By Emily Owens and Emily Hope Anderson

We analyze 2.3 million stops made by the California Highway Patrol (CHP) in 2022 to better understand who is being stopped (or helped in non-enforcement stops), if there are racial and ethnic disparities in who is being stopped, and suggest possible strategies the CHP could use to reduce unwarranted disparities in stops while also promoting public safety. KEY FINDINGS: 1. As compared to 2019, there were fewer enforcement and non-enforcement stops made by the CHP in 2022. This is likely driven by changes in the number of California drivers and their behavior or by the number of CHP Officers, rather than a reduction in CHP enforcement effort. 2. The overall size of Black-White and Hispanic-White disparities in stop rates, benchmarked to non-enforcement stops, is about the same as it was in 2019. This is true both state-wide, and within individual CHP Divisions. 3. In 2022, CHP Officers were more likely to stop Black or Hispanic people for moving violations than White people. A Veil of Darkness test also suggests the potential presence of bias in stops for moving violations. 4. In 2022, 21% of the traffic enforcement stops made by the CHP were for non-moving violations. These stops for non-moving violations led to 35% of all serious contraband seizures by CHP Officers and 12% of DUI arrests. Officers are more likely to discover serious narcotics in searches following non-moving violations than in searches following moving violations. 5. Black-White and Hispanic-White disparities in stop rates for non-moving violations made a small contribution to overall disparities in stops rates. If the CHP did not make any stops for non-moving violations in 2022, Black-White disparities in stop rates would have been 2.9% lower, and Hispanic-White disparities would have been 2.2% lower.  RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. The CHP should consider further investigation into the quantity and specific type of contraband seized when conducting searches; this information is currently not included in RIPA data. This would allow for a more formal cost-benefit analysis of making stops for non-moving violations. 2. The CHP may want to consider increased use of technology in making stops for moving violations. Statistical tests suggest that stops made where speed information is gathered by radar, lidar, or airplane, are less likely to involve nonWhite drivers than stops made when a CHP Officer collects speed information by driving alongside or behind the potentially speeding car.   

Berkeley: California Policy Lab, 2024. 56p.

By Ben Grunwald

Beginning in 2020, law enforcement experts widely claimed that a surge in police separations triggered a national retention crisis and that political activism after George Floyd's murder was a principal cause. We lack data, however, to track such trends in the national police labor market. Using information from Police Officer Safety and Training (POST) agencies, I construct an Interstate Police Employment Database (IPED) on every job held by every officer in all 6,800 local law enforcement agencies across fifteen states that, together, cover half the U.S. population. I then conduct the largest empirical study of the law enforcement labor market to date. My findings show that the increase in separations in IPED agencies after the summer of 2020 was smaller, later, less sudden, and possibly less pervasive than the retention-crisis narrative suggests. All told, the cumulative impact on the labor force by the end of 2021 was just 1%. Aggregate figures, however, mask variation at the agency level. As I show, a substantial minority of large agencies meaningfully shrank by the end of 2021. I also provide evidence that local political activism cannot explain local separation rates, raising some doubt about whether the protests were a principal cause of rising turnover.

Duke Law School Public Law & Legal Theory Series No. 2024-41

By Ben Grunwald

Beginning in 2020, law enforcement experts widely claimed that a surge in police separations triggered a national retention crisis and that political activism after George Floyd's murder was a principal cause. We lack data, however, to track such trends in the national police labor market. Using information from Police Officer Safety and Training (POST) agencies, I constructed an Interstate Police Employment Database (IPED) on every job held by every officer in all 6,800 local law enforcement agencies across fifteen states that, together, cover half the U.S. population. I then conduct the largest empirical study of the law enforcement labor market to date. My findings show that the increase in separations in IPED agencies after the summer of 2020 was smaller, later, less sudden, and possibly less pervasive than the retention-crisis narrative suggests. All told, the cumulative impact on the labor force by the end of 2021 was just 1%. Aggregate figures, however, mask variation at the agency level. As I show, a substantial minority of large agencies meaningfully shrank by the end of 2021. I also provide evidence that local political activism cannot explain local separation rates, raising some doubt about whether the protests were a principal cause of rising turnover.

