questions

/in /by

 

Each answer Must be no less than 200 words and no more than 1000 words each

 

 

 

1.)Module 5: For this discussion question, first read the case study on pages 138 – 166 of the textbook. Analyze case study in utilizing the Five Step Approach provided by the authors. The five steps are the following:

 

  1. Define the problem and determine its causes.
  2. Establish criteria to evaluate alternatives.
  3. Generate policy alternatives.
  4. Evaluate and select policy.
  5. Evaluate adopted policy.

 

After addressing these five steps, answer discussion question number 8 on page 161, which states:

 

Did the five-step model help you understand the problem, and help you organize and structure your research and a potential response in a way that made the task more manageable, and your analysis more thorough? Or did this problem reveal possible limitations of the five step approach?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.)Module 6A: Describe the differences of policy approaches toward gun control throughout the United States. Take into account the context of the school shootings case study in Chapter 6 of the textbook. State your opinion on the matter and provide a thoughtful and well reasoned argument to support your point of view.

 

3.)Module 6B: For this discussion question, first read the articles titled, “First Amendments Zones” (Nuñez, 2011), “Unlawful Assembly Dispersal Order,” and the “FTAA Independent Review Panel Report.”

 

Put yourself in the place of Major Warren as he formulates his policy recommendations to Director Duncan and County Manager Herrera for their final approval. What general policy recommendations would you make in regard to the designation of First Amendment Zones? What would you recommend as a general policy regarding protest groups and their possible disruption of the DRNC event. Consider the risks and benefits that are likely to come from the implementation of different policies. Be prepared to defend your policy recommendations.

 

 

 

4.) Module 7:For this discussion question you are to assume the position of Major Louis Warren, the principal planner for security for the DRNC event.

Based on your readings so far, identify the three likeliest threats that you expect to encounter on the week of the event. Then identify the three most consequential threats that you expect to encounter that week. Understanding that risk is a function of likelihood and consequence (Risk = Likelihood X Consequence), how do you rank order the overall risk posed by these threats?

For the second part of this question, you will need to formulate a very brief policy statement (not to exceed seven words) that best addresses the risks that you have identified. You may formulate one, two, or three policy statements at the most for this question.

 

5.)Module 8:For this discussion question, first review the article “A Policy Review of ‘Operation Fast & Furious’” (Nuñez, 2011) in Doc Sharing. Conduct a brief review and analysis of the article.

At a minimum, you are to address the following questions:

 

  • What were the unintended consequences of Operation Fast & Furious?
  • What are the lessons learned from this operation? What, if anything can be done to avoid these mistakes in the future?

 

 

 

Written 4(1)

/in /by

Responce at least 50 words

 

 

Why Leaders Fail

Robby Colbert

Saint Leo University

July 23, 2014

 

 

 

 

Abstract

This paper will be a brief examination of the theories behind why leaders of organizations fail to act, or fail to lead in times when action is called for.

 

Key words:  leadership.

   What is a leader?  According to the online resource Dictionary.com a leader is a person or thing that leads; a guiding or directing head, as of an army, movement, or political group. (Online Etymology Dictionary, n.d.)  And to lead has many definitions, part of which state: to go before or with to show the way; to influence or induce; to guide in direction, course, action, opinion, etc. (Encyclopedia Britannica, n.d.)

Now that we have established that a leader is someone who leads others, who influences decisions, who guides others and shows the way, we can explore the reasons why a leader fails to take the appropriate actions or fails to lead.  Some of this can be explained by fear, a lack of training, a lack of information, information overload and many other psychological or physiological reasons.

