When Politics Trumps Policy

While the public demand for the felon legal expert system to help ensure a safe and secure environment, thither are also occasions whereby the public may feel that the crook justice agencies are actu exclusivelyy the one posing unnecessary scourges to the society. Issues equivalent the ab apply of authority, deadly vehicle inquisitions and unauthorized utilize of weapons are all examples of faux pass in which the criminal justice system is actually threatening the recourse of the public.This paper will discuss the case of Racin Rays monstrous Day to examine the issues occupyd in the decisions made by Ripley as a righteousness enforcing authority. Central Issues The central issue in the case study would be the authority of the police officers to use excessive wring as fountainhead as to engage in violent pursuits. repayable to a previous incident of a violent pursuit conclusion with the death of a 14 year old teenager, the Pineville County Sheriffs surgical incision is currently facing a lawsuit. As such, the Department has implemented stricter rules and regulations to forbid such accidents from happening again.However, an another(prenominal) key issue which has cropped up would be that of the behavior of Deputy Raymond Ray Ripley who has been observed to be overstepping regulations as well as engaging in activities that are not part of his responsibilities such as to go for extra patrol as well as to engage in the violent pursuit of a vehicle that was not warranted since rules withdraw been implemented to prohibit any pursuit which does not invite any violent felony crime or pose significant threat to the community.In addition, he is also using weapons which he does not have the authority to use (Peak, 2010). Use-of-force policy Ripleys actions is not compliant with the use of force policy which states that a supervisor should cancel any pursuit that does not involve a violent felony crime or other circumstances that would justify the danger and potential liability . In addition, A separate policy prohibits the firing of example diaphysiss unless circumstances warrant. (Peak, 2010).In the wedded case, Ripley had no evidence to demonstrate that the vehicle he was chasing was involved in any violent felony crime or circumstances that would pose entire danger. In addition he used his discharged warning shots take down though the circumstances were not yet dangerous. As such, he was distinctly violating the use-of-force policy. End Ripleys pursuit The lieutenant should end Ripleys pursuit. Firstly, this is because Ripley has already overstepped the policies implemented by the Department, as such there is a mishap that he would further revilement his power to bring around unnecessary harm to others.In addition, the Department is already involved in a current legal tussle. Should any mistakes go wrong with this one, the consequence would be especially dire and people would lose confidence in the criminal justice a gency. Firing warning shots The replacement should have fired the warning shot. The department has already informed officers that no warning shots should be fired unless circumstances warrant. In this case, the officer was following normal regulations of being at least 30 meters away from the vehicle.In addition, he has proof to target that the circumstances warrant his actions since the driver was speeding towards him and thus the warning shot was fired to save his life. Lodging a complaint In the type that the people in the vehicle lodge a complaint about Ripley and his use of the force, the dog and the taser gun, there are various departmental policies which would take up to be applied. First, it is necessary to record down all the processes involved during the solely incident including when , how and why the deputy came across the vehicle, fired the warning shots and gave pursuance to the vehicle.Given that there is evidence to sufficient to show that the deputy did abuse his authority such as to own a Taser gun and to use a dog, appropriate disciplinary actions would need to be taken to ease up the deputy accountable for his actions. However, the head of the department will need to moot and take into account the factors affecting the situation and the decision-making of the deputy behind implementing the close appropriate form of punishment (Davis). Additional policiesGiven that the misconduct of the deputy has been identified, it is important that the department implement policies to ensure that standardized acts do not occur again. Hence, this would involve programs like training as well as frequent audits to ensure that officers do not engage in behaviors that involve the abuse of their authority. In addition, the department should also set up a program to monitor the progress of those who have previously engaged in misconduct before to ensure that they are competent enough for their work. completionIn conclusion, the case of Ripley demonstra tes the serious consequences of the abuse of authority by law enforcing officials. Therefore, it is necessary for criminal justice agencies to implement the appropriate strategies and programs to ensure that similar incidents do not occur again. ? Reference Davis, J. (n. d. ). Police Misconduct and well-mannered Rights Law. Retrieved from http//library. findlaw. com/1999/Nov/1/126320. html Peak, K. (2010). Justice administration police, courts, and corrections management (6th ed. ). amphetamine Saddle River, NJ. Pearson/Prentice Hall.