CRJ 331 Week 8 Case Study 3: Michael Brown
According to media reports, police officer Darren Wilson shot and killed 18 year old Michael Brown on August 9, 2014, in Ferguson, Missouri, a suburb of St. Louis. The disputed circumstances of the shooting of an unarmed man, the resultant protests, and the civil unrest due to racial undertones of the case have received considerable attention in the United States and abroad. In this case study, you will explore how police psychology impacts the future outcome of this case and the likelihood of criminal charges being brought against the officer.
Review the following articles regarding the Michael Brown case:
- “Timeline: Michael Brown shooting in Ferguson, Mo.”, located at http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/08/14/michael-brown-ferguson-missouri-timeline/14051827/
- “Michael Brown shooting: Legal questions loom”, located at com/2014/08/26/us/michael-brown-shooting-legal-questions/”>http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/26/us/michael-brown-shooting-legal-questions/
Write a three to five (3-5) page paper in which you:
- Determine whether or not after the resolution of this event, the officer in question will need an additional psychological assessment to ensure that his future conduct, if he returns to active duty, is befitting of an officer. Provide a rationale for your response.
- Explain the fundamental distinction between deductive analytic techniques and inductive analytic techniques. Analyze if the officer in question made his decision to act based on deductive analytic techniques or inductive analytic techniques. Provide a rationale for your response.
- Argue for or against the theory that a well prepared officer should possess the following characteristics – agreeableness, empathy, listening comprehension, and sociability – in order to perform well as a law enforcement officer. Next, determine if any of these characteristics were present when Officer Wilson encountered Michael Brown. Provide a rationale to support your response.
- Given the circumstances surrounding this event, consider the following options the officer in question may have had in this case:
- Wait for back up before engaging the suspect
- Engage the suspect without a weapon
- Follow the suspect without engaging him
- Resolve to allow the suspect to proceed to his destination
Select the option that you believe would have best served the purpose of protecting the officer, the suspect, and the general public in this case. Provide a rationale for your response.
- Use at least three (3) quality academic resources in this assignment. Note: Wikipedia and similar type Websites do not qualify as academic resources.
Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements:
- Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA or school-specific format.
|
Case Study 3: Michael Brown |
|||||
|
Criteria |
Unacceptable Below 60% F |
Meets Minimum Expectations 60-69% D |
Fair 70-79% C |
Proficient 80-89% B |
Exemplary 90-100% A |
|
1. Determine whether or not after the resolution of this event, the officer in question will need an additional psychological assessment to ensure that his future conduct, if he returns to active duty, is befitting of an officer. Provide a rationale for your response. Weight: 20% |
Did not submit or incompletely determined whether or not after the resolution of this event, the officer in question will need an additional psychological assessment to ensure that his future conduct, if he returns to active duty, is befitting of an officer. Did not submit or incompletely provided a rationale for your response. |
Insufficiently determined whether or not after the resolution of this event, the officer in question will need an additional psychological assessment to ensure that his future conduct, if he returns to active duty, is befitting of an officer. Insufficiently provided a rationale for your response. |
Partially determined whether or not after the resolution of this event, the officer in question will need an additional psychological assessment to ensure that his future conduct, if he returns to active duty, is befitting of an officer. Partially provided a rationale for your response. |
Satisfactorily determined whether or not after the resolution of this event, the officer in question will need an additional psychological assessment to ensure that his future conduct, if he returns to active duty, is befitting of an officer. Satisfactorily provided a rationale for your response. |
Thoroughly determined whether or not after the resolution of this event, the officer in question will need an additional psychological assessment to ensure that his future conduct, if he returns to active duty, is befitting of an officer. Thoroughly provided a rationale for your response. |
|
2. Explain the fundamental distinction between deductive analytic techniques and inductive analytic techniques. Analyze if the officer in question made his decision to act based on deductive analytic techniques or inductive analytic techniques. Provide a rationale for your response. Weight: 25% |
Did not submit or incompletely explained the fundamental distinction between deductive analytic techniques and inductive analytic techniques. Did not submit or incompletely analyzed if the officer in question made his decision to act based on deductive analytic techniques or inductive analytic techniques. Did not submit or incompletely provided a rationale for your response.
|
Insufficiently explained the fundamental distinction between deductive analytic techniques and inductive analytic techniques. Insufficiently analyzed if the officer in question made his decision to act based on deductive analytic techniques or inductive analytic techniques. Insufficiently provided a rationale for your response.
