By Timothy C. Barnum, Shaina Herman, Jean-Louis van Gelder, Denis Ribeaud, Manuel Eisner, Daniel S. Nagin

Guardianship is a core tenet of routine activity theory and collective efficacy. At its outset, routine activity research assumed that the mere presence of a guardian was sufficient to disrupt many forms of crime. More recent research, however, has taken as a starting point that would-be-guardians must take on an active role for a reduction in crime to occur. Integrating research on bystander intervention and guardianship-in-action, the current study elaborates the individual-level motivations and decision processes of guardianship to answer the following questions: Who serves as a reactive guardian? How do they do so? And why? We tasked young adults (N = 1,032) included in the recent waves of the Zurich Project on the Social Development from Childhood to Adulthood (z-proso) to assess a 70-second video depicting a sexual harassment event. We examined participants’ willingness to engage in a range of intervention options as a function of their prosocial attitudes, safety considerations, socioemotional motivations, and moral considerations. Results show a complex decision process leading to whether and how a would-be guardian decides to intervene to disrupt sexual harassment, such that prosocial motivations and emotional reactions are weighed against perceptions of danger when deciding on a specific course of action.

 Criminology Volume 62, Issue 3 Aug 2024 Pages 377-618

By U.K.HM Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services, Independent Office for Police Conduct and College of Policing

Stalking is a serious crime that can have a devastating effect on victims. It has been described as a crime of psychological terror which leaves victims feeling constantly unsafe and fearful. In some tragic cases stalking behaviours escalate to serious physical harm and murder. Victims and the public must be assured that reports of stalking will be treated seriously by the police. This means that the police must be able to recognise stalking and the risks associated with this crime. They must keep victims and the public safe and pursue perpetrators by investigating reports effectively and taking appropriate action to stop offending and seek justice. The Suzy Lamplugh Trust, on behalf of the National Stalking Consortium, raised serious concerns about the police response to stalking in its super-complaint. Our three organisations have jointly undertaken a comprehensive investigation into these issues. We have found clear evidence supporting the concerns they raise. We did find examples of the police taking stalking seriously, safeguarding victims well and carrying out good investigations. But in too many cases the police response was not good enough and victims were being let down. We have made recommendations that give a clear plan of action for policing to make improvements. These focus on the need for policing to take action now to make sure they are meeting the expected standards and doing the fundamentals well in their response to stalking. We also found there is a need for greater clarity in the criminal law relating to stalking. Our evidence suggests that government needs to change the law and guidance to provide a stronger foundation for the police response to stalking. We also recommend that the government makes changes to stalking protection orders to provide quicker options to safeguard victims and disrupt offenders. We were encouraged to see examples of innovative and promising practice in some forces. These include examples of forces developing hubs of expertise through multi-agency working and a promising approach to digital evidence analysis in stalking cases. We have made recommendations where we think these approaches should be considered more widely across policing. We are not the only ones calling for change and improvements. Many of the concerns we identified with poor investigations and victim care reflect the findings of other inquiries and inspections. Particularly those relating to the police response to violence against women and girls, of which stalking is a part. The V m ’ mm L has also published a report ’ to stalking. This highlighted similar findings to our investigation. Policing and its partners are responding to these calls for change. In July 2024 the NPCC and the College of Policing published a national policing statement on violence against women and girls (VAWG). This assesses the threat VAWG poses to public safety. The statement identifies stalking and harassment as one of five high-harm and high-volume threat areas that policing will focus on over the next year. This super-complaint report and our recommendations present a real opportunity for policing to build on the progress already made. Policing must now make a step-change to improve the quality of its response to this pervasive and insidious crime.   

HM Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services, Independent Office for Police Conduct and College of Policing, 2024. 158p.

By Matthew A. Graham

This paper provides an overview of racial disparities in the multiple decisions police officers make when interacting with the public during vehicle stops. More specifically, the white paper maps how racial disparities during traffic stops increase the risks of harm for Black drivers at subsequent decision points throughout the encounter and that these traffic stops serve no public safety or crime reduction purpose.

