Unit 1 -ip- research strategy

Criminal Profiling Criminal Profiling Introduction Criminal profiling can be defined as a process of gathering information about the people with criminal activity in the past. This practice is undertaken by law enforcement to keep criminals under surveillance. However, with the passage of time this legitimate suspicion grew into the form of paranoia (Ryberg, 2011), which influenced federal law agencies to consider everyone a terrorist until proven otherwise thus, nullifying the right of privacy for every individual living in US (Carbado, 2011). In the viewpoint of this paper profiling with or without prior notification is unlawful, unproductive and unethical as well because, it considers innocent people a security threat. Consequently, crime rate in US is increasing at a consistent rate for last two decades.
At the same time, it is suggested to law enforcement agencies to cultivate a culture of critical information sharing in the public through offering financial rewards. In this way, people will get motivated towards pointing out criminals in the society. This development may well serve as a substitute for unannounced public surveillance (Koppen, Eleffers, & Ruiter, 2011).
In parallel, this paper will accumulate necessary information about the phenomenon of public surveillance, through series of focus group discussion with governmental officials in order to document their viewpoint. On the other hand, public opinion will also be summarized through a similar technique (Muller, 2011). Notably, this research will develop its argument through qualitative means. Because, of the subjective nature of issue at hand. In this way, interviewers can abstract meanings from other sources such as body language and other similar factors.
On the ethical front, this research will not disclose any participant’s identity. At the same time, the research procedure will be kept transparent through reporting the views of public and government in their original form (Sofaer & Eyal, 2010). However, general public management implications may be derived from the information collected.
Carbado, D. (2011). Undocumented Criminal Procedure. UCLA Law Review 58, pp. 1543-1616.
Koppen, M., Eleffers, H., & Ruiter, S. (2011). When to Refrain from Using Likelihood Surface Methods for Geographic Offender Profiling: An Ex Ante Test of Assumptions. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling 8 , pp. 242-256.
Muller, D. (2011). Qualitative Approaches to Criminal Profiling asWays of Reducing Uncertainty in Criminal Investigations. Policing 5(1) , pp. 33-40.
Ryberg, J. (2011). Racial Profiling and Criminal Justice. Journal of Ethics 15 , pp. 79-88.
Sofaer, N., & Eyal, N. (2010). Translational Research Beyond Approval: A Two-Stage Ethics Review. The American Journal of Bioethics 10(8) , pp. 1-3.