Police Officer Suicide
1. The number of law enforcement officers killed each year has actually declined since 1973. Discuss some of the reasons for this progress and also the leading causes of injury and death to officers.
In June 1971, executives from the law enforcement conference, “Prevention of Police Killings,” called for an increase in the FBI’s involvement in preventing and investigating officers’ deaths. In response to this directive, the UCR Program expanded its collection of data to include more details about the incidents in which law enforcement officers were killed and assaulted. Using this comprehensive set of data, the FBI began in 1972 to produce two reports annually, the Law Enforcement Officers Killed Summary and the Analysis of Assaults on Federal Officers. These two reports were combined in 1982 to create the annual publication, Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted.
There have been several new technologies that have been brought into the police field since 1973 that have made the job of the police officer safer. One of these is the in car camera. The in-car camera system has become a valued tool to confirm and ensure a high degree of officer professionalism. The …show more content…
ability to record video footage of events involving the public from a patrol car perspective has proven invaluable in such matters as traffic stops, criminal investigations and arrests, internal affairs, and training. These systems are constantly improving and becoming more cost effective. The people that think about hurting police while at a car stop now think twice before running off or shooting the police officer that has stopped them because they know that they are being recorded. The recording shows what the car looks like and also shows the license plate number.
Another item that has helped the police force save more lives is the Automatic License Plate Recognition. Technology now enables officers to check thousands of license plates per shift to determine if vehicles are stolen, if registered owners are wanted, or if there are restraints on registered owners’ driver’s licenses. The automatic license plate recognition (ALPR) system is an integrated camera-database technology. The system takes a picture of the car license plate and then processes the numbers and letters using optical character recognition software against a known database. Suspected “hits” are relayed to users either visually or verbally. This will also tell the officer if the owner of the car has a history with the police and if they have attacked the police in the past.
Lastly the technology of radios has gotten better in the last several years. Communication systems are critical equipment in the law enforcement profession. Tremendous advances in wireless and digital capabilities have made this tool more valuable than ever. Today officers can share pictures of suspects, criminal records, bulletins, fingerprints, blueprints, and surveillance video footage across thousands of miles in minutes or even seconds.
With all this new technology that has come out since 1973 has helped saved the police officers lives too many times to count. There continually is new technology coming out to help save lives.
2. The Mandatory Victim Restitution Act was passed by Congress in 1996. What actually led up to this event, and how did the new law impact victims of violent crime?
The victims’ rights movement of the 1970s and 1980s resulted in the creation of many programs designed to assist victims of crime and in the passage of laws at the local, state, and federal level establishing certain rights for victims. These rights and services vary somewhat from state-to-state, depending upon the laws of each state and available resources. State and local authorities investigate crimes which are violations of state criminal laws. Most crimes investigated by the FBI involve violations of the United States Federal Criminal Code. Victims of federal crimes are entitled to certain rights and services according to federal law.
Before the Mandatory Victim Restitution Act of 1996 there was the Victims of Crime Act of 1984. The Crime Victims Fund was established by the Victims of Crime Act of 1984 (VOCA) and serves as a major funding source for victim services throughout the country. Each year, millions of dollars are deposited into this Fund from criminal fines, forfeited bail bonds, penalty fees, and special assessments collected by U.S. Attorney's Offices, U.S. Courts, and the Bureau of Prisons. These dollars come from offenders convicted of Federal crimes not from taxpayers.
The Mandatory Restitution Act of 1996 provides that you may be entitled to an order of restitution for certain losses suffered as a direct result of the commission of the crime for which the defendant was convicted. There is four areas that will allow the victim to be paid after they are victimized. These are property, bodily injury, loss of life, and loss of income.
In the case of an offense resulting in damage, loss, or destruction of property of a victim, the court may order the return of the property to the owner or someone designated by the owner or if the return of the property is impossible, the court may order payment in an amount equal to the greater of: the value of the property on the date of the damage, loss, or destruction, or the value of the property on the date of the sentencing, less the value (as of the date the property is returned) of any part of the property that is returned. In the case of an offense resulting in bodily injury to a victim, the court may order payment of an amount equal to the cost of necessary medical and related professional services/devices relating to physical, psychiatric, and psychological care, including non-medical care and treatment rendered in accordance with a method of healing recognized by law payment of an amount equal to the cost of necessary physical/occupational therapy and rehabilitation, and reimbursement to the victim for income lost by such victim as a result of such offense.
