$19.95 Buy and instantly download this paper now
This paper explores whether police accountability has increased or decreased over the years and also discusses the ways in which governmental bodies are able to strengthen police accountability. The paper addresses issues such as the number of deaths in custody and the failing powers of the police in administrating justice, to determine whether the police are using their powers justly and whether they are being held accountable for their actions. The paper argues that it is a basic requirement of any modern police service that they should be accountable to their community; the paper also maintains that graft, bribery, theft and general abuse of powers are topics in police ethics and realities in police practice that must be under a constant scope of scrutiny in order to reassess on an ongoing basis the practices of the modern police force.
From the Paper:"The issue of police accountability and deviance within police practice has been a mounting concern since the eighteenth century. Corruption had not and was not a problem until allegations of malpractice and corruption within the practice brought serious concern, and as a result the Royal commission was established in 1959, and was later followed the Police Act 1964. It is seldom understood how relatively modern the idea of a Police force actually is. It was not until 1829 that Sir Robert Peel's Police began to enforce the law in the streets of London. The Metropolitan Police Act 1829 provided the world's first preventive, professional, legally accountable Police force (Lyman, 1964).
"The Police Act of 1964 holds the present arrangement of practices within the police force today, through a tripartite structure which has three divisions; the Chief constables under the police act 1964 are given responsibility for the "direction and control of their force" and are required to present the home secretary along with their police authority with an annual report. Chief constables are further required to investigate any complaints against their police force and further submit them to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) if they are considered to be serious concerns (Jefferson & Grimshaw, 1984)."
Sample of Sources Used:
- Jefferson, T., & Grimshaw, R. (1984). Controlling the constable. London: Frederick Muller Limited.
- Lyman, J. (1964). The Metropolitan Police Act of 1829: An Analysis of Certain Events Influencing the Passage and Character of the Metropolitan Police Act in England. Journal of Criminal Law , 141-154.
- Moore, M. H., & Alpert, P. (1998). Measuring Police Performance in the New Paradigm of Policing. In M. H. Moore, & P. Alpert, Community Policing: Contemporary Readings (pp. 215-232). Prospect Heights, IL.: Waveland Press.
- Potegal, M., & Knutson, J. (1994). The Dynamics of aggression: biological and social processes in dyads and groups. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Reiner, R., & Spencer, S. (1994). Democracy, Justice and the Limits of Policing: Rethinking Police Accountability. Social Legal Studies , 521-544.
Cite this Term Paper:
Police Ethics in Great Britain (2013, January 13) Retrieved August 09, 2020, from https://www.academon.com/term-paper/police-ethics-in-great-britain-152201/
"Police Ethics in Great Britain" 13 January 2013. Web. 09 August. 2020. <https://www.academon.com/term-paper/police-ethics-in-great-britain-152201/>