Custody and Prison Statistics

In Britain, criminology arose so indecisively and fitfully that its history can not be purveyed easily in a coherent manner. Hermann Mannheims forty year old account of its loosely connected stages remains as serviceable as any (Maguire et al, 2007). Maguire, (2007) postulates that statistics can not merely be simplified as tables, formulae, sets of techniques or numbers. On the contrary, statistics is an approach that enables the analyst to understand the world and how it operates. Despite this fact, the said world is a complex phenomenon whereupon there is no easy and quick way of comprehending it. To Maguire, if everything appears to be in black and white, perhaps one has misunderstood the issue under consideration (Maguire, 2007).

This paper will assess various crime levels as well as trends and patterns and how these are measured. This vary from what appears to be straightforward empirical and methodological questions for instance, how much crime is present, how is this crime revealed and how does it change to more political and sociological questions regarding the relationship between the types of crime statistics that are recorded and published. On the other hand, these sociological and political questions carry with them the changing developments in the criminal justice system as well as the perceptions of the nature of crime problem together with the politics of crime control.

Interpreting Custody and Prison Statistics

As on 31st December 2008, the population in custody stood at 82,023. This was a 2 increase from the 2007 statistics. In the same year (2008), prison population was 81,636 while that in Securing Training Centres (STCS) was 214. Secure Children Homes had 173 children in custody.

The male prison population grew by three percent to stand at 77,435 while the population of female prisoners dropped by the same percentage to 4,201. The remand population in prison grew by six percent standing at 13,010 inmates in December 2008. The population of untried prisoners within this total grew by eight percent to 8,591 while that of un-sentenced prisoners who had been convicted grew by 4 percent to stand at 4,419. The largest percentage increase amongst remand population since 2007 was exhibited in sexual, burglary and other offences by fourteen, twenty one and twelve percent respectively. There were decreases in fraud and forgery as well as motoring and drug offences which recorded drops by 9, 18 and five percentage points respectively. As of 31st December 2008, there were 66,930 sentenced prisoners. This indicated a two percent increase compared to the previous year. Since December 2007 the largest proportionate increase was recorded among prisoners serving indeterminate sentences (Indeterminate and life sentences). This grew by fifteen percent.

Fraud and forgery, sexual offences as well as violence against the person amongst the sentenced prison population exhibited the greatest increases with eight, five and five percent respectively from December 2007. Since December 2007, the number of inmates serving motoring offences decreased by 17. Population of adults in prison as at 31st December 2008 stood at 70,067. Compared to 2007, this was a three percent increase. Over the same period, there was a 2 increase among 15 to 17 year olds which stood at 2,227 while the population of young adult prisoners was 9,342.

 Foreign national prison population as of 31st December 2008 was 11, 283. This population is inclusive of prisoners held on remand as well as those in custody under the Immigration Act together with those serving custodial sentences. Most of the foreign prisoners were Jamaicans who stood at 1,105 prisoners. Jamaica was followed closely by Nigeria that had 881, Ireland (620) and China (482). Other countries with notable populations include Somalia (445), Vietnam (465) and Poland (445).
Population in Custody by Type and Sex

2007 December2008 December2007 December2008 DecemberMalesMales FemalesFemalesPrisons752757743543304201prison Cells0000SCHs1652144934STCs14624810275

Population in custody by age group, December 2008  on remand ,                 under-sentence  or  non-criminal .
All Adult Population15 - 17 Yr Olds in PrisonYoung Adults in PrisonRemandUntried70233581210Convicted un-sentenced3524148747Under SentenceFine Defaulter10003Less than or Equal to 6 Months34767685Greater than 6 months to less than 12 Months1858739012 months to less than four years190642238024 years or more2235621662Indeterminate Sentences112022716Non-criminal prisoners14640126

RemandImmediate Custodial SentenceMaleFemaleMaleFemaleViolence against the person306118018579816Sexual Offences87612773947Robbery1283628495329Burglary1486617534202Theft and Handling 9311152909348Fraud and Forgery434701697221Drug Offences15471439845888Motoring Offences1253104217Other Offences17191495670361Offence not Recorded6757717418

Population in Prison by Type of Offence Dec 2008

RemandImmediate Custodial SentenceAll Adult PopulationAll 15 - 17 Yr OldsAll Young AdultsAll Adult PopulationAll 15 - 17 Yr OldsAll Young AdultsViolence against the person256515116745484Sexual Offences7823572736183341Robbery85611237665924711761Burglary1208882516539258938Theft and Handling 868411372841123293Fraud and Forgery4722301868447Drug Offences146525200988384765Motoring Offences10122592920110Other Offences1558462635040187804Offence not Recorded671378158429

Population Changes in Prison by Type of Offence Dec 07  Dec 08

Type of OffencePercentage in RemandType of OffencePercentage of Immediate Custodial SentenceBurglary21Fraud and Forgery8Sexual Offences14Violence against the person5Other Offences12Sexual Offences5Theft and Handling10Robbery3Robbery7Drug Offences1Violence against the Person5Burglary0Offence not Recorded2Other Offences-1Drug Offences-5Theft and Handling-8 Fraud and Forgery-9Motoring Offences-17Motoring Offences-18Offence not Recorded-38
v. Ratio of Females to Males

Total Population  82023
Males 77713
Females 4310
H 118

Percentage of all Prisoners Sentenced to an Immediate Custodial Sentence for Violence against the person

All Prisoners under Immediate Custodial  65737
Prisoners under Immediate Custodial Sentence for Violence against the person  18407
If 65737 100
            18407  100     28

The Percentage of All Young Prisoners Sentenced to an Immediate Custodial Sentence for Violence Against the Person.

All Young Adults Sentenced to an Immediate Custodial Sentence  7255
All Young Prisoners Sentenced to an Immediate Custodial Sentence for Violence Against the Person  2167

7255  100
          2167  100  29.869

The Percentage of All Prisoners aged 15  17 Sentenced to an Immediate Custodial Sentence for Violence against the person

All Prisoners aged 15  17 Sentenced to an Immediate Custodial Sentence  1719

All Prisoners aged 15  17 Sentenced to an Immediate Custodial Sentence for Violence against the person  484

If 1719  100
   484  100  28.16
(C) Discussion

Overall Pattern of People in Custody
As by December 2008, there were 77,713 males in custody.  This was a 3 percent increase from the previous year (2007). High crime rates among males can be attributed to rising unemployment whereupon the said males are embrace illegal means for survival. These growths can also be attributed to falling morals in the society as well as reluctant law enforcement agencies that are charged with curbing crime rates. In response, the government ought to formulate policies that tighten loose ends and thus enable a lawful society. Additionally, the government can also provide jobs for the jobless and lawless individuals. Within this same period the crime rate among women witnessed a 4 drop. This indicates that policies formulated to cut down female lawlessness are working. As such, the government should continue funding these policies to extend the percentage drop. Secure Childrens Homes (SCHs) as well as Secure Training Centres (STCs) also witnessed significant drops. This low numbers within these two institutions should not be solely interpreted as positive trends as they might imply a government state agencies reluctance to enroll more individuals in these programs.

Overall Pattern of People in custody by type of Prisoner
Among males, in 2008, there was a three percent increase while females had a decrease by the same percentage margin. The percentage of males in remand grew by 6 compared to 2007 while their female counterparts increased by 5. Among these, 8034 males and 557 women were untried. The increase certainly indicates a strain on national justice systems resources which are unable to match the backlog of cases manifested with the increase thus the holding of prisoners without trial. This is further indicated by the convicted prisoners that are yet to be sentenced. In the same period of 2008, prisoners under sentence witnessed increases under three categories. These are fine defaulters (28), indeterminate sentences (15) and 12 months -  4 years. The fine defaults could be attributed to the slow state of the economy where prisoners are unable to raise the prescribed fine or bail. There also were decreases among prisoners serving e 6 months (-5),  6 12 months (-3) and 4 years or more.

Official statistics establish the prime age of recorded offending for females is 15 while for males the age is placed at 18 for males (Home Office, 2004). According to the statistics, juvenile offences by females are primarily restricted to moderately minor offences. Additionally, the gender gap amongst 1517-year-olds tends to be small for stolen goods, theft and handling as well as assault (Home Office, 2004).

Any attempts to assess trends in either the treatment of girls and young women or offending female youth by the criminal justice system are hindered by major difficulties of interpreting available evidence. Differences within categories of offence can also misrepresent the general picture of female offending. A good example to cite is violence against the person which indicates anything from playground fight to a serious offence as murder. Additionally, small baseline numbers can denote that even little variations or changes may appear dramatic in terms of percentage.

Under the statistical classification of population by type of offence, the most significant positive change in 2008 is in the motoring offences category. This category witnessed an 18 percent drop for its remand prisoners while immediate custodial sentences witnessed a 17 percent drop. This major decline can be attributed to various factors including sound traffic civil education and improved infrastructure (roads, traffic signs). While traffic offences faired on well, burglary and sexual offences on the other hand increased with 21 and 14 for remand and 0 and 5  increases for immediate custodial sentences respectively. Increase of burglary cases can be attributed to lack of security measures on the victims side, reduced police vigilance, as well as new complex methods by burglars.
(D) Conclusion

A primary factor that can be cited to give credit to the methodological models of statistical analysis evident in this paper is how the methods remain valid to provide credible solutions to research problems regarding crime. Researchers seek to come up with research strategies that are able to reach conclusions that are as valid as possible to the research problem (Jupp et al, 2006). Here, there are two aspects regarding validity of data collection that call for exemplification. Firstly is the fact that research conclusions remain credible for their respective cases in time and context of the investigation. As such the conclusions drawn from research can neither be wrong nor right but on the contrary they remain either strongly credible or less credible. Out of the tendencies that can be drawn from the numbers, the resulting conclusions can be said to be internally drawn and thus strongly credible. For instance, if the researcher concludes that traffic police in Britain have become reluctant, the statements validity can be judged from the rise in traffic offences.

