[Solution]Critical Analysis of Criminal Justice Public Policy

Final Project During Unit VII, you will submit the Final Project. The Final Project will consist of the following components: (1) Overview section submitted during…

Final Project
During Unit VII, you will submit the Final Project. The Final Project will consist of the following components: (1) Overview section submitted during Unit III; (2) Criminal Justice Reform History section submitted during Unit V; and (3) Evaluation of the role public opinion and public policy played in the evolution of the selected criminal justice reform. Information presented in each section should be supported with scholarly resources.
MCJ 6530, Critical Analysis of Criminal Justice Public Policy 4
Sections of the Final Project that were previously submitted in Units III and V must include any updates that were recommended by the course instructor as part of feedback given during previous reviews of these sections. The final section of the paper, Section 3 – Evaluation, will be created and submitted with the Final Project.
While the level of detail in each section of the Final Project will vary, it is anticipated that Section 3 will be approximately 3–5 pages in length. This should result in a Final Project (Parts 1, 2, and 3) that is 10–14 pages in length, not counting the cover and reference pages. Please review the general guidelines for papers to obtain a description of other formatting requirements.
Information about accessing the Blackboard Grading Rubric for this assignment is provided below.
APA Guidelines
The application of the APA writing style shall be practical, functional, and appropriate to each academic level, with the primary purpose being the documentation (citation) of sources. CSU requires that students use APA style for certain papers and projects. Students should always carefully read and follow assignment directions and review the associated grading rubric when available. Students can find CSU’s Citation Guide by clicking here. This document includes examples and sample papers and provides information on how to contact the CSU Success Center.
This is a SAMPLE BELOW of what the final paper should look like. Please follow the instructions.*
LAW ENFORCEMENT TECHNOLOGICAL FUTURE 1
Emerging Law Enforcement Technological Future: Using Technology to Protect and Serve
Dr. Charles T. Kelly, Jr.
University of Maryland

LAW ENFORCEMENT TECHNOLOGICAL FUTURE 2
Abstract
In the United States, law enforcement resides within the executive branch of government at the local, state, tribal, and federal levels. Their power, authority, and jurisdiction is derived through the legislative branch at each of those levels, and the judicial branch is responsible for ensuring that law enforcement’s policies, procedures, and use of force are in compliance with the 50 individual state’s Constitution, and the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights. Specifically, law enforcement is guided by the fourth, fifth, sixth, eight, tenth, and fourteenth amendments.
In order to perform their duties, law enforcement officers and managers use certain systems that over time have been technologically improved. Technology is defined as “the application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes” (Soanes, Stevenson, Eds., 2006, p. 1476). This paper will introduce the reader to a number of technologies that are relatively new and one that has been tested over the last four years, and is not in use in over 50 law enforcement agencies around the United States (Star Chase Pursuit Management System). This system was designed with the intent of reducing the risk of death, injury, and destruction of property which often results from high-speed police pursuits.
LAW ENFORCEMENT TECHNOLOGICAL FUTURE 3
Contents
Abstract ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …………………………. 2
CSEC 670 IA Emerging Law Enforcement Technological Future: Using Technology to Protect and Serve ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………. 5
INTRODUCTION ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………….. 5
Overview of technological advancement in law enforcement ………………………….. …….. 5
Communications and Investigative Technologies ………………………….. ……………………… 6
1800s ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………………… 6
1900s ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………………… 6
Geographic Information Systems ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………. 7
Police pursuits and the inherent liability ………………………….. ………………………….. ……… 8
StarChase Pursuit Management System ………………………….. ………………………….. ……. 10
Technical aspects of the StarChase Pursuit Management System ………………………….. 10
StarChase Pursuit Management System Test Phase ………………………….. ………………… 12
Protecting StarChase Pursuit Management System from intrusion ………………………… 14
Fourth Amendment Search and Seizure Issue ………………………….. ………………………… 15
Secure Law Enforcement Network (FirstNet) ………………………….. ………………………… 15
Conclusion ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …………………… 18
Improving cyber security ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………… 18
Real-world examples of this technology………………………….. ………………………….. ……. 18
LAW ENFORCEMENT TECHNOLOGICAL FUTURE 4
Federal Government Support of StarChase Pursuit Management System ………………. 19
References ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………………. 21
Table of Cases ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………. 24
Addendum 1 ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …………………. 25
Addendum 2 ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …………………. 26
Addendum 3 ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …………………. 27
Addendum 4 ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …………………. 28
Addendum 5 ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …………………. 29
LAW ENFORCEMENT TECHNOLOGICAL FUTURE 5
Emerging Law Enforcement Technological Future: Using Technology to Protect and Serve
INTRODUCTION
Overview of technological advancement in law enforcement
American policing was born in Boston, Massachusetts in 1635, over 300 years ago. In 1829 in London, England, Sir Robert Peel created the new Metropolitan Police. The Peelian Principles of Reform, as they are known in law enforcement and academic circles, are the fundamental principles American policing are rooted in; additionally, the military model of organization has been adopted by most American police agencies. In the early times of policing, the tools used were simple and in some ways primitive compared with the more advanced tools of policing in the 21st century. Some of those tools include:
• Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System (IAFIS)
• Next Generation Identification (NGI)
• National Crime Information Center (NCIC)
• The Law Enforcement National Data Exchange (N-DEx)
• National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS)
• Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program: Summary Reporting System
• National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS).
