Examples Of Schemata Theory

To illustrate this imagine that two men get into a fight in Times Square. A nearby police officer notices the disturbance and attempts to separate the two men instead of arresting them on the spot. In this hypothetical situation the police officer needed to use discretion to decide how to best handle the situation. At times however, police discretion causes more problems than it resolves. There have been reports of police being called to a scene were a husband is being extremely aggressive towards his wife. The police feel as the situation that is occurring is not severe, and therefore leave the scene. The next day, the police station receives a call that there was a homicide. As they arrive to the scene, the police realized it was the same couple from day before.” The report details in-depth reviews of 84 cases in which 135 people died, including some instances of homicide-suicide — cases when abusers killed victims as well as themselves. In 48 of those 84 cases, police had previously responded to a domestic-violence call”- (WA Report: Criminal-Justice System Fails Domestic-Violence Victims). At times the unfettered use of discretion can lead to the denial of citizen rights, at times the unfettered use of discretion can lead to the denial of citizen rights, and cause many flaws in the justice system; for example, many communities might have different definitions of what constitutes criminal behavior or what

In this essay a discussion will be explored about the benefits and problems associated with police use of discretion. Which current policing strategies have the most potential for controlling officer discretion and providing accountability, and which have the least, and why is that the case? And finally, how might these issues impact the various concerns facing law enforcement today?

A '''use of force continuum''' is a standard that affords law enforcement officials & security officers (police, probation, or corrections) with guidelines as to how much use of force may be used against a repelling subject in a given situation. In certain ways it is similar to the military’s escalation of force. The reason of these models is to clarify, both for officers and citizens, the complex subject of use of force by law officers. They are often vital parts of law enforcement agencies' use of force policies. Although various agencies have developed different models of the continuum, there is no universal standard model (Stetser, 2001, p. 36)

The purpose of the paper is to show how the criminal justice system is trying to reduce officer and offender assaults in Texas Corrections facilities. In the Texas Corrections facilities, also known as Texas Department of Criminal Justice, defines the “Use of Force” as a physically controlling measure taken during a confrontational situation to make an offender do something involuntary. This may include physical contact by an officer with an offender in order to control movements, a situation when an offender physically resists the application of restraints, chemical agents are discharged, batons or other instruments make contact with an offender in an effort to restore or preserve order, and even when offensive or

Police brutatlity infleucnes its victims, as well as can undermine the group 's trust in it 's police force. Cops are given a extended range of scope in playing out their obligations. Since they are required to ensure society general safety and face conceivably brutal people, they can legitmatley utilize physical, and even fatal constrain in specific situations (Pierce, 1986, p. 52). Notwithstanding, and officer who utilizes extreme force when it is not called for, or important to play out his or her employment, may go too far into police

Officer involved domestic violence is a disgraceful act that creates an abhorrent response from members of society. The realization that those who those who swore to protect and serve the community also may take part in such vile transgressions goes above and beyond most people's intellectual capacity. Provided the statistical pervasiveness of officer involved domestic violence, systematic research is desired to determine exactly how police agencies are acknowledging the problem (Lonsway, 2006).

Discretion in policing and the court system is a necessary and unavoidable facet of criminal justice work, yet it is still very controversial. Discretion exists when courtroom actors (police officers, attorneys, judges) have the flexibility to choose an appropriate response to a situation. Police discretion is defined as “The opportunity of law enforcement officers to exercise choice in their daily activities” (Nowacki, 2015). This means that actors with a great deal of discretion at their disposal may allow biases to affect their decision-making. These decisions lead to important implications throughout the criminal justice process, especially in the courtroom. The process begins with the decision to arrest by a law enforcement officer in the field. Once the case is forwarded to the prosecuting attorney, multifarious avenues of discretionary decisions are available to resolve a case. Potential issues that could arise and that are ever-present in everyday policing include racism, sexism and socialism (Miller, 2015). These issues ultimately have a negative affect on the criminal justice process, leading civilians to not trust the one process and actors that are there to help them. While discretion should play a role in the actions a courtroom actor takes and cannot be eliminated entirely, instead it should be limited and controlled throughout the criminal justice environment so that citizens can once again trust the process and so that there will be no disparities.

Police officers have a significant level of discretion when ethical decision making is incorporated in deciding how to respond to a domestic violence call. For example, officers exercise discretion by deciding how to respond to domestic violence when a situation involves a fellow officer. America is a country in which many believe in privacy within the household and often choose not to be involved in a domestic dispute because families should resolve their own problems. However, discretionary powers abused by an officer are used to dissuade the victim from filing charges against the officer’s colleague. Officers often do not choose to arrest in a domestic dispute because they believe the family, not the justice system, should resolve the

Have you ever thought about what happens if a person breaks a law? What if this individual breaks a minor law and creates a larger problem? A strong topic is upon our society when it comes to law enforcement and the tough physical and verbal oppression that they have the potential to put on people when it comes to breaking the law. Police officers are supposed to be society 's saviors, guardians, and our friends. However, when things do not go quite right, and when someone breaks the law, there will always be that chance that things could escalate. These officers are supposed to deescalate situations and solve problems. That is what society relies on them at any given moment. Sometimes it takes an escalation of force to deescalate a criminal situation. This is why society sees the men and women in uniform with weapons capable of hindering life to the fullest. However, when this force is used and abused, it creates problems. The public eye becomes weary of the police in many different ways for using excessive force to deescalate a situation. Excessive force and police brutality are often caused by depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety, as well as other mental disorders; due to the way they are portrayed by the media, excessive force and police brutality have a direct effect on the American society as well as fellow officers in all branches of law enforcement.

