1 A
I agree with Joh (2004)’s idea that there is a new silver platter doctrine in the making. Here, private cops now have the ability to present the “silver platter to local, state, and federal public policing agencies. Now, this doctrine focuses on the fact that private officials can turn over evidence to their federal counterparts without much regard to suppression even if the former obtained this information through illegal search processes.
In essence, the doctrine does not allow public police agencies to conduct unreasonable search and seizure activities. Thus, all pieces of evidence obtained using this means would be inadmissible during trial. As a way of countering this measure, police departments are increasingly collaborating with their private counterpart to gather information in readiness for trial.
Now, as seen in Joh (2004), private policing focuses on four major practices, including loss, preventive mechanisms, private justice, and private protection. These elements overlook their public peers’ crime, punishment, public justice, and public property security initiatives. These practices are part of the private initiative that seeks to satisfy private versus public gain. That said, such goals leave them susceptible to methods, otherwise deemed unethical for their public peers.
1B
I support the idea that nixing the silver platter would require a new security scheme in this age of underlying technologies. The reason new technologies allows access to information that would otherwise have been unavailable with traditional policing. In essence, technological advances have had mixed results for modern day policing departments. For instance, the explosive spread of online media has opened up access to information through social media (Joh, 2004).
Here, law enforcement agencies now have the ability to capture criminal gangs and terrorists. That said, social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter are now the ideal marketplace for policing agencies. They consider the ability of such platforms to display and record current criminal situations as a way of allowing enhanced law enforcement. However, while this procedure enhances law enforcement, it creates a security breach through which criminals can exist with little or no trail (Weiss, 2012).
Ideally, without proper knowledge, law enforcement agencies find themselves using expensive techniques to identify and stop crime. Also, online technologies have become a web of shared information, which remains permissible and admissible in criminal justice. Such changes in criminal law show that the advent of the internet has opened up new policing strategies. This platform allows continuous exposure to personal data in ways not seen and witnessed using traditional policing agencies (Joh, 2004).
Response
However, I do not agree with the need to toss any existing restrictions on silver platters. The reason is that the advent of online technologies has exposed policing agencies to elaborate policing challenges. That is, advanced technologies not only complicate but also expose officers to the idea that they lack the technical muscle to practice pre-crime strategies. In essence, history shows that criminals are always ahead of the police when committing cyber-crime. Such situations indicate that the rapid increase in technology requires quick adaptation procedures for enhanced policing.
References
Joh, E. (2004). The Paradox of Private Policing. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 95 (1), 49-132.
Weiss, T. (2012). Cool cop tech: Five New Technologies Helping Police Fight Crime . Retrieved from Computer World : http://www.computerworld.com/article/2501178/government-it/cool-cop-tech--5-new-technologies-helping-police-fight-crime.html