Over the last three years a new technology has been tested that is intended to reduce injury, death, and property damage; that new system is called the StarChase Pursuit Management System (SCPMS). The National Institute of Justice has funded this research and by all accounts the system is meeting the challenges associated with novel technology.
LAW ENFORCEMENT TECHNOLOGICAL FUTURE 6
Most police officers walked their beats, and some rode on horseback, until bicycles became popular. History tells us that the first police car happened to be a wagon that was powered by electricity in Akron, Ohio in 1899. In the 1920s, the New York City Police Department began using police cars that had radio communication. Since that time, police cars are now specially designed with high performance engines, transmissions, and suspension systems, and they have a number of technologies that have recently been adopted (Spillman Technologies, Inc., n.d.).
Communications and Investigative Technologies
1800s
Communications technologies began being used in law enforcement in the early 1850s when district states or precincts used the telegraph and telegraph lines to communicate with headquarters. This technology enabled law enforcement officers and supervisors to communicate with the central command of the organization. In the late 1800s, call boxes were positioned on street corners. This technology enabled the officers walking their beat to communicate and check in with the desk sergeant. The use of call boxes was viewed as having a great impact on officer safety and enabled them to get medical attention and backup assistance in emergency situations (PoliceOne Staff, n.d.).
1900s
In the early 1900s, radios were placed in police vehicles. This technology provided officers a way to respond much more quickly to calls for assistance. In 1907 the Berkley Police Department was the nation’s first police department to use blood, fiber, and soil analysis in their investigation of crimes. In 1921 the lie detector was introduced to the world of law enforcement. Fingerprint classification was introduced in 1924 and has experienced exponential technological
LAW ENFORCEMENT TECHNOLOGICAL FUTURE 7
growth. Later in 1928 radio equipped squad cars were becoming increasingly popular (PoliceOne Staff, n.d.).
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) inaugurated the concept of the forensic laboratory (advanced technology) to law enforcement in 1932. Later, as the use of automobiles became increasingly popular, so did the problems associated with a motorized vehicle (speeding, accidents, etc.). Thus, in the late 1940s the radar was introduced to law enforcement in order to assist with traffic control and speeding. As calls for service and crimes increased dramatically, the need for advanced communications was recognized as a priority and the 911 Call System was introduced and police operators were inundated with calls. Now, in the 21st century, law enforcement uses the CAD (Computer Assisted Dispatch) System. This is a highly sophisticated and complex system that utilizes communications technology, advanced recording technology, and the ability to ping cell phone towers to pinpoint the location of a person’s cell phone; of course this is used in emergency situations only, and with strict guidelines and approval from cooperating cell phone providers (PoliceOne Staff, n.d.).
The aforementioned communications and investigative technologies provide some historical basis and history for the overall theme of this treatise. What follows is an examination of some of the newer technologies that are currently being researched and tested, as well as at least two that have come online. The essential elements of the SCPMS are Geographic Information Systems (GIS), and Global Positioning Systems (GPS).
