The overall content of this movie is state crime. This movie has served to bridge the gap between abstract and distant cases to people from regions far from Rwanda, as well as those who are born years after the Rwanda genocide. It explores the importance of respecting human rights. It explores the experiences of those involved in the Rwanda genocide. It also voices out their calls for redemption. (Rothe & Ross, 2007)This movie has extensively exploited the history of the situation in Rwanda during the war and the outcomes. It exposes the conflict that existed and the cause of the conflict. The movie has a vivid picture of the emotional sufferings of the victims of genocide. It provides an array of facts on the impact of civil conflicts and sate criminology. It has succeeded in highlighting the motivational and opportunity factors that lead to state crimes like the Rwandan case.In this movie, the case of Rwanda genocide was as a result of explosion of a suppressed hatred fostered by lengthy years of tribal marginalization by the former government. (Rothe & Ross, 2007) This government favored one tribe and oppressed the other. When the marginalized tribe came to power, it sought to eliminate the once favor tribe. The film highlights the issues of opportunity and enactment patterns by the regime to accomplish the genocidal crime.The film casts are seen discussing the discriminatory impacts of the existing regime and they vow to revenge once they get the power. This movie portrays the issues of dealing with offenders and the victims of mass criminal acts. The movie captures the scope of the genocide, and the role of every Rwanda in perpetrating the genocide. (Rothe & Ross, 2007) The film then illustrates rationale ways that states need to adopt in response to such types of crimes. It shows the varied systems of accountability for a country to heal and proceed with life.
Saint Leo University
CRJ-530-MCOL2 Ethics in Criminal Justice
Dr. Gary Metts
February 18th, 2022
Throughout the history of the Criminal Justice System in the United States, undercover operatives have been a crucial part of obtaining information and convictions of the organizations in which they were placed undercover. Along with the life-threatening risks that the undercover police officers face, there is also the possibility of engaging in criminal activity that could lead to the undercover officers being prosecuted. This document/memo to Detectives Freeman and Underwood outlines the crimes that are approved by the Special Agent in Charge (SAC), as well as some of the ramifications of abusing their undercover status by committing crimes that were not permitted. By giving Detectives Freeman, and Underwood this outline on what is expected of them, it instructs them on how to behave, what crimes they can take part in, and what to do if they are forced into criminal activity without prior approval from the Special Agent in Charge. With these instructions, Detectives Freeman and Underwood should have all of the necessary tools and information to make the undercover operation a success in preventing a riot at the political protests led by the Ruckus Society.
On Tuesday, February 15th, 2022, along with other members of the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) based in Miami, Fl, I, Lead Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard DeAlmas was placed in charge of creating and distributing a task memo for our operation for the undercover mission to infiltrate the Ruckus Society. Both, Detective Amy Underwood, of the Pasco County Sheriff’s Office, and Detective Sheila Freeman, of the Pinellas County Shariff’s Office have jointly agreed to be placed under deep cover as it would not draw suspicious with their friends or family for being away for long periods of time. The Ruckus Society has been an important organization in many large-scale protests throughout the country over the last couple of years. In efforts to obtain more success than other undercover assignments of the same nature in the past, this memo serves to provide an outline of what is expected and permitted for the officers’ actions throughout the investigation.
Detectives Freeman and Underwood are being placed, undercover, to dispatch the larger criminal plans between the protesting groups. Because of this, they will likely be asked to participate in activities that are below the ethical standards of the criminal justice program, even illegal. Detectives Freeman and Underwood are now permitted, within the scope of the undercover investigation, to participate in criminal behavior in order to gain evidence to the targeted crime, or to maintain their cover (Joh, 2009). The detectives now have the authority and responsibilities of Covert Human Intelligence Sources, or CHIS (Dawson, 2021). In simpler terms, Underwood and Freeman are essentially criminal informants (Dawson, 2021). This provides the immunity to crimes that further benefit the undercover operation(s).
Since the precedent has been set, while undercover, and operating in the investigation, Detectives Underwood and Freeman are permitted to commit misdemeanors, such as smoking marijuana or shoplifting (Dawson, 2021). This has benefitted the investigations in the past. Almost all foiled terrorism attacks were dismantled by a criminal informant (CI) or CHIS (Casciani, 2020). The first action that is taken is to target someone in the society to believe that the undercover agent is one of the activists (Joh, 2009). Once Underwood and Freeman are successfully placed inside one of the organizations, contact with their superiors will cease, except for a cellphone call every night to provide briefings on the day’s actions. Underwood and Freeman are to understand the dangers of the job. Not only are they in danger with the group that is being surveyed, but by other law enforcement officers as well.
