-reporting hate crimes against gay women.

In Wales (Williams & Robinson, 2004)

Unprotected by law: 53% felt unprotected because they were of the LGBT community -there wasn’t laws against homophobia the same way there are laws against racism.

Harassment or discrimination from police: men were two times as likely to report victimization than women.
Ageism: The pattern of prejudice and discrimination that negatively targets either the young or the elderly.
Apartheid: An official ideology of racism.
Chivalry Hypothesis: Women are treated less harshly than male suspects by the police and the criminal justice system, given traditional gender expectations and notions of them being “the weaker sex”.
Discrimination: an act that involved overtly treating members of a subordinate group negatively and unequally.
Dominant groups: A group that is advantaged and has superior resources and rights in a society.
Double marginality: A situation in which someone, while he or she is a member of two groups, does not receive full acceptance and trust by both groups.
Ethnic bias: Prejudice and discrimination that is based on cultural differences among groups, sometimes even if they are of the same race.
Heterosexism: General term for negative attitudes and actions towards homosexuals.
Homophobia: A term that generally indicates fear of or aversion to homosexuals and homosexuality.

Multicultural (or plural) societies: Societies that are made up of more than one ethnic group.
Prejudice: Refers to an attitude that evaluates an individual member of a subordinate group negatively on the basis of certain negative characteristics that are associated with that group even if the individual does not conform to those expected traits.
Prejudiced discriminator: One who harbours negative attitudes toward any particular subordinate group and will act negatively toward them.
Prejudiced non-discriminator: One who harbours negative attitudes toward any particular subordinate group but will not act negatively toward them.
Racial profiling: This term refers to the tendency of police officers in some jurisdictions to stop, question, and search members of subordinate racial and ethnic groups for minor infractions in comparison to members of dominate racial and ethnic groups.
Racism: Unequal treatment of members of certain groups, based on perceived biological differences such as skin colour, complexion, and hair and/or eye colour.
Scapegoating: A process by which members of subordinate groups are blamed for problems and frustrations experienced by members of the dominant group.
Sexism: Biased beliefs about and actions toward one of the genders (almost always targeting women).
Stereotyping: A fairly rigid, oversimplified (positive or negative) view or image of a particular social group that is then applied to individuals who belong to that group.
Subordinate groups: One whose members, because of physical or cultural characteristics, are disadvantaged and subjected to unequal treatment by the dominant group and who regard themselves as objects of collective discrimination.
Unprejudiced discriminator: One who does not harbor negative attitudes toward any particular subordinate group, but does discriminate against them.
Unprejudiced non-discriminator: One who does not harbor negative attitudes toward any particular subordinate group and will also never act negatively toward them.

Rape is the only crime where the victim is treated as unreliable, and the victim shoulders the blame; it is a unique situation

Rape culture is an environment in which rape is prevalent and where sexual violence is normalized or excused

Rape myths: Beliefs about rape that are usually untrue, but that we use to explain or excuse rape —Ie.
Only females are victims of rape, rape only occurs when there is violence, etc.

Reality: 65-95% of rapes are not reported due to the judgment that can be placed on the victim

Politicians: Todd Atkins was running for Senator – his argument was that abortion should be illegal and we don’t have to worry about ‘rape babies’ because women’s bodies can “shut that whole thing down” if the rape is legitimate – this is untrue.

Police: Are at the front lines of reports on rape – police play an important part of the process. The better police deal with it, the more likely people are to report rape.


Causes of rape – Social services tend to attribute rape to men’s socialization & need for power & dominance. Police attribute it to women’s poor judgment, dress and demeanor (victim blaming).

Rape complaints: Social services say 80% of rape complaints were true. Police say only 35% were actually real rapes.

Credible rape complaints: Both social services & police said that when there were physical injuries involved, and when the victim waited fewer than 48 hours to come forward/ had a consistent story – they are true. Credible victims are willing to do a lie detector test or do not participate in extramarital or pre-marital sex.

Sexist beliefs: Police are less likely to investigate if they are sexist.

People today are often referred to as living in a global society or global village

Globalization — the increasing interconnectedness of the economies, peoples, and to a lesser extent, the politics of various countries of the world.

The global village metaphor incorporates three potential processes:
1.
Describing the movement of individuals from one country or world region to another for economic or political reasons (ie. Ireland to the United States)
2.
Describing economic globalization (ie. American airplanes being sold to Korea; call centers in
India handling support services for computer owners in the United States)
3.
Referring to international communication networks (involving telecommunications —ie. multinational satellite broadcasts)

Criminal behavior is conceived differently from society to society consisting of varied consequences- thus we must be careful when trying to understand the meaning of crime globally.

