![]() ![]() The legal justification for a police officer’s legitimate use of deadly force is established through case law, usually by criteria from Tennessee v. These include passing statutory measures that clarify the definition of excessive use of force and civil rights violations revitalizing the DOJ pattern-or- practice and Collaborative Reform programs and developing and employing more robust independent state and local governmental oversight efforts through the use of inspectors general, police monitors, police auditors, and police integrity units. There are several ways that outside governmental agencies and reform measures could address these challenges. Finally, the threat of civil cases is a weak deterrent given the protections afforded officers and their agencies through qualified and sovereign immunity. Moreover, the criteria for police use of force that constitutes a federal civil rights violation is quite narrow. In addition, prosecutors use different practices when bringing police misconduct cases to grand juries, providing much more exculpatory evidence in the case of police officer defendants than they do with defendants in other criminal cases.Īt the trial stage, the absence of a clear legal definition of what qualifies as excessive force makes it difficult for jurors to determine if the police have violated the law. The culture of police agencies is typically protective of officers, compromising the independence and efficacy of internal investigations, and this dynamic is bolstered by strong union representation. Legal experts attribute the low rate of police officer indictments and convictions for excessive use of force to several factors. But judging from the minuscule number of indictments and convictions for fatal police shootings – figures that have barely changed over the past six years despite increased public awareness and a wave of reforms – current investigation and prosecution practices remain insufficient. With an average of more than 1,000 fatalities of community members at the hands of law enforcement each year, it is crucial that systems of investigation, indictment, and prosecution of police officers are transparent, equitable, and hold wrongdoers accountable. In some cases, a state attorney general may be better suited than a local prosecutor’s office to manage such inquiries. Relatedly, consideration should be paid to who is best suited to independently investigate and prosecute particular instances of police misconduct. ![]() State attorneys general should have the authority to bring pattern-or-practice investigations.Consent decree and collaborative reform processes should include opportunities for community engagement, such as community outreach plans and inclusion of community voices in the review of new policies.The DOJ should revive and dramatically expand this program and the Collaborative Reform Initiative within the Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) office. Department of Justice’s (DOJ) “pattern-or-practice” program have been effective in reducing uses of force, civil litigation costs, and improper stops, frisks, and searches. Reforms in individual police agencies resulting from the U.S.The criteria should be expanded to include “knowing” and “reckless” deprivations of rights. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |