Read each paragraph and give me your opinion do you agree do you disagree with those two paragraphs one for each para and if you agree or disagree he why or why not
Analyze the steps you would take when faced with this dilemma, from an ethical standpoint: This first thing I would do is go over the police report to see exactly what happened, and how the suspect complied with the officer’s instructions. Once I have read over everything on the police report I would then pull the suspect criminal history, to see if there is a repeat of this crime. After covering everything I would then talk to the victims, I would let them know that the suspect does not have any history of this type of crime or any. I would then let them know that the suspect stated he wanted a plea agreement that he would admit guilt if he would only get probation. Then I would state that since he has no prior criminal history this would be a better choice. However, if the suspect has a criminal past that is quite thick, then I would proceed with the trial to prosecute him.
Explain your individual philosophy of ethics, as a criminal justice professional in this scenario, based on the ethical system that applies: Personally if a criminal has a past history of committing these types of crimes, I believe they should be sentenced to jail/prison. I do believe people can change, however, if they continue to commit the same crime over and over they are more for themselves and do not care about the consequences. The ethical system that I think is used here is the teleological ethical system, which judges the consequences of an act.
Differentiate the legal, moral, and ethical issues you see in the scenario provided: I think the moral and ethical thing for the district attorney would be to remain unbiased towards the criminal, as well as to the victims. The district attorney should look over everything, before deciding the suspects fate.
Analyze the steps you would take when faced with the dilemma, from an ethical standpoint.
There are many things I would do when looking at cases. First, you must take someone’s previous criminal record into account. I can only go by what the arresting officer has issued in their report. So the officers report will also help determine what steps to take. You must look at the events leading up to the arrest. Was the subject calm and compliant? The ethical issues here would be, district attorneys or solicitors as they are called in South Carolina are public officials. How they deal with certain cases is a huge deal to them because it may lead to bigger things or officers down the road. Solicitors have prosecutorial discretion. With that being said, the DA or solicitor must make the right decision for all parties involved. I would do what is right for the general public. If that meant locking someone up for a couple years, so be it. I would not be there to make friends but to make the streets a safer place.
Explain your individual philosophy of ethics, as a criminal justice professional in this scenario, based on the ethical system that applies.
The ethical system used here would probably utilitarianism because it looks at the effects from ones actions. I would say the divine theory would be used because thou shall not steal. As I mentioned the utilitarianism judges the consequences of an act. With that being said, the DA has to look at all the facts and make his determination on the act which in return will decide what consequences are given. As a former prison officer, I have seen to many repeat offenders return for the same crimes they had already once committed. This to me tells me one thing. The DA never worried about the person being repeat offenders. My philosophy is: if they have done it multiple times, they will do it again. I like the three strikes and you’re our rule on certain crimes. People who have done multiple crimes, especially for the same thing has no care for ethics or morals. They only care for one thing and that is them.
Differentiate the legal, moral, and ethical issues you see in the scenario provided.
The moral and ethical thing for a DA in this scenario is to look at the whole picture. Don’t do what the defense team wants because all they want it a way out to get back on the street. If you let people back out they will violate their parole because they will be back in jail in no time. You may say this is harsh but I have seen this time and time again. Legally, DA’s have a set of rules and criteria they must follow. They must decide if the laws were followed legally from the officer report to any evidence found. Yes, they are elected officials and they have certain rules of conduct. If they make a wrong moral or ethical choice, it will affect all of use. Who wants to be out with someone who has a violent past history? I am not in favor of it myself.
Internal Affairs Investigations
This is a tough scenario because most criminal justice professionals want to have their fellow workers backs, whether it’s a fellow cop or DA, or an agent. There is a line that has to be drawn in the sand though, as much as I want to understand and have my fellow agents back, there is legal issues pertaining to this and I can’t do my job properly if I disregard illegal acts by a fellow agent and ethically go on to make arrests of civilians. I definitely empathize with this agent and can understand the lengths that he felt (in his mind) he needed to go to take care of his wife, though not right, nor legal, sometimes a person gets desperate when it comes to a loved one and they are at the end of their rope (per se).
