CITP Exam 1 QUESTIONS WITH COMPLETE 100%VERIFIED SOLUTIONS 2024/2025, Exams of Business Administration

Download CITP Exam 1 QUESTIONS WITH COMPLETE 100%VERIFIED SOLUTIONS 2024/2025 and more Exams Business Administration in PDF only on Docsity! CITP Exam 1 QUESTIONS WITH COMPLETE 100%VERIFIED SOLUTIONS 2024/2025 Define "culture" and its major components. Culture, for law enforcement purposes, can very generally be defined as learned behavior associated with: a. The collective way of life of the people in a particular group. b. The standards, perspectives and the physical objects that constitute our everyday lives. c. The shared sets of "understandings" and expectations about how to think, feel and act. d. The sum total of ways of living built by a group of human beings. e. Learned and transmitted from generation to generation. Demonstrate and/or identify principal barriers to effective cross cultural communications There are four primary barriers to cross cultural communications that will be discussed: Language, Ignorance of Cultural Norms, Prejudice, and Ethnocentrism. Identify racial profiling (to include race, color and perceived ethnic background) and the potential negative impacts that it may have on effective law enforcement. Racial profiling is the use, by law enforcement officers, of race or ethnicity as the sole factor to justify initiating a stop, conducting a search or focusing an investigation on a particular individual or individuals. Identify skills for improving cross-cultural communication. It is virtually impossible to learn every aspect and characteristic of the many cultures a law enforcement professional will come in contact with. But it is possible and it is expected to: a) Treat all as individuals with respect, while remaining safe. b) Understand and avoid confirmation bias. Instead, seek valid information and corroboration on a case by case bases or individual by individual, in search of the truth. c) Understand and avoid bias by not dismissing information that challenges an already established opinion or belief (belief perseverance). Seek all information. d) Understand and avoid illusory correlations perceptions of associations that do not exist (instead of assuming that a person is a criminal because they live in a high crime neighborhood): Hear their story. Demonstrate and/or identify interpersonal and communication skills required to generate rapport and obtain reliable information. Self-concept, active listening, listening is a gift, mimicry/mirroring, self-disclosure, establishing common ground, and motivational interviewing (MI). Motivational Interviewing (MI) a. Autonomy - Allowing the interviewee to cognitively or emotionally process the situation in light of the evidence, and elect to be truthful and cooperative. Create in your interviewees the perception that they have some control in their interview (that they're making autonomous decisions). You're actually in control, allowing the interviewee to cognitively and/or emotionally process the situation, and to come to the conclusion of cooperation and truthfulness on his/her own. By allowing the interviewee to guide the conversation or by setting up your interview room so that he/she feels comfortable and in control are examples of how you might afford an interviewee autonomy. b. Acceptance - Listen without judgment. When we listen, actively in particular, without conveying judgment through either our actions or our words, we communicate acceptance to the speaker, which encourages him/her to continue talking. You needn't disingenuously support or condone what he/she did to communicate acceptance; just listen without judgment. c. Adaptation - Appropriately meeting resistance and adapting to the interviewee's behavior meet resistance with reflection instead of confrontation. Meet resistance and adapt to the interviewee's behavior. What does your interviewee want to talk about? If he/she wants to tell you about who he/she is and what he/she stands for, let him/her (adapt to him/her) rather than insisting that he/she tell you right now about everything that happened. Adaptation can also refer to mirroring; you can mirror or adapt to an interviewee's speech or behavior to build rapport and facilitate better communication. Adaptation goes handinhand with Autonomy. d. Empathy - the attempt of a selfaware person to comprehend, without making judgments, both the positive and negative experiences of another (Inzunza, 2014). Demonstrate to your interviewee that you're interested in what he/she has to say. Put yourself mentally in his/her shoes, and if you feel, see, or hear something that leads you to conclude that he/she is experiencing a particular feeling, label it, but do that only using what you felt, saw, or heard, e.g., "You look as if...", "You sound as if...", and "It feels as if you..." Don't make pronouncements about his/her emotional state, e.g., "You're ", because if you're wrong, you can make him/her angry—at you—and create the impression that you really don't understand. At its core, empathy is about understanding things from others' perspectives. Some psychologists theorize that there are two forms of empathy "hot" or emotional, and "cold" or cognitive (this is different from the "hotcold empathy gap," for those familiar with it)and that "hot" (emotional) empathy generally refers to the ability to feel what others are feeling, and "cold" (cognitive) empathy generally refers to the ability to know what others are thinking and feeling. (Breithaupt, 2012) e. Evocation - involves eliciting