A second aspect that regards validity is the ability of statistical data to generalize conclusions presumed at the end of a research (data collection) to other cases time periods as well as contexts (Jupp et al, 2006). The extent, to which this remains credible as such, is the extent to which the derived conclusions are presumed externally valid. External validity is dependent on cases time and contexts forming part of research design as it has typicality as well as representatives.
The hall mark of statistical analysis of crime data is the inherent ability of research decisions comprising the process of statistical data analysis to anticipate validitys potential threats.
Crime statistics are also absolutely critical as they provide a basis for credible quantitative measurements of criminal trends as well as activities. This enables parliament to carry out its democratic mandate whereupon it can hold the sitting administration of the day accountable for this aspect with regard to the state of the nation. This is especially critical as sitting governments can term credible allegations by the opposition (the public watch-dog) as mere political campaigns or cheap shots endeared towards gaining cheap political mileages. With the statistics as the foundation of given allegations, the said allegations are given credibility whereupon the government is forced to respond appropriately.

Crime statistics are also important as they keep the public as well as the media, relevant special interest groups together with the academe informed about the state of crime in Britain. This enables the said groups to access data consequently informing non-governmental research agendas as well as wider debate.

Pros and Cons of the Death Penalty

Death penalty also referred to as capital punishment is a form of punishment that is applicable to any person found guilty of a capital offence. Capital offences include murder, attempted murder, and robbery with violence and treason. For many years there has been a looming debate on whether death penalty should be abolished. Many are of the argument that it should be done away with as it is not only unfair but also inhuman. On the other hand an equally big number believes that the only way that people will refrain from committing capital offences is by implementing the death penalty. This discussion looks at the pros and cons of death penalty with much emphasis being put on whether to retain or abolish this form of punishment (Bedau, H. 2005).

Capital punishment has got two sides to it. This discussion looks at both sides of the coin to determine whether this practice should be abolished or retained. Some of the reasons as to why death penalty should be retained are discussed below

A person who has been tried in a court of law and found guilty of a capital offence deserves to be punished through death so that they may suffer similar pain to the pain they inflicted on the victim of their criminal acts. For example, a person who has committed rape or murder has caused grievous and fatal harm respectively to the victim. This will discourage other members of society from committing crime. Capital punishment should therefore be retained as a means of discouraging people from committing capital offences (Deepa, K. 2009).

The other argument that supports capital punishment is that if a person who has committed a capital offence is put in jail and then later releases, there is a possibility of such a person committing the same crime again or even a greater crime mainly for revenge purposes. It is thus argued that the only way to keep the society safe from such people is by eliminating the completely from the society and this is done through capital punishment (Deepa, K. 2009).

It is also argued that instead of jailing a person for life for having committed a capital offence, it is far much better to kill them as it is viewed as more torturous to live in the four walls of prison for the rest of a persons life. It is thus argued that persons found guilty of capital offences should be face death penalty as it is less torturous and it also helps reduce overcrowding in prisons.

On the other hand, those who are opposed to death penalty as a form of punishment argue that it may lead to the death of an innocent person. It is therefore viewed as unjust and unfair since it is argued that most poor people are likely to face death punishment as they cannot afford the best of lawyers. For that therefore, they argue that it should be done away with (Bedau, H. 2005).

They also argue that life belongs to God. He is the giver of life and He is the only one mandated to take it away. This form of punishment is thus seen as blasphemous as it takes the mandate of God.
Many people have also argued that although the main intention of this punishment is to reduce the rate of crime in the society, it has not been able to achieve this purpose and should therefore be done away with. Crime rate is still up even though death penalty is still be implemented (Bedau, H. 2005).
In conclusion, I am of the opinion that death penalty should be done away with mainly because it has not been able to achieve the very purpose for which it was established.

The effectiveness of prisons and jails to rehabilitate inmates

Whenever a person is charged with an offence and found guilty by a court of law, they are usually sentenced to particular punishment. The most common form of punishment in many judicial systems is imprisonment. A prison or a jail is a correctional facility where people accused of crimes are confined. The main aim of prisons is to rehabilitate or correct inmates so that they may become good and trustworthy members of the society (Andres, A.  Valerie, J. 2010). However some analysts have on more than one occasion cast doubt as to whether the prisons have been able to fulfill the mission of rehabilitation. This discussion attempts to find out if these correctional facilities are effective in rehabilitating inmates and if so, to what extent they are.

The prisons in America have on a couple of times been accused of not being as effective in rehabilitating prisoners. According to various researches conducted there are a high number of prisoners who are re-arrested within a short period of being released from jail. Those prisoners who are put on probation have very slim chances of completing the probation period without committing yet another crime (Peter, M. et al 2006).

It has also been noted that when inmates are in prison they tend to change their behavior with some becoming hardcore criminals. Some practices like homosexuality and use of hard drugs are rife in prisons. By the time an inmate completes to serve their jail term they have picked other bad habits which make then worse than the way they were when they first got into prison. This makes one wonder if prisons are effective or they are breeding places for hardcore criminals (Andres, A.  Valerie, J. 2010).

The prison has been viewed by many as a solution to the problems in the society. The public takes the assumption that the prison rehabilitates inmates y making all the offenders pay for their crimes. It is also the expectation of the society that by the time a criminal is released from prison, they have turned around and changed their lives completely. However this expectation has continually been eluded by the reality that prisons have not effectively been able to rehabilitate prisoners into becoming better members of the society (Peter, M. et al 2006).

Prison officials have however been on the defensive and they have not been taking the accusations of ineffectiveness lying down. They argue that the duty of ensuring that inmates reform is communal where all stakeholders are involved. They argue that they cannot make the reforms happen single handedly. They ask for the support of the public and more importantly they argue that the inmates must be willing to reform and become responsible and trustworthy citizens.

However, accusing fingers having been pointed on the prison officials, who are being accused of not meting punishments that are severe enough to make the inmates change. And for that accusation, prison officials argue that the severity of a punishment does not always guarantee change on the part of the prisoners. There must be will and effort that must be demonstrated by the inmates if change is to occur (Peter, M. et al 2006).

It is clear that the prisons have not been able to serve effectively the main purpose for which they were established. It is therefore important for all stakeholders to go back to the drawing board and find out what exactly the problem is and what is preventing these correctional facilities from being as effective as they ought to be.


Race, Drugs, and Policing Understanding Disparities in Drug Delivery Arrests
By Katherine Beckett, Kris Nyrop, and Lori Pfingst

This article was written to make the reader understand where the racial disparities in the drug arrest and drug use are coming from.  There are many forms of research that have been done to help clear this up.  Some of the type of research that was done was The Data Source and Research, The Seattle Needle Exchange Program, Public Drug Treatment Admission Data (TARGET), Ethnographic Observations, Seattle Police Department Incident Reports, Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring Program (ADAM) and finally setting (Greenwood, 2001).

The research has a main question which exactly asked about how and why Blacks and Hispanics experience comparatively high drug arrest rates.  It is believed that Blacks and Hispanics are more likely to use and deliver drugs than whites because of social economic reasons. The paper has been shown that a residents perception of a neighborhood disorder can be significantly affected by the neighborhoods racial, ethnic and class composition.  The researchers also presented that when it comes to Blacks and Hispanics people believe in what is known to be as a script or what perception they have on certain things.  This happens if people believed that the case is existed because they associate things with the standard crime news that usually feature African Americans and Latinos as the crime offenders. This scenario also applies to drug use and arrest (Beckett, Nyrop and Pfingst, 2006). Additionally, there are studies focused on patterns of the strategic criminal investigations among the arrests. To have a stronger potential to impact the structure, management, strategies and modern criminology effectiveness compared to its members (Abram, 1996).  Diversity among every people and local situation has become an increasingly more important issue to every organization, people, and organizational productivity. Effective patterns will most likely attract more effective justice criminal system will also be increased (Aiklo, 2004).

A study conducted by Burston, Jones and Robertson-Saunders (1995) found out that over 95 percent of people surveyed perceived African Americans as a typical drug user. A study called the sentencing project done in 2000 showed that 60 of todays inmates presently incarcerated were mostly Black and Latin-American (Burston, Jones and Robertson-Saunders, 1995).  This number may even higher today.  The reason behind can be attributed to the policies and practices associated with the war on drugs which surfaced as an important factor in this study (Burston, Jones and Robertson-Saunders, 1995).  In Seattle, it appears that blacks are extremely over-represented, and whites are under-represented.  Moreover, an undercover operation was performed in Seattle by the Seattle Police Department from January 1999 to April 2001.  This operation included buy-bust operations reverse buy-bust operations, and search warrants.  After the completion of this operation it was shown that evidence indicates that the majority of those who deliver serious drugs in Seattle are white, and that a smaller percentage of those who do so are black. And yet, according to Seattle Police Department arrest records, 64.2 percent of those purposefully arrested for this crime from January 1999-April 2001 were black 14.1 were Latin-American, and 17.6 were white (Klement, Tal and Siggins, 2001).

It appears that the Seattle police department chooses to focus there attention more on the areas that are mostly affected by crack cocaine and less attention on areas that deal with other types of drugs which also raise the amount of blacks and Hispanics being targeted.  It has been proven that crack cocaine is mostly used, sold and delivered by blacks. Therefore by targeting this area of drugs the outcome is more like be blacks than whites who are dealing with drugs.  I think this scenario is also true in todays society.  Generally, we tend to associate Black and Latino to crimes and drugs but statistics and facts shows that when more whites are using drugs and committing crimes.  Yet for some reason the punishment seems less harsh and sometimes these crimes or drug use are not even reported.  According to Abram (1996), along with the need for increased awareness and appreciation of analytical capabilities, there was also a need for those in modern criminology system to have a thorough understanding of the philosophical foundation of the criminal justice system that includes an understanding of the philosophical positions regarding the roots of crime as well as typical positions about justice and fairness in the behavior of individuals and in the process of crimes and punishment.

