CASE STUDY CRITIQUE #1
Case Study Critique #1
Robert Gleason
Liberty University
CJUS 530
Dr. B.
Lafond
6/2/2021
CASE STUDY CRITIQUE #1
Abstract
The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides protection for all citizens from being
forced to give information to the police, or any other governmental entity, that would be harmful to the
person during a criminal proceeding. Public employees, to include police officers, are also provided this
right, even though they are part of the government, they should not be compelled to be a witness
against himself/herself. This poses a problem for government entities, like police departments, that are
entrusted by the stakeholders of a community to be able to deal with members who have violated a
departmental policy or statutory law. In the Supreme Court created a set Garrity v. New Jersey (1967),
of rules for employees of the government who are compelled by their employer to be truthful or face
disciplinary actions. This critique will review the article “Garrity Warnings: To Give or Not to Give, That Is
the Question,” by Eric Daigle (2012), and examine application of the warning as it relates to the
mentioned case law.
CASE STUDY CRITIQUE #1
Introduction
Police Departments are given a powerful responsibility to uphold the law, maintain order, and
protect the lives of the people who they are sworn to protect. The leadership within the department are
held accountable for the actions taken by the members of the department by the citizens they protect
