Police Integrity Lost - A Study of Law Enforcement Officers Arrested, Stinson et al, 2016
Download original document:
Document text
Document text
This text is machine-read, and may contain errors. Check the original document to verify accuracy.
The author(s) shown below used Federal funds provided by the U.S. Department of Justice and prepared the following final report: Document Title: Police Integrity Lost: A Study of Law Enforcement Officers Arrested Author(s): Philip Matthew Stinson, Sr., J.D, Ph.D., John Liederbach, Ph.D., Steven P. Lab, Ph.D., Steven L. Brewer, Jr., Ph.D. Document No.: 249850 Date Received: April 2016 Award Number: 2011-IJ-CX-0024 This report has not been published by the U.S. Department of Justice. To provide better customer service, NCJRS has made this federally funded grant report available electronically. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. POLICE INTEGRITY LOST: A STUDY OF LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS ARRESTED Final Technical Report Award Number: 2011-IJ-CX-0024 National Institute of Justice Office of Justice Program U.S. Department of Justice Principal Investigator: Philip Matthew Stinson, Sr., J.D, Ph.D. Telephone: 419-372-0373 E-Mail: stinspm@bgsu.edu Co-Investigators: John Liederbach, Ph.D. Telephone: 419-372-1053 E-Mail: jlieder@bgsu.edu Steven P. Lab, Ph.D. Telephone: 419-372-2326 E-Mail: slab@bgsu.edu Consultant: Steven L. Brewer, Jr., Ph.D. Telephone: 724-983-2954 E-Mail: slb64@psu.edu Criminal Justice Program Department of Human Services College of Health & Human Services Bowling Green State University Bowling Green, OH 43403-0148 http://www.bgsu.edu/policeintegritylost January 2016 This project was supported by Award No. 2011-IJ-CX-0024, awarded by the National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Department of Justice. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 1 ABSTRACT There are no comprehensive statistics available on problems with police integrity, and no government entity collects data on all criminal arrests of law enforcement officers in the United States. Police crimes are those crimes committed by sworn law enforcement officers with the general powers of arrest. These crimes can occur while the officer is either on- or off-duty and include offenses committed by officers employed by state and local law enforcement agencies. This study provides a wealth of data on a phenomena that relates directly to police integrity— data that previously did not exist in any useable format. The first goal of the study is to determine the nature and extent of police crime in the United States. The objective for this goal is to determine the incidence and prevalence of officers arrested. A second goal is to determine what factors influence how an agency responds to arrests of its officers. Objectives for this goal are to determine whether certain factors influence agency response and employment outcomes: (a) severity of crimes for which officers are arrested; (b) level of urbanization for each employing agency; (c) geographic location for each employing agency; (d) length of service and age of arrested officers; and, (e) criminal case outcomes. A final goal is to foster police integrity by exploring whether officer arrests correlate with other forms of police misconduct. Objectives for this goal are to determine whether arrested officers were also named as a civil defendant in any 42 U.S.C. §1983 federal court actions during their careers, and to inform practitioners and policymakers of strategies that will better identify problem officers and those at risk for engaging in police crime and its correlates. The advent of nationwide, objective, and verifiable data on the law-breaking behavior of sworn officers and provides potential benefits to law enforcement agencies that connect the technical expertise of researchers to criminal justice policymakers and practitioners. These data This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 2 provide direct guidance in three areas. First, the study provides agencies information on the types of crime that are most frequently perpetrated by police officers. Second, the research provides information on the relationship between police crimes and other types of misbehavior that collectively comprise the problem officer. Third, nationwide data on police crimes and the manner in which arrested officers are organizationally sanctioned provides points of comparison for law enforcement agencies that confront these problems, as well as information on the degree to which law enforcement agencies tend to sanction or ignore certain crimes committed by officers. This is a quantitative content analysis study of archived records reporting several thousand arrests of police officers during the years 2005-2011. The primary information source is the Google News search engine and its Google Alerts email update service. Chi-Square was used to measure the statistical significance of the association between two variables measured at the nominal level. Cramer’s V was utilized to measure the strength of the Chi-Square association. Stepwise binary logistic regression was used to determine which of the predictor variables are statistically significant in multivariate models. Classification tree analysis was utilized to uncover the causal pathways between independent predictors and outcome variables. The Google News searches resulted in the identification of 6,724 cases in which sworn law enforcement officers were arrested during the years 2005 through 2011. The cases involved the arrests of 5,545 individual sworn officers employed by 2,529 nonfederal state and local law enforcement agencies located in 1,205 counties and independent cities in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The findings indicate that nonfederal law enforcement officers were arrested nationwide during 2005-2011 at a rate of 0.72 officers arrested per 1,000 officers, and at a rate of 1.7 officers arrested per 100,000 population nationwide. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...............................................................................................14 The Problem of Police Crime ..................................................................................14 The Purpose of the Study .........................................................................................16 Research Design.......................................................................................................17 Findings....................................................................................................................21 Conclusion ...............................................................................................................25 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................29 Statement of the Problem .........................................................................................33 Literature Citations and Review ..............................................................................41 Statement of Rationale for the Research ..................................................................60 METHODS ........................................................................................................................65 Coding and Content Analysis ..................................................................................65 Statistical Analysis ...................................................................................................69 Strengths and Limitations ........................................................................................72 RESULTS ..........................................................................................................................76 Part I: Full Police Crime Data Set Models...............................................................76 Part II: Sex-related Police Crime Data Set Models ...............................................104 Part III: Alcohol-related Police Crime Data Set Models .......................................124 Part IV: Drug-related Police Crime Data Set Models............................................139 Part V: Violence-related Police Crime Data Set Models .......................................151 Part VI: Profit-motivated Police Crime Data Set Models ......................................167 Part VII: Employing Law Enforcement Agencies of Arrested Officers ................177 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 4 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................188 Discussion of Findings...........................................................................................189 Implications for Policy and Practice ......................................................................199 Implications for Further Research .........................................................................207 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................210 DISSEMINATION OF RESEARCH FINDINGS...........................................................232 Publications ............................................................................................................232 Presentations ..........................................................................................................235 TABLES ..........................................................................................................................229 Table 1 – Arrested Officers and Agencies .............................................................238 Table 2 – Most Serious Offense Charged ..............................................................239 Table 3 – Victim Characteristics............................................................................240 Table 4 – Police Crime Arrest Cases: Bivariate Associations of Conviction ........241 Table 5 – Police Crime Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Conviction ................................................244 Table 6 – Police Crime Arrest Cases: Bivariate Associations of Job Loss ...........245 Table 7 – Police Crime Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Job Loss....................................................249 Table 8 – Police Crime: Bivariate Associations of Sex-related Arrest Cases...............................................250 Table 9 – Police Crime: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Sex-related Arrest Cases ..........................254 Table 10 – Police Crime: Bivariate Associations of Alcohol-related Arrest Cases ........................................255 Table 11 – Police Crime: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Alcohol-related Arrest Cases ...................259 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 5 Table 12 – Police Crime: Bivariate Associations of Drug-Related Arrest Cases ...........................................260 Table 13 – Police Crime: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Drug-related Arrest Cases ........................263 Table 14 – Police Crime: Bivariate Associations of Violence-related Arrest Cases ......................................264 Table 15 – Police Crime: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Violence-related Arrest Cases ..................268 Table 16 – Police Crime: Bivariate Associations of Profit-motivated Arrest Cases ......................................269 Table 17 – Police Crime: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Profit-motivated Arrest Cases ..................273 Table 18 – Civil Rights Litigation as a Correlate of Police Crime: Bivariate Associations of Being Named as a Party Defendant Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983 at Some Point during Law Enforcement Career .......................................................................................274 Table 19 – Logistic Regression Model Predicting Being Named as a Party Defendant in a Section 1983 Action at Some Point during Law Enforcement Career ............................................................................277 Table 20 – Arrested Officers and Agencies in Sex-related Cases .........................278 Table 21 – Most Serious Offense Charged in Sex-related Cases ..........................279 Table 22 – Victim Characteristics in Sex-related Cases ........................................280 Table 23 – Bivariate Associations of Conviction in Sex-related Arrest Cases ........................................................................................281 Table 24 – Sex-related Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Conviction ................................................282 Table 25 – Bivariate Associations of Job Loss in Sex-related Arrest Cases ........................................................................................283 Table 26 – Sex-related Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Job Loss....................................................284 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 6 Table 27 – Bivariate Associations of Child Victims in Sex-related Arrest Cases ........................................................................................285 Table 28 – Sex-related Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Child Victims ...........................................287 Table 29 – Bivariate Associations of Conviction in Police Sexual Violence Arrest Cases .....................................................................288 Table 30 – Police Sexual Violence Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Conviction ................................................289 Table 31 – Bivariate Associations of Job Loss in Police Sexual Violence Arrest Cases .....................................................................290 Table 32 – Police Sexual Violence Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Job Loss....................................................291 Table 33 – Bivariate Associations of Conviction in Driving-While-Female Arrest Cases......................................................................292 Table 34 – Driving-While-Female Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Conviction ................................................293 Table 35 – Bivariate Associations of Job Loss in Driving-While-Female Arrest Cases......................................................................294 Table 36 – Driving-While-Female Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Job Loss....................................................295 Table 37 – Arrested Officers and Agencies in Alcohol-related Cases ..................296 Table 38 – Most Serious Offense Charged in Alcohol-related Cases ...................297 Table 39 – Victim Characteristics in Alcohol-related Cases .................................298 Table 40 – Police DUI Arrest Cases: Incident Events ...........................................299 Table 41 – Police DUI Arrest Cases: Drug-related ...............................................300 Table 42 – Bivariate Associations of Conviction in Alcohol-related Arrest Cases .................................................................................301 Table 43 – Alcohol-related Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Conviction ................................................302 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 7 Table 44 – Bivariate Associations of Job Loss in Alcohol-related Arrest Cases .................................................................................303 Table 45 – Alcohol-related Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Job Loss....................................................305 Table 46 – Bivariate Associations of Conviction in DUI Arrest Cases ...................................................................................................306 Table 47 – DUI Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Conviction ................................................307 Table 48 – Bivariate Associations of Job Loss in DUI Arrest Cases ....................308 Table 49 – DUI Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Job Loss....................................................309 Table 50 – Arrested Officers and Agencies in Drug-related Cases .......................310 Table 51 – Most Serious Offense Charged in Drug-related Cases ........................311 Table 52 – Specific Drugs......................................................................................312 Table 53 – Victim Characteristics in Drug-related Cases ......................................313 Table 54 – Patterns of Drug-related Police Corruption .........................................314 Table 55 – Drug-related Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Patterns of Corruption ...................................................315 Table 56 – Bivariate Associations of Conviction in Drug-related Arrest Cases ......................................................................................316 Table 57 – Drug-related Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Conviction ................................................317 Table 58 – Bivariate Associations of Job Loss in Drug-related Arrest Cases ......................................................................................318 Table 59 – Drug-related Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Job Loss....................................................319 Table 60 – Arrested Officers and Agencies in Violence-related Cases...........................................................................................320 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 8 Table 61 – Most Serious Offense Charged in Violence-related Cases...........................................................................................321 Table 62 – Victim Characteristics in Violence-related Cases...........................................................................................322 Table 63 – Bivariate Associations of Conviction in Violence-related Arrest Cases................................................................................323 Table 64 – Violence related Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Conviction ................................................326 Table 65 – Bivariate Associations of Job Loss in Violence-related Arrest Cases................................................................................327 Table 66 – Violence-related Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Job Loss....................................................330 Table 67 – Bivariate Associations of Conviction in Officer-involved Domestic Violence Arrest Cases................................................331 Table 68 – Officer-involved Domestic Violence Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Conviction ................................................332 Table 69 – Bivariate Associations of Job Loss in Officer-involved Domestic Violence Arrest Cases................................................333 Table 70 – Officer-involved Domestic Violence Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Job Loss....................................................335 Table 71 – Arrested Officers and Agencies in Profit-motived Cases ..............................................................................................336 Table 72 – Most Serious Offense Charged in Profit-motivated Cases ...........................................................................................337 Table 73 – Victim Characteristics in Profit-motivated Cases ................................338 Table 74 – Bivariate Associations of Conviction in Profit-motivated Arrest Cases ................................................................................339 Table 75 – Profit-motivated Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Conviction ................................................341 Table 76 – Bivariate Associations of Job Loss in Profit-motivated Arrest Cases ................................................................................342 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 9 Table 77 – Profit-motivated Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Job Loss....................................................344 Table 78 – 200 Largest State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted by # of Full-Time Sworn Personnel) .........................................................345 Table 79 – Nonmetropolitan State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted Alphabetically by Agency Name) .............................................................351 Table 80 – Primary State Police Agencies in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted Alphabetically by Agency Name) .............................................................367 Table 81 – Sheriff’s Offices in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted Alphabetically by Agency Name) .............................................................369 Table 82 – County Police Departments in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted Alphabetically by Agency Name) .............................................................382 Table 83 – 500 Largest Municipal Police Departments in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted Alphabetically by Agency Name) .............................................................384 Table 84 – Special State & Local Law Enforcement Agencies in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted Alphabetically by Agency Name) .............................................................399 FIGURES .........................................................................................................................403 Figure 1 – Police Crime Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Conviction .....................................................................403 Figure 2 – Police Crime Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Job Loss .........................................................................404 Figure 3 – Police Crime: CART Model Predicting Sex-related Arrest Cases ...............................................405 Figure 4 – Police Crime: CART Model Predicting Alcohol-related Arrest Cases.........................................406 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 10 Figure 5 – Police Crime: CART Model Predicting Drug-related Arrest Cases .............................................407 Figure 6 – Police Crime: CART Model Predicting Violence-related Arrest Cases .......................................408 Figure 7 – Police Crime: CART Model Predicting Profit-motivated Arrest Cases .......................................409 Figure 8 – CART Model Predicting Being Named as a Party Defendant in a Section 1983 Action at Some Point during Law Enforcement Career ........................................................410 Figure 9 – Sex-related Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Conviction .....................................................................411 Figure 10 – Sex-related Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Job Loss .........................................................................412 Figure 11 – Sex-related Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Child Victims ................................................................413 Figure 12 – Police Sexual Violence Arrest Cases: CHAID Model Predicting Conviction ...................................................................414 Figure 13 – Police Sexual Violence Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Job Loss .........................................................................415 Figure 14 – Driving-While-Female Arrest Cases: CHAID Model Predicting Conviction ...................................................................416 Figure 15 – Driving-While-Female Arrest Cases: CHAID Model Predicting Job Loss .......................................................................417 Figure 16 – Alcohol-related Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Conviction .....................................................................418 Figure 17 – Alcohol-related Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Job Loss .........................................................................419 Figure 18 – DUI Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Conviction .....................................................................420 Figure 19 – DUI Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Job Loss .........................................................................421 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 11 Figure 20 – Drug-related Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Conviction .....................................................................422 Figure 21 – Drug-related Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Job Loss .........................................................................423 Figure 22 – Violence-related Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Conviction .....................................................................424 Figure 23 – Violence-related Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Job Loss .........................................................................425 Figure 24 – Officer-involved Domestic Violence Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Conviction .....................................................................426 Figure 25 – Officer-involved Domestic Violence Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Job Loss .........................................................................427 Figure 26 – Profit-motivated Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Conviction .....................................................................428 Figure 27 – Profit-motivated Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Job Loss .........................................................................429 APPENDIX A: Employing Law Enforcement Agencies: Rates of Officers Arrested Sorted by # of Full-Time Sworn Personnel ..........................430 Appendix A-1 – Nonmetropolitan State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted by # Full-Time Sworn Personnel) .............................................................430 Appendix A-2 – Primary State Police Agencies in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted by # Full-Time Sworn Personnel) .............................................................446 Appendix A-3 – Sheriff’s Offices in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted by # Full-Time Sworn Personnel) .............................................................448 Appendix A-4 – County Police Departments in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted by # Full-Time Sworn Personnel) .............................................................461 Appendix A-5 – 500 Largest Municipal Police Departments in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted by # Full-Time Sworn Personnel) .............................................................463 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 12 Appendix A-6 – Special State & Local Law Enforcement Agencies in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted by # Full-Time Sworn Personnel) .............................................................478 APPENDIX B: Employing Law Enforcement Agencies: Rates of Officers Arrested Sorted by Rate per 1,000 Officers ........................................482 Appendix B-1 – 200 Largest State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted by Rate per 1,000 Officers) .......................................................................482 Appendix B-2 – Nonmetropolitan State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted by Rate per 1,000 Officers) .......................................................................488 Appendix B-3 – Primary State Police Agencies in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted by Rate per 1,000 Officers) .......................................................................504 Appendix B-4 – Sheriff’s Offices in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted by Rate per 1,000 Officers) .......................................................................506 Appendix B-5 – County Police Departments in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted by Rate per 1,000 Officers) .......................................................................519 Appendix B-6 – 500 Largest Municipal Police Departments in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted by Rate per 1,000 Officers) .......................................................................521 Appendix B-7 – Special State & Local Law Enforcement Agencies in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted by Rate per 1,000 Officers) .......................................................................536 APPENDIX C: Employing Law Enforcement Agencies: Rates of Officers Arrested Sorted by Rate per 100,000 Population ................................540 Appendix C-1 – 200 Largest State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted by Rate per 100,000 Population) ...............................................................540 Appendix C-2 – Nonmetropolitan State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted by Rate per 100,000 Population) ...............................................................546 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 13 Appendix C-3 – Primary State Police Agencies in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted by Rate per 100,000 Population) ...............................................................562 Appendix C-4 – Sheriff’s Offices in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted by Rate per 100,000 Population) ...............................................................564 Appendix C-5 – County Police Departments in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted by Rate per 100,000 Population) ...............................................................577 Appendix C-6 – 500 Largest Municipal Police Departments in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted by Rate per 100,000 Population) ...............................................................579 Appendix C-7 – Special State & Local Law Enforcement Agencies in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted by Rate per 100,000 Population) ...............................................................594 APPENDIX D: State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies: Police Crime Arrest Cases ...............................................................................................598 APPENDIX E: Entity Relationship Diagram of Stinson’s Police Crime Database .....................................................................................669 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 14 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This study is a quantitative content analysis of archived news articles and court records reporting on the arrest(s) of law enforcement officers in the United States from 2005-2011. Police crimes are those crimes committed by sworn law enforcement officers given the general powers of arrest at the time the offense was committed. These crimes can occur while the officer is on or off duty and include offenses committed by state, county, municipal, tribal, or special law enforcement agencies. Police crimes damage the occupational integrity of police, the organizational legitimacy of the employing agency, and the overall authority and legitimacy of the law enforcement enterprise. Three distinct but related research questions are addressed in this study. First, what is the incidence and prevalence of police officers arrested across the United States? Second, how do law enforcement agencies discipline officers who are arrested? And, third, to what degree do police crime arrests correlate with other forms of police misconduct? The Problem of Police Crime Surprisingly little is known about the crimes committed by law enforcement officers, in part because there are virtually no official nationwide data collected, maintained, disseminated, and/or available for research analyses. Researchers have utilized other methodologies to study police misconduct and crime in the absence of any substantive official data, including surveys, field studies, quasi-experiments, internal agency records, and the investigative reports of various independent commissions delegated to report on this phenomenon within particular jurisdictions. These methodologies have thus far failed to produce systematic, nationwide data on police crime. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 15 The lack of data on police crime is clearly a problem, since the development of strategies to mitigate police crime in the least requires that they be documented and described in some sort of systematic and generalizable manner. From an organizational perspective, more comprehensive data could provide comparisons among agencies on rates of police crime, and subsequently contribute to the development and implementation of policies to deter police crime and lessen damage to police-community relations in their aftermath. From a scholarly perspective, the collection, analysis, and dissemination of more comprehensive police crime data could instigate studies designed to identify significant correlates, explore relationships between police crimes and more general forms of police deviance, and provide information on how police culture and socialization potentially contribute to the problem. Scholars have yet to fully pursue these and other important issues associated with the problem of police crime because we lack any sort of comprehensive data on the types of crime that police commit and how frequently they commit them. The current study demands a conceptual framework that reflects both the broad range of offenses committed by law enforcement officers and the generalized nature of our research questions. Thus, the finding of the current study are organized within a conceptual framework that incorporates five key types of police crime: Sex-related Police Crime Alcohol-related Police Crime Drug-related Police Crime Violence-related Police Crime Profit-motivated Police Crime This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 16 The study is organized around these five types of police crime. We provide data pertinent to the three broad research questions within each area, as well as additional data that further describes the nature and character of police crime both in general and within each of the five types. The conceptual framework serves to organize data that describes a phenomenon that encompasses a wide range of criminal behavior. The framework also allows for the presentation and discussion of data specifically focused on answering the stated research questions; but also, the wealth of data collected on police crime as part of this project that does not readily fit under one or more of the specific research questions. The Purpose of the Study The purpose of the current research project is to promote police integrity by gaining a better understanding of police crime and agency responses to officer arrests. The study provides a wealth of data on a phenomena that relates directly to police integrity—data that law enforcement executives did not previously have access to because they did not exist in any useable format. The first goal of this research is to determine the nature and extent of police crime in the United States. A second goal of this research is to determine what factors influence how a nonfederal law enforcement organization responds to arrests of officers. A third and final goal of the research is to foster police integrity by exploring whether police crime and officer arrests correlate with other forms of police misconduct. The purpose for the current study evolved from long-standing obstacles associated with the collection of data on police crime. The underlying reasons for the current study reflect the ongoing lack of empirical data on the crimes committed by law enforcement officers—a situation that relates directly to the limitations of previous methodologies used to collect data on the phenomenon. Researchers have resorted to a variety of methodologies to learn more about This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 17 the nature and extent of police misconduct, corruption, or crime. Empirical scholarship has usually incorporated one or more of the following: (a) officer surveys, (b) agency records, and (c) sociological field studies. Studies that utilize one or more of these methodologies have clearly contributed to the knowledge base on police crime, but the methodology used in the present study offers clear advantages in terms of both the scope and quality of potential data on police crime. Research Design Data for the current study were collected as part of a project designed to locate cases in which sworn law enforcement officers had been arrested for any type of criminal offense(s). Data were derived from published news articles using the Google News search engine and its Google Alerts email update service. Google Alerts searches were conducted using the same 48 search terms developed by Stinson (2009). The Google Alerts email update service sent a message each time one of the automated daily searches identified a news article in the Google News search engine that matched any of the designated search terms. The automated alerts contained a link to the URL for the news articles. The articles were located, examined for relevancy, printed, logged, and then scanned, indexed, and archived in a digital imaging database for subsequent coding and content analyses. The present study focuses on the identification and description of the cases in which police officers were arrested during the years 2005-2011. Content analyses were conducted in order to code the cases in terms of (a) arrested officer, (b) employing nonfederal law enforcement agency, (c) each of the charged criminal offenses, (d) victim characteristics, (e) organizational adverse employment outcomes, and (f) criminal case dispositions. Each of the charged criminal offenses was coded using the data collection guidelines of the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) as the coding This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 18 protocol for each criminal offense category (see U.S. Department of Justice, 2000). Fifty-seven criminal offenses are included in the NIBRS, consisting of 46 incident-based criminal offenses in one of 22 crime categories as well as 11 additional arrest-based minor criminal offense categories. In each case every offense charged was recorded on the coding instrument as well as the most serious offense charged in each police crime arrest case. The most serious offense charged was determined using the Uniform Crime Report’s (UCR) crime seriousness hierarchy (see U.S. Department of Justice, 2004). An additional eight offenses were added following an earlier pilot study (see Stinson, 2009) because police officers who were arrested often were charged with criminal offenses not included in the NIBRS (e.g., online solicitation of a child, indecent exposure, official misconduct / official oppression / violation of oath, vehicular hit-andrun, perjury / false reports / false statements, criminal deprivation of civil rights). The primary unit of analysis in this study is criminal arrest case. One of the primary issues in coding was differentiating between arrest cases with multiple victims and officers who were arrested on multiple occasions within the study years 2005-2011. Arrest incidents that involved multiple victims with corresponding criminal charges were assigned an individual case for each respective victim. Additionally, law enforcement officers who were arrested on multiple occasions had an arrest case generated in the project database for each respective arrest. Cases were also coded on Stinson’s (2009) typology of police crime, which posits that most crime committed by police officers is alcohol-related, drug-related, sex-related, violencerelated, and/or profit-motivated. The types of police crime are not mutually-exclusive categories. Rather, each type of police crime is coded as a dichotomous variable because crimes committed by officers often involve more than one type of police crime. Additionally, cases were coded for the presence of police sexual violence and/or driving while female encounters. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 19 Police sexual violence is operationalized as “those situations in which a female citizen experiences a sexually degrading, humiliating, violating, damaging, or threatening act committed by a police officer through the use of force or police authority” (Kraska & Kappeler, 1995, p. 93). Driving while female is operationalized as instances where a police officer stops a female driver under the pretext of an alleged traffic violation and then abuses the power and authority of his position to take advantage of a vulnerable motorist (Walker & Irlbeck, 2002, 2003). In some cases, driving while female encounters escalate into sexual harassment, sexual assault, and in rare instances, forcible rape. Secondary data were employed from the Census of State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies (CSLLEA) (U.S. Department of Justice, 2008) to ascertain demographic data including the number of full-time sworn personnel and part-time sworn personnel employed by each agency where arrested officers served. County and independent city were used to verify location of arrested officers’ employing law enforcement agencies, as well as for use as a key variable to merge other data sources into the project’s master database and data set. The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (2003) county-level urban to rural nine-point continuum scale was used to measure rurality. Population data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s decennial census in years 2000 and 2010 were utilized for county, independent city, and state populations. Analytic procedures were undertaken to ensure reliability of the data. An additional coder was employed to independently code a random sample of five percent of the total number of cases in the study. Intercoder reliability was assessed by calculating the Krippendorf’s alpha coefficient across 195 variables of interest in this study on a random sample (n = 290, 4.3%) of the cases in the study (N = 6,724) (see Hayes & Krippendorff, 2007). The Krippendorf’s alpha coefficient (Krippendorf’s α = .9153) is strong across the variables in this study. The overall This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 20 level of simple percentage of agreement between coders across all of the variables in this study (97.7%) also established a degree of reliability well above what is generally considered acceptable in content analysis research. Chi Square was used to measure the statistical significance of the association between two variables measured at the nominal level. Cramer’s V measures the strength of that relationship with values that range from zero to 1.0 and allows for an assessment of the importance of the relationship. Stepwise binary logistic regression was used to determine which of the predictor variables are statistically significant in multivariate models. Stepwise logistic regression models are appropriate where the study is purely exploratory and predictive. Classification tree analysis was utilized as a statistical technique to uncover the causal pathways between independent predictors and various outcome variables of interest, including job loss, and conviction. This is an exploratory study because little is known empirically about police crime arrests and the specific factors responsible for conviction and job loss subsequent to the arrest of a sworn law enforcement officers. Strengths and Limitations The news search methodology utilizing the Google News search engine and the Google Alerts email update service provided an unparalleled amount of information on police crime arrests at law enforcement agencies across the United States. The Google News search engine algorithm offers some clear advantages over other aggregated news databases and the methodologies employed by previous studies that used news-based content analyses to document cases of sex-related police misconduct. The Google Alerts email update service provides the ability to run persistent automated queries of the Google News search engine and deliver realtime search results. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 21 There are four primary limitations of the data. First, this research study includes every case known to the research team of a nonfederal sworn law enforcement officer who was arrested during the years 2005-2011. Thus, this study is a census of the universe of police crime arrest cases identified through our search methodology. We do not purport to include every single instance of a law enforcement officer being arrested. Second, our research is limited by the content and quality of information provided for each case. The amount of information available on each case varied, and data for several variables of interest were missing for some of the cases. Third, the data are limited to cases that involved an official arrest based on probable cause for one or more crimes. We do not have any data on police officers who engaged in criminal activity if their conduct did not result in an arrest. Fourth, we note that these data are the result of a filtering process that includes the exercise of discretion by media sources in terms of both the types of stories covered and the nature of the content devoted to particular stories. Despite the noted limitations, the use of news articles as the primary data source is a long established method of analyzing deviant/illegal police behavior (see, e.g., Lawrence, 2000; Lersch & Feagin, 1996; Rabe-Hemp & Braithwaite, 2013; Ross, 2000). Findings Findings from the study provide three general observations about the nature of police crime overall. First, police crimes are not uncommon. The study identified 6,724 arrest cases from 2005-2011 involving 5,545 sworn law enforcement officers. The arrested sworn law enforcement officers were employed by 2,529 state and local law enforcement agencies located in 1,205 counties and independent cities in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Sworn law enforcement officers were arrested at a rate of 0.72 per 1,000 officers and 1.7 per 100,000 of the population nationwide. Second, police crime is an occupationally-derived phenomenon. Police This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 22 work is conducive to all sorts of criminal behavior, largely because of plentiful opportunities provided by the nature of the work and police-citizen interactions. Third, police crime is complex and multivariate. Police crime can be alcohol-related, drug-related, sex-related, violence-related, or profit-motivated. These five types of police crime are not mutually exclusive, and there are numerous significant predictors of (a) each type of police crime, (b) adverse employment outcomes, and (c) criminal case dispositions. Distinctions between on- and off-duty police crime are often difficult to make. Aside from these general observations, the findings can be summarized in terms of both the full data set and the five types of police crime. The most common most serious offense charged in the cases overall were simple assault (13%), driving under the influence (12.5%), aggravated assault (8.5%), forcible fondling (5.2%), and forcible rape (4.8%). Slightly more than one-half of the cases (54%) ultimately resulted in job loss for arrested officers. The factors that influence whether an arrested officer will be criminally convicted or lose his or her job are numerous and complex, and include both legal factors (e.g., most serious offense charged) and extralegal factors (e.g., age, years of service as a sworn law enforcement officer, relationship of victim to the arrested officer). In terms of case outcomes, the events of job loss and criminal conviction are not isolated. Job loss provides a context for the incidence of criminal conviction and vice versa. The number of cases and officers arrested in terms of the five types of police crime were as follows: Sex-related police crime included 1,475 arrest cases of 1,070 sworn officers Alcohol-related police crime included 1,405 arrest cases of 1,283 sworn officers Drug-related police crime included 739 arrest cases of 665 sworn officers Violence-related police crime included 3,328 arrest cases of 2,586 sworn officers Profit-motivated police crime included 1,592 cases of 1,396 sworn officers This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 23 Sex-related Police Crime The two most important points in regard to the sex-related crimes include the serious nature of these events and the prevalence of relatively young victims. Serious cases of police sexual violence are not isolated events. The study identified a total of 422 forcible or statutory rapes, 352 cases of forcible fondling, and 94 sodomy arrest cases. Children seem to be particularly vulnerable to law enforcement officers who perpetrate sex crimes. Almost one-half of the known victims were children, and the second-most commonly occurring category in terms of the victim's relationship to the arrested officer was an unrelated child. Arrested officers were criminally convicted on at least one charge in four-fifths (80%) of the sex-related cases in which conviction data were available. The simple odds of job loss are 2.8 times greater if the arrested officer was ultimately convicted of a sex-related crime. Alcohol-related Police Crime Job loss in the aftermath of being arrested for an alcohol-related police crime is tied to organizational characteristics of an arrested officer’s employing state or local law enforcement agency. Arrested officers employed by law enforcement agencies with 1-99 full-time sworn personnel lost their jobs in less than half (44.6%) of the alcohol-related cases, and officers employed by agencies with 100 or more full-time sworn personnel lost their jobs in less than one-third (29.8%) of the alcohol-related cases. Sworn law enforcement officers engaging in drunk driving is a major problem and concern. There were 960 cases of police DUI (driving under the influence) arrests. These police DUI arrest cases largely provide examples of officers who have lost their exemption from law enforcement. That is to say, state and local sworn law enforcement officers do not typically arrest other sworn law enforcement officers, especially for drunk driving. In many of the police This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 24 DUI arrest cases in this study, however, the drunk driving officer did something in terms of the incident events that led to being arrested. For example, many of the police DUI arrest cases involved traffic accidents (51%) often resulting in victim injury (24.1%) or fatalities (4%). Arrested officers are known to have lost their jobs as sworn law enforcement officers in less than one-third (29.8%) of the police DUI arrest cases. Drug-related Police Crime Drug-related crime by sworn law enforcement officers tends to spawn all sorts of other kinds of police misconduct and police crime. Personal use of drug does not seem to be the primary problem in drug-related police crime. Drug-related police crime often involves drug trafficking, facilitation of the drug trade, and shakedowns of citizens most often associated with the trade of cocaine and crack. Taken together, cocaine and marijuana account for over one-half of the drug-related police crime arrest cases. Well over one-half of the drug-related police crime arrest cases were also profit-motivated police crime. Violence-related Police Crime Policing is often violent. A major problem identified in this study, however, is officerinvolved domestic violence. There were 961 cases of officer-involved domestic violence. Approximately one-third of the cases involving a sworn law enforcement arrested for officerinvolved domestic violence are known to have resulted in the arrested officer losing his or her job as a result of the arrest. When the victim is currently involved (i.e., current spouse, current boyfriend/girlfriend), the arrested officer is less likely to be convicted than when the victim is somebody else in officer-involved domestic violence arrest cases. The simple odds of an officer losing his or her job after being arrested for a crime relating to officer-involved domestic violence are greater when the relationship with the victim is more distant. Serious concerns This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 25 regarding compliance with the gun and ammunition prohibitions of the Lautenberg Amendment (1996) to the Federal Gun Control Act of 1968 for persons convicted of qualifying crimes of domestic violence are raised by officer-involved domestic violence arrest cases in this study. There is no exception to the gun prohibition in the federal statute for sworn law enforcement officers who have been convicted of qualifying misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence. Profit-motivated Police Crime Most of the profit-motivated crimes occurred at the street-level and involved patrol personnel. These crimes are more like street crimes than white collar crimes. The most common most serious offense charged in the profit-motivated police crime arrest cases were unclassified thefts (16%), false pretenses (theft by deception) (12.5%), drug offenses (11.9%), robbery (6.4%) thefts from buildings (5.8%), and extortion or blackmail (5.3%). More than two-thirds of the sworn law enforcement officers arrested for profit-motivated crime lost their jobs (67%) and more than half of the profit-motivated arrest cases resulted in conviction (57.4%). The single largest predictor of job loss in profit-motivated police crime arrest cases is when the profitmotivated crime is also drug-related. Conclusion Cases in which sworn law enforcement officers act as criminals—whether dealing drugs, or driving drunk, or sexually molesting a vulnerable citizen—strike a direct blow to the law enforcement enterprise and the essence of what it means to be a law enforcement officer: protect and serve. These cases threaten to undermine public trust in both the authority and legitimacy of state and local law enforcement organizations, and the work of law-abiding sworn officers who go about their job selflessly, efficiently, and professionally every day. Police crime as a topic This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 26 worthy of empirical study however is not clearly understood, and would probably best be described as untapped or at the very least not sufficiently explored. The contrast between the topic's substantive weight and comparatively light coverage within the scholarship is mostly due to an absence of suitable data. The traditional sources of data and methods of study, whether official statistics, self-report surveys, or direct observations, either do not exist in any usable format or are ill-equipped to identify, count, or provide the basis for empirical analyses of instances in which police perpetrate crimes themselves. These cases have thus far escaped large-scale empirical scrutiny, but they are intrinsically newsworthy events. Those in the news media need to identify stories that will be of interest to their audience, and cases of police crime typically include storylines that are clearly newsworthy. This project utilized a methodology designed to capitalize on the newsworthy character of police crime, identify these events, and subject them to analyses that have thus far been impossible. Given the previous unavailability of data and the relative absence of empirical studies dedicated to the topic, our work should be considered exploratory. The primary aim was to uncover cases of police crime arrests and to provide the basis for what we hope will become an important contribution to the establishment of a more substantive and useful line of research on the topic. Implications for Policy and Practice The findings of the current study have several direct implications for policy and practice in state and local law enforcement agencies. First, employing law enforcement agencies should have written policies to compel mandatory disclosure whenever a sworn officer is arrested for a crime, as well as whenever a court issues an order of protection against a sworn officer. Second, it is imperative that employing law enforcement agencies implement a policy of conducting annual criminal background checks of all current sworn personnel to ascertain if any sworn This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 27 officer has been arrested or convicted of any crime. The practice of conducting annual criminal background checks on every sworn law enforcement officer employed will ensure compliance with the gun and ammunition prohibition provisions of the Lautenberg Amendment (1996) to the federal Gun Control Act of 1968. Third, law enforcement agencies should have written policies in place regarding standard agency responses to when a sworn law enforcement officer is arrested, and the policy should address procedures for both situations where a sworn officer employed by that agency is arrested as well as when the agency effectuates the criminal arrest of a sworn law enforcement officer employed by some other law enforcement agency. Finally, many arrested officers experience an unraveling of their lives, and mental health problems can be present in some instances. Early intervention and warning systems should be utilized to track instances of officers being arrested and officers should be referred to employee assistance programs when appropriate. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 28 Acknowledgements Adam Watkins provided statistics expertise. Hannah Brewer, Michael Buerger, Melissa Burek, Chris Dunn, Judith Leary, and Brooke Mathna provided technical expertise. Dan Lee, Dennis Giever, Paul McCauley, and David Myers offered early encouragement. The following graduate student research assistants at Bowling Green State University worked on this project: Evin Carmack, Paige Crawford, Jacob Frankhouser, Maria Gardella, Breanne Hitchens, Jessica Kirkpatrick, Krista Long, Matthew Roberts, Dennis Roehrig, Andrew Rudnik, Adam Sierra, Scott Stevenson, Erin Thomson, Natalie Todak, Georgianna Whitely, and Mallorie Wilson. The following undergraduate student research assistants at Bowling Green State University also worked on this project: Christy Adams, Warifa Azeez, Joelle Bridges, Zachary Calogeras, Vincent Crews, Natalie DiChiro, Charles Eberle, Rachel Fettinger, Madeline Fisher, Joanna Hanson, Breanne Hitchens, Ryan Hunter, Tanya Korte, Theresa Lanese, Mariah Lax, Raven Ory, Tiffany Pleska, Ashley Roberts, Taylor Szalkowski, and Mallorie Wilson. This project was made possible through the guidance of Chief Information Officer John Ellinger and assistance from numerous Information Technology Services staff at Bowling Green State University, including Adam Arthur, Chad Brandeberry, Kyle Butler, Patrick Enright, Chad Fletcher, Michael Good, Danee Gunka, Lauren Hall, Matthew Haschak, Katrina Horvath, Margo Kammeyer, Clinton LaForest, Bridget Place, Nick Rodgers, Thomas Shuman, Andries Smith, Chris Wammes, and Deb Wells. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 29 INTRODUCTION Police crimes are those crimes committed by sworn law enforcement officers who are given the general powers of arrest at the time the offense was committed. These crimes can occur while the officer is either on- or off-duty and include offenses committed by officers employed by state, county, municipal, tribal, or special law enforcement agencies. Anecdotes and journalistic investigations indicate that police officers commit various criminal offenses including larceny/theft, drug trafficking, driving while intoxicated, domestic assault, and predatory sex offenses (see, e.g., Kappeler, Sluder, & Alpert, 1998). Further evidence of the crimes committed by police is also contained in the reports of several independent commissions on police misconduct (Knapp Commission, 1972; Mollen Commission, 1994; Pennsylvania Crime Commission, 1974). The occurrence of police crime should be a concern to police executives, scholars, and the general public. Police crimes damage both the occupational integrity of police and the legitimacy of the employing police agency. But, surprisingly little is known about the crimes committed by law enforcement officers. There are no comprehensive statistics available on the phenomena, and no government entity collects data on criminal arrests of police officers in the United States (Anechiarico & Jacobs, 1996; Barak, 1995; Kane, 2007). There have been very few studies that provide specific data on the nature and prevalence of police crime. Reiss' (1971) classic field research found that officers commonly engaged in on-duty crime, mostly bribetaking and petty thefts; but, no other large-scale observational studies attempt to determine the prevalence of police crime. Scholars have instead been more likely to broach the topic within the context of more general studies on police corruption or misconduct (Fyfe & Kane, 2006). Some studies use officer surveys to identify police attitudes toward misconduct or to measure This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 30 their propensity for criminal behavior under particular scenarios, but these methods are unlikely to produce valid data on actual police crime because police tend to maintain a code of silence or provide socially desirable responses to sensitive questions in regard to their own criminal behavior and/or the criminal behavior of fellow officers (Fishman, 1978; Maguire & Mastrofski, 2000; Maguire & Uchida, 2000). The lack of statistics and empirical studies on police crime is problematic. First, more comprehensive data could be used to develop policies to deter police crimes and/or mitigate damage to police-community relations in their aftermath. Second, data on the correlates of police crime could provide information on the relationship between police crime and more general forms of police deviance including corruption, discrimination, and other forms of abuse. Third, an expansion of this line of research would provide information on the role of police culture and socialization processes, particularly if these data include both on-duty and off-duty crimes committed over the course of the career. Scholars have yet to fully pursue these questions because we lack any sort of comprehensive statistics on the types of crime committed by police and when and how often they commit them. These exploratory data are necessary to advance the understanding of police crime. This study is a quantitative content analysis of archived records consisting of news articles and court records reporting the arrests of police officers during the years 2005-2011. The overall purpose of the study is to identify and describe crimes committed by police officers. Three distinct but related research questions guide this research study. First, what is the incidence and prevalence of police officers arrested across the United States? Second, how do law enforcement agencies discipline officers who are arrested? And, third, to what degree do police crime arrests correlate with other forms of police misconduct? This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 31 The research questions relate to different aspects relevant to the study of police crime and police integrity more generally. The crimes committed by police officers that are identified and described in this study encompass the broad nature of crime in general and range from the mundane to the most serious, a situation that reflects what Ross (2001) observed as the multidimensional character of police crime. The wide array of criminal offenses committed by police officers also obviously varies in terms of the research questions identified above, including the frequency with which they occur, the frequency and types of discipline imposed, and the degree to which they are associated with other forms of misconduct. The study of off-duty police misconduct and crime has been complicated by a debate on whether these concepts include acts committed while an officer is technically off-duty. Several policing scholars emphasize the occupational origins of police crime and focus on those acts that occur on-duty under the guise of police authority (Barker & Carter, 1994; Foster, 1966; Stoddard, 1968) and during the course of an officer’s normal work activities (Barker, 1978; Ross, 2001). Kappeler et al. (1998) argue that many off-duty crimes should not be considered police crimes because they do not involve some aspect of an officer’s occupational position to carry them out. This situation begs questions as to whether off-duty misconduct arises from specialized law enforcement training, skills, and knowledge, or even prevailing occupational norms that may serve to legitimize such behavior. Fyfe and Kane (2006) make a compelling case for the inclusion of off-duty acts in their study of career-ending police misconduct, an argument that also applies to police crimes. First, the job provides officers unique criminal opportunities that can be taken advantage of either onor off-duty. Second, police officers are more likely to engage in either on- or off-duty crimes in part because they believe their status as sworn law enforcement officers affords them some This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 32 degree of exemption from prosecution (see Reiss, 1971; Stinson, Liederbach, Brewer, & Todak, 2014). Third, most jurisdictions grant full law enforcement powers to off-duty sworn law enforcement officers and permit them to carry service weapons. These factors make it difficult to distinguish between on- and off-duty police behavior because “the knowledge, gun, and badge that comes with being a police officer” often facilitates the off-duty crimes of police officers (Mollen Commission, 1994, p. 30). Other studies have raised concerns about the off-duty guninvolved misconduct of sworn officers (e.g., Commission to Combat Police Corruption, 1998a, 2001a, 2001b, 2010; Fyfe, 1980, 1987, 1988; Kane & White, 2009; Stinson, Liederbach, & Freiburger, 2012). The current study demands a conceptual framework that reflects both the broad range of offenses committed by law enforcement officers and the generalized nature of our research questions. Thus, the contents of our report are organized within a conceptual framework that incorporates five key types of police crime: Sex-related Police Crime Alcohol-related Police Crime Drug-related Police Crime Violence-related Police Crime Profit-motivated Police Crime The remainder of this report is organized around these five key types. We provide data pertinent to the three broad research questions within each area, as well as additional data that further describes the nature and character of police crime both in general and within each of the five types. The conceptual framework serves to organize data that describes a phenomenon that encompasses a wide range of criminal behavior. The framework also allows for the presentation This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 33 and discussion of data specifically focused on answering the stated research questions; but also, the wealth of data collected on police crime as part of this project that does not readily fit under one or more of the specific research questions. The latter part of this section introduces the problems associated with these different types of police crime in sequence. Likewise, the Literature Citations and Review section of the report presents overviews of the relevant research literature organized in terms of the five key types of police crime. The Findings portion of this report also incorporates the same conceptual framework and organizing themes. The final section of the report discusses our findings and implications of the study both within and across the key types of police crime. Statement of the Problem Scholars have struggled with the task of measuring police integrity because there are virtually no official nationwide data collected, maintained, disseminated, and/or available for research analyses (see, e.g., Anechiarico & Jacobs, 1996; Collins, 1998; Kane, 2007; Klockars, Kutnjak Ivkovic, Harver, & Haberfield, 1997; Kutnjak Ivkovic, 2003; Sherman & Langworthy, 1979; Stinson, Liederbach, & Freiburger, 2010). Complicating the matter is the reality that police officers are largely exempt from law enforcement because there is a reluctance to enforce the law against fellow officers (Klockars, Kutnjak Ivkovic, & Haberfield, 2006; Reiss, 1971). As a result, researchers have resorted to a variety of methodologies in their efforts to learn more about the nature and extent of police crime, corruption, and misconduct. These include surveys (e.g., Barker, 1978; Greene, Piquero, Hickman, & Lawton, 2004), quasi-experiments (e.g., Fyfe & Kane, 2006; Kane & White, 2009, 2013), sociological field studies (e.g., Reiss, 1971; Sherman, 1978), investigation reports of independent commissions (e.g., Christopher Commission, 1991; Knapp Commission, 1972; Mollen Commission, 1994; e.g., Pennsylvania This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 34 Crime Commission, 1974), analyses of internal agency records (e.g., Fyfe & Kane, 2006; C. J. Harris, 2009, 2011a, 2011b, 2012; Kane & White, 2009, 2013; Liederbach, Boyd, Taylor, & Kawucha, 2007), and analysis of criminal justice system records (e.g., Collins, 1998; Kutnjak Ivkovic, 2005). These various methodologies have thus far failed to produce systematic, nationwide data on police crime. These lines of literature do make clear, however, that the phenomenon covers a wide range of criminal behavior that is difficult to generalize. Ross (2001) was among the first to recognize the multidimensional nature of police crime. He developed a taxonomy that in part distinguished the phenomenon in terms of four bipolar distinctions of police criminality. Likewise, Stinson (2009) developed a typology of police crime as a means to both organize data on the wide range of acts committed by police officers and to distinguish various types of police crime. Stinson’s typology of police crime is incorporated in the current study. The section below includes a statement of the problem associated with the five types of police crime including: (a) sex-related police crime, (b) alcohol-related police crime, (c) drug-related police crime, (d) violence-related police crime, and (e) profit-motivated police crime. The Problem of Sex-related Police Crime Sex-related police crimes encompass a continuum of acts ranging from less serious forms of sexual misconduct to more egregious cases that involve violence, including acts that have been referred to in the research literature as police sexual violence (Rabe-Hemp & Braithwaite, 2013). Police sexual violence has been defined to include acts that are officially recognized and involve violence or the use of police force (Maher, 2003). Police sexual violence occurs when the victim experiences “sexually degrading, humiliating, violating, damaging or threatening acts committed by a police officer through the use of force, fear, intimidation, or police authority” This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 35 (Kraska & Kappeler, 1995, p. 93). Less serious forms of sexual misconduct include acts whereby a police officer uses his or her position to “initiate or respond to some sexuallymotivated cue for the purpose of sexual gratification” (Maher, 2003, p. 357). Opportunities for sex-related police crime abound because officers operate in a low visibility environment with very little supervision. The potential victims of sex-related police crime include criminal suspects but also unaccompanied victims of crime (Rabe-Hemp & Braithwaite, 2013). Cases of sex-related police crime often do not involve direct forms of violence, because police may be able to perpetrate these crimes on the basis of threats or other forms of intimidation given their position of authority. Police sexual misconduct and cases of police sexual violence are often referred to as hidden offenses, and studies on police sexual misconduct are usually based on small samples or derived from officer surveys that are threatened by a reluctance to reveal these cases. Rabe-Hemp and Braithwaite (2013) recently identified the need for national level studies on the phenomenon. The Problem of Alcohol-related Police Crime A second type of police crime explored in this study is alcohol-related police crime. In August 1998, the (New York City) Commission to Combat Police Corruption released a comprehensive report on the misconduct of New York Police Department (NYPD) officers. The Commission found that a significant number of cases arose out of misconduct that occurred while the officers were off-duty. A large number of the misconduct cases analyzed by the Commission to Combat Police Corruption involved off-duty officers who were intoxicated (Commission to Combat Police Corruption, 2004). The most prevalent charges in these cases were driving under the influence and cases where officers had consumed enough alcohol to be considered unfit for duty. The Commission to Combat Police Corruption report indicates the This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 36 magnitude of alcohol-related problems among NYPD officers and suggests that these problems primarily involve both the off-duty consumption of alcohol and cases involving police officers who drive drunk, a phenomenon we refer to as police driving under the influence (DUI). Following the outline of the Commission’s findings, this report describes the problem of alcoholrelated police crime in two parts: (a) police crimes that involved the consumption of alcohol, and (b) police crimes that specifically involve cases of police DUI. One problem for scholars interested in the study of alcohol-related police crime stems from the fact that much of it—or at least many of the most visible cases of alcohol-related police crime—seems to occur while police are technically off-duty (Commission to Combat Police Corruption, 2004). Virtually all of the existing data on off-duty police misconduct and crime describes the misbehavior of NYPD police officers. The data are based on either the findings of independent commissions designed to investigate the city's unique cycle of police scandals or published research derived from a data set on career-ending misconduct among NYPD officers from 1975 to 1996 (Fyfe & Kane, 2006; Kane & White, 2009). The existing line of research provides coverage on the off-duty misbehavior of NYPD officers, but the absence of data on the phenomenon as it occurs elsewhere raises legitimate concerns in regard to generalizability. The current study provides much needed data on the alcohol-related police crimes perpetrated by offduty police officers as these crimes occur nationwide. Police DUI—or cases in which police are arrested for crimes associated with driving while intoxicated—comprises the second part of our description of alcohol-related police crime. Drunk and/or impaired driving is unquestionably an enormous societal concern (Commission to Combat Police Corruption, 2009; Shults, Beck, & Dellinger, 2011), and evidence from anecdotes and journalistic investigations demonstrate that some police drive while impaired themselves This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 37 (e.g., Castaneda, 2008; Davis, 2008; Fazlollah, 2001, 2003). Aside from anecdotes and the reports of local journalistic investigations however, there are no systematic data on the problem of police DUI's. There are no official statistics on the number of officers arrested for DUIrelated offenses, and only one study provides data that describe cases involving police who drive impaired on a national scale (see Stinson, Liederbach, Brewer, & Todak, 2014). Additional data are clearly necessary to understand and mitigate the problem. The Problem of Drug-related Police Crime A third type of police crime explored in this study is drug-related police crime. Police scandals during the last two decades of the twentieth century exposed dramatic cases of drugrelated corruption in several major American cities. A report of the United States General Accounting Office (1998) outlined several different drug-related corruption scandals across the United States during this period. The most widely-recognized scandals occurred in Miami (Sechrest & Burns, 1992), Los Angeles (Los Angeles Police Department, 2000), and New York City (Baer, Jr. & Armao, 1995). The scandals within the NYPD gained particular notoriety because of both the visibility of the NYPD and the egregious crimes perpetrated by the involved officers. Investigations into the NYPD scandal discovered widespread drug-related corruption including police who burglarized drug dens, trafficked in stolen drugs, and robbed drug dealers and their customers (Baer, Jr. & Armao, 1995). Twenty years ago the Mollen Commission (1994) highlighted the role of cocaine and crack markets in the production of drug-related police corruption in New York City. Whereas previous scandals usually arose within the context of payoffs tied to gambling or prostitution rackets, the Commission described how the burgeoning narcotics trade had become the source for more “aggressive, extortionate, and often violent” corruption that “parallel[ed] the violent This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 38 world of drug trafficking” (Baer, Jr. & Armao, 1995, p. 76). The Mollen Commission revealed how drug corruption tends to instigate various forms of misconduct and in some cases violent crimes perpetrated by police, at least as these cases unfolded within the largest police agency in the nation during the 1980s and 1990s. The patterns identified by the Mollen Commission suggest the need for more recent data to explore the incidence of drug-related police crime since the 1990s, and the degree to which drug-related police crime occurs within agencies across the nation. The Problem of Violence-related Police Crime A fourth type of police crime explored in this study is violence-related police crime. Crimes committed by police officers are by their nature special and deserving of scholarly attention because the law affords police unique rights and responsibilities, including the legal authority to use coercive force and access to weapons not available to ordinary citizens. The police are afforded unique opportunities for misconduct and crime that potentially involve violence including the excessive and/or illegal use of violence against criminal suspects and other citizens. This report describes the problem of violence-related police crime in two parts: (a) police crimes involving violence, and (b) cases in which police are arrested for crimes associated with domestic and/or family violence. Police use of physical force is synonymous with police violence. Sherman (1980) defines police violence as behavior by any officer—acting pursuant to their authority and/or power as a sworn law enforcement officer—that includes any use of physical force (including, but not limited to, the application of deadly force), whether justified or unjustified, against any person. Many acts of police violence are never brought to the attention of law enforcement authorities and never disclosed to the public. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 39 A second aspect of the problem of violence-related police crime involves what is commonly referred to as officer-involved domestic violence (Blumenstein, Fridell, & Jones, 2012; Gershon, 2000; Johnson, 1991; Johnson, Todd, & Subramanian, 2005; Sgambelluri, 2000; Stinson & Liederbach, 2013; Wetendorf, 2000). The movement to recognize officer-involved domestic violence gained momentum through the last two decades; and, incorporates provisions of the 1994 Violence Against Women Act that defined domestic violence as a national crime problem and the 1996 enactment of the Lautenberg Amendment to the federal Gun Control Act (18 U.S.C. § 925) prohibiting individuals—including police officers—from owning or using a firearm if they have been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence (Lonsway & Harrington, 2003). In 1999, the International Association of Police Chiefs promulgated a model policy on the handling of officer-involved domestic violence cases and described domestic violence in police families as a problem that “exists at some serious level and deserves careful attention” (International Association of Chiefs of Police, 2003, p. 2). These and other initiatives have worked to establish officer-involved domestic violence as an important issue for police scholars and executives as well as the general public; but, there is still a lack of empirical data on the phenomenon. The Problem of Profit-motivated Police Crime Profit-motivated police crime involves officers who use their authority of position to engage in crime for personal gain (see, e.g., Kane & White, 2009, 2013; Stinson et al., 2010; Stinson, Liederbach, et al., 2012; Stinson, Todak, & Dodge, 2013). The Mollen Commission (1994) noted that greed is the primary motive behind corruption-based police crime. This is likely true in the traditional conceptualization of police corruption in the context of, for example, an officer accepting a bribe as payoff to refrain from law enforcement. It is less clear, however, This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 40 when an officer while either on- or off-duty sells drugs, shoplifts, commits burglaries or robberies, or engages in acts of insurance fraud. Fyfe and Kane (2006) recognized this conceptual problem and—in labeling their reconceptualization as profit-motivated police misconduct—urged future policing scholars and police administrators to rethink the notion of police corruption because “police corruption is not as easy to define as we formerly may have believed” (Fyfe & Kane, 2006, p. xv). Carter (1990a, 1990b) also conceptualized drugmotivated police corruption as characterized by a profit-driven cycle as one of two behavioral motivations. Stinson (2009) adopted profit-motivated police crime as the fifth type of police crime and noted that it is consistent with Ross’ (2001) taxonomy of police crime. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 41 Literature Citations and Review Our review of the relevant research literature proceeds from the general to the specific. First, we cover scholarship relevant to the conceptualization of police crime. These studies provide definitions for the focus of our research and an identification of the features that distinguish the phenomenon from the more general topics of police deviance, police misconduct, or police corruption. This part of the review also outlines studies that describe and specifically measure the more general forms of police deviance. These studies provide data on behaviors that sometimes—but not always—involve specific violations of the criminal law by police officers. The second portion of the review covers research literature more relevant to each of the five key types of police crime outlined in the preceding section of the report. The Conceptualization of Police Crime The study of police crime has thus far been hampered by a degree of conceptual confusion, mostly due to the tendency of police scholars to consider crimes perpetrated by officers within studies focused on the more generalized topics of police corruption, deviance, or misconduct. A quick review identifies the myriad of terms used to define each of these distinct topics. Wilson (1963) defines police criminality as “illegally using public office for private gain without the inducement of a bribe, whereas acts of corruption do involve the acceptance of bribes (p. 190). He further distinguishes police criminality and corruption from brutality, which includes “mistreating civilians or otherwise infringing their civil liberties” (p. 190). Punch (2000) distinguishes “crimes committed by criminals in uniform” from acts of police misconduct, which involve violations of administrative rules that are typically investigated and sanctioned internally by the police organization (pp. 302–303). Ross (2001) provides a multidimensional taxonomy of police crimes based in part on whether the act was (a) violent, (b) This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 42 motivated by profit, and/or (c) perpetrated on behalf of the individual or the organization. Sherman (1978) focuses on corruption as a form of organizational deviance, and does not distinguish between police corruption and police crime. Scholars have tended to consider acts of law violation together with other forms of police deviance that do not involve specific violations of the criminal law, as well as those whose legal status as crimes tends to shift over time, such as bribery (see, e.g., Anechiarico & Jacobs, 1996, pp. 6–7). Fyfe & Kane (2006) point out that the various forms of police deviance are not mutually exclusive—some forms of corruption and misconduct are police crime and all forms of police crime constitute misconduct. Crimes, however, that do not involve the misuse of authority cannot be defined as acts of corruption (Fishman, 1978). The distinction among the various forms of deviance is that all police crimes involve a violation of criminal statutes and are subject to criminal prosecution, but not all acts of police corruption or misconduct violate criminal laws (Wilson, 1963). The conceptual confusion stems largely from the failure to distinguish specific violations of the criminal law whether or not they constitute an abuse of authority. The current study focuses on crimes committed by police officers that involved an arrest on at least one criminal charge to avoid this confusion and focus scholarly attention on behaviors that have thus far remained invisible to researchers because they have often been lumped together with more general acts of corruption, deviance, and/or misconduct (Box, 1983; Jupp, Davies, & Francis, 1999; Kutnjak Ivkovic, 2005). Most of what we know about police corruption and other forms of police deviance is from the investigations of independent commissions in the wake of police scandals including the Knapp Commission (1972) report, the Pennsylvania Crime Commission (1974) report, and the Mollen Commission (1994) report. These investigations were not designed to investigate police This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 43 crimes per se, but their findings in regard to corruption and other forms of misconduct shed some light on the crimes committed by officers. The commissions collectively demonstrated a problem that went well beyond the usual claim that police deviance is limited to a few “rotten pockets” of morally deficient officers, but their findings supplied only limited information on the true nature and extent of crimes committed by officers (Sherman, 1974, p. 7; Skogan & Frydl, 2004). The Knapp Commission (1972) acknowledged that bribe-taking and petty thefts were pervasive. The investigation also identified small groups of officers referred to as “meat-eaters” who “spend a good deal of their working hours aggressively seeking out situations they can exploit for financial gain, including gambling, narcotics, and other serious offenses” (p. 65). Twenty years later, the Mollen Commission recognized a shift in the nature of corruption “primarily characterized by serious criminal activity” closely associated with the drug trade, including wide-scale drug abuse and trafficking among officers (Mollen Commission, 1994, p. 17). The trend was closely tied to an explosion of crime opportunities provided by open-air markets for crack cocaine that sprouted during the early 1990s. Researchers have used police agency records to study officer misconduct that in some cases includes specific violations of the criminal law. Fyfe and Kane (2006) studied the careerending misconduct of a sample of 1,543 New York City Police Department officers employed during the period 1975 through 1996 (see also Kane & White, 2009, 2013). They identified eight separate categories of career-ending misconduct, and found that officers commonly engaged in several different types of profit-motivated crime including bribe-taking, grand larceny, insurance fraud, burglary, petit larceny, receiving stolen property and welfare fraud. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 44 Officers also engaged in a wide variety of crimes while they were off-duty, including domestic violence, driving while intoxicated, bar fights, and sexual offenses. Discussions on the conceptualization of police crime lead naturally to debates on appropriate responses to the phenomenon including various forms of organizational and courtbased dispositions. There is a limited body of empirical evidence in regard to factors that influence the imposition of organizational sanctions in cases of career-ending police misconduct based on the study of a sample of 1,543 NYPD officers employed from 1975 through 1996 (Fyfe & Kane, 2006; Kane & White, 2009, 2013). The research demonstrated that the NYPD was more likely to terminate employment in cases of serious misconduct where there was evidence that an officer violated the criminal law and/or a major administrative policy. The NYPD commonly used suspension(s) to respond to less serious forms of misconduct. The best predictors of career-ending police misconduct were disciplinary and reliability problems at previous jobs, prior criminal involvement, and the mean number of complaints against an individual officer per year. Overall, the imposition of some form of organizational discipline was most likely in cases where officers: (a) exhibited serious behavioral problems, and (b) violated rules that “conflicted with the proper functioning of the organization” (Kane & White, 2013, p. 163). The existing research on organizational dispositions—based almost exclusively on the experience of NYPD officers—remains difficult to interpret in regard to generalizability and how police agencies nationwide respond to cases of police misconduct. The logical source of data on organizational dispositions are agency records and personnel files; but, these data are not commonly made available to researchers, the media, or the public. Kane and White (2013) summarize some more general limitations associated with the use of agency records in the study This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 45 of organizational responses to police misconduct. These data are in some ways inherently biased since they largely represent the organizational perspective on the process of discipline. Agency records also commonly present an incomplete picture of the disciplinary process. For example, police organizations often suggest resignation as an alternative to termination for officers involved in serious forms of misconduct, a situation that threatens the validity of data based exclusively on the final documented organizational disposition of these sorts of cases. Problems associated with generalizability and an overall dearth of data are exacerbated in regard to the issue of legal rather than organizational dispositions. We are aware of no existing studies focused on the legal disposition of police crime cases in terms of the imposition of adverse employment outcomes aside from those derived from data collected as part of the current project (e.g., Stinson, Liederbach, et al., 2013, 2012; Stinson, Brewer, Mathna, Liederbach, & Englebrecht, 2014; Stinson & Liederbach, 2013; Stinson, Liederbach, Brewer, & Mathna, 2014; Stinson, Liederbach, Brewer, & Todak, 2014; Stinson et al., 2010; Stinson, Todak, & Dodge, 2015; Stinson, Reyns, & Liederbach, 2012; Stinson & Watkins, 2014). One primary goal of this project is to describe and analyze the organizational and legal disposition of cases of police crime, including officers arrested for crimes that related to sex, alcohol, drugs, violence, and/or were profit-motivated. In Garrity v. New Jersey (1967) the United States Supreme Court discussed the difference between adverse employment actions in the nature of disciplinary investigations against officers for police misconduct and initiation of criminal proceedings against a police officer for the same underlying event. The Court held that a police officer is required to answer questions truthfully in internal disciplinary investigations where the officer would be subject to termination for failing to answer the questions, but that statements made in that context by a This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 46 police officer cannot then be used in any criminal proceeding against the officer because the statements were coerced. As a result, many investigations into police misconduct that potentially involve police crime are stymied because a decision must be made by police administrators whether to (a) elect to gather information by questioning an officer in a disciplinary matter, or (b) forego any questions of an officer administratively and proceed with a criminal investigation against the officer. If the second option is elected, then the officer would be entitled to the right against self-incrimination that is afforded to any suspect or defendant in a criminal investigation pursuant to the Court’s holding in Miranda v. Arizona (1966). In some instances, law enforcement agencies simply allow an officer to resign in lieu of initiation of criminal proceedings against a sworn officer as an effort by the agency to quietly resolve a matter without public disclosure of police misconduct. Review on Sex-related Police Crime The first type of police crime explored in this study is sex-related police crime. Scholarship on the topic has been comparatively sparse. Early studies focused broadly on behaviors that constituted police sexual misconduct and acts such as on-duty consensual sex between officers and female adult citizens. Barker (1978) surveyed police officers who indicated that consensual sex on-duty was quite prevalent, especially in patrol cruisers. Sapp (1994) provided data derived from in-depth interviews of police. The study included qualitative— sometimes lurid—descriptions of seven different forms of police sexual misconduct, including cases wherein police spent entire shifts seeking opportunities to view unsuspecting females partially clad or nude, the sexual harassment of crime victims and criminal suspects, and sexual contacts between officers and underage females. Some of the behaviors described within the This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 47 Sapp study clearly involved sexual coercion rather than consensual sex between police and willing citizens. Kraska and Kappeler's (1995) exploratory study on police sexual violence incorporates a wide continuum of behaviors that range from comparatively unobtrusive forms of sex-related misconduct (e.g. voyeurism and other invasions of privacy) to obtrusive forms of sexual violence (e.g. sexual assault and rape). Kraska and Kappeler study the phenomenon within the context of existing police scholarship and scholarship derived from the feminist literature that more clearly defines police sexual violence as a form of gender bias and the systematic differential treatment of females in the criminal justice system. They identified 124 cases of police sexual violence through both published news reports and federal lawsuits arising under 42 U.S.C. §1983 involving police accused of sexual misconduct. Close to one-third of the cases (30%) identified involved rape and/or sexual assault. More than one-half of the cases involved strip searches. Published news reports tended to identify more serious forms of police sexual violence, while cases that involved strip searches and less serious acts were more likely to be identified through the federal lawsuit data. Cases of police sexual violence were widely dispersed geographically, and Kraska and Kappeler (1995) suggest that the cases identified in their study were likely the “tip of the iceberg” (p. 97). They indicated that the organizational and occupational culture of policing provides officers ample opportunity to engage in sex-related misconduct and crime, and note the obstacles to reporting these forms of misconduct confronted by victims including the fear of retaliation and forms of secondary victimization similar to that experienced more generally by victims of sexual assaults (see, e.g., LaFree, 1989). More recently, Maher provided data on police sexual misconduct derived from surveys of both officers (Maher, 2003) and police chiefs (Maher, 2008). Surveys of officers demonstrate This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 48 that they believe less serious forms of sexual misconduct occur frequently, and are facilitated by the opportunity structure provided by the job. The majority of officers indicated that they had not been pressured to engage in acts of sexual misconduct, but, they were unlikely to report less serious forms of the phenomenon. Surveyed police chiefs believed that less serious forms of sexual misconduct were common and serious forms of sexual misconduct and crime were rare. The data suggest that most police agencies do not have any written policies that expressly prohibit sexual misconduct (Maher, 2008). Walker and Irlbeck (2002) describe cases that they refer to as "driving while female," wherein police initiate bogus traffic stops to harass, intimidate, and/or sexually assault female motorists. Rabe-Hemp and Braithwaite (2013) recently published a study focused on police sexual violence and the problem of officer shuffle, wherein police involved in various forms of sexual misconduct and crime escape punishment and maintain their law enforcement career through employment with another police agency. Data were derived through a content analysis of published newspaper accounts of police sexual violence from 1996-2000. They identified 106 cases of police sexual violence. Close to one-half (41.5%) of the cases involved repeat police perpetrators. Repeat offenders were more likely than first time offenders to victimize juveniles. Review on Alcohol-related Police Crime The second type of police crime covered in this study is alcohol-related police crime. This report describes the problem of alcohol-related police crime in terms of both the off-duty consumption of alcohol and the phenomenon of police DUI. As we previously described, virtually all of the existing empirical data on off-duty police misconduct describes the misbehavior of NYPD officers primarily through the reports of the Commission to Combat Police Corruption (1998b, 2004). The Commission recommended specific policies designed to This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 49 mitigate problems associated with off-duty alcohol abuse, including provisions to expand the definition of unfit for duty to include intoxicated off-duty officers and prohibitions against carrying an off-duty weapon while intoxicated (Commission to Combat Police Corruption, 1998b). Fyfe and Kane's (2006) classification of police misconduct includes driving while intoxicated within the category of off-duty public order crimes, but they do not provide specific data that distinguishes misconduct that includes the abuse of alcohol. Kane and White (2009) provide several descriptions of cases that involved intoxicated off-duty officers engaged in bar fights, drunk driving, and personal disputes. Despite the findings of Kane and White (2009), the lack of existing scholarship on alcohol-related police misconduct and crime is even more acute in the specific case of police DUI. Reviews of the empirical literature failed to uncover any scholarly research specifically focused on the phenomenon of police DUI other than the research by Stinson, Liederbach, Brewer, and Todak (2014) using data from the current study on police crime. Some recent evidence indicates that officers and agencies often minimize or ignore the problem of impaired driving among police. A Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) survey reported that over one-third of responding state and local police agencies would consider police applicants with a prior DUI conviction (Reaves, 2012). Additionally, a majority of officers responding to a survey on police integrity said they would not report a fellow officer who had a minor traffic accident while driving under the influence of alcohol (Klockars, Kutnjak Ivkovic, Harver, & Haberfield, 2000). Recent journalistic investigations in Milwaukee (Barton, 2011), Denver (McGhee, 2011), and New York City (Paddock & Lesser, 2010) reported disturbing cases in which police found to have driven drunk were either not arrested and/or otherwise minimally punished. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 50 Scholars have long recognized the existence of alcohol-related problems in policing and have identified factors that seem to promote excessive drinking among police (Dietrich & Smith, 1986; Dishlacoff, 1976; Hurrell, Jr. et al., 1984; Violanti, Marshall, & Howe, 1985). Violanti et al. (2011) group these factors in terms of (a) officer demographics, (b) stress, and (c) police culture. Excessive alcohol consumption is certainly due at least in part to demographics and the over-representation of young males among police officers, in particular patrol officers. Men are more likely to have problems with alcohol than women, and alcohol use disorders are most prevalent among 18-24 year-olds (National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, 2008). Age and gender have also been specifically correlated with drinking and driving. Alcohol dependence at the age of 21 has been found to significantly predict persistent driving while drinking episodes (Begg, Langley, & Stephenson, 2003) and young adult males have been found to be significantly more likely to engage in driving while drinking than other cohorts (Chou et al., 2006). There is an extensive line of research on how stress may influence excessive drinking among police. Abdollahi (2002) provides a comprehensive overview of this literature in terms of factors that include (a) intra-interpersonal stressors, (b) job-related stressors, and (c) organizational stressors. Violanti et al.'s (2011) survey of police found that stress derived from failed interpersonal relationships increased the likelihood of hazardous drinking behavior, especially among male officers. A number of studies attribute excess alcohol consumption to the failure to properly cope with stress that is related more specifically to the job, including those derived from a perceived lack of organizational support and problematic encounters with citizens (Anshel, 2000; Ayres, Flanagan, & Ayres, 1992; Kohan & O’Connor, 2002). Leino et al. (2011) recently explored how job-related exposure to violence and the absence of adequate debriefing This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 51 procedures may increase levels of drinking among police. Swatt, Gibson, and Piquero (2007) utilize Agnew's general strain theory to explain how anxiety/depression mediate the relationship between work-related strain and drinking prevalence among police officers. Studies focused on the drinking behavior of police also underscore the impact of police culture. Police culture has been referred to as essentially a drinking culture that often includes frequent social interactions that involve the consumption of alcohol (Violanti et al., 1985). Various occupational factors have been found to increase the risk of alcohol and drug problems (Fennell, Rodin, & Kantor, 1981; Hingson, Mangione, & Barrett, 1981). Indeed, Macdonald, Wells, and Wild (1999) specifically found that the existence of a drinking subculture at work was associated with the development of alcohol problems. Lindsey and Shelley (2009) found that police officers most at risk for drinking problems admitted that fitting in was the primary reason they engaged in alcohol consumption. Officers may also be discouraged from reporting problem drinking or drunk driving among fellow officers in order to uphold other widely-recognized values shared among police including secrecy and solidarity (Banton, 1964; Skolnick, 1994). Review on Drug-related Police Crime The third type of police crime covered in this study is drug-related police crime. This line of research covers three relevant issues including (a) the etiology of drug-related misconduct, (b) the classification of drug-related misconduct, and (c) the prevalence of drug use by police. Police scholars typically attribute drug-related corruption to factors associated with the organization of police work and the occupational culture of police. Stoddard (1968) emphasizes the role of police culture and the nature of police work in the causation of what he referred to as blue coat crime. Kraska and Kappeler (1988) underscore the prevalence of on-thejob opportunities for patrol officers to become involved in the drug trade in some fashion, This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 52 including lack of direct supervision, drug availability, and exposure to drug users and dealers. The report of the General Accounting Office (1998) highlights the influence of deviant police subcultures that both promote drug corruption and protect police who adhere to deviant subcultural norms such as secrecy, loyalty, and cynicism about police work and the criminal justice system. Carter and Stephens (1994) view substance abuse as primarily a “job-related condition” among police, particularly those working undercover vice in drug-infested beats (p. 107). Carter (1990b) provides the most often cited classification scheme for drug-related corruption. His typology identifies two forms of drug corruption. Type 1 or traditionallyconceptualized drug corruption involves officers motivated by illegitimate goals including personal profit. This form of drug corruption includes the extortion and robbery of drug dealers and the acceptance of bribes to protect them. Type 2 drug corruption is comprised of officers motivated by organizationally-derived legitimate goals ostensibly tied to the arrest and conviction of dealers and users. This form of drug corruption includes perjury, violations of criminal procedure, and the planting of criminal evidence. Aside from its utility as an organization scheme, Carter's typology demonstrates how the drug trade tends to give rise to many different forms of police crime. The drug trade provides opportunities for personal gain through payoffs, shakedowns, robberies, and opportunistic thefts, as well as types of misconduct tied to drug enforcement goals and violations of the rights of criminal defendants including perjury and the planting of evidence. Officers who are recreational drug users expose themselves to street-level dealers and associated manipulation and coercion (Kappeler et al., 1998). Carter's (1990b) conclusions about the impact of these markets on the nature of police corruption closely mirror those of the Mollen Commission (1994) by noting that “the nature of This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 53 corruption has changed, particularly with respect to police drug users, the emergence of crack houses as easy targets, and the frustration with drug-law enforcement associated with the extraordinarily high volume of drug traffic” (Carter, 1990b, pp. 96–97). Very little is known about the prevalence of drug use among police officers (Mieczkowski, 2002). Kraska and Kappeler (1988) provide what is widely-cited as the only empirical description of on-duty drug use by police through their study of one medium-sized police agency. They found that 20% of the officers used marijuana on duty at least two times per month, and that 10% had used other non-prescribed controlled substances while on duty, including hallucinogens, stimulants, and/or barbiturates. The study provides initial evidence to suggest that the problem of on-duty drug use by police is not limited to large urban departments, although data derived from a much larger sample of agencies is needed to assess the prevalence of drug use among police across various types of jurisdictions. Official drug tests provide another source of data on the degree to which police use drugs, but most of this evidence describes testing results from a single agency, and no entity collects comprehensive data on the number of police who test positive overall. One journalistic investigation reported a 1.1% failure rate (75 officers) among Boston Police Department police tested from 1999-2006, as well as the failure of 14 Los Angeles Police Department officers drug tested from 2000-2006. Over 81% of the positive tests in Boston involved the use of cocaine, and police executives indicated that they believed cocaine had surpassed marijuana as the drug of choice among police (Smalley, 2006). More recent data derived from self-report surveys of officers in a single agency in Australia suggest that police use a wider variety of drugs including marijuana, amphetamines, cocaine, ecstasy, heroine, ketamine, and non-prescribed steroids (Gorta, 2009). This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 54 Lersch and Mieczkowski (2005a) report results of drug tests conducted in a large police agency in the Eastern United States in which very few officers tested positive (~ .005%). Scholars often point out, however, that official drug tests are likely influenced by (a) “announcement effects” and the fact that officers employed by these agencies are aware of testing protocols (Lersch & Mieczkowski, 2005a, p. 292), and (b) the method of drug testing. Cocaine is the most frequently detected drug based on hair analysis, and marijuana is the most frequently detected drug based on urinalysis (Lersch & Mieczkowski, 2005a; Mieczkowski, 2002; Mieczkowski & Lersch, 2002). Review on Violence-related Police Crime The fourth type of police crime explored in this study is violence-related police crime. According to Sherman (1980), police use of physical force is synonymous with police violence, defining police violence as behavior by any police officer—acting pursuant to their authority and/or power as a sworn law enforcement officer—that includes any use of physical force (including, but not limited to, the application of deadly force), whether justified or unjustified, against any person. Based on Sherman’s definition, explanations for police violence in the existing literature have been quite varied (e.g., Alpert & MacDonald, 2001; Garner, Maxwell, & Heraux, 2002; Griffin & Bernard, 2003; Lersch & Mieczkowski, 2005b; Manzoni & Eisner, 2006; Terrill & Mastrofski, 2002; Terrill, Paoline, & Manning, 2003; Terrill & Reisig, 2003). Stinson, Reyns, and Liederbach (2012) use data from the current study to identify and describe cases that involve the criminal misuse of conductive energy devices—purportedly a less-thanlethal alternative to firearms—so studies that describe the factors that influence police use of force more generally during citizen encounters seem particularly relevant. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 55 Police scholars have examined the factors that influence the use of force more generally since the 1960s, and quantitative studies have focused on the relationship between police force and a wide range of predictors including situational, individual, organizational, and communitylevel variables. Overall, virtually all studies that compare situational factors to others such as officer, organizational, and community-level factors have found that situational factors exert the most powerful influence on the decision to use coercive force (Skogan & Frydl, 2004). Police are more likely to resort to violence in encounters that include physically aggressive suspects and citizens who resist officer attempts to control the situation. Researchers have most often investigated the influence of situational factors in cases that involve the use of deadly force by police (e.g., Alpert & Smith, 1999; Binder & Scharf, 1982; Blumberg, 1983; Fyfe, 1981). This line of research has primarily emphasized the direct relationship between the level of situational risk faced by an officer and the specific decision to employ deadly force. Situational risk refers to the immediate scenario within which police must decide to shoot or not shoot. Did the suspect assault the police? Was the suspect armed? Did the suspect shoot at police? These situational factors appear to explain the use of deadly force more directly than other variables. Terrell's (2003) research based on observational data suggests that situational factors are also the primary determinants of the use of non-deadly force by police. He examined the relationship between five levels of suspect resistance (none, passive, verbal, defensive, and active), and four levels of non-lethal force (none, verbal, restraint, and impact) and found that force levels were significantly related to levels of suspect resistance. The review to this point has outlined prior research that examines the general use of police force and its predictors, whether situational, individual, organizational, and/or communitylevel factors. Distinctions as to whether the use of police force in a particular case will be This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 56 defined as “justified” or “excessive” or perhaps even “criminal” are subjective and are made case-by-case based largely on the discretionary decisions of actors within the criminal justice system, including police and prosecutors. Most states provide guidelines for the police use of force in existing criminal codes, and local prosecutors may choose to prosecute police who engage in behavior that violates the criminal law. The level of force used to complete an arrest or otherwise protect public safety must be commensurate with the crime committed and proportionally related to its necessity (Cheh, 1996; Klockars, 1996). Police officers who use “excessive” levels of force may be criminally prosecuted for a range of offenses including homicide, manslaughter, and assault. Comprehensive statistics on the criminal prosecution of police are generally neither maintained nor available to scholars or the public, so an empiricallybased identification of the specific factors that distinguishes cases on the basis of whether force was “justified” or “criminal” is not currently possible. One primary goal of the this project is to utilize media-based data in order to identify and describe cases of violence-related police crime that are distinguished by the fact that they involved the criminal arrest of a police officer(s) and were thus defined by the system as “criminal,” at least prior to the adjudication phase of the case. This type of police crime also incorporate cases that involve police arrested for crimes associated with domestic and/or family violence, a phenomenon increasingly referred to in the research literature as officer-involved domestic violence. There have been very few empirical studies designed to estimate the prevalence of officer-involved domestic violence—all of them based on self-administered surveys of police and/or their spouses. Johnson (1991) reported that 40% of responding officers admitted that they had behaved violently toward their spouse at least once during the previous six months, and 20% of the spouses in a concurrent survey reported that their spouse had abused either them or their children in the previous six months. Neidig, Russell, This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 57 and Seng (1992) and Neidig, Seng, and Russell (1992) reported that 41% of responding male officers admitted that at least one incident of physical aggression occurred in their marital relationship during the previous year, and 8% of those reported the occurrence of “severe” physical aggression including choking, strangling, and/or the use or threatened use of a knife or gun (Neidig, Russell, et al., 1992, p. 32). Reported rates of officer-involved domestic violence are highest among officers who are currently divorced or separated from their spouses. The literature on officer-involved domestic violence is filled with anecdotes that underscore the occupationally-derived etiology of violence within police families. Factors associated with police culture and the job that have been discussed within the context of officerinvolved domestic violence include: (a) violence exposure, (b) authoritarianism, and (c) problem drinking. Researchers suspect higher rates of domestic violence among police most exposed to work-related violence based on studies that document a relationship between violence exposure and the personal well-being of police officers; and, the research literature on the relationship between work and family and the possibility of spillover effects (Johnson et al., 2005; Mullins & McMains, 2000). Officer surveys identify violence exposure as one of the most significant work-related stressors for police (Gershon, 2000), and studies based on clinical trials describe links between police stress and poor family functioning (Neidig, Russell, et al., 1992). Police training in authoritarian styles and the regular exercise of coercive force may influence marital interactions and promote domestic and/or family violence (Greene-Forsythe, 2000; Johnson, 1991; Johnson et al., 2005; Sgambelluri, 2000). Police are trained to exert power and use coercive force to accomplish their goals and gain compliance from citizens (Bittner, 1978; Skolnick, 1994). The regular exercise of coercion and authoritarianism may spillover to the home in cases where police treat family members as This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 58 criminal suspects. Johnson (1991) identified a link between authoritarian spillover and high levels of strain in police families; and, Johnson et al.'s (2005) survey of police indicates that authoritarian spillover mediates the relationship between exposure to violence on the job and domestic violence among police. Problem drinking is another aspect of the work-family spillover that may contribute to the incidence of violence in police families. The research that associates officer-involved domestic violence with problem drinking cite many of the same occupationally-derived factors covered in the previous section on alcohol-related police crime including (a) intra-interpersonal stressors, (b) job-related stressors, and (c) organizational stressors. Much of the remaining research literature on officer-involved domestic violence focuses on the unique vulnerabilities of domestic violence victims in police families and factors that conspire to discourage exposure of these crimes and contribute to the hidden nature of the problem. While scholars have long demonstrated that victims of domestic and/or family violence are often reluctant to officially report these crimes, the fact that perpetrators of officerinvolved domestic violence are police themselves creates particular problems and barriers to reporting. First, they must consider the fact that perpetrators possess and are trained to use lethal weapons. Second, police perpetrators are likely to know the location of domestic violence shelters and have professional experience that can be used to manipulate the system and shift blame to the victim (Gershon, 2000; National Center for Women & Policing, 2005). Third, decisions to report incidents of officer-involved domestic violence are also likely influenced by the cultural values of secrecy and loyalty, wherein police (and their families) are expected to “never blow the whistle” and expose police perpetrators (Johnson et al., 2005; Shernock, 1995, p. 623). Fourth, domestic violence victims in police families also may be concerned about This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 59 consequences associated with provisions of the Lautenberg Amendment (1996) that prohibit police from owning or using a gun if they are convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence. Review on Profit-motivated Police Crime The Mollen Commission (1994) found that greed is the primary motive behind police crime that constitutes corruption. This is true if police corruption is conceptualized in the traditional context of acts such as accepting bribes to refrain from law enforcement. It is, however, “less clear whether officers who perform robberies or burglaries, shoplift, sell drugs, or engage in welfare or insurance fraud during their off-duty time are engaging in a variety of police corruption” (Fyfe & Kane, 2006, p. xv). Fyfe and Kane (2006) reconceptualized these actions as “profit-motivated misconduct” and noted that “police corruption is not as easy to define as we formerly may have believed (p. xv). Similarly, Carter (1990b, pp. 89–90) conceptualized police corruption as being characterized by a “profit-driven cycle.” The classification of some police crime as profit-motivated is also found in Ross’ (2001) taxonomy of police crime, where the second of four dichotomous distinctions is between “economicallymotivated and noneconomically-motivated police behavior” (p. 184). Using the same data set as Fyfe and Kane (2006), Kane and White (2013) explored the nature of the career-ending police misconduct in the NYPD and found that the profit-motivated cases (N = 387) included bribe-taking (18.6%), grand larceny (17.1%), insurance fraud (8.6%), burglary (7.3%), petit larceny (7.3%), receiving stolen property (3.9%), government fraud (3.1%), gratuities (2.6%), gambling (1.8%), illegal operation (1.8%), and other profit-motivated misconduct (27.4%) such as extortion, robbery, abusing official resources (p. 73, Table 4.2). This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 60 Stinson and colleagues found that profit-motivated police crime is a quantifiable variable that helps explains the nature of police crime across the life course of officers’ law enforcement careers in a variety of contexts at nonfederal law enforcement agencies across the United States. Whereas less experienced police officers are more likely to commit violent crimes, those officers who commit profit-motivated crimes are more likely to be experienced officers late in their policing career and more likely to be supervisors and/or administrators (Stinson et al., 2010). Likewise, crime by policewomen is most often profit-motivated (Stinson, Todak, et al., 2013). Crime by school resource officers typically is not profit-motivated police crime (Stinson & Watkins, 2014). Profit-motivated police crimes are more likely to be committed while on-duty and less likely to be committed while an officer is off-duty (Stinson, Liederbach, et al., 2012). Statement of Rationale for the Research The purpose of the current research project is to promote police integrity by gaining a better understanding of police crime and agency responses to officer arrests. The study is providing a wealth of data on a phenomena that relates directly to police integrity—data that police executives did not previously have access to because they did not exist in any useable format. The first goal of this research is to determine the nature and extent of police crime in the United States. Objectives for this goal are to: (a) identify and describe the incidence of officers arrested during each year in the study period; and (b) identify and describe the prevalence of officers arrested over the course of the study period. A second goal of this research is to determine what factors influence how a police organization responds to arrests of officers. Objectives for this goal are to: (a) identify, describe, and analyze the severity of crimes for which police officers are arrested and determine whether This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 61 severity of crime influences employment outcomes; (b) identify and analyze the level of urbanization for each employing police organization by using a 9-level urban-to-rural continuum scale to determine whether an agency’s degree of urbanization or rurality influences agency response and employment outcomes; (c) identify and analyze the geographic location (region, division, and state) for each employing police organization to determine whether geographic disparity influences agency response and employment outcomes; (d) identify and analyze length of service and age of arrested officers to further investigate whether age in years and/or years of service influence agency response and employment outcomes; and (e) identify and analyze criminal case outcomes for each officer arrested to determine whether this factor influences agency response and employment outcomes. A third and final goal of the research is to foster police integrity by exploring whether police crime and officer arrests correlate with other forms of police misconduct. Objectives for this goal are to: (a) identify and analyze whether the arrested officers in our database were also named individually as a defendant in any federal court civil actions pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983 during the life course of their law enforcement careers; and (b) inform police practitioners and policymakers of strategies derived from the project’s findings that could improve early intervention systems and other internal controls to better identify problem officers and those at risk for engaging in police misconduct – including engaging in police crime creating potential agency exposure to civil liability – and its correlates. The rationale for the current study evolved from long-standing obstacles associated with the collection of data on police crime. The underlying reasons for the current study reflect the ongoing lack of empirical data on the crimes committed by police—a situation that relates directly to the limitations of previous methodologies used to collect data on the phenomenon. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 62 Researchers have resorted to a variety of methodologies to learn more about the nature and extent of police misconduct, corruption, and/or crime; but, empirical scholarship has usually incorporated one or more of the following: (a) officer surveys, (b) agency records, and (c) sociological field studies. Studies that utilize one or more of these methodologies have clearly contributed to the knowledge base on police crime, but the methodology used in the present study offers clear advantages in terms of both the scope and quality of potential data on police crime. The first part of this section provides a brief overview of those limitations by method. This overview is followed by a concise description of the advantages of our methodology. These advantages provide the basis of and rationale for our research on police crime. Limitations of Surveys, Agency Records, and Field Research Surveys have been perhaps the most commonly utilized method to collect data on the closely related problems of police corruption and police misconduct. Since the phenomena of police crime, police corruption, and police misconduct are analogous and sometimes overlapping, some survey research does provide limited insight into the measurement of police crime. There are two primary limitations associated with the utilization of surveys in regard to the study of police crime, corruption, and misconduct. The first problem relates to gaining access to police organizations to collect data on these issues. Researchers have long reported problems in gaining access and maintaining access to law enforcement agencies for research purposes (see, e.g., Kutnjak Ivkovic, 2005; Lundman & Fox, 1978, 1979), so researchers have been afforded comparatively few opportunities to openly ask police officers about their perceptions of or tolerance for various forms of misconduct—let alone their perpetration of actual criminal behavior (Barker, 1978; Kutnjak Ivkovic, 2003). In fact, none of the survey research reported in the literature directly measures police crime. Rather, the studies measure This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 63 correlates of police crime and tend to indicate the level of tolerance for such misconduct within some police agencies (see, e.g., Fishman, 1978). The second limitation of surveys in regard to the study of police crime involves validity and problems associated with the propensity to provide socially desirable responses to inquiries about misconduct, wrongdoing, and/or criminal behavior. There are some indications that police administrators and other police personnel may be less than truthful in responding to surveys by exaggerating (Maguire & Uchida, 2000). There are obvious problems associated with asking police officers to complete questionnaires with items on the nature and extent of police offending, because it is widely assumed that officers will maintain a code of silence and fail to disclose the nature and extent of police crime through a survey format (Fishman, 1978). Researchers have also utilized agency and other official records to study issues associated with police misconduct, corruption, and crime. This line of research includes numerous crosssectional studies based on small single agency samples of police officers. More recently, Fyfe and Kane (2006) provide longitudinal data on the misconduct and crime of police based on official agency records derived from the NYPD. The NYPD data compared the personal and career histories of all 1,543 NYPD officers who were involuntarily separated from the NYPD for cause from 1975 to 1996 with a random sample of their police academy classmates. The study methodology offers unique opportunities to describe and measure police misconduct and crime from single agencies over comparatively long time periods. Studies based on agency records have two primary limitations. First, similar to officer surveys, these data require difficult to obtain access to a police organization. Most police agencies are obviously reluctant to disclose official records of officer misconduct and crime to researchers. As a result, studies based on agency records almost invariably describe the misbehavior and crime of officers from a single This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 64 police agency, a situation that leads to issues in regard to the generalizability of studies based on data from a single police agency. A second limitation of using agency records is that they result from a filtering process within the organization that created the records. That is to say, agency records are the version of events from the perspective of the organization. Reiss' (1971) classic research on the behavior of police officers in Chicago, Boston, and Washington DC stands as the only published study that utilized field observations to specifically describe various forms of police misconduct and crime. Reiss found that roughly 20% of observed police engaged in on-duty crime, not including assaults and syndicated crime. Most of the observed police crime was limited to thefts. Large scale observational studies of police are costly and difficult to conduct, so only a small number have been completed (Bayley & Garofalo, 1989; see, .e.g., Black & Reiss, 1967; Frank, Novak, & Smith, 2001; Liederbach, 2005; Liederbach & Frank, 2003; Mastrofski et al., 1998). Small scale observation studies are nonsystematic and often involve ride-along observations in one single agency. Field observations are also limited by the danger of reactivity, wherein officers may alter their behavior because of the presence of a civilian observer. Reactivity poses clear problems in the collection of observational data on police misconduct, corruption, and/or crime. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 65 METHODS Data for the current study were collected as part of a project commenced in the year 2004 designed to locate cases in which sworn law enforcement officers had been arrested for any type of criminal offense(s). Data were derived from published news articles using the Google News search engine and its Google Alerts email update service. Google Alerts searches were conducted using the same 48 search terms developed by Stinson (2009). The Google Alerts email update service sent a message each time one of the automated daily searches identified a news article in the Google News search engine that matched any of the designated search terms. The automated alerts contained a link to the URL for the news articles. The articles were located, examined for relevancy, printed, logged, and then scanned, indexed, and archived in a digital imaging database for subsequent coding and content analyses. The present study focuses on the identification and description of the cases in which police officers were arrested during the years 2005-2011. Coding and Content Analysis Content analyses were conducted in order to code the cases in terms of (a) arrested officer, (b) employing nonfederal law enforcement agency, (c) each of the charged criminal offenses, (d) victim characteristics, (e) organizational adverse employment outcomes, and (f) criminal case dispositions. Each of the charged criminal offenses was coded using the data collection guidelines of the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) as the coding protocol for each criminal offense category (see U.S. Department of Justice, 2000). Fifty-seven criminal offenses are included in the NIBRS, consisting of 46 incident-based criminal offenses in one of 22 crime categories as well as 11 additional arrest-based minor criminal offense categories. In each case every offense charged was recorded on the coding instrument as well as This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 66 the most serious offense charged in each police crime arrest case. The most serious offense charged was determined using the Uniform Crime Report’s (UCR) crime seriousness hierarchy (see U.S. Department of Justice, 2004). An additional eight offenses were added following an earlier pilot study (see Stinson, 2009) because police officers who were arrested often were charged with criminal offenses not included in the NIBRS (e.g., online solicitation of a child, indecent exposure, official misconduct / official oppression / violation of oath, vehicular hit-andrun, perjury / false reports / false statements, criminal deprivation of civil rights). The primary unit of analysis in this study is criminal arrest case. One of the primary issues in coding was differentiating between arrest cases with multiple victims and officers who were arrested on multiple occasions within the study years 2005-2011. The remainder of this paragraph presents hypothetical situations to demonstrate the unit of analysis in this study. Assume, for example, that an officer was arrested for assaulting his wife. That is coded as one arrest case (arrest case #1). If the same officer was again arrested a week later for violating an order of protection (arrest case #2) that was issued by a court judge following the officer’s first arrest, the second arrest was treated as a separate case in this study. If that same officer was arrested a few months later for drunk driving, that too was recorded as a new arrest case (arrest case #3). The officer was suspended from his employment immediately following his arrest for DUI. For the purposes of this hypothetical, assume that the same officer was acquitted at trial in all three of those arrest cases (that is, arrest case #1, arrest case #2, and arrest case #3) and returned to duty as a police officer. Two years later, let’s assume that the same officer was arrested for sex crimes involving a 14 year-old victim (arrest case #4) and 15 year-old victim (arrest case #5). Further assume that the officer was convicted in the case involving the 14 yearold victim (arrest case #4), and the charges were dismissed by the prosecutor in the criminal case This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 67 involving the 15 year-old victim (arrest case #5). Following the officer’s conviction (in arrest case #4), the officer was fired from the police department. By coding each arrest case separately, the criminal case dispositions in each case as well as the adverse employment actions attached to each arrest case can be documented for analysis. Cases were also coded on Stinson’s (2009) typology of police crime, which posits that most crime committed by police officers is alcohol-related, drug-related, sex-related, violencerelated, and/or profit-motivated.1 The types of police crime are not mutually-exclusive categories. Rather, each type of police crime is coded as a dichotomous variable because crimes committed by officers often involve more than one type of police crime. In a case where an officer was arrested and charged with the forcible rape of a female motorist during a traffic stop, for example, the case would be coded in this study as both sex-related and violence-related. Additionally, cases were coded for the presence of police sexual violence and/or driving while female encounters. Police sexual violence is operationalized as “those situations in which a female citizen experiences a sexually degrading, humiliating, violating, damaging, or threatening act committed by a police officer through the use of force or police authority” (Kraska & Kappeler, 1995, p. 93). Driving while female is operationalized as instances where a police officer stops a female driver under the pretext of an alleged traffic violation and then abuses the power and authority of his position to take advantage of a vulnerable motorist (Walker & Irlbeck, 2002, 2003). Walker and Irlbeck (2002) conceptualized the problem of driving while female as a parallel to the problem of racial profiling of African-American motorists often referred to as driving-while-black (cf. D. A. Harris, 1997, 1999). In the context of driving while female encounters, an officer typically asks for sexual favors in exchange for dropped charges or in lieu 1 A sixth type of police crime not yet explored is revenge-motivated police crime. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 68 of being taken to jail in a forced quid pro quo. In some cases, driving while female encounters escalate into sexual harassment, sexual assault, and in rare instances, forcible rape. Cases were coded on numerous variables relating to police DUI arrest cases (see Stinson et al., 2010), off-duty police crimes (see Stinson, Liederbach, et al., 2012), drug-related police crimes and drugs of abuse (see Stinson, Liederbach, et al., 2013), and officer-involved domestic violence (see Stinson & Liederbach, 2013). Cases were also coded to assess each arrested officer’s history of being named as a party-defendant in federal civil rights litigation pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1981 (asserting a denial of equal rights under the law), 42 U.S.C. §1983 (asserting a civil rights deprivation under the color of law), and 42 U.S.C. §1985 (asserting a conspiracy to interfere with civil rights). The master name index in the federal court’s Public Access to Courts Electronic Records (PACER) system to search and cross-reference the names of each arrested officer in our database to measure official capacity civil rights litigation as a correlate of police misconduct. Data from PACER were also recorded on civil actions removed from state trial courts to a United States District Court pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. §1441 (removal of civil actions). Secondary data were employed from the Census of State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies (CSLLEA) to ascertain demographic data including the number of full-time sworn personnel and part-time sworn personnel employed by each agency where arrested officers served. There are 52 agencies included in this study that were not listed in the 2008 wave of the CSLLEA. County (and independent city) five-digit FIPS identifier numbers were used to verify location of arrested officers’ employing law enforcement agencies, as well as for use as a key variable to merge other data sources into the project’s master database and data set. The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (2003) county-level urban to rural nine-point continuum scale was This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 69 used to measure rurality. Population data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s decennial census in years 2000 and 2010 were utilized for county, independent city, and state populations. Reliability Analytic procedures were undertaken to ensure reliability of the data. An additional coder was employed to independently code a random sample of five percent of the total number of cases in the study. Intercoder reliability was assessed by calculating the Krippendorf’s alpha coefficient across 195 variables of interest in this study on a random sample (n = 290, 4.3%) of the cases in the study (N = 6,724) (see Hayes & Krippendorff, 2007). Krippendorf’s alpha is often recognized as the standard reliability statistic for content analysis research (Riffe, Lacy, & Fico, 2005). The Krippendorf’s alpha coefficient (Krippendorf’s α = .9153) is strong across the variables in this study (see Krippendorff, 2013). The overall level of simple percentage of agreement between coders across all of the variables in this study (97.7%) also established a degree of reliability well above what is generally considered acceptable in content analysis research (see Riffe et al., 2005). Statistical Analysis Chi Square is used to measure the statistical significance of the association between two variables measured at the nominal level. Cramer’s V measures the strength of that relationship with values that range from zero to 1.0 and allows for an “assessment of the actual importance of the relationship” (Riffe et al., 2005, p. 191). Stepwise binary logistic regression is used to determine which of the predictor variables are statistically significant in multivariate models. Stepwise logistic regression models are appropriate where the study is purely exploratory and predictive (Menard, 2002). This is an exploratory study because little is known empirically about police sexual misconduct arrests and the specific factors responsible for conviction and/or This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 70 job loss subsequent to the arrest of a police officer for sex-related crimes. Summary statistics are also reported for evaluation of regression diagnostics and each logistic regression model. Classification tree analysis—also known as decision trees—is utilized as a statistical technique to uncover the causal pathways between independent predictors and one of Stinson’s (2009) types of police crime versus other types of police crime, job loss, and conviction. This approach moves beyond the simple one-way additive relationship of linear statistical models by identifying the hierarchical interactions between the independent predictors and their compounding impact. Classification trees examine the entire data set and produce a graphical output that ranks the variables by statistical importance. The most influential variable is represented at the top of the tree (known as the root node). This variable is used to split the data in a recursive manner through the creation of subsets into the lower branches of the tree. Variable selection and splitting criteria are driven by the algorithm of the tree program. Decision tree techniques have received attention due to their ability to handle interaction effects in data without being bound to statistical assumptions (Sonquist, 1970). Classification tree analysis has been used to examine police practices including career-ending police misconduct (Kane & White, 2013), police drug corruption arrests (Stinson, Liederbach, et al., 2013), fatal and nonfatal incidents involving conductive energy devices (White & Ready, 2009), and police drunk driving (Stinson, Liederbach, Brewer, & Todak, 2014). This study utilizes two decision tree predictive analytic algorithms: Classification and Regression Trees (CART) and Chi-Square Additive Interaction Detection (CHAID). CART is a classification procedure that produces a binary decision tree and restricts partitioning at each node to two nodes, thus producing binary splits for each child node (Dension, Mallick, & Smith, 1998). Breiman, Friedman, Olshen, and Stone’s (1984) CART This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 71 algorithm uses an extensive and exhaustive search of all possible univariate splits to determine the splitting of the data for the classification tree. Partitioning will continue until the algorithm is unable to produce mutually exclusive and homogenous groups (De’ath & Fabricius, 2000; Dension et al., 1998). After creating an exhaustive tree, CART will prune nodes that do not significantly contribute to overall prediction. The CHAID algorithm differs from other classification tree algorithms through the inclusion of multiple measurement levels for the independent variables. The algorithm can compute nominal, ordinal, and interval levels for both independent and dependent variables. Therefore, the independent variables can have different levels of measurement. If a ratio level variable is included in the analysis, the program will convert the variable into a categorical variable. Kass (1980) was concerned with the computation time when running decision trees and therefore, created his algorithm with time in mind (Wilkinson, 1992). He created an algorithm that partitioned the data in a timely manner without losing its ability to uncover interactions and lose predictive power. Because of this, computation time is saved and CHAID can search through large data sets to produce T without adding significant computation time. The CART algorithm was primarily used in this study because it fit our problems and produced optimal decision trees for most of the models by minimizing the generalization error (see, e.g., Rokach & Maimon, 2005, p. 167). CHAID was selected for a few decision tree models due to CART’s inability to partition the data. Since CART only produces binary splits certain subsets of data are unable to be partitioned into an interpretable tree. The CHAID algorithm conducts exhaustive searches of the data, which allows smaller data sets to be partitioned into trees. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 72 The predictive power of logistic regression and classification tree models is assessed through the area under the curve (AUC) component of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC). The AUC assesses the predictive accuracy of a statistical model and serves as the preferred method for assessing and comparing models (Bewick, Cheek, & Ball, 2004; Dolan & Doyle, 2000). The ROC curve considers the sensitivity versus 1- specificity, a representation of the true positive rate versus the false positive rate (TPR vs. FPR). The curve is displayed graphically by plotting the true positive rate (TFP) on the y-axis and the false positive rate (FPR) on the x-axis. ROC curves are interpreted through the AUC, a score that ranges from zero to one. A straight line through a ROC curve is the equivalent of 0.5 and suggests that the model is no better at prediction than flipping a coin. A score of one indicates that the model is able to accurately predict all cases. The AUC is interpreted as a proportional reduction of error (PRE) 2 measure of explained variation by calculating RROC 2( AUC .5) (Menard, 2010). Strengths and Limitations The news search methodology utilizing the Google News search engine and the Google Alerts email update service provided an unparalleled amount of information on police crime arrests at law enforcement agencies across the United States. The Google News search engine algorithm offers some clear advantages over other aggregated news databases and the methodologies employed by previous studies that used news-based content analyses to document cases of sex-related police misconduct. The Google Alerts email update service provides the ability to run persistent automated queries of the Google News search engine and deliver realtime search results. The Google News search engine draws content from more than 50,000 news sources (Bharat, 2012) and allows for access to a larger number of police misconduct cases than would be available through other methods (Payne, 2013). This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 73 There are four primary limitations of the data. First, this research study includes every case known to the research team of a nonfederal sworn law enforcement officer who was arrested during the years 2005-2011. Thus, this study is a census of the universe of police crime arrest cases identified through our search methodology. We do not purport to include every single instance of a law enforcement officer being arrested. Second, our research is limited by the content and quality of information provided for each case. The amount of information available on each case varied, and data for several variables of interest were missing for some of the cases. This is especially true for victim-related variables in this study as news organizations generally do not report the names and other personally identifiable information (e.g., victim age, relationship to the accused) of rape victims (Denno, 1993). Third, the data are limited to cases that involved an official arrest based on probable cause for one or more crimes. We do not have any data on police officers who engaged in criminal activity if their conduct did not result in an arrest. Finally, we note that these data are the result of a filtering process that includes the exercise of discretion by media sources in terms of both the types of stories covered and the nature of the content devoted to particular stories (Carlson, 2007). Ready, White, and Fisher (2008), however, found that news coverage of officer misconduct is consistent with official police records of these events. Research also suggests that police agencies are not especially effective at controlling media accounts of officer misconduct (Chermak, McGarrell, & Gruenewald, 2006). Despite the noted limitations, the use of news articles as the primary data source is a long established method of analyzing deviant/illegal police behavior (see, e.g., Lawrence, 2000; Lersch & Feagin, 1996; Rabe-Hemp & Braithwaite, 2013; Ross, 2000). Efforts were made to minimize the limitations inherent in utilizing open source information for data collection and quantitative analyses. Online news sources were limited to This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 74 the news articles published by reputable news sources. We did not rely on blog entries and other self-published information. Whenever possible data sources were triangulated for each instance where an arrest case of a sworn law enforcement officer was reported. Triangulation included reliance on multiple published news articles, videos from television news programs, and online criminal court records. Efforts were made to verify case information by at least two separate sources whenever possible. As LaFree and Dugan (2007) noted, even with data triangulation there are two serious drawbacks in use of open source data culled from online news sources. First, news reporting on police crime is inherently biased toward publication of only the most newsworthy forms of crime by sworn law enforcement officers. In some instances arrests of officers were not reported in the news, because the arrestee’s employment as a law enforcement officer was unknown to news reporters. Indeed, sometimes the only aspect making an arrest newsworthy is the fact that a law enforcement officer was arrested. Second, our database lacks information on many aspects of the crimes reported in online open source news publications. There is a lack of uniformity from article to article and across the census of articles collected about each case and arrest. There was journalistic consistency whereby news articles typically included some or all of the following data: name of the officer arrested, officer’s employer, officer’s age and years of service as a sworn law enforcement officer and types of criminal offense(s) charged. Often times the information regarding crime victims in these cases were vague, typically to protect the identity of victims of domestic violence or sexual assault, and when the victim was a child. News articles as a primary source of arrest data is merely a substitute for better data sources that either do not exist or are not readily available to researchers. There are no official data collected, tabulated, This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 75 archived, or published that would provide the same level of information as analyzed in this study. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 76 RESULTS The results of the study are organized in seven parts. Part I presents the full police crime data set models. Part II presents the sex-related police crime data set models. Part III presents the alcohol-related police crime data set models. Part IV presents the drug-related police crime data set models. Part V presents the violence-related police crime data set models. Part VI presents the profit-motivated police crime data set models. Part VII presents the employing law enforcement agencies in terms of rates of police crime per agency, per 1,000 officers, and per 100,000 population. Part I: Full Police Crime Data Set Models The Google News searches resulted in the identification of 6,724 cases in which sworn law enforcement officers were arrested during the time period January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2011. The cases involved the arrests of 5,545 individual sworn officers employed by 2,529 nonfederal state, local, and special (e.g., school district police, college/university police, park police, and constables) law enforcement agencies located in 1,205 counties and independent cities in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.2 Of these, 674 (12.1%) of the officers have more than one case (although X = 1.21, Mdn = 1.00, Mode = 1, SD = .870) because they have had more than one victim (one criminal case per victim) and/or were arrested on more than one occasion. More than half of the criminal cases resulted in the arrested officer losing his or her job (n = 3,628, 54.0%) as a result of being arrested. The known final adverse employment outcomes include cases where no adverse action was taken against the arrested officer (n = 868, 12.9%), cases where the officer was suspended from their job (n = 2,228, 33.1%) as a sworn officer for a 2 Cities in the Commonwealth of Virginia are not in counties. The cities of Baltimore, Maryland, St. Louis, Missouri, and Carson City, Nevada, are also independent cities that are separate from counties. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 77 period of time, cases where the officer resigned (n = 1,709, 25.4%), and cases where the officer was terminated (n = 1,919, 28.5%). Less than half of the police crime arrest cases resulted in known criminal conviction (n = 2,846, 42.3%) on at least one offense charged against the arrested officer. Arrested Officers, Employing Law Enforcement Agencies, and Criminal Offenses Charged Table 1 presents information on the arrest cases in terms of the arrested officers and their employing nonfederal law enforcement agencies. Most of the cases involve male officers (n = 6,357, 94.5%). The modal category for known officer age at time of arrest is 36-39 years of age (n = 1,081, 16.1%). The youngest officer(s) were age 19 at time of arrest, and the oldest officer(s) were 79 years old ( X age = 37.34, Mdn age = 37, Mode age = 39, SD = 8.576 years). The modal category for known years of service at time of arrest is three to five years (n = 954, 14.2%). Most of the cases involve police employed in a patrol or other street-level rank such as nonsupervisory officers, deputies, troopers, and detectives (n = 5,464, 81.3%). Other arrest cases involve line and field supervisors (n = 881, 13.1%) (i.e., corporals, sergeants, and lieutenants), as well as police managers and executives (n = 379, 5.6%) (i.e., captains, majors, colonels, deputy chiefs and chief deputies, and chiefs and sheriffs). More than half of the arrest cases involve crimes that were committed while an officer was on-duty (n = 3,931, 58.5%). Two-thirds of the cases (n = 4,447, 66.1%) involve arrests made of officers by a law enforcement agency other than the arrested officer’s employing law enforcement agency. Most of the arrest cases involve sworn officers employed by municipal police departments (n = 4,915, 73.1%) or sheriff’s offices (n = 1,109, 16.5%). Arrested officers were also employed by primary state police agencies (n = 269, 4.0%), county police departments (n = 226, 3.4%), special police departments (n = 174, 2.6%) (e.g., park police departments, school This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 78 district police departments, college/university police departments, etc.), or other nonfederal law enforcement agencies (n = 31, 0.4%) (e.g., constable agencies, tribal police departments, and regional police departments). The modal category for agency size by number of officers employed is 1,000 or more full-time sworn officers (n = 1,857, 27.6%) and zero part-time sworn officers (n = 5,008, 74.5%). Most of the arrested officers were employed by a law enforcement agency located in a nonrural metropolitan county (n = 5,711, 84.9%). The employing agencies are located throughout the United States, including in Southern states (n = 2,906, 43.2%), Northeastern states (n = 1,430, 21.3%), Midwestern states (n = 1,380, 20.5%), and Western states (n = 1,008, 15.05%). Table 2 presents the cases in terms of the most serious offense charged. There are 61 separate offense categories represented as the most serious offense charged in the arrest cases in years 2005-2011. Most common as the most serious offense charged in a case are simple (misdemeanor) assault (n = 877, 13.0%), driving under the influence (n = 841, 12.5%), aggravated (felonious) assault (n = 572, 8.5%), forcible fondling (n = 352, 5.2%), forcible rape (n = 322, 4.8%), and drug offenses (n = 308, 4.6%). Other noteworthy crimes that were the most serious offense charged in cases include murder and nonnegligent manslaughter (n = 125, 1.9%), burglary (n = 112, 1.7%), robbery (n = 109, 1.6%), thefts from buildings (n = 103, 1.5%), statutory rape (n = 100, 1.5%), extortion and blackmail (n = 95, 1.4%), forcible sodomy (n = 94, 1.4%), obstruction of justice (n = 93, 1.4%), pornography and obscene material (n = 86, 1.3%), and criminal deprivation of civil rights (n = 84, 1.2%). Victims of Police Crime Table 3 presents information on the characteristics of the victims in police crime arrest cases in years 2005-2011. Over half of the known victims of police crime are female (n = 2,246, This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 79 33.4%, valid 61.2%). The modal category for victim age is 25-32 years old (although X age = 24.16, Mdn age = 20, Mode age = 15, SD = 14.134 years). Victim age is missing data in a large number of cases (n = 4,876, 72.5%). In many cases (n = 2,142, 31.9%) we were able to determine if the victim was an adult (n = 3,051, 45.3%, valid 76.5%) or a child (n = 939, 14.0%, valid 23.5%) but were unable to determine the exact age of a victim. The youngest victims were infants under the age of one year old (n = 10, 0.1%, valid 0.5%) and the oldest victims were age 92 (n = 4, 0.1%, valid 0.2%). The relationship of the victim and the arrested officer could not be determined in a large number of arrest cases (n = 2,790, 41.5%). Many of the known victims are adult strangers or nonstranger acquaintances (n = 2,237, 33.3%, valid 56.9%) or a child unrelated (n = 673, 10.0%, valid 17.1%) to the arrested officer. Other victims are a current spouse (n = 346, 5.1%, valid 8.8%), former spouse (n = 68, 1.0%, valid 1.7%), a current girlfriend or boyfriend (n = 202, 3.0%, valid 5.1%), a former girlfriend or boyfriend (n = 136, 2.0%, valid 3.5%), or a child or stepchild of the arrested officer (n = 177, 2.7%, valid 4.5%). The victims in some of the arrest cases are also police officers (n = 229, 3.4%, valid 5.8%). In those cases where the victim was also a police officer, most of the crimes occurred while the officer who was arrested was off-duty (n = 179, 78.2%), where χ2 (1, N = 3,967) = 30.746, p < .001, V = .088. Predicting Conviction Bivariate analyses were conducted as part of the regression diagnostics and to assess the associations between various independent variables and the dependent predictor variables of interest. Chi-Square associations are statistically significant at the p < .05 level for 90 independent variables, individually, and the dependent variable, criminal conviction on any offense charged. See Table 4. The strongest bivariate predictors of an officer being convicted This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 80 on any offense charged are (a) most serious offense charged, where χ2 (67, N = 3,934) = 394.757, p < .001, V = .317; (b) age of the victim, where χ2(1, N = 3,934) = 110.509, p = .005, V = .305; and (c) victim’s relationship to the arrested officer, where χ2(1, N = 3,934) = 114.234, p < .001, V = .219. Multivariate analyses were conducted to further investigate the relationship between the outcome variable, criminal conviction on any offense charged, and various predictor variables. Table 5 presents a backward stepwise binary logistic regression model predicting criminal conviction on any offense charged. Bivariate correlations computed for each of the independent variables revealed that none of the variables were highly correlated with each other. Multicollinearity is not a problem in the model as indicated by no tolerance statistics below .575 and no variance inflation factors exceeding 1.386. A Durbin-Watson score of 1.754 indicates that there is no autocorrelation in the model. Regression results indicate that the overall model of 16 predictors is statistically reliable in distinguishing between officers who were convicted on any offense charged and officers who were not convicted on any charge. The model correctly 2 classified 71.2% of the cases (AUC = 718, 95% CI [.697, .740], RROC = .436). Wald statistics indicate that all of the independent variables in the model significantly predict conviction versus nonconviction. Odds ratio interpretations provide context for prediction of criminal case outcomes. Twelve independent variables in this model predict when an officer is more likely to be convicted of a crime. For example, the simple odds of an officer being convicted on any offense charged are 13 times greater if the arrest case involved a drug shakedown, controlling for all other variables in the model. The simple odds of an officer being convicted are 6.9 times greater if the arrest case was officer-involved domestic violence and the victim died of the injuries, This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 81 controlling for all other variables in the model. Also, the simple odds of an officer being convicted are about 1.9 times greater if the officer was arrested for driving under the influence while driving a personally-owned vehicle, controlling for all other variables. Four independent variables in the model predict when an officer is less likely to be convicted of any offense charged in their arrest case. Among these, for every one step increase in an arrested officer’s rank at time of their arrest, the simple odds of conviction go down by 9.2%, controlling for all other variables in the model. The simple odds of conviction go down by 29% if an officer was suspended from his or her law enforcement job following their being arrested. Also, the simple odds that an arrested officer will be convicted go down by 38.8% if the officer was arrested for a crime related to officer-involved domestic violence and the victim suffered nonfatal injuries. Decision trees were used to derive the casual pathways between independent predictors and the case dispositions using the CART algorithm. The CART analysis includes a total of 3,934 cases. Figure 1 presents the results of this analysis. The tree had an overall classification 2 = .388) and selected the variable most score of 74.6% (AUC = .694, 95% CI [.676, .713], RROC serious offense charged as the splitting criterion. Officers who were charged with offenses scores over 18 were convicted of a crime in 77.8% of the cases (node 2). In contrast, officers who were charged with offenses scores equal to or less than 18 were convicted in 53.9% of the cases (node 1). The second tier of the decision tree includes four additional splits in the data. Node 2 is further separated by the variable most serious offense charged; these scores are all greater than 18. Officers who received an offense score between 19 and 68 were convicted of a crime in 80.4% of the cases. Officers who had a score above 68 were only convicted in 63.7% of the cases.3 3 The numerical scoring for this variable (V183, most serious offense charged) is misleading to the extent that the categorical variable was created by taking the 65 dichotomous offense variables (V15 through V80) and making a This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 82 Node 1 was further separated by the variable victim’s relationship to the offender. In the cases where victims were a stranger or an unrelated child the officers were convicted in 60.3% of the cases. In cases that involved victims who were a current spouse to the offender, relative, child or stepchild, current and or former boyfriend/girlfriend, the officers were convicted in 43.4% of the cases. The tree also included the following variables in tiers three through five: gender of the victim, geographic division, victim’s relationship to the offender, state, profitmotivated versus other crime type, and age categorical. Predicting Job Loss The next set of models predict job loss after an officer has been arrested for committing one or more crimes. At the bivariate level, Chi-Square associations are statistically significant at the p < .05 level for 120 independent variables, individually, and the dependent variable job loss. See Table 6. The job loss variable is a binary variable that was created by recoding the variables for involuntary termination (V100)—that is, an officer was fired—and resignation (V101)—that is, an officer quit his or her job as a sworn officer—after being arrested. The recoded dichotomous variable for job loss is coded as 0 = kept job, and 1 = lost job. Cases where we were unable to determine the final adverse employment outcome were coded as 0 = kept job. As such, for this dichotomous recoded variable the absence of information as to an officer having lost their job was treated as if the officer kept their job after being arrested for some criminal offense(s).4 The strongest bivariate predictors of an officer losing their job as a sworn law new 65-category variable for the most serious offense charged in each case. Since the research assistant coders were already familiar with the specific offenses (that is, V15-V80), we continued to use the labels of 15-80 for the 65 offense categories in V183. 