AU Blogspot

 
              Thanks to lucianvenutian for permission to use this Photo.

It’s true that controversy is often manufactured by “the media” to create “news,” but I find the the issue of sex offenders’ rights, particularly those convicted of crimes against children, to only be controversial if seen through a filter more theoretical than pragmatic. In legal theory, the general question of whether a mandated process of full disclosure violates the rights of these offenders is a legitimate one.  However; there is no moral equivalency between the rights afforded say someone convicted of a felony property crime in the past vs. someone convicted of a felony sex offense.  Yes, I would like to know if the guy next store to me was convicted a burglary 10 years ago, but I can ultimately accept living in the dark to preserve this individual’s right to live freely in society after paying his debt.  On the contrary, I would not accept living in the dark when it comes to compromising the safety of a defenseless child to protect the rights of a pedophile.   

There’s also a disturbing element of political correctness influencing how communities see their role in protecting their own children.  If, because of the law, there is no way to prevent a sex offender from moving into your neighborhood, it’s apparent that the instrument used to enforce the law (the police) can not be turned to for help unless it’s “after the fact.”  What does a community do under these circumstances?  

The media often characterizes communities who make it known that such offenders are not welcome as some type of vigilante mob.  This is absurd.  Yes, there are extreme cases where community members violently assault an offender to get the point across, but these are few and far between, which is why they make “the news.”  The communities that have succeeded in removing these offenders from their neighborhoods have done so through organized protests, house eggings, and tactical use of the media to apply pressure.   Although politically incorrect and offensive to legal scholars, I find these resourceful methods of forced exclusion to be perfectly reasonable.

What do you think?     

Ryan Rode
Interactive Services Manager
Ashworth School Of Legal Studies

 
             Thanks to suite100gallery for permission to use this Photo.

A recent U.S. Court case and new research are focusing attention on “workplace bullying,” prompting some employers to take steps to curb aggressive behavior.

There has been a lot of news articles lately regarding bullies in the work place. There was a time in the not-too-distant past that the word bully conjured up memories of the school yard bully, or the neighborhood bully. Not so anymore. According to a recent 2007 survey of 1,000 U.S. Workers, 44% said they had worked for a boss they considered abusive. The survey was sponsored by the Employment Law Alliance, an association of 3,000 employment lawyers.

This year, two Canadian professors concluded bullying can take a more severe emotional and physical toll than sexual harassment, perhaps because companies provide greater support for victims of the latter. In a review of 110 studies spanning two decades, the researchers found that bullied employees were more likely than sexually harassed employees to quit, report physical and mental health problems, and be dissatisfied with their jobs.

Garry Mathiason, a senior partner at Littler Mendelson, a leading employment-law firm, says more corporate clients are raising the issue, motivated by legal questions, as well as concerns about the impact on productivity. Littler Mendelson featured bullying among its “breaking trends” in labor law at a conference for U.S. Employers this year.

Dr. Ruth and Dr. Gary Namie equate workplace bullying with Psychological Violence in work.  Their site Workplace Bullying Institute is an in-depth resource for anyone who feels they are a victim of workplace bullying.

Roger Mezger reported in the Cleveland Plain Dealer on July 26, 2004 that, “Some of the most common bullying tactics, according to a 2000 survey, include making unreasonable demands, yelling and screaming, insulting or putting down a worker, taking credit for someone else’s work, blaming others for mistakes, casting doubt on the quality of another’s work, creating arbitrary rules and isolating a worker. You can read his entire article by clicking here.

Betty Ray Mydland
Student
Ashworth Criminal Justice Program

The creation of the Criminal Justice “Study Hall” forum was inspired by one of your fellow students: Betty Ray Mydland.  The general concept behind this particular forum or “Study Hall” is to provide students in our various Criminal Justice programs with a dedicated “space” to openly discuss criminal justice program issues, lessons, topics, careers, questions, news, ideas, etc.

