|
One of the most efficient means to eliminate a possible suspect in a crime is if his alibi proves to be correct. This is only true, however, when the investigator is absolutely certain of the time of the offense and when there are independent witnesses to corroborate the alibi. Unfortunately, in many situations, an investigator must make an immediate decision following an interview whether or not to interrogate a suspect, without the benefit of being able to verify an alleged alibi.
There are a number of behavioral characteristics which tend to support or refute the validity of an alibi. To take advantage of these, the investigator must elicit an alibi in a manner which provides the most meaningful of information. Consider a home invasion where a jeweler was robbed by a man last Friday night at 7:30. The traditional interview question asked to elicit this suspect's alibi would be, "Where were you last Friday night at 7:30?" The suspect may respond, "I was shopping at K-Mart for a birthday present for my nephew." Follow-up questions may reveal that the suspect purchased a football, for which he paid $25.00 cash, but he did not keep his receipt. Furthermore, the suspect denies encountering anyone he knew during his shopping trip. Is this alibi true or false? Given this limited information it is impossible to tell. Suppose, however, that the suspect was asked the following question to elicit his alibi: "Tell me everything you did last Friday night from 6:00 until 9:00." This question offers the potential for much more meaningful information. Because it does not reveal the time of the crime (7:30), the innocent suspect's detail and recollections of his activities should be similar before and after the commission of the crime. The deceptive suspect, however, knows when he committed the crime and this guilty knowledge may influence his recounting of events. He may offer sketchy information prior to and after the commission of the crime, but very specific details at the time of the crime (a rehearsed alibi). On the other hand, the guilty suspect may tell the truth about his general activities before and after the crime, which includes a fair amount of detail, but he conveniently glosses over the details of his whereabouts at the time the crime was committed (an unprepared alibi). Some crimes involve incriminating activities before and after the actual commission of the crime. Under this circumstance, the guilty suspect must fabricate most of his account, where the entire account tends to be vague. Consider the following two responses to the question, "Tell me everything you did last Friday night between 6:00 and 9:00."
|
|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ A Message From Our Sponsor ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Keep Moving Up in Criminal Justice with a CJ degree from Excelsior College
Earn your degree studying at your own pace through flexible programs from Excelsior College, an accredited leader in online education. Apply approved academy and military training toward your degree. Excelsior College courses and examinations, plus student support services, will take you from start to finish. Five emphases, including Homeland Security.For more information, click here.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ |
|
By David Whalen
Public service professionals encounter a high volume of situations whereby they come in contact with individuals with disabilities. This is especially true in law enforcement where situations can vary from high intensity to very confusing. Recent statistics indicate that 50%-80% of encounters by officers involve an individual with a disability. Furthermore, up to two-thirds of children in juvenile detention facilities have received special education services and at least 50% of incarcerated individuals have some form of disability. Discussions over the past several months with select local law enforcement personnel and the Criminal Justice department at Niagara University, suggested that appropriate disability education and training for officers is typically not provided to the extent necessary to adequately prepare officers for interactions with an individual with a disability. However, disability awareness training (DAT) has been gradually working its way into the fabric of standard training protocols across a broad spectrum of the American workforce. For example, training has been provided to corporate America and Human Resource departments, public transportation, educators, and emergency responders. It some cases, like public transit and school districts, the absence of training mirrors the absence of training in law enforcement, although positions in these arenas often demand regular interaction with individuals with a disability. However, unlike employees in other private and public sectors, law enforcement officers are regularly required to make split-second decisions in extremely complicated situations where they do not have complete situational knowledge. These split-second decisions are often open to public review via the media, and may result in unintended consequences, particularly in the absence of appropriate training. Where it challenges law enforcement beyond the aforementioned is in public perception, media exposure, and some of the dire results if the officer is not properly trained.
article continues >> |
by John R. Budnik, Esq.
civilliabilities.com
In Mueller v. Mena 125 S.Ct. 1465 (2005) the Supreme Court addressed an issue familiar to all law enforcement officers which is the detention of residents of a house in handcuffs during the execution of a search warrant. The residents sued claiming a Fourth Amendment violation for the use of handcuffs during the search and for questioning one of the residents about immigration status. The case went to trial with a jury award against the officers. However, the Supreme Court held the officers' actions in handcuffing the residents were "reasonable".
The case states that the detention was proper because the warrant was for an address and the persons detained were occupants at the time of the search. Inherent in the detention is the right to effect the detention using force and the use of handcuffs was reasonable because the government interest outweighs the marginal intrusion under inherently situations. The underlying risk was great since the warrant was a search for weapons arising out of a gang shooting. The residents claimed that the duration of two to three hours in handcuffs was per se unreasonable. The court held that such delay was not unreasonable under the circumstances. Another issue related to questions asked about immigration status. The Supreme Court stated that police may ask general questions even if they have no basis for suspecting an individual. There was no separate Fourth Amendment violation by asking about immigration status. It was important that there was no showing that the detention in handcuffs was prolonged by any questioning. Once the reasons for the detention no longer exist, then the detention must end.
article continues > |
|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~ A Message From Our Sponsor ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Portland State University Now Offering Online Certificate in Criminal Behavior
Starting Fall 2009, Portland State University will begin offering an exclusive Certificate in Criminal Behavior. Courses in the certificate examine various forms of criminal behavior and offender typologies. Particular attention is paid to the biological, psychological, and social factors associated with the onset and persistence of antisocial behavior among youths and adults. Intervention and treatment strategies for preventing and controlling criminal activity also are covered.
For more information, click here.>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ |
 TOP 10 Reasons You Didn't Get Promoted:
- You insist that everybody call you "Mr. Majestic".
- You use steroids and forget to work out.
- You call everyone "butt breath".
- You wear your underwear outside your pants.
- You consider deodorant "unnatural".
- You believe in "counseling" not "arresting".
- You formed your own religion.
- You got the Mayor's teenage daughter pregnant.
- Toe picking.
- You refer to 9th grade as your "Senior Year".
|
|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~ A Message From Our Sponsor ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Protect More & Serve Better with a Master's from
University of Cincinnati
The professors in University of Cincinnati's
Online Master of Science in Criminal Justice program have published more CJ
articles than any other faculty; and are some of the most recognizable
respected leaders in the industry. Our graduates are truly empowered to
become leaders in their communities; with a confidence that can only be
gained by learning from the greatest minds in their field.
Download your free brochure
and
learn more >
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ |
|
|