When dealing in the realm of law enforcement leaders we need to define the three main styles of leadership.  In their seminal work on leadership Lewin, Lippitt and White (1939) listed the leadership styles as authoritarian, democratic, and laissez-faire.  The authoritarian style is also known as the autocratic style and is characterized as being totally one sided.  The leader who utilizes this style makes all the decisions with very little or no outside influence or consultation.  The second style is the democratic style and is characterized by engaging other members and soliciting their input in decisions that could have an effect on their organization.  And the last style is one that is very seldom used in the realm of law enforcement since it is characterized more by a lack of decision making and inaction; some call this a hands-off approach.  This style of leadership is one that does not produce action and has the tendency to be seen as a weakness on the part of the leader.  Due to the dynamic nature of law enforcement leadership one seldom finds this style in senior members of a law enforcement agency. (Swanson, Territo and Taylor, 2012)

Some leaders fail to lead out of a sense of fear.  At times doing nothing seems like a better option than making a decision that can be dissected in hindsight.  At other times those who have risen to a position of power become caught up in the way things have always worked in the past and fail to adapt to the changing environment in business or public service. 

There are occasions when leaders fail to lead by neglecting the established rules or by defending the actions of subordinates before they have a chance to gather all of the information necessary to make an informed decision.  A sergeant and the Chief of Police for the Newport News Police Department were caught up in such a situation in January 1994. 

The northern end of Newport News, VA is known as Denbigh.  Denbigh was experiencing a rash of pizza delivery robberies.  The modus operandi (M. O.) was that someone would call one of the pizza delivery companies delivering in that area and order a pizza to be delivered to an apartment complex.  When the delivery driver arrived in the area the suspect would display a weapon and rob the driver of the pizza and any money he was carrying. 

On the evening of January 12, 1994 a call was received that matched the M. O. of the previous robberies.  The sergeant on duty that evening placed a hastily designed plan into action.  It called for an officer to act as the delivery driver and to have a back-up officer concealed in the delivery vehicle and additional officers strategically placed around the area.  The officer who volunteered to act as the driver that evening was Steven Rutherford.  Officer Rutherford dressed in the uniform of the delivery driver with his back-up concealed in the car drove to the apartment complex.  Upon arrival he was met by a suspect who proceeded to display a weapon and rob Officer Rutherford.  At some point the suspect fired several shots at Officer Rutherford before any of the back-up officers could react.  Officer Rutherford was struck in his side in an area not covered by his ballistic vest and died at the hospital.

During the next couple of days, prior to the completion of the internal investigation, the Chief of Police made several statements during press conferences defending the operation and at one point calling it a “textbook” undercover operation. 

The internal investigation did not corroborate the Chief’s and revealed several errors that were made by the supervisors on scene.  As a result of the investigation the sergeant was terminated and due to a loss of confidence in his abilities, the Chief of Police was asked to resign.

  Another reason leaders fail is because of information overload or, as it has been called by some, analysis paralysis.  Owen Harari wrote an article that was published in the journal Management Review on the leadership philosophies of former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and later Secretary of State, Colin Powell.  Lesson 15 of 18 states: “Part I: Use the formula P=40 to 70, in which P stands for the probability of success and the numbers indicate the percentage of information acquired.  Part II: Once the information is in the 40 to 70 range, go with your gut.”   Powell’s advice is don’t take action if you have only enough information to give you less than a 40 percent chance of being right, but don’t wait until you have enough facts to be 100 percent sure, because by then it is almost always too late. (Harari, 1996)

Conclusion

            A leader’s job is to lead.  This may sound simplistic, but the alternative is to have everyone running around doing their own thing.  Leaders set the example from the front.  Men like General Colin Powell who are not afraid to make the hard, right choice instead of the easy wrong choice are the reason our country has excelled and is the model that others strive for.  Leaders must not be afraid to make difficult decisions.   

1200

/in /by

 

Assessment

Assignment: Historically, juvenile crime has peaked in the hours after school is dismissed but crime in schools has also become a major problem. Delinquency prevention and intervention programs have focused significant attention and funding on research and programs related to school violence.  

1) Use one (1) reputable set of data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics 2014 Indicators of School Crime and Safety Report http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/iscs14.pdf AND at least three (3) peer-reviewed journal articles to:

            a) identify and thoroughly explain a statistically documented school-related juvenile crime problem that occurred over a period of at least 5 years, 

            b) discuss the research you found and how it can help address that specific juvenile crime problem, and

            c) specifically explain in one paragraph how our university’s core value of RESPECT applies to specific contents of the textbook readings for this module and include a citation and page number.