In the case of an offense resulting in bodily injury that also results in the death of a victim, the court may order payment of an amount equal to the cost of necessary funeral and related services. In any case, the court may also order reimbursement to the victim for lost income and necessary child care, transportation, and other expenses related to participation in the investigation/prosecution of the offense or attendance at proceedings related to the offense. 3. Should victims be encouraged to seek retaliatory justice – why or why not?
No I do not think that victims should seek retaliatory justice. People see that the United States seeks out retaliatory justice all the time. Every single war or police action that the United States has ever been in has been a prime example of what retaliatory justice is.
One of the only examples of the retaliatory justice that I see that is justifiable is the death penalty. I believe that if you have killed a person and you are found guilty for the crime you should be held accountable for it and be put to death.
One example of the retaliatory justice really hurt the United States Department of Justice happened in 1995. The Justice Department investigated whether the law was violated by the disclosure of Central Intelligence Agency misconduct in Guatemala. The administration of justice was warped when the Government pursues someone for exposing misdeeds that the Government itself found deplorable and that led to the dismissal of two senior C.I.A. officers and the punishment of several others. The person under investigation was Richard Nuccio, a special adviser on Cuba to President Clinton and Secretary of State Warren Christopher. The Justice Department, at the instigation of the C.I.A., examined whether Mr. Nuccio may have illegally given information about agency operations in Guatemala to Representative Robert Torricelli, a New Jersey Democrat, who disclosed and denounced the operations in public. Mr. Torricelli revealed that Col. Julio Roberto Alpirez, a Guatemalan officer on the C.I.A. payroll, was linked to the 1990 murder of Michael DeVine, an American innkeeper in Guatemala, and the later killing of Efrain Bamaca, a Guatemalan guerrilla married to an American lawyer. Both men were killed by Guatemalan soldiers in operations condoned, if not authorized, by Colonel Alpirez.
The C.I.A. withheld information about the crimes, and its connections to Colonel Alpirez, from the State Department, White House and Congress. The agency continued secretly to bankroll the Guatemalan military even after the Bush Administration cut off military assistance to protest the killings. After an internal investigation, John Deutch, the new Director of Central Intelligence, took strong disciplinary action against those responsible for the Guatemala operation. He concluded that while there was no conspiracy to withhold information from Congress, agency officials had not kept the lawmakers informed, as required by law.
At the time of Mr.
Torricelli's disclosures, Mr. Nuccio was working at the State Department, specializing in Guatemalan affairs. He was cleared for access to classified information and met regularly with members of Congress. Part of Mr. Torricelli's work as a member of the House Intelligence Committee was to keep informed about C.I.A. activities. It would have been perfectly lawful for Mr. Nuccio to share intelligence information with Mr. Torricelli. This investigation smelled of retaliatory justice. The Justice Department should have dropped the case before it looked extremely horrible. That is just one of the many examples of retaliatory justice. When people commit retaliatory justice the only thing that it does is make that person look dumb and it also makes that person look like a
fool.
About Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted. (2012, January 1). Retrieved November 27, 2013, from The FBI: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/leoka/2011/about-law-enforcement-officers-killed-and-assaulted
Mandatory Restitution Act of 1996. (n.d.). Retrieved November 27, 2013, from justice department: http://www.justice.gov/usao/az/victimw/restitut.pdf
Retaliatory Justice in Washington. (1995, December 5). Retrieved November 27, 2013, from New york times: http://www.nytimes.com/1995/12/04/opinion/retaliatory-justice-in-washington.html
The Future Is Here: Technology in Police Departments. (2008, june 6). Retrieved november 27, 2013, from The Police Chief: http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?article_id=1527&fuseaction=display&issue_id=62008
Victim Assistance. (n.d.). Retrieved 27 2013, 2013, from The FBI: http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/victim_assistance/victim_rights
Victims of Crime Act Crime Victims Fund. (1999, July 1). Retrieved November 27, 2013, from office for victims of crimes: https://www.ncjrs.gov/ovc_archives/factsheets/cvfvca.htm
In June 1971, executives from the law enforcement conference, “Prevention of Police Killings,” called for an increase in the FBI’s involvement in preventing and investigating officers’ deaths. In response to this directive, the UCR Program expanded its collection of data to include more details about the incidents in which law enforcement officers were killed and assaulted. Using this comprehensive set of data, the FBI began in 1972 to produce two reports annually, the Law Enforcement Officers Killed Summary and the Analysis of Assaults on Federal Officers. These two reports were combined in 1982 to create the annual publication, Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted.
