Dallas Police Department: Training Techniques Changes Proposal

Abstract

This paper addresses the issue of lack of efficient training of police officers especially on search and seizure procedures and on legal principles surrounding the Fourth Amendment at the Dallas Police Department. Cases of convicted criminals having their convictions overruled on the basis of technicalities such as arresting officers breaching the individual’s privacy are rampant throughout the United States. The author of this paper identifies the problem to be a lack of proper training and the use of outdated modes of instruction. This paper proposes a training plan that is aimed at lifting the training of law enforcers at the Dallas Police Department to acceptable standards in order to reduce the cost incurred annually due to lawsuits and to prevent criminals from being freed on such technicalities. It starts by identifying the problem, then goes ahead to propose solutions and the methodology that can be applied in implementing these solutions. This paper also looks at some of the projected outcomes of the proposed change.

Introduction

In the year 2000, Steven Bond was traveling on a bus in Texas headed to Arkansas. When the bus halted at the Sierra Blanca checkpoint, a law enforcement officer entered the bus to inspect for illegal immigrants. That agent was called Cesar Cantu. As officer Cantu was doing his routine checks on the passengers’ luggage, he discovered a bag belonging to Bond that contained a brick-like object. After obtaining permission from Bond, he proceeded to inspect the bag and found a substantial amount of methamphetamine draped using a duct tape. During that incident, Bond was apprehended and convicted.

When the case was later brought before the Supreme Court, the issue that arose was whether agent Cantu had violated the Fourth Amendment in his handling of Bond’s luggage. The case was dismissed in a quick and short decision. The court voted seven to two, asserting that evidence used in Bond’s trial was obtained in contravention of the Fourth Amendment. The amendment prohibits searches and seizures without sufficient proof of reasons for suspicion.

This case is an indication of the dilemma that most officers of the law face on a daily basis as they try to grapple with the intricate nature of the Fourth Amendment. Most cases that end up at the Supreme Court about search and seizures involve the use of the wrong procedure in obtaining evidence or lack of sufficient reason to warrant suspicion (Galiano, 2011). In most of these cases, the judges ruled that the evidence in question should be excluded from the trial.

The Fourth Amendment is a fundamental restriction on the authority of governments in the United States to probe individuals’ lives, apprehend them and seize their possessions (Schulhofer, 2012). It was created to put a stop to government agencies’ tendency of invading the privacy of its citizens. This amendment demands that there must be sufficient probable cause before law enforcers can conduct searches or seizures. This implies that law enforcement officers need to have reasonable conviction that a criminal act has been perpetrated and that evidence or products of the action are obtainable. When a citizen alleges to have been searched in contravention of the Fourth Amendment, the judge often demands to know if the individual indeed has sufficient reason to expect privacy given the setting, documents or property that the law enforcement agents have inspected or seized.

The author’s purpose is to propose a plan that will see an improvement in the quality and scope of training of police officers in line with the requirements of the Fourth Amendment.

Work Environment

The general job description of police officers includes working in collaboration with the societies they serve to preserve law and order, safeguard public and private property, avert crime, and enhance the value of life for all citizens. Their day-to-day line of work demands constant use of varying forms of techniques such as identification and arrest of offenders and ensuring successful prosecution of perpetrators of crime. They also participate in various training sessions in order to keep abreast with the changing nature of crime and the criminal justice system.

With a population of 1,241,162, Dallas is one of the largest cities in the United States of America. It is also the third-largest city in Texas and is the county seat of the County of Dallas. The principal law enforcement agency for the city of Dallas is the Dallas Police Department, which is made up of approximately 3,200 sworn officers. The police department is divided into seven divisions, each led by a chief of police. An officer can only work in a division in which he is assigned.

A normal day in the life of a patrol officer in any of the divisions at the Dallas Police Division includes working eight hours. During the working hours, an officer works one of the available five shifts answering calls of service such as burglary, robbery, murder or domestic violence. The officer at the call is expected to gather all the evidence at the scene of the crime and accurately complete a report. It is also the officer’s duty to protect the scene of crime to prevent anyone from tampering with evidence. In addition, the officer is supposed to make arrests in line with the penal code of Texas. Those officers that are not assigned to a patrol unit work under other departments like the Investigative Bureau, Family Violence, Narcotics, Child Abuse, Robbery, Homicide, Assault, Forgery, and Computer Crimes.

