“Depart from discretion when it interferes with duty” says Hannah More, an English writer and philanthropist. Police officers are given discretion for their line of work; however, if there is a means of it interfering with their job, which protecting public safety, then discretion is inappropriate. Detectives, Jed Dineen and Ross Nemeroff, present their perspective on policing. One of the detectives mentions that officers, who are on patrol, have discretion to either look for crime or wait until crime to happen. They also mentioned that a police officer may use whatever force is necessary, based on the particular officer’s discretion, to conduct an arrest. These particular uses of discretion are inappropriate because police may not have enough initiative to finding crimes and the public trust of police is lessened. During the detectives’ presentation, one of the detectives mentions that officers, who are on patrol, have discretion to either look for crime or wait for crime to be reported to them. This discretion may …show more content…
One of the detectives replied that, the police officer’s discretion warrants whatever force is used that benefits conducting an arrest. According to David H. Bayley, a specialist in international criminal justice, “The police are tempted to violate the law in order to serve the larger interest of natural justice.” He also states that “police feel pressure from the public to overstep their authority; they are taught…that it is essential to establish immediate control.” (2002, p. 140). There is no doubt that there are times that police overstep their authority and give in to the temptation. Because of this, the public’s trust in these public officials decreases, when it comes to the public’s
As taught in the lectures, it is impossible for police officers to win the war against crime without bending the rules, however when the rules are bent so much that it starts to violate t...
How prevalent is police discretion and why does it exist? Can discretion be eliminated? Should it be? Due Date March 11 2005
Police officers have a great amount of discretion. Since they are not always supervised and on patrol they choose which cases should be process and which one should just be not. Police discretion is the most important part because it determines the outcomes of the interaction between the police and the juvenile. Krisberg and Austin noted that police have five basic options in deciding what course of action to pursue with juveniles. The first one would be release, accompanied by a warning to the juvenile. The second one would be release, accompanied by an official report. The third one would be Station adjustment. Which include release to parent accompanied by an official reprimand, referral to a community youth agency, or referral to a public or private social welfare or mental health agency. Fourth would be Referral to juvenile court without detention and last referral to the juvenile court with detention.
While on the job, police must put all their personal opinions aside. They must provide everyone with an equal and fair chance. It is important in a democratic society for police to not know too much about the community they are policing. It allows them to ...
Over the years, this country has witnessed many cases of police brutality. It has become a controversial topic among communities that have seen police brutality take place in front of their homes. Officers are faced with many threatening situations everyday, forcing them to make split second decisions and to expect the worst and hope for the best. Police officers are given the power to take any citizens rights away and even their lives. With that kind of power comes responsibility, that’s one major concern with the amount of discretion officers have when to use force or when to use lethal force.
Police officers have a significant level of discretion when ethical decision making is incorporated in deciding how to respond to a domestic violence call. For example, officers exercise discretion by deciding how to respond to domestic violence when a situation involves a fellow officer. America is a country in which many believe in privacy within the household and often choose not to be involved in a domestic dispute because families should resolve their own problems. However, discretionary powers abused by an officer are used to dissuade the victim from filing charges against the officer’s colleague. Officers often do not choose to arrest in a domestic dispute because they believe the family, not the justice system, should resolve the problem. If the police officer abuses his discretionary power by persuading the victim to not file charges, then he is going against community policing. This is because, he is not serving the interests of the community, but rather the code of silence within a police department. This discretion is exercised even more when the domestic violence situation involves an off duty police officer. When police officers commit domestic violence against their spouse it is usually explained by the fact that police officers deal with difficult citizens on a daily basis on the streets and as a result of the high levels of stress on the job bring their frustrations home and spouse becomes the scapegoat for his feelings (Wetendorf, 1998:3).
It is a myth to believe that an officers job is spend fighting dangerous crimes, in reality officers spend more time handing smaller cases. For example, police officers spend a lot of time doing daily tasks such as giving speeding tickets and being mediators in disputes (Kappeler & Potter, 2005). Handing out speeding tickers and handling minor disputes are far from fighting crime. Police officers spend more time doing preventive measures (Kappeler & Potter, 2005). Preventive measures involve officers intervening to prevent further altercations. Victor Kappeler and Gary Potter discussed the myth of crime fighting as invalid and misleading notions of an officer’s employment.