As we learned from the Chapter 6 of our textbook entitled Criminology Theories, Patterns and Typology by Speigel, social structure plays a big part in crime. As we learned inner city zones and neighborhoods wracked with extreme poverty had higher crime rates as I believe was also the case in Seattle. Police are more likely to focus on areas that are run down or maybe have a lower economic standings that to focus on a mostly upper class or white neighborhood (Siegel and McCormick, 2002).  Even in todays media such as the news, newspapers, magazines etc. we mostly hear about crimes involving blacks and rarely do we hear about the crimes involving whites unless it is someone who is high profile, famous or wealthy.  Any other time these crimes would not be mentioned.  I also feel that the police department has always had a way of playing with numbers as far as being able to show how many arrest were made by whom and for what crimes.  We have no way of confirming whether or not there statistics are fact or fiction.  I personally believe that there is racial disparity.

The conclusion of the paper draws on a number of concepts and sources in order to assess competing explanations of racial disparity in drug arrests, and discovers that this disparity is largely law enforcements consequences that focus on black and Latino users of crack cocaine. Their findings are supported by multiple data sources and present a lot of commonly held assumptions about the causes of racial disparity in drug arrests which may not be reliable. My understanding on their conclusion focuses on crack as the primary cause of racial disparity in drug arrests and drug possession in Seattle that seemingly underscores the need to understand the focus particularly on that substance which clearly defined and presented by the authors.

In conclusion the authors findings indicated that the majority of those who delivered drugs other than crack were white and the majority of those who delivered crack were black, yet 64 of those arrested for delivery of other drugs besides crack were black.  The author felt that this was because of three main factors, which were. The focus on crack cocaine, the focus on outdoor drug activity and third outdoor drug markets are not treated alike.  Mostly because areas where white outdoor drug activity is taking place receives less attention that a mostly black area of Seattle.  I think that the author has hit on some very important facts and her study and surveys were very well planned out but I do not think that it gives us any idea of how we can address or correct this problem.  I feel that the author did prove her point in stating that blacks are over represented and whites are under represented but to be honest I believe this has been the case for as long as I can remember and I do not think that this is the case just in Seattle but in just about all the states.  I think that the major problem will always be demographics and locations. Aiklo(2004) argued that the current political conflicts and geographical differences provide significant challenges to the issue of crimes and justice, the world is now in general as it threatens to widen inequalities and affect human living systems.

I can see that the authors successfully achieved their purpose because much of what the study did can be seen as settling conflicts among citizens. Basic values justice and fairness are central to such system of social control have also a factor in the development of modern criminology (Abram, 1996). Anyone working in the punishment has the obligation to explore such basic values to understand their importance in criminal justice and to understand their meaning and value to them as individuals without resorting to racial disparity. Those who work in the area must be responsible for their part in that system. Law enforcement agencies and police must not tolerate injustice, the police must not accept brutality, and prison officials must be responsible for prison conditions when racial issues are concerned. For that to be true, we cannot rely on citizens video cameras to exposed and correct the system. Everyone must appreciate the importance of values that make the criminology system credible (Aris, 2008).

This value of this paper in explaining a problem or issue in the field is an attempt to build theoretical foundations that explain why this phenomenon occurred and test those theoretical concepts by observing their behavioral and other related aspects. Criminological concepts used in this research help shape the response of society to crimes in terms of responding and preventing crimes after its occurrence. The concern of it was focused with the human moral relationship, values and moral status together with its non-human elements. It has become a new philosophical sub-discipline and examined the rational possibility of arguments for providing intrinsic value to the diversity of crimes and punishment elements. However, experts have agreed that crimes and justice should impact the places defined in which areas are to be restored, and have questioned over exactly which must be  demographic features, terrorism, criminal features, etc. These issues are emerging in human societies, and then an issue also emerges over the laws of the nature and punishments that will show in them, and also of their combination into huge global, regional, political and economic field disparities (Barry, 2003).

The Case for Abolishing Plea Bargaining Rae Carruth and Martha Stewart Cases

Although plea bargaining has long functioned as one of the fundamental features of the American criminal justice system for more than one hundred years HYPERLINK httpwww.questiaschool.comPM.qstaod5001761425(Gorr, 2000, p. 129), a review of the effects and recent high-profile criminal cases demonstrates why this type of prosecutorial discretion ought to be abolished in order to ensure a more just type of criminal justice system.  Historically, plea bargaining was devised and implemented based on British legal practices that too frequently employed coercive measures and pressures to secure confessions in criminal cases HYPERLINK httpwww.questiaschool.comPM.qstaod5037664707(Vogel, 1999, p. 166).  It was precisely this type of coercive government pressure that would eventually persuade America to incorporate special rights to a jury and other procedural safeguards into Americas founding documents such as the American Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Culturally, plea bargaining is also rooted in the one-sided types of inquisitions represented by early Puritan approaches to guilt and innocence in the form of the Salem Witch Trials.  Confessions were sought through an early form of American plea bargaining in which a failure to confess very well might mean an effective death sentence.  Taken together, it can be seen that plea bargaining has its historical and cultural origins in practices than would seem to run contrary to notions of justice and fairness in criminal cases.  Although some argue that plea bargaining is a useful and practical strategic tool for prosecutors and defense attorneys, the facts suggest that it is unevenly and unjustly applied in many criminal cases.  This has led to many state-based grassroots movements, characterized as Victims Rights movements, which have sought to have plea bargaining more stringently regulated or eliminated in California, for instance, Californias Proposition 8, a Victims Bill of Rights, was conceived, drafted, passed, and implemented with one of its primary objectives being the elimination of plea bargaining HYPERLINK httpwww.questiaschool.comPM.qstaod22796668(McCoy, 1993, p. xi).  National criticism of plea bargaining has attended fairly recent criminal prosecutions involving public figures and celebrities because of public perceptions that these celebrities received preferential treatment through the plea bargaining mechanism.  One of these criminal cases included murder charges against former National Football League player Rae Carruth and a series of white collar criminal charges against television celebrity Martha Stewart.

In the case of Carruth, the facts fairly firmly established that he conspired with other men to kill his girlfriend who was pregnant more specifically it was alleged that he conspired with three men to kill Adams because he did not want the baby HYPERLINK httpwww.questiaschool.comPM.qstaod113365854(Nasheri, 2002, p. 144).  In furtherance of this conspiracy one of these men, Watkins, killed the girlfriend and the baby was also prevented from being born.  Originally, Carruth was faced with a possible death penalty because of his involvement in the various crimes.  Ultimately, however, because the defendants were trying to help themselves by providing incriminating evidence, a number of plea bargains were discussed.  Eventually, Carruth agreed to a plea bargain for a much shorter prison sentence than Watkins even though Carruth was the motivating force behind the crimes.  This is patently unjust.  A different type of problem created by plea bargaining is illustrated in the Martha Stewart case.  In Stewarts case, for instance, the prosecutors used plea bargaining as a coercive tool to try and compel Steward to confess to certain financial crimes which she denied.  In this respect, it was noted that Martha Stewart was not charged with violating insider trading laws instead, she was charged with obstruction of justice, making false statements, and conspiracy to obstruct justice, make false statements, and commit perjury HYPERLINK httpwww.questiaschool.comPM.qstaod5037469803(Hurt, 2008, p. 374).  Unlike the Carruth case where the defense attorneys used a plea bargaining strategy to secure a shorter prison sentence for premeditated murder, the Stewart case shows zealous publicity-seeking prosecutors using plea bargaining to coerce a criminal defendant into some sort of confession because of inadequate evidence.  The Stewart case provides an excellent contemporary example of the colonial British and Puritan approaches to guilt and innocence hundreds of years ago and violates fundamental notions of fairness and justice.

In conclusion, plea bargaining arose from historical and cultural practices unrelated to fairness and justice.  That this oppressive and corrupt remnant of British rule persists is clearly indicated in the miscarriages of justice represented by the criminal cases involving Rae Carruth and Martha Stewart.  Compromise is not a wise course of action quite the contrary, it is simply time to abolish plea bargaining in order to maintain the integrity of the criminal justice system.

Neighborhoods, Crime and Community Policing

In the world today, one of the major institution termed as hostile to the society is the police industry. Police regarded as people who are used by the government or other relevant authorities in denying the public certain freedoms, for example, freedom of expression and freedom of association. Whereas it is true that sometimes police act unfairly or ruthlessly their role in the society is important and cannot be replaced. However, they should improve their approach towards the public thus nurture the culture of community policing. Knowledge-based public order policing shifts the initiative of maintenance of law and order and public safety to the communities. In this sense the public becomes the eyes of the police and as such work jointly with the police in the promotion of public safety. This study therefore seeks to illustrate that community policing can reduce the rate of crime in a given community as compared to other policing strategies such as beat policing.

Community Policing
As mentioned above community policing involves shifting the policing initiative to the public by making them involved in safeguarding public security. They however, do not replace the police or take their role for example, walking into the police stations and taking all the guns or uniforms for their use no, it is working jointly with the police to eradicate criminal activities in the society and above all, establishing a friendlier relationship with the police. Looking at the modalities of beat policing it risks putting all the responsibility in policing to an individual police officer. Beat policing involves an individual police officer taking responsibility for the policing needs of a community in a given territory (Mazerolle, P. 2003). In most cases, beat policing does satisfy the community and this low performance can be attributed to the fact that the initiative in maintenance of safety is overseen by one police officer. Surely, she cannot manage every thing without the cooperation of the entire community in that geographical area.

In deed, community policing is the best preferable modality in the promotion of safety in the public domain. I believe that people can eradicate criminal evil in their context since they know the criminals better than police. A criminal will hide from the police but will never hide from the community. This logic is the governing principle in community policing that if police work jointly with community the war on criminal evil will go down significantly.

An Evaluation of the Video Children Without Childhood

Question 1 What are the major causes of child prostitution in the Philippines based on the video

One of the five parts of the documentary video is focused on the problem of child prostitution in the Philippines. Aptly titled as Philippines Angels of the Night, the documentary follows the lives of three children, ages between 11 to 13, who are forced into the practice of prostitution at very young ages. There are several reasons behind these child molestations. The movie highlights how poverty, the demand for cheap labor, and the thirst for a good life became the contributing factors that led to many children becoming victims of prostitution in the Philippines. The video emphasized how these three young children were forced to sell their bodies for their own and their familys survival. As a result, they were not able to a better life anymore and after five years one became a flesh-peddler herself, the second one a drug addict, and the last one was presumed dead for she was not seen again.

