Police Patrol: Birzer Roberson 2015 Chapters 3-4 Development

Police Patrol1read Birzer Roberson 2015 Chapters 3 4develop A

Develop a 15–20 slide PowerPoint presentation that compares and contrasts the investigative process before and after the adoption of the community policing philosophy. Use the tips provided to create the slideshow. Each slide should contain very few words, with a corresponding script that describes the content of each slide in about 50 words, effectively telling the story of the comparison.

Paper For Above instruction

The evolution of police investigative processes from traditional policing models to community policing represents a significant shift in law enforcement philosophy and operational strategies. This transformation reflects changes not only in tactical approaches but also in underlying values such as community engagement, problem-solving, and preventative policing. Understanding these differences is essential for appreciating modern law enforcement's complexities and effectiveness.

Introduction

The traditional police investigative process, often characterized by reactive procedures, focused on crime scene investigation, evidence collection, and individual crime resolution. The community policing philosophy, adopted more widely since the late 20th century, emphasizes proactive engagement, problem-solving, and building trust within neighborhoods. Comparing these paradigms reveals important distinctions in approach, impact, and community relations.

Investigative Process Before Community Policing

Prior to community policing, investigations were predominantly reactive. Officers responded to calls, documented crimes, and focused on specific incidents. Investigative steps involved initial assessment, evidence gathering, interviews, and arrests. These methods prioritized efficiency and crime resolution but often overlooked root causes or community context.

• Reactionary approach
• Focus on individual crimes
• Evidence-based and procedural
• Limited community involvement

Investigative Process After Community Policing

Post-adoption of community policing, investigations incorporate proactive strategies. Police partners with community members to identify issues early, often taking a problem-solving approach. Emphasis on building community trust allows officers to gather intelligence informally, leading to more sustainable crime prevention and problem resolution.

• Proactive engagement
• Partnerships with community members
• Focus on problem-solving and crime prevention
• Enhanced trust and information sharing

Contrasts in Approach

The core difference lies in reactive versus proactive strategies. Traditional models respond after crimes occur, often missing underlying issues. Community policing emphasizes prevention through community involvement, cultural change, and addressing social factors contributing to crime. This shift enhances community trust but requires more time and resources.

Impact on Investigations and Outcomes

Traditional police investigations tend to resolve individual incidents efficiently, but may neglect broader social issues. Community policing fosters collaborative investigations, leading to more holistic solutions. This may result in longer resolution times initially, but ultimately produces more sustainable crime reduction and stronger community relations.

Challenges and Limitations

Adapting to community policing's investigative methods includes challenges such as training needs, resource allocation, and cultural shifts within departments. Resistance to change and managing community expectations can also hinder effectiveness. Overcoming these barriers is crucial for successful implementation and sustaining the philosophy.

Conclusion

The comparison between the traditional and community policing investigative processes highlights a paradigm shift from reactive to proactive strategies. While traditional methods focus on quick resolution of crimes, community policing aims for long-term societal benefits through collaboration, trust, and problem-solving. Both approaches have unique strengths and challenges that must be balanced for optimal law enforcement outcomes.

References

• Birzer, M. L., & Roberson, A. (2015). Criminal Justice: An Introduction. Cengage Learning.
• Katz, C. M. (2000). The reform of community policing. Crime & Delinquency, 46(4), 519-533.
• Skogan, W. G., & Hartnett, S. M. (1997). Community policing, Chicago style. Oxford University Press.
• Goldstein, H. (1990). Problem oriented policing. McGraw-Hill.
• Trojanowicz, R., & Bucqueroux, B. (1990). Community policing: A contemporary perspective. Anderson Publishing.
• Pease, K., & Canter, D. (2008). Offender profiling and criminal investigation. Routledge.
• Reiss, A. J., & Roth, J. A. (1993). Understanding and preventing violence. National Academies Press.
• Cordner, G. (2014). Community policing. Police executive research forum.
• Tilley, N. (2003). Crime prevention and community safety: Politics, policies and practice. Willan Publishing.
• Boba, R. (Ed.). (2014). Crime analysis and crime mapping. Sage publications.