Example Of Monitoring Report

Since their has been policing entities, it is understood by most that law enforcement officers have been performing a public service that is not easy to carry out. To assist law enforcement officers in diffusing situations, apprehending alleged criminals, and protecting themselves and others, officers are legally entitled to use appropriate means, including force. In discussing police misconduct, this report acknowledges not only the legal grant of such authority,

The report explained that since the Consent Decree began, the Monitor has consistently reviewed all serious uses of force by officers and regularly conducted broader Use of Force audits to ensure that uses of force are being accurately reported and appropriately supervised and when necessary, evaluated. The Monitor has conducted several Use of Force analyses to date, including a comparative analysis of uses of force from 2012 through November 2016, multiple analyses aimed at assessing the integrity of the Department’s use of force data, a discussion of specific 2016 uses of force, and a comprehensive historic analysis of 2015 uses of force. To conduct the audits, the Monitor reviewed supervisors’ use of force reports and officer Force Statements for the relevant time period. To ensure the integrity of the NOPD’s use of force data, the Monitor conducted several targeted “control audits” that reviewed resisting arrest cases, Injury to Arrestee reports, and all citizen and rank complaints of excessive use of force. In addition, the Monitor assessed the Department’s Use of Force Review Board and reviewed random body worn camera videos. The Monitor found no incident where use of force to overcome resistance was unreported or use of force resulted in unreported injuries and no unreported uses of force when reviewing excessive force lawsuits or cross-comparing against citizen and rank allegations of

Use of force has been scrutinized even more recently due to the media. Recordings of officers using force (weather excessive or not) become uploaded to the web and many individuals quickly jump to conclusions. Police use of force is up to the discretion of each individual police officer, and with each action a multitude of consequences can occur. The public often gets enraged after a court justifies the use of force, but often individuals do not have the full facts or understand how the justice system works. Because of the outcomes of some use of force cases, many individuals are asking for transparency of agencies. Policy makers are often quick to react to satisfy the public by changing police policy.

Like other law enforcement agencies throughout the United States, New Jersey has a policy that addresses police use of force. The New Jersey Attorney General’s Use of Force Policy was first put into operation in April 1985. The purpose of the policy is to serve as a guide for police officers who are confronted with use of force situations during their duty to preserve the law and protect others. This essay will provide a summary of the policies and practices of New Jersey’s Use of Force Policy. An evaluation of these components will be presented with emphasis on the legal sufficiency of the policies and procedures. Policy strengths and weaknesses will be identified in addition to suggestions for improvement. This essay will conclude

The use of force is without a doubt an important aspect in policing. The decision to utilize any type of force comes from a multitude of recourses; department policies, training, situational variables and ethical systems. There are three major categories in which an officers use of force is categorized under; justifiable, excessive and deadly; with a thin line between justifiable and excessive. Cases where excessive force has been used, has lead to injuries, deaths, civil damages, officers convicted and sentenced to jail and police chiefs and elected officials being removed from office (Fyfe, 1988). It is an officer`s discretion in determining when the use of force is justifiable.

A '''use of force continuum''' is a standard that affords law enforcement officials & security officers (police, probation, or corrections) with guidelines as to how much use of force may be used against a repelling subject in a given situation. In certain ways it is similar to the military’s escalation of force. The reason of these models is to clarify, both for officers and citizens, the complex subject of use of force by law officers. They are often vital parts of law enforcement agencies' use of force policies. Although various agencies have developed different models of the continuum, there is no universal standard model (Stetser, 2001, p. 36)

Police officers are authorized to use force under certain circumstances, for instance; controlling a disruptive, aggressive and disturbing demonstration, undergoing arrest of an accused person or controlling a combative individual. These officers are trained properly regarding use of force while fulfilling their duties. However, the use of force by police is a subject of hot discussion amongst public, as many times law enforcement agencies, televisions, newspapers, and civil as well as criminal courts have taken serious actions against excessive use of force by police-officers under a given situation (U.S department of Justice, 1999). The aim of this paper is to study national as well as international

Whenever a law enforcement officer places an individual under arrest or is involved in a deadly force scenario the officer has used some degree of force. The incidents where an office has to make a split second decision and use physical force to control a situation is known as “Use of Force.” The use of force varies as situations present themselves to the officer and they must decide what level of force is necessary to control the situation. Often the use of force is subject to much debate and not a year goes by without some media coverage of some law enforcement officer accused of using excessive force. In dozens of studies of police use of force there is no single,

When debating the issue of police use of force, the issue of what actions constitute too much force must also be addressed. Another concern is the possibility of corruption amount officers. When given such great power, the probability of corruption is high. Officers generally do not start out as corrupt, but years of work on the force can create animosity between officers and suspects and lead them to decide to use force more quickly (McEwen, 1996). Many times, officers patrol the streets alone which creates the opportunity for potential abuse of power (McEwen, 1996). Although police officers need to be permitted to exercise some discretion, they also need limits and guidelines to follow when using their powers of discretion (Manning, 1997). The decision to use force should not be taken lightly in that citizen’s lives are at stake. Police should be allowed discretion in decisions to use force; however, this discretion should be limited. In several cases in Arizona, officers have used deadly means of force. In all cases, the officers

It is also often an emotional and psychological satisfaction in terms of relationships between the worker and employer as well as between the worker and the employer’s children that plays a role in the dynamic. These women are not only to provide physical labor but also emotional, and in turn, are still not paid living wages. In 2001, it was stated that it was not unusual for domestic workers in Los Angeles to make about $150 per week while working an average of sixty-four hours per week (40). As a resident of Los Angeles for my entire life, I can personally attest to the fact that this is almost criminal and nowhere near living wages. Currently, at my work study, part time job, I make about the same amount of money each week for only twelve hours of work that is in no way as labor intensive nor does it take a toll on my physical and emotional health.

Force that police tend to use on subjects that pose a threat has become an escalating issue in society today as we know it. Sometimes the public gets the notion that the police abuse their authority and use dangerous

The use of excessive force by police officers is a topic that continues to make headlines and a study that needs to be done. Although much research has gone into this topic there still is no consensus on why the use of excessive force occurs. Some studies suggest lack of training and/or problems with organization policy/procedures. Law enforcement officers are authorized to use force when necessary, but when the level of force is excessive, however, the actions of the police come under scrutiny. The resulting effects can include; public outrage, scandal, negative reputation for not only the officer but the law enforcement community, and criminal considerations. Although there’s is no concrete definition of excessive force, police

The Gap is a leading international retailer, whose revenues for 2007 surpassed $15.8 billion. As with any company, The Gap seeks to increase these revenues and to accomplish this task, they must analyze the external environment they operate in to determine the threats that exists and the opportunities to overcome. The Gap, as an incumbent firm, must try to maintain their position in the market by trying to increase barriers that prevent potential businesses from making a successful entry into the retail business. The threat from potential competitors is not as significant as the threat posed by the other incumbent companies in the retail industry which can leverage certain aspects of the external environment to negatively

Police officers are faced with a wide variety of threatening situations on the job every day, they go through an intensive training at the academy to prepare them for the safety keeping job they have. The use of force may or may not be a significant predicament but it should be viewed by the community as well as the police. Often police officers find

training, an additional assumption is that many in-service teachers lack practicum experience with culturally and linguistically diverse students during the preparatory course to work directly with culturally diverse students (Atwater et al., 2010; Castro, 2012; Jackson, 2013). Therefore, each of the participants will have different behaviors in regards to the phenomenon, based on their individual experiences.