Question 2 The video discussed several prevention strategies. Do you believe that these prevention strategies are effective Why or why not

The video effectively documented how child abuses result to  grave future for many youth. Children end up growing up too soon and being robbed of the chance to experience of a free and happy childhood. The documentary also tried to explore possible solutions or prevented strategies in order to change the kind of life that children could have. Some of these preventive strategies include protecting the rights of the children and emphasizing on projects that could prioritize giving young children a chance to good life. These strategies could be effective if they are given the amount of priority they deserve.

Question 3 Has this video changedreinforced your opinions about sexual abuse, particularly involving children, in the U.S. and around the world Explain.

The biggest impact of this documentary video is that it opens the eyes of viewers to the realities of life and heightens the awareness of people on the truth behind child sexual abuses. Cases of sexual abuse are apparent and occurring in all parts of the world. But this video widened my understanding behind prostitution and sexual abuses. The truth is, there are children who experience molestation in exchange for money for survival. The video reinforced my thoughts about sexual abuses because not only are they inescapable, they are also difficult to heal already.

Question 4 What are the responsibilities of Western developed countries (and citizens in these countries) in this regards What are the steps can governmentscitizens take to reduceprevent this problem of sexual abuse.

In todays time, one of the most prominent advocacy is to create a peaceful world wherein all countries can be united to help each other out. The five countries that served as the main focus of the film are Mexico, Japan, India, Uganda, and the Philippines. Majority of these countries are in direct relation with some of the most powerful Western countries, primarily the Philippines and America. Being developed and established nations already,  western countries also have the responsibility to evaluate the deteriorating situation in poorer or more unstable nations and help them address these problems. Governments from all around the world can implement programs that would demand cooperation from all and  help each other out in order to reduce the cases of child abuses. Western countries should help raise awareness against these practices not only because they are capable of helping out to reduce this practice but also because it is part of their responsibilities to the rest of the world.

Infrastructure Protection

Critical infrastructure within a State includes those facilities that are useful to both the public and the private sector. Such facilities include telecommunication systems, banking facilities, water supply facilities, transport networks, electrical power plants, oil and gas stores, hospitals, schools and administration offices. Others which have special consideration include security systems and media house. In case such critical infrastructure rare destroyed there are huge loses that are incurred. In order to avoid such losses security should be beeped up within those facilities. This can be carried out those certain policies and collaboration with the concerned agencies such as the department of security and federal agencies.

The department of homeland security plays certain roles in ensuring the security of critical assets. It ensures coherent and harmonious collaboration between various agencies which involve private sector, federal agencies, local officials, and State officials. These measures are taken to provide enough security on critical infrastructure. There are various contributing factors for beeping up security on critical infrastructure.  National income development is achieved by providing security on critical infrastructure which might be costly to the government upon destruction. It also enables protection of human within this critical infrastructure.

Terrorist have always targeted key assets and critical infrastructure in their ventures to attack authorities or powerful States in the world. They participate in such crimes in their mission of testing the security status in the powerful nations. Cyberspace is the mostly affected critical infrastructure. Terrorist exercise their security to jeopardy the security of a certain State. The highly targeted critical infrastructure by terrorists include telecommunication systems, power grid, finance departments and key national banks amongst others.  The accomplishment of the destruction is usually a successful venture to criminals and terrorists because they first study the set up of the critical assets within a nation. This enables them identify the weak points in terms of security.  This is possible because most developed nations have their agencies and critical infrastructure networked or linked to the internet services.  Unfortunately, the networked systems and critical infrastructure does not have appropriate security strategies which have being laid down to avoid or detect attacks at quick look (Cordesman Anthony, 2002). This is very devastating because attacks are planned missions which occur unexpectedly.

The public sector is not the only one that is affected.  Private sectors are also involved in the menace as terrorists target private sectors which carry essential information and value. This is because the private investor relies most on the infrastructural security. It is the mandate of the government to provide such security. The private sector also has a role to play

There are various strategies which have been laid to counter terrorist attacks. Security provisions are not worse with the Mcfee, Inc technology company in California. It is involved in providing security to curb cyber attacks. This eliminates some of the challenges posed to the cyber space in terms of security threats. It is the mandate of stakeholders to coordinate to eliminate such security threats.
The department of homeland security has preset goals to safeguard security within critical assets.  Some of the critical infrastructure which is highly protected includes information technology, chemical industry, emergency services like the health care, transport systems, shipping services as well as the postal services (Hawkins Kyleen, 2003).The department also plays a role in safeguarding prominent personnel within the government. This is as laid down in the presidential directives of 2003. Priority in these directives is to ensure security and maximum protection to the critical infrastructure (Koldaro Michelle, 2001). According to the presidential directives on the security provision, Bush directed that the DHS form collaborative strategies with the private sector and well known federal agencies in order to provide security on critical infrastructure. It is not a one man affair since terrorists identify any loophole in attacking critical infrastructure.
United States has made crucial move since 1996 in establishing a well equipped security towards the protection of critical infrastructure (Geddes Elizabeth, 2003). The department of homeland security has established some buffer zone protection facilities. This has been in place since 2005.The mandates of such facilities are to fight terrorist attacks affecting the chemical industry.  The collaboration of the DHS and the State has yielded good fruit. This has been achieved by organizing workshop training, assistance on technical matters and seminar related to the BZP process of plan development.  A significant move has been made in providing security on critical assets. The completion of the NIPP plans by the DHS is significant as it involves security matters.   The assurance of the National Leaders security as provided by the DHS through the operation of the Domestic Protectees program safeguards their security giving better change to serve the nation without many constraints.  Among the highly protected leaders under the 100 protection plan are the President, vice President, their families and the former presidents families.

In conclusion, there is need for security provision in both private and public critical infrastructure (Anderson Teresa, 2004). Although the State through the department of homeland security has made an attempt to make such protection for leaders, citizen, physical and invisible assets, it is worth noting that there is need for improvement because terrorists can bomb the facilities any time.

Emergency and recovery measures for any loses in case of successful attacks should be set up to protect grounding of critical infrastructure there after.   As mentioned earlier, cyber space attacks are most prevalent since the majority of developed nations have connected their systems to the internet and are therefore threatened with attacks related to the cyberspace due to limited protection.    

Sneak and Peek Warrants

The sneak and peek warrant was incorporated into the United States legislation as a section of the Patriot Act in 2001. The main aim for the enactment of the legislation was to curb terrorist activities and prevent them from taking place within the jurisdictions of the United States. Sneak and peek gave law enforcement officers the power to search private residential areas and business premises without prior notification or with delayed notification to ensure that the suspect cannot interfere with evidence that can enable them have a strong case against the suspect. In the context of this paper, the sneak and peak warrants will be highlighted and their relevance to the United States established.

Sneak and Peek warrants are search warrants which give law enforcement officers the power to break into private homes as well as businesses and conduct a search within the premise without the prior search and knowledge of the party being investigated. This is a piece of legislation which was passed in 2001 as part of the United States Patriot Act. They are also referred to as Covert entry search warrants or surreptitious entry search warrants. The main aim of coming up with this legislation was to reinforce the measures aimed at preventing terrorist activities within the United States. The officers in charge of law enforcement are not allowed to seize personal properties. These warrants have demonstrated great benefits in investigations that involve the manufacturing of illegal drugs. The warrant gives the officers the power to conduct a thorough search for chemicals as well as drug paraphernalia within the premise to give them the authority to return with the normal search warrant (Sievert, 2007).

Sneak and Peek Warrants
While the sneak and peak warrants were basically meant to act as an anti-terrorism measure, it is not necessarily limited to terrorism and has application in various federal crimes. This has particularly brought it to the limelight regarding its efficiency. It brings along a number of advantages and disadvantages. This piece of legislation was formulated after the terrorist attack which took place in Washington leading to the destruction of twin towers and causing serious harm to human life. The United States had to find ways of fighting terrorism both externally and internally (Leahy, n.d). Sneak and Peak warrants give room for delayed information of the search or not informing the suspect at all about such searches in his premise. This is very vital if the officials in charge of the investigations want to get first-hand evidence. The court can only give the sneak and peek warrant if there is a possible negative result that can be brought about by issuing prior information concerning the search. If the warrant does not include seizure of private property, unless there is an indubitable necessity for that, and that the warrant may be extended if there is a reasonable cause (Crawford, 1997).

With the evidence in their hands, law enforcement officers have a strong ground and are able to present solid cases in court. Critics have expressed fears that the law enforcement officers may take such warrants for granted and go the extent of applying them even on the lesser law breaking acts that occur on a day-to-day basis (Larry  Maria, 2008). Sneak Peak is not considered to be a violation of the Fourth Amendment that protects the citizens from unreasonable and unlawful searches. Sneak peak has been credited with ensuring safety of both the law enforcement officers and the resident. If the search could be normal, then there is a probability that the resident can plan to harm the officers or may act in such a manner as to attract the wrath of the officers (Stuntz, 2002). This practice has the potential of preventing the resident from fleeing when he is sure he is guilty. The officer will locate him if they realize that he has a case to answer (Bullock, Haddow,  Coppola, 1997).

The suspect cannot be in a position to interfere with the evidence as could be the case when he is informed of the imminent search. Some of the residents can intimidate the witnesses if they are aware that their premises are bound to be searched (Odum, 2010). Sneak and peek search could thus act as a savior to the innocent witnesses. When a resident is aware that his premise is bound to be searched, he may jeopardize investigations and even delay the trials (Howard,  Sawyer, 2006).

Sneak and peak warrants have demonstrated viability in combating terrorism since the time of their adoption. They have always ensured that evidence is not destroyed, the suspects do not flee, the witnesses are protected, trials are not delayed safety of the resident and the law enforcement officers have been ensured and most of all is that the general safety of United States citizens and residents have been ensured. Despite the numerous advantages, sneak and peak warrants have come under sheer criticism citing the infringement into the rights of the citizens.

