Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 30, 2024 Tue
Time: 1:35 am
Time: 1:35 am
Results for law enforcement collaboration
3 results foundAuthor: Stewart, James K. Title: Tampa Bay Manhunt After Action Report: Lessons Learned in Community Police Partnerships & Incident Command System Summary: On June 29, 2010, at 2:15 a.m., the Tampa Police Department (TPD) suffered a tragic loss when two officers were shot and killed during a traffic stop. The suspect fled the scene on foot and evaded immediate arrest. The subsequent law enforcement response and multijurisdictional manhunt involved 22 law enforcement agencies and over 1,000 personnel during a 96-hour deployment that culminated in the arrest of the suspect. TPD established a multi-agency, Unified Command using the Incident Command System (ICS) to plan, coordinate, and manage the complex response, which included volunteers and donations from the community. TPD reported that few complaints were received, despite frequent special weapons and tactics (SWAT) deployments, numerous residential searches, significant police presence in local neighborhoods, traffic disruptions, staging operations, and extensive media activities. This report demonstrates how building relations before a crisis impacts local community acceptance of extraordinary police presence or measures for extended periods of time. Tampa’s unexpected incident provides a rare opportunity to analyze an actual law enforcement response and capture the lessons learned. This analysis can be of significant use to all local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies that need to be capable of coordinating an extended, multi-jurisdictional law enforcement response within their communities. TPD asked CNA to analyze this event, with a focus on implementing ICS and incorporating community policing. The Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) supported this analysis with specific interest in the role community partnerships played. Conducting afteraction analyses by independent observers and making results widely available to other law enforcement agencies also allows for a reassessment of strategies, policies, and procedures, which can further lead to enhanced officer safety and the prevention of lives lost. Details: Alexandria, VA: CNA Analysis & Solutions, 2011. 94p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 19, 2011 at: http://www.cna.org/sites/default/files/research/Tampa%20Bay%20Manhunt%20After%20Action%20Report.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.cna.org/sites/default/files/research/Tampa%20Bay%20Manhunt%20After%20Action%20Report.pdf Shelf Number: 122786 Keywords: Community PolicingIncident Command SystemsLaw Enforcement CollaborationLaw Enforcement PartnershipsPolice ManhuntsPolice-Community RelationsPolicing (Tampa Bay, Florida) |
Author: Chorney, Brenda Title: Organized Crime Integrated Units: Analysis Report Summary: Public Safety Canada is maintaining a National Research Agenda on Organized Crime in support of the National Coordinating Committee on Organized Crime (NCC). As a step in this process, Public Safety Canada contracted PRA Inc., an independent research company, to compile an inventory of organized crime integrated teams and units1 operating across Canada and to conduct further analysis of a subset of the identified integrated units. An important component of combating organized crime is a collaborative integrated approach. The inventory will provide a greater understanding of the integrated teams operating across Canada, and, as such, will identify existing teams and units, as well as some basic information on each unit. The analysis component examines a subset of the integrated units identified through the inventory phase to gain a greater understanding of the operational aspects, challenges, and keys to success for these units. This report presents the findings for the analysis component. The report also incorporates information obtained while compiling the inventory database. Details: Ottawa: Research and National Coordination, Organized Crime Division, Law Enforcement and Policing Branch, Public Safety Canada, 2010. 50p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 7, 2012 at: http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2012/sp-ps/PS4-101-2010-eng.pdf Year: 2010 Country: Canada URL: http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2012/sp-ps/PS4-101-2010-eng.pdf Shelf Number: 125500 Keywords: Criminal InvestigationLaw Enforcement CollaborationOrganized Crime (Canada)Police Investigations |
Author: Temple University Beasley School of Law Title: Interlocking Systems: How Pennsylvania Counties and Local Police are Assisting ICE to Deport Immigrants Summary: Under the Trump Administration, arrests of immigrants by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) have increased in Pennsylvania. Fear of arrest, detention, and deportation permeates the everyday lives of immigrants and their families, affecting their physical and psychological well-being. The lack of transparency or consistency in ICE practices creates pervasive uncertainty, stress, and anxiety for communities. Community based organizations across the state have firsthand experience with the impact of ICE enforcement on their communities. They know anecdotally how localities cooperate with ICE in arresting and detaining immigrants. Given the difficulties in challenging ICE directly at the federal level, community based organizations are increasingly looking to advocate for change at the local level. These organizations, however, have expressed a need to more comprehensively understand how localities are cooperating with ICE. This report, therefore, seeks to shed light by more systematically examining cooperation between ICE and local entities in the era of the Trump administration. We collected information by filing Right to Know (RTK) requests, speaking with local officials, and reviewing the results of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests conducted by other advocacy organizations (see Methodology in the Appendix). By providing an in-depth study of the mechanisms of ICE collaboration with select county jails, county probation, and local law enforcement, we reveal the various ways in which ICE's enforcement system interlocks with local criminal justice systems in Pennsylvania. We found that counties are consistently collaborating with ICE (Figure 1). 6 County jails and probation departments, for example, regularly share information about immigrants with ICE pursuant to informal agreements or formal written policies. They also actively help ICE to locate and arrest immigrants. Further, counties allow ICE to use their jails and prisons solely for purposes of detaining persons accused of violating civil immigration laws. In Pennsylvania, there are currently seven county jails and one county-run family detention center that have signed federal contracts to detain immigrants for ICE. Despite the significant human cost, counties are profiting from the growing numbers of immigrants in civil detention. On the other hand, police collaboration appears to be less systematic and mostly ad hoc. The majority of the police departments we examined in Pennsylvania do not have written policies or arrangements governing ICE collaboration. The vacuum has created an opening for individual police officers to act based on their own personal inclinations, and for ICE to solicit greater levels of assistance from individual police and police departments. Yet localities have the legal right to make deliberate choices about the role, if any, they play in ICE's enforcement scheme. Localities nationwide are enacting policies that, for example, restrict the information shared with ICE, limit ICE's access to local jails, prohibit inquiries into immigration status or place of birth, or more generally prohibit the use of local resources to engage in federal immigration enforcement. Most recently, localities have also started to cancel their lucrative federal contracts to detain immigrants in local jails or prisons. Such cancellations suggest a discomfort with Trump administration policies and "an attempt to disengage from federal policies seen as harmful to immigrant families." In Pennsylvania, local communities too are organizing and advocating for more immigrant-friendly policies at the local level. We hope that the information provided in this report will assist local communities and organizations in shaping their positions on these issues. Details: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Temple University Beasley School of Law, Center for Social Justice, 2019. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 2, 2019 at: https://vamosjuntos.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Interlocking-Systems-For-Release.pdf Year: 2019 Country: United States URL: https://www2.law.temple.edu/csj/publication/interlocking-systems-how-pennsylvania-counties-and-local-police-are-assisting-ice-to-deport-immigrants/ Shelf Number: 158104 Keywords: Illegal Immigration Immigration and Customs Enforcement Inter-agency Collaboration Law Enforcement Collaboration |