Duke Law School Public Law & Legal Theory Series No. 2024-41

By Kristi Barksdale and Tully Yount

Since December 2018, the National Sheriffs’ Association (NSA) and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS Office) have been hosting and actively participating in meetings with border sheriffs to discuss their unique needs and challenges. The purpose of these meetings was to provide the NSA, the COPS Office, and other DOJ stakeholders with a better understanding of border security needs and to identify gaps for personnel and equipment, as well as training and technical assistance. More than 130 people participated in three roundtable and focus group discussions. The first meeting, held in December 2018 in Rockwall, Texas, featured a roundtable of Texas sheriffs discussing their need for support and equipment needs, funding opportunities, personnel shortages, and operational control. Promising practices discussed included an introduction to the North Texas Criminal Interdiction Unit (NTXCIU). Continuing the conversations, the NSA and the COPS Office called on the Southwestern Border Sheriffs’ Coalition (SWBSC) to participate in two focus group sessions facilitated by NSA, the COPS Office, and CNA on next steps. The first focus group session took place during the Western State Sheriffs’ Association meeting in Reno, Nevada, and the second, in which the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) also took part, at the SWBSC annual conference in Del Rio, Texas. They continued the discussion of the DOJ and DHS’s commitment to supporting sheriffs. Federal representatives presented on initiatives and projects being deployed to meet the needs of sheriffs. Throughout these meetings, border sheriffs made it clear that they were facing a number of challenges. Participating sheriffs agreed that they could always use more training and would continue to accept any training opportunities that were made available. They responded well to the NTXCIU presentations where they gained knowledge on basic criminal interdiction and how to build a criminal interdiction unit. Participants also discussed their need for more technology, such as automatic license plate readers and x-ray machines. To allow sheriffs who had not participated in the roundtables an opportunity to voice their needs, the NSA, in coordination with the COPS Office, sent a needs assessment to northern and southwestern border sheriffs to gather a comprehensive list.  

Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services , 2020. 28p.

By The International Association of Chiefs of Police.

Published by the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS), this publication discusses peer support as an important part of an officer wellness strategy. Employees may feel more comfortable initially seeking support from a peer who understands the context and has experienced the same stressors. This guide provides a road map for small and rural law enforcement agencies implementing or enhancing peer support services. It highlights promising practices and provides brief case studies of peer support programs in three small or rural agencies. Topics include establishing trust and buy-in; identifying, training, and supporting team members and leaders; confidentiality; local and regional partnerships; and evaluation metrics.

Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. Published 2023 ..32p.

By  Michael Vitoroulis, Cameron McEllhiney, Liana Perez

In the 2010s, viral videos of seemingly routine police encounters depicting tragedy have sent shockwaves through both communities and law enforcement agencies across the country, setting off a national conversation on the relationship communities have with law enforcement. At the national level, these encounters have coincided with reduced public confidence in American policing, particularly among youth and minority populations.  While low levels of trust have existed in certain communities throughout history, the most recent wave of high-profile incidents has prompted widespread calls to meaningfully address issues of community concern, such as officer-involved shootings and excessive force, discriminatory policing, aggressive crime fighting strategies, and accountability for misconduct. Across the nation, law enforcement leaders, academics, and government officials have seemingly reached a consensus that addressing such issues with a focus on public trust and legitimacy is integral to fair and effective public safety in an increasingly diverse nation. The response by governments, law enforcement executives, community groups, and technical advisors to the challenge of mending police-community relations has been significant. In the aftermath of unrest in Ferguson, Missouri, and elsewhere, then President Barack Obama established the Task Force on 21st Century Policing to identify policing practices that promote public safety and build community trust in law enforcement. The Final Report of the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing, published in May 2015, offered several recommendations, including many relating to public trust, procedural justice, and legitimacy; accountability and transparency; community policing efforts; and the inclusion of community members in policy development, training programs, and review of force incidents. In addition, the task force’s report recommended that civilian oversight of law enforcement be established in accordance with the needs of the community and input from local law enforcement stakeholders. Civilian oversight of law enforcement can contribute significantly to the implementation and institutionalization of many of the task force’s recommendations and further the development of public trust, legitimacy, cooperation, and collaboration necessary to improve police-community relations and enhance public safety. Community efforts to address the issue of police-community relations increasingly include civilian oversight of law enforcement as a means of building trust. Traditionally, high-profile incidents have spawned the creation of new or strengthened civilian oversight.  However, decision makers in jurisdictions throughout the country are increasingly establishing civilian oversight proactively in recognition of its ability to promote public trust in law enforcement and reduce exposure to the risks of misconduct. At its core, civilian oversight can be broadly defined as the independent, external, and ongoing review of a law enforcement agency and its operations by individuals outside of the law enforcement agency being overseen. Civilian oversight may entail, but is not limited to, the independent investigation of complaints alleging officer misconduct, auditing or monitoring various aspects of the overseen law enforcement agency, analyzing patterns or trends in activity, issuing public reports, and issuing recommendations on discipline, training, policies, and procedures. Taken together, these functions can promote greater law enforcement accountability, increased transparency, positive organizational change, and improved responsiveness to community needs and concerns. By acting as an independent and neutral body reviewing the work of the law enforcement agency and its sworn staff, civilian oversight of law enforcement offers a unique element of legitimacy that internal accountability and review mechanisms simply cannot. Because civilian oversight agencies operate outside of the overseen law enforcement agency, and report to local stakeholders outside of its chain of command, the findings and reports of an oversight agency are free from the real or perceived biases that are often the source of mistrust in a law enforcement agency’s internal systems. Similarly, a civilian oversight agency’s impartiality, neutrality, and adherence to findings of fact can alleviate officer skepticism in internal systems and bolster procedural fairness within the law enforcement agency as a whole. The organizational structure and authority of civilian oversight agencies in the United States varies widely. While civilian oversight agencies can be broadly categorized into review-focused, investigation-focused, or auditor/monitor-focused models, no two oversight agencies are exactly alike. There is no one-size-fits-all approach that makes one form of civilian oversight better than another.6 Effective civilian oversight systems will reflect the particular needs of their local partners and incorporate feedback from community members, law enforcement and their unions, and government stakeholders in order to achieve the most sustainable and appropriate structure. As the field of civilian oversight grows in sophistication, many cities are combining various aspects of traditional oversight models to produce “hybrid” forms best suited for their local context. 