 

2) In addition to the written assignment, submit a minimum 4 page PowerPoint presentation explaining the data used in the paper. You must present the data AND your analysis.

 

Your response should go beyond the obvious and be written at a graduate level. Your answer must be no less than 1200 words and you must use at least three authoritative sources to support your position. All sources must be properly cited using the APA style.

 

Assess Outcomes:        

Learning Outcome #4:  The assignment will demonstrate proficient skills in researching authoritative sources to identify the components of successful delinquency prevention and intervention programs used in law enforcement, corrections and communities and that assist in increasing public safety.

help

/in /by

Summary and Brief These Cases;

1- Renton v. playtime theatres (1986).

2- Virginia state board of pharmacy v. Virginia citizen’s consumer council (1976).                                                                                                                                               3- Ohralik v Ohio state bar association (1978)

 

The requirements that my professor expect from me as what is: –

The first paragraph is your introductory paragraph.  Tell me why you are writing to me and a brief synopsis of what will follow: the cases you briefed. Then, spend a paragraph discussing substantively that participation. For example, discuss some points about the topic. Etc. So, explain the materials carefully (I will use these paragraphs to assist in my doing a qualitative measure of your participation). If a case, tell me about the case itself AND about the contribution you made in class. Remember, this is a thoughtful documentation, reflection and representation of your oral contribution and explanation of the substance of the materials.

–       Explain whether you personally agree or disagree with those cases and whys. 

–       How you correlate with your classmates.

–       Free plagiarism. 

–       Use your own words.

 

Form requirements:

–       3 full pages, single space, but double space between paragraphs. Add some participate that I have agree with someone with my classmate.

–       Do not indent paragraphs.

–       italicize or underline the names of cases.

–       1 inch margins on all sides and typed in 12 point Times Roman font. 

–       I have attached my note for these Cases and will helps you A lot.

 

summary the cases and evaluate it

/in /by

 

summary this case and evaluate about 150 words.

Brits Rescued by Promissory Estoppel

FACTS: Portman Lamborghini, Ltd. (Portman), was owned by Chaplake Holdings, Ltd., a United Kingdom company, which was owned by David Jolliffe and David Lakeman as equal shareholders. Between 1984 and 1987, Portman sold approximately 30 new Lamborghinis each year through its exclusive concession contract with the car maker. It was then the largest Lamborghini dealer in the world since Lamborghini’s production was just 250 cars per

year. These cars sold at a retail price between $200,000 and $300,000. In 1987, Chrysler Corporation bought Lamborghini, and its chairman, Lee Iacocca, presented a plan to escalate production to 5,000 units within five years. The plan included the introduction of a new model, the P140, with a retail price of $70,000. Between 1987 and 1991, all of the Chrysler/ Lamborghini top executives with whom Jolliffe and Lakeman and their top advisors came in contact provided the same message to them: Chrysler was committed to the Expansion Plan, and in order for Portman to retain its exclusive U.K. market, it must expand its operational capacity from 35 cars in 1987 to 400 cars by 1992. Accordingly, Portman acquired additional financing, staff, and facilities and built a new distribution center. An economic downturn in the United States and major development and production problems at Lamborghini led Chrysler to reduce its expansion investment by two-thirds. Factory production delays eroded Portman’s profitability and success, and it entered into receivership in April 1992. Suit was brought on behalf of the Portman and Chaplake entities on a promissory estoppel theory against Chrysler, a Delaware corporation.

DECISION: Judgment for Portman and Chaplake on the promissory estoppel theory. (1) A promise was made by Chrysler that the Lamborghini line would expand tenfold and that Portman would retain its exclusivity deal only if it expanded its operational capacity. (2) The promisor, Chrysler, should have reasonably expected that Portman would rely on this promise. (3) Lakeman and Jolliffe were given the same message and promise by all of the top executives involved, and it was therefore not unreasonable for them to rely upon the promises made by these executives and to undertake the detriment of major expansion activity that would have been unnecessary but for the Expansion Plan and the role they were promised. (4) The prevention of injustice is the “fundamental idea” underlying the doctrine of promissory estoppel, and injustice can be avoided in this case only by the enforcement of Chrysler’s promise. Portman is entitled to £ 569,321 for its costs to implement its Expansion Plan, and Chaplake is entitled to £ 462,686 for its investment in Portman’s expansion. [Chrysler Corp. v Chaplake Holdings, Ltd. 822 A2d 1024 (Del 2003)] 

Crime Victim Processing

/in /by

IP – This assignment will be a bit different than you usually have to prepare. In this assignment you will make an intake form.