information. You allow the interviewee to discover and explain the discrepancies. Get your interviewee to talk. Employ reflective listening, take turns in speaking, and make a conscious effort not to interrupt. Your interviewee should perceive you to be patient and interested in him/her as an individual. Allow him/her to discover discrepancies. It is critical for the criminal investigator to be selfaware and to understand the impact he/she has on motivating the interviewee. If necessary, the (3) Belief in Mission "Commitment to the law enforcement profession" (4) Reality based training (dynamic and interactive) (5) Training with imagination and emotion (6) Have a commitment to family and friends (7) Physical fitness (8) Officer's personal appearance Identify the fundamentals of documenting a use of force incident. Use of force training identifies numerous facts, non-verbal cues, and verbal threat indicators. It is not enough to just recognize and act on those cues, officers must articulate in writing and verbally during interviews and testimony what those facts were so fact finders can draw appropriate conclusions. Only facts known to the officer at the time may be used to evaluate the force. Facts learned after the force was used, no matter how helpful they may be, are not relevant if the officer did not know them at the time 1) Officer safety 2) Objective, not subjective 3) Basis for seizure (reasonable suspicion, probable cause) 4) Training and experience 5) Matched description Identify human performance factors that impact use of force responses. 1) The mind (conscious and subconscious) 2) Physiology (increased BP, dry mouth, sweating, nausea, etc.) 3) Vision 4) Perception (attention, action v. reaction, training, etc.) Graham v. Connor SIRF Among the totality of circumstances that may govern the reasonableness of using a particular level of force, the Supreme Court emphasized four key factors in the Graham decision (Graham v. Connor, 1989, 396): (1) Severity of the crime (2) Whether the suspect is an immediate threat to the safety of the officer or others (3) Whether the suspect is actively resisting arrest, and/or (4) Attempting to evade arrest by flight SIRF Severity of crime Immediacy of threat Resisting Flight Tennessee v. Garner the Supreme Court stated it is not reasonable to shoot an unarmed non-dangerous fleeing suspect. However, the Court did provide examples of when using force likely to cause serious bodily injury or death could be constitutionally reasonable. "Where the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to others, it is not constitutionally unreasonable to prevent escape by using deadly force. Thus, if the suspect threatens the officer with a weapon or there is probable cause to believe that he has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm, deadly force may be used if necessary to prevent escape, and if, where feasible, some warning has been given" (Tennessee v. Garner, 1985, p. 15) Tennessee v. Garner Key Elements (1) Probable Cause-not certainty. An officer need not be 100% sure the suspect is going to cause death or serious bodily harm. (2) Threat of (a) An officer is not obligated or required to wait until death or serious bodily harm is occurring. (b) If based upon the totality of circumstances and the officer perceives a threat of such action, a reasonable force option may be used. (3) Serious Physical Harm (4) To officer or others (5) Warning if feasible-a number of factors may determine whether a warning is feasible. Those factors may include: (a) Time (b) Distance (c) Available cover/concealment (d) Known history of violence (e) Whether such a warning may cause the offender to act before an officer could respond (i.e. a case involving a sniper) Scott v. Harris the court stated the Garner case "did not establish a magical on/off switch that triggers rigid preconditions whenever an officer's actions constitute 'deadly force'. Garner was simply an application of the Fourth Amendment's 'reasonableness' test" (p. 372). "Whether or not an officer's actions constitute 'deadly force,' all that matters is whether the [officer's] actions were [objectively] reasonable." This determination depends upon the underlying facts and circumstances of each particular case. the court reaffirmed that Graham v. Connor provides the outline for how courts should review all use of force cases. Define human trafficking, including Federal legislation. Human Trafficking is compelling someone to work OR to engage in a commercial sex act. Simply put... "Modern Day Slavery"! Human Smuggling and Human Trafficking are NOT the same thing! They are separate crimes! 1. Human Smuggling: this crime requires the crossing of a border. 2. Human Trafficking: this crime is all about the exploitation of another human being. Transportation and crossing of a border are not required. Additionally, being a foreign national is irrelevant as U.S. citizens can also be trafficked. However, Human Smuggling can lead to Human trafficking (i.e. an illegal alien may have voluntarily agreed to be smuggled in, but later became a victim of human trafficking through force, fraud or coercion. Committed via force, fraud, and coercion. The Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 was the first comprehensive federal law to address human trafficking (made human trafficking a federal crime). The law provides a threepronged approach that includes: prevention, protection and prosecution. Established the TVISA nonimmigrant status for victims of trafficking if they cooperated in the investigation and prosecution of traffickers. The TVPA has been reauthorized 4 times since 2000 (2003, 2005, 2008 and 2013). The TVPA 2000 was created to "ensure just and effective punishment of traffickers, and to protect their victims." TVPA provides the legal foundation for the U.S. government to combat and prosecute human trafficking crimes, and it sets additional policy and provides essential resources to help prevent and respond to victimization. Identify indicators of human trafficking. 