By Alex Severson

In July 2019, Bernalillo County and the City of Albuquerque established the Law Enforcement Assisted Diversion (LEAD) program, a pre-booking diversion intervention designed to provide harm reduction services to individuals either at risk of or previously involved in the criminal justice system. In this report, we analyzed whether enrolling and engaging in LEAD improved participants’ housing, substance use, employment, and recidivism outcomes. We did not have enough data through November 2023 to support strong statistical conclusions about whether LEAD – Bernalillo County had been effective at improving outcomes of participants due to low enrollment counts prior to September 2021 and due to the deadline for submitting the present outcome evaluation. Preliminary results were suggestive of potential short-term gains in housing outcomes specifically among the subset of LEAD participants who continued to engage with the program through six-months, though it is unclear whether these results generalized to the subset of LEAD participants who disengaged following enrollment. Results, though statistically underpowered to detect effects, also did not suggest that program enrollment or engagement meaningfully influenced participant recidivism.

Albuquerque: University of New Mexico, Center for Applied Research & Analysis, 2023. 29p

By Stephanie Seguino, Nancy Brooks, Pat Autilio

This study has three goals. The first it to analyze police behavior as regards race and traffic policing. The second is to evaluate police compliance with the law requiring the collection and reporting of traffic stop data. And the third is to evaluate the effectiveness of the legislation in generating robust data collection on race and traffic policing that is relatively user friendly for analysis by community stakeholders. With regard to the first goal, we examine the data for evidence of racial disparities in several areas: racial shares and magnitudes of stops as well as racial disparities in stop rates, reasons for stops, arrest rates, search rates, and contraband “hit” rates. We also examine trends to determine whether racial disparities fall over time, particularly in response to the legalization of cannabis in July 2018. Our study is based on more than 800,000 traffic stops and 79 Vermont law enforcement agencies. The study includes a number of agencies that had not reported their data in time for our earlier study (Seguino and Brooks 2017). In addition to providing a statewide overview of racial disparities, we compare policing patterns as well as racial disparities across agencies, and separately for municipal law enforcement agencies, sheriff’s departments, and the Vermont State Police. We report raw data on all agencies in our sample, and these results can be found in the appendix. We have been careful to include in the body of the report that follows agency-level statistics only for those agencies that have the minimum number of observations by race (typically, 10 or more). Our main findings are as follows: • The Black and Hispanic shares of stopped drivers exceed their shares of the estimated driving population. The data indicate Black drivers were over-stopped by between 3% to 81%, depending on the measure of the driving population used. Hispanic drivers were over-stopped by 26%. The shares of stops of all other racial groups are at or below their share of the driving population. These numbers represent a statewide average, and obscure wide variation at the agency level. We provide detailed agency-level data in the report, which show that approximately 45 agencies over-stopped Black drivers by more than 25%. • The stop rate per 1,000 residents is very high in Vermont (255 drivers stopped per 1,000 residents) compared to the national average of 86 per 1,000 residents. This overall average obscures notable racial disparities in stop rates. The statewide white stop rate per 1,000 white residents is 256 compared to 459 stops of Black drivers per 1,000 Black residents. The Black stop rate is about 80% higher than the white stop rate and matches the upper bound described above since one of our measures of the driving population of an area is its number of residents. • These averages also obscure the wide variation in stop rates per 1,000 residents. Of particular concern are agencies with large racial disparities in stop rates that also significantly over-stop relative to the national average. For example, in Bennington the overall stop rate per 1,000 residents is estimated to be 659 and Black drivers are over-stopped from 55% to 335% depending on the measure of driving population. • Black and Hispanic drivers were ticketed at a higher rate than white drivers, and Black drivers were also more likely to be given multiple tickets per stop. Our ability to report accurately on ticket rates is limited by data quality concerns as some agencies only report a single outcome per stop even when more than one outcome occurred, such as multiple tickets. • White drivers were more likely to be stopped for moving violations than Black drivers. Black drivers were more likely to experience a stop for vehicle equipment violations. We are concerned that this type of stop may be more investigatory and pretextual than moving violations. Stops that are investigatory/pretextual, based on suspicion of illegal activity rather than observable behavior or evidence, are more susceptible to officer racial bias than stops based on other reasons, such as a moving violation or suspicion of Driving While Impaired (DWI). Several experts have recommended banning this type of stop, which could help to reduce not only racial stop rate disparities but also search disparities. (A November 2019 ruling by the Oregon Supreme Court has banned this increasingly controversial policing practice). • The arrest rate of Black drivers is roughly 70% greater than that of white drivers. The Hispanic-white arrest rate disparity is even larger, with the arrest rate of Hispanic drivers 90% greater than the white arrest rate. Some agency-level disparities were much wider. In Brattleboro, Black drivers’ arrest rate is 400% greater than the white rate; in Colchester, 185% times greater. • Black drivers are about 3.5 times more likely to be searched subsequent to a stop than white drivers and Hispanic drivers are searched at a rate that is 3.9 times greater than that of white drivers. Asian drivers are less likely to be searched than white drivers. Again, some agencies exhibited much wider disparities than the state average. In Brattleboro, Black drivers are almost 9 times more likely to be searched than white drivers; in Shelburne, 4.4 times greater; in South Burlington; 3.9 times greater; in Vergennes, 3.8 times greater; in Burlington, 3.6 times greater; and in Rutland, 3.45 times greater. • Black, Hispanic, and Asian drivers were less likely to be found with contraband than white drivers. The lower hit rate (that is, the percentage of searches that yield contraband) of drivers of color is widely regarded as providing evidence the police rely on a lower bar of evidence to search drivers of color than white drivers, suggesting possible racial bias in the decision to search. In a second test (a logit analysis) for racial bias in searches, we find that the race of the driver continues to be strongly correlated with the officer’s decision to search a vehicle, even after controlling for other factors that may influence the officer’s decision to search a vehicle. • We find that searches based on reasonable suspicion (a lower threshold of evidence than probable cause) have lower hit rates for all racial groups. And, the gap between the (higher) white hit rates and (lower) hit rates for people of color increases. Just as with investigatory/pretextual stops, searches based on reasonable suspicion are more prone to racial bias. With regard to trends over time: • From 2015 to 2019, the number of traffic stops has increased for all racial groups. Sheriff’s Departments registered an 86.4% increase in traffic stops over this time period, compared to a statewide average for all agencies of 39.7%. • Racial disparities in the increase in number of traffic stops are notable. While stops of white drivers increased by 44.6% over this time period, Black stops increased 72.5%; Asian stops, 66.7%; and Hispanic stops, 120.3%. • The share of stops that are investigatory/pretextual, including vehicle equipment stops, increased for all racial groups, but increases were greatest for Black drivers—so much so that by 2019, about one third of all stops of Black drivers were included in this category, up from 23% in 2016. For Hispanics, the increases in the share of such stops was even greater, rising from 18.0% in 2015 to 27.5% in 2019. • Racial disparities in arrest rates have also widened since 2014. The widening gap is due to a decline in the white arrest rate from 2018 to 2019 rather than an increase in the Black arrest rate. • Search rates declined for all racial groups after cannabis legalization but by 2019, the Black search rate continued to be 3 times greater than the white rate. Legalization of cannabis, in other words, did not have a substantial impact on the Black-white search rate disparity. The Hispanic search rate disparity widened from 2018 to 2019 with Hispanic drivers 2.6 times more likely to be searched than white drivers by 2019. • Hit rates have decreased for searches that result in any outcome (warning, ticket, or arrest) but the arrest-worthy hit rate rose slightly from 20.3% to 24.9% from 2018 to 2019. As search rates have fallen, searches appear to be somewhat more productive with regard to those that lead to an arrest but are somewhat less productive overall. Increasing hit rates suggests greater efficiency in policing decisions regarding searches, and clearly, less negative impact on drivers for whom searches are often traumatic experiences. Regarding data quality, our main findings are: • Data quality has improved for some but not all agencies over time. There continues to be a lack of compliance with the legislation requiring race data collection during traffic stops. Missing data on all of the outcomes of a stop, when stops have more than one outcome, date and time of stop, and stops IDs also hinders analysis. • Particularly worrisome is the large number of stops missing race of driver, the main concern of traffic stop data collection. One way to put into perspective the quantity of missing data is to compare the share of stops missing race of driver to the percentage of stops that are of BIPOC drivers. Given the low percentages of people of color in Vermont, even a small amount of missing race data can distort results. For more than a dozen agencies, the percentage of stops missing race of driver is at least double the percentage of stops that are reported to be of BIPOC drivers. At a minimum, this leads to low quality data and the accuracy of results from those agencies. It also violates the spirit of the legislation requiring race data collection. • The legislation has not been sufficiently precise or comprehensive in delineating the data to be collected. Police chiefs have interpreted the meaning of various components of the legislation differently, and thus do not follow a uniform method of reporting data. Some categories of data that would be useful—and are already collected—were not stipulated in the legislation. Law enforcement agencies have as a result declined to share those data. These findings suggest the need to revise the legislation on traffic stop race data collection in order to insure complete data that is uniformly submitted so that it can be analyzed without excessive difficulty.    

Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, 2021. 159p.

By Robin Joy

Act 193 mandates that law enforcement agencies collect data on roadside stops for the purpose of evaluating racial disparities. The Act dictates agency data collection and any related conversation centers on agency behavior. The Act and the data collected do not focus on or reflect the stories told by Black, Indigenous and People of Color (BIPOC) as related to their contacts with law enforcement agencies. Because of Vermont’s rural nature, small populations, and policing strategies, we conclude that traffic stop and race data are not sufficient to inform policy makers and stakeholders. Rigorous qualitative research focused on the experiences of the BIPOC community which detects patterns and trends can distinguish structural issues within the criminal justice system. Agency data should be used as a supplement to that research. The purpose of the study was to test different methods of assessing racial disparities in traffic stops for their applicability for all Vermont law enforcement agencies. In short, we found that this was not possible. This report reviews the methodologies tested and the findings. On Measuring Disparities 1. We tested three peer reviewed methods for benchmarking the driving population: Commuting Hour populations, Resident Driver populations, and Crash Data benchmarking. All three failed in Vermont because of the state’s rural nature and small populations. The low volume of people of color makes it difficult for consistent analysis. It is not possible for one benchmarking standard to be applied to all law enforcement agencies in the state. 2. We can recommend the “Veil of Darkness” analysis as an effort to examine racial disparities. However, that analysis essentially measures one work shift in a police department. In some departments that may just be a single officer. 3. Post-stop outcome measures may be useful, however, without more information on the stop (such as the violation for which the person was ticketed/arrested and other circumstances surrounding the stop) it is of limited value. Further, because so few people are searched or arrested it is hard to draw a conclusion from the data. 4. Stop data will now include information as to how often the same person is stopped by a department. Specifically, the year, make, model, and color of the car and the town/state of residence and the state of the plate will be available. This will help illustrate the stories community members have spoken about in protests, legislative hearings, and news articles – stories of people who feel they are being continuously targeted. For example, using these additional data fields, researchers can identify a 30-year-old Asian female from Montpelier driving a 2008 White Honda CRV who has been stopped four times in one month for various reasons

Montpelier, VT: Crime Research Group, 2021, 27p. 