There are three parts-submit all documents as ONE file ( use a zip file) or include all content in ONE word document.

Part I

The first part of your presentation-2-3 pages will be an actual essay.
This essay will discuss the importance of recognizing the signs of stalking, the criminal definition of stalking, 
and key facts that we should know about stalking.
Use APA format-include title page, abstract and reference page.

Part 2

Create an intake form that can be used to get information from alleged victims of stalking

Basic example of an intake form can be found: https://cliniclegal.org/sites/default/files/Sample%20Client%20Intake_0.pdf

http://storage.cloversites.com/lonestarcowboychurch/documents/Intake%20Form%20Sexual%20Abuse.pdf

You will need to transition this intake form to make sense for victims of stalking. Essentially, you are creating your own intake form. You will provide information about the suspect’s information , and information about the incident . It does not have to look exactly like any of the forms that you find online. Just make sure that the form is comprehensive and looks like a complete intake form. There is no one set example for an intake form.

You need to fill in these forms with hypothetical information so they can be tied together. Do not submit blank forms.

Part 3

The second part of the assignment said to create an risk assessment/evaluation and assessment form that will be based on the intake form you just made.

Make sure that you provide the general information such as name, date etc for the victim as you would on any other assessment form.

You need to fill in these forms with hypothetical information from the intake form so they can be tied together. Do not submit blank forms.

In this assessment form you will present questions about:

The relationship with the victim and the suspect. Include about five or so questions related to this topic.
example question-Do you know who the suspect is? Yes or no

Information about the stalking incident and frequency: Include five or so questions here.
Example question-does a suspect contact you by electronic devices? Yes/ No

Another section might be-Specific threats made by the suspect: Include five or so questions related to this topic.
Example question: Has the suspect made threatening or intimidating calls to communicate with you? Yes/No

Another section might be-Have you taken any actions to stop the suspect behavior-include five or so questions related to this topic
Example question. Have you moved to a new location? yes/no

When you have an evaluation, you should have some type of scale, such as 1-10, or Low ,medium, high etc at the end of the form-this would essentially be the “risk assessment”.

In the risk assessment section, you would sort of explain: Example-if the victim responded yes/no to the specific questions above, this would indicate a “low-level” of stalking risk.

or

If the victim responded Yes/no to questions 1-5, this presents a medium risk to the victim.

if the victim responded yes to questions 15- 20 this would present a high risk.

However you want to frame this assessment is fine. Just think about your approach here.

Continue to look at evaluation and assessment forms online to get a little bit more clarity about this.

Assistance

/in /by

Sammury These Cases;

1- Cohen V. California (1971).

2- New Yourk v. Ferber(1982) .

3- US v. o’brien (1968). 

4- Texas v. Johnson (1989).

 

The reqiermts that my instoctuer excpect from me as what is :-

The first paragraph is your introductory paragraph.  Tell me why you are writing to me and a brief synopsis of what will follow: the cases you briefed, etc.,.

Then, for each major form of participation, spend a paragraph discussingsubstantively that participation. For example, discuss some points about the topic. Etc. So, explain the materials carefully (I will use these paragraphs to assist in my doing a qualitative measure of your participation). If a case, tell me about the case itself AND about the contribution you made in class. Remember, This is a thoughtful documentation, reflection and representation of your oral contribution and explanation of the substance of the materials.

– Agree or Dissagree with other classmate topic that they have talked about in the classroom. 

– How you correlate with yourclassmates.

– Free plaigrisme. 

– Use your own words.