The Cost of Justice

This paper examines defines the concept of justice in the context of the American criminal justice system. It also evaluates the costs associated with criminal justice and the benefits that citizens experience as a result of state expenditures for the justice system by performing a literature on studies that have performed cost-benefit analysis on particular aspects of criminal justice. The paper showed that the cost of crime is escalating in the United States and some criminal justice policies were proven to be cost-effective while others have not.

Justice is one of the dearly-held tenets of democracy. Philosophically, justice has been associated with moral right, on the grounds of rationality, law, religious, fairness, ethics, and equity (Morrison, 1995). Another popular definition of justice is giving to each what he or she is due  (Morrison, 1995, p. 306).

In this day and age, knowing what is due has been left to the divisions of criminal justice  law enforcement, corrections, and the judiciary - to decide. Ensuring that justice is served does not come without a price. The federal government shoulders several tangible and intangible costs of meeting the objectives of criminal justice, restraining known, convicted, violent, and repeat criminals  (The New Citizenship Project, 1996, p. i). This paper seeks to address how much justice costs in America in terms of the expenditures of the criminal justice system and analyzes the benefits of investment on justice.

A cost-benefit analysis of criminal justice calculates tangible and intangible or social costs as well as social benefits of prisons. Social costs refer to burdens on society in addition to the resources it takes to run a prison system  (Piehl, Bert,  DiIulio, 1999). Aside from operational expenses of building prisons and running them, the costs of justice should also include variables such as lost labor-market productivity of inmates, the loss to families of having a member away from home, and the loss to communities of having a resident removed  (Piehl, Bert,  DiIulio, 1999).  Benefits include a) incapacitation of offenders and b) crime deterrence or prevention.

Costs of Crime
According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, there were approximately 7.3 million individuals who were either incarcerated, on parole status, or on probation status in the federal corrections system all throughout the United States. This means that out of every 31 U.S. adults, 1 of them is committed to the prison system  (Office of Justice Programs, 2010).

For the year 2006, operating the three divisions of criminal justice  law enforcement, corrections, and the judiciary  incurred a total cost of 214 billion (Office of Justice Programs, 2010). Expenditures have steadily risen since 1986 and for year 2006 alone, the increase was 5.1 percent compared to the previous year.

In terms of social costs, a report from the National Institute of Justice (as cited in Piehl, Bert,  DiIulio, 1999) presents an outlook on the cost of crime with respect to victimization. The figures presented in Table 1 are based on average compensations awarded by the jury to victims of particular crimes. Rape entails the highest compesation at 98,325 in every victim while drug sales entails compensation of 5.

Table 1. Estimates of Social Costs of Crime
CrimeSocial Cost (USD)Rape98,327Assault10, 624Robbery8,830Motoe vehicle theft3,429Burglary1,271Fraud, forgery, petty thefy1,271Drug Sale5
A more comprehensive study by Moreover, Cohen, Miller, and Rossman in 1994 (as cited in Cohen, 2000) tried to measure the costs of the criminal justice system by comparing costs of crime calculted in several studies. They approximate the cost of justice on a per-crime basis as of year 1987 to be 5,925 (murder), 2,050 (rape), 1,125 (robbery), and 1,225 (aggravated assault).

Another study conducted by Miller, Cohen, and Wiersema in 1996 (as cited in Cohen, 2000)  calculated the tangible costs of crime that were derived from surveys of victims. The study showed that cost estimations of private researchers are comparatively higher than the estimates calculated by government agencies. According to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), the average cost of a rape is 234. Miller, Cohen, and Wiersema estimated the tangible cost for rape per victim at 5,100 broken down into 2,200 for lost productivity plus 2,200 for mental health care.

Cost-benefit analysis of crime prevention
After estimating the costs of crime, a cost-benefit analysis proceeds by comparing cost with the benefits of criminal justice programs measured primarily in terms of the crime prevented. There have been a few studies that performed a cost-benefit analysis of several criminal justice programs.
One study was made by Greenwood and his colleagues (1994) to assess what incarceration policies related to the three-strikes rule debate in California would be the most cost-effective. The study calculated that the cost per serious crime prevented amounted to 11,800 for the third violent offense committed and 16,300 for the third felony offense committed. The study concluded through the figures that focusing on the most violent offenders gives the most justice (in terms of cost per crime prevented) out of the taxpayers money.

Another criminal justice policy that has been studied for cost-effectiveness is the practice of incarcerating drug offenders, whose population take up most of the space in the prison systems all over the U.S. It has been contended that the state spends too much on the prison beds, facilities, and expenditures for incarcerated drug offenders when the return in terms of compensation is only 5 per drug sale (Piehl, Bert,  DiIulio, 1999). In the study conducted by  Piehl, Bert,  DiIulio (1999), they concluded that the policy of admitting so many drug offenders into U.S. jails is not a cost-effective means of crime prevention. The fact is, the imprisonment of a drug dealer or seller does not deter crime. That jailed seller is simply replaced by another drug seller. Ultimately, the costs shouldered by the state to incarcerate drug dealers compared to the degree of crime prevented suggests that it is not cost-effective. Experts suggest that prison beds occupied by drug offenders instead be reserved to violent and high-cost property crime offenders.

Studies have shown that crimes indeed pay. The cost of justice, as this paper has stated, is increasing in the U.S. Crime prevention entails gigantic expenses shouldered by the state through taxpayers money. Studies that have conducted cost-benefit analysis show that some criminal justice programs are cost-effective while others are not. Until now, obtaining empirical evidence to measure the cost-effectiveness of the justice system has been difficult, but the fact that such efforts are being are crucial to the development of criminal justice programs that will enhance the delivery of justice in the country.

Death Penalty for the Mentally Challenged

The number of imprisoned individuals with mental disabilities has continued to rise steadily in the past few decades. This has almost make prisons some of the biggest providers of mental health especially in America. The problem is that the prisons are not equipped to deal competently with the case of mentally challenged persons. This problem has worsened so much today that people who are mentally ill are being executed on conviction.  But this should not be the case mentally ill convicts should never be executed.

The environment around and in prisons poses great discomfort to these individuals who may not even be aware of the reasons that lead to their imprisonment in the first place. The impact of this problem is compounded by the fact that these mentally challenged prisoners have impaired thinking and emotional responses. These conditions are brought about by diseases such as schizophrenia, major depression, bipolar disease, and other major mental illnesses (Jamie, 2010).

In prison, the mentally challenged are also faced with other challenges such as lack of privacy, isolation from family and friends, lack of meaningful activities that could help them get better faster, violence from both fellow inmates and the prison wanders hence denying them peace of mind, uncertainty of the condition of life after prison, overcrowding and lack of sufficient health care facilities. The fact that the mentally ill prisoners lack sufficient mental health care facilities leave them either mistreated or under treated. This may also result to many prisoners receiving wrong types and quantities of medication. This may lead to further impairment hence deteriorating their conditions (Jamie, 2010)

According to Mental Health America, there are major gaps in the protection accorded by the law to the mentally challenged, especially when they are defendants, charged with capital crimes or convicted of the same. Sadly, America still permits the execution of the mentally ill convicts. This problem is not as simple as it may seem. According to research done by one of the leading mental health group, five to ten percent of all the inmates on death row suffer from acute mental illness (Mental Health America, 2010)

The mentally ill in prisons
Despite the fact that there is insufficient historical data, Jamie (2010) believes that the percentage of mentally ill prisoners is on the rise. A survey carried out in 1998 showed that out of the 31 states that responded, nineteen reported a disproportionate rise in the number of people sent to prison with mental illnesses in the previous five years. On one end, this may be attributed to the improvement in the diagnostic technologies. However, it is arguably true that the major cause for this trend is the fact that the number of people who are being imprisoned is rising steadily (Jamie, 2010).

One of the contributing factors to the number of mentally ill people in prisons, according to Jamie, is the crisis in the mental health system in the United States. It was recently reported by the presidential advisory commission that this system is in chaos. Some of the challenges facing this system include serious under-funding, fragmentation, and inability to be accessed by the minority classes. As a result of this situation, so many people who need services in mental health that are publicly financed are finding it very hard to obtain them. This happens until someone is in an acute state and considered dangerous both to him or herself and to others (Jamie, 2010).

When these individuals who have serious mental illnesses are left untreated and unstable, it becomes easy for them to break the law and face the system of justice. This is especially so if the concerned victims are poor addicted to drugs, homeless or are suffering from alcoholism which has not been treated. Criminalizing of the mentally ill, as Jamie calls it, is the resulting factor in this whole process (Jamie 2010)

Jamie provides some statistics that show the proportionate increase in the number of prisoners who are mentally ill. A survey of prisons conducted by The National Institute of Corrections (NIC) conducted a survey of prisons concerning mental health requirements and services shows that eighteen of twenty five states that participated reported a rise in the volume of prison populace with mental disabilities. In Connecticut, for example, the number of inmates with severe mental illness amplified from 5.2 to 12.3 of the state jail population. In New York prisons, the mental health cases have shot up by 73 from 1991, 5 times the prison populace increase. The percentage of prisoners with key mental infirmity in Colorado was five or six times more in 1998 than in 1988 (Jamie, 2010)
The report from Colorado, according to Jamie, includes the outcomes of its study of prison mental health directors concerning the percentage of inmates with severe mental disorders. Nineteen of thirty-one states participating in the survey observed a disproportionate rise in the population of inmates who have serious mental illnesses in the past five years (Jamie, 2010). Many people with mental illnesses would not have ended up in jail or even faced charges in court had they received the services they needed. It is the duty of the mental health system itself to ensure that the mentally ill persons do not enter the criminal justice system, if it has to be regarded as effective (Jamie 2010).

The punitive and aggressive policies by the state that are meant to fight crime have largely led many people who are mentally ill to end up in prisons. This trend is fanned by the so called war on drugs that has been carried out by security forces. These tough approaches in fighting crime have led to large numbers of prisoners. Among the ones cornered are the mentally ill. And due to the problems and challenges faced by such people during the process of prosecution, most of them end up in prisons (Jamie, 2010).