The author is currently assigned to a narcotics Street Squad, where the members work in teams comprising seven officers tasked with the principal duty of handling drug complaints. Once they receive a drug complaint, the team collects intelligence and conducts investigations by talking to locals. Officers in the Narcotics Department concentrate on thwarting illicit use and distribution of drugs. They scrutinize drug distribution nets and prepare reports. They also inspect evidence from cases and are expected to share information concerning drug use and drug related crime with other agents and members of the public. Continuous and effective training prepare these agents of law enforcement to handle legal issues as well as perform routine tasks of search and seizure without contravening the principles.

Problem

A major test presented by constitutional law is the interpretation of a document designed several years ago. Changes in legal systems and ways of life constantly present new challenges to existing legislation and materials of instruction available for officers of the law who are charged with the responsibility of implementing the constitution.

Most Supreme Court judges contend that privacy is the primary right shielded by the amendment (Maclin, 2012). The author of this paper believes that the Fourth Amendment is about protecting power rather than privacy. However, the Fourth Amendment explicitly covers the people’s entitlement to safety. If the Fourth Amendment is meant to protect the security of the state as well as the right of the individual, then the officer who enforces arrest and search procedures must be properly trained on and accustomed to the principles pertaining to search and seizure.

This is the only way of ensuring that their cases hold up in court and that criminals do not get away with crime. Except in cases where the facts and circumstances surrounding the search and seizure are contained within the borders of distinctly determined warrant exemptions acknowledged by the Supreme Court, search and seizure warrants are a compulsory requirement in accordance with the Fourth Amendment. The law does not provide a discrete exception for crime or homicide scenes.

In a Supreme Court case pitting Bailey versus the United States, a six-to-three judgment overruled the conviction of a man who had been arrested when officers of the law pursued him after he had escaped from his house before the police commenced searching his house (Doyle, 2012). This Fourth Amendment case seeks to establish whether a person who leaves his residence can be seized by officers devoid of probable cause. The Supreme Court stated that the seizure was unreasonable according to the Fourth Amendment. In a similar case in 1981, the Supreme Court judged that the inhabitants of a residence that was under lawful search should be detained to aid in the search and ensure the safety of the officers conducting the search. This case raises the question of whether this 1981 ruling is applicable to a person who leaves the area under search before the search begins. Can cases such as Bailey’s be avoided with proper training?

In a slightly different case (Florida versus Harris), but still concerning the application of the Fourth Amendment during search and seizure, questions are raised about the possibility of police officers conducting searches without warrants founded only on a signal from a trained and certified drug-sniffing dog (Doyle, 2012). Recent research establishes that trained dogs have shifting degrees in their ability to detect drugs (Chaurasia, 2003). The question raised by this case is whether any kind of signal raised by a certified dog is enough to provide proof for sufficient cause to conduct a search. One thing established in this case is the need of officers to obtain warrants before conducting searches. In this case, for instance, the judges rule that alert by a well-trained and certified dog is not sufficient cause to search a car of property.

In another Fourth Amendment case of Messerschmidt versus Millender, the police acquired a warrant to search the petitioner’s home scanning for a weapon employed in an incident of domestic violence (Doyle, 2012). The provisions of the warrant that the officers obtained permitted the search of all weapons and other things in the house. In that case, though the officers had obtained a search warrant as stipulated by the Fourth Amendment, the warrant was not supported by reasonable cause. That Supreme Court case sought to establish whether officers could be held responsible for carrying out searches with a warrant that was not backed by reasonable probable cause.

These three cases are among many that depict the status of the police force concerning the Fourth Amendment. Many officers do not understand the principles and legalities surrounding this key part of search and seizure. Most cases like the ones highlighted above show the implications of not following the right protocol during search and seizure. Cases end up being overruled and costly lawsuits are filed against individual police officers and police departments that oversee these search and seizure procedures.

This proposal postulates that aggressive studies focusing on mental and behavioral tendencies should accompany sufficient training of law enforcement officers in order to alter their comprehension of fundamental Fourth Amendment rules. Contemporary studies on inherent social perception reveal that personalities have unintended prejudices that can affect the assessments, decisions and actions that are essential to application of the tenets of the Fourth Amendment (Haberfeld, Clarke & Sheehan, 2011). The author proposes proper training to enable police officers apply the criterion of reasonable suspicion in advancing effective policing. To be effective, law enforcement must safeguard the liberty of individuals against haphazard intrusion while advancing efficient law enforcement where cases are not thrown out of court simply because the right procedure was not followed or the suspect’s rights were violated (Rostker, 2008).

