Police corruption is a lot more common than people realize. But it is not because we have so many police officers involved in gangs. It is because there are many different types of corruption. Police corruption is a tough topic for a lot of police departments to talk about with their officers. Police are trained on how to deal with it, but it isn’t always easy to throw a friend under the bus.

Police corruption can be seen in plane sight. Have you ever been driving on a main road and seen a police officer flick on their lights to pass through a red light? That is corruption. It is using their power to avoid abiding by traffic laws. It happens all of the time. Police often do not abide by speed limits, I can’t even count how many times I have seen a police officer flying down a road that has a speed limit of 35 miles per hour. But you know as well as I, that no one is going to pull them over and give them a citation.

The “I got your back” behavior. No, I don’t mean in serious life threatening situations. Of course police are trained to protect one another along with innocent civilians. But some instances, a person could get pulled over for speeding on the highway away from their home town. They just so happen to be a police officer that is off duty, and they show the officer that pulled them over their badge and POOF! The officer that pulled them over lets them go. This is very common. One of my friends is a police officer and he has gotten out of four speeding tickets by showing his badge. He has only been a police officer for seven months.

Civilian relationships get in the way of work. My father owns an Italian restaurant in my home town. When I was in high school, he made friends with a couple state troopers in my area. Being a kid in high school, I had a heavy foot when I was driving. I was pulled over a total of four times when I was younger for speeding. And every time the officer would take my registration to his car, and then they would ask me why Benny was on the registration. When I told them it was my dad, they would let me go. I was lucky, but it does not make this OK behavior. Just because an officer is a friend, does not excuse your from being punished for a crime.

See how common it actually is? Comment below on any experiences you have had with police corruption.

Recidivism is when offenders are incarcerated or formally charged, and then re-offend. This is a very common thing to expect. The thing is, in most cases, prisons don’t really teach people how to stop being a criminal. Instead, they teach them how to be a better criminal. Think about it, putting all of those criminals in one place together is bad as it is. Most people that go to jail or prison and get out, end up hanging around the same peers. Which is probably what got them into trouble in the first place.

Inmates that leave prison are likely to make new contacts. In some cases, someone that was convicted for selling narcotics could meet some new “connections” and then be even more of a threat to their community. They will not only re connect with their friends they had from before their conviction, but they will bring in their new friends. Only expanding whatever operation that was going on before. Selling narcotics is sometimes the only means to a living for some people. So naturally, when they leave prison, they will essentially get back to work.

If an inmate is a part of a gang, their criminality won’t stop with their first visit to jail or prison. When they are released, they will go back to the same activity they were doing before. Like I said above, this is essentially their job. Why stop because they got caught once? It is likely that instead of slowing down, they will increase activity and just be more careful in doing so. Gangs aren’t likely to just let you leave. When you join, it is most likely permanent. But we will discuss gangs at a later time.

Some people that were convicted did it intentionally. It is not uncommon to find some people that went to prison on purpose. Think about it, its a free meal and a free roof over your head. There are plenty of less fortunate people that will go out of their way to make it back to prison. They go to their preliminary hearing ready to plead guilty, and all they have on their minds is that there is a hot meal coming their way. It is sad to think about, but it’s just their way of beating the system. In some cases, people may feel safer in prison.

Recidivism is something that may never change, but it is still something that should be payed attention to. Comment below what ways you think the criminal justice system can prevent recidivism.

Bias is a major problem with our criminal justice system. After all, we are all human, and one of our biggest flaws as humans is to remain neutral and not to be judgmental. We see bias happen often among our police and in the courtroom. It is something that needs to be fixed, but is one of the toughest things to change. We would have to completely change the way humans think and comprehend information. Seems very unlikely, but there could be a possible fix to this problem.

Routine traffic stops are stops done by police when there is suspected possible criminal activity. An officer will examine a persons behavior as they are driving by them, or the way they are driving. Can you guess who gets stopped the most for these types of traffic stops? African American males, but there is no surprise there. You may know this as racial profiling, but it also has to do with bias. For a police officer to assume that someone is up to criminal activity just because of their race is not acceptable, but is also not uncommon. African American males are the most likely to be stopped during routine traffic stops, and the most likely to have their vehicles searched. Whether it be the officer physically searching the car, or utilizing a drug sniffing K9. It is common that K9s are used because they do not need a warrant. After all, the dog can smell contraband from outside the vehicle.