There have been several new technologies that have been brought into the police field since 1973 that have made the job of the police officer safer. One of these is the in car camera. The in-car camera system has become a valued tool to confirm and ensure a high degree of officer professionalism. The …show more content…
ability to record video footage of events involving the public from a patrol car perspective has proven invaluable in such matters as traffic stops, criminal investigations and arrests, internal affairs, and training. These systems are constantly improving and becoming more cost effective. The people that think about hurting police while at a car stop now think twice before running off or shooting the police officer that has stopped them because they know that they are being recorded. The recording shows what the car looks like and also shows the license plate number.
Another item that has helped the police force save more lives is the Automatic License Plate Recognition. Technology now enables officers to check thousands of license plates per shift to determine if vehicles are stolen, if registered owners are wanted, or if there are restraints on registered owners’ driver’s licenses. The automatic license plate recognition (ALPR) system is an integrated camera-database technology. The system takes a picture of the car license plate and then processes the numbers and letters using optical character recognition software against a known database. Suspected “hits” are relayed to users either visually or verbally. This will also tell the officer if the owner of the car has a history with the police and if they have attacked the police in the past.
Lastly the technology of radios has gotten better in the last several years. Communication systems are critical equipment in the law enforcement profession. Tremendous advances in wireless and digital capabilities have made this tool more valuable than ever. Today officers can share pictures of suspects, criminal records, bulletins, fingerprints, blueprints, and surveillance video footage across thousands of miles in minutes or even seconds.
With all this new technology that has come out since 1973 has helped saved the police officers lives too many times to count. There continually is new technology coming out to help save lives.
2. The Mandatory Victim Restitution Act was passed by Congress in 1996. What actually led up to this event, and how did the new law impact victims of violent crime?
The victims’ rights movement of the 1970s and 1980s resulted in the creation of many programs designed to assist victims of crime and in the passage of laws at the local, state, and federal level establishing certain rights for victims. These rights and services vary somewhat from state-to-state, depending upon the laws of each state and available resources. State and local authorities investigate crimes which are violations of state criminal laws. Most crimes investigated by the FBI involve violations of the United States Federal Criminal Code. Victims of federal crimes are entitled to certain rights and services according to federal law.
Before the Mandatory Victim Restitution Act of 1996 there was the Victims of Crime Act of 1984. The Crime Victims Fund was established by the Victims of Crime Act of 1984 (VOCA) and serves as a major funding source for victim services throughout the country. Each year, millions of dollars are deposited into this Fund from criminal fines, forfeited bail bonds, penalty fees, and special assessments collected by U.S. Attorney's Offices, U.S. Courts, and the Bureau of Prisons. These dollars come from offenders convicted of Federal crimes not from taxpayers.
The Mandatory Restitution Act of 1996 provides that you may be entitled to an order of restitution for certain losses suffered as a direct result of the commission of the crime for which the defendant was convicted. There is four areas that will allow the victim to be paid after they are victimized. These are property, bodily injury, loss of life, and loss of income.
In the case of an offense resulting in damage, loss, or destruction of property of a victim, the court may order the return of the property to the owner or someone designated by the owner or if the return of the property is impossible, the court may order payment in an amount equal to the greater of: the value of the property on the date of the damage, loss, or destruction, or the value of the property on the date of the sentencing, less the value (as of the date the property is returned) of any part of the property that is returned. In the case of an offense resulting in bodily injury to a victim, the court may order payment of an amount equal to the cost of necessary medical and related professional services/devices relating to physical, psychiatric, and psychological care, including non-medical care and treatment rendered in accordance with a method of healing recognized by law payment of an amount equal to the cost of necessary physical/occupational therapy and rehabilitation, and reimbursement to the victim for income lost by such victim as a result of such offense.
