By Eisha Jain

This Essay argues that racial reckoning in policing should include a racial reckoning in the use of criminal records. Arrests alone—regardless of whether they result in convictions—create criminal records. Yet because the literature on criminal records most often focuses on prisoner reentry and on the consequences of criminal conviction, it is easy to overlook the connections between policing decisions and collateral consequences. This Essay employs the sociological framework of marking to show how criminal records entrench racial inequality stemming from policing. The marking framework recognizes that the government creates a negative credential every time it creates a record of arrest as well as conviction. Such records, in turn, trigger cascading consequences for employment, housing, immigration, and a host of other areas. The credentialing process matters because it enables and conceals race-based discrimination, and because a focus on the formal sentence often renders this discrimination invisible. This Essay considers how adopting a credentialing framework offers a way to surface, and ultimately to address, how race-based policing leaves lasting marks on over-policed communities.

Stanford Law Review Online, Volume 73, 2021. 18p.

By Jessica M. Eaglin

Much public debate circles around grassroots activists’ demand to “defund the police,” raised in public consciousness in the summer of 2020. Yet confusion about the demand is pervasive. This Essay adopts a literal interpretation of “defund” to clarify and distinguish four alternative, substantive policy positions that legal reforms related to police funding can validate. It argues that the policy debates between these positions exist on top of the ideological critique launched by grassroots activists, who use the term “defund the police” as a discursive tactic to make visible deeper transformations in government practices that normalize the structural marginalization of black people enforced through criminal law. w. By recognizing this socially contextualized meaning to the call to defund the police, this Essay offers two important insights for the public in this current moment. First, it urges the public to confront the structural marginalization of black people when evaluating legal reforms that may impact police budgets. Second, the Essay encourages the public to embrace the state of confusion produced by the demand to “defund the police” when considering social reforms going forward.

Stanford Law Review Online Volume 73 (2020-2021), 21p.

By The College of Policing (UK)

Key points Successfully identify stalking or harassment „ Think stalking first using the stalking mnemonic FOUR. Are the behaviours Fixated, Obsessive, Unwanted and Repeated? „ In cases of harassment, review and reconsider why the case does not meet the description of stalking. Investigate thoroughly „ Establish any pattern of behaviour and relevant history, reported or otherwise. „ Follow all lines of enquiry, whether they point towards or away from the suspect. „ In cases of stalking or harassment it is likely there will have been use of technology to facilitate the behaviour, and reasonable lines of enquiry must be pursued. Care for the victim „ Be compassionate and understanding in your approach. „ Do not make judgements about a victim’s behaviour – focus on the evidence. „ Remember that safeguarding the victim and reducing risk take priority over a criminal justice outcome. „ Recognise that victims may be traumatised and in need of specialist support. „ Remember that victims may be entitled to an enhanced service under the Code of Practice for Victims of Crime. „ Keep the victim updated on relevant stages of the investigation (eg, arrest, charge or release).

This advice will assist investigators responsible for a case once it has been transferred following the initial police response. This may be investigators working within public protection or CID, or in some forces, local policing investigators who retain stalking or harassment cases following an initial response

London: College of Policing (UK), 2024. 33p.

May Contain Mark-Ups

Designing Out Crime from Products and Systems Edited by Ronald V. Clarke & Graeme R. Newman

The book “Designing Out Crime from Products and Systems,” edited by Ronald V. Clarke and Graeme R. Newman, provides a comprehensive overview of how effective design can significantly reduce crime. It explores various successful initiatives from around the world, focusing on modifying products and systems to make them less susceptible to criminal exploitation. The book covers a wide range of topics, including the role of government and the corporate sector in crime prevention, the fundamentals of crime-proofing design, and specific case studies such as the U.K. vehicle licensing system and the security coding of electronic products. By analyzing these examples, the editors highlight the importance of incorporating crime prevention into the design process from the outset, rather than relying on reactive measures. One of the key themes of the book is the concept of“situational crime prevention,” which involves altering the environment or the design of products to reduce opportunities for crime. The editors argue that many crimes can be prevented by making relatively simple changes to the design of everyday objects and systems. For instance, the book discusses how the introduction of tamper-proof packaging for pharmaceuticals significantly reduced incidents of product tampering. It also emphasizes the need for collaboration between designers, manufacturers, and policymakers to create products that are both functional and secure. Overall, the book serves as a valuable resource for anyone interested in understanding how design can be used as a tool for crime prevention

Criminal Justice Press, 2005, 265 pages