I would get as many facts as I could before I sat down to interview the agent being accused of the crime. I would probably involve his superiors so as to have a better understanding of what this agent was like and what his background was, input from his superiors would be helpful. Has his home life been a big distraction, I would need to find out how accurate this allegation of his wife having cancer was so that I know if that may have been a motivating factor. I would need to interview any individuals involved and possibly speak with his family to see what information they knew. I would check his work history and see what type of agent he has been and if he has kept his nose clean thus far. I would then sit the agent down and ask him to explain to me his side of the situation. After gathering as much information as possible I would have a better understanding to make the decision as to whether I am able to recommend discipline within the department or if this action warrants me to recommend legal action. Though his actions are not right and possibly not legal, if he did commit this crime I would have to recommend charging him, but I would recommend leniency when it comes to sentencing and explain the circumstances behind his actions to the judge in hopes that he gets a lighter sentence. He would probably lose his job in the department as well.
If this agent were responsible for this criminal act, he would have to be charged. I would ask the DA to keep in mind that he has a spotless record and he is an outstanding agent that took a wrong path due to circumstances that he felt he had no control over and he felt like he had no other options. I would recommend leniency in hopes that the judge would look at the entire picture and either give him probation or give him only a few years. His crime is by no means right, but as a person that lost a spouse I can see where his desperation came from and why he mentally broke down to the point that he rationalized that this was something he had to do whether it was legal or not.
I can very much relate to this agent and the hurt and frustration he is feeling, but I also consider myself a good IA agent and I take my job very seriously so I would have to empathize with the agent but still do my job and investigate thoroughly. If after I investigated, I did not feel like I could finish this case without personal bias then I would have to turn this case over to my supervisor or a fellow agent to finish. I want to think that I can put my personal feelings aside and do my job properly.
.This is a tough call because I believe being human is inside all of us. Most of us do this job with heart and soul and that is what makes us good at our jobs. This same quality can also cause us to make unethical choices in our field. With that being said, letting emotions and allowing that little bit of human heart involve this investigation could affect judgement. Affairs of the heart often get us in trouble. This internal investigation can still take place on a professional level. As long as it is completed to department standards and by the book, there should be no issues.
As an investigator of this case I would want to involve my supervisor if possible. With a case that involves sensitivities combined with violation of department policy, I would want to keep upper level supervisors in the loop. Throughout the IA process I would need to be looking at all the research. Questions that will probably come up include are: Was the activity criminal in nature? What department policies were violated? Could the person be suspended with or without pay during the investigation? Paid or unpaid suspension would depend whether or not he was an exempt or non-exempt employee. He should immediately be placed on leave until the investigation is completed. Under these circumstances, I would probably suspend him with pay. It could be a while to reach a conclusion about criminal activity. Here say is not enough to go on.
Next if there are any witnesses, I need to get their statements for my investigation. Knowing which questions I can ask and not ask will keep me out of trouble. Most employees who are involved in an IA are questioned by the investigator at some point. Department policies typically state the employee has to be notified they are being investigated, usually within a certain time frame that an investigation has been opened. In many circumstances the employee has to be given an outcome of discipline or discharge, or resolution after so many days the investigation has been completed.
Personally, I would not inquire about the employee’s wife’s medical records. Those records have no relativity to the case, and are none of my business. This also could lead to HIPPA violations, which I want to steer clear of. Should any of this be brought up by the employee, I would still not include it in the investigation unless there was proof money was used to pay for medical expenditures. There is a line here as to what would be admissible in the IA, and I would be careful not to cross it.
In my opinion the outcome of the case would be termination of the employee. I believe the department would probably side with me. Corrupt behavior is not a trait a department wants to put on display. Clearly, the employee violated the department’s policies. Part of the job of a good IA person is not being biased and having all the facts and events in order. Once they are presented to upper management, they make the final decision. My findings and investigation will result in their final decision as to what happens.
Bottom of Form 1
Bottom of Form 1