Recording Victim Video Statements as Evidence to Advance Legal Outcomes in Family Violence Cases (ReVEAL)

This Implementation Guide provides an overview of the video-recording practices currently in place across several Texas jurisdictions. It provides guidance and considerations for jurisdictions in the collection and use of video evidence in family violence cases. This guide is divided into seven sections, including this Background and Overview. The second section includes information for law enforcement on the purpose of video statements, how to develop and implement a video program, and considerations for sustaining a program. The third section focuses on prosecutorial practices for the use of video statements including legal considerations, coordination with partners, and victim engagement around the video statement. The fourth section provides specific information for victim advocates and includes considerations for victim privacy and confidentiality. The fifth section focuses on technology and equipment, with information on type of equipment, technology infrastructure, and efficient transfer of evidence between agencies. The sixth section is the Summary Report of the ReVEAL project. The Summary Report is a technical overview of the evaluation that includes major findings and links to the ReVEAL reports that were previously released. The seventh and final section is comprised of the appendices and provides sample protocols, site overviews, equipment charts, and additional resources that may be helpful to users of this guide. Throughout this guide, there are several examples of cases and practices that illustrate the specific issues that may present themselves when launching a video-recording program. These examples highlight the complexities of the practice while using real world examples of how video impacts family violence cases, victim safety, and privacy.IC2 Institut

Measuring Infringement of Intellectual Property Rights

© Crown Copyright 2014. You may re-use this information (excluding logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit http://www.nationalarchives.gov. uk/doc/open-government-licence/ Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concernedThe review is wide-ranging in scope and overall our findings evidence a lack of appreciation among those producing research for the high-level principles of measurement and assessment of scale. To date, the approaches adopted by industry seem more designed for internal consumption and are usually contingent on particular technologies and/or sector perspectives. Typically, there is a lack of transparency in the methodologies and data used to form the basis of claims, making much of this an unreliable basis for policy formulation. The research approaches we found are characterised by a number of features that can be summarised as a preference for reactive approaches that look to establish snapshots of an important issue at the time of investigation. Most studies are ad hoc in nature and on the whole we found a lack of sustained longitudinal approaches that would develop the appreciation of change. Typically the studies are designed to address specific hypotheses that might serve to support the position of the particular commissioning body. To help bring some structure to this area, we propose a framework for the assessment of the volume of infringement in each different area. The underlying aim is to draw out a common approach wherever possible in each area, rather than being drawn initially to the differences in each field. We advocate on-going survey tracking of the attitudes, perceptions and, where practical, behaviours of both perpetrators and claimants in IP infringement. Clearly, the nature of perpetrators, claimants and enforcement differs within each IPR but in our view the assessment for each IPR should include all of these elements. It is important to clarify that the key element of the survey structure is the adoption of a survey sampling methodology and smaller volumes of representative participation. Once selection is given the appropriate priority, a traditional offline survey will have a part to play, but as the opportunity arises, new technological methodologies, particularly for the voluntary monitoring of online behaviour, can add additional detail to the overall assessment of the scale of activity. This framework can be applied within each of the IP right sectors: copyright, trademarks,patents, and design rights. It may well be that the costs involved with this common approach could be mitigated by a syndicated approach to the survey elements. Indeed, a syndicated approach has a number of advantages in addition to cost. It could be designed to reduce any tendency either to hide inappropriate/illegal activity or alternatively exaggerate its volume to fit with the theme of the survey. It also has the scope to allow for monthly assessments of attitudes rather than being vulnerable to unmeasured seasonal impacts

Colorblind Ideology and Perceptions of Minority Children During a Fictionalized Parent-Child Discipline Scene

Belief in colorblind ideology among 200 social service providers and its associations with their evaluations of a fictionalized minority family were examined. Perceptions of the family in the first scenes of the movie Crooklyn included the mother’s competency, abusiveness, supportiveness, and irresponsibility, as well as her children’s respectfulness, obedience, lack of control, and aggressiveness. Colorblind ideology was operationalized as participants’ reported degree of belief that differences should be ignored when encountering others. Significant associations were found between degree of belief in ignoring differences and perceptions of the children as aggressive and out-of-control. Therefore, as the tendency to believe in ignoring differences increased, the tendency to see the Crooklyn children as aggressive and out-of- control also increased. Imposing colorblind ideologies when evaluating minority children may be associated with increasingly negative perceptions, and therefore may not be in the children’s best interest. Implications for improving social service-provision also are discussed