West Hollywood, CA: Center for Police Equity, 2024. 22p.

By The Police Executive Research Forum

 The U.S. Department of Justice and the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) released a first-of-its-kind set of best practices for police-press interactions at mass demonstrations. The report resulted from a convening of police leaders and journalists, spearheaded by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and PERF, and supported with a grant from the Justice Department’s Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. The report, “Police-Media Interactions During Mass Demonstrations: Practical, Actionable Recommendations,” proposes that police establish clear policies before, during, and after a protest event. A primary recommendation is that police agencies adopt express “arrest avoidance” procedures that direct officers to let detained journalists go quickly and that journalists be explicitly exempted from dispersal orders and curfew enforcement. The report also recommends that while credentials are an easy way to identify working members of the news media, police should also recognize those “acting as journalists in function and behavior.”  The Reporters Committee's Bruce Brown said that “With a fraught election next month, we have a unique opportunity with these best practices to both protect journalists at protests and help police serve their public safety mission. The challenge now is to get the recommendations in the hands of police departments and newsrooms around the country.”

Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. 40p.

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 the United States Department of Justice.  Civil Rights Division and United States Attorney’s Office For the Southern District of Mississippi 

Hours after the Department of Justice announced its investigation of the Lexington Police Department (LPD) on November 8, 2023, officers chased a Black man through a field and tased him nine times. The man began foaming at the mouth. One officer pointed to a Taser probe lodged in the man’s hat and said, “Damn, one of my probes hit him in the head.” The man, who has a behavioral health disability, had been accused of disturbing a business. This was not the man’s first encounter with LPD. Earlier that year, LPD officers had jailed him for ten days for trespassing; four days for stealing a cup of coffee; and twelve days for stealing packets of sugar. Each time they arrested him, LPD unlawfully refused to release the man until he paid money towards old fines and fees he owed from misdemeanors and traffic tickets. But each arrest added more fines and fees to the ledger. By November 2023, the man— who has no job, no assets, and no bank account—owed more than $7,500. In encounter after encounter with the man, LPD violated his rights. But like countless people in Lexington, the man had little recourse. Through a combination of poor leadership, retaliation, and a complete lack of internal accountability, LPD has created a system where officers can relentlessly violate the law. FINDINGS The Department of Justice has reasonable cause to believe that the City of Lexington and the Lexington Police Department engage in a pattern or practice of conduct that deprives people of their rights under the Constitution and federal law. Specifically, we find that LPD unlawfully: • Arrests, jails, and detains people who cannot pay fines or fees, without assessing their ability to pay; • Uses excessive force; • Conducts stops, searches, and arrests without probable cause, including jailing people on illegal “investigative holds” and arresting people solely because they owe outstanding fines; • Imposes money bail without justification or assessment of ability to pay; • Jails people without prompt access to court; • Violates the rights of people engaged in free speech and expression, including by retaliating against people who criticize the police; • Discriminates against Black people; and • Operates under an unconstitutional conflict of interest because LPD’s funding depends on the money it raises through its enforcement.. 

Washington, DC: United States Department of Justice. Civil Rights Division, 2024. 47p.

By  Susannah N. Tapp,  and Elizabeth J. Davis,

This report is part of a series that began in 1996 and examines the nature and frequency of contact with police reported by U.S. residents, including demographic characteristics, types of contact, and perceptions of police misconduct, threats of force, or use of nonfatal force.

Highlights:

• About 19% (49.2 million) of U.S. residents age 16 or older had contact with police in 2022.

• A smaller percentage of persons had contact with police in 2022 (19%) than in 2020 (21%).

• In 2022, males (8%) were more likely than females (7%) to experience police-initiated contact, while females (12%) were more likely than males (11%) to initiate contact with police.

• Among U.S. residents who initiated their most recent contact with police, almost half (46%) did so to report a possible crime.

Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), 2024. 24p.