The feminist movement and women’s advocacy groups identified domestic violence as a serious issue and demanded for a change in the police response (Feder and Henning 2005). In conjunction with the release of the Minneapolis Domestic Violence Experiment’s research findings that arrest deterred future acts of violence and aided in lowering recidivism rates, many states enacted the new police policies to facilitate the arrest of domestic violence perpetrators. Previously, officers assessed the scene and interviewed the parties then decided the best course of action based on the facts collected. Historically, police officers used discretion in “street-level decision making ranging from decisions on whom to stop, when to write a ticket, and when to follow agency policy” (Phillips and Sobol 2010:100). Yet, some research has suggested that the enactment of mandatory arrest laws “require a specific action, eliminating an officer’s discretion to ignore, stretch, or only provisionally apply criminal law” (Phillips and Sobol 2010:100). The dichotomy of such laws eliminated officer discretion thus leading to the increase of arrests of victims and perpetrators alike. Hirschel et. al. (2008) found that the existence of mandatory arrest laws produced higher arrest rates across all three relationship categories of intimate

According to theguardian.com, 634 people have been killed so far in 2015 by police officers or while in custody (theguardian.com, 2015). Years of good policing practices and community trust can be jeopardized by a single act of, or perception of, the excessive use of force (EUF) by police (www.justice.gov, 2015 ). Police deal with difficult people and situations on a daily basis, one of the biggest complaints from citizens is that excessive and sometimes unnecessary force is used by police officers during arrests. In the wake of past claims of police brutality such as Rodney King and more recently publicized victims like Freddy Gray, Eric Garner, and Michael Brown, I will use the functionalist perspective to determine if giving police the liberty to exercise the force they deem necessary per arrest situation is effective or if stricter guidelines for the use of force and training is needed to deal with citizens. I believe most citizens exert some type of resistive behavior when they feel they are being unlawfully arrested. I will investigate separate claims of excessive force use by police against citizens in America. I will also look at other countries’ police brutality complaints to determine if the issue lies mainly in America or if it is a global issue. I will use the inductive research method as well as qualitative research such as present and historical data, past journals, court cases, news publications, and statistical data to conclude my findings.

The Minneapolis Domestic Violence Experiment is also known as (MDVE), was an experiment that evaluated the effectiveness of the police when they responded to domestic violence calls in Minneapolis. This experiment was conducted during early 80’s for over a year by Dr. Lawrence W. Sherman who at the time was the Director of Research at the Police Foundation that is a non-profit foundation to assist police department to become extra effective and by the Minneapolis Police Department with all the monetary support from the National Institute of Justice. The results were mix showing a deterrent effect for arrest and impacted the current police practices during the early 80’s. Ten years later, numerous law enforcement agencies implemented policies to enforce mandatory arrest, without any warrant, for domestic violence cases where the police officer had probable cause for an arrest since a crime had occurred.

Whenever a law enforcement officer places an individual under arrest or is involved in a deadly force scenario the officer has used some degree of force. The incidents where an office has to make a split second decision and use physical force to control a situation is known as “Use of Force.” The use of force varies as situations present themselves to the officer and they must decide what level of force is necessary to control the situation. Often the use of force is subject to much debate and not a year goes by without some media coverage of some law enforcement officer accused of using excessive force. In dozens of studies of police use of force there is no single,

When debating the issue of police use of force, the issue of what actions constitute too much force must also be addressed. Another concern is the possibility of corruption amount officers. When given such great power, the probability of corruption is high. Officers generally do not start out as corrupt, but years of work on the force can create animosity between officers and suspects and lead them to decide to use force more quickly (McEwen, 1996). Many times, officers patrol the streets alone which creates the opportunity for potential abuse of power (McEwen, 1996). Although police officers need to be permitted to exercise some discretion, they also need limits and guidelines to follow when using their powers of discretion (Manning, 1997). The decision to use force should not be taken lightly in that citizen’s lives are at stake. Police should be allowed discretion in decisions to use force; however, this discretion should be limited. In several cases in Arizona, officers have used deadly means of force. In all cases, the officers

Role schema, which is the cognitive structure that organizes one’s knowledge about appropriate behaviors, tells the audience that the police officer initial purpose was to help Chris and Rose. The role and expectations associated with these categories are commonly referred to as stereotypes – mental representations of social groups and their members that are widely shared. (Hamilton & Sherman, 1994; Macrae, Stangor & Hewstone, 1996; and Stangor & Lange, 1994). Expectations from our memory tell us how police officers are to act through real life situations we experience and from what we are taught. We then make inferences and judge whether the officer is acting “correct” based upon these experiences and teachings. The term ‘correct’ is subjective, and define differently from out group members to stigmatized group members. Police officers’ purpose is to protect and serve civilians; however, social expectation theory challenges the role schema of police.