Geographic Information Systems
In the early 1960s, geographic information systems (GIS) materialized and developed into its own discipline. GIS was used in Canada in association with land use applications. Since that time, GIS has evolved into “an all-pervasive technology used today in applications as
LAW ENFORCEMENT TECHNOLOGICAL FUTURE 8
diverse as in-car navigation, retail store site location, customer targeting, risk management, construction, weather forecasting, utilities management and military planning, GIS has become ubiquitous in modern life” (Chainey and Ratcliffe, 2005, p.3); it is also used in the SCPMS, along with GPS.
In the 1980s, computer technology became a bit less expensive than in previous years, and the reduction in costs led to the development of the GIS software enterprise, and in turn prompted the growth in “cost-effective GIS applications” (Chainey and Ratcliffe, 2005, p.2). As relates to law enforcement and public safety, the aforementioned developments and growth of computers and software ultimately led to Crime Mapping. In New York City in 1993, Commissioner William Bratton brought together three technologies, Computers, GIS, and GPS, to create Compstat. “Today Compstat is a part of the institutional DNA of policing” (PERF, 2013, p. vii). The overall idea of this paper is public safety, reduction in the loss of life, serious injury, and property damage. At the same time, in order to keep pace with all of the technological advancements in the world, cyber-security is vital in protecting the information produced from the tools, devices, and programs that law enforcement uses. This brings us to the StarChase Pursuit Management System.
Police Pursuits and the Inherent Liability
In the early 1960s, significant research and debate began regarding police pursuits and the inherent liability that can result when things go wrong. There are two juxtaposing arguments that law enforcement executives and policy makers are faced with:
? The first position is that in some instances police pursuits are necessary in order to enforce the law and apprehend the violators.
LAW ENFORCEMENT TECHNOLOGICAL FUTURE 9
? The second and most important position is that police pursuits should be limited and called off when certain speeds are reached or the fleeing offender begins to put the lives of passengers or bystanders in jeopardy—the risk to public safety.
Alpert and Fridell (1992) suggest several factors that a pursuing officer and his or her supervisor must analyze:
? What was the original violation?
? What type area is the pursuit taking place in?
? What are the traffic conditions?
? What are the weather conditions?
When an officer is operating a motor vehicle (police unit) during normal conditions, they are not immune nor do they enjoy or are protected by any special consideration or privilege. There is a second set of conditions, and that is driving in an emergency situation. Police agencies have established policies and procedures based upon the reasonableness standard. Police officers driving under emergency conditions are protected in a narrow way by being given limited statutory immunity for violation or non-compliance with state and municipal traffic laws.
There are certain principles of negligence related to police pursuits. These principles include the duty of care, breaches of reasonableness, and judicial constructions of causation; this means there are proximate cause issues. Proximate cause “in the litigation of third-party police pursuit cases:
? Proximate cause as a doctrinal barrier to findings of police liability,
? Proximate cause as a function of police conduct in a particular situation,
? Foreseeability analysis” (Kappeler, 2006, p. 152).
LAW ENFORCEMENT TECHNOLOGICAL FUTURE 10
There have been more than 55,000 police pursuit related injuries. The National Highway Transportation and Safety Administration relates that there are more than 360 officer and civilian fatalities per year, and a review of case summaries from 1988-2007 revealed more than $1.3 billion dollars was awarded by juries; this does not include out-of-court settlements that usually have a condition of confidentiality attached to them in order to avoid statements of liability (Fischbach, Hadsdy, McCall, 2013, p. 3). The question is this: How can law enforcement enforce the law, protect civil liberties, reduce death and injuries, and reduce civil litigation through the use of the StarChase Pursuit Management System? This question will now be examined.
StarChase Pursuit Management System
SCPMS is a technological development that gives law enforcement officers another tool in their arsenal to fight crime, reduce death, injury, and destruction of property. SCPMS uses several technologies that in the end enable law enforcement to tag and track a fleeing subject and his or her vehicle through the use of a fall back strategy. This system enables the officer to “deploy a GPS tag onto a fleeing vehicle, thus enabling the officer to fall back and reduce the psychological stress on the fleeing driver. By falling back, the fleeing driver will reduce his or her speed and possibly their reckless driving in order to reduce the likelihood that the driver of the fleeing vehicle will crash, harming him or herself, and potentially reducing the risk of other drivers and pedestrians in their path, while at the same time allowing the officer and other responding officers to track the vehicle through a sophisticated GPS mapping system.