Thanks to Betty for this excellent recommendation. Well, the forum has been created. It’s up to our forum community to spread the word and get as many of your peers engaged as possible. I’m really looking forward to watching this Study Hall evolve. 

If you haven’t registered for the Ashworth University Student Forum yet, take a minute to do so.  It literally only takes a minute before you’re ready to join the discussion. 

We encourage all of our Criminal Justice/Legal Studies students to begin participating in this new Study Hall today!  Get involved with your student community!

Here’s the link:

Criminal Justice Study Hall Forum

Ryan Rode
Interactive Services Manager
Ashworth University

                Thanks to Roxanne for permission to use this Photo.

Whether you are a security manager or a security guard, you may be faced with the problem of employees carrying guns to work. It may be your company policy to not permit guns in the workplace, but many employees have sued for the right to keep them in their cars for protection.  Often, the corporate policy may not be in sync with the state laws on permitting guns on private property. I’ve worked where guns are absolutely not permitted in the workplace or on the grounds, yet many did in fact carry guns in their cars in violation.

Recently a federal court in Oklahoma ruled that employers have the right to prohibit firearms from privately owned vehicles parked on site. This decision was based on OSHA, because employers are required to reduce hazards in the workplace that could lead to harm or death.  Use this ruling as a guideline to help your corporation if the issue arises. It’s a very sticky situation to pit the rights of private property owners against the right to bear arms.

Learn what your state laws are in regards to this issue and clearly state and distribute your company policy regarding the carrying of weapons onto company property.

Terry Cochran, CPP
Ashworth University Security Management/Services Instructor

A new book has been published that I must recommend to anyone with physical security responsibilities. It’s the “Integrated Physical Security Handbook” by Don Philpott, Senior Editor of Homeland Defense Journal and Shuki Einstein, International expert on Mission Critical Facilities Design and Engineering. It’s pricey at $149, but worth it. I’m already referring to it on almost a daily basis. Take a look at it at www.physicalsecurityhandbook.org.

I do not get any compensation at all for recommending this book. It’s purely a viewpoint from a professional.

Terry Cochran, CPP, CAS
Security Management Instructor
Ashworth University School Of Legal Studies

      Thanks to Aaron Fulkerson for permission to use this Photograph.

As a private investigator, I am usually subjected to quite a bit of tedium either on long surveillance or digging in civic and criminal files. However, I’ve now had a first: surveillance on my own neighbor! I knew already that there were serious problems with the couple there. Likely using/dealing drugs as the signs were all there. Definitely one person who is bipolar and untreated with meds, too. Her frequent rages attest to that. Yes, the police do know about the drugs and seem to do nothing, but I digress.

I received a call from a US Marshall who found out through public records that a PI lived right next door to someone he had a warrant for and he asked me to perform the surveillance! A visitor (family member) had come to stay about two weeks before and that person was wanted on kidnapping and vehicle theft charges in another city. He apparently made out the Marshall’s surveillance and was not showing himself, therefore, the Marshall could not be sure the person was still there. Nothing would be thought of me coming or going and my neighbor had no clue what I did for a living.

The Marshall sat about a block away waiting for my call to affirm the man was there. I finally saw him and called back. They arranged a SWAT team, but in a neighborhood full of children on the last day of school, this isn’t good; especially when the man may be armed and dangerous. I convinced the Marshall to hold until the man moved and to follow him out of the area before making the arrest.

When the man left the home with his cousin, I went out on an “errand” to get a good look at the man. I called back to the Marshall to go ahead and follow them out of the area. The arrest was made when they stopped for gas. Nice, clean, no one hurt, no excitement to scare people in the neighborhood. By working together, we made this happen. If you are on such a surveillance, remember to consider all of the outcomes of actions you or others on the team may take. Try to go for the best possible outcome, if you can make it happen! Also, this way, my neighbor never knew I had anything to do with it. I was out of sight when they were arrested. Always consider this when working in your “turf”.

