week 6 replies

561 replies 200 words

Reply to troy

If I were the officer first on scene, my first job would be to calm the situation and separate the parties involved. I would speak quietly, give clear directions, and separate the fighting parents. I would quickly move the adolescent away and get the younger child to a safer place. In family crises, people often react emotionally. To calm things down, the officer should lower the volume, establish a framework, and allow each person to speak without interruption. James (2024) says the first steps in crisis intervention are to ensure safety, manage emotions, and help everyone talk. Trauma-informed strategies for intimate partner violence stress safety, trust, autonomy, and cooperation, which apply here (Wathen & Mantler, 2022). To assess the risk of ongoing harm, I would check for injuries, listen to each person's account, and look for signs of strangling, threats, weapons, domestic violence history, drug use, and the children's well-being. I would also note if a parent appears scared, restrained, or hesitant. This information guides decisions about arrest, emergency removal, or referral to protective services. Family crisis calls are challenging because people are upset, stories may differ, and kids or neighbors can complicate matters. The kids would immediately modify what I said. I would check whether they were hurt, talk to them in a calm, age-appropriate way, and not ask them questions in front of the adults who were fighting. Their presence makes the call more serious since even if they weren't physically hurt, they are still going through trauma. If I thought the kids were in danger, I would call child protective services. I would also help the family find resources for domestic violence, victim advocacy, and crisis therapy. I think these outside groups are really important because cops can calm things down, but long-term safety typically depends on help beyond the first call.

References

James, R. K. (2024). Crisis Intervention Strategies (9th ed.). Cengage Learning US.

Wathen, C. N., & Mantler, T. (2022). Trauma-and Violence-Informed Care: Orienting Intimate Partner Violence Interventions to Equity. Current Epidemiology Reports.  https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9527731/

Reply to eric 200 words

In this scenario, my first priority is to stabilize the scene, separate the involved parties, and protect the children. I would immediately request additional resources through dispatch upon arrival to ensure scene stability and a coordinated response. Specifically, I would call for a backup officer to assist with separating the adults, maintaining scene safety, and managing the presence of neighbors. If available, I would also request a supervisor to support decision-making. I would use clear verbal direction, calm tone, nonthreatening body language, and physical separation to reduce emotional intensity and stop cross-talk. I would speak to each adult individually, use short, concrete questions, and acknowledge emotion without taking sides. These techniques are effective because family crises are highly reactive; slowing the interaction reduces escalation, improves information gathering, and supports a trauma-informed response (James, 2024; Office of Community Oriented Policing Services [COPS Office], 2024). 

To further stabilize the situation and provide specialized support, I would request a Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) officer or mental health professional. As noted by James (2024), crisis-trained personnel are better equipped to manage emotionally charged environments, de-escalate heightened reactions, and assess underlying behavioral health concerns. This is especially important given the emotional involvement of the child attempting to intervene.

A major challenge is that family crises are often chaotic, emotionally charged, and incomplete on first contact. Victims may minimize abuse, aggressors may present as calm, children may be traumatized, and neighbors may increase pressure on the scene. I would assess continued harm by examining allegations of physical violence, visible injuries, prior incidents, threats, strangulation, weapon access, coercive control, substance use, and whether anyone is afraid to remain in the home. If probable cause exists, I would arrest or separate the parties in accordance with law and policy. Current guidance stresses that officers must avoid bias and focus on evidence, context, and survivor safety rather than who appears more emotional (U.S. Department of Justice [DOJ], 2022).

For the children, I would move them to a quiet space, reassure them they are safe, avoid repeated questioning, and request medical or child welfare response if needed. Their presence changes my strategy because children are not just witnesses; they are potential victims of trauma exposure and may face immediate or ongoing risk. Trauma-informed victim response requires balancing evidence collection with emotional stabilization and referral (COPS Office, 2024).

External agencies are essential. I would contact child protective services if abuse, neglect, or unsafe supervision is suspected; a domestic violence advocate or shelter for survivor safety planning; and a behavioral health/crisis team if emotional or mental health needs are acute. Effective resolution depends on coordinated, multidisciplinary follow-up rather than a police-only response (SAMHSA, 2025). In practice, that means warm handoffs, documented referrals, and clear communication about protection options, shelter, and victim rights.

 

References

 

James, R. (2024). Crisis intervention strategies (9th ed.). Cengage Learning.

Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. (2024). Victim-centered, trauma-informed practices: An overview. U.S. Department of Justice.

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2025). National guidelines for a behavioral health coordinated system of crisis care.

