More handpicked essays just for you.
Ethical decision-making in law enforcement agencies
Ethical dilemma case study police
Introduction to miranda rights
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
People face ethical dilemmas every day. But it is perhaps, most prevalent in the law enforcement profession. Law enforcement officers face ethical dilemmas constantly. Some of the ethical issues that police face each day are: racial profiling, officer discretion, police officer loyalty, police officer abuse, and interrogatory deception. This paper will discuss the purpose of interrogatory deception, ways in which it is used, some of the current debates over the practice, and a landmark ruling in the Miranda case of 1966 which attempted to cease the use of intimidation and coercion practices of the police.
The first thing that should be thought about prior to any form of interrogation is the suspect’s rights; particularly his or her Miranda Rights. Also known as the Miranda warnings, “the purpose of [which] depends on whether you are the law enforcement officer or the suspect. From a suspect's point of view, it is to remind you that you have a Fifth Amendment right to remain silent and not incriminate yourself. From an officer's point of view, it is to help preserve the admissibility of your statements in a criminal proceeding” (Second Call Defense, 2014). There are four main principles to the Miranda statement that an officer will read; although the exact wording may change from police department to police department. Miranda warnings or rights basically state that: you have the right to remain silent, anything you say can be used against you, you have the right to an attorney, and you may be appointed an attorney if you cannot afford one. In addition, an individual may wave his rights outlined within the Miranda statements. Suspects can waive their rights to a lawyer and to remain silent by knowingly and voluntari...
... middle of paper ...
...lice Deception Is. Retrieved from http://www.davekopel.com/: http://www.davekopel.org/CJ/OpEds/Miranda.htm
Leo, R. A., & Thomas, G. C. (1998). The Miranda Debate: Law, Justice, and Policing. In R. A. Leo, & G. C. Thomas, The Miranda Debate: Law, Justice, and Policing (p. 343). Boston, Massachusetts: Northeastern University Press.
Pollock, J. M. (2014). Ethical Dilemas and Decisions in Criminal Justice. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Second Call Defense. (2014). Understanding the Miranda warning and what it means to you. Retrieved from Second Call Defense: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/self-defense-news/understanding-miranda-warning-and-what-it-means-you
Skolnick, J. H., & Leo, R. A. (1992, January 1). The ethics of deceptive interrogation. Criminal Justice Ethics, 11(1). Retrieved from http://www.thefreelibrary.com/The ethics of deceptive interrogation.-a012396024
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
Defenders of the Miranda decision say that fewer crimes solved are for a good reason. They believe that law enforcement officers were forced to stop coercive questioning techniques that are unconstitutional. Over the years, the Supreme Court has watered down its stance in saying that the Miranda rules are not constitutional obligations, but rather “prophylactic” safeguards intended to insure that officers do not force a confession from a suspect. The need for both effective law enforcement as well as protection of society dictates the need for potential alternatives to the limitations of Miranda that would simultaneously protect the interest of society in effective law enforcement while at the same time providing protection to suspects against unconstitutional force (www.ncpa.org).
In 2005 NYPD Detective, first grade, James E. Griffith called internal affairs to report he was being pressured by a fellow officer to lie and take the blame during an internal inquiry for the mishandling of a homicide investigation by his unit (Goldstein, 2012). Another detective and union official claimed in his deposition that Griffin was a rat because he went to internal affairs instead of the union (Marzulli, 2013). According to the United States District Court Eastern District of New York’s memorandum of decision the retaliation was immediate, included adverse personnel actions and continued though out his career in different units until Detective Griffith was effectively forced to retire due to the harassment in 2009 (James Griffin v. the City of New York, n.d.). Griffin eventually filed a legal sit against The City of New York, the NYPD and two of the officers involved individually. This case study will analyze the incident, whistleblower laws and the ethical challenges involved.
Miranda rights are the entitlements every suspect has. An officer of the law is required to make these rights apparent to the suspect. These are the rights that you hear on every criminal investigation and policing show in the country, “You have the right to remain silent, anything you say may be used against you, you have the right to consult an attorney, if you can no t afford an attorney one will be appointed for you.” After the suspect agrees that he or she understands his/her rights, the arrest and subsequent questioning and investigation may continue. These are liberties that were afforded to suspected criminals in the Miranda Vs Arizona. However, with every rule there also exceptions like: Maryland v. Shatzer, Florida v. Powell, and Berghuis v. Thompkins.
Elsen, Sheldon, and Arthur Rosett. “Protections for the Suspect under Miranda v. Arizona.” Columbia Law Review 67.4 (1967): 645-670. Web. 10 January 2014.
...e police officers. Miranda established the precedent that a citizen has a right to be informed of his or her rights before the police attempt to violate them with the intent that the warnings erase the inherent coercion of the situation. The Court's violation of this precedent is especially puzzling due to this case's many similarities to Miranda.
The decision requires law enforcement officers to follow a code of conduct when arresting suspects. After an arrest is made, before they may begin questioning they must first advise the suspect of their rights, and make sure that the suspect understands them. These rights are known as the Miranda Warnings and include:
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...
Many of today’s interrogation models being utilized in police investigations have an impact on false confessions. The model that has been in the public eye recently is the social psychological process model of interrogation known as the “The Reid Technique.” There are two alternatives used by the police today to replace the Reid Technique, one is the PEACE Model and the other is Cognitive Interviewing. These methods are not interrogation techniques like Reid but interview processes.
This essay will bring to light the problem of racial profiling in the police force and propose the eradication of any discrimination. The Fourth Amendment states “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” Despite this right, multiple minorities across the country suffer at the hands of police officers through racial profiling; the singling out of a person or persons as the main suspect of a crime based on their race. Many people have also suffered the loss of a loved one because police believed the suspect to be a threat based on their races therefore the officers use their authority to take out the “threat”. Although racial profiling may make sense to police officers in the line of duty, through the eyes of the public and those affected by police actions, it is a form a racism that is not being confronted and is allowing unjust convictions and deaths.
Police often use deception as a form of discretion in law enforcement. Drug smuggling, pornography rings, and fences of stolen merchandise are investigated using undercover work or informants. Blue lies are used to control a
Martin, Rich. "Police Corruption: An Analytical Look into Police Ethics." The FBI Enforcement Bulletin May 2011: 11+. Academic OneFile. Web. 9 Feb. 2015.
If you have ever seen any of the many police dramas out on television then you have seen a police officer or detective employ questionable interrogation techniques at times. In the high stress environment of a police officer, the need to catch the perpetrator of a crime such as murder runs high. Officers often use a somewhat deceptive means of questioning when dealing with a criminal. For example, if two people are in custody and both face potential charges; the police will likely tell one that the other has already confessed in order to secure a confession. A murder charge is no different. With that said, which way should the officer go at this particular crossroads?
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).
Vicchio, Stephen. “Ethics and Police Integrity.” FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin. July 1997: 8-12. EBSCOhost. Web. 12 Nov 2013