Terry Cochran, CPP, CAS
Security Management Instructor
Ashworth University School Of Legal Studies

                  Thanks to andreashelke for permission to use this Photo. 

I’m in the middle of working on a very large security project. As a security professional, I am expected to outline a schedule (delivery of work) and a price per job or hour to my client based on their scope of work. This isn’t an easy thing to do. You can often underestimate time and end up losing money. There are several books available on security consulting and estimating—my recommended place to start is www.asisonline.org.

Some areas are restricted to members, but there are other areas open to anyone, such as the bookstore.  I will put out a realistic time schedule based on my workload and usually use an hourly rate.  You lose less money by having an hourly rates, but be very careful in documenting actual time spent on a project, section by section.  Set up an invoicing schedule, too.  I recommend setting up one for every week or every other week.  The income keeps income coming in, even if on a 30 day pay on invoice.

Now, for the actual job.  I can not detail the exact work, but it’s a complete physical security plan for IT/information systems and for physical security of buildings/holdings.  Part I is already completed and was completed early and significantly under budget. The customer loves this aspect, as the exact amount of time and money was very much unknown at the start of the project. 

How did I do it? 

I didn’t reinvent the wheel, that’s what. 

I belong to ASIS and utilized the resources available through my professional organization to see what open source material was already available.  I then added my expertise to these resources to create a viable program for the client.  This “open” approach to research and planning saved us both time and money.

The second part of this project will nearly be developed ”from scratch.”  Research has shown that this particular physical security plan has been done in small areas, but not comprehensively.  Consequently, I’ll be responsible for developing a plan on a comprehensive scale, which will require a more time intensive effort on my part.  Once again, I’ll consult ASIS is consulted for resources for this particular specialty field, contact other members for input, and embark on tours of similar facilities to gain a firsthand perspective of the unique security issues I’ll be addressing.

Just as in the security management course I teach here at Ashworth University; I utilize the criticality, vulnerability, risk assessment and LAYER security from the inside out—making sure that my goal is to protect people first, then information and property. If you are graduating and getting your first job, or starting out as a consultant, remember that experience is your number one asset.  Don’t worry if you don’t have a lot of experience right now.  You’ll build up to that over time.

For starters, I encourage you to begin developing relationships with working security professionals.  It’s also a good idea to make contacts in specialialty fields, as their knowledge and expertise will prove to be invaluable resources to you in the future.  

I’ll be sure to write a follow up blog when the second part of the project is finished. Once fielded, perhaps my client will allow me to disclose what it’s all about!

Terry Cochran, CPP, CAS 
Security Management Instructor
Ashworth University School Of Legal Studies

          Thanks to lucas chimello simoes for permission to use this Photo. 

We assume that because we have a justice system, it is “systematic.”  By that we mean, using the machine as a model, we expect that all parts work together toward a common result.  We assume that we are all in agreement and meshing in a well-oiled way at all levels and functions of the system.  We assume a consensus model, which we’ll examine below.  Of course, a little observation quickly derails this concept.  We know that there are pervasive conflicts in our way of doing justice.  In fact, it was designed to be an adversary system, not a consensus system; therefore, we are often forced into conflict. 

At the legislative end of the system, the great debates over drugs, guns, abortion, the death penalty, technology, security, and a host of other concerns, are routine.  Budgets are fought over.  Policies are implemented, defeated, and changed.  At the judicial end, the same arguments rage throughout the highest courts and into the lowest.  In the executive branch, where police and prosecution functions occur, the policies and decisions of the other branches of government can be resisted, disregarded, challenged, and otherwise put down.  In corrections, errors in policies, prosecution, and enforcement become painfully apparent. 

There are little empires to be protected and turfs to be safeguarded within our “system” of justice.  There is a lack of cooperation, and often there is secrecy between agencies and subcomponents.    

Remember, justice is not fairness.  What we get out of the non-system is not only unfair at times, but may also be unjust.  Errors are made, biases interfere with good judgment, and ideologies warp the outcome of trials and prosecutions.  I don’t think the system is a disaster, but I do think we must strive for the best possible outcome based on the ideal.

Dr. David Struckoff, Ph.D.
Criminal Justice Instructor
Ashworth University School of Legal Studies

          Thanks to camaraconvista for permission to use this Photo. 

One hot issue for today’s corrections professionals is punishment itself. Over the centuries, public sentiment has played a powerful role in determining what is illegal and what is an appropriate sanction for a violation of the law. Capital punishment has been the touchstone for this discussion. The death penalty is considered or even applicable for very few criminal violations. In Georgia, for example, kidnapping with bodily injury, treason, hijacking an aircraft, murder, rape, and armed robbery are capital crimes. One question both juries and those who work in the judicial system ask is, “Is death an appropriate penalty for someone who commits an offense that does not directly result in the death of another?”  

What standard should society use to determine what crimes should be capital crimes?  If religion is the grounds upon which one relies for advocating the death penalty, then the Old Testament verse calling for “an eye for an eye” implies that the death penalty is too great a punishment for crimes in which no one dies, even such crimes as rape. 

Throughout your Criminal Justice Masters Program, you will encounter a number of compelling discussions on the various theories behind punishment.  As a society, we have differing reasons for punishing different offenders, and those different theories can justify alternate forms of punishment.  If our ultimate goal is to keep offenders out of society, incarceration and even death may be appropriate. On the other hand, if our goal is to reform or rehabilitate offenders, jail may not always be the best punishment.  In the 1800’s, men who committed violent crimes were often hanged.  Meanwhile, young men found guilty of non-violent crimes “served time” by moving in with a family to help them work the farm.  The idea behind this punishment was that these men needed to be properly socialized by developing family and communal relationships.  When agrarianism gave way to industrialism, however, families no longer worked at home and, therefore, no longer needed young men to work.   

In addition, as more people lived in cities where they did not even know their neighbors, they were less likely to trust strangers or let them into their homes.  Hence, prison became the only solution society could find to keep citizens safe.  Nevertheless, one critic argues that “. . . the speed with which imprisonment superseded other traditional forms of legal punishment, and has come to represent a largely unquestioned resource of the criminal justice system, might give us pause and lead us to wonder whether it is not too convenient a device for dealing with the complexities of human failure” (Kleinig, n.d.)  Despite these questions, as well as the high cost of keeping millions of men, and now women, locked up, average citizens prefer paying the necessary taxes rather than feeling unsafe in their neighborhoods.

Jonathan B. Zeitlin, J.D. and Rachel M. Lazarus, J.D.
Ashworth University School Of Legal Studies

 
              Thanks to Anne for permission to use this Photo.

Let’s face it, when it comes to blockbuster movies and hit television shows centered around the criminal justice/legal system, the image of the paralegal, if even portrayed at all, will always remain in the shadow of the lawyer, whose’ cultural archetypes range from the honest to the corrupt to the heroic, etc.  Well, when it comes to dramatic appeal and TV-ready storylines, the paralegal profession may have found a star in the form of Susan Hu, a paralegal working for the Center For Constitutional Rights (CCR), a non-profit legal organization that has played a sometimes controversial role in the legal proceedings of detainees being held at  Guantanamo Bay.

Irrespective of your political views, the story that Susan Hu has to tell provides us with a rare glimpse into one of the most intensely debated legal issues this country has ever seen; the rights of prisoners (detainees) classified as enemy combatants.  I hope all our paralegal students realize that this profession can take you anywhere in life, including environments you could never have imagined yourself working in, i.e. Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.  Here is the video profile of Susan Hu.  I look forward to hearing your thoughts. 

Wendy Webb
Paralegal Program Instructor
Ashworth University