Police Knowledge Exchange: Full Report 2018

[Executive Summary] This report was commissioned to explore the enablers and barriers to sharing within and between police forces and between police forces and partners, including the public. This was completed from an interdisciplinary review of international literature covering sharing, knowledge exchange, learning and organisational learning. The literature broke down into four main factors; who, why, what and how. An introduction to the literature is presented with ‘Who’ is sharing which considers both personal identity and different institutional issues. The ‘Why’ literature covers issues of cultural and community motivators and barriers. The ‘What’ segment reviews concepts of data, information and knowledge and related legislative issues. Finally, the ‘how’ section spans face to face sharing approaches to technologies that produce both enablers and barriers. A series of 42 in-depth interviews and focus groups were completed and combined with 47 survey responses . The aim of the interviews, focus groups and survey was to show perceptions and beliefs around knowledge sharing from a small sample across policing in order to complement the findings from the literature review. The survey was adapted from a standardised questionnaire (Biggs, 1987). The Biggs questionnaire focused on what motivated students to learn and how they approached their learning. Our adapted survey looked at what motivated police to share, and how they approached sharing. The responses showed a trend, across the police, towards a motivation for sharing to develop a deeper understanding of issues. However, the approaches and the strategies they used to share with others, which were primarily driven by achieving and surface approaches (to get promoted and get the job done). According to Biggs (1987) this could leave them discontented as they never progress to a deeper understanding of issues. Scaffolding sharing within the police through processes that are clearly defined, effective and valued could help to overcome these issues. Within the interviews and focus group findings a similar structured approach to sharing was adopted. Within the ‘who’ section some key aspects around personal relationships, reciprocity and reputation were identified. The ‘why’ the police share was one of the largest discussion points. Not only was there a deep motivation to solve key policing issues there was an approach of reciprocity. Police sharing was deeply motivated to support ‘good practice’ in the prevention and detection of crime. However, a sharing barrier was identified in the parity of value given to different types of knowledge for example between professional judgement and research evidence knowledge. Sharing was achieved when there were reciprocal benefits, in particular with personal networks or face to face sharing which was noted as ‘safe’. Again, this was inhibited by misunderstandings around the ‘risks’ of sharing, frequently attributed to data protection legislation; producing cautious reactions and as an avoidance tactic to save time and effort sharing. However, a divide was noted between technical users and those who avoided any online systems for sharing; often due to poorly designed systems and a lack of confidence in how to use systems. The police culture was identified as being risk-adverse, and competitive due to multiple factors, a lack of supported time to share, Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) reviews and promotion criteria. The result was perceived to be a poor cultural ability to learn from mistakes and a likelihood to repeat errors. A set of strategic recommendations are given and include the use of a sharing authorised professional practice for HMIC reviews, sharing networks and training. A further set of operational recommendations are given such as; sharing impact cases for evidence based practice, data sharing officers and evaluating mechanisms for sharing. This full report is supported by the Police Knowledge Exchange Summary Report 2018 which gives an overview of the findings and recommendations

Do Black and White Americans Hold Different Views on Marijuana Legalization? Analyzing the Impact of “The War on Drugs” on Racialized Perceptions of Legalizing Marijuana

This study examines whether Black and White Americans develop their views regarding the legalization of marijuana based on different life experiences and, specifically, their involvement with the criminal justice system and drug laws. It aims to investigate if Black Americans generate their views regarding marijuana legalization differently than Whites based on concerns about Blacks as a group and the experiences of Black communities with the criminal justice system. It relies on qualitative interviews of White and Black Americans (n = 7) over the age of 35. The results preliminarily show that while White Americans develop views on legalizing marijuana based on traditional notions of personal freedom and drug abuse, Black Americans generate their views based on “linked fate” conceptions of group interests related to the history of drug laws and the experiences of Blacks in the criminal justice system. The implications of these findings are discussed

Body-Worn Cameras: Reducing Citizen Complaints and Improving Relationships

Video recordings of police-citizen interactions, most notably those obtained from the dashboard cameras (dashcams) of police cars, have been successful in objectively capturing police-citizen exchanges. However, since police-civilian interactions do not solely occur in front of police cars, dashcams present significant limitations. Off-camera violent, and sometimes fatal, encounters (such as the notorious Ferguson case) have fueled increased public support for body-worn cameras. This is especially true in cases with conflicting accounts from the officer(s), victim(s), and witness(es). Requiring officers to wear bodycams may reduce incidents of force and citizen complaints, and increase officer accountability. This paper will present peer-reviewed research to help create an understanding of officer perceptions about the device, and will evaluate the effects of bodycams on both police officers and the communities they serve. Although bodycams have the potential to improve behaviors of both officers and civilians, its efficacy is dependent on its implementation (i.e., policies). Additionally, this paper will present suggestions for police agencies adopting the use of bodycams. Since bodycams hold promise for helping to rebuild relations between officers and the community, more research and feedback can help address the growing privacy and retention concerns

Limitation of Sales Warranties as an Alternative to Intellectual Property Rights: An Empirical Analysis of IPhone Warranties’ Deterrent Impact on Consumers

Apple\u27s success with the Apple iPhone has brought with it certain problems. Its success has engendered a community that has attempted to circumvent Apple\u27s exclusive service agreement with AT&T. Unfortunately for Apple (and similarly situated manufacturers), intellectual property law allows consumers to alter their products so as to circumvent relationships that manufacturers may have with others. The patent and copyright law first sale doctrine allows consumers to manipulate a product after it is purchased. As a result, manufacturers are increasingly turning to alternatives to intellectual property to secure control over the device after the sale. One such alternative is the exclusion of warranty under Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code. This iBrief considers whether limitation of warranties have the deterrence effect manufacturers desire. Said differently, it considers whether manufacturers can use warranty limitations to prevent consumers from using their products in an unauthorized manner. The iBrief presents a behavioral model based on the Triandis model of planned behavior and enhances the model by accounting for likely and unlikely benefits and detriments. The model suggests that participants weigh the probability and magnitude of the detriment against the probability and magnitude of the beneficial impact when making the decision to engage in technological piracy. This model, considered with other empirical evidence, suggests that Apple\u27s warranty could be a stronger deterrent for consumers than civil liability. The iBrief concludes that manufacturers can better protect their post-sale expectation of profits by raising consumer awareness of their warranty\u27s quality and by raising awareness of the consequences for using the product in a way that is outside the terms of the consumers\u27 authorized use