Stop and Frisk by Michael D. White & Henry F. Fradella

Author:Michael D. White & Henry F. Fradella
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: SOC004000 Social Science / Criminology
Publisher: NYU Press

Importantly, prior research has demonstrated that administrative rule making can effectively control police officer behavior in a number of misconduct and racial bias–prone areas. For example, research has consistently demonstrated that administrative policies—when enforced—can substantially curtail the rate of officer-involved shootings.60 Alternatively, administrative permissiveness can also lead to higher rates of police shootings.61 Police scholar Michael White, for example, found that the number of police shootings in Philadelphia increased significantly after a restrictive administrative policy was abolished in 1974.62 Walker concluded that “administrative rules have successfully limited police shooting discretion, with positive results in terms of social policy. Fewer people are being shot and killed, racial disparities in shootings have been reduced, and police officers are in no greater danger because of these restrictions.”63 Similarly positive results have been documented with other types of formal police behavior, including high-speed pursuits, use of police dogs, foot pursuits, and responses to domestic violence incidents.64 For example, police scholar Geoffrey Alpert found that the number of automobile pursuits, accidents, and injuries all dropped significantly in Miami following the adoption of a restrictive pursuit policy that (1) strictly forbade pursuits under certain conditions; (2) required that officers consider certain specified factors before initiating a pursuit (weather, risk to bystanders, seriousness of the offense); (3) required completion of a written report detailing the incident; and (4) required supervisory review of that incident report.65

Additionally, during the 1990s the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department (LASD) was criticized because of an increasing number of lawsuits alleging excessive force and racial discrimination in the deployment of police dogs. As a result, the LASD adopted a more restrictive policy that limited use of canines against unarmed suspects, especially auto theft suspects. Moreover, handlers were required to announce or warn before releasing their dog, and dogs were trained to “find and bark” rather than “find and bite.” Following adoption of the new policy, canine deployments declined by 25 percent.66 Last, in response to growing awareness of the dangers associated with foot pursuits, the International Association of Chiefs of Police developed a model policy that strictly confines officers’ discretion by prohibiting foot pursuits under a wide range of circumstances, such as when the danger to the officer outweighs the necessity of immediate apprehension; when the officer is alone (unless exigent circumstances exist); when the suspect runs into structures, confined spaces, or isolated areas; and when the suspect’s identity is known and apprehension at a later time is likely.67

The adoption of clearly articulated policies governing police stops of citizens, with specific prohibitions of racial profiling, is absolutely crucial for controlling unlawful, unjust police behavior. The body of research that highlights police departments’ success in managing officer discretion across a wide range of police actions provides an important backdrop for consideration of SQF practices. The latter piece of the Walker and Archbold framework—the supervisory review and accountability component—is especially critical for stop and frisk because the practice generally does not reach the level of being classified as a critical incident.68 For example, over the past

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.