Edited by Korel Goymen and Robin Lewis

Public policy is a contested sphere. From politics to civil society, bureaucracy to academia, many professions have staked a claim in it since the latter half of the 20th century. For most of our known history, government was the sole proprietor of public policy. Until the civil rights movements that rattled the world in the 1960s, very little outside influence played a role in government’s policies on the greater good of the public. The few nongovernmental organizations that had succeeded in affecting public policy in the first half of the 20th century were professional lobby groups, cartels, or unions. These organizations were mostly confined to the Western world and could be counted on one hand. In fact, since these institutions were formed to look after the interests of particular groups, their impact on public policymaking was dubious at best.

However, the tumultuous 60s brought the curtain down on the post-war stability of the 1950s, and with that the invisible barrier between the public and government cracked. With the breakout of the Vietnam War, the civil rights movements, the fight for gender equality and women’s suffrage, the OPEC crisis and global economic volatility, people all over the world mobilized and staked their claim on policymaking in various shapes and forms. Some used mass protests, some organized around public advocacy groups, and a few built professional public policy research institutes. Especially from the mid-60s to the mid-80s, advocacy groups funded and initiated by the public, monitoring agencies, and think tanks mushroomed in North America and Western Europe. This epoch also corresponded to the increased access granted to public advocates, civil rights representatives and attorneys, as well as outside policy experts by governments mostly in the aforementioned territories.

By the turn of the last millennium, public policy was no longer confined to the realm of civil society; it had evolved far beyond the perception of a ragtag, concerned citizens’ movement, which would assemble in world capitals whenever the interests of their constituencies were threatened or ignored. On the contrary, they had become much more institutionalized. Many had opened permanent representations in power capitals such as Washington, New York, London, Berlin, Brussels, and even in Ankara and Istanbul toward the end of the millennium. More importantly, they constructed their policy advocacy on sound academic research and legal bases and often confronted governments with irrefutable, fact-based, powerful alternative policy options.

With the advent of globalization around this time, two important occurrences changed public policymaking once and for all. First, governance as a concept has become more fragmented. The international and local levels of governance for the first time came to the limelight as actors to be reckoned with. On certain occasions, central governments were bypassed; local and international governmental actors were able to engage one another freely. Second, the concept of “public” left the national confines and assumed a more global definition that rallied concerned citizens of different states around common global causes. With the coming of the EU as a supranational entity and its power over national competences, the influence of the UN programs on regimes in non-Western part of the world, and the increasing number of multinational corporations, multilateral agreements as well as free trade zones turned policymaking into a more sophisticated endeavor. This development eventually tampered with the traditional definition of policymaking, as well as the fundamental principles, depth, and breadth of governance.

Therefore, there has been a general shift in the understanding of public policymaking in recent years. The changing tenets of public policy also renders academics, policy specialists, and decision-makers more flexibility in determining the actors, instruments, and influence of public policymaking. The current sophistication of this concept requires thinking about government beyond its primary characteristics as an administration to decide on and look after the best interests of the public. For most academicians, policymaking has evolved to a different level now, and interregional relations has an important impact on this change.

Friedrich Naumann Foundation for Freedom (FNF)

By: Joseph L. Schofer, Saeed D. Barbat, Rachel A. Carpenter, Grady T. Carrick, JANICE DANIEL, PAUL P. JOVANIS, FRANZ LOEWENHERZ, JEEVANJOT SINGH, BETTY SMOOT-MADISON, ROBERT C. WUNDERLICH, C. Y. DAVID YANG, and JINGZHEN (GINGER) YANG

The United States faces a road safety crisis: the fatal crash rate per mile traveled has been climbing for the past decade, and crashes involving vulnerable road users—pedestrians, bicyclists, and others who share the roads with motor vehicles—have grown the fastest. Minority communities have been disproportionally impacted. These developments are alarming, and especially so when considering that road safety has been improving throughout many other high-income nations. To assess the effectiveness of road safety research and its implementation, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) asked the Transportation Research Board (TRB) to assemble an expert committee to study the process for transitioning evidence-based road safety research into practice and to recommend process improvements.