Police officers are faced each day with a vast array of situations with which they must deal. No two situations they encounter are ever the same, even when examines a large number of situations over an extended period of time. The officers are usually in the position of having to make decisions on how to handle a specific matter alone, or with little additional advice and without immediate supervision. This is the heart of police discretion. As we shall find, the exercise of discretion by police has benefits and problems associated with such exercise. The unfettered use of discretion can lead to the denial of citizen rights. Strategies that control the use of discretion are, therefore, very important. The benefits and problems of police discretion and controlling strategies are the focus of this essay.
The degree of force that officers use is heavily influenced by police discretion in real-world situations rather than espoused by a certain agenda. Discretion can be classified into four different categories where administrators, the community, and the individual police officer exercise differing degrees of influence in decision-making. What is needed to help officer discretion is a central ethos that will guide discretion when all other rules fail to help.
Police discretionary practices vary from officer to officer and every officer is differently trained by departments. Without the proper use of discretion out on the field, police officers are left open for legal suit actions however, if the officers are trained and exercising the use of discretion in a good manner, each individual officer can be held accountable. The second disadvantage of use of police discretion is that it allows the police officers to have too much power on making decisions which can affect the life, safety or liberty of an individual (Bargen, 2005). Police discretion presents a clear danger to society because the average officer can make a poor decision and affect the life of a person or persons. If discretion in law enforcement is used in a wrongful manner, it has great potential for being abused out of the field. Discretion allows police officers to “perform a duty or refrain from taking action” (Gaines & Kappeler, 2003, p. 251). Police officers are supposed to enforce equality under the law, people in society all should have equal rights and should be treated the same. However, discretion allows police officers to misuse it by treating offenders of different genders, race, class, ethnicity, religion, age and more inappropriately (Pepinsky, 1984). Law enforcement officers are
Laws and procedures are the most common basis for officers choosing not to allow offenders to remain free based on their discretion, a study by Mendias and Kehoe (2006) has found. The study found that laws or responsibilities were the main reason for a decision to suspend discretion in eighty-two percent of cases involving an arrest. The study also found that keeping the peace and procedural implications were the primary justifications for ex...
...rsation among researchers. The problem I see with the topic of conversation is there is not a lot of research done on the actual affects of the individual discretion of each officer compared to a department that has been educated in following policies more than personal discretion. In fact, from what I saw there is not much research on the effects of discretion at all. It seems like it is a topic that is overlooked when researching the effectiveness of a department. I feel like before more solutions are found on how to correct the problem of discretion, more research needs to be done on how discretion plays a role in every day policing. Until this research is conducted, all the articles published are on theories of discretion causing problems, and all of the solutions mentioned are methods to correct a problem that has not even been proven to be an issue yet.
A police chief representing a community and acting on behalf of a police department must use extreme caution and thoughtfulness in the deliberate choices he makes at his own preference. Failure for the leader of such a department to make sound, sensitive, moral, consistent decisions can cause public uproar and negative media attention. The concept of discretion via two situations will be examined and how it affects the very unique role of the police chief. Police chiefs’ use many types of administrative and operational discretion and the manner that they may use that discretion can affect the officers who work in the department and in the field under them as well. The situations that will be discussed that require the Police Chiefs discretion will be considered using operational and administrative environments.
The citizens of the United States gives a lot of power and authority to the police as part of the social contract. So in other words, we give up some of our freedom in exchange for protection and order from the government in order to live in a greater society. This is true when we give power to the police so they can protect us. According to the book, “police discretion is the authority that police officers have to use their individual judgements concerning decisions that they must make on a daily basis” (Aberle 116). In society, police discretion is almost universally accepted so that they can make decisions based on their training, background, experience, etc. This concept exists because police will have to
Police decisions can affect life, liberty, and property, and as guardians of the interests of the public, police must maintain high standards of integrity. Police discretion concerning how to act in a given situation can often lead to ethical misconduct (Banks 29).