 

Form requirements:

– 4 full pages, single space, but double space between paragraphs. Add some participate that I have agree with someone with my classmate.

– Do not indent paragraphs.

– italicize or underline the names of cases.

 – 1 inch margins on all sides and typed in 12 point Times Roman font. 

– I have attached my note for these Cases and wil helps you A lot.

 

Please make sure follow these steps as what it is.

Three-page essay

/in /by

 

Presidential Authority in a Murder Case

 

Assume you are a Criminal Justice student working on a research project. You are assigned to research the arrest and conviction of a suspect charged with a murder that took place in a federal building. Click here to read the scenario.

—————————————————————————————————————–

 

 

Assessment Scenario:

 

Tim began working at the Rosa Parks Federal Building in Detroit, Michigan, as a security guard immediately upon graduating high school. In 1975, a female clerk working in the building was found murdered in an isolated stock room in the basement of the building. During the investigation, an employee indicated to police that she saw Tim leaving that area earlier in the day and that she recalled a conversation between Tim and the victim months earlier. She told police she overheard them arguing over a vending machine cupcake that the victim had eaten after Tim had left it in the employee lounge for later in his shift. Based on this testimony and records that showed Tim regularly entered the stock room while making his rounds, Tim was arrested, charged, and convicted of murder under Michigan law. Tim’s attorneys argued unsuccessfully that he should have been tried under federal law because the crime occurred in a federal building.

Tim has always maintained his innocence and immediately appealed his conviction. Seven years into his sentence, Tim learned that a detective involved in the investigation of his case was fired for sloppy police work and aggressive witness interviewing in unrelated cases. The victim’s family has participated in each parole hearing for the defendant and has testified at these hearings arguing that Tim should not be released from prison. After 21 years of incarceration, Tim has exhausted his options on appeal, as the United States Supreme Court has declined to accept his case for review.

 

———————————————————————————————————————-

 

 

 

 

Using your understanding of the relevant constitutional issues, write a three-page essay describing how you think the president should decide if the defendant were ever to request a presidential pardon. Your essay should include the following:

 

•A short description of the facts of the case

 

•Your understanding of the president’s authority to help the defendant under the Constitution

 

•A discussion of the difference between a pardon, a reprieve, a commutation of sentence, and amnesty

 

•Identification of all possible constitutional issues in the case, including a comparison of the use of state versus federal law

 

•Your opinion, after applying the facts of the case to the Constitution and considering the ethical issues involved, regarding whether or not the president should exercise his pardon authority

 

written assignment

/in /by

 

Assignment:

 

Using the Doc Sharing articles as a starting point:

 

1) how are law enforcement officers trained about youth gangs? Present a detailed overview of currently available training designed to teach law enforcement officers about youth gangs (NOTE: G.R.E.A.T. is NOT gang officer training and should NOT be referred to), and

 

2) using theories and concepts examined in this module and your own research propose at least two (2) specific improvements to youth gang training for officers (not just more training),

 

3) explain how and why the specific improvements you proposed in 2) above can help law enforcement officers work more safely and effectively with youth drawn to or in gangs, and

 

4) specifically explain in one paragraph how our university’s core value of RESPECT applies to specific contents of the textbook readings for this module and include a citation and page number.

 

 

 

Your response should go beyond the obvious and be written at a graduate level. Your answer must be no less than 1200 words and you must use at least three authoritative sources beyond those provided to support your position. All sources must be properly cited using the APA style.

 

 

 

Assess Outcomes:       

 

Learning Outcome #5: The assignment will demonstrate a thorough understanding of how policies and practices of law enforcement, the court system, and corrections can positively and negatively impact juvenile delinquency and future criminality.

 

Chan v. Wodnicki, 123 F. 3d 1005 (7th Cir. 1998)

/in /by

 

 

 

Case Brief Example

 

 
This is an example of a well-written case brief. Note the compliance with the required format and how the student gets right to the important points in plain language. If legal terms are encounter which are not understood, chances are that other students will not understand them, so it is best not to use them unless defined within the brief. 
 