The study committee expanded its interpretation of the statement of task to include the entire road safety research and development process, consisting of research project selection and funding as well as the conduct of research, the development and dissemination of guidance for practitioners, and the incorporation of feedback from the field to inform future research. The committee explored in detail the science of research translation in other fields.

In recent years, concern for the safety of all road users has been growing within transportation and public health agencies. The direction of road management is changing to be more inclusive of matters such as environment, energy consumption, and safety, albeit slowly because of the challenge of adapting a well-developed institutional framework and associated professional practices. For example, there is a trend toward balancing the needs of motorists, other road users, and communities.

This report uncovers important gaps and shortcomings in this process and identifies opportunities to address them. These include making road safety a true priority for action by highway agencies consistent with the Safe System Approach and its multi-pronged pursuit of zero road fatalities; breaking down silos between parallel research and action programs to build an integrated road safety strategy; and pursuing these ends through the collaboration of the broad, multi-disciplinary community of experts in such fields as roadway and vehicle engineering, public health and medicine, human behavior studies, and law enforcement. This will require a coordinated, disciplined, interagency effort by multiple champions working together to promote a renewed transportation safety culture across highway agencies.

Previous studies have addressed the road safety concerns central to this report, in some cases making similar recommendations for action. Those recommendations, by and large, were not pursued even as the country’s long-term gains in road safety waned and since collapsed into the current crisis. The coordinated set of actions recommended in this report is intended to achieve more impactful outcomes that can be sustained over time, as recent trends in highway injuries and fatalities can no longer be dismissed as temporary setbacks when their human, social, and economic costs have become so high. This committee, and its predecessors conclude that, with the right changes in strategy, well targeted and evidence-based research can be translated into practice and actions to make meaningful advances in U.S. road safety.

The following recommendations are offered with these opportunities in mind. All are directed to the U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT), urging the exercise of leadership in motivating, coordinating, and sponsoring—in effect, “rallying”—the involvement of the many parties integral to the road safety practice and research enterprises and to the implementation of research results in the field.

The National Academies Press 2024

Monica Schoch-Spana, Sanjana Ravi, AIshwarya Nagar, Christina Potter, and Tyrone Peterson

The Pandemic Recovery Metrics to Drive Equity – PanREMEDY project sought to give form to the least considered phase of a catastrophic outbreak of infectious disease, while applying an equity lens. The project inquired, “By what measures could local and state decision-makers know that efforts at holistic recovery were working, especially for the socially vulnerable individuals and communities hit hardest by COVID-19?”

To answer this question, the project team gathered and analyzed a wide range of evidence. They consulted disaster recovery and resilience experts, convened a scoping symposium, reviewed academic and gray literature on epidemic/pandemic recovery, and elicited input from diverse participants via listening sessions. Based upon thematic analyses of these inputs, the team generated an initial set of 44 indicators and distilled ethical and practical considerations concerning their implementation.

The PanREMEDY indicators were ordered into 2 categories—recovery system organization and operations and system outcomes, the latter of which could be thought of as community status:

Organization and Operations

• Governance and Leadership: political authority, collective action, financing structures, public face

• Planning: guiding framework, time horizons, technical expertise, aligned futures

• Data Management: actionable data, disaggregated data, extant data, community contextualization

• Public Involvement: representative bodies, feedback loops, community dashboards

Outcomes

• Human Health: epidemiological curve, disrupted care, disease sequelae, healthcare infrastructure, health insurance

• Human Development: healthy housing, adequate nutrition, safety/security, educational attainment, connectivity/mobility

• Economic Vitality: earning power, entrepreneurship, work protections, neighborhood pulse, thriving grassroots

• Political Integrity: power-sharing, equity structures, safety net, public trust, inventive policy

• Social Fabric: connectedness, collective impact, stigma repair, caretaking

• Emotional Wellbeing: truth-telling, public memorialization, psychological supports, self-medication, relief/resolution

Subsequently, a panel of practitioners, community advocates, subject matter experts, and local government leaders rated the indicators according to importance (ie, salience to holistic recovery) and feasibility (ie, ease of application).