By The Crime Research Group

Act 193 mandates that law enforcement agencies collect data on roadside stops for the purpose of evaluating racial disparities. The Act dictates agency data collection and any related conversation centers on agency behavior. The Act and the data collected do not focus on or reflect the stories told by Black, Indigenous and People of Color (BIPOC) as related to their contacts with law enforcement agencies. Because of Vermont’s rural nature, small populations, and policing strategies, we conclude that traffic stop and race data are not sufficient to inform policy makers and stakeholders. Rigorous qualitative research focused on the experiences of the BIPOC community which detects patterns and trends can distinguish structural issues within the criminal justice system. Agency data should be used as a supplement to that research. Part 1 of this report covers the data collection process over the past five years. The purpose of Part 2, which is in a separate report, was to test different methods of assessing racial disparities in traffic stops for their applicability for all Vermont law enforcement agencies.

Montpelier VT: Crime Research Group, 2021. 12p.

By Robin Joy

Introduction

Criminal justice stakeholders and policymakers are interested in the way people with mental health concerns and/or substance use disorders engage with law enforcement agencies. This examination explores a sample of these interactions to describe individuals’ contact with the criminal justice system. A better understanding of these interactions can evaluate the utility of administrative data to inform policies regarding police responses in crisis incidents.

Methods

With data provided by a municipal police department, researchers identified 18 people who had the most arrests from 2018-2022 and at least one incident with a mental health flag in the Valcour system. Criminal histories were obtained and used in conjunction with data from the Vermont judiciary and Department of Corrections to construct a robust description of how these individuals interact with the criminal justice system.

This study is a preliminary exploration of the utility of administrative data in describing how and why people with behavioral health concerns utilize police services in one municipal police department. As such, the results may not be applicable to other agencies and populations in Vermont. The cohort was too small to find patterns in the criminal histories that suggest how a person goes from limited contact in the first two years to a high utilization of services. Missing also is how much contact the cohort had with law enforcement during their lifetime. Additionally, the interaction that individuals with behavioral health concerns have with other law enforcement agencies, social service providers, and hospitals was outside the scope of study.

Findings

On average, individuals in the cohort had 1.39 contacts per day with law enforcement. Most of the calls were related to non-violent matters. The most common type of call involved intoxication followed by trespass.

Montpelier VT: Crime Research Group, 2024. 18p.

By Stephen Rushin

This Article argues that, if effectively regulated, policing represents a fundamentally important social institution that advances the community interest in public safety, justice, equality, and the rule of law.

In recent years, a significant and growing body of legal scholarship has called for the shrinking of police responsibilities, the defunding of police budgets, or the complete abolition of local police departments. A countervailing body of scholarly literature has questioned the wisdom of some of these proposals, arguing that they could unintentionally make policing worse or have unintended public safety effects.

This Article enters this debate by affirmatively defending the importance of the institution of policing. It argues that effectively regulated policing is critical to the investigation of harmful criminal behavior, the responses to public safety emergencies, the deterrence of future harmful conduct, the physical protection of historically marginalized communities, and the rule of law.

However, policing can only serve these important functions if it is effectively regulated and accountable to the community it serves. Too often, the failure of policymakers to properly regulate police behavior has led to unaccountable policing agencies that regularly violate the constitutional rights of their constituents, particularly the rights of historically marginalized populations. However, that represents an ongoing regulatory challenge rather than an indictment of the fundamental importance of the institution of policing.

Understanding the importance of policing as a social institution has more than mere academic significance. As some scholars push for a fundamental reimagination of public safety, it is vital for these proposals to understand the value conferred by the institution of policing. Only by understanding the importance of policing can both abolitionists and reformers develop solutions that balance public safety and the protection of constitutional rights.

76 South Carolina Law Review 133 (2024), 47p.

By Jeannine Bell and Stephen Rushin

This Article considers how policymakers can more effectively constrain police authority during traffic stops to reduce racial disparities and prevent unnecessary violence.

We begin by chronicling the power granted to police officers during traffic enforcement and the harms generated by this discretionary power. Under existing criminal procedure, police officers have considerable authority to stop motorists for any technical violation of the traffic code, even if the stated justification is a pretext for investigating an unrelated hunch or suspicion. After stopping a motorist, existing doctrine gives police the ability to question motorists, search vehicles under numerous circumstances, arrest drivers for minor violations of the law, and otherwise use traffic stops as a justification for criminal fishing expeditions. This makes police traffic stops an entryway into officer misconduct and violence.

Moreover, the harms of police traffic enforcement are felt disproportionately by communities of color. Empirical evidence generally suggests that Black and Hispanic drivers are more likely than their white counterparts to experience traffic stops. Black and Hispanic drivers are more likely to be stopped during daylight hours relative to nighttime hours when their race is apparent to police through visual observation. And searches of Black and Hispanic motorists are less likely to produce contraband than searches of white drivers, suggesting that police may employ a less rigorous standard of probable cause when justifying vehicle searches of drivers of color.