While the establishment of civilian oversight alone cannot restore law enforcement’s legitimacy, it is difficult, if not impossible, to maintain public trust without it. As such, developing effective and adequately resourced civilian oversight is among the several strategies that must be employed to rebuild community relations with law enforcement. This report is intended to provide the reader with the information necessary to better understand civilian oversight, its principles, and its history; discuss effective practices; and guide communities in the establishment of sustainable civilian oversight mechanisms. The first half of this report provides a brief overview of the history of civilian oversight, the features of traditional oversight models, and original insights on trends and developments on the current state of the field. This includes information on the geography of civilian oversight, patterns in oversight agency functions and authority, oversight staffing and resourcing, oversight agency access to department records and information, and developments in community outreach functions performed by oversight agencies across the country. This information is intended to fill existing gaps in the literature on civilian oversight and provide stakeholders with a broader understanding of the contemporary civilian oversight landscape. The second half of this report focuses on the principles that underlie effective civilian oversight and the recommended practices that bolster an oversight agency’s ability to adhere to these principles. In total, this report offers 73 recommendations across 16 core areas of civilian oversight, such as independence, access to information, processing and managing complaints, analyzing law enforcement policies and data, issuing public reports, evaluating a civilian oversight agency, and performing community outreach. These recommendations have been developed with input from seasoned oversight professionals throughout the country and include commentary as well as additional references that can assist in their implementation. While these recommendations do not cover all aspects of civilian oversight, stakeholders should take them into consideration and determine their propriety in their local contexts. As a whole, this report is one of many ongoing efforts to expand and improve civilian oversight of law enforcement throughout the country. Moving forward, additional research and resources from a variety of sources are still necessary to develop further guidance and understanding of this rapidly growing and evolving field.    

Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 2021. 176p.

By Beth A. Colgan

Highly publicized killings of people by law enforcement during traffic stops have led to a growing interest in traffic enforcement reform. While some see automated traffic enforcement and unarmed civilian units as a way to decrease interactions with law enforcement in hopes of decreasing police killings, it fails to address traditional traffic enforcement’s budgetary and racial problems. This article argues that this shift may lead to more enforcement of other codes that can create opportunities for violence and revenue extraction in overpoliced communities of color. The article concludes with a urging for more expansive and systemic changes to account for the revenue-generating economy of traffic enforcement.    

Key Findings: 

• Nonpayment of economic sanctions stemming from traffic tickets may trigger arrest warrants, vehicle impoundment, or a suspended driver’s license, which may carry additional costs.

• Law enforcement uses traffic codes as a weapon to implement pretextual stops to make traffic-based forfeitures.

• Research suggests revenue generation may push law enforcement officers away from investigating violent and property offenses and toward traffic enforcement and drug interdiction.

• Studies suggest law enforcement’s ability to retain forfeiture revenue has helped motivate the war on drugs.

Recommendations: 

• Afford a statutory right to counsel in cases involving fines and forfeitures.

• Require a criminal conviction before forfeiture in nearly all cases.

• Eliminate the federal Equitable Sharing program or pass laws that prohibit participation in the program.

• Reduce law enforcement dependency on fines, fees, and forfeiture revenue by redirecting them elsewhere

North Carolina Law Review, Vol. 100, 889-958 (2023)

By The Honorable Edwin Meese III and John G. Malcol

It is a time of change and transition for many in America’s law enforcement community. Across much of the nation, police and sheriffs find themselves on the front lines of the opioid crisis, struggling to deal with the scope of the epidemic and the new challenges and dangers to officers it presents. At the same time, communities are increasingly turning to law enforcement officials to address other issues, such as dealing with disruptive or downright violent individuals suffering from mental illness, placing still further demands on these departments. tackling these diverse and multitudinous missions without compromising community safety is often a difficult proposition, particularly in light of the budgetary and resource constraints many law enforcement agencies face. All the while, police and sheriffs are facing internal pressures as experienced officers retire and departments work to attract young, talented recruits and diversify their ranks. those tasks are made all the more difficult by persistent narratives in mainstream and social media that paint policing as “systemically racist”—and which have the effect of encouraging antipathy towards the profession. What is needed now are thoughtful, innovative approaches to tackling these challenges. In this effort, America’s midsize police departments and sheriff’s offices are helping to lead the way. these agencies are large enough to test solutions applicable to much larger departments, but small enough to remain agile and adaptable in the face of changing circumstances, making them well-suited to serving as laboratories of innovation. Recent history bears this out. Some midsize departments have discovered creative means of overcoming funding limitations to properly equip their officers. Law enforcement leaders have developed new programs for community outreach and engagement, which have built trust and eased tensions within their jurisdictions. Some have demonstrated the value of better educating their officers on history—including the undisputed fact that many agencies once enforced racist laws (or neutral laws in a discriminatory manner)—to build empathy and reduce tensions with members of the community. And departments are increasingly training officers in tactics and techniques to de-escalate confrontational situations, as well as employing new technologies—such as data-driven policing, body-worn cameras, and even drones—to improve their operations. With these issues in mind, in January 2018, the Heritage Foundation convened its second policing.  Strategy Summit. While the 2017 summit focused on the major cities’ police and the nation’s largest departments, this summit brought together a diverse group of leaders from midsize law enforcement agencies across the country, along with representatives from national law enforcement organizations, police unions, and professionals with extensive federal, state, and local experience. As was the case with the first Policing Strategy Summit, this meeting had three principal objectives: 1. Identify the most pressing problems that law enforcement agencies face today, including the breakdown in trust, adequacy of training, proper use of new technologies, media, and community relations, and the gathering and sharing of data; 2. Identify the best practices and most innovative approaches that law enforcement authorities are employing to address these problems and combat crime; 3. Identify the most effective means of communicating with public and political leaders, building trust improving police-community relations, and bringing the needs and concerns of police agencies to the attention of federal officials. the following represents the proceedings of the Policing Strategy Summit. It does not necessarily reflect the views of specific attendees or organizations but seeks to capture the wide-ranging discussion that took place at the summit.   