According to the Washington Post, two police officers were sentenced to four years in prison for beating an undercover police officer that was gathering information, much like Detective Underwood and Freeman, however, A police officer, Randy Hays, and his partner severely beat undercover officer Luther Hall (Beachum, 2021). Officer Hall has since been diagnosed with depression, anxiety, and post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (Beachum, 2021). This illustrates the fact that not only are you going to be subjected to the threat of physical harm if your cover is blown, or by getting into an altercation with another officer who does not know that you are undercover, but also with the fact that some of these situations can lead to devastating mental abuse. Therefore, Detectives Underwood and Freeman have been chosen for the assignment. The previous police records and accomplishments between the two suggest that they are physically and mentally prepared for many of the possible situations that may arise in their undercover investigation. Pre-approval has been granted for petty crimes, such as smoking marijuana or shoplifting, however, felonies vary from this process (Dawson, 2021). Generally, committing felonies would require the undercover agent to get prior approval. However, the amendment to this process has been added. If there is no opportunity to clear the crime with your superiors, your common sense and professional judgement to make this decision (Dawson, 2021). The only caveat to this is that whenever an officer participates in the commission of a felony related crime without prior approval, will have to justify their actions and explain how their actions benefitted the case (Dawson, 2021). This does not give Detectives Underwood and Freeman cheque blanc to commit any crime (Dawson, 2021). For example, the two detectives would not be permitted to commit armed robbery with it being unrelated to the investigation. There is another standard to consider when prior approval to commit a crime is not given, the detectives are to report the details of the crime, why the crime was committed and why prior approval was not given. It is up to the individual agency as to which crimes are to be permitted, as well as what the undercover officers are not permitted to participate in (Joh, 2021). However, if one of the detectives does commit one of the not permitted crimes, the agency will investigate the situation and have action taken from there (Joh, 2021). Although, the goal of the undercover investigation is to be several steps ahead of the targets.
Another way that undercover police officers can help further their image of not being a police officer, or CI, is to partake in crimes. They are not compelled to stop a crime in progress (Joh, 2021). As the CHIS bill, and the same with criminal informants who assist police for money or a reduced sentence from a crime they commit, they often have immunity from those crimes. However, that only applies to crimes that were suggested by others in the group (Joh, 2021). If Underwood or Freeman suggest that the group commits an armed robbery to get more criminal evidence on them, this would be considered police entrapment and the entire case would likely get thrown out because the suspects could then make the case that the crimes that were committed were the idea of the officers, thus entrapment occurred (Joh, 2021).
Although Detectives Freeman and Underwood have immunity from prosecution for crimes that they commit during the course of the investigation, this is not without its limits (Joh, 2021). The undercover entities are permitted to participate in crime, including to felonies, as long as it is relevant to the investigation to which they are assigned (Joh, 2021). As their securities in immunity makes an undercover officer complacent, there are actions in which they can be prosecuted (Joh, 2021). As an example, if an officer partakes in smoking marijuana before all measures were taken to attempt to avoid the situation; also in the circumstance in which an officer consumed illegal substances where there is no benefit to the investigation (Dawson, 2021).
As previously mentioned, there are going to be situations in which the undercover operatives are forced into crimes that maintain their undercover status (Joh, 2021). The operatives are permitted to commit these crimes, on the condition that they are reported as soon as feasibly possible (Joh, 2021). Once the crime has been reported to the Special Agent in Charge (SAC), the SAC will then submit the report to the Federal Bureau of Investigation Head Quarters (FBIHQ), who then, in turn review the report and determine if the crime was beneficial to the investigation (Undercover, 1992). If those actions by Freeman or Underwood are deemed to be the actions of a “rogue cop (which implies that the crime that was committed did not further the investigation)”, they shall be promptly removed from the case and, if necessary, prosecuted (Undercover, 1992).
Though the operatives are vetted, and acting under the authority of the government, this paper outlined when, and under what circumstances, the operatives may participate in otherwise unlawful actions. The government thanks the participants for their involvement in the case.100 words