The criterion of reasonable suspicion endeavors to ensure that in providing effective law enforcement, personal rights of confidentiality are not violated (McInnis, 2010). This criterion addresses police concerns by allowing officers to operate on their suspicions about perpetration of crime even if there is no probable cause. Nevertheless, in order to avert subjective police acts that violate some human rights, courts enforce an articulation prerequisite that compels officers to validate the disturbance by stating the facts that generate these suspicions. Courts then evaluate these facts to ascertain their implication on criminal behavior. Sufficient understanding of these standards requires training and conditioning and should be carried out regularly to accustom law enforcers with the expectations of their work.

The number of training sessions allocated to the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement Officer Standards and Education (TCLEOSE) training for legal updates is insufficient. These training sessions are conducted only once in every two years and last a mere two hours. First, with the consistent alterations in techniques used by criminals, two hours in every two years cannot cover the material comprehensively. The author does not believe that a two-hour period allows practical enactment of legal challenges that police officers face as they try to keep up with the changing face of the law.

The training period allocated for search and seizure is another problematic area. The Dallas Police Academy allocates only sixteen hours in a classroom setting to this important part of an officer’s training. This time is definitely not enough to go through all the intricate procedures and rehearsals necessary for an officer to grasp the Fourth Amendment comprehensively. Though other aspects of officer training are equally important, an understanding of the principles and legal implications of the Fourth Amendment is integral if cases are to hold in court. Such training can also help reduce the number of lawsuits against the department and officers for negligence. These officers do not overlook the arrest and search procedures intentionally, but lack sufficient knowledge on the legal demands when arresting or investigating suspects.

Since criminal lawyers and criminals do not take breaks, the author believes that law enforcement officers must remain abreast with information and avoid mistakes that can have not only financial implications, but also impression effects on the department. These mistakes can be easily avoided by fine-tuning the training of officers to include more content and practical situations outside the classroom environment (Martinez, 2008). To do this effectively demands investment of time and resources. Such an investment will be rewarded when the officers demonstrate a good understanding of the Fourth Amendment search and seizure techniques. The force will be saved from unnecessary financial and legal challenges that come with such an oversight.

Proposed Solutions

Since human rights are bound to be integrated into laws, the police are tasked with protecting these rights. They are guided by the same laws that they apply against criminals. The fact that the police are also under the law that they enforce places unusual demands of impartiality on them. However, the main concern of law enforcement agencies throughout the United States is how to go about their duties of fighting crime without contravening the intricate principles of the Fourth Amendment. As outlined in the previous section, this endeavor requires sufficient training of new and practiced police officers. This section is dedicated to some practical solutions that can be applied to solve this problem.

Primarily, it is imperative to recognize the role of training in improving the performance of police officers. As a police officer, the author believes that training acts as a refresher of the legal as well as practical principles of law enforcement. At the Dallas Police Department, only two hours in every two years are dedicated to legislative sessions on legal updates. Moreover, this training is only conducted using PowerPoint presentation.

The first solution the author would like to propose is the incorporation of practical field-oriented training in the program. This practical approach is meant to relate training and what the officers meet on the field. Studies prove that practical approaches to training are interesting and the concepts therein easy to grasp (Kurke & Scrivner, 2013). The current training offered at the Dallas Police Department should include skits and enactments of real-life search and seizure procedures in order to reduce the number of lawsuits and complaints from the public.

In effective police training, more time should be allocated (per session) to enable the trainees to cover more issues concerning the Fourth Amendment (Taslitz, 2006). A paltry two hour period is not sufficient especially if the training incorporates a practical approach of instruction. The author suggests at least two three-hour lessons with a one-hour break between them. The three hours are sufficient to enact real-life scenarios while the one-hour break is meant to prevent fatigue and boredom that often come with protracted periods of instruction. During the break, the officers should be instructed to formulate problems related to the Fourth Amendment. These problems ought to form the core of discussion in the second session. The lessons should also be conducted regularly and not just after every two years since a lot can change in the legal and criminal worlds in two years.

Proper understanding of legislation surrounding crime and crime prevention requires effective training and re-training (Charles, 2000). This training should exhaust the legal requirements of the Fourth Amendment especially those concerning search and seizure. Many guilty criminals get acquitted simply because the arresting officer overlooks some aspects of the constitutional demands of search and seizure during the arrest and in the collection of evidence. The author proposes that officer training syllabus should be increased in depth and scope to equip officers at the Dallas Police Department with more knowledge on the Fourth Amendment principles.

