Criminal Violations by Police and Correctional Officers
This paper examines criminal violations committed by police and correctional officers, framing them within the broader concept of deviance in criminal justice work. It distinguishes between procedural, civil, and criminal violations while surveying the most prevalent forms of misconduct — including perjury, brutality, sexual violence, and profanity. The paper explores the environmental and individual factors that contribute to these violations, noting the role of limited supervision and the demanding nature of law enforcement and correctional work. It concludes by outlining major efforts undertaken to address police and correctional misconduct, such as external oversight, improved recruitment and training, and enhanced accountability measures.
- Introduction: Framing deviance and the slippery slope in criminal justice
- Deviance in Criminal Justice Work: Defining deviance, misconduct, and violation subcategories
- Types of Criminal Violations by Police and Correctional Officers: Overview of common violation types and reform efforts
- Specific Forms of Misconduct: Perjury, brutality, sexual violence, and profanity explained
- Addressing Criminal Violations: Oversight, training, and accountability as remedies
- Conclusion: Causes and persistence of officer misconduct summarized
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- It establishes clear definitional boundaries early, distinguishing deviance, misconduct, and the subcategories of procedural, civil, and criminal violations before moving into specific examples.
- Each type of violation is treated in its own focused section, making the argument easy to follow and well-organized for a survey paper.
- The paper grounds abstract concepts in concrete examples, such as "dropsy evidence" for perjury, giving readers tangible illustrations of each violation type.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates effective use of taxonomy — systematically categorizing a broad subject (police/correctional deviance) into nested subcategories (procedural, civil, criminal) and then further into named types (perjury, brutality, sexual violence, profanity). This technique allows the writer to impose structure on a complex topic and signal academic rigor through organized, hierarchical analysis.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a contextual introduction establishing the "slippery slope" framing, followed by a definitional section on deviance. The core section inventories specific violation types with brief explanations of each. A shorter section surveys institutional responses — oversight, recruitment, training, and accountability — before a concise conclusion that ties causes back to the nature of criminal justice work itself. This classic problem-types-solutions arc is appropriate for an introductory criminal justice survey paper.
Introduction
The work of law enforcement and correctional officers revolves around a slippery slope — the likelihood of a slow worsening of social and moral inhibitions and a shifting perception of what constitutes permissible conduct. Generally, law enforcement and police officers are mandated with the task of maintaining law and order in society by dealing with crime and criminals. Correctional officers, on the other hand, assist in the incarceration and rehabilitation of convicted criminals as those individuals serve their sentences.
As a result, both law enforcement and correctional officers are expected to carry out their work with extreme professionalism and without any deviant conduct. While the general public holds enormous expectations of these professionals, it tends to overlook the inherently difficult nature of the work. Criminal justice work involves dealing with situations that routinely fall below ordinary comfort levels. The nature of this work has contributed to the emergence of the concept of correctional deviance, which encompasses all activities that are inconsistent with the regulations, values, and ethics of criminal justice practice.
Deviance in Criminal Justice Work
Criminal violations committed by police or correctional officers can be broadly defined as deviance — a term that is considerably broader than corruption (Barnhart, 2010). Deviance in criminal justice work refers to all criminal violations carried out by law enforcement and correctional officers, encompassing all activities that are not in accordance with the laws, ethics, and values governing the criminal justice field. These behaviors are inconsistent with applicable standards not only within criminal justice, but also from broader societal and professional perspectives.
In recent years, criminal violations by these officers have often been explained through the concepts of police misconduct and corruption, which are primarily abuses of police authority. While these terms are sometimes used interchangeably, they are applied to criminal, civil, and procedural violations. The term police misconduct is the broadest category, encompassing all three types. Procedural violations occur when officers violate the internal rules and regulations of their police department or correctional facility. Civil violations take place when officers violate state or federal laws with respect to citizens' civil rights, meaning their actions are unconstitutional. Criminal violations, by contrast, involve practices that breach state or federal laws without necessarily infringing upon an individual's civil rights.
Generally, the most common forms of police and correctional officer misconduct involve the use of excessive force, physical or verbal abuse, discrimination, and selective application of the law.
Types of Criminal Violations by Police and Correctional Officers
Police misconduct and deviance occur in several ways, depending on the situation and the particular officer involved. The past few decades have seen substantial reform efforts within the criminal justice and law enforcement field. One example is the move by many police departments and correctional facilities to screen out candidates with minimal ethical standards during hiring. Even though these efforts have yielded some positive results, unethical practices and criminal violations continue to take place in both small and large departments and facilities (Martin, 2011). Some of the most common types of criminal violations committed by police and correctional officers are described below.
Conclusion
Criminal violations by police and correctional officers in the line of duty have become a significant concern in modern criminal justice work. The causes of these violations range from the individual characteristics of the officer to the specific features of the working environment. Ultimately, however, the primary driver of these violations is the demanding nature of criminal justice work itself, compounded by inadequate supervision. Sustained efforts in oversight, training, and accountability remain essential to reducing misconduct and upholding the integrity of the criminal justice system.
References
Barnhart, T. E. (2010, February 15). Deviance and corruption. Retrieved November 30, 2013, from http://www.corrections.com/news/article/23579-deviance-and-corruption
Bayley, D., & Perito, R. (n.d.). Police corruption — What past scandals teach about current challenges. Retrieved November 30, 2013, from http://www.usip.org/sites/default/files/SR%20294.pdf
Martin, R. (2011, May). Police corruption — An analytical look into police ethics. Retrieved from the Federal Bureau of Investigation website:
"Worse than the disease: Law enforcement officers committing sexual violence in the line of duty." (n.d.). Tech Dirt. Retrieved November 30, 2013, from
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.