Washington DC: The Heritage Foundation, 2024. 31p.

By Ben Grunwald, John Rappaport, Kyle Rozema

We investigate the labor market consequences of police discipline for serious misconduct. To do so, we use data on employment for all Florida law enforcement officers and on 1,818 incidents of misconduct recorded by the state licensing board between 2000 and 2016. We find that discipline increases at least sixfold the likelihood that an officer separates from their department and the likelihood that their law enforcement career in Florida ends. We also find, however, that unions protect officers from at least one-fourth of the consequences of discipline. Our results suggest that the common narrative that police officers wear a badge of impunity is not always accurate.

Duke Law School Public Law & Legal Theory Series No. 2024-55,

By Security Insight

Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology can completely transform policing; from advanced criminal analytics that reveal trends in vast amounts of data, to biometrics that allow the prompt and unique identification of criminals. With the AI and policing report, produced through the Observatory function of the Europol Innovation Lab, we aim to provide insight into the present and future capabilities that AI offers, projecting a course for a more efficient, responsive, and effective law enforcement model. This report offers an in-depth exploration of the applications and implications of AI in the field of law enforcement, underpinned by the European Union's regulatory framework. It also looks at concerns about data bias, fairness, and potential threats to privacy, accountability, human rights protection, and discrimination, which are particularly relevant in the background of the EU's Artificial Intelligence Act.

 The Hague: EUROPOL, 2024. 61p.

By: Leslie Tutty, Jennifer Koshan, Deborah Jesso, Cindy Ogden, and Jacqueline G. Warrell

The serious nature of intimate partner violence and the harm to women and their children has been acknowledged in numerous documents (Statistics Canada, 2005; Tutty & Goard, 2002). The costs to society for charging abusive partners and providing treatment in the hope of stopping domestic violence are substantial (Bowlus, McKenna, Day & Wright, 2003; Greaves, Hankivsky, & Kingston-Reichers, 1995; Healey, Smith, & O‘Sullivan, 1998).

The criminal justice system is an institution that deals with a high number of cases of domestic assaults yearly. While there is no separate domestic violence offence, abusers are subject to a variety of charges, from common assault to uttering threats to murder, that would apply to anyone regardless of the relationship between the victim and the perpetrator. Nevertheless, the dynamics and the intimate relationship between the accused and the victims in domestic violence cases, has severely challenged the criminal justice response that typically deals with crimes committed by strangers.

Beginning with the development of the court in Winnipeg in 1991, specialized domestic violence courts have become increasingly available across Canada with the goal of more effectively addressing the criminal justice response to domestic violence. The extensive effort involved in creating such specialized justice responses should be acknowledged. To date, however, few evaluations have been published that assess whether these initiatives make a difference, exceptions being the work of Ursel in Winnipeg, the Yukon Domestic Violence Treatment Option (Hornick, Boyes, Tutty & White, 2005: funded by NCPC), some courts in Ontario (Moyer, Rettinger & Hotton (2000), cited in Clarke, 2003; Dawson & Dinovitzer, 2001), and Tutty and Ursel in the Canadian prairie provinces (Ursel, Tutty, & LeMaistre, 2008).

Calgary‘s model developed in early 2000 with the input of key players from not only the criminal justice institutions such as police services, the Crown Prosecutor offices, probation, Legal Aid and the defence bar, but also community agencies that offer batterer intervention programs and support, shelter and advocacy for victims. The model was innovative, with the initial emphasis on a specialized domestic violence docket court with the aim of speeding up the process for those charges with domestic abuse offences to both allow low risk offenders to take responsibility for their actions and speed their entry into treatment.