Technical aspects of the StarChase Pursuit Management System
The SCPMS “uses laser targeting and a compressed air apparatus to fire a miniature GPS system, complete with batter, at a car” (NIJ, n.d., p.2). The system also uses a specially produced
LAW ENFORCEMENT TECHNOLOGICAL FUTURE 11
adhesive compound to ensure the projectile containing the GPS tracker remains on the intended vehicle. The GPS sends a signal to the officer’s vehicle every few seconds, pinpointing the target or fleeing vehicle. The StarChase components are:
? A compressed air launcher that is affixed to the police unit’s grille;
? Laser target technology;
? GPS Tracking Tag that is attached to the fleeing vehicle
? An Intuitive Driver Control System. This means that the GPS tag is deployed from an in-car console or through the use of something similar to a key fob;
? The fleeing vehicle is tracked through the use of a Secure Map Portal that enables the dispatcher to track and locate the fleeing vehicle in real time (StarChase Brochure, p. 3).
The SCPMS uses encryption technology to ensure that unauthorized users are prevented from accessing the system. This means that there is a secure cellular backbone that is password protected and uses a secure Web portal. There is also “a communication protocol designed with stringent levels of built-in security” (StarChase FAQ, n.d., p. 1).
Additional technological aspects to the SCPMS include the use of GPS (AGPS), a Secure Socket Layer (SSL), a secure browser, and a very high-speed Internet connection. The system is also connected to the agency’s Computer-Aided Dispatch System (CAD). “The secure Web portal provides dispatchers with the ability to control vehicle location functions such as setting geo-fence alerts, scheduling status updates, initiating module health checks, or changing update rates to preserve battery life” (StarChase FAQ, n.d., p. 2).
LAW ENFORCEMENT TECHNOLOGICAL FUTURE 12
The following is a three-minute video on how the SCPMS actually works: https://www.policeone.com/police-products/Pursuit-Management-Technology/videos/5955963-StarChase-Pursuit-Management-System-How-It-Works/
StarChase Pursuit Management System Test Phase
In Fiscal Year 2011, StarChase, LLC. was awarded a grant by the National Institute of Justice to begin working on the StarChase Pursuit Management System. Immediately upon receiving the grant, StarChase began a series of meetings with the Pennsylvania State Center of Excellence Associate Director and the SCPMS Technical Working Group. At that meeting, Fischbach advised those attending the meeting that “much of the generation II (SC Gen II) technology development was nearly complete” (Fischbach, Hadsdy, McCall, 2015, p. 5). At that point the group began discussing next steps in the evolutionary process of SCPMS. At the conclusion of that meeting, the following goals were decided upon and promulgated to the entire SCPMS Team through a Statement of Work:
? Create four test beds or sites with each testing site consisting of 10 units. Each test bed was decided upon, taking into consideration several variables. The variables included geographic settings (urban/rural) in order to test system performance on long stretches of highway and in inner-city environments. Environmental conditions were another variable. The environmental conditions included temperature, rain, snow, extreme heat, and extreme cold.
? The next goal was designed with engineering improvements as a goal. This goal included testing for improvement related to the integration of an on-board compressor that would reduce the cost per unit, create a stable PSI for projectile deployment, and to increase reliability and efficiency.
LAW ENFORCEMENT TECHNOLOGICAL FUTURE 13
? The second objective within this goal was to experiment with various adhesive compound alternatives that would be efficient in a broader range of environmental conditions. The original adhesive compound was not effective when the temperature dropped below 32º F. Additionally, there were some problems associated with wet surfaces as a result of rain.
? The final objective under this goal was to examine “targeting and range finding capabilities” in order to improve distance to target accuracy and reliability (Fischbach, Hadsdy, McCall, 2015, p. 5).
