CJ1000 – The Police: Role and Function (Comprehensive Study Notes)

Learning Objectives

1. Define the three major roles of police.
2. Explain the necessity and dynamics of discretion in policing.
3. Describe the police subculture and its effects on behavior.

The Tripartite Functions of Policing

1. Law Enforcement / Crime-Fighting

• Core mandate: identify law violators, collect evidence, and facilitate arrest/prosecution.
• Empirical reality: only about $10\%$–$20\%$ of calls for service truly demand an enforcement response; the remaining time is spent on routine patrol, traffic duties, paperwork, and community interaction.
• Key tasks
  • Detection – mainly via random or directed patrol to observe offenses.
  • Apprehension – rapid response to calls and on-view arrests.
  • Investigation – follow-up case building by detectives or specialized units.

Historical Evolution of Enforcement Tactics

Political Era

• Officers hired/retained by local politicians → high corruption (e.g., selling jobs, selective enforcement).
• Police provided broad social services—fire watch, soup for the poor, escorting the drunk.

Reform (Professional) Era

• Reformers (e.g., August Vollmer, O. W. Wilson) sought scientific, apolitical policing.
• Hallmarks: patrol cars, two-way radios, centralized dispatch, civil service exams.
• Tactical triad: random patrol, rapid response, criminal investigation.

Community Era

• Triggered by 1960s civil unrest, rising crime, and legitimacy crises.
• Focus: partnerships, problem-oriented policing (POP), SARA model (Scanning, Analysis, Response, Assessment), CAPS, etc.

2. Order Maintenance / Peacekeeping

• Objective: restore order in situations where no clear crime is evident but community well-being is threatened (e.g., loud disputes, public intoxication, neighborhood decay).
• Often tied to “quality-of-life” or “broken windows” policing—address minor disorders (graffiti, loitering) to prevent serious crime.

3. Service

• Police are a default emergency resource—accessed via $911$.
• Calls include lost pets, mental-health crises, traffic hazards (downed trees, dead deer), welfare checks.
• Police triage: call-takers prioritize, then dispatch patrol, specialized units, or refer to other agencies.
• Modern embodiment: Community Policing—recognizes policing cannot succeed without citizens, non-profits, schools, code enforcement, etc.

Key Professional-Era Strategies and the Research Evidence

Random Patrol

• Premise: omnipresent police will deter offenders and reassure citizens.
• Kansas City Preventive Patrol Experiment (1971-1973)
  • Method: divided beats into “reactive” (no routine patrol), “control,” and “saturation” (2–3× patrol).
  • Finding: changing patrol dosage had no significant impact on crime, citizen fear, or satisfaction.
  • Implication: visible patrol alone is an inefficient deterrent.

Rapid Response

• Rationale: the faster officers arrive, the higher the arrest probability and the greater the public confidence.
• Four temporal components
  1. Discovery time – offense occurs → victim/witness becomes aware.
  2. Reporting time – awareness → call placed.
  3. Dispatch time – call received → unit assigned.
  4. Travel time – unit assigned → arrival on scene.
• Studies (late $1970$s–early $1980$s):
  • $75\%$ of crimes are discovery crimes (no offender on scene).
  • Avg. reporting delay: $10$–$10.5$ minutes for discovery crimes; $4$–$5.5$ for involvement crimes.
  • Arrest probability ≈ $35\%$ if crime reported during commission; additional $28\%$ within first $5$ minutes.
• Ineffectiveness stems largely from civilian delays (steps 1–2), not police lag ⇒ mere speed cannot overcome late discovery.

Criminal Investigation

• 2017 clearance rates: $45.6\%$ for violent crimes, $17.6\%$ for property crimes.
• Research since $1970$s indicates:
  • $\approx30\%$ of clearances result from patrol officers arresting offenders at/near scene.
  • $\approx50\%$ are solved because suspect identity is known when report is taken.
  • Thus, only $\le20\%$ of clearances stem from detective work.
• Investigations are labor-intensive → cost-effective crime reduction likely lies in preventive and problem-oriented methods rather than case-by-case follow-up.

Discretion in Policing

Definition

Official action or inaction by a CJS professional based on personal judgment about the appropriate course.

Why Discretion Is Inevitable

1. Legal ambiguities – statutes are broad, situations unique.
2. Resource limits – impossible to enforce every violation.
3. Humane considerations – strict enforcement may be unjust or counterproductive in some contexts (e.g., mental illness, juveniles).

Determinants of Discretion

1. Legal factors
   • Statutory law, seriousness, evidentiary strength, departmental policy.
2. Extralegal factors
   • Race, ethnicity, gender, neighborhood characteristics, victim preference, suspect demeanor, officer-citizen relationship.
3. Organizational rules / Supervisory expectations.
4. Police subculture – informal norms guiding “real” decisions.

Police Subculture

Culture vs. Subculture

• Culture – shared values, beliefs, and practices of a society ("Western culture").
• Subculture – a subgroup’s distinctive patterns within the larger culture (e.g., skateboarders, surgeons, police).

Occupational Environment

• Work primarily on the street, often alone → heightened risk & uncertainty.
• Authority to use legitimate coercive force → need for trust and backup.
• Perceived isolation: officers = “in-group,” public = “out-group.”

Core Values (often summarized as the “Blue Curtain”)

1. Solidarity – “got your back” mindset.
2. Us vs. Them – civilians seen as potential threats or unpredictable variables.
3. Crime fighter orientation – valorizing proactive, aggressive action.
4. Cynicism – expectation that most people lie or manipulate.
5. Code of Silence – non-snitching norm.

Empirical Insights

• National Institute of Ethics (early $2000$s):
  • $79\%$ of recruits recognized the Code of Silence.
  • $52\%$ were unbothered by its presence.
• Consequences
  • Officers who “rat” risk ostracism, lack of backup, or career stagnation.

Pros & Cons

• Cons
  • Resistance to transparency & community engagement.
  • Persistence of questionable tactics, faster resort to force.
  • Maintenance of insular identity can foster bias or us-vs-them hostility.
• Pros
  • Self-protection – mutual aid in dangerous scenarios.
  • Teamwork & loyalty – critical in high-risk operations.

Service Orientation & Community Policing

• Policing increasingly framed as public service rather than mere crime control.
• Community policing emphasizes shared responsibility; police act as facilitators and problem-solvers.
• Tools: neighborhood meetings, citizen advisory boards, school resource officers, social media engagement.
• The approach assumes collective efficacy—communities that trust police are more willing to report crimes, testify, and co-produce safety.

Ethical, Philosophical, and Practical Implications

1. Legitimacy – discretion and subculture directly affect how just and unbiased citizens perceive the police to be.
2. Accountability vs. Autonomy – balancing necessary judgment with oversight (body-worn cameras, early-warning systems, civilian review boards).
3. Efficiency vs. Equity – empirical evidence questions traditional tactics; data-driven or problem-oriented alternatives may better align resources with outcomes.
4. Human Rights – misuse of discretion (e.g., racial profiling, excessive force) undermines civil liberties.

Comprehensive Takeaways

• Police fulfill three overlapping roles: crime control, order maintenance, and service.
• The professional era’s “standard model” (random patrol, rapid response, investigations) has limited impact per four decades of research.
• Discretion is an inescapable, powerful element of street-level policing, molded by law, policy, personal judgment, and the police subculture.
• The subculture offers protective solidarity but can inhibit reform and transparency through mechanisms like the Code of Silence.
• Modern trends—community policing, problem-oriented strategies, and evidence-based approaches—seek to align police work with empirical effectiveness and public legitimacy.