Such actions were thought to better safeguard victims, both because their partners were mandated to treatment much earlier, and to prevent repercussions to victims who, if the case proceeded to court, might be required to testify. Crisis intervention theory has long posited that the sooner one receives intervention, the more likely the counselling will be effective (Roberts & Everly, 2006). Also, the safety and wishes of the victims are taken into consideration by the court team early on in the process, while the assault is still fresh in their minds and they are not influenced by the accused to the same extent as they might be later on.

The National Crime Prevention Centre of Public Safety Canada and The Alberta Law Foundation March 2011

By Brittany C. Cunningham, Bryce E. Peterson, Daniel S. Lawrence, Michael D. White, James R. Coldren, Jr., Jennifer Lafferty, Keri Richardson

Over the past decade, thousands of law enforcement agencies in the United States have adopted body‑worn cameras (BWCs) (Hyland, 2018). The rapid diffusion of these devices has been driven by several factors, most notably numerous controversial uses of force by police against community members of color and evidence suggesting that BWCs can produce a range of positive outcomes like reductions in complaints and uses of force (Braga et al., 2018; Peterson & Lawrence, 2021; Sutherland et al., 2017), added evidentiary value in investigations and downstream court proceedings (Huff et al., 2023; Todak et al., 2023), and enhanced perceptions of procedural justice and police legitimacy (Demir et al., 2020; McCluskey et al., 2019). The demand for police BWCs has continued unabated into the 2020s (National Conference of State Legislatures, 2022; White & Malm, 2020), and interest has now expanded to corrections. By 2023, at least ten state prison systems have begun the process of deploying BWCs, with many local jails following suit (Bogel-Burroughs, 2022; Brodie et al., 2020; Welsh-Huggins, 2021; Winton, 2021). Despite this expansion, there is limited research on the impact of these devices in prisons or jails. There are also fundamental differences between correctional and law enforcement settings that researchers must consider. For example, correctional officers interact with incarcerated residents on a more consistent and long-term basis than police interact with civilians. Prisons and jails also include a high concentration of vulnerable populations, including people under serious psychological distress and experiencing mental and behavioral health challenges (Maruschak et al., 2021). Another potential concern is that BWCs are redundant in prisons and jails because these environments are already saturated with stationary surveillance cameras (Allard et al., 2006). Although the stationary camera networks in many correctional facilitates are outdated and suffer from blind spots (Lawrence et al., 2022), it is not yet clear whether BWCs offer any added benefits beyond what is captured through these extant systems. For example, can BWCs provide additional evidentiary value in the investigation of misconduct incidents or staff uses of force? The current brief seeks to address this knowledge gap by examining the footage of response-to-resistance (RTR) events produced by BWCs compared to stationary closed-circuit television (CCTV) cameras in a correctional setting. The following sections describe the background of the current study, our approach to reviewing BWC and  stationary CCTV camera footage, and our key findings.

Arlington, VA: CNA, 2023. 16p.

By Brittany Cunningham, Jessica Dockstader, Zoe Thorkildsen

Officer safety is of critical importance in an era of increased risk for law enforcement officers. Law enforcement officers (hereafter, “officers”) respond to some of the most unpredictable, traumatic, and violent encounters of any profession.1 Although much of an officer’s workday entails repetitive interactions, some calls for service or self-initiated interactions by police officers may escalate into dangerous encounters. According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI’s) Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted (LEOKA) Program, between 2010 and 2018, an average of 51 officers died in a felonious killing per year. LEOKA defines a felonious killing as an “incident type in which the willful and intentional actions of an offender result in the fatal injury of an officer who is performing his or her official duties.” Regardless of how officer line-of-duty deaths, assaults, or injuries occur, the consequences are tragic and complex, affecting officers’
work and home life.2 Just as de-escalation, defusing, and crisis intervention tactics are paramount today, so is officer safety. This brief provides an accessible resource for law enforcement agencies, line officers, and their stakeholders (e.g., policy-makers, training instructors) to inform the development of targeted training, policies, and practices to promote officer safety while in the line of duty. Specifically, this brief offers the following:

•  a summary of officer safety risks related to calls for services, traffic-related encounters, ambushes, and blue-on-blue encounters;

• recommendations for promoting officer safety related to tactical preparedness; and

• real-world policing initiatives that serve as examples of practices in the field to improve officer safety.

Arlington, VA: CNA, 2021. 24p.

By The Europol Innovation Lab ( © European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation, 2024

