In the case of McKinley v. City of Mansfield, 404 F.3d 418 (2005), there was an internal investigation of the police department of “improper use of police scanners to eavesdrop on cordless phones and cellphones” (Diagle, 2012 para.10), which involved many officers. Police officer McKinley was interviewed two times. The first time McKinley was interviewed it was about the investigation, and the second time was about allegations that he was untruthful during the first interview, both times he was questioned he was under the Garrity Warnings. By the time of the second interview, McKinley was already “under criminal investigation for lying” (Diagle, 2012, para. 10), and during the second interview it was made clear to McKinley that it was about …show more content…
Decisions At the end of the internal investigation, McKinley was fired from the police department. McKinley was however, “reinstated with back pay and benefits following collective bargaining agreement arbitration” (Diaglo, 2012, para. 10). McKinley however was charged and convicted of falsification and obstruction of official business even though he filed to have his statements during questioning by the investigators thrown out. Under Garrity, “the statement and the evidence derived from the statement cannot be used against the subject officer in a criminal action against the officer arising from the same circumstances about which the officer was questioned” (Diagle, 2012, para.3). The appellate court threw out the convictions against McKinley based “on the department’s agreement not to use his statements in any prosecution against him” (Diaglo, 2012, para. 11). The case study did not specify what if any coercion was used when they questioned McKinley under the Garrity warnings. In order for the Garrity rules to apply, the employee being questioned must told that they could lose their job or other benefits if they are not truthful about investigation in question and be forced to tell the truth even if it would implicate them in what could be illegal activity in order for the
What the author Elliot Spector concluded on the topic of Should Police Officers Who Lie Be Terminated as a Matter of Public Policy, is that there should be policies that are constantly reminded to the police officers. Ensure that the departments have the Honest Policy in place between the officers and the department. Mr. Spector, indicates that this topic will continued to be discussed because the departments need to interact with the Honesty Policy and Code of Conduct. The department needs to ensure that all the officers have a perfect understanding of the repercussions that can occur for the department and themselves when an officer has a record of lying. The most important aspect that Mr. Elliot makes
City of Pinellas Park v. Brown was a case brought to the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District by the plaintiff Brown. In this case, the Brown family sued the City of Pinellas Sheriff Department on the grounds of negligence that resulted in the tragic death of two Brown sisters during a police pursuit of a fleeing traffic violator Mr. Deady. The facts in this case are straight forward, and I shall brief them as logical as possible.
Facts: Rex Marshall testified that the deceased came into his store intoxicated, and started whispering things to his wife. The defendant stated that he ordered the deceased out of the store immediately, however the deceased refused to leave and started acting in an aggressive manner; by slamming his hate down on the counter. He then reached for the hammer, the defendant states he had reason to believe the deceased was going to hit him with the hammer attempting to kill him. Once the deceased reached for the hammer the defendant shot him almost immediately.
McCulloch v Maryland 4 Wheat. (17 U.S.) 316 (1819) Issue May Congress charter a bank even though it is not an expressly granted power? Holding Yes, Congress may charter a bank as an implied power under the “necessary and proper” clause. Rationale The Constitution was created to correct the weaknesses of the Articles. The word “expressly” particularly caused major problems and therefore was omitted from the Constitution, because if everything in the Constitution had to be expressly stated it would weaken the power of the Federal government.
Coleman had never worked undercover before moving to Tulia. In fact, he had been fired from his previous law enforcement position. His previous supervisor warned Swisher County (Tulia) officials that he may have mental illnesses and was unfit for police work. Also, Coleman left town after establishing nearly $7,000 in debts from various local merchants. As a result, he was arrested for abuse of power and theft, a separate charge for stealing gas. Those charges took place while he was undercover in Tulia, but he wasn’t suspended from the investigation. Nonetheless, the public defenders didn’t present this information to the juries. In the end, Coleman was convicted of perjury and fired from a subsequent position at a different police department after having sex with his criminal informant, a drug-addicted
Name & citation of case: Urban v. Jefferson County School District R-1, 870 F. Supp. 1558 (D. CO 1994)
» Determination: Counsels contentions have been considered and determined to be insufficient to overcome the preponderance of evidence in that based on department’s evidence and deputy’s testimony. Deputy Ranes signed the DS-367 Officer sworn statement under penalty of perjury and certified by signing the chemical test section of the DS-367
Now, it takes a lot of courage for an investigator to stand up and admit a wrongful conviction, especially in a case that he helped to convict. That brings me to think agree with the statement of Chief Justice William H. Rehmquist “the justice system has not yet learned to confront the fact that, even when there are no easily identifiable misstep, it can produce an unjust outcome.” (Clifford 4) It is because of this reason, that manyinnocent people end up in jail. Despite the efforts to get them out, many of them are denied. It took nine years for federal agents to even consider looking into the Edward Garry conviction case. In addition, it took another three years for Garry’s lawyer to get a post-conviction motion, which was denied by a Bronx judge, saying that the new evidence wasn’t credible. And still, Garry has yet to be absolved for this crime that he did not commit despite witnesses testifying on his behalf. This is a really depressing case because of the fact that Garry has become broken. “Garry gives the impression of a man who has been inside literally and figuratively for far too long.” Twenty one years of his innocent life that he may never get back. All because this justice system has failed him as a
Wood identifies that during the probationary period of the police officers first year on the force he or she can easily be fired for any cause. He specifically points to the fact that if a rookie police officer were to complain about another police officer’s ethical behavior the rookie police officer could be terminated. This constant threat of easy termination forces the police officers hand to fall in line with others. Consequently, during the officers first year he or she learns to shut up and do as others do. Therefore, by the end of the polices officers first year he or she is just as corrupt or ignorant to the corrupt actions of fellow officers. For instance, Mr. Wood alleged that another officer kicked a handcuffed and facedown suspect at the end of a chase (Wood, 2015). Two problem exist, the actions of the officer kicking an act of malfeasance and the failure to report the crime by the witnessing officer an act of nonfeasance. Although probationary periods are great policy, if not administered correctly an environment of corruption will easily be passed to another generation of police officers. Therefore, the lack of department policy to protect new officers from termination if reporting unethical actions was the driving factor the lead officers like Sgt. Wood to perform nonfeasance while the other officers kicked the suspect (Albanese, 2012). Essentially, police officer become ignorant of the unethical behavior
The act of interrogation has been around for thousands of years. From the Punic Wars to the war in Iraq, interrogating criminals, prisoners or military officers in order to receive advantageous information has been regularly used. These interrogation techniques can range from physical pain to emotional distress. Hitting an individual with a whip while they hang from a ceiling or excessively questioning them may seem like an ideal way to get them to reveal something, but in reality it is ineffective and . This is because even the most enduring individual can be made to admit anything under excruciating circumstances. In the Fifth Amendment of the Bill of Rights there is a provision (“no person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself” ) which reflects a time-honored common principle that no person is bound to betray him or herself or can be forced to give incriminating evidence. This ideology of self-incrimination has been challenged heavily over the past s...
The court case that I chose as the precedent for this scenario is Brandenburg v. Ohio. In this court case, a leader from the Ku Klux Klan made a speech at a Klan rally in Ohio and was charged with terrorism, sabotage, and violence.This conviction violates Brandenburgs right to free speech. In the scenario and the court case both Ku Klux Klan members were convicted of a crime that violated the state law which does not allow the advocacy of crime, sabotage, violence and unlawful methods of terrorism. Also in the scenario John Doe is fined $1500 and sentances to 5 years in prison. Both cases are very similar down to the point that they both deal with the Ku Klux Klan. After reading the court case I believe that the punishments given to John Doe
...at information to interview other witnesses, the witness may go along with the statement. We did learn that this can also occur when witnesses interact and talk with each other. The good news is that law enforcement officials realize that this is a problem and have come up with some solutions like seeing how alike stories are and trying to pick out information that may be incorrect. Other ways that law enforcement officials can try to minimize misinformation is to try to interview witnesses separately. Also, the way the officials phrase the question can have an effect, asking for example: “Did you see a vehicle? If so what color or make and model was it?” and not asking: “Did you see a dark blue Ford Focus?” By asking more open questions I feel that witnesses would rely on only their observations and not those that the official or other witnesses said they saw.
...T. M. (1997). Can the jury disregard that information? The use of suspicion to reduce the prejudicial effects of retrial publicity and inadmissible testimony. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(11), 1215-1226.
Correcting police misconduct and police officers using professional discretion and crossing ethical boundaries is a colossal challenge that every police department in America has at one time taken on. In order to correct the problem police departments should maintain a written policy regarding the guidelines pertaining to the use of officer discretion and the result of incorrectly using their discretion. Also, training in police ethics and past examples of officer misconduct must be incorporated from the first day at the academy, in addition to annual ethics training. This will lay the foundation for a police department’s success. Reward an officer’s ethical behavior. Rewarding ethical behavior and disciplining officers for unethical
The intellectual battle between police officers and suspects has been ongoing since laws were created. Who did it? Being one of the most popular questions around the globe. There is a multitude of different way to figure out who did it, but one of the most common, and often the only, piece of evidence and investigator can gather is a confession. To get these confessions investigators often use a harsh and aggressive method of interrogation known as the Reid technique. The Reid technique uses a multitude of morally questionable methods to gather a confession such as intimidation, telling the suspect that there is evidence placing them at the scene, and continually refusing to accept the denial of the suspect. These interrogations can also last