Four aspects associated with this point:
1.
Frequency of crimes varies across countries, with poorer countries typically experiencing lower crime rates. The Modernization Hypothesis argues that when a country undergoes economic development (industrialization, and urbanization), its crime rate increases. Thus, underdeveloped countries experience more crime as they undergo a process of becoming modern.
2.
Economic Development and affluence will bring about their own set of crime problems. Ie.
Increased availability and use of automobiles as a result of economic growth results in a rise in motor vehicle theft as a form of crime in society.
3.
It is only with affluence that people come to conceive certain things as problems. Ie. Consider views regarding slavery and indentured servitude that were often seen as preindustrial societies — in contemporary societies, these practices are universally condemned and criminalized.
4.
Developed affluent societies may be more “at risk” to the consequences of specific criminal events and to crime in general —Ie. What a burglar would get if he stole from a poor peasant’s home in an underdeveloped country vs. what he would get by robbing a wealthy home in a wealthy country… when you have little, you have little to lose to crime.

International Crimes : Major criminal offences so designated by the community of nations for the protection of interests common to all mankind
—ie. Genocide, mass human rights violations.
**Different from transnational crimes**

Global forms of crime and disorder that call for a police response involving more than one sovereign nation.
They consist of offences, whose inception, prevention and or direct or indirect effects involved more than one country. While it is possible for individuals to commit transnational crimes, such offences usually involve organized activity of some sort.
Types of Transnational Crime:

Money Laundering

Illegal Drug Trafficking

Corruption and Bribery

Infiltration of Legal Business

Fraudulent Bankruptcy

Insurance Fraud

Computer Crime

Intellectual Property Crime

Illicit Arms Trafficking

Terrorism

Aircraft Hijacking

Sea Piracy

Hijacking on Land

Human Trafficking

Human Smuggling

Human Organ Trafficking

Art and Cultural Object Theft

Environmental Crime
Global Policing of Transnational Crimes

Policing is no longer a set of practices embedded in the sovereign nation-state, but rather has become trans-nationalized and greatly differentiated

The practical outcome in terms of action against transnational crime is depressing in that it has been lacking.

EUROPOL - European Office of Police-the establishment of such organization was a step forward and a firm integration between the national police forces

INTERPOL - International Criminal Police Organization-arguably the most discussed and least understood national police organization- formed as a result of deliberations at the International Police
Congress in Vienna in 1923. Consists of 182 member countries and is financed by their governments through annual contributions
Closed-circuit television ( CCTV ) is the use of video cameras to transmit a signal to a specific place, on a limited set of monitors (video surveillance). Four functions:
1.
To aid in public safety
2.
To ID a suspect for arrest (most often what it is used for)
3.
Act as a deterrent for theft and other related crimes
4.
Evidence-gathering tool

During the twentieth century, police made great strides in technological sophistication- concealed weapon detection, interactive stimulation trainers, mobile sensor platforms, sniper identification, and urban mapping-


Categories of police technological application are:
1.
Biometrics
— the use of biological parameters to control people and places (Ie. fingerprinting,
DNA, etc.)
2.
Monitoring — the direct or remote observation of people, places and machines (Ie. video surveillance)
3.
Imaging — analog or digital pictures of people, places and evidence (Ie. to reconstruct crime scenes)
4.
Communications — expanded audio and video communications among agencies and agents
5.
Decision Support — Smart computer software capable of assisting human decision making
6.
Record Keeping — the maintenance of analog and digital databases for retrieval as needed
7.
Weaponry — the use of lethal and non-lethal weapons-

Deaths: 26 people have died shortly after being Tasered

Controversy: Robert Dziekanski, a Polish man in the Vancouver airport who didn’t speak English, was
Tasered by the RCMP 5 times in 2007 —people had video cameras, recorded it; led to public inquiry to see whether Tasers are being used in proper ways

RCMP claim: Tasers do help save lives; they are an immediate device that can be used to reduce the risk of harm, especially when compared to the use of guns (more lethal)

For use especially during riots and crowd maintenance

Victoria Police dept. was one of the first in Canada to use the Taser for a 6 month trial in 1998; led to trial, assessment was that it shouldn't be confused with a less lethal force — must be understood that it could cause death; recommendation was to use sparingly

USA Comparison: has been using them for a while; have about 11500 agencies that use it, 334 people died since 2008 as a result of it; US officers use the Taser more often than Canadian officers

Amnesty International: claimed it shouldn't be used when a suspect is unarme d, doesn’t count as just a threat because it could cause death

RCMP changes (2009) — 1) Reducing Taser use to one shot, and 2) To inform suspects that they were using it (lots of controversy)
(White and Ready (20072010) conducted studies on the Taser’s appropriate use, using it as an alternative, effectiveness, and harm).
 Media’s role in effectiveness: Important in how they portrays technology; usually portray it positively and sends message that it is very effective (fictionally and non-fictionally)

Usage: Want for people to agree for more usage of this technology; if people see it's effective they will be less likely to resist it; can be hidden

Costs: Can be cost-effective, especially in contrast of public and private police (ex. When watching an establishment)

Can just make it look like you're being watched and people will behave better- Panopticon theory

Assumption #1: Cameras never freeze/get dirty/obstructed/destroyed/continuously working

#2. Computers never crash

Public Support: Usually not fuelled by evidence that it works, but rather fear of crime and that this technology will prevent it; most info the public gets is from the media and the media says its effective