This report aims to provide the law enforcement community with a comprehensive understanding of the various applications and uses of artificial intelligence (AI) in their daily operations. It seeks to serve as a textbook for internal security practitioners, offering guidance on how to responsibly and compliantly implement AI technologies. In addition to showcasing the potential benefits and innovative applications of AI, such as AI-driven data analytics, the report also aims to raise awareness about the potential pitfalls and ethical considerations of AI use in law enforcement. By addressing these challenges, the report endeavours to equip law enforcement professionals with the knowledge necessary to navigate the complexities of AI, ensuring its effective and ethical deployment in their work. The report focuses on large and complex data sets, open-source intelligence (OSINT) and natural language processing (NLP). It also delves into the realm of digital forensics, computer vision, biometrics, and touches on the potential of generative AI. The use of AI by law enforcement is increasingly scrutinised due to its ethical and societal dimensions. The report attempts to address concerns about data bias, fairness, and potential encroachments on privacy, accountability, human rights protection and discrimination. These concerns become particularly relevant in the context of the EU’s Artificial Intelligence Act (EU AI Act), an overview of which is detailed in this report, as well as its broader context. The report emphasises the significance of the forthcoming regulation, detailing its objectives, scope, and principal provisions. The Act’s implications for law enforcement agencies are also discussed, emphasising the balance between fostering innovation and ensuring ethical use beyond compliance. Central to the report is the assessment of how law enforcement can maintain a delicate balance between leveraging AI’s benefits and addressing its inherent restrictions. Strategies for addressing bias, privacy concerns, and the pivotal role of accountability frameworks, are elaborated. The report highlights the importance of innovative regulatory environments. The concluding section forecasts the trajectory of AI in law enforcement, underscoring the potential technological advancements on the horizon. It also emphasises the need for public trust and acceptance, and the importance of collaboration and knowledge sharing. This comprehensive document serves as both a guide and a reflective tool for stakeholders vested in the confluence of AI and law enforcement within the European landscape.  

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2 : 2024. 61p.

By The Policing Project, NYU School of Law

This model statute gives guidance on how states should proceed to remove some of the barriers to law enforcement officer accountability and oversight commonly found in state or municipal laws (often enacted as provisions of Law of Enforcement Officers’ Bill of Rights (“LEOBORs”)), and collective bargaining agreements (“CBAs”).1 The statute also clarifies common procedural protections for officers that states should provide because they further due process, do not impede accountability, and fall in line with the protections afforded to other public employees. Accordingly, in states with LEOBOR or other statutory provisions that this model statute prohibits, legislatures should repeal those provisions. Except where state peace officer standards and training boards (“POST boards”) are expressly invoked in this statute, the provisions of this statute are not intended to apply to state POST boards. The model statute also contains provisions setting forth (a) minimum requirements in law enforcement agency complaint policies and (b) clear rules for governing public access to complaints and related investigatory materials, agency disciplinary matrices, and CBAs

New York: Policing Project, NYU School of Law, 2024. 26p.

By Monique Jenkins, Jessica Dockstader, Sharon Oster, Thomas Woodmansee, and Mary O’Connor

Though effective training is an important part of all professions, it is especially crucial for those that include high levels of stress and life-or-death situations—like law enforcement. Accordingly, law enforcement agencies spend considerable time and resources on training—paying recruits to attend police academies, managing field-training programs, ensuring the resources and equipment needed to conduct in-service trainings along with sending staff or soliciting experts for external trainings. Field training is often described as the most important stage in an officer’s career; Time spent with a field training officer (FTO) is vital to a trainee’s career development and helps shape the culture of an agency. Recently, American policing has seen a shift in its public perception as a result of highly publicized officer involved use of force incidents. Some of the involved officers have been field training officers. Research shows that trainees’ behavior is directly correlated to the field training they receive, with FTOs having a statistically significant effect on subsequent allegations of misconduct brought against trainees. Further, a gap in research exists surrounding the effectiveness of field training practices, the impact of a field training officer on the recruit’s retention of academy knowledge, and the processes by which departments select and recruit FTOs. This gap has led to a lack of standardization among law enforcement agencies on these topics. Despite the importance of police officer training, a common saying that trainees hear is “forget what you learned in the academy—the real learning begins now,” signifying the disconnect between classroom lessons and the real-world setting.

Case Study: Six Police Field Training Programs

CNA’s Center for Justice Research and Innovation seeks to further explore police field training programs around the country in an effort to highlight promising practices, identify areas for improvement, and promote information sharing. The research team recruited six agencies for a case study to answer the following questions:

• Are participating law enforcement agencies using similar processes and procedures for their field training programs?

• Are there common qualifications and standards across participating law enforcement agencies that an officer must meet in order to become a field training officer?

• Are there common qualifications, experiences, performance standards, and accountability measures that officers must demonstrate in order to remain a field training officer in participating agencies?

CNA conducted six to ten semi structured interviews with various members of each department, including officers in the field training program, officers post-field training, current field training officers, and former field training officers. We also reviewed written documents from each agency, including position postings for field training officers, written policies and procedures pertaining to the field training program, and training materials and curriculum pertaining to the field training program.

Areas for Improvement in Police Officer Field Training

The research team identified themes that were important to address within each of the field training programs: Trainer Requirements, Preparation, and Incentives; Pairing of Trainers and Trainees; and Trainer Evaluation and Trainee Communication. We also felt it was important to highlight the perceptions about the field training programs from the perspectives of both the FTOs and the trainees.

Our research found a lack of standardization among these practices across agencies. Agencies required various levels of experience for trainers, trained FTOs using different philosophies, and motivated trainers using several methods. The majority of participating departments also did not use a formal method to match trainees and trainers. However, many agencies did strive to ensure each trainee was paired with only one trainer for each phase. When done correctly, this structure allowed trainees to experience different policing and teaching styles so the trainee could adapt and develop their own. Agencies required FTOs to document the training process and communicate with trainees using formal and informal methods. In some agencies, trainers also received formal evaluations from supervisors and trainees and in others, these feedback mechanisms were less formal or did not exist at all.

