Week 4 Paper (for Hifsa Shakaut)

(1) Is law enforcement misconduct indicative of bad apples or a bad barrel?

It was reported in a drama film, The Stanford Prison Experiment, has been depicted that well-educated, and people with stable physical and mental health turned out to be taking pleasure from torturing prisoners (Gilmour, 2016). This is an example of a bad-barrel. The bad apples scenario is true but on the other hand that there are some people who are ambitions for a “noble cause” (Fitch, Means, & Seidel, 2014). They may treat the people as hardened criminals, and may have been involved in shooting the potentially-criminal-looking persons: just for the sake of their ambitiousness. This is the example of preoccupied people with certain beliefs that can make them bad apples. There are also some peer-pressure practices such as consuming too much alcohol to deal with the stress (Fitch & Jones, 2014), for example, a rookie officer who has just made visited a horrific accident or child abuse; it could be quite disturbing for them to deal with such kind of situations and may cause secondary trauma to them. (You didn’t answer the question. Giving examples is good but you need to follow the instructions and answer this question “is law enforcement misconduct…bad barrel?)

Another example of a bad barrel is the racial profiling as mentioned, where an African-American woman had to pay fines for illegal parking and was unable to come to the court who was also suffering from homelessness; for her original amount of fines of $151, she has paid the installments of $550 in terms of fine, whereas she still owes $541 (DOJ, 2015). This tells the lack of social insight into the system towards the people that make a good apple a bad barrel. Having the present system of civil oversight and independent audit, these phenomena should be referred as bad apples, because it is the personal responsibility of a person to deal with the stress and other factors in law enforcement career.

(2) What is "marginality" and how does it impact law enforcement?

Marginality is the behavior that is required to “pass” or get to a certain threshold to complete the objective of a given assignment. It can be defined as a ‘formality fulfilling behavior’ in law enforcement. Marginality can seriously affect an assignment or situation on law enforcement personnel, as they are trying to meet the requirements by ignoring other things. This is because they are overwhelmed with their jobs and lives that they don’t pay attention to the situation at hand (Zipper & Adams, 2014). The example of this could be if a person is required to pass an exam, and the passing score is 80%. He or she will attempt the paper that will get him/her passed and will not attempt all even if that person is capable of doing that. This sort of behavior could occur in repetitive jobs of similar nature where a person may assume the settings of the other case and make it align with the new case, fit all the situations in it, and fulfill the formality of his job. It can affect the law enforcement adversely because concerns are not given to the situation, and often the overlooking behavior is present that may provoke similar incidents to occur again because perpetrators may believe that the justice system will just meet the formalities for the situations, and they will be saved from prosecution. (I don’t know what you are trying to say by “will just meet the formalities”. I know the definition of formality)

(3) How does "marginality" contribute to the creation of a bad barrel? (provide examples)

Marginality may contribute to the creation of a bad barrel. For example, if a police officer is designated to provide security to an event, and because of his marginal behavior (probably because the person is too stressed), has not imposed the proper procedures required. Because of this behavior from the officer supervisor, subordinates working under a supervisor would likely become bad barrels. because these are the good people put into the bad barrel; they are on the stake of their supervisor in the given situation and it is not their own will that is creating unlawful compliance.

Furthermore, an officer just stops an African-American driving, because just he was told by his peers to preferably stop them as part of the sub-culture. (Are you saying he is the supervisor that was on duty? Then you said subordinates working under the supervisor. I am confuse)

(4) Describe two ethical dilemmas in law enforcement and how they should be handled.

Dilemma 1

A middle-aged person who has been doing a good job at work suddenly finds themselves in a financial burden with their children. The person has to take on additional assignments with late hours to add it to their income. The person has got a good reputation in the police department; however, the officer fails to implement the required procedures because of fatigue and do not take precautionary actions assuming that ‘all would be fine’. However, a mishap occurs and his best friend is given the charge for inquiry, who is hesitated to charge his/her friend for not paying sufficient attention to the job. (you failed to say how you would handle it)

Dilemma 2

A well-educated graduate with good behaviors starts a job in law enforcement. He sees that all of his peers are involved in drinking to avoid stress. He finds that one of his peers is drunk on the job, but has a higher than his. The young rookie officer does not want to report him because he does not want to make enemies in the work place. (you failed to say how you would handle it)

(5) In your planned audit (Research Paper), what are the statements you will use to clearly state any conflicts of interest that you have in the audit for full purposes of disclosure (if any)? If no conflicts, why not?

For example, in a situation with a highly esteemed department, there has been undue pressure on the auditor for not having the details because of an incident that occurred due to a reckless behavior of high-rank officers. The details have been declined asserting the security reasons and confidentiality clauses. In this situation, the auditor is pressurized to carry out further investigations. The statements can be used, “In the given audit, it was difficult to find the out details because of the official procedures that were found to be in conflict and because of the true judgment and reporting is not possible”. In this way, the auditor can inform the authorities without making subjective statements.

References DOJ. (2015). Investigation of the Ferguson Police Department. Retrieved 9 8, 2019, from https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/opa/press-releases/attachments/2015/03/04/ferguson_police_department_report.pdf Fitch, B. D., & Jones, C. H. (2014). Bad Apples or Bad Barrrel: Social Learning Theory as a Paradigm for Understanding Law Enforcement Misconduct. In B. D. Fitch, Law Enforcement Ethics: Classic and Contemporary Issues. Sage. Fitch, B. D., Means, R. B., & Seidel, G. (2014). The Role of Supervision in Motivating and Maintaining a Culture of Ethics. In B. D. Fitch, Law Enforcement Ethics: Classic and Contemporary Issues. Sage. Gilmour, C. (2016). The Stanford Prison Experiment: ‘put people in bad barrels and they’ll become bad apples’: A new movie charts how Philip Zimbardo’s famous 1971 project at Stanford University in California had a devastating effect on those involved. Retrieved 9 8, 2019, from https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/features/the-stanford-prison-experiment-put-people-in-bad-barrels-and-they-ll-become-bad-apples-a7070596.html Zipper, P., & Adams, T. (2014). The Psychology of Marginality: The Role of Subculture in Shaping, Developing, and Reinforcing Work Ethic. In B. D. Fitch, Law Enforcement Ethics: Classic and Contemporary Issues. Sage.