Looking at the numbers of the mentally challenged persons in the prisons, one can conclude that these institutions have been turned into facilities of providing mental health care. This is so despite the fact that prisons do not have the requisite facilities for these tasks. The mentally ill prisoners therefore fail to get the services they need both in terms of quality and quantity. These individuals need a team of staff which is qualified in order to evaluate the extent of their illness, plan and carry out treatment procedures and also to follow up on their progress (Jamie, 2010).  In prisons, they are given treatment that is little more than medication, which is not properly administered or even monitored. In some cases, they do not receive any treatment at all. They lead a life that is deficient of diversity of the interventions of mental health they need. The therapeutic and supportive environment that would help them manage their illnesses is not provided, and in cases where it is provided, it is on short term basis. This makes them suffer the pain of the symptoms of their illnesses as their condition deteriorates (Jamie, 2010).

On top of the mental health services issue, that one is never sure whether or not it will be provided, prisons usually treat prisoners with mental illness in the same manner as all other prisoners. The prisons do not have special allowances for the mentally challenged. Prison wanders use the same facilities on them, require them to follow the same routines, and require them to observe the same rules and regulations (Jamie 2010)

A significant number of those mentally ill individuals who are arrested are normally charged with capital cases. When found guilty, most face the threat of facing the hangmans noose.

Executing the mentally ill
In the United States, capital trials have been divided into two phases since 1976. The first question that needs to be answered is whether the accused is guilty or innocent of the offence he is charged with. In case it is proven that the defendant is guilty of a murder case that would call for execution, he proceeds to the next phase. This phase is called the penalty phase. Here, the decision to be made by the jury is whether to imprison the convict for life or to rule for execution (Mental Health America, 2010).

According to Mental Health America (2010), the issue of mental illness is very crucial when it comes to issues of capital trials. There are several aspects to be considered before subjecting an individual with mental illness to the process of capital trial. These aspects are discussed below.

First, it is important to note that those people with mental illnesses are more susceptible to pressure from police and may end up giving false confessions. Studies have shown that some characteristics associated with mental illnesses can cause a patient to give incorrect testimonies and false confessions. These characteristics include problems in cognitive processing, impulsivity, suggestibility, extreme compliance and delusions. It has also been established that mentally ill patients who are not mentally retarded have problems with understanding the Miranda rights which guard against self incrimination. They also have problems when it comes to the issue of access to an attorney that they are asked to forego by the police during the process of interrogation. It is therefore evident that mentally ill individuals may not demand their rights fully during the process of police interrogation. They may also end up give false confessions (Mental Health America, 2010).

Another aspect to be considered is the issue of competence to stand trial. The constitution of the United States is very clear on this matter. It states that before the actual trial starts, it must be proven that the concerned person is competent enough to stand the trial. Competence hearing will seek to establish whether the accused has both factual and rational understanding of the proceedings. It also determines whether the defendant has the ability to seek advice from a lawyer with a rational degree of understanding.  If for example a defendant is suffering from schizophrenia and is not at par with reality and has severe delusions, which means that such a person cannot expressively consult with the lawyer with a sensible amount of rational understanding, should be ruled out incompetent to stand trial (Mental Health America, 2010).

According to Mental Health America (2010), it is the duty of courts and juries to ensure that the mentally ill meet basic standards of competency before starting the trial. This they normally do on a routine basis. This implies that just because a defendant is delusional or schizophrenic, he she does not have to be judged incompetent to stand trial.

When a trial judge rules out that a defendant on capital trial seems incompetent to stand trial, he or she will be transferred to a mental hospital run by the state. Here, the doctors normally try to improve the mental condition of the patient. This is aimed at making sure that the patient attains the minimum standards required to face trial. In 2003, the Supreme Court came up with rules and regulations about when a defendant should be forcibly medicated to make them competent to stand trial. These rules relate to defendants who are not dangerous to themselves or to other people (Mental Health America 2010). According to the ruling in sell vs. United States, forcible medication should be restricted to those cases which are rare. Such medication should be medically appropriate, should be free from those side effects that may in one way or another distort the fairness of the trial, and should be necessary to considerably promote important government trial-related interests. This is after taking into consideration other possible alternatives. If a process like counseling would be an appropriate alternative, the government cannot force someone to take medication. The forcible medication may also not take place if the side effects threaten to abuse the fairness and equity of the trial process (Mental Health America 2010)

The insanity defense
Insanity is an important aspect when it comes to the process of prosecuting persons with mental illnesses. This issue is handled differently by different states. However, a common stand point is that insanity is a defense that the defense must raise and prove. The MNaghten test, is the most common test of insanity and seeks to determine whether the accused was unable to comprehend what he or she was doing when they committed the crime because of a problem in reasoning or an illness of the mind. In case the accused knew what he or she was doing, the test will seek to determine whether they knew that what they were doing was not right. The second test for insanity that is commonly used is the American Law Institute test (ALI). This test seeks to analyze the defendants ability to understand the criminality of his or her actions or conform his conduct to the requirements of law as a result of a mental disease or defect (Mental Health America, 2010).

In most cases, where the two tests are used, Mental Health America observes that the juries normally reject the defenses based on insanity even if there is sufficient evidence that the defendant was suffering from severe mental illness during the time when he or she committed the crime, especially in capital cases.

It is required by most capital murder statutes that the state proves beyond any sensible doubt that the accused had a clear intention to kill the victim. This is known as the ability to form criminal intent. It is evident that most defendants with mental illnesses could not be able to form a criminal intent to kill when they committed the said crime. A decided case between Clark and Arizona was particularly disturbing. (Mental Health America, 2010). In this case, the United States Supreme Court decided that defendants with mental illnesses do not have a constitutional right to give evidence showing that they were suffering from severe mental illnesses and therefore were not in a position to form a criminal intent to kill. But Justice Kennedy dissented, and declared,

In my submission the Court is incorrect in holding that Arizona may convict petitioner Eric Clark of first-degree murder for the intentional or knowing killing of a police officer when Clark was not permitted to introduce critical and reliable evidence showing he did not have that intent or knowledge (Mental Health America, 2010).

Mental Health America holds that during the penalty stage in the course of trial, evidence of mental illness may be significantly important. During this stage, the defendant has a constitutional right to give mitigating evidence or any other evidence that would form a strong basis for a life verdict. The defendant may for example prove to the court that he or she was seriously abused when they were a child and this would serve as good mitigating evidence. Despite the fact that evidence of mental health can be a good mitigation, it has been proven that jurors usually misapprehend the relationship between mitigating factors and mental illnesses. They normally consider mental illness a cause to call for death instead of life (Mental Health America, 2010).

There are other challenges that the mentally ill persons face during the process of trial. These include cases whereby due to their condition, they mistrust their lawyers hence failing to coordinate with them appropriately. In many cases, such defenders normally prefer to represent themselves and waive any chances of appeal. They may be led by their delusional beliefs that they are the only ones who can be able to represent themselves competently in a trial.

Case Study Penry v. Lynaugh
On the morning of October 25, 1979, Pamela Carpenter was beaten, brutally raped and stabbed with a pair of scissors. She was in her home in Texas. She died several hours later in the process of treatment. However, before she died she managed to describe her assailant. The description she gave helped the police to suspect someone by the name Penry, who had been recently released from prison on parole after he had been convicted of another rape case. The man made several statements that confessed to the crime. This led him to be charged with a murder case (OCONNOR, 1989).

Before the trial started, Penry was subjected to a competency hearing. In this hearing, Dr. Jerome Brown, said that the accused was mentally retarded. Penry was diagnosed as having organic brain damage. This could have been caused by trauma to the brain at birth. The accused was tested over the years and found to have an Intelligence Quotient of between 50 and 63. This shows serene to moderate retardation. According to Dr. Browns testing before the trial, Penry had an IQ of 54. Dr. Browns assessment also exposed that Penry had the mental age of a six and a half-year-old, despite being 22 at the time of the crime. This meant that he has the ability to learn and the learning or the knowledge of the average 6 12-year-old kid. The social maturity of Penry, or capability to operate in the world, was that of a nine- or ten-year-old. According to Dr. Browns testimony, theres a point at which anyone with Penrys IQ is always incompetent, but, you know, this man is more in the borderline range (OCONNOR 1989)

Penry was found by the jury to be capable to stand trial. On March 24, 1980, the guilt-innocence stage of the trial started. The trial court decided that Penrys confessions were deliberate. They were therefore included into evidence. The defendant brought before the court the issue of insanity. He supported this by the evidence of Dr. Jose Garcia, a psychiatrist. Dr. Garcia held that the accused was suffering from organic brain damage and moderate retardation. This condition led to poorly coordinated impulse control and lack of ability to learn from past experience. According to Dr. Garcia, brain damage that Penry suffered was perhaps caused during birth. This may also have been caused by injuries and beatings received especially from his mother during his early years. Due to the brain disorder that the defendant was suffering from, he was not able to appreciate the guilt of his actions when he committed the crime (OCONNOR, 1989)

According to the defendants mother, Penry was not able to learn at school, and he never went past the first grade. His sister told the court that their mother had frequently beaten him over his head while he was young. The defendant was also locked in a room without a toilet for long periods. He used to be taken to state hospitals every now and then. When he was 12 years old, his father removed him from school altogether. There were attempts by his aunt to teach him how to write his name for a whole year, but she did not succeed. (OCONNOR 1989)

The state on the other hand brought before the court the testimonies of two psychiatrists to counter Dr. Garcias testimony. One of these psychiatrists, Dr. Kenneth Vogtsberger, testified that despite the fact that the defendant was a person of inadequate mental ability, he could differentiate between right and wrong at the time of crime since he was not suffering from any mental illness or defect. He also argued that he had the ability to respect the rule of law. According to him, the defendant had features consistent with unsociable traits. These, according to the psychiatrist, included lack of ability to learn from experience, propensity to be impetuous and to infringe communal norms. Due to the defendants low IQ scores, Dr. Kenneth Vogtsberger believed there was an understatement of Penrys alertness and comprehension of what transpired in his environment (OCONNOR, 1989).