|
Partially explained the fundamental distinction between deductive analytic techniques and inductive analytic techniques. Partially analyzed if the officer in question made his decision to act based on deductive analytic techniques or inductive analytic techniques. Partially provided a rationale for your response.
|
Satisfactorily explained the fundamental distinction between deductive analytic techniques and inductive analytic techniques. Satisfactorily analyzed if the officer in question made his decision to act based on deductive analytic techniques or inductive analytic techniques. Satisfactorily provided a rationale for your response.
|
Thoroughly explained the fundamental distinction between deductive analytic techniques and inductive analytic techniques. Thoroughly analyzed if the officer in question made his decision to act based on deductive analytic techniques or inductive analytic techniques. Thoroughly provided a rationale for your response. |
|
3. Argue for or against the theory that a well prepared officer should possess the following characteristics – agreeableness, empathy, listening comprehension, and sociability – in order to perform well as a law enforcement officer. Next, determine if any of these characteristics were present when Officer Wilson encountered Michael Brown. Provide a rationale to support your response. Weight: 20% |
Did not submit or incompletely argued for or against the theory that a well prepared officer should possess the following characteristics – agreeableness, empathy, listening comprehension, and sociability – in order to perform well as a law enforcement officer. Did not submit or incompletely determined if any of these characteristics were present when Officer Wilson encountered Michael Brown. Did not submit or incompletely provided a rationale to support your response. |
Insufficiently argued for or against the theory that a well prepared officer should possess the following characteristics – agreeableness, empathy, listening comprehension, and sociability – in order to perform well as a law enforcement officer. Insufficiently determined if any of these characteristics were present when Officer Wilson encountered Michael Brown.
Insufficiently provided a rationale to support your response.
|
Partially argued for or against the theory that a well prepared officer should possess the following characteristics – agreeableness, empathy, listening comprehension, and sociability – in order to perform well as a law enforcement officer. Partially determined if any of these characteristics were present when Officer Wilson encountered Michael Brown. Partially provided a rationale to support your response.
|
Satisfactorily argued for or against the theory that a well prepared officer should possess the following characteristics – agreeableness, empathy, listening comprehension, and sociability – in order to perform well as a law enforcement officer. Satisfactorily determined if any of these characteristics were present when Officer Wilson encountered Michael Brown.
Satisfactorily provided a rationale to support your response.
|
Thoroughly argued for or against the theory that a well prepared officer should possess the following characteristics – agreeableness, empathy, listening comprehension, and sociability – in order to perform well as a law enforcement officer. Thoroughly determined if any of these characteristics were present when Officer Wilson encountered Michael Brown. Thoroughly provided a rationale to support your response.
|
|
4. Given the circumstances surrounding this event, consider the following options the officer in question may have had in this case. Select the option that you believe would have best served the purpose of protecting the officer, the suspect, and the general public in this case. Provide a rationale for your response. Weight: 20% |
Did not submit or incompletely considered the options the officer in question may have had in this case. Did not submit or incompletely selected the option that you believe would have best served the purpose of protecting the officer, the suspect, and the general public in this case. Did not submit or incompletely provided a rationale for your response.
|
Insufficiently considered the options the officer in question may have had in this case. Insufficiently selected the option that you believe would have best served the purpose of protecting the officer, the suspect, and the general public in this case. Insufficiently provided a rationale for your response.
|
Partially considered the options the officer in question may have had in this case. Partially selected the option that you believe would have best served the purpose of protecting the officer, the suspect, and the general public in this case. Partially provided a rationale for your response.
|
Satisfactorily considered the options the officer in question may have had in this case. Satisfactorily selected the option that you believe would have best served the purpose of protecting the officer, the suspect, and the general public in this case. Satisfactorily provided a rationale for your response.
|
Thoroughly considered the options the officer in question may have had in this case. Thoroughly selected the option that you believe would have best served the purpose of protecting the officer, the suspect, and the general public in this case. Thoroughly provided a rationale for your response.
|
|
5. Support your views with at least three (3) relevant and credible references, documented according to APA. Weight: 5% |
No references provided |
Does not meet the required number of references; all references poor quality choices. |
Does not meet the required number of references; some references poor quality choices. |
Meets number of required references; all references high quality choices. |
Exceeds number of required references; all references high quality choices. |
|
6. Clarity, writing mechanics, and formatting requirements Weight: 10% |
More than 8 errors present |
7-8 errors present |
5-6 errors present |
3-4 errors present |
0-2 errors present |