Trainers in the majority of participating agencies felt a tremendous amount of responsibility and pressure to successfully train the next generation of law enforcement. This pressure, coupled with an insufficient number of available trainers in the cadres, contributed to a consistent pattern of burnout in the position. However, there were trainers who felt that their agency provided enough support for them to remain in the role, despite their fatigue. There were also both positive and negative perceptions of field training from a trainee point of view. Although all trainees recognized the importance of field training, many felt unprepared for the shift from academy learning to hands-on learning. Those trainees with the most positive views of field training shared that their agencies clearly stated expectations for the program, supported the trainers and the trainees, and encouraged open and honest feedback.

Further research should explore standardization of field training programs, career outcomes of trainees as a result of their trainer, effective incentives for trainers, and methods of pairing trainers and trainees. It is our hope that this study will provide helpful information to the law enforcement field regarding FTO programs. We also hope that it will serve as a stepping stone to further analysis that will aid law enforcement agencies in improving FTO programs, thus improving the communities they serve.

Arlington, VA: CNA, 2021. 50p.

By Tom Christoff, Benjamin Carleton, and Theron Bowman

The ability of a police department to act in a fair and just manner is vitally important to creating internal and external trust, which in turn increases the perception of legitimacy by those who work for the department and those the department serves. Law enforcement agencies across the U.S. have faced increased scrutiny from the public in the last several years, with the events of 2020 exacerbating already simmering community relationships. The City of Little Rock has experienced recent issues of internal and external legitimacy stemming from the officer-involved shooting of Bradley Blackshire, a Black man, who was killed by a Little Rock Police Department (LRPD) officer in February 2019. The incident, in which Mr. Blackshire was fired upon at least 15 times, led not only to backlash from the public, but also internal strife within the LRPD. Since the February 2019 incident, the City of Little Rock, LRPD, the Chief of Police, and other members of LRPD have been the subjects of various lawsuits. In response to calls from members and leadership of the LRPD for an investigation, the City of Little Rock, through a competitive bid, selected CNA’s Center for Justice Research and Innovation to conduct an independent audit of the LRPD. This report details the findings and recommendations of this targeted audit of the LRPD. The audit team used a variety of sources, including policies, training records, administrative data, and focus groups and interviews with LPRD personnel to assess the department. Throughout this report we identify both strengths and weaknesses of LRPD’s operations with in the following areas:

1. Personnel policies and procedures

2. Training and professional standards

3. Accountability system data

4. Performance evaluations

5. Promotional process

6. De-escalation

7. Cultural competency

8. Harassment

9. Nepotism

10. Handling of private and confidential information

11. Early Intervention System

12. Body-worn cameras

13. Vehicle pursuits

14. Asset forfeiture

15. Take-home vehicle

Overall, this assessment will help LRPD standardize processes and metrics related to these topic areas, ultimately improving officers’ and community members’ levels of trust in the department.

Arlington, VA: CNA, 2021. 104p.

By Benjamin Carleton, Brittany Cunningham, Zoe Thorkildsen

Policing is an evolving field; law enforcement agencies are being asked to do more with limited resources, forcing agencies and their relevant stakeholders (e.g., policy makers, other justice system agencies, community organizations) to continuously look for new ways to reduce crime, keep communities safe, and effectively allocate resources. The use of predictive analytics has evolved in the last several decades as a promising response to reduce and prevent crime. Predictive analytics in policing “is a data-driven approach to characterizing crime patterns across time and space and leveraging this knowledge for the prevention of crime and disorder” (Fitzpatrick et al. 2019). Traditionally, law enforcement agencies have operated using primarily reactive measures, such as rapid responses to 911 calls, random patrols, and a greater focus on criminal investigations (Brayne 2017; Fitzpatrick et al. 2019). To operate more proactively, agencies have increasingly employed predictive analytics that informs crime prevention strategies. For example, agencies across the US have implemented a number of strategies (e.g., hot spot detection, targeted offender lists, and risk terrain modeling) and software programs that use a variety of predictive analytics to forecast where and when crimes are most likely to occur and to identify offenders and groups or individuals at risk of becoming victims of crimes. Predictive analytics builds on traditional crime analysis practices (e.g., identification of crime trends and patterns). In addition to identifying crime trends and patterns based on crimes that have already occurred, predictive analytics goes a step further, forecasting where and when crime is likely to occur or who is likely to be involved in criminal behavior. It equips agencies with knowledge (i.e., data) to help inform where they should target police operations and resources. Agencies can use this knowledge to operate more efficiently and effectively in their crime reduction efforts and resource allocations. It is important to understand that predictive analytics cannot tell the future very well. These predictions rely on past data and assume that future criminal activity will be similar to that reflected in extant data (sometimes factoring in anticipated future changes). This reliance on past data also means that predictive techniques can reinforce systemic bias, racial and otherwise, present in past justice system actions. The objective of this brief is to provide an accessible resource for law enforcement agencies and their stakeholders (e.g., crime analysts, policy makers, and researchers) interested in learning more about the role of predictive analytics in police operations. Specifically, this brief offers the following:

• Summarizes the use of predictive analytics to inform policing operations

• Distinguishes between approaches to predictive analytics (person-based and place-based)

• Highlights the emergence of machine learning algorithms as a preferred predictive analytics technique

• Delineates considerations and limitations brought forth in recent literature that law enforcement agencies must consider when using predictive analytics to reduce and prevent crime

• Summarizes several research studies and real-world policing initiatives as examples of how the use of predictive analytics can inform policing practice

Arlington, VA: CNA, 2000. 32p.