The other mental specialist who testified in the court for the state was Dr. Felix Peebles. According to him, the defendant was officially sound at the time of the felony and had a full-blown personality which was anti-social. Furthermore, Dr. Peebles informed the court that he had diagnosed the defendant himself with mental retardation both in 1973 and 1977. He said that Penry had an awful life in general. According to him, Penry was both socially and emotionally disadvantaged.  By the time of diagnosis, he had not learned how to write and read properly. The psychiatrist of the two sides agreed to the fact that the defendant was an individual of severe mental limitations and could therefore not learn from his mistakes. The only aspect they disagreed about was the extent and cause of the defendants mental illness (OCONNOR 1989).

Despite the evidence presented in court, the jury discarded the insanity defense by Penry. He was found guilty of capital murder by the court. Despite several trials to invalidate the decision, Texas Court of Criminal Appeals confirmed his conviction and verdict on direct appeal (OCONNOR, 1989).

Dealing with death penalty for the mentally ill
The above case shows clearly that despite the fact that executing people with mental disabilities has been expressly prohibited, a lot needs to be done in the legal system so that this prohibition may be of any significance. There are technicalities involved in defining insanity or mental illnesses and most defendants who deserve pardon end up being executed, as demonstrated by the above case.

According to Amnesty International (2010), the execution of people with mental illness or the insane is unmistakably forbidden by international law. Practically every state in the world prohibits the death sentence of people with mental illness (Amnesty International USA, 2010).

UN Commission on Human Rights requires all states that uphold the death penalty not to impose it on a person suffering from any form of mental disorder not to execute any such person. (Amnesty International USA 2010). UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions adds that governments that carry on with the use of the death penalty should do so with esteem to minors and the mentally ill. Above all, he has called upon all governments to bring their domestic legislation into compliance with global legal principles. According to Amnesty International USA, the UN safeguards, guaranteeing safety of the rights of those sentenced to die. The death sentence shall not be carried out on people who have turned out to be insane.

The sentencing to death of the insane means executing someone who dos not comprehend the reality of, or reason for his or her punishment. This clearly violates the United States constitution. The ruling in the case, (Ford v. Wainwright, 1986), gave each state the autonomy to determine for itself the issue of sanity. The United States constitution offers minimal protection to those individuals with other forms of mental illnesses. It is however notable that many people have been executed despite the fact that they suffer from severe mental illnesses. It has been established by The National Association of Mental Health that about five to ten percent of the people sentenced to death suffer serious mental illnesses (Amnesty International USA, 2010).

According to the authors of the op-ed in the Charlotte-Observer A death penalty trial is a long and heartbreaking experience for victims families, and likely especially so when they want the offender executed but the verdict is life. In the Shareef trial, much pain and many resources could have been saved had a law that has been proposed in the General Assembly been in effect. The trial these authors talk about is one in which a death row inmate was instead of being executed, was pardoned on the grounds of insanity (Death Penalty Information Center, 2010).

Current legislations
There is however an array of hope in the current legislations. In 2006, the American Bar Association resolved to call for the exclusion of people with severe mental illness from obligation and carrying out of the death penalty. There is only one state that prohibits the execution of somebody who is mentally unwell. This is Connecticut. The General Statute of Connecticut  exempts a defendant on capital charge from execution if his mental capacity was significantly impaired or his ability to conform his conduct to the requirements of law was significantly impaired but not so impaired in either case as to constitute a defense to prosecution(Mental Health America 2010)
There are other states such as North Carolina Tennessee, Kentucky and Indiana which have proposed bills that will exempt defendants who are suffering from serious mental illness from being executed. Such kind of legislation is vital when it comes to the protection of persons suffering from severe mental illnesses from execution (Mental Health America 2010)

It is evident from the discussion given above that is wrong to execute persons with mental disabilities. Laws have been put in place to ensure that. But these laws are not enough. Several definitions need to be made to rid the judicial system of the technicalities that have been making mentally ill people be executed, regardless of the law.

Ethical issues in Policing

The various components of the criminal justice system like the courts, police force, homeland security, corrections etc. face several challenges. Issues with regard to the police force are very prominent and have an immense bearing on the effectiveness of the system. Police ethics is particularly important as it helps police officers to decide during the dilemma situations they frequently encounter in their course of their job. The public image of the police is also improved when they act in accordance with the binding ethics. An important aspect of police ethics is that it is closely associated with law, and both bind police officers.

The area of criminal justice encompasses criminology and includes criminal justice processes, law and administrative issues. The contemporary criminal justice system may be described as a tool to carry out social control. Dangerous behaviors exhibited by people who are very destructive, need to be strictly controlled while people who have destructive capabilities need to be confined or monitored. The agencies associated with justice seek to deter such outlawed people and behaviors by apprehending and sanctioning lawbreakers. Society may have many other informal social controls, like parental and school discipline etc., but these are directed at maintaining morality and not relevant to legality and misbehavior. It is the criminal justice system that has the power to control and punish crime and outlawed behavior. The criminal justices system of today is comprised of three main groups, namely the law enforcement agencies, the court system and the correctional system. The law enforcement agency investigates crimes and arrest suspects, while the court system charges the suspects, put them on trial and sentences them. The correctional system incapacitates those sentenced by the court, and tries to rehabilitate them. The criminal justice agencies may be described as political entities whose framework and functioning is associated with all three branches of the government.

The organizations associated with the criminal justice system face constant challenges. The law enforcement, correctional institutions, courts etc are constantly under pressure to ensure rendering of timely justice. However, like in all other fields, occasional lapses do occur in the rendering of justice although the morality of law holds that even if criminals are not brought to book, it should be ensured that no innocent man is ever punished. Given the enormity of the situation, this however cannot be guaranteed. Although the practices by and large contribute to enforcement of societal justice, there are enormous opportunities for lapses in every aspect of their functioning. Officers in the criminal justice system including enforcement officers, correctional officers, parole officers and judges are always under immense stress of the workload that every case cannot be given its due diligence. The justice process when not undertaken with care and caution can have immense implications for the individual. There are many cases where people have even been set free from the death row due to lack of evidence or faulty trials. The various entities constituting the criminal justice system face issues and challenges in standing up to its demands. The police force of today too face many such issues.

The police force of today is faced with several issues, in the trans jurisdictional area. Although each of these qualify for an in depth individual study, these are all interlinked without any hierarchy or order in its prevalence and relevance. These issues in policing as dealt with in police science include policing styles, policing management, stress and dangers in policing, public accountability and police ethics. Although each one of them is vital in understanding the roles and responsibilities of the police, police ethics is particularly important. This is because ethics is an important aspect of any respectable profession and while it is well developed for most other professions, it is considerably under developed and less perceived in the police force. The codes of conduct that guide appropriate conduct are actually ethical codes based on judgment of right and wrong. Generally most codes of conduct are enforced by laws, and sometimes by morality. The profession of a police officer is no exception to binding ethics. The police profession gives lots of opportunity for its enforcement officers to carry out responsibilities, with each responsibility having its own implications of ethical conduct. It must be noted here that many do not agree on the need for police ethics. This is mainly due to the mingling or close association of law and ethics related to police, since police officers are bound by both.

The ethics toolkit issued by the International Association of Chiefs of Police emphasizes on the dos and donts of the police, with regard to legal and ethical conduct. It identifies accountability as the duty of all officers to truthfully acknowledge and explain their actions and decisions when requested to do so by an authorized member of this agency without deception or subterfuge.  Although the toolkit does not bar police officials from receiving gifts and other items of value, it emphasizes that those receiving unsolicited gifts and items should report the receipt of such things. If required, they should also provide a detailed report of the circumstances under which they were received. Officers should also not buy or keep articles or properties found, impounded, recovered or abandoned. Police officers, through their position in law enforcement, gain access to information which again should not be used for financial gains or benefits. An important misuse of police power is when they use their powers to resolve personal problems (i.e. problems and issues of the police officer or his friends and relatives). Officers should not involve themselves in ordinary roles like arresting, booking traffic violations, etc., when they are not traveling in a marked police vehicle. The duty of a law enforcement officer is primarily to be in self-compliance with the law, himself. The officer should be aware of law enforcements upon himself, when he is on duty, enforcing it. The officer should realize that his presence in the force and the force itself has been established in line with the community welfare aspirations. Whether the officer is engaged at the local, state or federal level, he plays a role in enforcing the community or public will, a will of safety, security and equality of all. Through all his actions, the officer should defend this system and be careful not to encroach upon it. The law enforcement officer should use his powers to arrest offenders, only in accord with all existing laws (IIT, 2008). At time of arresting, the officer should respect the rights of the offender. In executing the arrest, the officer should only use the minimum physical force necessary. The officer needs to conduct himself with respect to self-compliance, to uphold the law, when dealing with both, law abiders and law violators. 

High-ranking officers in police department have powers and privileges given to them, to help them to perform better in their duty of service to the public. When these are misused, used with bias, or unused for reasons of personal interest they defeat the purpose for which they have been established. In doing so, the relevant officers have used their powers and privileges to harm the society, instead of using it to help society. Police department personnel should avoid relationships that can be interpreted as being unfair or partial. They should realize that accepting gifts and favors are not too far from direct bribes, as these too must carry a sense of gratitude and obliging. Favors particularly, keep flowing out for any police staff, either on duty or off duty. Small time favors that dont look bad include free transport, low pricing, meals and refreshments, and home-based deliveryservices. Even if the officer accepts these with a mindset of not going to oblige, or go out of the way to repay the favor, the provider of the favor expects one. It is unethical if such a gesture is not repaid. If these are unconsciously accepted at the initial stages, an urge to receive more, gradually develops, which soon gets transformed as a right to receive. The community and police service expect law enforcement personnel to lead a honorable and decent life. Inappropriate conduct in private life, disrespecting the law or seeking special privileges reflects appropriately, not only the officer but also the police service as a whole. Police officers need to refrain from accepting such favors in the course of executing their duty. Most department members do not hesitate to seek favors directed towards cutting departmental expenses on most occasions. This looks normal to the police higher officials too, as they are under instruction to reduce expenditures. Sometimes they may have received administrative orders too, saying that repair or replacement would take time, or cannot be done till the close of the financial year. Such policies only encourage the relevant police staff to look to external free sources. These include repair and maintenance of their premises, small stationary requirements, convict needs etc. It is unfortunate that no one within the government machinery is either aware or realize the negative consequences of such policies. These officers need to realize the extent of public participation in law enforcement, in accordance with binding ethics. Even in their interaction with their own suppliers, the department can be benefited with higher quality and lower costs, when the officers concerned stand up to the same without accepting favors.