Given the growing body of literature on the harms caused by police traffic enforcement, some have called for the abolition of police traffic enforcement. Short of abolition, though, this Article shows how jurisdictions across the country have already moved to limit the authority of police during traffic encounters. This approach does not seek to eliminate entirely the police from the enforcement of traffic laws. Rather, it involves state and local policymakers enacting restrictions on police power during traffic enforcement that go beyond those mandated by the U.S. Supreme Court under existing doctrine. Indeed, in recent years, states and municipalities have enacted limitations on the use of pretextual traffic stops, consent searches, and unrelated questioning of motorists after stops. Others have restricted or banned the use of quotas as a police management tool. Some prosecutors’ offices have announced declination policies designed to disincentivize police from using traffic stops as a tool for the investigation of other unrelated crimes. Still other jurisdictions have explored additional reporting requirements and even technological replacements for the use of police officers in the enforcement of the traffic code.

Combined, we argue that this sort of criminal justice minimalism can reduce the harmful and racially disparate effects of police traffic enforcement without compromising public safety

57 Arizona State Law Journal, 2025, 52p.

By The College of Policing (UK)

The government’s Safer Streets mission aims to reduce serious harm and increase public confidence in policing and the wider criminal justice system. This guide supports senior police leaders and police and crime commissioners to help achieve this mission. It clearly sets out the best available evidence on public confidence in the police, as well as the policing activities that are most likely to have an impact. „ Implementing neighbourhood policing – Having a targeted visible presence in crime and anti-social behaviour hot spots or places with low trust. – Community engagement to identify the crime and anti-social behaviour issues that matter to people locally. – Carrying out effective problem-solving to tackle the issues that matter the most to local people. „ Policing with procedural and distributive justice – Making fair decisions and treating people respectfully. – Not being seen to over-police and under-protect communities. „ Improving police contact with victims – Responding to the needs and concerns of victims. – Focusing as much on the process as the end result. „ Improving police contact with suspects – Minimising the number of negative experiences. – Explaining enforcement action and preserving people’s dignity. „ Tackling police wrongdoing – Working within the law and adhering to ethical and professional standards. The guide begins by providing key definitions and trends in public perceptions over the past 20 years. It ends with a summary of what else may be important to public confidence in the police.

Coventry, UK: College of Policing Limited (2025) 23p.

By

Sarah Charman

,

Jemma Tyson

Record numbers of police officers are voluntarily resigning in England and Wales yet there is a lack of research which analyses why. Findings from an analysis of 62 interviews with police leavers who voluntarily resigned from the police service within England and Wales between January 2021 and June 2022 suggest that officers are leaving primarily due to perceptions of organizational injustice which focus upon: a lack of voice; concerns about promotion/progression; poor leadership; and a lack of organizational flexibility. This paper takes this latter reason—organizational flexibility—as its focus and through an inductive analysis of these leavers’ voices, aims to both enrich the scarce qualitative academic literature on police workforce resignations and retention but also to offer significant evidence for future consideration of workforce optimization. The findings indicate that although sympathetic to operational policing complexities, participants were frustrated by organizational inflexibility. Three key areas were identified where the police service was perceived to be unsupportive or unreceptive—(a) dealing with additional needs, disabilities, or health issues of officers, (b) conflicts with non-work commitments, primarily those associated with childcare/parental responsibilities, and (c) supporting officers transitioning to part-time working. These structural barriers to effective workplace functioning were exacerbated by the cultural norms of overwork and ‘fitting in’ and were additionally particularly experienced by female resigners. The authors call for a challenge to the cultural barriers towards flexible working, the modelling of flexible working at all levels of the organization, and a focus on reciprocal flexibility between employer and employee. Until this issue can be tackled, it is argued that retention will continue to be an underestimated but significant site of inequality within policing.

Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, Volume 18, 2024, paad104,

By Jacqueline M Drew, Elise Sargeant, Sherri Martin

Policing worldwide is facing a staffing and retention crisis. If the staffing exodus continues, communities will be left with too few police and large cohorts of inexperienced new recruits on the job. Drawing on 2,669 survey responses collected as part of a national study of law enforcement officers across the USA, we test an integrated theoretical model of the predictors of turnover intentions. We computed a path model using structural equation modelling, finding that job demand stressors (including trauma, organizational, and operational stressors), burnout, psychological distress, and commitment (including organizational commitment and occupational commitment) all play important roles in explaining the intentions of officers to exit the policing profession. Based on the study findings, the importance of trauma, organizational and operational job demand stress, and the differential impact of organizational and occupational commitment on police turnover intentions is established. Addressing burnout and psychological distress through a wellness agenda is likely to assist in stemming the outflow of officers from policing. The current study makes a significant empirical and practical contribution to the small body of existing police turnover research. The current research guides police leaders on the critical factors that must be considered when developing strategies and initiatives that aim to positively impact on the retention of officers within policing.

Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, Volume 18, 2024, paae036,

By The United States Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division and United States Attorney’s Offices Eastern, Middle, and Western Districts of Louisiana

On the evening of May 10, 2019, near Monroe, Louisiana, a Louisiana State Police trooper tried to stop a 49-year-old Black man named Ronald Greene for speeding and running a red light. Mr. Greene drove away. For 14 minutes, officers pursued him until he lost control of his vehicle, crashing on the side of the road. According to a sergeant that LSP regarded as its in-house use-of-force expert, what happened in the ensuing hours, weeks, and months was a “catastrophic failure in a million different directions.” Multiple LSP troopers and sheriff’s deputies arrived at the scene of the crash. They tased Mr. Greene repeatedly and pulled him out of his car. They punched him, dragged him by ankle shackles, and left him face down in the road. When Mr. Greene tried to roll onto his side, a trooper put his foot on Mr. Greene’s buttocks to hold him down on his stomach. That trooper later told a supervisor, “I’m trying to keep him laying down. I was going to sit him up, but I don’t want him spitting blood all over us.” Mr. Greene pleaded, “I’m scared. I’m your brother. I’m scared.” The LSP troopers deactivated or muted their body-worn cameras. When a supervisor arrived, he casually stepped over Mr. Greene, who laid moaning on the ground, and instead asked the troopers if they were ok. None of the troopers rendered aid to Mr. Greene, who became unresponsive and died before he reached the hospital. After Mr. Greene died, troopers filed reports attributing his death to a car accident. “We investigate crashes every day,” one trooper later told us. “No way someone died from a car crash with that damage.” One trooper who was there misdated the incident in an official report. LSP’s designated use-of-force expert at the time believed that was a deliberate attempt to cover up the incident. Another trooper miscategorized camera footage in LSP’s systems. And the supervisor who stepped over Mr. Greene’s body that night signed off on all the use-of-force reports. Over 15 months passed before LSP opened an Internal Affairs investigation into Mr. Greene’s death. In the intervening days and months, LSP troopers—including one involved in Mr. Greene’s death—would go on to assault more drivers. It was not until September 2020, 16 months after the incident, that LSP fired one of the troopers involved. It would take until 2021 for LSP to suspend a second trooper and fire a third who was involved in both Mr. Greene’s death and an assault of a different Black man. Mr. Greene’s death and its aftermath demonstrated serious failures at LSP—excessive force, improper supervision, ineffective training, and breakdowns in accountability. As our civil pattern or practice investigation revealed, these failures were not isolated, but part of a larger pattern or practice of law enforcement conduct that deprives people in Louisiana of their rights under the Constitution.

Following a comprehensive investigation, the Department of Justice has reasonable cause to believe that the Louisiana State Police engage in a statewide pattern or practice of using excessive force, which violates the Fourth Amendment. Our investigation, opened in 2022, also included examining whether LSP engages in racially discriminatory policing. At this time, we make findings only as to excessive force. Though this investigation reveals systemic problems, we recognize that most LSP troopers work hard to keep the public safe. We commend LSP troopers and staff who devote their professional lives to serving the community. LSP began making much-needed reforms after video of Mr. Greene’s death became public in 2021, two years after the incident. We believe those changes may have contributed to some recent improvements in use-of-force practices. The changes include revising LSP’s use-of-force policy, creating a Force Investigation Unit to investigate serious uses of force, and updating training programs. However, more reforms are needed to remedy the unlawful conduct we found. We describe recommended changes at the end of this report. We hope to work constructively with the State and LSP to implement these reforms.

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, 2025. 32p.

By Jillian Long

Incidents of police-involved shootings resulting in the death of unarmed civilians, such as Andre Hill in 2020, Bijan Ghaisar in 2017, and Michael Brown in 2014, have raised concerns about law enforcement use of deadly force, particularly involving firearms. In light of these concerns, growing attention has been paid to less-than-lethal weapons (LLWs) and the role LLWs may play in providing law enforcement officers alternatives to the use of deadly force.

A multitude of weapons marketed as less-than-lethal alternatives to firearms are currently in use by federal, state, and local law enforcement, including batons, pepper sprays, and stun guns. There are also a number of LLWs in development, such as unmanned aircraft systems (drones) equipped with tear gas, rubber bullets, and TASERs.

Some observers contend that LLWs offer the possibility of minimizing risk of death and serious injury to citizens and officers while simultaneously providing law enforcement with effective tools to incapacitate violent or noncompliant persons. Nevertheless, there is evidence that LLWs may present a number of potential health risks, lending credence to arguments that LLWs are less-than-lethal in name, but, depending on the circumstances of their use, can be lethal in practice. For example, a team of journalists led by the Associated Press, in collaboration with the Howard Center for Investigative Journalism programs at the University of Maryland and Arizona State University, documented over 1,000 deaths that followed local and state police officers’ use of less-than-lethal force from 2012 to 2021. Similarly, a 2019 Reuters investigation of deaths related to law enforcement use of TASERs found that 1,081 individuals had died after being hit by a police TASER from 1983 to 2017.

Should policymakers consider examining ways to legislate on the use of LLWs, numerous issues may garner attention. Currently, there is no single, universally accepted definition of less-than-lethal weapon, and the use of the term varies greatly among U.S. federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies. Conceptualizing a definition for LLWs raises a number of questions, including whether LLWs should be defined

• under a label other than less-than-lethal,

• according to a common capability,

• according to a common operational utility,

• according to an intended use to minimize risk of death and permanent injury, or

• according to a common application.

Policymakers could consider whether it is beneficial to establish a statutory definition of less-than-lethal weapon. Codifying the meaning of LLWs could be useful in terms of clarifying what weapons are (and are not) classified as less-than-lethal, which may help sharpen the focus and potential efficacy of policies. On the other hand, some may argue that law enforcement agencies and departments are better suited to define LLWs and, thereby, address LLWs in their individualized use-of-force policies, based on their organization’s specific needs, duties, and circumstances.