By Bridgette Bryson and Zoë Thorkildsen

Law enforcement agencies across the country continuously face challenges due to the ever-changing nature of policing, especially with recent events including the deaths of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor. These recent events have called into question the objectivity and fairness of policing practices. These developments  signal a need for strengthened police-community relations, and the Town of Niskayuna, New York, and the Niskayuna Police Department (NPD) are working hard to ensure their community has positive relationships with their police department. This audit provides baseline information to inform the Town of Niskayuna’s response to Governor Andrew M. Cuomo’s Executive Order No. 203: New York State Police Reform and Reinvention Collaborative.1 In December of 2020, the Town of Niskayuna developed a contract with CNA’s Center for Justice Research and Innovation to conduct a racial bias audit of the NPD. This assessment focused on  policies and practices, while also touching on more than racial matters. These types of assessments can help police departments gauge the status of community  relationships and work towards improvement. CNA designed this racial bias audit to accomplish the following:

• Assess NPD’s internal operations, policies, and procedures to detect the presence of implicit bias and systemic racial bias.

• Collect and analyze data related to traffic stops, use of force, and other police officer/civilian interactions to determine disparate outcomes for Black and Brown community members.

• Assess compliance with existing police reform policies initiated by NPD.

• Provide actionable recommendations (e.g., realistic within legal, budgetary, and organizational constraints) for reforms that reduce or eliminate racial and implicit biases in policing deployments, strategies, policies, procedures, and practices. These recommendations focus on specific, measurable issues. Such recommendations must meet the following requirements:

  • Promote community engagement, transparency, professionalism, accountability, community inclusion, fairness, effectiveness, and public trust; 

  • Be guided by evidence-based best practices and community expectations; and 

  • Are likely, given meaningful organizational support, to reduce or eliminate racial and implicit biases in policing deployments, strategies, policies,  procedures and practices.

Based on CNA’s review of policies, procedures, and practices, as well as data provided by the NPD, our key findings included the following:

• NPD’s traffic stops data collection process should be refined to help the department further understand its activity for all outcomes and why the activities may look different over time.

• NPD lacks body-worn cameras (BWCs) for its officers and should obtain funding to outfit all officers, patrol officers at a minimum, with the cameras.

• NPD’s complaint process is not clearly written and is poorly understood by officers and community members. NPD should clarify the process and structure it to be open and transparent.

• Currently, there is no disciplinary matrix in place to make certain that officers receive equitable discipline outcomes, to ensure there are no disparities among discipline across race, ethnicity, and gender.

• NPD does not utilize an early intervention system to identify behavioral issues, signs of job exhaustion, and training concerns that could be handled in a proactive manner before an issue arises.

• NPD’s newly revised use of force policy is a very clear and detailed policy that defines when different types of force are justified.

• Currently, there is no formal tracking system for use of force incidents other than the department’s paper filing system. Creating a database to track these incidents will allow the department to begin developing annual summary reports of all use of force in the department.

• NPD currently does not have a strong commitment to community policing practices; however, personnel are very interested and open to working to employ proactive policing strategies, as opposed to reactive.

• NPD does not have designated personnel that oversee the department’s community engagement efforts; however, this has not weakened the trusting relationship expressed by community members and NPD officers.

• NPD personnel have not received sufficient training in the past; however, the new administration is prioritizing training for all officers in various topic areas.

• There are no formal recruitment plans in place, especially for people of color, women, and youth in the community.

• NPD personnel lack trust in the promotion and specialty assignment process.

• NPD does not have a performance evaluation process in place; not all officers receive informal feedback on their performance.

Over the next 12 to 18 months, NPD will work with the Town of Niskayuna officials and community leaders to digest, prioritize, and implement the recommendations proposed in this report, reflecting its dedication to improving community trust, eliminating racial disparities and bias, providing more transparency, and creating a collaborative working environment. We recommend that the NPD and the Town of Niskayuna seek an independent firm to help implement the proposed recommendations and track NPD’s progress. 

Arlington, VA: CNA, 2021. 88p.

By Kees Kuiken

“Soldiers, Cops, Bannermen: The Rise and Fall of the First Communist Chinese PoliceState1931-1969”by Kees Kuiken, discusses the history of the Chinese police state from1931 to 1969. The book explores topics such as the role of police in maintaining control, the transition from soldiers to cops, and the challenges faced by the police state. The book also examines the historical context of China’s quest for order and the evolution of the police system in the Chinese Empire.

Wolters-Noordhoff, 1993 - 143 pages