In the case of an offense resulting in bodily injury that also results in the death of a victim, the court may order payment of an amount equal to the cost of necessary funeral and related services. In any case, the court may also order reimbursement to the victim for lost income and necessary child care, transportation, and other expenses related to participation in the investigation/prosecution of the offense or attendance at proceedings related to the offense. 3. Should victims be encouraged to seek retaliatory justice – why or why not?
No I do not think that victims should seek retaliatory justice. People see that the United States seeks out retaliatory justice all the time. Every single war or police action that the United States has ever been in has been a prime example of what retaliatory justice is.
One of the only examples of the retaliatory justice that I see that is justifiable is the death penalty. I believe that if you have killed a person and you are found guilty for the crime you should be held accountable for it and be put to death.
One example of the retaliatory justice really hurt the United States Department of Justice happened in 1995. The Justice Department investigated whether the law was violated by the disclosure of Central Intelligence Agency misconduct in Guatemala. The administration of justice was warped when the Government pursues someone for exposing misdeeds that the Government itself found deplorable and that led to the dismissal of two senior C.I.A. officers and the punishment of several others. The person under investigation was Richard Nuccio, a special adviser on Cuba to President Clinton and Secretary of State Warren Christopher. The Justice Department, at the instigation of the C.I.A., examined whether Mr. Nuccio may have illegally given information about agency operations in Guatemala to Representative Robert Torricelli, a New Jersey Democrat, who disclosed and denounced the operations in public. Mr. Torricelli revealed that Col. Julio Roberto Alpirez, a Guatemalan officer on the C.I.A. payroll, was linked to the 1990 murder of Michael DeVine, an American innkeeper in Guatemala, and the later killing of Efrain Bamaca, a Guatemalan guerrilla married to an American lawyer. Both men were killed by Guatemalan soldiers in operations condoned, if not authorized, by Colonel Alpirez.
The C.I.A. withheld information about the crimes, and its connections to Colonel Alpirez, from the State Department, White House and Congress. The agency continued secretly to bankroll the Guatemalan military even after the Bush Administration cut off military assistance to protest the killings. After an internal investigation, John Deutch, the new Director of Central Intelligence, took strong disciplinary action against those responsible for the Guatemala operation. He concluded that while there was no conspiracy to withhold information from Congress, agency officials had not kept the lawmakers informed, as required by law.
At the time of Mr.
Torricelli's disclosures, Mr. Nuccio was working at the State Department, specializing in Guatemalan affairs. He was cleared for access to classified information and met regularly with members of Congress. Part of Mr. Torricelli's work as a member of the House Intelligence Committee was to keep informed about C.I.A. activities. It would have been perfectly lawful for Mr. Nuccio to share intelligence information with Mr. Torricelli. This investigation smelled of retaliatory justice. The Justice Department should have dropped the case before it looked extremely horrible. That is just one of the many examples of retaliatory justice. When people commit retaliatory justice the only thing that it does is make that person look dumb and it also makes that person look like a
fool.
About Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted. (2012, January 1). Retrieved November 27, 2013, from The FBI: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/leoka/2011/about-law-enforcement-officers-killed-and-assaulted
Mandatory Restitution Act of 1996. (n.d.). Retrieved November 27, 2013, from justice department: http://www.justice.gov/usao/az/victimw/restitut.pdf
Retaliatory Justice in Washington. (1995, December 5). Retrieved November 27, 2013, from New york times: http://www.nytimes.com/1995/12/04/opinion/retaliatory-justice-in-washington.html
The Future Is Here: Technology in Police Departments. (2008, june 6). Retrieved november 27, 2013, from The Police Chief: http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?article_id=1527&fuseaction=display&issue_id=62008
Victim Assistance. (n.d.). Retrieved 27 2013, 2013, from The FBI: http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/victim_assistance/victim_rights
Victims of Crime Act Crime Victims Fund. (1999, July 1). Retrieved November 27, 2013, from office for victims of crimes: https://www.ncjrs.gov/ovc_archives/factsheets/cvfvca.htm