CRJS420 DB3

CRJS420-DB3

Name

Class

Date

Professor

CRJS420-DB3

In the scenario where the probation officer has learned that probationer John Smith is living with a woman that has three children, ages six, nine, and fourteen and has failed to report to his probation officer for fourth months despite the fact he is a sex offender should result in the probation officer revoking the offenders probation and warning the women that he is a dangerous threat to children. Smith has a past history of molesting two girls, ages 4 and seven and poses a clear threat to his girlfriends children. Police officers have an ethical duty to their probationers but they also have an ethical obligation to protect members of society.

It would be unethical for the police officer to fail to warn Smith’s girlfriend of the threat he poses to her children. Smith lied and said he is on probation for statutory rape of a sixteen year old that lied about their age. This is far from the truth. Smith is a dangerous sex offender that preys on small children. Smith has the right to an attorney and a bunch of other due process rights but he does not have the right to move in with a woman that has small children that could potentially become his next victims. Not only has Smith failed to keep up with the probation officer he is also supposed to register as a sex offender.

Police have an ethical obligation to do no harm as well as allow people to make decisions based on the facts (Deshon, 2000). There is nothing illegal about providing a woman with the facts so she can make an informed decision on whether or not to place her children in danger. If the woman continues to live with the child molester the police officer is mandated by law to call social services and warn them of the threat to these children.

References

Deshon, R. (2000). Police Officers Oaths and Ethics. Retrieved may 19, 2013 from http://www.emich.edu/cerns/downloads/papers/PoliceStaff/Unsorted/OATH%20&%20ETHICS