Developed in the COVID-19 context, the PanREMEDY project’s findings can prompt further learning and actions specific to that pandemic. At the same time, the findings offer a more general framework with which to prepare communities for future pandemics. End-users are encouraged to tailor the indicators to their context, including local values, programmatic priorities, and political environments.

With the PanREMEDY indicators in hand, state and local leaders and other community members can better assess how well their jurisdictions are:

• Rebounding from the worst effects of the COVID-19 pandemic

• Targeting support to COVID-19 survivors who still need help

• Engaging in pre-event planning for future post-pandemic recovery

• Strengthening resilience to the increasing likelihood of future pandemics

• Motivating non-traditional partners to join in pandemic preparedness efforts.

Baltimore MD: Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security; 2024.

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 Mehmet Murat PAYAM

It is obvious that tourism is a critical revenue source for many countries and visitors are affected by the perception of safety and security at the destinations. According to the World Travel and Tourism Council, tourism continues to be one of the world’s largest sectors. In addition to this, Travel and Tourism Competitiveness Report considers safety and security to be a pillar of tourism competitiveness with ‘reliability of police services’ a central anchor. As any safety or security mishap can destroy a tourism destination’s reputation, the safety and security of tourists should be a matter of national security. In this context, it is believed that tourism police help create the destination image. For this purpose, the Tourist Police Unit should be set up in order to provide safety and security to tourists. Any investments in tourism oriented policing will be an investment in the economic future of the destination and the country. If a country wants to increase its competitiveness in the tourism industry, tourist police system must be introduced as soon as possible. The objective then is to become one of the top five most visited safe and secure destinations in the world. There should be consensus on the necessity to introduce a separate Tourism Police Unit at least in major cities such as Antalya, İstanbul and Konya. In short this paper provides an overview of tourism security and concentrates on the world of Tourism Oriented Policing and Protection services (TOPPs).

Conference: I. Eurasia International Tourism Congress: Current Issues, Trends, and Indicators (EITOC-2015)

By Md. Ohidujjaman and ARM Mehrab Ali

Problem-oriented policing is considered to be a very effective strategy to prevent crimes, which prefers proactive strategies over-reactive responses. Understanding the importance of problem-oriented policing, Dhaka District Police has already taken some initiatives for preventing offenses in the first place. The paper has given a look at those initiatives taken by Dhaka district police and wanted to explore whether those initiatives can decrease crimes and minimize the tendency of criminal behaviors. Our result shows that the number of case filed under Dhaka District Police has a decreasing pattern during 2011-15, especially cases concerning violence against women and children have reduced significantly. It is clear that the problem-oriented proactive policing worked as one of the catalysts to reduce the number of cases filed. This result is consistent with the evidence from similar other studies and existing theory, which predicts that problem-oriented proactive policing will reduce cases and have a positive impact on the community level. However, further research with extensive primary data collection is necessary to measure the impact of the proactive policing practice of the Dhaka District Police.

IOSR Journal Of Humanities And Social Science (IOSR-JHSS); Volume 22, Issue 9, Ver. 7 (September. 2017) PP 01-09

By RAJIV RANJAN

A comprehensive foray into criminology of investment fraud in Canada is an elusive evaluation given the efficacy of the disparate current system to combat it. Surely, no authoritative source provides a measure of the size of the problem or its scope. This warrants an all-rounded initiative within the securities industry, and between the industry, government regulators, and policy thinkers to develop a robust what can be termed as problem-oriented policing (POP) to address tactical, strategic and ideological aspects of security fraud to protect investor rights, structure efficient and effective compliance management of the dynamic of ‘unclean’ and illicit money catalyzed through commingling with licit capital market, advancing cause of crime and terrorism. POP identifies pattern within a typology of securities fraud through analysis; developing a response; implementing the response; and monitoring and evaluating the program.

