Question 1
The Kansas City experiment took place between October 1972 and 1973 (Kelling, Pate, Dieckman, & Brown, 2003). It was conducted by the Kansas City police department and later evaluated by the Police Foundation. The experiment found that routine patrols conducted using marked police cars do have a huge effect on the levels of crime. Also, it has no effect on the public’s feeling of security. The experiment showed that it is possible for police departments to test their strategies and that the patrol resources can be manipulated without compromising the public’s safety. The implication of this experiment is felt to date in law enforcement. The experiment affects the resources that police departments allocate to preventive patrol since such resources can be used in better and productive strategies (Kelling, Pate, Dieckman, & Brown, 2003). The resources also show that police can base their deployment strategies on crime prevention instead of preventive patrol. Further, the experiment has an effect on other experiments conducted today. It shows that police departments can evaluate their patrol strategies and other strategies as well. However, to do this, it is important to have the right help and leadership.
Question 2
Cases of police brutality continue to rise, especially against people of the minority groups. These cases draw attention from the public and the need to come up with strategies to curb this menace increases. Strategies for improving training and conducting investigations have not helped thus far. As such, it is important to come up with other strategies that might be helpful. The establishment of independent civilian oversight groups has existed in different countries. Such groups can be made up of non-political members and of people without biased views of the police. These agencies can give their complaints to the police for any misconduct which should then be addressed by the police and official reports given to indicate the attempt or success in addressing the issues. Also, the public can use protests to influence the high court to broadly define the reasonable use of force for police (Cordell, 2014).
Question 3
The Fifth Amendment states that without due process of the law, a person should not be deprived of their life, property, or liberty. Also, the Fourteenth Amendment states that the States have a legal obligation to provide due process for everyone regardless of their status. Due process ensures that a citizen’s Bill of Rights are protected. Due process is said to incorporate the important elements of the Bill of Rights and has made them applicable to all states (Cornell University Law School, 2016). Most people understand due process to only mean concern with procedure. However, it is a combination of other rights as explained. These rights are expressed in the constitution as well. An example can be used to explain this better. The Supreme Court found it unconstitutional for the 1905 New York Law that regulated bakers’ working hours. The law deprived the said bakers of working under their terms.
Question 4
The enactment of due process has led to the elimination of several problems, especially regarding providing justice to all people regardless of their status. The clause ensures that governments follow fair procedures before depriving citizens of property, life, or liberty. It is not only enough that the government acts in accordance with the law. Citizens are entitled to have the government follow fair procedures regardless of whether they are provided by the law in which the government acts. It has led to the elimination of legislation that enforce entitlement. For instance, in application procedures, no special characteristics are required to receive certain benefits during the application. Any person who is qualified for such an application cannot be deprived of this without due process. As such, all persons are equal in the eyes of the law. Due process also eliminates the problem of deprivation. People are given opportunities for a fair trial where need be and this does not depend on their race or status in the society. For example, this applies to schools where school administrators cannot suspend a student without giving them some form of hearing. By so doing, it guarantees that the punishment is justifiable and unavoidable (Cornell University Law School, 2016).
Question 5
An accused person is sometimes required to have justifications that could result in a case being acquitted. The justifications are defences and can be different depending on the case being charged. Defence of double jeopardy is where a person can only be tried for an offense once and they are convicted or acquitted. The defence includes not being prosecuted under the same action under different charges. The defence of legitimate purpose is where an accused can claim they did not commit the act for the said purpose and hence was not a breach of the law. Such a defence is acceptable where the law has a stated purpose and the accused did not commit the purpose stated. The defence of entrapment is where an accused committed the crime out of deception by the authority or a person disguised as one. The said authority officer may have convinced the accused they were doing an act that is not illegal or for a legitimate cause (Hopkins, 2011).
References
Cordell, L. H. (2014, August 15). Policing the Police. Slate. Retrieved from http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/08/we_know_how_to_decrease_police_violence_like_what_we_ve_seen_after_the_michael.html
Cornell University Law School. (2016). Due Process. Retrieved from https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/due_process
Hopkins, D. (2011, May 5). Top 10 Defences Against Criminal Charges. Retrieved from http://listverse.com/2011/05/05/top-10-defenses-against-criminal-charges/
Kelling, G. L., Pate, T., Dieckman, D., & Brown, C. E. (2003). The Kansas City Preventive Patrol Experiment. Washington, DC: Police Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.policefoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Kelling-et-al.-1974-THE-KANSAS-CITY-PREVENTIVE-PATROL-EXPERIMENT.pdf