Assignment sub-heading: Sixth Amendment Right to Counsel



TITLE AND CITATION: Nix v. Williams, 467 U.S. 431, 104 S.Ct. 2501 (1984)



TYPE OF ACTION: Review by the U.S. Supreme Court of a lower court ruling that evidence should be suppressed as a result of a violation of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. The state (Nix) sought to overturn the motion to suppress that was upheld by the U.S. District Court of Appeals.



FACTS OF THE CASE: 
On December 24, 1968, ten year old Pamela Powers was kidnapped from an Iowa YMCA and her body was later found in a ditch, which was within an extensive area that was being searched by volunteers and law enforcement. The defendant was observed “carrying a large bundle wrapped in a blanket…two legs in it and they were skinny and white.” Williams’ car, which contained clothing items belonging to the victim, was found the next day approximately 160 miles from the incident. Based on this information, an extensive search was started that extended from Des Moines to Davenport, Iowa. 



Law enforcement obtained a warrant for Williams’ arrest, and he subsequently turned himself into the authorities in Davenport. Williams was arraigned and had obtained and spoken with an attorney. Des Moines police detectives agreed to transport Williams and not interview him during the drive between Davenport and Des Moines. During the drive, one of the detectives on the case began to speak to Williams regarding the need to find the child’s body before it snowed so that her parents could give her a proper, “Christian” burial. The detective did not ask Williams any specific questions during this conversation. At that point, Williams provided statements to the detectives that led them to the child’s body. 



Williams was then tried in state court and was found guilty of first degree murder. Williams filed a motion to suppress the evidence of the body and all related evidence concerning the body’s location based on illegally obtained testimony. When the conviction was affirmed by the Iowa state Supreme Court, Williams sought relief in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa. The U.S. District Court, U.S. Court of Appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court agreed with Williams and determined that he was denied the right to counsel and his statements, which led to the child’s body, could not be introduced into evidence. 

 

Williams was tried in state court a second time, without the use by the prosecution of the statements he had given to detectives. Prosecutors introduced evidence of the child’s body under the premise of “inevitable discovery”, as the child’s body was in an area that was within the designated search area. Williams was convicted a second time and the conviction was upheld by the Iowa Supreme Court again. Appeals by the parties brought the case back to the U.S. Supreme Court a second time. 



CONTENTIONS OF THE PARTIES:

Nix: The state (Nix) contends that the evidence of the child’s body and all related evidence concerning the body as to its location should be admissible in spite of the denial of right to counsel because the body would have been discovered in any event due to the wide-ranging search in the area which was not the result of anything that Williams said to the detectives. In the second trial, the defendant’s statements were not introduced, but the body evidence should still be admissible because it would have been discovered and in the same condition anyway even if there was no violation of the Sixth Amendment. The child’s body was found well within the extensive search area and would have been located by one or more of the over two hundred searchers nearly the same time that the defendant took the detectives to the child’s body. This argument is called the “inevitable discovery rule.”



Williams: Williams contends that were it not for the illegally obtained statements from Williams by law enforcement, the evidence would not have been discovered or used against the defendant. The evidence obtained is considered the “fruit of the poisonous tree,” and therefore should not be admitted at trial. 



ISSUE: Once a violation of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel has occurred, can evidence obtained from the illegally-obtained statements be admitted at trial based on the fact that the evidence would have been discovered anyway?



DECISION: Yes, because the prosecution was able to prove that the same physical evidence would have been discovered even if the constitutional rights violation did not occur.

 

REASONING: The court applied the reasoning of the independent source doctrine to that of inevitable discovery. “The independent source doctrine teaches us that the interest of society in deterring unlawful police conduct and the public interest in having juries receive all probative evidence of a crime are properly balanced by putting the police in the same, not a worse, position that they would have been in if no police error or misconduct had occurred” (quoting from Nix v. Williams, 104 S.Ct. 2501, 2509 (1984)).



RULE OF LAW: Evidence that may have been obtained in violation of a constitutional protection may still be admissible if it can be proven by a preponderance of the evidence that it was inevitable that the evidence would have been discovered even if the violation had not occurred. This is known as the “inevitable discovery” rule.