Moreover, there are relatively little federal data available on law enforcement officers’ use of LLWs and, consequently, few studies analyzing the health effects caused by law enforcement’s use of such weapons. Policymakers may wish to direct a federal agency or department to conduct research into LLW injury and mortality. Based on these findings, policymakers could consider legislative actions to influence law enforcement use of LLWs, such as (1) passing a bill encouraging or limiting federal law enforcement officers’ usage of LLWs and (2) placing provisions on or withholding funding from existing federal grant programs to incentivize or discourage state and local law enforcement usage of LLWs.

R48365

Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, January 23, 2025I

27p.

By Mylan Denerstein

This is the Monitor’s 23rd report and second report focused on the compliance of the New York City Police Department’s (the “Department” or “NYPD”) Neighborhood Safety Teams (“NST”) and Public Safety Teams (“PST”) with constitutional requirements in executing stops, frisks, and searches. In March 2021, the NYPD initiated NST units in certain precincts to combat gun violence in high-crime areas. Officers in NST units engage in proactive stop, frisks, and searches, and generally they are not expected to respond to 911 calls-for-service. NST officers drive unmarked cars and wear uniforms distinct from those worn by NYPD patrol officers. In June 2023, the Monitor filed the Nineteenth Report of the Independent Monitor (the “19th Report”) with the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, which contained results of the Monitor team’s 2022 audit of the NSTs. That report concluded that NST officers performed substantially below constitutional standards and had a rate of unlawful Terry stops nine percentage points higher than their counterparts in regular patrol positions. In addition, the report concluded that supervisors in the Department failed to identify and remediate unlawful reported stops. To determine Fourth Amendment compliance with the stops, frisks, and searches conducted by NSTs since the filing of the 19th Report, the Monitor began a second, more comprehensive audit of NSTs and PSTs, another specialized proactive enforcement unit, to assess their compliance with court-ordered reforms. This follow-up report audits NST, PST, and regular patrol officers based on stops, frisks, and searches conducted in 2023. It compares NST officers with their counterparts on regular patrol and in PSTs and measures compliance rates of all supervisors and officers regardless of unit assignment. Based on the 2023 audit, the Report concludes that NST and PST officers are not performing stops, frisks, and searches at constitutional levels, and that supervisors of NST, PST, and patrol officers are not appropriately overseeing their officers. Some of the key findings are below: • This 2023 audit shows that NST officers’ constitutional compliance with respect to stops, frisks, and searches did not improve since the Monitor’s 2022 audit. • In the 2023 audit, NST officers had reasonable suspicion (and thus a lawful basis) for 75% of the reported Terry stops, slightly below the NST percentage of 76% compliance in the 2022 audit. • In the 2023 audit, NST officers made lawful stops at a rate of 75%, 17 percentage points lower than their patrol counterparts’ rate of 92%. • In the 2023 audit, PST officers also made lawful stops at a rate lower than patrol officers, with only 64% of their reported stops being assessed as lawful, which is 28 percentage points lower than their patrol counterparts’ rate of 92%. • In the 2023 audit, NST officers and PST officers overwhelmingly conducted self-initiated stops (70% and 77%, respectively, were self-initiated), while officers on routine patrol primarily conducted stops based on radio runs (68% were radio runs). • In the 2023 audit, regardless of the officer’s unit assignment (NST, PST, Patrol, or other), Terry stops based on a complainant/witness (100% lawful) or a radio run (94% lawful) were nearly all constitutional, while only 65% of self-initiated stops were assessed as lawful. • In the 2023 audit, NST officers had reasonable suspicion for only 58% of the frisks assessed and had a legal basis for only 54% of the searches assessed. • In the 2023 audit, despite significant numbers of unlawful stops, frisks, and searches, command-level supervisors of NST, PST, and Patrol officers only determined that 1% of stops were unlawful and 1% of frisks and searches were unlawful. • In 95% of the stop reports in this audit in which race was identified (N=385) and 93% of the BWC videos assessed (N=697), the person stopped was identified as Black or Hispanic. Of the 397 stop reports in which gender was indicated, 97% were male. Overall, in this audit, 89% of the individuals encountered were Black or Hispanic males. The NYPD must focus on supervisors ensuring implementation of constitutionally compliant stops, frisks, and searches. The Department must improve Fourth Amendment compliance levels and NST and PST units must be better supervised. The ball is in the Department’s hands, and the NYPD can do this. The law requires no less.

New York: New York Police Department Monitor, 2025. 51p.

By Amnesty International UK

UK police are using data and algorithms to ‘predict’ who they believe will go on to commit crimes and where. The data they use is biased, particularly against Black and racialised communities in deprived areas. It is no surprise what this leads to. Through primary research and freedom of information requests, analysis of public sources, first-hand accounts from people in affected areas, and interviews with academics, experts and community organisers, this report investigates the harmful impact of predictive policing. The research finds that this increasingly widespread data-based policing is leading to the criminalisation, punishment and violent policing of Black and racialised people, and people from deprived areas, based on who they are, their backgrounds, where they live, who they associate with. This is the new face of racial profiling. In the words of one interviewee: ‘Rather than “predictive” policing, it’s simply, “predictable” policing. It will always drive against those who are already marginalised.’ Amnesty International finds the use of these data-based systems to predict, profile and assess people’s ‘risk’ of being involved in crime breaches the UK’s human rights obligations and should be prohibited.  

London: Amnesty International UK, Human Rights Action Centre , 2025. 139p.

