1) According to Houston, Bridgmon and Parsons (2008) criminal policy shall refer to a combination of prevention and conservative deterrence programs. Majority of the policy-making that deals with criminal justice is pursuant to criminological theory, whether the authors of the policies are unaware of such fact or not. Some of the common causes of failed policies in criminal justice can be attributed to misinterpretation, fractional implementation, or illiteracy on criminological theories (Houston et al., 2008, p. 58). However, are some instances when there are problems that beset the implementation of policies such as when the law enforcement arrested mistaken individuals. On the other hand, there are some factors that may affect the implementation such as federalism, weakly defined goals, inability to determine the variables that may affect implementation and opposing political ideologies (Houston et al., 2008, p. 58). Therefore, it is imperative that to have a better implementation of policies, legislators and the law enforcement agencies under the criminal justice system must be able to understand the policies by exploring the crime committed and the theories of crime.
Before a policy is created, there is a process that has to be followed such as the technical methods that have to be observed such as planning, programming and budgeting systems (PPBS) and the cost benefit analysis (Houston et al., 2008, p. 58). These are the processes that have to be done to be able to determine if the policy has reached the intended public, client or constituent. Another consideration is to ensure that the policy has addressed the targeted issue. The best way to enforce a proper evaluation of the policy is to conduct measurement, analysis and recommendation. This will entail the comparison of the before and after effects of the policy to be implemented, measurement of the problem and finally, to make an analysis of both the advantages and disadvantages of the policy on the targeted problem/issue (Houston et al., 2008, p. 58). The evaluation of the policy must take into consideration both political and scientific aspects of the problem. The goals of policy evaluation shall vary depending on the purpose such as achievement of results and the speed of delivery.
It is also vital to analyze the impact of variables such as the economic, social and cultural influences on the crime. The impact analysis shall cover: 1.) the issue which is the subject matter of the investigation; 2.) the goals and objectives of the policy that addresses the issue; 3.) the causality depending on the observations made; 4.) the framework that will assess the impact of the policy; and 5). a report should be made regarding the findings (Houston et al., 2008, p.63). The last step of policy making is that after evaluation has been made, the decision-makers should be able to determine whether to preserve, amend of scrap the policy based on the feedbacks obtained from the public.
2) Slippery slope in criminal justice means police corruption. This concept has been developed by Sherman by explaining that taking rewards and money shall begin on a small scale if acknowledged by other police officers. As the police shall become accustomed to this kind of culture, corruption shall result in a grander scale (Banks, 2004, p. 38). The end result is that the police officers become addicted to corruption and disregard the moral and legal implications of their actions. The police officers will find themselves in this slop resulting from the social considerations that connect them together and the perception of the police officers on their own behavior. The way to solve the problem based on Sherman’s recommendations is to decriminalize the activities that will lure the police force to commit graft. According Dempsey and Forst (2011), police corruption shall be in the form of taking of gratuities, accepting bribes, theft and internal corruption. The level of discretion that the police officers should use will be dependent on the flexibility of the authority given to them by their departments. They are given the freedom to make minor decisions be able to respond effectively to any given situation such as maintaining peace and order tasks and while performing arrests (Brooks, 2010). However, there are instances when the police officer has to make split-making decisions due to the emergency situations.
However, there is an opposing view by Feldberg who claimed that the police should be able to distinguish the minor perks and bribes that can affect the performance of police officers. The theory of Sherman rests on moral grounds, which cannot be found in the theory of Feldberg (Banks, 2004). The slippery slope model shall begin with the process of the noble cause of corruption instead of taking into consideration the economic effect of corruption. There are three stages that comprise the slippery slope model and its starts with small perks such as free meals, and to assess if the loyalty of such officer to the team can be relied on. The loyalty of one officer shall test whether such individual is willing to support other officers even if it entails making false testimonies or to shake down a suspect (Banks, 2004). The last step is when the police officers use force against the citizens that will expose the officers to risks of retaliation, detection and injury. This can be illustrated when police officers plant evidence in order to justify the arrest of the accused. This shall including planting of drugs to aggravate the crime committed and justify arrest. This puts the police officers on the slippery slope and becomes the way for them to employ justification of the noble cause (Banks, 2004, p. 38).
In order to combat police corruption, it is imperative that the agency should consider the following skills and qualities that every police officer must possess such as proper attitude, integrity, leadership, judgment, communications, human relations, cognitive skills or knowledge and technical skills in order for him to be able to function effectively in the modern society (Ortmeier, 2006). The police officer must possess the proper attitude in order to gain community support and efficiently carry-out the objectives of the agency. Police attitude is vital to be able to solve the problems he is confronted with in a proactive manner, and not driven by selfish motivations. He must be a peace-maker and encourage cooperative relationships while on duty having a sense of values and goals (Ortmeier, 2006). He must possess a strong ethical standard in terms of trust to be able to gain public’s belief that he is fair, credible and act with restraint. The police officer must be able to exercise sensible judgment using his own discretion. He must be able to have a solid foundation of what is morally right and wrong to avoid wrong decisions motivated by corruption. It is also important to consider the characteristic and personal behavior of each officer as part of the recruitment and selection process since it may affect the informal police decision-making process as they carry out their daily functions. Since police officers encounter ethical dilemmas, they face difficult challenges which demand the use of firm discretion or judgment.
3) Personal Loyalty Syndrome in criminal justice system refers to the personal loyalty to the employees to unworthy superiors and will lead to violation of the provisions of the law, Constitution, and the public good (Souryal and Diamond, 2001). There is no organization in the criminal justice system that will demand loyalty from the employees based on rules and policies. However, the criminal justice system has promoted loyalty inside the workplace. Some experts have perceived that personal loyalty to superiors is one of the essential factors in order for the organization to survive. This was also opposed by another view stating the employees in the criminal justice agencies are reminded that lack of loyalty to superiors violates a commandment that can equate to cardinal sin because it has the tendency to cause the downfall of the professional career of an individual. However, supporters of personal loyalty to superiors have negated this argument by stating the personal loyalty is imperative since it becomes a way to motivate productivity beyond the call of duty, inculcates institutional responsibility, and make work more meaningful and worthwhile since it dispels any form of disloyalty and guarantees integrity (Souryal and Diamond, 2001). However, there should also limitations on loyalty if it falls under the duty-based model that circumvents using loyalty in the framework of work relationship that takes place between superiors and subordinates. This is in effect will promote dutiful supervision on the part of the superiors and that incorporates professional accountability of the supervisors and officers (Souryal and Diamond, 2001).
It is vital that employees should be given constants reminders that having a successful career shall also be dependent on a high level of personal loyalty to ensure team spirit and camaraderie in the organization. However, there are other acceptable alternatives that will serve as models for the employees and to avoid the regard for loyalty that exists between subordinates and superiors by focusing on the accountability of the superiors. This can be illustrated when the head of the department is seen by his subordinate employing physical force on a suspect of a crime. On account of the personal loyalty syndrome, the subordinate is forced to stay silent and pretend that he did not witness the violence in order to maintain the loyalty to the superior and to promote team spirit, even it may result to violation of constitutional rights of a person and requirements under the law (Souryal and Diamond, 2001).
4) According to Cronkhite (2013, p. 323), criminal justice administration is the obligation to oversee the fulfillment of public mission for criminal justice agencies. Administration shall entail both management and leadership. There is a difference between the two terms since management refers to the appropriate use of resources, such as employees and equipment to effectively achieve the goals and objectives of the organization. On the other hand, leadership is defined as getting people who will cooperate to work toward a common goal by inspiring them to perform their jobs efficiently (Cronkhite (2013, p. 323). According to Allen and Sawhey (2010), there is no exact definition of leadership, but the term leadership rests on two basic characteristics which are: First, leadership involves influencing other members of the group and leadership has the ability to direct the group towards the attainment of its set goals. The art of leadership is synonymous to personality, the art of inducing compliance, the exercise of influence, a power relationship or an instrument towards the achievement of goals, integration and behavioral changes (Allen and Sawhey, 2009).