Expected Results

Irrespective of the size of the city or the number of police officers concerned, those in command of the police force should set up a robust police officer instructing course. Establishing efficient training programs for novice police officers has numerous values. Extending this training schedule to the serving members also serves to increase police efficiency. In this section, the author outlines some of the benefits of improved training on the police and the population they serve. The proposed plan for change, if properly implemented is expected to achieve the following results.

The changes to the training program are expected to improve the skill and knowledge of police officers concerning search and seizure, and their general knowledge on Fourth Amendment principles. This knowledge will not only aid in improving the overall performance of officers in search and seizures, but it is also expected to reduce the crime rates and the number of criminals who get away with crime based on technicalities.

Instituting a well-defined sequence of command is a fundamental part of any police department. A properly planned and executed training program is expected to outline the chain of command. Search and seizure routines demand that the chain of command is followed in obtaining a warrant and in the execution of the arrest. Improved training will aid in the understanding of each officer’s role in the procedure. This is expected to help in improving functionality and efficiency as the police try to rid the society of criminals.

Court cases of police harassment as well as cases where the right of the suspect is violated in the process of arrest and seizure cost the force a large sum of money annually. Government executives in the city of Dallas and police heads are expected to institute well-defined targets for their officers and moderate the probability of costly lawsuits using an effective training plan. Proper and constant training will ensure that police officers will have a better conception of their roles and the expectations of the society and their superiors. Consequently, the officers will be expected to act swiftly on intelligence on crime without overstretching their limits. This plan, if properly implemented will reduce the costs incurred from lawsuits and other charges that result from misconduct by officers of the law.

Project Design

The goal of this proposal is to see a reduction in the number of lawsuits and cases resulting from lack of understanding of the Fourth Amendment principles. According to government policy on police training, such training should target provision of quality law enforcement.

This project is intended to benefit both new and experienced police officers at the Dallas Police Department to increase their knowledge of legal implications of their work and how to improve their practice. The project proposal will be forwarded to the author’s training unit supervisor to help elevate training to a more acceptable standard in terms of how the training is implemented and how officers are held responsible.

Though a project of this nature demands considerable investment, the author believes that this investment will be rewarded upon successful implementation of the project through reduced fines and costs of lawsuits. This project will remain the property of the Dallas Police Department and will only be shared with other police departments upon written requests and permission from the relevant Dallas Police Department authorities.

Methodology

The following steps will be followed in the implementation of the project.

Initiation

The first stage in the implementation of this project will involve the discussion of the project feasibility by all the stakeholders. Financial implications of implementing the project will also be discussed to establish the project’s viability. The cost of implementing the project is expected to be lower than the expected returns. Long and short term impact of the project on the Dallas society will also be scrutinized. The project will proceed to the planning stage after being approved.

Planning

This stage will include the purchase of materials and the preparation of new training timetables in collaboration with all divisions in the Dallas Police Department. Timelines for the accomplishment of each task will be drawn, and responsibilities will be delegated. Reasonable targets will be set for each division and modes for assessment identified. In addition, recommendation for adjustments in timelines will be made in the event that the targets are not accomplished within the stipulated time. The planning period should not take more than one year from the time of approval of the project.

Participation

The project aimed at improving training facilities at the Dallas Police Department will involve the participation of all 3,200 officers stationed at the department. Leadership roles will be delegated according to rank and the relationship of that rank to accomplishment of the project goals.

Execution

This is the most important part of the project implementation. It includes the actual application of the proposed changes. For smooth execution of the project, all stakeholders will be expected to perform their delegated roles effectively. After the structures have been put in place, the training will be expected to commence, and changes in results will be noted for record-keeping and further improvement.

Monitoring and Evaluation

This is a very important part of the implementation process as it enables assessment of the successes and failures of the project. While the successes will be noted, the failures will either be rectified or noted for later consideration. In the unlikely scenario that the project will be deemed a failure and officers will not demonstrate an improved understanding of the core principles of the Fourth Amendment and training materials, the project will either be proposed for improvement and application or it will be completely discarded. Monitoring and evaluation will be conducted throughout the implementation of the program.

Conclusion

The Fourth Amendment was created for a noble cause of protecting the privacy of citizens from state intrusion. However, many criminals use the principles of this amendment to escape justice based on technicalities of arrest and seizure. Most of the police officers who contravene the principles of the Fourth Amendment do not have sufficient training that is required in search and seizure procedures. This proposal, if adopted will improve the quality and scope of training of police officers in the Dallas Police Department thereby reducing the frequency of lawsuits.