By Europol. Strategic Group on Technology and Ethics 

Europol was mandated in 2019 by the EU Justice and Home Affairs ministers to create an Innovation Lab to support the law enforcement community in the area of innovation. The Lab aims to identify, promote and develop concrete innovative solutions in support of the EU Member States’ operational work. These will help investigators and analysts to make the most of the opportunities offered by new technology to avoid duplication of work, create synergies and pool resources. The activities of the Lab are directly linked to the strategic priorities as laid out in Europol Strategy 2020+, which states that Europol shall be at the forefront of law enforcement innovation and research. The European Clearing Board for ‘Tools, Methods and Innovations in the field of technical support of operations and investigations’ (EuCB) was launched by the Heads of Europol National Units (HENUs) in their meeting of 5 November 2020. It is composed of Single Points of Contact (SPoCs) from the Europol Innovation Lab, all EU Member States and the four Schengen-associated countries. SPoCs meet regularly in plenary meetings, during which they update each other on innovative projects and tools and decide on new joint collaboration activities. The Strategic Group on Technology and Ethics was founded in 2021 under the umbrella of the EuCB. Currently, the group is composed of representatives from Australia, Netherlands, Norway, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and the UK. One of the objectives of the group has been to create these guidelines ‘Assessing technology in law enforcement: A method for ethical decision-making’ for the benefit of all EuCB members. A method for applying ethics in practical decision-making Digital transformation and technology are vitally important in enhancing order and security but may also pose a threat to fundamental rights and freedoms. This document presents a method for assessing novel technology from a perspective of widely accepted values and principles. The guidelines contain a description of the central values and ethical principles, and give examples in the form of use cases, illustrating how they may be applied in structured decision-making and evaluation, in situations involving new technology in law enforcement. The use cases show how the method can be helpful in forming transparent and understandable arguments for trustworthy decisions about the adoption and use of various types of technology in law enforcement. The values and principles discussed here are also valuable when cooperating European law enforcement authorities are in search of common moral ground in their respective practices. The work of the Strategic Group on Technology and Ethics is based on methods used in clinical ethics committees and insights from value-based practices in policing – in addition to studies of ethical guidelines for technology and a survey of values central to European law enforcement authorities. Part I of the guidelines explains the seven steps of the method, while Part II sets out use cases to illustrate the application of the method in practice. Precautions regarding the use cases It should be noted that the use cases in Part II have not been legally vetted. They serve to illustrate the present method, and although the conclusion of a use case may be that it is ethical to use the technology (under certain conditions), this should NOT be understood as a conclusion concerning its legality. Legal regulation of law enforcement’s use of technology exists on many levels, both nationally and internationally, and it is beyond the mandate and resources of the Strategic Group on Technology and Ethics to perform a legal assessment of each use case scenario. It is a virtue of the present guidelines that they provide for transparency concerning the principles and values taken into consideration by the decision-maker, and ensure that the making of a decision is specific with respect to local, political, social, cultural and economic contexts, and the technology in question. This also implies that the use cases will never merely be copied to a domestic setting. While they may provide guidance and inspiration, the decision-maker is always responsible for producing an original assessment that takes account of the concrete circumstances in the actual situation. Ethics and the law To the members of Europol, it is fundamental that any development and deployment of technology in law enforcement must be lawful. For the purpose of these guidelines, it is thus assumed that, in a concrete case, issues of legality have already been duly addressed according to appropriate procedures. In the field of new technologies in law enforcement, however, the law may sometimes lag behind, leaving grey areas that are open for interpretation. A structured ethical approach, as presented in these guidelines, may shed light on the values and principles involved, and suggest which interpretation is ethically defendable. In the same vein, the present value-based reflective method may play a constructive role in the legislative process, by making visible – and more understandable – the ethical concerns that legislators should take into account when striking the balance between freedom and security in the field of law enforcement. Law enforcement’s development and/or use of new technology also regularly raises issues related to fundamental rights, where law and ethics are closely intertwined and the lines between the two may become blurred. This, too, leaves space for the present method to contribute with new perspectives and enrich our understanding of the issues at stake. A ‘living’ document The intention is to make this a ‘living’ document, that is, a document that captures new technology as well as novel applications of technology already in use. This is provided for by the expansion over time of the collection of use cases, which may integrate further developments in this area on European and national levels. This should also be reflected in Initiatives for training in the use of the method. By its dynamic character the document aims to be a durable resource for law enforcement authorities and policy makers.

Europol 2025. 30p.

By Zoe Marchment · Paul Gill

Project Servator is a strategic method of policing designed to deter, detect and disrupt a wide range of criminal activity including terrorism. This paper is the first empirical study to evaluate the stop and search aspect of Servator deployments. We compare the outcomes of 3488 routine stop and searches and 510 Servator stop and searches to determine whether the stop and search tactics used in this initiative produce more positive outcomes than routine stop and searches. We also compare outcomes of stop and searches that occurred on the basis of suspicious behaviour alone, by ethnicity, and through using a geographically matched sample. Collectively, the results indicate that stop and searches that occur during Servator deployments are more efficient than routine stop and search.

Security Journal (2025) 38:13

By Gregory D. Breetzke and Luna Asefaw Girmay

Research examining the crime drop has become increasingly popular with a plethora of studies showing how crime has declined since the 1990s. The vast majority of this research has, however, emanated from the United States and other ‘Western’ countries. In this study, we undertook a national-level analysis of crime trends in South Africa from 2010 to 2019 using official police data. Results showed that crime did drop marginally in the country over the study period although there is substantial variability in crime decline by crime type and geography. Moreover, various socio-demographic characteristics, such as income inequality, were found to possibly influence the temporal trends of crime in the country observed. These findings underscore the importance of context-specific analyses in understanding decadal crime trends and highlight the need for targeted, geographically nuanced approaches to crime prevention in South Africa

Security Journal (2025) 38:14

By Stijn Aerts

Key takeaways » Understanding Recidivism Recidivism refers to re-offending after release from imprisonment, probation, or parole, measured by rates of re-arrest, reconviction, or re-imprisonment. In the EU, recidivism rates typically range from 30% to 50% within two years, with repeat offenders responsible for a significant portion of crime. » Causes of Recidivism Risk factors for recidivism include substance abuse, lack of education, mental health issues, limited employment opportunities, stigmatisation, weak reintegration support, and structural issues in the justice system. “Prisonisation,” or the negative social and psychological effects of imprisonment, exacerbates these challenges. » Age and Crime Patterns The age-crime curve shows criminal behaviour peaks in late adolescence and early adulthood, declining sharply thereafter. Offenders who engage in criminal activity at a younger age are more likely to re-offend. Rehabilitation should focus on young offenders to address impulsivity and decision making, and on older offenders to facilitate life-course transitions like stable employment or family formation. » Effective Interventions Education and vocational training equip offenders with employability skills and foster self-esteem. Substance abuse treatment targets addiction, a major driver of criminal behaviour. Cognitive-behavioural therapy addresses distorted thought patterns and promotes pro-social behaviour. Community support services provide resources like job placement, housing, and peer support to ease reintegration, supplementing in-prison rehabilitation programmes. Mental health treatment treats disorders linked to criminal behavior, reducing risks of re-offending. EUCPN I Toolbox Red Restorative justice focuses on repairing harm through inclusive processes involving victims, offenders, and communities. It can have preventive effects by addressing offenders’ accountability and reducing victim harm. Overall, tailored initiatives for specific offender groups, such as neurodivergent individuals or members of organised crime, demonstrate significant potential in addressing unique challenges. One example is the Risk-NeedsResponsivity (RNR) model, which aligns rehabilitation efforts with offenders’ risk levels, criminogenic needs, and learning styles.Evidence suggests RNR-aligned interventions are more effective than any other, with reductions in recidivism up to 60%. Residential programmes offer intensive, structured environments, ideal for serious offenders. Community-based approaches are cost-effective, maintain community ties, and serve lower-risk individuals » EU Good Practices Examples like the RUBIKON Centre in the Czech Republic, the Revion programme in Finland and Primus Motor in Denmark highlight innovative, evidence-based approaches to reducing recidivism, emphasising holistic and community-oriented strategies. » Challenges Effective implementation faces hurdles like resource limitations, inconsistent application of models, and stigma. Tailored and integrated efforts are critical for long-term success. A holistic, evidence-based approach to reducing recidivism, combining individual rehabilitation, systemic reforms, and community engagement should be adopted.

Brussels: EUCPN, 2025. 44p.

By Susan Olzak

An underlying premise of democratic politics is that protest can be an effective form of civic engagement that shapes policy changes desired by marginalized groups. But it is not certain that this premise holds up under scrutiny. This paper presents a three-part argument that protest (a) signals the salience of a movements’ focal issue and expands awareness that an issue is a social problem requiring a solution, (b) empowers residents in disadvantaged communities and raises a sense of community cohesion, which together (c) raise costs and exert pressure on elites to make concessions. The empirical analysis examines the likelihood that a city will establish a Civilian Review Board (CRB). It then compares the effects of protest and CRB presence on counts of officer-involved fatalities by race and ethnicity. Two main conjectures about the effect of protest are supported: Cities with more protest against police brutality are significantly more likely to establish a CRB, and protest against police brutality reduces officer-involved fatalities for African Americans and Latinos (but not for Whites). But the establishment of CRBs does not reduce fatalities, as some have hoped. Nonetheless, mobilizing against police brutality matters, even in the absence of civilian review boards.

Forthcoming. “Does Protest Against Police Violence Matter? Evidence from U.S. Cities, 1980-2019.” American Sociological Review., 83 p.

By Rylan Simpson ,Leigh Grossman

Purpose

Longstanding debates in policing regard the optimal method of patrolling the community. One question that often gets raised is if patrol officers should be deployed in single-crewed (i.e., one-officer) or double-crewed (i.e., two-officer) units? As part of the present research, we empirically examine the call-related output of patrol units by crewed status in Oakland, California.

Methods

Drawing upon calls for service data from the Oakland Police Department, we retrospectively reconstructed the patrol environment to assess the call-related output of single- versus double-crewed units. We also explored potential variation in the output of double-crewed units as a function of pairing characteristics (e.g., regularly partnered versus not regularly partnered).

Results

Our results revealed that single- and double-crewed units handled similar numbers of calls for service, although sometimes of potentially different types, in similar amounts of time. Our results also revealed that the output of double-crewed units was similar regardless of the pairing characteristics examined.

Conclusions

Whereas many police agencies deploy their patrol officers in single-crewed units, other police agencies deploy their patrol officers in double-crewed units. Overall, we find limited variation among the output of patrol units by crewed status. We discuss our results in the context of research and practice.

Journal of Criminal Justice

Volume 94, September–October 2024, 8 p.