U.S. Department of Justice. (2022). Updated guidance on improving law enforcement response to sexual assault and domestic violence by identifying and preventing gender bias.

524 replies 100 words each

d1 reply chet

Chapter 9’s history of the “adultification” of juvenile offending accurately describes policy pendulum swings away from parens patriae treatment principles and towards punishment-oriented handling of teens, especially during the tough-on-crime era of the 1980s–1990s. I concur with the main arguments made by authors that changes were poorly guided by evidence and motivated more by fear-driven media messages, “law and order” politics, and sensationalized portrayals of youth crime. Historical trends have certainly favored more individualized handling of teens and instituted treatment-focused court responses. The landmark juvenile justice Supreme Court rulings of the 1960s–70s (Kent v. United States, In re Gault, Winship) were appropriately applied to youth to ensure due process rights. However, movements towards tougher sanctions and easier transfer of juveniles to the adult system during the 1980s–1990s (and beyond) ignored developmental research on adolescent impulsivity, poor judgment, and susceptibility to rehabilitation. Research reviews mentioned in the chapter and other studies have shown that transfer to adult court is likely to increase recidivism and harm adolescents – failing to achieve the goal of protecting public safety and decreasing crime long-term.

 

That being said, I understand that the public wants serious consequences for serious crimes. If statutes allow for juveniles to be tried as adults, I support the option of juvenile adult transfer for certain high-level, violent offenses in a very limited way. Transfer decisions should be guided by comprehensive risk assessment, statutory criteria, procedural protections, and allow for later review. Transfer should be considered on a case-by-case basis with explicit consideration of seriousness of the offense, age of the juvenile (both chronologically and developmentally), previous record, likelihood of rehabilitation with juvenile sanctions, and safety to the public. Race should not be a factor in the decision, though disproportionate impact on minorities should be monitored, and access to quality legal counsel and rehabilitative services should be provided.

 

One case that comes to mind is that of Lionel Tate. Tate was 13 years old when he killed a 6-year-old girl in Florida in 1999 and was tried as an adult and sentenced to life without parole (“Boy Face”, 2004). The facts of the case and Tate’s subsequent processing in adult criminal court were highly criticized. Prosecutorial discretion played a role in the decision to charge Tate in adult court. Other factors in the decision may have included the heinousness of the crime coupled with media attention surrounding the case, determination of culpability based on the harm caused to the victim, and political and public pressure to punish the crime severely. Tate’s subsequent legal battles and sentence reduction highlight some of the shortcomings of transferring children to adult court and the value of sentence review.

 

CNN. (2004, February 5). Lionel Tate freed after sentence overturned. https://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/02/05/tate.released/index.html

 

Jr., F.P.R. B. (2019). Flawed Criminal Justice Policies: At the Intersection of the Media, Public Fear and Legislative Response (2nd ed.). Carolina Academic Press.  https://ccis.vitalsource.com/books/9781531011376

D1 reply laycee

When considering the younger generation being involved in the criminal justice system, there are multiple things to consider. A juvenile is considered as an individual under the age of 18 in most states, a juvenile is considered as an individual under the age of 17. Juveniles committing crimes could be the ending result of being in an unfortunate circumstance. Some of the unfortunate circumstances could be lack of positive role models in their life, poverty, family dynamics, and their social environment. The adultification with the juvenile system hasn’t always been fair. Depending on the circumstance, there have been children placed in situations that weren’t the best for them. Juveniles are then being tried as adults in their crimes and receiving punishments that are similar to an adult. These possibilities happen to the seriousness of the crime, history, and the decreased chance of rehabilitation happening for the juvenile offender.  For juveniles to learn from their mistakes, there should be an opportunity offered for rehabilitation, community services, therapeutic services, access to different providers that can provide services for psychiatry and substance use as well. Back on November 2025, 17 year old Da’Caveon Nelson was certified as an adult for Murder 2nd Degree after being accused of shooting a man to death in Randolph County, MO. Ethan March, 22, was found with a gunshot wound in a home on County Road 2605. According to the probable cause statement, Nelson shot March while he was stealing a gun. In January 2026, Lonnie Lockhart Bey conducted an interview with KMIZ. Lockhart discussed that people don’t consider the reasons why a child would join a gang. Lockhart discussed that something traumatic or sinister happened in that child’s life. Children don’t have the access to positive influences to keep them out of trouble

 

'Choose a side, or it's going to choose you:' Columbia nonprofit takes to the streets to keep kids from turning toward them - ABC17NEWS