Annotated Bibliography

Charles, T. M. (2000). Police training: Breaking all the rules: implementing the adult education model into police training. Illinois: C. C. Thomas Publisher.

This book is about a study that was conducted about the Police Training Institute at the University of Illinois that addressed the implementation of change in police training using the model applied in adult education. Since this study is about improving the quality of police training, this material is very important for this proposed change in training techniques at the Dallas Police Department. The methods used in this study, the proposed solutions and the results provide an insight into what can be expected in this project.

Doyle, C. (2012). Search and seizure cases in the October 2012 term of the Supreme Court. Web.

This article by a senior specialist in American public law provides an analysis of a selected sample of cases where officers overlooked certain requirements of the Fourth Amendment. In the cases outlined in the article, Supreme Court judges overruled the convictions based on the belief that the evidence obtained during search or the arrest procedure went against the Fourth Amendment. The cases provided therein give us a glimpse of the predicament facing police officers as they seek to uphold the law.

Galiano, D., (2011). The Fourth Amendment: Unreasonable search and seizure. New York: The Rosen Publishing Group.

This book summarizes the grueling journey that the quest for freedom and privacy has gone through and concentrates on impact of the Fourth Amendment on the lives of modern-day Americans. The part of this book that is significant to the proposed project is the views expressed therein about the duty of the Supreme Court in safeguarding the rights of citizens to privacy. The author of this book provides us with real-life scenarios of cases where the Supreme Court ruled that the Fourth Amendment had been contravened. The book highlights the Fourth Amendment’s impact on modern American life and the role of the Supreme Court in safeguarding these protections.

Haberfeld, R. M., Clarke, A. C., & Sheehan, L. D. (2011). Police organization and training: Innovations in research and practice. New York: Springer.

This valuable source provides information on how to conduct research concerning police training. In the proposal to improve police instruction at the Dallas Police Department, the author proposes the application of new techniques to improve the quality of training and to enable law enforcement officers to adapt to the use of such techniques. This expertly documented book, which contains a preamble by the secretary general of Interpol, is a valuable source of information for anyone willing to improve police training.

Kurke, M. I., & Scrivner E. M. (2013). Police psychology into the 21st century. New York: Psychology Press.

In proposing any changes to a training program, agents of such change must consider the role of mental processes and conditioning in learning. This book provides us with insights by psychology experts on police training. They offer information on how changes in training affect the efficiency of law enforcement. Other psychological concerns in implementing change in the police force such as stress are also addressed.

Maclin, T. (2012). The Supreme Court and the Fourth Amendment’s exclusionary rule. USA: Oxford University Press.

In this material, Maclin undertakes an expert analysis of the Fourth Amendment and some reasoning behind major court decisions. When police violate an individual’s Fourth Amendment rights, the cases usually provide a ground for controversial debates by Supreme Court judges. This book is useful in police training on the Fourth Amendment as it provides an insight into some of the rationale behind the application of the search and seizure requirements.

McInnis, T. (2010). The evolution of the Fourth Amendment. Maryland: Lexington Books.

Using key examples of court cases, this book outlines the history of the Fourth Amendment. McInnis also takes a look at the way the Supreme Court changes people’s understanding of the Fourth Amendment in its interpretation of situations where exemptions are permissible. This book aids our purpose of understanding the Fourth Amendment from a legal perspective.

Schulhofer, J. S. (2012). More essential than ever: The Fourth Amendment in the twenty first century. New York: Oxford University Press.

This book addresses the changes that make the Fourth Amendment difficult to comprehend to police officers. Schulhofer looks at the impact of the Fourth Amendment on minority groups. According to this book, the Fourth Amendment does not prohibit invasion of privacy. On the contrary, it approves the violation of privacy but requires justification of sufficient proof. In our understanding of the Fourth Amendment principles and how to improve police officers’ grasp of the principles, this book comes highly recommended.

Taslitz, E. A. (2006). Reconstructing the Fourth Amendment: A history of search and seizure, 1789-1868. USA: NYU Press.

This is a highly recommended text for any officer who wants to understand the intricacies surrounding search and seizure procedures. This book outlines the importance of tracing the history of the Fourth Amendment if we are to understand the current principles that govern successful search and seizure procedures. Taslitz proposes that understanding search history is useful in correcting the misconceptions about the Fourth Amendment.