Bias among the prosecution and the defense is also common. In the small number of cases that make it to trial that is. For example when someone is on the prosecution team, it is likely that they will assume the defendant is guilty. And if you flip it, it is likely that the defense attorney is sure that their client is innocent. This poses a problem because people are letting their emotions blur the facts of a case. No matter what the defense throws at the prosecution, they will still think the defendant is guilty. But the only thing that really matters is, who can convince the jury.

When it comes to judges, their bias is a little more justified, but still wrong. During preliminary hearings, a judge can see the defendants past criminal history and assume that they must be guilty. But this is not always true. If a man is convicted of murder, and has previous violent charges on his record, then the judge will assume that he is guilty. But this is not how our system is designed. Defendants are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty!

With better training for our criminal justice employees, we can make them better understand how to keep a level head and look at facts. Assuming is never good, no matter what the circumstances. Comment below on other types of bias that are in our criminal justice system.

Police searches are common in traffic stops..as they should be, with probable cause. A lot of people are unaware of some of your rights as an American citizen. But please, don’t try to make police officers look bad with YouTube videos. They have enough to worry about day to day. Police most commonly do searches during traffic stops. This post will tell you what to expect and the proper way to act when you do get pulled over.

Do not take your anger out on the officer! They are doing their job! Traffic stops are very common. The officer does not have some vendetta against you…well most of the time. But we will touch on that at a later time. When you are pulled over by a police officer, your best bet is to treat them with respect and understanding. When an officer says “I pulled you over for going 75 in a 60 mile per hour zone” don’t try to make them feel bad for stopping you. Instead, you should blame yourself, after all you were the one that broke the law, you are just mad that you got caught.

During traffic stops, it is common that a police officer will analyze the person they have pulled over, what type of vehicle they are driving and any suspicious behaviors or smells. Police have to look for signs of other criminal activity, it is simply part of the job. If an officer smells marijuana in the car or alcohol on your breath, they are (in the state of Pennsylvania) permitted to ask you to step out of the vehicle. What happens next is pretty routine. They will take you aside and ask you questions, while backup comes to either search your vehicle or bring a dog to sniff out illegal substances. If anything is found…remember that they are again just doing their job. If something is illegal, don’t do it.

So what rights do you have? Well for starters you have the right to remain silent, but that comes later. If an officer asks to search your vehicle, you have the right to say NO. Technically, searching your vehicle is similar to your home, police need a warrant…unless you give them permission. But if it comes to this point, it is law that you stay inside your vehicle and parked until you get permission to leave. It is illegal to flee the scene of a traffic stop unless allowed by the police. It is kind of like fleeing the scene of a crime.

After reading this post I hope you understand that police do not often have “good days” at work. No one likes upsetting people everyday. So if you get pulled over, admit defeat and be polite to the officer that pulled you over. They did nothing but what they are paid to do! Comment below on your experiences with the police.

Junk science is a term used by scientists and criminology professionals to define certain types of analyzes. For example hair and bite mark. These types of evidence are not things that should be brought into the court room for the simple fact that they are not factual. If a jury is going to find a defendant guilty, shouldn’t it be based on fact and not opinion?

Junk science is something that is not understood by the general public. A jury sitting in on a trial will believe anything an expert says on the stand. If a hair analysis expert comes to the stand and says that the hairs were a “perfect match”, the jury will believe that there can be no mistake. The defendant must be guilty! This is unfair because everyone has the right to a fair trial, if it comes to that.

Junk sciences are not based on facts. They are basically an argument of opinion. What looks like a match to you under the microscope, may not look like a match to me. Evidence brought into the courtroom needs to be based on fact and not the opinion of one expert. It is hard to believe someone could be wrong when they are a “hair analysis expert”, but it can indeed be true.

Junk science should be inadmissible in the courtroom. Yes a lot of a trial is speculation. “Do you really think Mr. Jones would have hurt his wife? A woman he loved for 35 years?” Well, how can anyone in the jury be sure? They didn’t personally know his relationship with his wife. But the thing is, it is different when we are talking about evidence. Evidence needs to be solid, concrete and unquestionable. With junk science, it this is definitely not the case.