Part I walks through the conceptual dimensions of fraud under Criminal Code and Securities Act fraud provisions, types and the extant structures to combat them, besides introducing notions and principles of POP as improvising the manner to combat this. Part-II discusses the scope of problem, the almost-symbiotic equation between organized crimes and securities fraud with malignant consequences for investor protection and money-laundering crimes. Part-III takes a resume of categories of enforcement cases chronicled in the 2014 Enforcement Report of Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA) as a barometer as to what ails the securities market in Canada having monstrous impact economically, socially, and politically. Part-IV underscores criticality of enforcement to shape up a robust securities regulatory framework. In conclusion, I have flagged recommendations stating that POP is a must to have a coordinated approach to this problem of securities fraud with probably, an optimal national fraud enforcement agency workable through a dynamic data-base based on psychometric analysis of demographic, psychological and behavioral attributes of investors with lateral inputs from other programs like FINTRAC system, investors’ tools, deterrence, whistleblower program, multi-agency co-operation and international enforcement co-operation.

August 19, 2015, 28 pages

By John S. Hollywood, Dulani Woods, Samuel Peterson, Michael J. D. Vermeer, Brian A. Jackson

Deficiencies in the quality and interoperability of law enforcement data have been identified as major problems that hamper law enforcement decisionmaking and operations. Data governance and data management (DG/DM) can address these issues by improving the quality and shareability of data. On behalf of the National Institute of Justice, the Police Executive Research Forum and RAND convened a panel to identify the most-pressing needs to leverage DG/DM knowledge to enable major improvements in the quality, availability, and interoperability of law enforcement data.

The panelists identified five themes: improving law enforcement's DG/DM capabilities; improving protections on law enforcement data; improving community participation in data decisionmaking; developing novel data and processes to support broad, multiagency conceptions of community safety; and improving the value of traditional law enforcement data. The panelists rated the problems and potential solutions they described to identify a set of high-priority needs for improving the quality and integrity of community safety data for law enforcement agencies and all other agencies and groups involved in the community safety enterprise. These needs and supporting context are described in this report. The highest-priority theme emerging from the workshop was using DG/DM to improve community safety data protections in various ways, including developing guidelines, core processes, training, and guidance for agencies to work with vendors and improving community participation in data decisionmaking.

RAND - Sep. 11, 2024

By BARRY VAUGHAN

The problem of policing is often portrayed as providing sufficient personnel to sate demand. Pluralism, however, complicates the issue since the public disagree among themselves over which activities or individuals should be policed. In turn, police priorities may differ from these demands, inciting public discontent. In these circumstances, how can public policing sustain its legitimacy? Lessons can be learnt from how political theories have grappled with pluralism and legitimacy. This article analyses how three major political theorists, John Rawls, Michael Walzer and Friedrich Hayek, dealt with these issues. It mines their insights to nominate the principle of non- domination, defined as freedom from interference on an arbitrary basis, as best suited to justify policing in an era of pluralism.

Vol. 11(3): 347–366; 1362–4806

By: Dustin A. Richardson, Jeremy D. Barnum, Meagan E. Cahill, Dulani Woods, Kevin D. Lucey, Michael J. D. Vermeer, Brian A. Jackson

Individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDDs) are at a higher risk of being victimized, arrested, and charged with a crime (The Arc, undated-a). They are also more likely to serve longer prison sentences than individuals without IDDs (The Arc, undated-a). Despite their overrepresentation, individuals with IDDs who are involved in the criminal justice system are often overlooked or neglected, and the body of research on this topic is lacking (The Arc, undated-a; Wilkerson, Lopez-Wright, and Davis, 2022). As gatekeepers of the criminal justice system, police officers are often the first point of contact for individuals with IDDs, yet rarely are they trained on how to respond to this population effectively (Melendrez et al., undated; Watson, Phan, and Compton, 2022; Watson, Compton, and Pope, 2019). Consequently, justice system professionals may have limited experience with or insufficient knowledge about IDDs, which can lead to the “misidentification of disability, a heightened risk of false confessions, inaccurate assumptions about competency and credibility, inappropriate placement in institutions, and the unknowing waivers of rights” (The Arc, undated-a). In the absence of proper training, officers are forced to rely on traditional approaches that do not account for the unique needs of those with IDDs. Therefore, it is critical to identify ways in which the law enforcement response to persons with IDDs can be improved.

This report documents an effort to do just that as part of the Priority Criminal Justice Needs Initiative, a multiyear collaboration to develop expert-identified research and policy needs on issues affecting the criminal justice system. On behalf of the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), RAND and the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) convened a workshop to address the law enforcement response to persons with IDDs. The purpose of this workshop was to inform a research agenda for NIJ and other stakeholders to discover and implement novel law enforcement responses to individuals with IDDs. The meeting occurred on July 12 and 13, 2023, in Washington, D.C., at the NIJ offices within the Office of Justice Programs. PERF staff consulted the research literature and identified practitioners, academics, and individuals associated with advocacy organizations to serve as participants. PERF also received input from federal partners and law enforcement agencies (LEAs) attempting to improve their response to the IDD community, taking care to include perspectives from various geographic regions.

RAND - Sep 23, 2024

By Amy J. Halsted, Max L. Bromley and John K. Cochran

Numerous prior studies have explored the level of job satisfaction of police officers. Some research has also focused on officer perceptions of community policing as practiced in municipal police agencies. There has been little empirical research on either topic conducted in sheriffs' offices throughout the US. The present study examines the relative effects of work orientation on levels of job satisfaction among deputy sheriffs in an urban sheriff's office which practices community policing on an agency-wide basis. Our findings suggest service-oriented deputies are somewhat more satisfied with their jobs than their crime control-oriented counterparts.

PIJPSM 23,1 82

By: Joshua C. Hinkle, David Weisburd, Christine Famega, and Justin Ready

Background: Hot spots policing is one of the most influential police innovations, with a strong body of experimental research showing it to be effective in reducing crime and disorder. However, most studies have been conducted in major cities, and we thus know little about whether it is effective in smaller cities that account for a majority of police agencies. The lack of experimental studies in smaller cities is likely partly due to challenges of designing statistically powerful tests in such contexts.

Objectives: The current paper explores the challenges of statistical power and “noise” resulting from low base rates of crime in smaller cities and provides suggestions for future evaluations to overcome these limitations.

Research Design: Crime data from a randomized, experimental evaluation of broken windows policing in hot spots are used to illustrate the challenges that low base rates present for evaluating hot spots police innovations in smaller cities.

Results: Analyses show that low base rates make it difficult to detect treatment effects. Very large effect sizes would be required to reach sufficient power, and random fluctuations around low base rates make detecting treatment effects difficult irrespective of power by masking differences between treatment and control groups.

Conclusions: Low base rates present strong challenges to researchers attempting to evaluate hot spots policing in smaller cities. As such, base rates must be taken directly into account when designing experimental evaluations. The paper offers suggestions to researchers who attempt to expand the examination of hot spots policing and other microplace-based interventions to smaller jurisdictions.

By Dr Colin Rogers

The Problem-Oriented Policing (or Partnership) approach is one that is used to underpin the current neighbourhood policing team approach in England and Wales. It relies upon a scientific approach which identifies problems and provides ethical and appropriate responses using the concepts of the Problem Analysis Triangle (PAT) and the SARA model. However, this approach has been in vogue since the mid and late 1990s and this article compares data from a current police service with that published in 1998. Comparison is made between this information to provide an indication of just how far the police have progressed in their use, application, and understanding of the Problem-Oriented Partnership approach.

Police Journal, PJ 83 4 (295), 1 December 2010