Leadership is characterized by the art of inducing compliance, exercise of influence and power and a tool towards the achievement of goals (Allen and Sawhney, 2010). On the other hand, leadership behavior refers to the traits and behaviors that leaders will have to develop in order to achieve the set goals in their department. The leaders must learn how to coordinate with their people, interaction of their ideas and utilize the available resources towards the realization of the organizational objectives. According to Allen and Sawhney (2010), the study made by the Ohio State University and University of Michigan investigated the behaviors of leaders and specifically identified the two different dimensions of leadership behavior. First dimension is the consideration or concern of the leader for his people by providing the employees’ needs. The leader sees to it that there is a two-way communication between management and the employees to address all issues and improve their working relationship. The second is the concern of the leader for the task outcomes. It is referred as the initiating structure which is more focused on achieving the goals set by the organization and that the standards of performance are met. This approach is more focused on completing tasks assigned to each member of the group. Effective leadership is vital for all branches of the criminal justice system because it is an instrument that will decrease corruption, discrimination and abuse of power in the agencies.
5) According to Callum (2011), a person of integrity is committed to fulfill the goals and objectives by understanding their job requirements and expectations of their position. Leaders are admired by their subordinates and staff if they are honest and consistent with their beliefs and actions. Hence, when a leader possesses all these positive traits, it will encourage the staff to become like the leader and follow his ways. Therefore, there is a high probability that the efficient leadership will decrease corruption, discrimination and abuse of power within the criminal justice agencies such as the police department and correctional facilities.
In the case of corrections, the supervisor of the corrections officer requires various styles of leadership. In the event that the supervisor gets along well with the officers and is well-accepted by them, it may be beneficial for the agency because human relations oriented organization work harmoniously. However, if the supervisor has a weak position power to lead the group, it will be difficult to achieve the goals of the organization. The uncertainty about the relationship between tasks and organizational objectives and the weak position of the supervisors and the administration shall require them to become more oriented towards human relations aspect of the group (Stojkovic, Kolfas et al., 2011). The leaders must be able to encourage effective communication among the subordinates and the needs of the public. Human relations is a vital component in the function of policing, not just within the organization, but community relations of the police force should extend to the general public. The unity and cooperation between the police officer and the public will be equivalent to better cooperation in terms of reporting crimes, resources and information given to the police by the people (Ortmeier, 2006).
References
Allen, J. M. and Sawney, R. (2010). Administration and Management in Criminal Justice: A Service Quality Approach. California: SAGE.
Banks, C. (2004). Criminal Justice Ethics: Theory and Practice. California: SAGE.
Callum. D. W. (2011). Leadership Within the Florida Department of Corrections. Web.
May 22, 2013
http://www.fdle.state.fl.us/Content/getdoc/5ca27f87-d4c4-4a79-b01f-11cc95e24af9/McCallum-David-paper-pdf.aspx.
Cronkhite, C. L. (2013). Law Enforcement and Justice Administration. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett.
Dempsey, J.S. and Forst, L.S. (2011). Introduction to Policing. New York: Cengage.
Houston, J. G., Bridgmon, P. B. & Parsons, W.W. (1999). Criminal Justice and the Policy Process, 2nd ed. New York: University Press of America.
Ortmeier, P. J. (2006). Introduction to law enforcement and criminal justice, 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
Souryal, S.S. and Diamond, D.L. (2001). Rhetoric of Personal Loyalty to Superiors in Criminal Justice Agencies. Journal of Criminal Justice. 29(6), pp. 543-554.
Stojkovic, S., Klofas, J. and Kalinich, D. (2011). Criminal Justice Organizations:
Administration and Management. California: Cengage.