Junk sciences need to be more broadly understood by those that are not in the field of criminology. They are not based on fact and not many people realize it. Comment below how we can better prepare juries on what to expect in the courtroom.

Bite marks are not as common as hair and finger print. But they are still occasionally used in cases that make it to trial. Bite mark analysis is conducted by orthodontists that do a short online course to receive a certificate as a “Bite Mark Analysis Expert”. Yes, that is already a red flag. Any orthodontist can do it.

The first issue with bite mark analysis is that it is again done by a person. A super machine that can analyze and compare bite marks does not exist. The expert with have the suspect bite into a gel like substance and then compare this to images of a bite mark found on a body. This is not exactly scientifically accurate because simply comparing two things is not science.

The experts are not supervised. These experts will do their comparisons on their own in their lab or in an office. Some will work with a team of other orthodontists to get other opinions. This is really not something that the criminal justice system should rely on because it is OPINION. One expert can say it is a match, while others can disagree and say they are not a match. It’s simply not something that can be relied upon.

Sometimes a mark on a body can be mistaken for a bite mark. There have been cases where the autopsy doctor mistakes a mark on the victims body for a bite mark. Then the whole process of getting an expert to compare the injury to the suspect starts. And sometimes they will say it is a match. Completely denying the fact that the mark on the body could be anything else, they are convinced that it is a bite mark

Bite mark analysis is something that should be taken out of the courtroom and re evaluated. It is unreliable and unfair to use against a defendant. Because remember, we are innocent until proven guilty. Comment below how you think bite mark analysis can be improved.

The common “we found your hair on the scene of the crime” phrase. Most of the time, it is said to pry a confession, but other times police truly believe that they have the person in the palm of their hands. Hair analysis is one of the most unreliable types of forensic analysis. I will tell you some key reasons why it is not a reliable source of evidence and what has to be done in order to make it reliable.

Hair can be almost identical from person to person. If I took a hair out of my head, and you had another hair of the same color from someone else and we put them under a microscope. Chances are they will look very similar. Studies show that a lot of different people have similar hair qualities. Hair analysis is the act of an expert comparing a hair to the defendants hair. By simply comparing a suspects hair to one found on the scene, is not science. It is simply a compare and contrast. But the even bigger issues here, is that I promise you that your hair could be completely identical to the hair of at least 10 inmates doing life sentences for murder.

Hair is analyzed by a person. There is again no super high tech software. An expert simply compares the hairs together and determines whether or not the hair is a match. A lot of the times hair analysis is used, there is a match. The reason being, that a lot of hair looks extremely similar under a microscope. And if there is a color difference, the prosecution can simply say that the defendant must have dyed their hair.

Hair that was retrieved from a crime scene is not completely useless. Hair can be used to find DNA which can be compared to the suspect of a crime, or plugged in to see if the owner of the DNA has been put into the system before. The issue with this is that it takes much longer to get the results back. An expert can look and compare hair much faster, and the results will get to the prosecution in a timely manor. However if the hair was sent to a lab for DNA testing, it can take months to receive the results. This being for the fact that the sample will be sitting on a waiting list for quite a while.

Hair analysis is something that should be completely inadmissible in court. It is not accurate or factual. Comment below what you think about hair analysis and what we can do to fix it.

Finger and hand prints seem to be a big thing on people’s minds when thinking about a crime scene. If you walked into a crime scene, wouldn’t your first instinct be to look for finger prints? I know mine would…well it used to be. Finger prints are, like most things in criminology, not very cut and dry. There are a few issues with finger prints and why sometimes, they can’t be used at all.

The number one and most important issue with finger prints is the way they are analyzed. People assume that they are scanned onto a computer and then there is software that compares finger prints. I thought this too for a very long time. When actually, finger prints are compared by an expert. Yes, they look at them to compare them. There is software available at their disposal that will zoom in and give them a closer look, but humans make mistakes, and that is a huge issue.

Finger prints are easy to hide or get rid of. If you touch a cup and then rub your shirt on it, poof! Your fingerprint is now not able to be taken. A finger print needs to be nearly perfectly on a surface in order for an accurate sample for an examination. This is why you see on detectives on television saying “don’t touch anything”. This is actually good advice to live by when stepping onto a crime scene.