1. Situational Indicators: a. Surveillance equipment (cameras and sensors) b. Locks, fences, restraints or guards surrounding a building Standardized part of all passports is called machine readable zone who counterfeits documents and/or uses them terrorists, identity theft, forgery, illegal immigration, human trafficking, slavery/smuggling Identify the elements, applicability, and scope of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Bivens Analogy. A plaintiff can sue a government official for a constitutional tort under two separate, but related theories. a. TITLE 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (CIVIL ACTION FOR DEPRIVATION OF RIGHTS). 1) THE STATUTE. Based on a law originally enacted in 1871, Title 42 U.S.C. § 1983 provides that: "Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer's judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia." 2) PURPOSE. 42 U.S.C. § 1983 provides a civil cause of action against state and local law enforcement officers who, acting under color of law, deprive an individual of any civil right. It is not a criminal statute, but a civil one that permits state and local law enforcement officers to be sued in federal court for civil rights violations. The statutory prerequisites to state a claim under Section 1983 are twofold: (1) The defendant acted under color of state law, and (2) The plaintiff was subjected to the deprivation of some right or immunity secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States. 3) The Elements of the Statute. In order to establish a claim under § 1983, the following elements must be met: a) An act ... b) Under color of law of a state, territory or the District of Columbia ... c) Depriving any person (a citizen or other person within United States jurisdiction) ... d) Of rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution or federal laws 4) COLOR OF LAW. Follow the instruction under Title 18 U.S.C. § 242. Unlike 18 U.S.C. § 242, however, by its express language 42 U.S.C. § 1983 applies only to state and local law enforcement. It does not apply to officials acting under color of federal law. 5) INTENT. No specific intent to violate a constitutional or federal civil right is required. The plaintiff must only prove intent to do the act which results in the deprivation of civil rights (e.g., the officer intended to seize someone and the seizure was not objectively reasonable). 6) REMEDY. Personal liability to the injured party in a civil suit. The result of an action under this statute may be judgment for actual (compensatory) damages, punitive (exemplary) damages, attorney's fees, and/or injunction. THE BIVENS ANALOGY. In Bivens, the Supreme Court created an analogy to Title 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Federal officers and agents may be sued in civil court for violating a person's constitutional rights. When the suit is against a federal officer, it is commonly called a "Bivens Action." Recognize the most common incidents of civil liability for Federal law enforcement officers under Bivens and the defense of qualified immunity. 1. CONSTITUTIONAL TORTS. The most common constitutional tort action against federal officers is for a Fourth Amendment violation. a. FOURTH AMENDMENT TORT CLAIMS. In Bivens, the Supreme Court held that federal law enforcement officers are civilly liable for violations of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. The claim may be for an unreasonable search or seizure b. UNLAWFUL ARRESTS AND SEARCHES. In determining whether a Bivens action for an unlawful warrantless arrest is proper, the courts must examine whether "a reasonable officer in the position of the defendant could have believed the arrest to be lawful in light of clearly established law and the information the arresting officers possessed." c. FRANKS RATIONAL FALSE AFFIDAVITS. In Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (1978), the United States Supreme Court held that a law enforcement officer violates the Fourth Amendment if, in order to obtain a search warrant, he perjures himself or testifies in reckless disregard for the truth. It is clearly established that the Fourth Amendment requires a truthful factual showing sufficient to constitute probable cause. d. UNREASONABLE SEIZURES. All claims that law enforcement officers used excessive force deadly or not in the course of an arrest, investigatory stop, or other seizure of a free citizen should be analyzed under the Fourth Amendment and its [objective] reasonableness standard. G e. FAILURE TO STOP A CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATION. "A law enforcement officer has an affirmative duty to intercede on the behalf of a citizen whose constitutional rights are being violated in his presence by other officers." Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity is the officer's defense to standing trial in a civil case for a constitutional tort. (Qualified immunity is not an available defense in a criminal prosecution.) It is raised by the officer well in advance of trial, and if granted, the court dismisses the case. The rationale behind qualified immunity is twofold. First, it permits officers to perform their duties without fear of constantly defending themselves against insubstantial claims for damages. On the other hand, it allows a plaintiff to recover damages when any reasonable officer would know that the officer violated a clearly established constitutional right Recognize incidents of potential civil liability for Federal law enforcement officers under state tort theories and the FTCA protection from individual liability. Negligence, breach of duty, assault, battery, false imprisonment, false arrest, intentional infliction of emotional damage PROTECT FEDERAL EMPLOYEES WHO ACT WITHIN THE SCOPE OF EMPLOYMENT. The FTCA protects federal employees from personal liability for state law torts committed within the scope of their employment. The United States is substituted as the defendant. The exclusive remedy is against the United States. To this extent, the FTCA provides absolute immunity to the federal employee. Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) The FTCA is a limited waiver of the United States' sovereign immunity. It allows the plaintiff to sue the United States for the in-scope negligent torts of employees of the government. Legislative Branch The Legislative Branch (Congress) enacts laws as provided in Article I, Section 8. This section provides the specific powers of the legislative branch, which are enumerated below: a. The power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, and the power to provide for the common defense and general welfare. b. The authority to borrow money on the credit of the United States. c. The power to regulate interstate and foreign commerce. d. The power to establish rules of naturalization and laws relating to bankruptcies. e. The authority to coin money, to regulate the value thereof, and to fix the standards of weights and measures. f. The power to provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States. g. The authority to establish post offices and post roads. h. The jurisdiction to secure to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries. i. The prerogative of establishing judicial tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court. j. The rights to make and enforce laws related to piracies and felonies committed on the high seas and offenses against the laws of nations. k. The power and responsibility for declaring war and making rules concerning captures on land and water. l. The responsibility to raise and support armies. m. The power to provide and maintain a navy. n. The authority to make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces. barring some narrow exceptions, holds that any evidence obtained by law enforcement officers in a manner which violates one's constitutional rights cannot be used against him/her in court. 3. The Fifth Amendment Self-incrimination Clause, as with the Fourth Amendment, has a direct and dramatic impact on law enforcement conduct. It will be discussed in depth in the course on self- incrimination. Generally, an accused cannot be compelled by law enforcement to provide incriminating evidence. The Due Process Clause says that no person may be denied life, liberty or property without due process of law. It directly impacts several important law enforcement practices such as show-ups, lineups, and photo arrays. If they are overly suggestive, they violate this provision of the Fifth Amendment. 4. Many of the federal criminal procedural rules have their origins in the Sixth Amendment. It is here that we find the constitutional basis for the following: a. Speedy Trial, which may have a great impact on the preparation of cases for trial. Law enforcement officers should be aware of the time limits for certain procedures, as specified in the Act. b. The right to the assistance of counsel which attaches at the beginning of the "adversarial process," and has been extended to include the right to have counsel present not only in court, but at any "critical stage" of the prosecution following indictment, information or initial appearance, whichever occurs first. "Critical stages" include police interrogations and postindictment identifications (lineups), and suppression hearings to determine the admissibility of evidence. This governs how and when law enforcement may talk with defendants and, coupled with the Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination, provides the basis for Miranda warning requirements. c. The right to be informed of the nature and cause of the charges forms the basis for the Initial Appearance. It is typically at the Initial Appearance that Criminal Complaints and Search Warrants are returned, the accused is first formally told of the charges and informed of other constitutional rights. Often, there will be no Assistant U.S. Attorney at the Initial Appearance. Therefore, the Federal law enforcement officer will be the one representing the government's interest at this crucial stage. d. The Eighth Amendment prohibition against "excessive bail" is the basis for the Bail Reform Act of 1984, which changed the entire perspective on this issue. Rather than the accused being required to show why release is appropriate, the government must show sufficient reason why the accused should remain in custody. The Federal law enforcement officer must investigate, determine and develop evidence relevant to this critical issue. They must be prepared to state the government position regarding pretrial release and be able to articulate the evidence to support the recommendation to the Magistrate Judge at the Initial Appearance or bond hearing. Identify the components of the criminal justice system that originate in the U.S. Constitution. 