Legitimacy and trust are among the important factors of policing. Legitimacy refers to the righteousness or fairness associated with policing while trust relates to the procedural justice associated with it. Legitimacy and trust are associated with the following indications.





The police require the public to perceive them in good light with respect to the above indications, which are the four cornerstones of trust. Researches suggest that police visibility is the only aspect of policing that can be associated with these indications. This visibility is evident in the patrolling of the neighborhood. With image being everything, police can be observed doing anything. Being seen accepting bribes, sleeping in a car, threatening etc. would not contribute to the image of the police. With regard to action and service, there is a serious role conflict between the two, an action based crime fighter and a service based public servant. The conflict between these two roles causes a police subculture. A group thinking occurs in police cultures resulting in everyone adopting similar thought and actions. It becomes necessary to show loyalty to coworkers, thus facilitating immorality and corruption to be veiled by it. Whistle blowing is also not encouraged. When police try to execute both roles, they deviate at both ends. Thus under enforcement is as much a problem as over enforcement. Leniency shown under a due process is a similar problem to zero tolerance under crime control. It becomes difficult to tread the middle ground in such situations of role conflict. The role conflict is also associated with the lovehate perception of the public. People love police when they see them confronting enemies. They however hate police when police attempt to serve all people without any enemies.

With regard to prison settings, prison officials have three strategies to have control over their prisoners namely the use of coercion, their legal authority and their personal authority (HM Prison Service, 2004). Although there are guidelines on how prisoners are ought to be treated under the law, in practice officials see these in conflict with how they should be practically treated, to uphold the penal order. There are cases where actions by officials not only breach the law but also the spirit of the law. These are then also defended by the officials as being necessary to preserve order and discipline. When such developments become the norm, the prison becomes devoid of law, and prisoners life is dependent on their relationship with the officers. Officials make negotiations based on factors unrelated to law, which may or may not be very discriminating, but however not open to public scrutiny or legal accountability. Prison officials no doubt work under harsh and risky circumstances and are accountable to both the society and prisoners. This however doesnt justify their unilateral actions, particularly when it is against the interests of the prisoner or society. When prison officials fail to take decisions on legal or ethical grounds, the prison becomes a place of manipulated or negotiated law, where prisoners are ironically brought for breaking law.

Police excesses in the form of brutality and torture, are an important aspect of police ethics. Police brutality is the use of excessive force to achieve a lawful purpose by the police. It often goes unnoticed because police themselves are part of the machinery that checks these offences. Police brutality in the form of unwanted shootings, beatings and kicking may sometimes result in serous injuries or even death of the suspect. When such unfortunate situations happen, police are quick to come out with a denial of charges and put a suitable theory to account for the happenings. Apart from the need to extract information, police resort to brutality for several other reasons like, personal vengeance or hatred against a particular community or race. The accused or suspect is also brutally assaulted when the police have had a tough time in apprehending him. The methods adopted by the police in the course of their brutality is highly diverse and unimaginable. Apart from the physical injuries, the victims also suffer from a mental trauma. The laws and punishments are formed to appropriately deal with the crimes caused. Thus extreme brutality by the police adds to the decided punishment. Although brutality may be a requirement for the police, it should not be misused at the will and fancy of the policemen. Since it is not possible to prevent police brutality, society can benefit by regulating it, and actions of the police made more transparent and accountable. The Human Rights Watch group acknowledges that police too are prone to making mistakes, as they sometimes need to take instant decisions. Any amount of training, counseling or monitoring cannot make policemen perform perfectly. Therefore they need to be under severe scrutiny to ensure that their actions are justifiable (Human Rights Watch, 2007).

Torture is another issue associated with policing, in the fight against terrorism. Police officers require to consider the use and effectiveness of torture, against the ethics they violate and the society in whose interest they act. There is no doubt that torture might help in enforcing public security, but when needless torture is used, the police force become no different from the enemies they fight against. The situational response and dilemma associated with torture of apprehended terrorists is compounded by the fact there is public support for torture too. Therefore in their efforts to ensure effective policing, police personnel find themselves in several difficult situations. For instance resorting to torture or just rely on interrogation techniques to gain information is a difficult choice. Thus police find themselves entangled in a dilemma of refraining from torture and abiding by the law or resorting to illegal torture to provide for the society. The ticking bomb scenario has been widely stated to prove the need for torture on terrorists. The use of torture in extracting information on an impending catastrophe so as to prevent it and save lives is logical. When a terrorist threatens violence, it is paramount to terrorism, and qualifies for torture tactics when permitted. However there needs to be a difference between a threat of violence and actually committing that violence.

According to Carl Wellman, use of coercion or threat of violence is non-violent terrorism. Instances of non-violent terrorism include judges imprisoning criminals to prevent future crimes, blackmail and teachers threatening their students with failure (Wellman, 1979). Violent terrorism and non-violent terrorism need to be perceived differently, in the use of torture.

Another area of immense debate and conscious action is in profiling. Profiling is an important aspect of police responsibilities. Based on the clues existing for a given crime, behavior experts generate a profile of the offender. The profile will have traits that are common for those types of crimes and criminals, and also have specific details and qualities of the particular offender. The profiling can suggest details of the offender like the offenders age, gender, built, profession, passions, place likely to hang around etc. Profiling becomes an ethical issue when it gets associated with ethnicity and race in identifying suspects. Racial profiling is evident when police stop and inspect people solely on the basis of their race, religion or ethnicity. Instances of racial profiling are evident when certain passengers are frisked in airports, drivers in highways, visitors crossing borders etc. Arguments that support racial profiling are based on statistics that blacks are more likely to smuggle drugs and that high offender rates are evident in minorities. There has been a divided opinion on the measures adopted, with many favoring the measures adopted and many calling it a breach of civil liberties.

Advocates of civil rights say that the government is stretching too far and not respecting the fundamental rights of several sections like immigrants and foreign people. The US Patriot Act that was enacted with almost total support in the legislature provides for enhanced surveillance and detention with respect to non citizens (Chishti, 2010). Critics of the governments policies point out that the enforcement actions are directed towards certain religions and communities. Profiling of the members of these communities are considered as ineffective and crude way of gathering information. Critics also point out that the practice of profiling violates constitutional freedom and discriminates individuals based on religious and ethnic backgrounds. Profiling leads to stereotype working in the police force and is ethically and morally wrong. It also provides for a public perception that policing is biased so much that even if multicultural policing were projected, it would be seen as attempts to improve public perception.

Just like economics remains the bottom line for a private sector employee, ethics is the bottom line for a public service employee. Given the broad perspective of the public service ethics compared to professional ethics, the public service ethics are also referred to as ethos. Public service doesnt stop with integrity while being employed, it is also associated with the aspirations prior to being employed and the principles held after employment. One never becomes an ex-employee but only a former employee. The lifeline of law and order for any society is obviously its police force. Only when the police are seen to be righteous, the people would have respect and confidence on them. The public would be willing to cooperate and help police personnel, only when they remain trust worthy. It is therefore very important for the police personnel to command the respect and goodwill of the people, to function effectively. The public-police relationship is vital, for maintaining law and order, and this relationship can be strengthened only when police conduct themselves in appropriate manner.  Every police officer must realize that they need to be law-abiding citizens too, and serve the society with an unbargained commitment and desire (Proctor, 1997). Members of the police department have to adhere to a code of morality or ethics, if they have to win and retain the trust and respect of the society they serve. It is only when they act in an unfair or inappropriate manner, compromising on their responsibilities and values, that they fall low, in public esteem.

The police officers of today face a tough challenge of maintaining law and order in the society like never before. The enforcement officers of today combat crimes, law and order situations and risks that were not relevant ever before. Life style changes, technological developments and international relevance for all happenings, have made the job tougher. There is no doubt that for the compromising officer, such situations open up newer avenues of quick money and wealth. But for the honest officer, he would be without all such illegal benefits. Tainted officers may go free, enjoy their ill-gotten wealth but it is the money earned by honest means that give the satisfaction and peace of mind. Apart from satisfaction, there is an immense sense of self-value, that one would cherish forever. Living on legitimate earnings, is in several ways, a pride to the family and the community, to which the officer belongs. An honest officer needs no certificate. He is easily identified and respected by the public and his very own colleagues. The most capable and respectful officer is perhaps one, who can say each day to himself I dont fall for money or favors. The character of a police officer is evident in the way he executes his work, in all what he does or doesnt.

It is evident that police officers, who are properly educated and trained, are able to respond better to ethical and moral situations demanded by their professions. It is very important for police officers to be able to overcome their moral and ethical dilemmas, for them to perform their duties and obligations in a professional way (Pagon, 2003). The police officer should be familiar with the principles of police ethics and needs to be trained in moral reasoning and ethics based decision-making. Supervisors have an important role in establishing and promoting the spirit of the code of ethics. They should be role models in the communitys effort of delivering impartial, effective and professional policing service.  The supervisors should ensure that individuals under their guidance and responsibility develop their professional performance. They should question and address behaviors, which violate conduct codes, apart from reporting wherever appropriate (NIPB, 2007). The supervisors responsibility of maintaining professional standards and integrity can be facilitated by advice, corrective or appropriate action. When complaints of misconducts are brought by public, the supervisor must investigate and take appropriate actions. He should send a message that there would be no compromise on any actions by any staff that are directed to personal interests.

It requires an honest and duty bound officer to turn down benefit aspects and execute the job. Honest and straightforward officers carry with them the credibility of their department. It requires self-commitment and voluntary adoption of ethics to perform in a manner worthy of public respect. It is indeed sad that many police officers have preferred to amass wealth through their disrespect of integrity. As these officers are mostly part of the law enforcement machinery, they often get away unchecked. The only way such tainted officers can be reformed is by self-judgment and choice, rather than external enforcement. Although there are several such dishonest and corrupt policemen, it is only those few, who uphold values and ethics against all adversities, that the department still commands respect and trust.