Finger prints are only useful for finding a suspect if they already have a suspect. If a forensic analyst gets a finger print on a crime scene and the police department doesn’t have a suspect, then they will just have to hold onto the prints. A software that analyzes a finger print and compares them to others in the system does not exist. So the prints are pretty useless until a solid suspect is found.

Finger print analysis is a fairly unreliable source of evidence. People should understand that it is not a very solid form of evidence.

Comment below what type of evidence you think could be inaccurate!

Let’s face it, everyone loves a good crime drama. They are entertaining, attention grabbers, and some will keep you on the edge of your seat. The sad truth is, they are hardly ever realistic. Solving a crime takes time….a very long time. There are a few things that every crime drama seems to have that is just not very realistic. The thing is, people that are not in the field of criminology wouldn’t be able to point them out. Other things seem a little obvious.

First off, there is no such thing as a science lab that every police department has at their disposal. When there is blood collected from a crime scene, (or other bodily fluids) the sample has to be sent to a lab and then it sits on a waiting list. Each sample is typically tested in the order that the lab received them. So it is usually months before the detectives get results back. A lot of the time, results come back inconclusive. The problem is that a lot of the time, the DNA is a match to the victim, or that the results are inconclusive because DNA is only in the system if someone has committed a crime and been processed into the system. So if a woman was murdered and her killer bled on the scene, chances are that won’t help finding him if it was his first crime.

Secondly, there are not super hackers at the disposal of the department. For example, in Criminal Minds there is a character that stays in Quantico and finds information on people in seconds, at the request of her boss. This is not the case. Majority of cases are investigated by local detectives. These guys normally don’t have this type of equipment and personnel at their disposal. The simple fact is, if they need to know more about someone, they go to them directly or a family member.

Lastly, real life investigating is not so cut and dry. It seems that on television shows, detectives can “read people”. Yes, detectives can pick up on social queues that someone may be lying, but it isn’t some kind of sixth sense. Detectives are people too, it takes time to dig into the details of a case in order to find out who is responsible. A lot of the process of investigating crimes will bring you back to square one. A lot of the leads you get are going to be dead ends, and a lot of the people you try to question will refuse to speak to police. Also, many detectives are working on multiple cases at a time. A typical day does not involve talking to three or four people involving the same case. Rather it is getting a meeting with maybe one person about one case.

Along with this and many more discrepancies, investigating a case takes a very long time to do. My friend’s father was a detective in Harrisburg for 20 plus years and he told me that most cases took a year to get a conviction, or even more. With all that being said, they are still good shows! Comment below on what your favorite crime show is and name some things that you think might not be realistic.

A lot of people assume that just because I study criminology, I want to be a cop. Along with everyone else in this particular major. The fact is that is not what criminology is limited to. Criminology is the study of crimes and criminals, law enforcement, prevention methods and our whole judicial system as a whole. It is a field that is a mystery to those that have never studied it or done simple research online. In my four years as a criminology student, I have learned so much about the criminal justice system, and it is very interesting stuff. I think people will benefit from knowing more about this field because we are affected by it everyday.

Criminology was just a part of sociology for a very long time. When it finally became its very own study, there were many “legends” that came up out of the wood work and wrote some very interesting text books about criminology. Since it is basically a more focused sociology, a lot of criminology is theory and ideas about how we can prevent crime. Now this may seem silly, but a lot of criminals that commit serious crimes, fall into at least one of the theories. Social learning Theory basically helps us better understand people that get involved in gangs. It is behavior that they were raised around, it is safe to assume that they will have the same lifestyle as they get older. Criminology dives in a lot deeper than most people assume. It is a great field for people that like to have debates and discussions on topics to exchange ideas.

Criminology also studies law enforcement and why it is so important that officers have integrity. A lot of you are familiar with TV and movies depicting police misconduct and corruption. You would be surprised how common it actually is, but it does not always involve affiliating with gangs. But we will talk more about that later. The judicial system is a big focus too because it is far from perfect, and in criminology, you will analyze the flaws and discuss options that could potentially fix them.

Criminology is more than meets the eye. Comment below on what you would like to discuss involving criminology!