1. Grand Jury. According to the Fifth Amendment, all "infamous" crimes must be prosecuted by grand jury indictment. "Infamous" means felony offenses. 2. The Initial Appearance comes from the Sixth Amendment right to be informed of the nature and cause of the charges. It is typically at the Initial Appearance that the Criminal Complaint and Search Warrants are returned, the accused is first formally told of the charges and informed of other constitutional rights. 3. Venue comes from Article III, Section 2 and the Sixth Amendment, which states that trials shall be held in the state and district where the crime was committed. 4. The right to trial by jury comes from Article III, Section 2. The Sixth Amendment provides for an impartial jury of the State and district where the crime was committed. The Graham Factors (SIRF) Severity of the crime Immediacy of the threat Resisting arrest (actively) Flight; evading arrest Other Factors number of officers/suspects ratio size, age, and condition of suspect duration of action criminal or psychiatric history, if known time deadly force requires a commensurately strong governmental interest. must weigh the nature of the intrusion against the facts confronting the officer. intermediate weapons batons, tasers, and pepper spray. the test for using one is the same as deadly force. qualified immunity an officer's defense to standing trial in a civil case for a constitutional tort (not available in a criminal case). It is raised by the officer well in advance of trial. When raised, the burden is on the plaintiff to present sufficient facts that the officer violated a clearly established constitutional right. Identify and analyze when the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination is applicable. The Fifth Amendment states, in pertinent part, that: No person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself. To qualify for the Fifth Amendment privilege, a person's communication must be testimonial, incriminating, and compelled. In some situations, the privilege against self-incrimination is not self-executing. For example, when a person voluntarily agrees to an interview with a law enforcement officer, if that person desires the protection of the privilege against self-incrimination, that person must claim it. This means that a person in this situation cannot invoke the privilege by simply standing mute; the person is required to assert the privilege in order to benefit from it. A person can assert his or her Fifth Amendment privilege in any proceeding - civil or criminal, administrative or judicial, investigatory or adjudicatory. Once asserted, it protects the person against any compelled disclosures that the person reasonably believes could be used against him or her in a criminal prosecution, or that could lead to other evidence that might be so used. Identify and analyze when Miranda warnings are required. Cops, Custody, and Questioning. Law Enforcement Custodial Interrogation. Law enforcement questioning is an effective tool for the enforcement of criminal laws. Voluntary confessions are not merely a proper element in law enforcement, they are an unmitigated good, essential to society's compelling interest in finding, convicting, and punishing those who violate the law. However, statements obtained from law enforcement custodial interrogation, whether inculpatory or exculpatory, may not be used in a criminal trial against a defendant unless the government demonstrates the use of procedural safeguards effective to secure the privilege against self-incrimination. Identify and analyze a valid Miranda waiver. Knowing, Intelligent, and Voluntary. The Supreme Court said that law enforcement officers must clearly and unequivocally advise suspects of their constitutional rights prior to any custodial interrogation. Miranda warnings are given, an individual may waive his or her Miranda rights and agree to answer questions or make a statement. A reviewing court will conduct an inquiry into the totality of the circumstances surrounding an interrogation to determine whether an accused validly waived his or her Miranda rights. Only if the totality of the circumstances surrounding the interrogation reveals both an un-coerced choice and the requisite level of comprehension may a court properly conclude that the Miranda rights have been waived. Identify and analyze how to proceed after a suspect invokes a Miranda right. Under the Fifth Amendment, there are two rights that a suspect can assert when subjected to a custodial interrogation: (i) the right to silence; and (ii) the right to counsel. If a suspect asserts either right, the general rule is that law enforcement officers must stop the interrogation. The procedure that will follow differs depending on which right the suspect asserted. If the suspect asserts both rights, the procedure regarding the right to counsel will take precedence. Asserting the Right to Remain Silent - the Supreme Court said that if a person indicates in any manner, at any time prior to or during questioning, that he wishes to remain silent, the interrogation must cease. Without this right to cut off questioning, the setting of in-custody interrogation can operate on an individual to overcome his or her free choice in producing a statement after the privilege has been invoked.