Additionally, several technologies were used to measure distance to target. The technologies tested included optic (IR), laser reticle, sonic, and radar. As is always the case, there are some technologies that are cheaper than others; this, too, was the case here. IR optic and sonic were cheaper per unit; however, they failed the first testing protocols, the bench test. The radar option worked but was eliminated because of the very high cost that it would bring to the system. Finally, the solid state laser dynamic range detection system (SSL DRD) passed the bench test and was subsequently used on a test vehicle. This particular system provided the officer with an “audible tone” to alert the officer when he or she was in range of a target vehicle; it also prevented the officer from “deploying a tag when out-of-range” (p. 8). The following image illustrates the air-compressor and flow charge sequence:
LAW ENFORCEMENT TECHNOLOGICAL FUTURE 14
Protecting StarChase Pursuit Management System from intrusion
The SCPMS uses cellular technology equipped with encryption on the back end and portal. The system also uses SSL protection, and adheres to the standards for cellular communication. At the present time, there have been no intrusion attempts by hackers. The absence of any attempted intrusion is likely due to the fact that each projectile has a serial number coded into the system that is unique to each projectile. Additionally, when an officer deploys a GPS projectile, the timeframe is so short that it is virtually impossible for a hacker to have enough time to lock in on the system, even if they were able to penetrate the plethora of security layers that the SCPMS and mobile carriers use. Presently, deployment logs, itemized serial numbered GPS tags, and other important data are stored in company databases. In the near
LAW ENFORCEMENT TECHNOLOGICAL FUTURE 15
future, SCPMS will move toward use of the Microsoft Cloud Platform, as related by T. A. Fischbach, owner of SCPMS (personal communication, May 27, 2016). Additionally, the average time of a deployment to the time the vehicle is located is approximately 25 minutes in duration, making it nearly impossible for a hacker to gain entry into the system.
Fourth Amendment Search and Seizure Issue
In United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. (2012), the Supreme Court ruled that it is a violation of the Fourth Amendment (search) for law enforcement to track a criminal suspect’s vehicle for a long period of time (long-term tracking). However, the Court stated that SCPMS is not deemed long-term tracking and that under certain circumstance the use of SCPMS is not a violation of the Fourth Amendment because its use is short-term, and is only deployed in exigent circumstances. Therefore, the use of SCPMS remains constitutional.
Secure Law Enforcement Network (FirstNet)
Helping protect the protectors (law enforcement and other first responders) can sometimes be a very difficult process. As stated earlier in this treatise, law enforcement uses a plethora of highly technical and sophisticated tools to investigate crime, identify perpetrators and victims, and apprehend those who violate the laws at the local, state, tribal, and federal levels.
The use of systems such as SCPMS and,
• Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System (IAFIS)
• Next Generation Identification (NGI)
• National Crime Information Center (NCIC)
• The Law Enforcement National Data Exchange (N-DEx)
• National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS)
• Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program: Summary Reporting System
LAW ENFORCEMENT TECHNOLOGICAL FUTURE 16
• National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS)
clearly requires a highly sophisticated system of technologies to help protect the data and evidence that is identified, collected, tested, and preserved. Much of what law enforcement uses in this fight to protect its citizens and visitors is communicated through the Internet and via mobile technologies.
In February 2012, the President of the United States, Barak Obama, signed into law the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 (Public Law 112-96-Feb. 22, 2012). Title VI of this law is the Public Safety Communications and Electromagnetic Spectrum Auctions. This law is particularly important as it relates to a Public Safety Broadband Network.
47 USC 1422 SEC. 6202. Public Safety Broadband Network provides for the following:
(a) ESTABLISHMENT. —The First Responder Network Authority
shall ensure the establishment of a nationwide, interoperable public
safety broadband network.
(b) NETWORK COMPONENTS. —The nationwide public safety
broadband network shall be based on a single, national network
architecture that evolves with technological advancements and initially
consists of—
(1) a core network that—
(A) consists of national and regional data centers, and
other elements and functions that may be distributed geographically,
all of which shall be based on commercial
standards; and
(B) provides the connectivity between—
LAW ENFORCEMENT TECHNOLOGICAL FUTURE 17
(i) the radio access network; and
(ii) the public Internet or the public switched network,
or both; and
(2) a radio access network that—
(A) consists of all cell site equipment, antennas, and
backhaul equipment, based on commercial standards, that
are required to enable wireless communications with
devices using the public safety broadband spectrum; and
(B) shall be developed, constructed, managed, maintained,
and operated taking into account the plans developed
in the State, local, and tribal planning and
implementation grant program under section 6302(a). (Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 (Public Law 112-96-Feb. 22, 2012).
