CRIMINAL JUSTICE TECHNOLOGY
Technological progress is like an axe in the hands of a pathological criminal. (Albert Einstein)

    The impact of technology on policing raises a lot of questions. Will it make them more efficient people processors? More humane technocrats? The new guardians of info-liberty? Already, a growth movement is underway in technical divisions of police departments. These divisions include computer services, communications, fingerprinting, crime scene evidence, crime reporting and record keeping, crime analysis, high tech crimes, and more. Technology itself is amoral. It can be used for good or bad. It can be used in "smart" ways or unintelligent ways. At some point, however, it may begin to interfere with our freedoms, but more likely, it will just change the face of criminal justice as we know it.

    One of the ways technology impacts is by making law enforcement more proactive. It casts a wider net, a crime mapping net, one that tells the police where the next crime is going to be before it happens. This is the thrust behind GIS (Geographical Information Systems) mapping. Pick up any big city newspaper and look at the number of job ads for city and police planners with GIS mapping skills. It's a growth industry. Police cars can be dispatched to geographic areas which a computer model predicts the next crime is going to occur. While that sounds like a good thing, mistakes are inevitable in any computer model, and would you want to be a resident in the neighborhood selected for a intensive law enforcement presence? Also, the courts have yet to declare computer algorithms as sufficient grounds for things like stop and frisk or search and seizure.

    Computerization is a double-edged sword in policing. On the one hand, the police need to play catch-up (there's a lot of noncomputerized departments out there, and many more with outdated equipment). On the other hand, modern policing is going to need top-notch computerization to catch the latest crop of new criminals coming online, people like hackers, porn site producers, white collar criminals, and infoterrorists.

    There's a number of things that technological policing might do, if we are willing to peer into the future. There's the possibility of better surveillance, better lie-detection devices, and, in the court system, criminal trials by Internet videoconferencing. In corrections, rehabilitation might make a comeback, what with new drugs, brain surgeries, and biochemical breakthroughs.

    Despite the enormous potential of technological policing, there's little if any discussion of it, or an understanding of its history. It's the perfect area for college-educated minds to make a contribution, and in general, practitioners welcome fresh ideas in this area. There's the organization known as Police Futurists, which gives out some information about modern trends. There's also the World Futurist Society, which is a somewhat larger organization.  For a close, hard look at the technology making its way into law enforcement, try the IACP technology clearinghouse or better yet, NLETC. You'll be amazed at the latest gadgets and devices.

    So, think hard about the role of technology in policing. Think about it in terms of the big picture. Don't think about it in terms of what to do with the latest gadget that's invented. Somewhere out there is an engineer without a clue as to what to build next. It's time to take technology seriously--time for people in criminal justice to look at what they need.

    It's fairly well-known that when J. Edgar Hoover was in charge of the FBI, and maybe after, the Bureau kept secret information files on prominent U.S. citizens. These so-called G-files are just now becoming open, public domain property. Of course, Hoover destroyed most of the personal files he kept in his office, but the ones that made their way into official FBI filing systems are now obtainable thanks to Freedom of Information Act petitions from various parties.  An organization once known as APBnews created a web page for some of the more shocking G-file stories.  Did you know, for example, that Sonny Bono was an undercover DEA agent? That the CIA and FBI were intimately involved in spiking drinks with LSD at Grateful Dead/Jefferson Airplane parties? That John Wayne was secretly a paramilitary counterterrorist who helped overthrow the Panamanian government?  Various other secrets are revealed by Hoover's files that survived destruction after his death.  Reading the G-files will change your perception of history, and maybe even your thinking.

    All this leads to the inevitable question: do the police have a right to collect secret information on U.S. citizens? Although society has its national security agencies, nobody is probably better positioned in society, with the technology, with the know-how, and with the experience, to collect domestic intelligence information, if they wanted to. Police cannot help collecting more information on citizens than they have a right to know. It's just part of their role. On the other hand, what about privacy? There probably aren't enough laws in place protecting privacy because there are lots of exceptions involving the CIA and law enforcement activities.

    To determine if the FBI has a file on you (not a criminal record, just information), you should make a request under the Freedom of Information Act. The request must be in writing and should include a complete name, address, date and place of birth and notarized signature. It should be sent to:

FBI
Freedom of Information Privacy Section
935 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20535.
Telephone: (202) 324-5520

    Technology in criminal justice seems to chart a course that runs headlong against our right to privacy.

"Previous cases suggest that the specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights have penumbras, formed by emanations from those guarantees that give them substance. Various guarantees create zones of privacy, such as the First Amendment right of association, the Third Amendment prohibition against quartering soldiers in a home, the Fourth Amendment right to be secure in one's person, house, papers, and effects, the Fifth Amendment right to not surrender anything to one's detriment, and the Ninth Amendment right to not deny or disparage any right retained by the people. These cases press for recognition of the penumbral rights of privacy and repose."

    Not everybody agrees on the logic of establishing a penumbra, or combination, of Amendments that produce a right. It's much clearer when you focus on a specific Amendment, like motorcycle helmet law activists do with the Ninth Amendment. With various cyberprivacy issues taking hold now in the 21st Century, it may very well be time for a new Constitutional Amendment on Privacy.

INTERNET RESOURCES
Detective Training Advanced Technology
Freedom of Information Act
IACP technology clearinghouse
Mitretek Systems, Inc.
NLETC
Officer.com Special Operations Directory
Police Futurists
World Futurist Society

PRINTED RESOURCES
Christie, N. (2000). Crime Control as Industry. London: Routledge.
Greek, C. (2000). "The cutting edge: A survey of technological innovation." Federal Probation. (June): 60-61.
Harris, K. & Romesburg, W. (2002). Law Enforcement Tech Guide: How to Plan, Purchase, and Manage Technology. Sacramento: SEARCH Group. (html)
Moriarty, L. & Carter, D. (1998). Criminal Justice Technology in the 21st Century. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
Schwabe, W. (2000). Needs and Prospects for Crime Fighting Technology: The Federal Role in Assisting State and Local Law Enforcement. Santa Monica: RAND.

Last Updated: 02/23/04
Syllabus for JUS 111
Instructor Home Page