Teen charged with murder in 2024 Randolph County shooting - ABC17NEWS

D2 reply 1 shequita

“The Justice Department is marking the 10th anniversary of the National Public Safety Partnership, a milestone in the program’s ongoing commitment to support local law enforcement and agencies, community organizations and other partners in addressing public safety challenges. By bringing together expertise, resources and proven methods, PSP has helped transform public safety landscapes in cities across the nation. Earlier this month, DOJ announced the addition of five new sites to the PSP program: Dekalb Count, Georgia; Pueblo, Colorado; Seattle, Washington; Springfield, Massachusetts; and Tampa, Florida. Through the program, DOJ collaborates with jurisdictions of different sizes and diverse needs to support customized and data-driven strategies tailored to address each site’s most pressing public safety challenges. The program focuses on eight core areas: community engagement, constitutional policing, crime analysis, criminal justice collaboration, federal partnerships, gun violence, investigations, and technology. 

In one ‘s opinion, the Camden County Police Department of Camden County, New Jersey, has transformed its policing strategy into a high-tech, data-driven model resulting in historical drops in violent crime. By Camden County Police Department using a Real-Time Tactical Operations Intelligence Center, to monitor cameras and data, they proactively prevented crime, rather than just reacting to the calls. One does not see an area for improvement with this site as it is a modeled site of success for other police agencies as well as the community. Technology has been an approach to building community trust and engagement, making it a success for police modernization. Technological integration through the National Public Safety Partnership, assists departments in the use of advanced tools like social network analysis to map relationships between offenders and improved ballistics technology with the end state to solve gun crimes faster” (DOJ, 2024). 

                                                             References 

U.S. Department of Justice (2024) National Public Safety Partnership: Building Safer Communities. Bureau of Justice Assistance. Office of Programs.  https://bja.ojp.gov   

D2 reply 2 doug

The Violence Reduction Network was established by the U. S. Department of Justice in 2014 as a pilot program to address high rates of violent crime. You can read more about it in this December 2017 report  U.S. DOJ Violence Reduction Network Shows Promise in Early Stages. In June 2017, the DOJ established the  National Public Safety Partnership.  You will find a listing of the  PSP Sites here with data about what has been accomplished to address crime rates at each site.

I looked through the report linked below in reference to the Violence Reduction Network or VRN.  It stated, “In many of our most dangerous communities, social ills like poverty, unemployment, and lack of opportunity lead to tragic circumstances in which systemic violence can easily take root.” (Lopez 2017). The article then goes on to make several more arguments for why the VRN has shown promise in its early stages.  The author relates the aim is to create partnerships with federal and state agencies to deliver strategies such as leveraging resources to address challenges.  

What I took away from this article was a lot of fancy talking points, but in reality the issues that cause violent crime still exist to this day. Poverty, unemployment, and lack of opportunity.  None of which (in my opinion) can be eliminated by a criminal justice, or federal bureau of justice program alone.  I think these deeply rooted socio-economic conditions that cause these problems will always plague these urban areas of the U.S.  To cure this we need to spend our resources on other things. What?  I have a few ideas, but they are probably going to seem extreme and the price tag might be a bit high. 

Visit the link for all PSP sites and provide an example in which you believe the program has been implemented and monitored successfully.  In what areas do you believe there have been challenges? What suggestions do you have for improved assessment and monitoring?

After reviewing a few of the sites, it seems there are a few that have measurable results while others are still waiting for the stats to drop.  For example, Cuyahoga County, Ohio states they were able to hire a few staff and some detectives, but reported no information on crime reduction.  Amarillo, Texas stated they read books together with elementary school kids… (insert slow clap here). On the other hand, locations such as Baltimore, Maryland mentioned their Eastern and Western districts had a measurable drop in homicides from 2017 to 2020.  I would definitely be able to call that a win! Wichita Kansas, had success in solving all of their homicides in 2020, however, did this lead to less Homicides in 2021?  We don’t have information on that, and that's the type of info we need to measure real success.  If Wichita were to advertise this winning statistic, in some sort of public crime campaign, like “If you commit the crime, You will do the time.”  Back this statement up with the 100% data, and you have a winning crime suppression model.  

~Doug

Lopez, B. (2017). National Institute of Justice: US DOJ Violence Reduction Network Shows Promise in Early Stages.  https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/us-doj-violence-reduction-network-shows-provmise-early-stages                                           

Online Article (2025). Bureau of Justice Assistance: National Public Safety Partnership.  https://bja.ojp.gov/program/national-public-safety-partnership/overview#4-0