More simply stated, this law will “provide a secure, reliable and dedicated interoperable network for emergency responders to communicate during an emergency” (PERF, 2014, p. 29). This law provides for a dedicated and specified use of the radio spectrum. The “D-block” section is specifically allocated to public safety use. The bill also mandates that $7 billion is dedicated to this project to assist in funding the construction of the network known as FirstNet.
And because the 911 call system is so important to fast, reliable, and uninterrupted calls for assistance, the bill also provides for the creation of the Next Generation 911 system (NG 911). These are very important developments for the future of law enforcement and first responders, and both of these systems will assist in ensuring that systems such as SCPMS as safe, secure, and protected against Advanced Persistent Threats (APTs).
LAW ENFORCEMENT TECHNOLOGICAL FUTURE 18
When implemented, FirstNet will be considered a force-multiplier for public safety employees and organizations. There are significant considerations though; implementation of the FirstNet system will require that the government build a new Band Class 14 network. In doing so, this will reduce costs and improve consumer-driven economies of scale, along with the potential to provide speedy advanced communications.
Conclusion
Improving Cyber Security
The StarChase Pursuit Management System clearly uses several newer technologies, and the SCPMS itself is very new. The time-frame from deploying the GPS tag to culmination of the incident makes it nearly impossible for hackers (state and non-state actors) to intrude or access the system. Future research related to the time-frame issue could provide insight into protecting critical infrastructure in government and the private sector.
Real-World Examples of this Technology
At the present time, there are more than 50 law enforcement agencies that are utilizing SCPMS. The following are some of the results from test bed locations and real-world application of SCPMS after it passed all testing and was implemented in agencies across the United States:
? Tagged vehicles slowed to within of 10 mph of the posted limit in under two-minutes
? No death, no injuries, and no property damage have been reported
? The data reflect >80% apprehension rate
? >30 stolen vehicles have been recovered without property damage
? 25 human smuggling victims have been recovered
LAW ENFORCEMENT TECHNOLOGICAL FUTURE 19
? 3 children that were in fleeing vehicles were returned to safety without physical injury
? DUI arrests have been made (the number is not known as of this writing)
? >40 arrests have been made
? > 4000lbs of narcotics have been recovered ((Fischbach, Hadsdy, McCall, 2015).
Federal Government Support of StarChase Pursuit Management System
The United States Government, through the U. S. Department of Justice, awarded a substantial grant under award number 2010-IJ-CX-K022, Pursuit Management: Fleeing Vehicle Tagging and Tracking Technology. The government was also instrumental in providing legal guidance to the research team as they developed the system. At this juncture, the U. S. Department of Justice is extremely happy with the fact that this system has reduced death, serious physical injury, with minimal property damage. This has resulted in a reduction of civil litigation against law enforcement agencies.
LAW ENFORCEMENT TECHNOLOGICAL FUTURE 20
LAW ENFORCEMENT TECHNOLOGICAL FUTURE 21
References
Alpert, G. P., Fridell, L. (1992). Police vehicles and firearms: Instruments of deadly
force. Prospect Heights, Ill.: Waveland Press
Brammer, R. F. (2013, 19, November). Northrop Grumman White Paper: A strategic approach to
Addressing cybersecurity threats to FirstNet. Retrieved from:
https://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabilities/Cybersecurity/Documents/PressKits/Strat
egicApproachtoFirstNetCyberThreats.PDF
Chainey, S., Ratcliffe, J. (2005). GIS and crime mapping: Mastering GIS, technology,
Applications, and management. Chichester, West Sussex, England: John Wiley &
Sons, LTD.
Dragseth, J. (2015). The Office of Infrastructure Protection, National Protection and
Programs Directorate Department of Homeland Security. GPS and Critical
Infrastructure. Retrieved from: https://www.gps.gov/cgsic/meetings/2015/dragseth.pdf
Fischbach, T. A., Hadsdy, A, McCall. (2015). Pursuit management: Fleeing vehicle tagging
And tracking technology, Final Technical Report, 2013. Retrieved from:
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/249156.pdf
Kappeler, V. E. (2006). Critical issues in police civil liability. (4th Ed). Long Grove, IL.:
Waveland Press, Inc.
Middle
The post Critical Analysis of Criminal Justice Public Policy

Assignment status: Solved by our experts

>>>Click here to get this paper written at the best price. 100% Custom, 0% plagiarism.<<<

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *