Police discretion. Police discretion is defined as the decision-making power afforded to Police Officers that allows them to decide if they want to pursue police procedure or simply let someone off with a warning. Police discretion can be also defined as the individual’s ability to make a decision based on the principle of courses in the actions. Police officers are usually in the position of having to make decisions on how to handle a specific situation alone, or without immediate supervision. In other words, police discretion is the choice the officer has on how he or she enforces the law.
INTRODUCTION In the first part of the following essay I will be analysing the Police Statement and the reasons that the Jurat has to be included in a statement. I will be making reference to current legislation, NSWPF operational guidance and other reference material contained within the 201415 PPP232 Interact Site. In the second part of the following essay I will be nominating one source of evidence that is present at the scene of a scenario. I will be discussing in my own words how Police should collate, handle and analyse the piece of evidence in a Criminal Investigation. In doing this I will be using relevant crime scene powers, NSWPF operational guidance and making reference to the Horswell (2004) reading.
Levels of force that officers use depend upon the unique situation. Guidelines for use of force can be based on factors, including: federal and state regulations, police department’s experience, law enforcement technology availability, and police and citizen relationship that may exist in a particular jurisdiction (p.1) The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights has stated that "…in diffusing situations, apprehending alleged criminals, and in keeping everyone safe... ... middle of paper ... ...if they are detailed to a special unit with minimal supervision, their style may be reinforced. They may perceive that the organization sanctions their behavior. This group would do better in peer counseling than individual counseling. It will then make them part of the solution, rather than part of the problem which may be central to changing their behavior.
Manning (1997:295) argues that it is generally accepted that police should be allowed to use force. He also explains that there is an uncertainty among people as to what constitutes excessive force. The line between what is necessary and what is extreme is very thin. Use of force is no doubt one important aspect in policing; however, force should also be used with great discretion. If officers do not use force on every suspect they encounter they may be creating a negative environment for the community.
Views on Discretion Many people interpret police activities from pre-conceived ideas because they happen away from the citizens' view. The privacy creates a circumstance that allows police officers’ discretion in the way they react and handle citizens that breach the law. The research community tries to investigate the issues that concern the police officers' conduct while responding to citizen's woes and their interaction with them. The gap that exists in... ... middle of paper ... ...oals due to the environment's needs that require rapid response. When they enforce discretion properly, they respond to margin situations in the best way possible.
To get a better view on how these policies are implemented, the actions of the police officers in Allen versus the city of Oakland will be examined and the justifications for their actions will be reviewed. Not all actions can be justified though. For those types of actions with no justification, an observation of the legal and policy issues surrounding them can demonstrate how strong policies can help deter officers from misconduct. The perception of prosecution is also useful by giving an overall representation of the case after reviewing it, deciding if there is enough evidence to let the case go further, and deciding on the charges that will be given. In court, a useful tool used by both sides of the case is using case law to get the court to side with their argument.
The officer can get physical with the individual, he can just pretend he never heard anything and let it go, or he could find the simplest probable cause to make an arrest. It is similar to when police officers are dealing with assholes. They need to figure out if the individual is going to cooperate, question, or go against police authority. Territoriality is also an important key to understanding police work. It is an advantage if the officer knows his surroundings because then the officer will know when something is going on.
Should police officers accept a gratuity, or should they politely decline these offers? Based on a community policing style of policing, it is necessary to ensure that police officers do not accept gratuities because it is important that officers recognize everyone in the community, not just those who may offer gratuities. This is because accepting gratuities may lead to favoritism by the officer, it may have an unintended effect on the relationship between other members of the community, it may lead to corruption within the department, and overall treatment of officers to members of the community who do not offer gratuities. Ethical decisions are involved with policing as officers often find themselves faced with ethical decisions when offered gratuities. Because of the risk officers take on a daily basis, it may seem ethical for them to accept gratuities offered.
A forcible rape you want to look at bruises semen stains or witnesses that may have heard screaming. Things like this are very important for an investigator to know to look for (Bennett & Hess, 71). As you can see there are many different steps in investigating crime scenes. It is very important that an officer follow the proper steps in an investigation. Failure to do this can result in a suspect to go free, possible charges against the department.
Finally, a tort of negligent investigation only exist when there is a loss or injury to the suspect and the loss or injury was caused by the negligent investigation. While the police officers have rights to investigate suspect, the duty of care of the officers to suspect exist and the officers were under a legal obligation to exercise care for Mr. Hill. ... ... middle of paper ... ... be found in Mr. Hill’s case given he position set out by the majority judgement in this case. Conclusion When police officers investigate suspect, especially a criminal suspect, public interest was against and officers owe a duty of care to general public for the purpose of public safety. Meanwhile, private interest was against as well and officers owe a duty of care to suspect to ensure suspect’s rights and avoid charging innocent person.