4 The research interest with this variable is in sworn law enforcement officers who lost their jobs (either through involuntary termination or voluntary resignation). A coding protocol decision was made to focus on what our data would support, which is job loss. We operationalize kept job as those cases where the arrested officer is not known by us to have lost their job. Data collection efforts on this variable often resulted in missing data from the open source information because in many jurisdictions final adverse employment outcomes are treated as confidential personnel records. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 83 enforcement officer following a criminal arrest are (a) most serious offense charged, where χ2 (1, N = 6724) = 752.849, p < .001, V = .335; (b) age of victim, where χ2 (1, N = 6,724) = 111.533, p = .008, V = .247; and (c) victim’s relationship to the arrested officer, where χ2 (1, N = 6,724) = 173.685, p < .001, V = .210. Table 7 presents a backward stepwise binary logistic regression model predicting job loss. Bivariate correlations computed for each of the independent variables revealed that none of the variables in the model were highly correlated with each other. Multicollinearity is not a problem as indicated by no tolerance statistics below .592 and no variance inflation factors higher than 1.689. There is no autocorrelation in the model as measured by the Durbin-Watson score of 1.646. Logistic regression results indicate that the multivariate model of 11 predictors is statistically reliable in distinguishing between officers who kept their jobs after being arrested and officers who lost their jobs after being arrested, although the model only correctly classified 2 = .276). Wald statistics indicate that 68.7% of the cases (AUC = .638, 95% CI [.625, .652], RROC all of the independent variables in the model significantly predict whether an officer lost their or kept their job subsequent to being arrested. Predictors of the final adverse employment outcomes are aided by interpretation of the odds ratios. Seven of the independent variables in the model predict when an officer is more likely to lose their job after being arrested. The simple odds that an officer will lose their job (through either involuntary termination or voluntary resignation) are approximately 2.5 times greater if the arrested officer has been sued in federal court pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983 (deprivation of rights under color of law) at some point during his or her law enforcement career. The federal civil rights civil action(s) may or may not be related to the underlying incident(s) leading to an officer’s criminal arrest, and the federal lawsuit(s) may have been filed before This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 84 and/or after an officer’s date of arrest. The type of crime(s) for which an officer was arrested impacts on job loss. For example, the simple odds that an officer will lose their job are 1.3 times greater if the offense was a sex-related crime. Similarly, the simple odds that an officer will lose their job increase by 73% if the crime involved police sexual violence. Likewise, the simple odds that an officer will lose their job increase by about 54% if the arrest case is alcohol-related. Four of the independent variables in the logistic regression model predict when an officer is more likely to keep their job in the aftermath of being arrested. Adverse employment outcomes short of termination predict the final adverse employment outcome. If an officer was suspended from their job after being arrested, then the simple odds of losing their job go down by 61.5%. Likewise, the simple odds of an officer losing their job after being arrested decrease by 65.4% if the officer was reassigned to another position within the employing law enforcement agency after being arrested. Two variables related to the nature of the incident resulting in an officer’s arrest also predict that an officer will not ultimately lose their job as a sworn law enforcement officer as a result of being arrested. The simple odds that an officer will lose their job decrease by 48.8% if the crime involves family violence. As to drug offenses, the simple odds that an officer will lose their job decrease by 95.6% if the criminal case involves marijuana. Figure 2 presents the results of predicting job loss and included a total of 6,724 arrest cases. The tree had an overall classification score of 71.0% (AUC = .766, 95% CI [.754, .777], 2 RROC = .532) and selected the variable sex-related police crime versus other police crime as the splitting criterion. Officers who were involved in sex-related cases (node 1) lost their job in 72.1% of the cases. In contrast, officers who were involved in a criminal case that was not sexrelated (node 2) lost their job in 48.9% of the cases. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 85 The sex-related cases in node 1 were partitioned by the variable officer was suspended for a period of time. Officers who had been previously suspended lost their job in 66.3% of the cases and officers who were not previously suspended lost their job in 82.1% of the cases. The cases that were not sex-related in node 2 were partitioned by the variable profit-motivated police crime versus other crime. Officers who were involved in a profit-motivated case lost their job in 67.7% of the cases and officers who were not involved in a profit-motivated case lost their job in 40.9% of cases. The tree also included the following variables in tiers three through nine: internal versus organization, geographic division, state, official capacity versus individual capacity, age categorical, victim’s relationship to the offender, driving under the influence, urban/rural continuum, years of service categorical, part-time sworn personnel, drug-related police crime versus other crime, officer was reassigned to another position in the agency, age of the victim, full-time sworn personnel, and gender of the victim. Predicting Sex-related Police Crime In this section, models predict sex-related arrest cases versus other types of arrest cases. Preliminarily, at the bivariate level, Chi-Square associations are statistically significant at the p < .05 level for 117 independent variables and the dependent variable, sex-related arrest cases versus other types of crimes. See Table 8. The strongest bivariate predictor of sex-related police crime is the most serious offense charged, where χ2 (63, N = 6,724) = 5322.861, p < .001, V = .890, indicating that there is a very high correlation between outcome variable (sex-related police crime arrest cases, which is a true dichotomy) and the predictor variable (most serious offense charged, which is a categorical variable with up to 65 levels of offenses). The most serious offense charged variable was coded based on the hierarchy of offenses in the Uniform Crime Reports. The very high bivariate correlation here is because the second most serious offense on This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 86 the UCR hierarchy is rape, and rape is the most serious offense charged (n = 322, 21.8%) within the sex-related arrest cases (N = 1475). Other strong bivariate associations of sex-related police crime arrest cases include (a) age of the victim, where χ2 (79, N = 1,848) = 592.004, p < .001, V = .566; (b) relationship of the victim to the arrested officer, where χ2 (7, N = 3,934) = 909.238, p < .001, V = .481; (c) years of difference in age between the arrested officer and their victim, where χ2 (103, N = 6,724) = 1,406.902, p < .001, V = .457; (d) gender of the victim, where χ2 (1, N = 3,668) = 651.711, p < .001, V = .422; and (e) child victims, where χ2 (1, N = 3,990) = 684.979, p < .001, V = .414. Moderate bivariate associations of sex-related arrest cases include (a) driving while female encounters, where χ2 (1, N = 6,724) = 587.698, p < .001, V = .296; (b) citizen complaint as the method of crime detection, where χ2 (1, N = 6,724) = 520.439, p < .001, V = .278; (c) profit-motivated police crime, where χ2 (1, N = 6,724) = 492.036, p < .001, V = .271; (d) violence-related police crime, where χ2 (1, N = 6,724) = 357.899, p < .001, V = .231; and (e) alcohol-related police crime, where χ2 (1, N = 6,724) = 260.078, p < .001, V = .197. A backward stepwise binary logistic regression model predicting sex-related police crime arrest cases versus other types of police crime arrest cases is presented in Table 9. Bivariate correlations computed for each of the independent variables in the model revealed that none of the variables were highly correlated with each other. Multicollinearity is not a problem as indicated by no tolerance statistics below .312 and no variance inflation factors higher than 3.207. The Durbin-Watson score of 1.643 indicates that there is no autocorrelation in the model. Regression results indicate that the overall model of 14 predictors is statistically reliable in distinguishing between sex-related police crime arrest cases and police crime arrest cases involving other types of crime. The model correctly classified 88.7% of the cases (AUC = .939, This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 87 2 95% CI [.931, .947], RROC = .878). Wald statistics indicate that all of the independent variables in the regression model significantly predict sex-related police crime arrest cases. Interpretation of odds ratios provides context for prediction of sex-related police crime arrest cases. Five of the independent variables in the model predict sex-related police crime arrest cases versus other types of police crime arrest cases, four of which are interpreted in the sentences that follow. Duty status predicts sex-related police crime. The simple odds that an arrested officer’s case involves a sex-related offense increase by 57% if the officer was on-duty at the time of commission of the crime(s) charged. The method of crime detection also predicts sex-related arrest cases. The simple odds that an officer’s arrest is sex-related are approximately 6.2 times greater is the method of crime detection is a citizen complaint, controlling for all other variables in the model. Since sex crimes are typically committed out of public view it makes sense that the primary method of crime detection for sex crimes is by way of a citizen complaint as opposed to other methods of crime detection. Two predictors involve characteristics of the victim of an officer’s sex-related arrest case. The simple odds that the victim is a child are 5.6 times greater if the arrest case is sex-related versus some other type of crime. The relationship of the victim to the arrested officer also predicts sex-related police crime arrest cases versus other types of police crime arrest cases. Victim relationship is an eight category variable, and the precise interpretation is difficult in a logistic regression model. Literally, the simple odds that an officer’s arrest case is sex-related go up by 40.7% for every one unit increase in victim relationship (but this is a nominal-level measure and the practical interpretation is lacking). In other words, the likelihood of a police crime arrest case being sex-related increases as you move from the victim being a spouse, through other levels of relation, toward victims who are strangers or nonstranger acquaintances. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 88 Ten of the independent variables in the logistic regression model predict that a police crime arrest case will be some type of crime other than a sex-related one. For example, the simple odds that an arrest case is sex-related decrease by 96.9% if the victim is male. Family violence cases are typically not also sex-related crimes. The simple odds that a crime is sexrelated decrease by 73.3% if the crime involves family violence. Also, the simple odds that a crime is sex-related decrease by 77% if the arrest case is officer-involved domestic violence where the officer is accused of using his hands/fists as a weapon. Alcohol-related or profitmotivated police crime arrest cases are not typically also sex-related crimes. The simple odds that an arrest case is sex-related decrease by 75.4% if the case is alcohol-related, whereas the simple odds that an arrest case is sex-related decrease by 88.6% if the case is profit-motivated. Finally, the simple odds of an arrest case being sex-related decrease by 51.5% if the arrested officer has been sued in federal court pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983 at some point during his or her law enforcement career. Figure 3 presents the results of predicting sex-related cases versus other crime types and included a total of 6,724 arrest cases. The tree had an overall classification score of 89.6% 2 (AUC = .895, 95% CI [.884, .907], RROC = .790) and selected the variable victim age (categorical) as the splitting criterion. Cases that involved the victims from the age of birth to 19 (node 1) were sex-related 68.4% of the time and cases that involved victims 20 years or older (node 2) were sex-related in only 14.7 % of the cases. The victim age categories in node 1 were partitioned by the variable gender of the victim. Cases that involved a female victim were sex-related 84.2% of the time and cases that involved male victims were sex-related in only 34.1% of the cases. The victim age categories in node 2 were partitioned by the variable driving while female encounter. Cases that stemmed from This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 89 driving while a female encounter were sex-related 95.7% of the time and cases that did not involve a female encounter were only sex-related in 12.3% of the cases. The tree also included the following variables in tiers three through five: victim’s relationship to the offender and alcohol-related versus not alcohol-related. Predicting Alcohol-related Police Crime The next set of models predict alcohol-related police crime arrest cases versus other types of police crime arrest cases. Table 10 presents statistically significant Chi-Square bivariate associations at the p < .05 level for 116 independent variables and the dependent variable, alcohol-related arrest cases versus other types of arrest cases. The strongest bivariate predictor of alcohol-related police crime arrests is the most serious offense charged, where χ2 (63, N = 6,724) = 3906.421, p < .001, V = .762. This very strong bivariate association is likely due to alcohol-related incidents typically falling within relatively few offense categories (e.g., driving under the influence, public drunkenness, disorderly conduct, etc.) for a large number of the alcohol-related arrest cases. Other moderate bivariate associations of alcohol-related police crime arrest cases include (a) duty status, where χ2 (1, N = 6724) = 630.074, p < .001, V = .306; (b) victim age, where χ2 (79, N = 1,848) = 172.884, p < .001, V = .306; and (c) individual versus official capacity, where χ2 (1, N = 6,724) = 619.269, p < .001, V = .303. Table 11 presents a backward stepwise binary logistic regression model predicting alcohol-related police crime arrest cases. Bivariate correlations computed for each of the independent variables in the model revealed that none of the variables were highly correlated with each other. Multicollinearity is not a problem as indicated by no tolerance statistics below .392 and no variance inflation factors higher than 2.552. The Durbin-Watson score of 1.612 indicates that there is no autocorrelation in the model. Logistic regression results indicate that This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 90 the overall model of 17 predictors is statistically reliable in distinguishing between alcoholrelated police crime arrest cases and police crime arrest cases involving other types of police crime. The model correctly classified 88.1% of the cases (AUC = .802, 95% CI [.781, .823], 2 = .604). RROC Odds ratio interpretations provide context for prediction of alcohol-related police crime arrest cases. Seven of the independent variables in the model predict when an arrest case is more likely to be alcohol-related. Two of these predictors are independent variables relating to the underlying nature of the criminal behavior. The first relates to drug usage. The simple odds that an officer’s arrest case will be alcohol-related are 5 times greater if the arrest incident involves marijuana. This can be explained to the extent that imbibing in alcoholic beverages and smoking marijuana often co-occur in social settings. The second relates to sexual violence. The simple odds that an officer’s arrest case will be alcohol-related are 1.6 times greater if the incident also involves police sexual violence. This specific finding is counterintuitive for two reasons. First, police sexual violence invokes some aspect of an officer’s official status as a sworn law enforcement officer and most of the police sexual violence arrest cases involved on-duty (n = 516, 82.8%) criminal behavior, where χ2 (1, N = 6,724) = 481.979, p < .001, V = .268. Second, most of the alcohol-related arrests in this study occur off-duty (n = 1,235, 87.9%). Events occurring in the aftermath of an officer’s commission of criminal offense(s) also predict alcoholrelated police crime. The simple odds that an officer’s arrest case will be alcohol-related are approximately 1.2 times greater if there an ensuing scandal or cover up of the incident at the law enforcement agency employing the arrested officer. Ten of the independent variables in the logistic regression model predict when it is unlikely that an officer’s arrest case will be alcohol-related. Alcohol-related crimes by police This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 91 officers tend to occur off-duty. The simple odds that an officer’s arrest case will be alcoholrelated decrease by 91.9% if the officer was on-duty when the crime occurred. Interestingly, although acts of police sexual violence predict alcohol-related crime arrests, that is not the case for other types of sex-related crime or violence-related crime. The simple odds that an officer’s arrest case will be alcohol-related decrease by 74.3% if the crime is sex-related. Similarly, the simple odds that an officer’s arrest case will be alcohol-related decrease by 29.7% if the crime is violence-related. Finally, crimes by police officers involving child victims are typically not alcohol-related offenses. The simple odds of an officer’s arrest case being alcohol-related go down by 73.4% if the victim of the crime is a child. Figure 4 presents the results of predicting alcohol-related cases versus other crime types and included a total of 6,724 cases. The tree had an overall classification score of 89.3% (AUC 2 = .802) and selected the variable internal crime versus = .901, 95% CI [.893, .910], RROC organizational crime as the splitting criterion. Cases that involved a crime by the organization against the officer (node 1) were alcohol-related 98.6% of the time and cases that internal crimes against the organization (node 2) were alcohol-related in only 18.3 % of the cases. A crime by the organization against the officer (node1) was a terminal node and was unable to be partitioned further. Crimes by the officer against the organization in node 2 were partitioned by the variable duty status. Cases that involved off-duty officers at the time of the offense were alcohol-related 26.7% of the time and cases that involved on-duty officers were alcohol-related in only 6% of the cases. The tree also included the following variables in tiers three through ten: age of victim, profit-motivated versus not profit-motivated, violence-related versus other crime type, official misconduct / official oppression / violation of oath, sex-related This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 92 versus other crime type, internal versus organizational, drug-related versus other crime type, false report / false statement, and method of crime detection: citizen complaint. Predicting Drug-related Police Crime The models in this section predict drug-related police crime arrests versus other types of police crime arrest cases. Table 12 presents statistically significant Chi-Square bivariate associations at the p < .05 level for 88 independent variables and the dependent variable, drugrelated arrest cases versus other types of arrest cases. Here again, the strongest bivariate predictor of drug-related police crime arrests is the variable most serious offense charged, where χ2 (63, N = 6,724) = 3127.330, p < .001, V = .682. Many, but not all, of the drug-related cases include specific drug offenses (coded as V23 in this data set), which explains this very strong bivariate correlation. Other moderate bivariate associations of drug-related police crime arrest cases include (a) profit-motivated police crime, where χ2 (1, N = 6,724) = 580.101, p < .001, V = 294; (b) violence-related police crime, where χ2 (1, N = 6,724) = 331.322, p < .001, V = .222; (c) age of the victim, where χ2 (79, N = 1,848) = 140.050, p < .001, V = .275; and (d) officerinvolved domestic violence resulting in fatal injuries to a victim, where χ2 (1, N = 3,840) = 3.840, p = .050, V = .240. Table 13 presents a backward stepwise binary logistic regression model predicting drugrelated police crime arrest cases. Bivariate correlations computed for each of the independent variables in the model revealed that none of the variables were highly correlated with each other. Multicollinearity is not a problem in this model as indicated by no tolerance statistics below .662 and no variance inflation factors higher than 1.512. The Durbin-Watson score of 1.654 indicates that there is no autocorrelation in the model. Logistic regression results indicate that the overall model of ten predictors is statistically reliable in distinguishing between drug-related police This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 93 crime arrest cases and police crime arrest cases involving other types of police crime. The model 2 correctly classified 97.9% of the cases (AUC = .645, 95% CI [.622, .668], RROC = .290). Odd ratio interpretations provide context for prediction of drug-related police crime arrest cases. Nine of the independent variables in the logistic regression model predict when an arrest case is more likely to be drug-related. Three other types of police crime also predict drug-related police crime arrests. The simple odds that an arrest case will be drug-related are 36.7 times greater if the crime is also profit-motivated. This finding suggests that much of the drug-related police crime involves the drug trade. Some drug-related police crime, however, is not related to the drug trade. For example, the simple odds that an arrest case will be drug-related are 3.6 times greater if the crime is also alcohol-related. Likewise, the simple odds that an officer’s arrest case will be drug-related is about 3 times greater if the crime is also sex-related. Several of the predictors of drug-related police crime are specific criminal offenses. The simple odds that an arrest case will be drug-related are 15.7 times greater if the officer is charged with perjury, false reports, or false statements. Similarly, the simple odds that an officer’s arrest case will be drug-related are 12.3 times greater if the officer is charged with obstruction of justice. Two specific sex-related criminal offenses also predict drug-related police crime. The simple odds of an officer’s arrest case being drug-related are 9.4 times greater if the officer is charged with pornography or obscene materials. Also, the simple odds that an arrest case will be drugrelated is 2 times greater if the officer is charged with forcible rape. One other predictor is noteworthy in that the simple odds of an officer’s arrest case being drug-related are 3.7 times greater if an arrested officer’s arrest case involves a DUI-related traffic accident. Figure 5 presents the results of predicting drug-related cases versus other crime types and included a total of 6,724 cases. The tree had an overall classification score of 89.6% (AUC = This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 94 2 .862, 95% CI [.849, .876], RROC = .724) and selected the variable profit-motivated versus other types of police crime as the splitting criterion. Cases that were profit-motivated (node 1) were drug-related 27.5% of the time and cases that were not profit-motivated (node 2) were drugrelated in only 5.9 % of the cases. The not profit-motivated cases (node 1) were partitioned by the variable violence-related police crime versus other crime. Cases that were not violence-related were drug-related 12.8% of the time and cases that were violence-related were drug-related in only 1.5% of the cases. The profit-motivated cases (node 2) were partitioned by the variable weapons law violation. Cases that involved officers who had a weapons law violation were drug-related 55.5% of the time and cases that did not involve a weapons law violation were drug-related in only 24.9% of the cases. The tree also included the following variables in tiers three through six: age of victim, sexrelated versus other crime type, method of crime detection: citizen complaint, state, and gender of victim. Predicting Violence-related Police Crime The models in this section predict violence-related police crime arrest cases versus other types of police crime arrest cases. Bivariate Chi-Square associations are statistically significant at the p < .05 level for 131 independent variables and the dependent variable, violence-related arrest cases versus other types of arrest cases. See Table 14. As in previous prediction models, the strongest bivariate predictor of violence-related police crime is the most serious offense charged, where χ2 (63, N = 6,724) = 4883.929, p < .001, V = .852. This indicates a very high correlation between the outcome variable, violence-related arrest cases, and the predictor variable, most serious offense charged. A large number of the violence-related arrest cases involve a relatively small number of offense categories for the most serious offense charged This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 95 variable (e.g., aggravated assault, simple assault, murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, etc.). Strong bivariate associations of violence-related police crime arrest cases include citizen complaint as the method of crime detection, where χ2 (1, N = 6,724) = 1327.054, p < .001, V = .444. Moderate associations of violence-related arrest cases include (a) years difference in victim age, where χ2 (103, N = 6,724) = 879.176, p < .001, V = .362; (b) age of the victim, where χ2 (79, N = 1,848) = 166.314, p < .001, V = .300; and (c) victim relationship to the arrested officer, where χ2 (7, N = 3,934) = 206.633, p < .001, V = .229. A backward stepwise binary logistic regression model predicting violence-related police crime arrest cases versus other types of police crime arrest cases is presented in Table 15. Bivariate correlations computed for each of the independent variables in the model revealed that none of the variables were highly correlated with each other. Multicollinearity is not a problem as indicated by no tolerance statistics below .471 and no variance inflation factors higher than 2.123. Autocorrelation is also not a problem in the model as indicated by the Durbin-Watson score of 1.608. Logistic regression results indicate that the overall model of 11 predictors is statistically reliable in distinguishing between violence-related police crime arrest cases and other types of police crime arrest cases. The model correctly classified 83.4% if the cases (AUC 2 = .688). Wald statistics indicate that all of the independent = .844, 95% CI [.826, .862], RROC variables in the logistic regression model significantly predict violence-related police crime arrest cases. Odds ratio interpretations provide context for prediction of violence-related police crime arrest cases. Five of the independent variables in the logistic regression model predict when a police crime arrest case is more likely to be violence-related. Six of the independent variables predict when a police crime arrest case is less likely to be violence-related. Some interesting This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 96 patterns emerge. For example, the simple odds that an officer’s arrest case will be violencerelated increase by 5.8% for every one year increase in the officer’s age at time of arrest. On the other hand, the simple odds that an officer’s arrest case will be violence-related decrease by 3.9% for every one year increase in years of service as a sworn officer at time of arrest. Although at first glance this seems counterintuitive, it is easily at least partially explained by noting that not all police officers start their law enforcement careers at the same age. Many violence-related instances of police crime come to the attention of law enforcement authorities through citizens. The simple odds of an officer’s arrest case being violence-related are almost 1.3 times greater if the method of crime detection is a citizen complaint. Most violence-related police crime is not also profit-motived, as the simple odds that an officer’s arrest case will be violence-related go down by 98.2% if the crime is also profit-motivated. Figure 6 presents the results of predicting violence-related cases versus other crime types and included a total of 6,724 cases. The tree had an overall classification score of 84.6% (AUC 2 = .764) and selected the variable citizen complaint as the = .882, 95% CI [.874, .891], RROC method of crime detection as the splitting criterion. Cases that involved a citizen complaint (node 1) were violence-related 68.1% of the time and cases that did not involve a citizen complaint were only violence-related in 22.9% of the cases. Cases that involved citizen complaints in node 1 were partitioned by the variable profitmotivated police crime versus other types of crime. Cases that were profit-motivated were violence-related 16.9% of the time and cases that were not profit-motivated were violencerelated in 76.8% of the cases. Cases that did not involve a citizen complaint in node 2 were partitioned by the variable victim age (categorical). Cases that involved crimes from 12-15 years of age were violence-related in 15.8 of the cases and for age birth to 11 and 16 or older This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 97 were violence-related in 74% of the cases. The tree also included the following variables in tiers three through five: driving under the influence, drug-related crime versus other crime type, intimidation, and victim’s relationship to the offender. Predicting Profit-motivated Police Crime In this section, models predict profit-motived police crime versus other types of police crime arrest cases. Table 16 presents statistically significant Chi-Square bivariate associations at the p < .05 level for 127 independent variables and the dependent variable, profit-motivated police crime arrest cases versus other types of arrest cases. As in the other models using the full data set in this study, there is a very strong correlation between the variable most serious offense charged and the dependent variable. At the bivariate level for the association between the most serious offense charged and profit-motivated arrest cases, χ2 (1, N = 6,724) = 4449.343, p < .001, V = .813. Other strong to moderate bivariate associations of profit-motivated police crime include (a) duty status, where χ2 (1, N = 6,724) = 633.147, p < .001, V = .307; (b) age of the victim, where χ2 (79, N = 1,848) = 211.386, p < .001, V = .338; (c) violence-related police crime, where χ2 (1, N = 6,724) = 1280.268, p < .001, V = .436; (d) drug-related police crime, where χ2 (1, N = 6,724) = 580.101, p < .001, V = .294; (e) alcohol-related police crime, where χ2 (1, N = 6,724) = 498.804, p < .001, V = .272; (f) official capacity, where χ2 (1, N = 6,724) = 540.962, p < .001, V = .284; and (g) sex-related police crime, where χ2 (1, N = 6,724) = 492.371, p < .001, V = .271. Table 17 presents a backward stepwise binary logistic regression model predicting profitmotivated police crime arrest cases. Bivariate correlations computed for each of the independent variables in the model revealed that none of the variables were highly correlated with each other. Multicollinearity is not a problem as indicated by no tolerance statistics below .362 and no This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 98 variance inflation factors higher than 2.790. The Durbin-Watson score of 1.776 indicates that there is no autocorrelation in the model. Logistic regression results indicate that the overall model of ten predictors is statistically reliable in distinguishing between profit-motivated police crime arrest cases and police crime arrest cases involving other types of crime. The model 2 correctly classified 97.6% of the cases (AUC = .870, 95% CI [.801, .939], RROC = .740). Prediction of profit-motivated police crime arrest cases are explained through interpretation of odds ratios. Five of the independent variables in the model predict when an officer’s arrest is more likely to be profit-motivated police crime versus other types of police arrest cases. The simple odds of a case being profit-motivated are 4.9 times greater if the crime came to the attention of law enforcement by a citizen complaint. These are not the types of crimes found on patrol by the police. More often than not profit-motivated police crime is crime that occurs while on-duty. The simple odds that an arrest case will be profit-motivated are 1.5 times greater if the crime occurred while on-duty. Profit-motivated police crime predicts when an arrested officer is at risk of being sued in his or her official capacity for civil rights violations. Specifically, the simple odds that an arrest case will be profit-motivated are 4.2 times greater if at some point during an officer’s law enforcement career he or she was named as a party-defendant in a federal court civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1985 for a conspiracy to interfere with civil rights. Children are rarely the victim of profit-motivated police crime as the simple odds go up by 7.9% for every one year increase in the age of the victim at time of an officer’s crime commission. Two independent variables in the model predict when a police crime arrest case is less likely to be profit-motivated. Profit-motivated police crime is rarely sex-related or violencerelated. The simple odds of a profit-motivated police crime arrest case decrease by 90.4% if an officer’s arrest case is sex-related and decrease by 94% if it is violence-related. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 99 Figure 7 presents the results of predicting profit-motivated crime and included a total of 6,724 police crime arrest cases. The tree had an overall classification score of 88.6% (AUC = 2 .908, 95% CI [.900, .917], RROC = .816) and selected the variable violence-related police crime versus other crime as the splitting criterion. Cases that were violence-related (node 1) were profit-motivated 4.9% of the time and cases that were not violence-related (node 2) were profitmotivated in 42% of the cases. The cases that were violence-related in node 1 were partitioned by the variable drug-related police crime versus other types of crime. Cases that did not involve a drug crime were only profit-motivated 2.5% of the time and cases that involved a drug crime were profit-motivated in 63.6% of the cases. Cases that were not violence-related in node 2 were further partitioned by the variable victim age. Cases that involved victims from birth to the age of 20 were only profit-motivated 2.9% of the time and cases that involved victims older than 20 years old were profit-motivated in 47% of the cases. The tree also included the following variables in tiers three through four: gender of victim, alcohol-related crime versus other crime type, and sex-related crime versus other crime type. Predicting Federal Civil Rights Litigation pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983 The final area of prediction using the full data set for model building examines arrested officers who have also at some point in their law enforcement career been sued in federal court at least once pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983. Table 18 presents statistically significant Chi-Square bivariate associations at the p < .05 level for 96 independent variables and the dependent variable, arrested officer named as a party defendant in a federal civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983 at some point during career. The strongest bivariate predictors of Section 1983 litigation are several other caused of action, including (a) 42 U.S.C. §1997 (civil plaintiff is an institutionalized person) civil defendant, where χ2 (1, N = 6,724) = 1247.262, p < .001, V = .431; This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 100 (b) 42 U.S.C. §1985 (conspiracy to interfere with civil rights) civil defendant, where χ2 (1, N = 6,724) = 632.692, p < .001, V = .307; and (c) 42 U.S.C. §1981 (equal rights under the law) civil defendant, where χ2 (1, N = 6,724) = 435.624, p < .001, V = .255. Civil rights litigation originally filed by a plaintiff in a state trial court and later removed by defense counsel to a federal district court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1441 is also a strong bivariate predictor, where χ2 (1, N = 6,724) = 1192.487, p < .001, V = .421. Other moderate bivariate associations of Section 1983 federal court civil actions are (a) age of victim, where χ2 (79, N = 1,848) = 159.139, p < .001, V = .293; (b) officer’s years of service at time of arrest, where χ2 (43, N = 4,780) = 250.387, p < .001, V = .229; (c) the state where the officer’s employing law enforcement agency is located, where χ2 (50, N = 6,724) = 346.944, p < .001, V = .227; and (d) the most serious offense charged, where χ2 (63, N = 6,724) = 320.050, p < .001, V = .218. A backward stepwise binary logistic regression model predicting arrested officers being named as a party defendant in federal civil rights litigation pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983 at some point during their policing career is presented in Table 19. Bivariate correlations computed for each of the independent variables in the model revealed that none of the variables were highly correlated with each other. None of the tolerance scores in the regression model are below .334 and no variance inflation factors are above 2.995, indicate that multicollinearity is not a problem. The Durbin-Watson score of 1.580 indicates that there is no autocorrelation. Binary logistic regression results indicate that the overall model of 16 predictors is statistically reliable in distinguishing between arrested officers who were sued in federal court pursuant to Section 1983 and those arrested officers who never have been named as a party defendant in Section 1983 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 101 federal civil rights litigation. The model correctly classified 76.4% of the cases (AUC = .743, 2 95% CI [.723, .764], RROC = .486). Fourteen of 16 independent variables in the binary logistic regression model predict when an arrested officer is likely to be named as a party defendant in a 42 U.S.C. §1983 federal court civil action at some point during his or her career as a sworn nonfederal law enforcement officer. Many of the federal court civil actions analyzed in this research study had nothing to do with the incident for which an officer was arrested. Some of the civil litigation occurred years or even decades prior to an officer being arrested for some crime(s). In other instances federal civil rights litigation directly arose out of the same operative facts as in an officer’s criminal case. Federal civil rights civil actions often include averment of more than one cause of action in the complaint filed in a federal district court. In many instances, the officers in this study were sued more than once for a variety of civil rights causes of action. Here, the simple odds that an arrested officer will be named as a party defendant in Section 1983 civil litigation are 51.5 times greater if the same officer has been named as a defendant in a civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1981 for denial of equal rights under the law. The simple odds that an officer will be sued in their official capacity pursuant to Section 1983 are about 2 times greater if the officer was on-duty at time of committing the crime(s) for which they were arrested. The longer an officer has been employed by a law enforcement agency, the more likely they are at risk of being sued in their official capacity in a federal court civil rights civil action. The simple odds of being named in a Section 1983 civil action increase by 6.9% for every one year increase in years of service at time of arrest. There is often collateral damage to others in an officer’s employing law enforcement agency as indicated by the odds This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 102 being 9.7 times greater that an officer will be sued under Section 1983 if the officer’s supervisor was disciplined and/or reassigned as fallout from the arrest of the subordinate officer. The nature of the criminal offenses in an officer’s arrest case provide context for predicting when an officer is likely to be sued in a Section 1983 civil action. The simple odds of being named as a party defendant in a Section 1983 civil action at some point during an officer’s law enforcement career are 1.1 times greater if an officer is arrested for kidnapping or abduction, one time greater if charged with a crime involving family violence, 6.4 times greater if arrested for crime involving cocaine, 1.54 times greater if arrested for a crime stemming from a “driving while female” encounter, and go up by 99.8% if arrested for murder or nonnegligent manslaughter. Figure 8 presents the results of predicting a 42 U.S.C. §1983 civil defendant included a total of 6,724 arrest cases. The tree had an overall classification score of 78.2% (AUC = .722, 2 = .444) and selected the variable official capacity versus individual 95% CI [.708, .737], RROC capacity as the splitting criterion. Arrested officers who were acting in their individual capacity during commission of the crime for which they were arrested (node 1) were named as party defendants in federal court Section 1983 civil actions at some point during their law enforcement careers 16.7% of the time. Arrested officers who were acting in their official capacity during commission of the crime for which they were arrested (node 2) were named as party defendants in federal court Section 1983 civil actions at some point during their law enforcement careers 32.4% of the time. The criminal cases where an officer was acting in an individual capacity (in node 1) were partitioned by the variable years of service. Officers who has served as a sworn officer seven and one-half years or less at time of arrest were named as Section 1983 civil defendants at some This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 103 point during their career in 11.3% of the criminal cases, whereas officers who had served more than seven and one-half years at time of arrest were named as Section 1983 civil defendants at some point during their law enforcement career in 20.6% of the criminal cases. Criminal cases that involved officers operating in their official capacity (in node 2) were further partitioned by the variable violence-related police crime versus other types of crime. As to the violence-related criminal cases, 43.8% of the cases involved arrested officers who – at some point during their law enforcement career – were sued in federal court pursuant to Section 1983, but only 22.9% of the cases that were not violence-related involved an officer who was at some point named as a federal court Section 1983 civil defendant. The tree also included the following variables in tiers three through ten: geographic division, rank, most serious offense charged, state, discussion of an agency scandal/ cover up, years of service, years of service, age of victim, type of agency, and urban/rural continuum. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 104 Part II: Sex-related Police Crime Data Set Models There are 1,475 cases in the data set where sworn law enforcement officers were arrested for sex-related crimes during the years 2005-2011. The sex-related police crime arrest cases involve 1,070 individual officers employed by 795 nonfederal state, local, special, constable, and tribal law enforcement agencies located in 550 counties and independent cities in 48 states (all except Maine and Wyoming) and the District of Columbia. Of these, 191 of the arrested officers have more than one case ( X = 1.38, Mdn = 1.00, Mode = 1, SD = 1.288) because they have more than one victim (one criminal case per victim) and/or were arrested for a sex-related crime on more than one occasion during the study period years. The majority of sex-related police crime arrest cases involve an officer who is known to have ultimately lost their job (n = 1,063, 72.1%) as a sworn officer after being charged with one or more crimes. The known final employment outcomes in the sex-related arrest cases include those in which there was no known adverse employment action taken against the officer (n = 96, 6.5%), cases resulting in the officer only being suspended for a period of time (n = 316, 21.4%), cases in which the officer was separated through voluntary resignation (n = 505, 34.2%), and those cases in which the officer was separated through involuntary termination (n = 558, 37.8%). More than half the sex-related police crime arrest cases resulted in criminal conviction (n = 791, 53.6%, valid 80.2%) on one or more offenses charged, however the final criminal case disposition is unknown (n = 489, 33.2%) in one-third of the sex-related arrest cases. Officers Arrested for Sex-related Police Crime, Offenses Charged & Employing Agencies Table 20 presents information on the sex-related arrest cases in terms of the arrested officers and their employing nonfederal law enforcement agencies. Almost all of the sex-related arrest cases involve male officers (n = 1,467, 99.5%) who were arrested. The modal category for This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 105 known officer age at time of arrest for sex-related cases is 36-39 years of age (n = 261, 17.6%). The youngest officer arrested for a sex-related crime was age 19 at time of arrest, and the oldest arrested officer was 74 years old ( X age = 37.88, Mdn age = 38.00, Mode age = 39, SD = 8.636 years). The modal category for known years of service at time of arrest for a sex-related crime is 3-5 years ( X years of service = 9.81 years, Mdn = 8.00 years, Mode = 2 years, SD = 7.650 years). Most of the sex-related arrest cases involve sworn officers employed in patrol or streetlevel nonsupervisory positions, including officers, deputies, troopers, and detectives (n = 1,221, 82.8%). Almost half of the sex-related arrest cases involves sex crimes that occurred while onduty (n = 682, 46.2%). The majority of the cases (n = 919, 62.3%) involve arrests made by some law enforcement agency other than the department where the arrested officer was employed. Most of the sex-related arrest cases involve sworn officers employed by municipal police departments (n = 1,040, 70.5%) or sheriff’s offices (n = 280, 19.0%). Officers arrested for sexrelated crimes were also employed by primary state police agencies (n = 61, 4.1%), county police departments (n = 30, 2.0%), or other types of nonfederal law enforcement agencies (n = 64, 4.4%). The modal category for agency size by number of full-time sworn personnel is 1,000 or more sworn officers (n = 349, 23.6%). Most of the employing law enforcement agencies were located in a nonrural metropolitan county or independent city (n = 1,229, 83.3%). The employing agencies are located throughout the United States, including in Southern states (n = 658, 44.6%), Western states (n = 316, 21.4%), Northeastern states (n = 259, 17.6%), and Midwestern states (n = 242, 16.4%). Table 21 presents the sex-related arrest cases in terms of the most serious offense charged. There are 40 separate offense categories represented as the most serious offense charged in sex-related police crime arrest cases during the years 2005-2011. Most common in This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 106 the sex-related cases as the most serious offense charged are forcible fondling (n = 352, 23.9%), forcible rape (n = 322, 21.8%), statutory rape (n = 100, 6.8%), unclassified sex crimes (n = 98, 6.6%), forcible sodomy (n = 94, 6.4%), pornography and obscene material (n = 86, 5.8%), intimidation and harassment (n = 52, 3.5%), online solicitation of a child (n = 44, 3.0%), and prostitution (n = 42, 2.8%). Victims of Sex-related Police Crime Victim characteristics in sex-related police crime arrest cases in years 2005-2011 are presented in Table 22. Victim information is particularly difficult to ascertain from news reports and even official court records (when available) in criminal cases involving sex offenses. For example, exact victim age is unknown (n = 661, 44.8%) due to missing data. We were, however, able to determine whether the victim of a sex-related case was a child (birth to 17 years of age) or an adult (ages 18 and older). Almost half of the known victims are children (n = 721, valid 52.4%). Most of the victims of sex-related police crime arrest cases are either an unrelated child (n = 527, valid 39.3%) or an adult who is a stranger or nonstranger acquaintance (n = 658, valid 49.1%). Predicting Conviction in Sex-related Police Crime Arrest Cases The regression models in this section predict criminal conviction on any offense charged in sex-related police crime arrest cases. Conviction data are available on two-thirds (n = 986, 66.8%) of the sex-related arrest cases. Of those sex-related cases with known criminal case outcomes, most of the officers arrested for sex-related crimes were convicted (n = 791, 80.2%) on at least one criminal offense charged against the arrested officer. Bivariate associations are presented in Table 23. Chi-Square associations are statistically significant at p < .05 for 23 independent variables and the dependent variable, conviction on any offense charged. There are This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 107 four bivariate associations of moderate strength as indicated by Cramer’s V scores for the statistically significant Chi-Square associations. They are age of the victim, where χ2 (50, N = 541) = 86.980, p = .001, V = .401; the State where the arrested officer’s employing law enforcement agency is located, where χ2 (48, N = 986) = 80.347, p = .002, V = .285; years of service at time of arrest, where χ2 (34, N = 820) = 52.020, p = .025, V = .252; and victim’s relationship to the arrested officer, where χ2 (7, N = 905) = 36,740, p < .001, V = .201. Table 24 presents a backward stepwise binary logistic regression model predicting conviction in sex-related police crime arrest cases. Bivariate correlations computed for each of the independent variables in the model revealed that none of the variables were highly correlated with each other. Multicollinearity is not a problem as indicated by no tolerance scores below .905 and no variance inflation factors above 1.105. The Durbin-Watson score is 1.587 and indicates that autocorrelation is not a problem. Logistic regression results indicate that the overall model of four predictors is statistically reliable in distinguishing between conviction and nonconviction in sex-related police crime arrest cases. Wald statistics indicate that all of the independent variables in the binary logistic regression model significantly predict conviction in sex-related police crime arrest cases. The regression model correctly classified 83.7% of the 2 = .346). cases (AUC = .673, 95% CI [.621, .725], RROC Context for prediction of conviction in sex-related police crime arrest cases is provided by interpretation of odds ratios. The greatest predictor conviction is being charged with pornography and obscene material offenses. The simple odds of conviction in sex-related police crime arrest cases are 4.6 times greater if the arrested officer is charged with crimes involving pornography and obscene material. Job loss also predicts conviction in sex-related cases as the simple odds of conviction are 4.2 times greater if the final adverse employment action against the This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 108 officer is job loss through either involuntary termination or voluntary resignation. Officers arrested for sex-related crimes involving a child are more likely to be convicted than officers whose victims are adults. The simple odds of conviction are 1.1 times greater in sex-related police crime arrest cases where the victim is a child. Years of service at time of arrest is also a slight predictor of conviction. The simple odds of conviction in sex-related police crime arrest cases goes up by 5.8% for every one year increase in years of service at time of arrest. Figure 9 presents the results of predicting conviction and included a total of 986 arrest cases. The tree had an overall classification score of 81.9% (AUC = .712, 95% CI [.699, .754], 2 = .424) and selected the variable job lost as the splitting criterion. Officers who had lost RROC their job (node 1) were convicted in 83.8% of the cases. In contrast, officers who kept their job (node 2) were convicted in 63.6% of the cases. The officers who lost their job in node 1 were partitioned by the variable victim’s relationship to the offender. Cases that involved a victim who was an unrelated child, a child or stepchild of the offender or former boy/girlfriend of the offender had a conviction rate of 91.3%. In contrast, cases that involved a victim who was a current spouse, other relative of the offender, stranger to the offender, current boy/girlfriend of the offender, or ex-spouse of the offender had a conviction rate of 63.6%. The officers who kept their job subsequent to being arrested in node 2 were partitioned by the variable age of victim. Officers were convicted 56% of the time when the victim was 19 years of age or older and were convicted 72% of the time when the victim was younger than 19 years of age. The tree also included the following variables in tiers three: state, years of service, and rank. Predicting Job Loss in Sex-related Police Crime Arrest Cases This section presents the regression models predicting job loss as the final adverse employment action taken against an officer following his or her arrest for a sex-related police This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 109 crime. Chi-Square associations are presented in Table 25. Bivariate associations are statistically significant at the p < .05 level for each of 35 independent variables and the dependent variable, job lost. There are, however, only four bivariate associations of moderate strength as indicated by the Cramer’s V scores for the statistically significant Chi-Square statistics. They are the year when the officer was arrested, where χ2 (6, N = 1,475) = 135.487, p < .001, V = .303; the State where the arrested officer’s employing law enforcement agency is located, where χ2 (48, N = 1,475) = 111.725, p < .001, V = .275; years of service at time of arrest, where χ2 (36, N = 1,195) = 62.775, p = .004, V = .229; and officer age at time of his or her arrest, where χ2 (46, N = 1,397) = 68.062, p = .019, V = .221. Table 26 presents a backward stepwise binary logistic regression model predicting job loss in sex-related police crime arrest cases. Bivariate correlations computed for each of the independent variables in the regression model indicate that none of the variables are highly correlated with each other. Multicollinearity is not a problem in the model as indicated by no tolerance scores below .649 and no variance inflation factors above 1.541. The Durbin-Watson score of 1.634 indicates that autocorrelation is not a problem. Logistic regression results suggest that the overall model of nine predictors is statistically reliable for sex-related police crime arrest cases in distinguishing between officers who kept their jobs after being arrested and officers who lost their job. Wald statistics indicate that all of the independent variables in the model significantly predict job loss in sex-related police crime arrest cases. The regression model 2 = .544). correctly classified 82.6% of the cases (AUC = .772, 95% CI [.733, .810], RROC Interpretation of odds ratios provides context for prediction of job loss in sex-related police crime arrest cases. Six of the independent variables in the logistic regression model predict when an officer is more likely to lose his or her job as a sworn law enforcement officer This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 110 after being arrested for a sex-related police crime. The single largest predictor of job loss in sexrelated criminal cases is conviction on at least one of the charged offenses. The simple odds of job loss are 2.8 times greater when the officer is convicted of a sex-related crime. Characteristics of the sex-related crimes also predict job loss. Sex-related crimes are committed by officers both on- and off-duty. The simple odds of job loss are 1.4 times greater if the sex-related crime was committed by an officer in his or her official capacity as a sworn law enforcement officer. Similarly, the simple odds of job loss are 1.7 times greater if the sex-related crime(s) for which an officer was arrested involved a driving while female encounter. Officers arrested for sexrelated police crimes are prone to commit other types of police misconduct; the simple odds of job loss are 1.2 times greater if at some point during the officer’s career he or she was named as a party defendant in federal civil rights litigation pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983. Some of the predictors in the model show when an officer is less likely to lose his job as a sworn law enforcement officer subsequent to an arrest for committing a sex-related crime. Older officers are less likely to lose their jobs; the simple odds of job loss go down by 3.5% for every one year increase in the officer’s age at time of arrest. Oddly, the simple odds of job loss decrease by 85.5% if the sex-related crime for which the officer was arrested also involves marijuana. Figure 10 presents the results of predicting job loss and included a total of 1,475 arrest cases. The tree had an overall classification score of 78.8% (AUC = .786, 95% CI [.758, .813], 2 = .572) and selected the variable year of arrest as the splitting criterion. Officers who were RROC arrested before 2007 (node 1) lost their job in 55.5% of the cases. In contrast, officers who were arrested after 2007 (node 2) lost their job in 82.7% of the cases. The officers arrested prior to 2007 in node 1 were partitioned by the variable officer was suspended. Officers who had been previously suspended lost their job in 43.2% of the cases and officers who had not been This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 111 suspended lost their jobs in 73% of the cases. The officers arrested after the year 2007 in node 2 were partitioned by the variable criminal conviction. Officers who were convicted lost their jobs in 84.9% of the cases and officers who were not convicted lost their job in 71.3% of cases. The tree also included the following variables in tiers three through five: being named as a 42 U.S.C. §1983 civil defendant (at some point during an officer’s law enforcement career), urban/rural continuum, geographic division, state, method of crime detection, citizen complaint as method of crime detection, the number of part-time sworn personnel employed by the arrested officer’s employing law enforcement agency, and the number of full-time sworn personnel employed by the arrested officer’s employing law enforcement agency. Predicting Child Victims in Sex-related Police Crime Arrest Cases The next set of regression models predict child victims in sex-related police crime arrest cases. Bivariate associations are presented in Table 27. Chi-Square calculations are statistically significant at p < .05 for 54 independent variables and the dependent variable, child victim (where adult victim = 0 and child victim = 1). Three of the bivariate associations are strong as indicated by Cramer’s V scores where V > .40. They are crimes committed in the arrested officer’s official capacity, where χ2 (1, N = 1,377) = 330.080, p < .001, V = .490; duty status at time of commission of the crime, where χ2 (1, N = 1,377) = 323.355, p < .001, V = .485; and crimes that are acts of police sexual violence, where χ2 (1, N = 1,377) = 290.300, p < .001, V = .459. The bivariate associations of adult versus child victim are of moderate strength in 14 instances, including among others, statutory rape, where χ2 (1, N = 1,377) = 179.498, p < .001, V = .361; the criminal offense of official misconduct, official oppression, or violation of oath, where χ2 (1, N = 1,377) = 161.527, p < .001, V = .342, and driving while female encounters, where χ2 (1, N = 1,377) = 142.850, p < .05, V = .322. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 112 A backward stepwise logistic regression model predicting child victims in sex-related police crime arrest cases is presented in Table 28. Bivariate correlations computed for each of the independent variables in the logistic regression model revealed that none of the variables are highly correlated with each other. Multicollinearity is not a problem as indicated by no tolerance scores below .449 and no variance inflation factors above 2.229. The Durbin-Watson score of 1.664 indicates that autocorrelation is not a problem. Logistic regression results indicate that the overall model of 20 predictors is statistically reliable in distinguishing between sex-related police crime arrest cases with adult victims and sex-related police crime arrest cases with child victims. 2 = The model correctly classified 85.9% of the cases (AUC = .920, 95% CI [.902, .938], RROC .844). Wald statistics indicate that all of the independent variables in the logistic regression model significantly predict child victims in sex-related police crime arrest cases. Odds ratio interpretations provide context for prediction of child victims in sex-related police crime arrest cases. Eight of the 20 predictors in the logistic regression model indicate when the victim of a sex-related police crime arrest case is more likely to be a child than an adult. Certain types of sex crimes tend to involve child victims. The simple odds of the victim being a child are 2.9 times greater if the arrested officer is charged with crimes involving pornography and obscene material. Similarly, the simple odds of the victim being a child are 2.2 times greater if the arrested officer was charged with an unclassified sex crime (that is, a sexrelated criminal offense not specifically included in the coding protocol for this study) such as promoting the sexual performance of a child, child enticement, corruption of a minor, or sexual coercion. Crimes involving fondling often involve a child victim; the simple odds of the victim being a child are 2.4 times greater if the arrested officer is charged with offenses relating to forcible fondling. The gender of the victim also predicts child victims. The simple odds that the This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 113 victim is a child are more than five times greater if the victim is male. Sex-related police crime arrest cases are more likely to result in a criminal conviction if the victim is a child; the simple odds of the victim being a child were 1.2 times greater if the arrested officer is convicted on at least one offense charged. Finally, the simple of odds of the victim being a child increased 17.2% if the crime for which an officer was arrested involved family violence. Some of the independent variables in the logistic regression model predict when the victim is less likely to be a child. The victims of sex-related police crime arrest cases are less likely to be a child in cases where the arrested officer is employed by a large police department in a metropolitan (that is, urban or suburban) county or independent city. The simple odds of the victim being a child decrease by 17.7% for every one unit increase in the size of the arrested officer’s employing law enforcement agency (on a ten-point scale) based on the number of sworn personnel. Likewise, the simple odds of a child victim decrease by 17.6% for every one unit increase in rurality (on a nine-point scale) based on the population of the county where the arrested officer’s employing agency is located. Duty status at time of commission of the crime for which an officer was arrested also predicts whether the victim of a sex-related police crime arrest case is an adult or child. The simple odds of the victim being a child decrease by 83.4% if the arrested officer was on-duty when the crime for which he was arrested was allegedly committed. The on-duty sex-related crimes of the arrested officers are more likely to involve an adult victim if the offenses are also violence-related crimes. For example, the simple odds of the victim being a child decrease by 62.7% if the crime is an act of police sexual violence. The odds ratios are similar if the arrested officer is charged with aggravated assault, kidnapping, abduction, or false imprisonment, or intimidation / harassment in sex-related police crime arrest cases. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 114 Figure 11 presents the results of predicting child victims for the sex-related cases and included a total of 1,377 police crime arrest cases. The tree had an overall classification score of 2 79.8% (AUC = .835, 95% CI [.814, .857], RROC = .670) and selected the variable official capacity versus individual capacity as the splitting criterion. Officers operating in their individual capacity (node 1) had child victims in 72.8% of the cases. In contrast, officers operating in an official capacity (node 2) had child victims in 23.9% of the cases. The officers who were operating in an individual capacity (node 1) were partitioned by the variable kidnapping/abduction. Cases involving a kidnapping or abduction had child victims in 14.3% of the cases. Cases that did not involve a kidnapping or abduction had child victims in 76% of the cases. The officers who were operating in an official capacity (node 2) were partitioned by the variable gender of victim. Cases that involved a female victim were also child victims in 19.4% of the cases and cases with a male victim were also a child victim in 66.2% of the cases. The tree also included the following variables in tier three through five: indecent exposure, violencerelated crime versus other crime type, driving while female encounter, state, and urban/rural continuum. Predicting Conviction in Police Sexual Violence Arrest Cases This section presents regression models that predict criminal conviction on any offense charged in sex-related police crime arrest cases involving police sexual violence. Conviction data are available in more than two-thirds (n = 431, 69.3%) of the police sexual violence cases. In the police sexual violence cases with known criminal case dispositions, the majority of the arrest cases resulted in criminal conviction (n = 345, valid 80%) on at least one offense charged against the arrested officer. Bivariate associations are presented in Table 29. Chi-Square associations are statistically significant at p < .05 for 13 independent variables and the dependent This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 115 variable, conviction on any offense charged. Only three of the bivariate associations are of moderate strength as indicated by Cramer’s V scores. They are job lost, where χ2 (1, N = 431) = 22.139, p < .001, V = .227; victim’s relationship, where χ2 (6, N = 427) = 20.988, p = .002, V = .222; and year of arrest, where χ2 (6, N = 431) = 18.185, p = .006, V = .205. Table 30 presents a backward stepwise binary logistic regression model predicting conviction in sex-related police crime arrest cases involving acts of police sexual violence. Bivariate correlations computed for each of the independent variables in the model revealed that none of the variables were highly correlated with each other. Multicollinearity is not a problem as indicated by no tolerance scores below .983 and no variance inflation factors above 1.018. Autocorrelation is not a problem as indicated by the Durbin-Watson score of 1.562. Logistic regression results indicate that the overall model of four predictors is statistically reliable in distinguishing between conviction and nonconviction in police sexual violence arrest cases. Wald statistics indicate that all of the independent variables in the model significantly predict conviction in police sexual violence arrest cases. The binary logistic regression model correctly 2 = .422). classified 80.8% of the cases (AUC = .711, 95% CI [.647, .774], RROC Interpretation of the odds ratios provide context for prediction of criminal conviction in police sexual violence arrest cases. Three of the four independent variables in the regression model predict when conviction is more likely. Here again, sex-related arrest cases involving a child victim are more likely to result in the arrested officer’s criminal conviction. The simple odds of conviction are 2.7 times greater if the victim of a sex-related arrest case involving police sexual violence is a child. The type of sex offense predicts whether an officer arrested for acts of police sexual violence will be convicted of a crime. The simple odds of conviction are 2.1 times This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 116 greater if the officer was arrested for forcible sodomy. Conversely, the simple odds of conviction decrease by 54.1% if the officer was arrested for forcible fondling. Figure 12 presents the results of predicting conviction in police sexual violent arrest cases and included a total of 431 police crime arrest cases. The CHAID tree had an overall 2 classification score of 80.0% (AUC = .680, 95% CI [.615, .746], RROC = .360) and selected the variable job lost as the splitting criterion. Officers who had kept their job (node 1) were convicted in 56.4% of the cases. In contrast, officers who lost their job (node 2) were convicted in 83.5% of the cases. The officers who kept their job in node 1 were not partitioned by another variable. The officers who lost this job in node 2 were partitioned by the variable forcible fondling. Cases that did not involve forcible fondling resulted in conviction in 88.3% of the cases and cases that involved forcible fondling resulted in conviction in 77.2% of the cases. The tree also included the variable adult victim versus child victim in tier 3. Predicting Job Loss in Police Sexual Violence Arrest Cases Regression models predicting job loss as the final adverse employment outcome taken against an officer following his or her arrest for sex-related crimes involving acts of police sexual violence are presented in this section. Chi-Square associations are presented in Table 31. Bivariate associations are statistically significant at p < .05 for each of 28 independent variables and the dependent variable, job loss. Six of the bivariate associations are of moderate strength as indicated by the Cramer’s V scores for the statistically significant Chi-Square statistics. They are the State where the arrested officer’s employing law enforcement agency is located, where χ2 (45, N = 622) = 78.683, p = .001, V = .356; years of service at time of arrest, where χ2 (29, N = 495) = 61.583, p < .001, V = .353; year of arrest, where χ2 (6, N = 622) = 60.900, p < .001, V = .313; internal crime against the organization, where χ2 (1, N = 622) = 60.900, p < .001, V = .290, This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 117 conviction, where χ2 (1, N = 431) = 22.139, p < .001, V = .227; and years of service (categorical variable), where χ2 (10, N = 622) = 25.372, p = .005, V = .202. A backward stepwise binary logistic regression model predicting job loss in cases involving acts of police sexual violence is presented in Table 32. Bivariate correlations for each of the independent variables in the regression model indicate that none of the variables are highly correlated with each other. Multicollinearity is not a problem in the model as indicated by no tolerance scores below .966 and no variance inflation factors above 1.035. The Durbin-Watson score of 1.562 indicates that autocorrelation is not a problem in the model. Logistic regression results indicate that the overall model of six predictors is statistically reliable for cases of police sexual violence in distinguishing between officers who kept their job after being arrested and officers who lost their job. Wald statistics indicate that all of the independent variables in the binary logistic regression model significantly predict job loss in sex-related police crime arrest cases involving acts of police sexual violence. The regression model correctly classified 89.5% 2 = .470). of the cases (AUC = .735, 95% CI [.651, .819], RROC Context is provided for prediction of job loss in sex-related arrest cases involving police sexual violence through interpretation of odds ratios. Four of the independent variable in the logistic regression model predict when an officer is more likely to lose his or her job as a sworn officer after being arrested for a sex-related crime involving an act of police sexual violence. Conviction predicts job loss in police sexual violence arrest cases. The simple odds of job loss are 4.7 times greater if the officer is convicted of at least one criminal offense charged in the case involving police sexual violence. Predatory behavior in police sexual violence arrest cases also predicts job loss. The simple odds of job loss are 2.2 times more likely if the police sexual violence arrest case also involves a driving while female encounter. Police sexual violence cases This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 118 are crimes against persons and rarely, if ever, constitute an internal crime against the organization or a crime by the organization against the officer. As such, the simple odds of job loss increase by 29.7% if the crime involving police sexual violence is neither an internal or organizational crime. The simple odds of job loss in police sexual violence arrest cases increase by 89.4% for every one unit categorical increase in the number of part-time sworn officers employed by the same law enforcement agency as the arrested officer. Two of the independent variables in the model predict when an officer is more likely to keep his or her job after being arrested for a crime involving police sexual violence. The longer an officer has been employed the less likely they are to lose their job. The simple odds of job loss in police sexual violence arrest cases go down by 23% for every one unit (three year) categorical increase in years of service at time of arrest. The years of service categorical variable groups years of service in three-year increments. Also, the simple odds of job loss in police sexual violence arrest cases decrease by 91.8% if the arrested officer is also charged with a weapons law offense. Figure 13 presents the results of predicting job loss and included a total of 622 cases. 2 = The tree had an overall classification score of 84.1%, (AUC = .794, 95% CI [.748, .840], RROC .496) and selected the variable year of arrest as the splitting criterion. Officers who were arrested before the year 2007 (node 1) lost their job in 60.2% of the cases. In contrast, officers who were arrested after the year 2007 (node 2) lost their job in 86.4% of the cases. The officers arrested prior to the year 2007 in node 1 were partitioned by the variable suspended for a period of time. Officers who had been previously suspended lost their job in 48.4% of the cases and officers who had not been suspended lost their jobs in 76.8% of the cases. The officers arrested after the year 2007 in node 2 were partitioned by the variable criminal conviction versus nonconviction. Officers who were convicted lost their jobs in 89.4% of the cases and officers This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 119 who were not convicted lost their job in 72.1% of cases. The tree also included the following variables in tiers three through four: geographic division and state. Predicting Conviction in Driving While Female Police Crime Arrest Cases Driving while female encounters are those incidents where a police officer initiates a bogus traffic stop to harass, intimidate, and/or sexually assault female motorists. The regression models in this section predict conviction in sex-related police crime arrest cases involving driving while female encounters (N = 174). Criminal case final disposition data are available in a majority of the driving while female cases (n = 126, 72.4%). Of those cases with known criminal case outcomes, most of the officers were convicted (n = 103, valid 81.7%) on at least one criminal offense charged against the arrested officer. Bivariate associations are presented in Table 33. Chi-Square associations are statistically significant at p < .05 for 18 independent variables and the dependent variable, conviction on any offense charged. The bivariate association for conviction and the number of full-time sworn officers employed (categorical) is strong, where χ2 (9, N = 126) = 22.232, p = .008, V = .420. There are eight bivariate associations of moderate strength: age (categorical), where χ2 (8, N = 126) = 18.588, p = .017, V = .384; year of officer’s arrest, where χ2 (6, N = 126) = 14.407, p = .025, V = .338; alcohol-related police crime arrest cases, where χ2 (1, N = 126) = 9.895, p = .002, V = .280; burglary, where χ2 (1, N = 126) = 9.101, p = .003, V = .269; internal versus organizational crime, where χ2 (1, N = 126) = 7.204, p = .007, V = .239; sexual assault with an object, where χ2 (1, N = 126) = 6.081, p = .014, V = .220; rank by function, where χ2 (1, N = 126) = 5.769, p = .016, V = .214; and, forcible fondling, where χ2 (1, N = 126) = 5.277, p = .022, V = .205. Table 34 presents a backward stepwise logistic regression model predicting conviction in sex-related police crime arrest cases involving driving while female encounters. Bivariate This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 120 correlations computed for each of the independent variables in the model revealed that none of the variables were highly correlated with each other. Multicollinearity is not a problem as indicated by no tolerance scores below .962 and no variance inflation factors above 1.040. The Durbin-Watson score is 1.700 indicating that autocorrelation is not a problem in the model. Logistic regression results indicate that the overall model of five predictors is statistically reliable in distinguishing between conviction and nonconviction in sex-related police crime arrest cases involving a driving while female encounter. Wald statistics indicate that all of the independent variables in the binary logistic regression model significantly predict conviction in driving while female encounter cases. The regression model correctly classified 85.7% of the 2 = .662). cases (AUC = .831, 95% CI [.741, .921], RROC Context for prediction of conviction in sex-related police crime arrest cases involving driving while female encounters is provided by interpretation of odds ratios. Two of the independent variables in the model predict when the odds of conviction increase. The simple odds of conviction in driving while female encounter arrest cases is 3.2 times greater if the arrested police officer has been sued in federal court pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983 (civil action for deprivation of rights) at some point during his or her law enforcement career. Driving while female encounter arrest cases involve crimes against a person and do not involve crimes against the organization or crimes by the organization against the officer. This is demonstrated where the simple odds of conviction increase by 23% if the driving while female encounter arrest case involves a crime against a person and is neither an internal or organizational crime. The other three independent variables in the logistic regression model predict when the odds of conviction decrease in sex-related police crime arrest cases involving driving while female encounters. The simple odds of conviction in driving while female cases decrease by 87.1% if the officer is This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 121 charged with the criminal offense of sexual assault with an object. Similarly, the simple odds of conviction decrease by 73.4% in driving while female cases if the arrested officer is charged with the criminal offense of forcible fondling. Additionally, the simple odds of conviction in driving while female encounter arrest cases decrease by 93.3% if the crime is also alcohol-related. Figure 14 presents the results of predicting conviction and included a total of 126 cases. 2 The tree had an overall classification score of 81.7% (AUC = .736, 95% CI [.637, .835], RROC = .472) and selected the variable year of arrest as the splitting criterion. Officers who were arrested in the year 2005 (node 1) were convicted in 66.7% of the cases. Officers who were arrested during years 2006-2011 were convicted in 90.1% of the cases. The officers who kept their job, in node 1, were not partitioned by another variable. The officers who lost their jobs, in node 2, were partitioned by the variable 42 U.S.C. §1983 civil defendant at some point during an officer’s law enforcement career. Cases that did not involve an officer who had been named as a party-defendant pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983 in a federal court civil rights lawsuit (at some point during his or her law enforcement career) resulted in conviction in 81.6% of the cases. In contrast, cases that involved an officer who had at some point been sued pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983 resulted in conviction in 97.7% of the cases. Predicting Job Loss in Driving While Female Police Crime Arrest Cases This section presents the regression models for predicting job loss as the final adverse employment actions taken against an officer following his arrest for a sex-related police crime arrest case involving a driving while female encounter. Chi-Square associations of job loss are presented in Table 35. Four of the bivariate associations of job loss are strong as indicated by the Cramer’s V score > .400. They are: the State where the officer’s employing law enforcement agency is located, where χ2 (33, N = 174) = 53.896, p = .012, V = .557; victim age difference, This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 122 where χ2 (28, N = 174) = 51.795, p = .004, V = .546; officer’s years of service, where χ2 (22, N = 144) = 42.173, p = .006, V = .541; and age, where χ2 (33, N = 168) = 47.043, p = .054, V = .529. There are also five bivariate associations of job loss that are of moderate strength: victim age (categorical), where χ2 (7, N = 174) = 22.217, p = .002, V = .357; year of arrest, where χ2 (6, N = 174) = 15.536, p = .016, V = .299; rank, where χ2 (4, N = 174) = 14.145, p = .007, V = .285; internal versus organizational crime, where χ2 (1, N = 174) = 13.514, p < .001, V = .279; and, indecent exposure, where χ2 (1, N = 174) = 12.402, p < .001, V = .267. Table 36 presents a backward stepwise binary logistic regression model predicting job loss in sex-related police crime arrest cases involving driving while female encounters. There are only two independent variables in the model predicting job loss. Neither of the independent variables are highly correlated with each other. Multicollinearity is not a problem, but the tolerance scores and variance inflation factors = 1 for both independent variables in the model. Autocorrelation is not a problem as indicated by a Durbin-Watson score of 1.587. Logistic regression results indicate that the overall model of two predictors is statistically reliable in distinguishing between cases where officers who lost their jobs and officers who kept their jobs after being arrested for sex-related police crimes involving a driving while female encounter. Wald statistics indicated that the independent variables in the model significantly predict job loss. The regression model correctly classified 93.3% of the cases (AUC = .766, 95% CI [.671, 2 = .532). .860], RROC Context for prediction of job loss in sex-related police crime arrest cases involving driving while female encounters is provided by interpretation of odds ratios. The cases involving driving while female encounters are crimes against persons. The simple odds of job loss go up by 42.9% in driving while female encounter arrest cases when the underlying nature of the crime This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 123 is not an internal crime against the organization nor a crime by the organization against the officer. The difference in age between the age of the arrested officer and the age of the victim also predicts job loss in these cases. The simple odds of job loss in sex-related police crime arrest cases involving driving while female encounters go down by 6.9% for every one year increase in the difference in age between the age of the arrested officer and the age of the victim. Figure 15 presents the results of predicting job loss and included a total of 174 arrest cases. The tree had an overall classification score of 84.5% (AUC = .776, 95% CI [.681, .870], 2 = .552) and selected the variable internal crime versus organizational crime as the splitting RROC criterion. Officers who committed an internal crime or crime against the organization (node 1) lost their job in 73.4% of the cases. In contrast, officers committed a crime against a person (node 2) lost their job in 93.7% of the cases. The officers who committed either an internal crime or crime against the organization in node 1 were partitioned by the variable victim age difference. Cases that involved a victim age difference that was unknown resulted in job loss in 84.6% of the cases. In contrast, cases that involved a known victim age difference (that is, the difference in years between the age of the arrested officer and the age of the victim) resulted in job loss in 51.9% of the cases. The officers who committed crimes against a person in node 2 were partitioned by the variable official misconduct. Officers who were not charged with the crime of official misconduct lost their jobs in 97% of the cases and officers who were charged with the crime of official misconduct lost their jobs in 86.2% of the cases. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 124 Part III: Alcohol-related Police Crime Data Set Models There are 1,405 cases in the data set where sworn officers were arrested for alcoholrelated crimes during the years 2005-2011. The alcohol-related police crime arrest cases involve 1,283 individual officers employed by 814 nonfederal state, local, special, constable, and tribal law enforcement agencies located in 564 counties and independent cities in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Of these, 81 of the arrested officers had more than one case ( X = 1.10, Mdn = 1.00, Mode = 1, SD = .452), because they had more than one victim (one criminal case per victim) and/or were arrested for an alcohol-related crime on more than one occasion during the study period years. More than one-third of the alcohol-related arrest cases involve an officer who is known to have lost his or her job (n = 533, 37.9%) subsequent to being arrested. The known final employment outcomes in the alcohol-related arrest cases include those in which there was no known adverse employment action taken against the arrested officer (n = 260, 18.5%), cases resulting in the arrested officer being suspended for a period of time (n = 612, 43.6%), cases in which the arrested officer was separated through voluntary resignation (n = 263, 18.7%), and cases in which the arrested officer was separated through involuntary termination (n = 270, 19.2%). Relatively few of the alcohol-related DUI arrest cases are known to have resulted in criminal conviction (n = 492, 35.0%, valid 75.2%) on at least one criminal offense charged against the arrested officer. Included in the alcohol-related police crime arrest cases are 960 driving under the influence (DUI) arrests during the years 2005-2011. The alcohol-related police DUI arrest cases involve 924 individual officers employed by 621 nonfederal state, local, special, constable, and tribal law enforcement agencies located in 464 counties and independent cities in all 50 states This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 125 and the District of Columbia. Of these, 27 of the arrested officers had more than one alcoholrelated DUI case ( X = 1.04, Mdn = 1.00, Mode = 1, SD = .256), because they had more than one victim (one criminal case per victim) and/or were arrested for an alcohol-related DUI on more than one occasion during the study years while employed as a sworn law enforcement officer. Less than one-third of the officers arrested for DUI are known to have lost their job (n = 303, 31.6%) after being arrested. The known final employment outcomes in the alcohol-related DUI arrest cases include those cases in which there was no adverse employment action taken against the arrested officer (n = 202, 21.0%), cases resulting in the arrested officer being suspended for a period of time (n = 455, 47.4%), cases in which the arrested officer was separated through voluntary resignation (n = 167, 17.4%), and those cases in which the arrested officer was separated through involuntary termination (n = 136, 14.2%). Less than one-third of the alcohol-related DUI arrest cases resulted in criminal conviction (n = 303, 31.6%, valid 80.2%). The final disposition in the criminal cases is unknown (n = 582, 60.6%), however, in many of the DUI cases. Officers Arrested for Alcohol-related Police Crime, Offenses Charged & Employers Table 37 presents information on the alcohol-related arrest cases in terms of the arrested officers and their employing nonfederal law enforcement agencies. The majority of the alcoholrelated cases involve male officers (n = 1,314, 93.5%) who were arrested. The youngest officer arrested for an alcohol-related crime was age 20 at time of arrest, and the oldest arrested officer was 66 years old ( X age = 36.70, Mdn age = 37.00, Mode age = 38, SD = 8.379 years). Most of the alcohol-related arrest cases involve sworn officers employed in patrol or street-level nonsupervisory positions, including officers, deputies, troopers, and detectives (n = 1,138, This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 126 81.0%). Most of the alcohol-related cases involved crimes committed while the officer was offduty (n = 1,235, 87.9%). The majority of the alcohol-related cases involve arrests made by some other law enforcement agency (n = 1,009, 71.8%) and were not arrests made by the agency where the arrested officer was employed. Most of the alcohol-related arrest cases involve officers employed by municipal police departments (n = 1,028, 73.2%) or sheriff’s offices (n = 214, 15.2%). Officers arrested for alcohol-related crimes were also employed by primary state police agencies (n = 74, 5.3%), county police departments (n = 54, 3.8%), special police departments (n = 24, 1.7%), tribal police departments (n = 7, 0.5%), or other types of nonfederal law enforcement agencies. The modal category for agency size by number of full-time sworn personnel is 1,000 or more sworn officers (n = 399, 28.4%). Most of the employing law enforcement agencies were located in a nonrural metropolitan county or independent city (n = 1,212, 86.3%). The employing law enforcement agencies are located throughout the United States, including in Southern states (n = 548, 39.0%), Midwestern states (n = 358, 25.5%), Northeastern states (n = 309, 22.0%), and Western states (n = 190, 13.5%). Table 38 presents the alcohol-related arrest cases in terms of the most serious offense charged. There are 38 separate offense categories representing the most serious offense charged in alcohol-related police crime arrest cases during the years 2005-2011. Most common are DUI (n = 817, 58.1%), simple assault (n = 149, 10.6%), aggravated assault (n = 103, 7.3%), weapons law violations (n = 47, 3.3%), forcible fondling (n = 27, 1.9%), disorderly conduct (n = 27, 1.9%), murder and nonnegligent manslaughter (n = 26, 1.9%), forcible rape (n = 26, 1.9%), and destruction of property / vandalism (n = 23, 1.6%). This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 127 Victims of Alcohol-related Police Crime Table 39 presents victim characteristics in alcohol-related police crime arrest cases during years 2005-2011. Many of the arrest cases—including most of the DUI cases not involving traffic accidents and injuries—do not involve crimes with victims. Where victim information is relevant and available in alcohol-related arrest cases, the victims are most often female (n = 263, valid 52.1%) and adults age 18 or older (n = 495, valid 87.8%). Most of the known victims are either strangers to the arrested officer or nonstranger acquaintances (n = 382, valid 69.1%). Sometimes alcohol-related police crime arrest cases involve victims who are also police officers (n = 58, 4.1%, valid 10.4%). Incident Events in Police DUI Arrest Cases Table 40 presents the DUI arrest cases in terms of DUI event incidents and characteristics. Some of the arrest cases involved officers who were DUI while actually on-duty in a police vehicle (n = 42, 4.4%), in a police vehicle while out of the officer’s jurisdiction (n = 28, 2.9%), or off-duty in a take-home police vehicle (n = 78, 8.1%). Some of the arrest cases involved officers who refused to perform field sobriety tests (n = 81, 8.4%) when stopped for suspicion of DUI and/or refused to consent to a blood-alcohol content (BAC) test (n = 195, 20.3%). Many of the police DUI arrest cases involved traffic accidents (n = 492, 51.2%), often resulting in victim injuries (n = 231, 24.1%) and fatalities (n = 39, 4.1%). Some of the DUIrelated traffic accidents happened when an intoxicated officer flipped his or her car (n = 33, 3.4%) or crashed into another vehicle causing the other vehicle to flip (n = 4, 0.4%). Some inebriated officers fled the scene (n = 103, 10.7%) after being involved in a DUI-related traffic accident, and many of those officers were subsequently criminally charged with vehicular hitand-run (n = 76, 7.9%). A few of the officers were involved in a DUI-related traffic accident This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 128 while attempting to flee and evade the police (n = 10, 1.0%). Other officers were arrested for DUI after causing a traffic accident while driving in the wrong direction on a roadway (n = 17, 1.8%) or denied being the driver after being involved in a DUI-related traffic accident (n = 12, 1.3%). Several of the traffic accidents involved an officer who was drunk while driving a motorcycle (n = 15, 1.6%). A few of the DUI-related traffic accidents occurred while the drunk officer was also engaged in family violence (n = 10, 1.0%) Drugs in Police DUI Arrest Cases Although there is a separate part reporting drug-related arrest cases, police DUI arrest cases that are drug-related (n = 49, 5.1% of the DUI cases) are reported in this section. The specific drugs involved in the drug-related DUI arrest cases are presented in Table 41. The most common drugs include “other” depressants (that is, depressants other than GHB and benzodiazepines, such as Ambien) (n = 15, 30.6%), oxycodone (n = 8, 16.3%), cocaine (n = 5, 10.2%), hydrocodone (n = 4, 8.2%), “other” narcotics (e.g., fentanyl, Demoral, methadone, Darvon, etc.) (n = 4, 8.2%), benzodiazepines (n = 4, 8.2%), amphetamine / methamphetamine (n = 3, 6.1%), and marijuana (n = 3, 6.1%). The drug-related DUI arrest cases include officers arrested for DUI while on-duty (n = 16, 32.7%), although the majority of the drug-related DUI cases involved an arresting agency that was not the officer’s employer (n = 34, 69.4%). Predicting Conviction in Alcohol-related Police Crime Arrest Cases The regression models in this section predict criminal conviction on one or more offenses charged against an arrested officer in alcohol-related police crime arrest cases versus nonconviction on any offense charged. Bivariate Chi-Square associations are statistically significant at p < .05 for 25 independent variables and the dependent variable, conviction on any offense charged. See Table 42. There are two bivariate associations of moderate strength as This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 129 indicated by Cramer’s V scores. They are the state where the arrested officer’s employing law enforcement agency is located, where χ2 (48, N = 654) = 95.625, p < .001, V = .382; and victim’s relationship to the arrested officer, where χ2 (7, N = 331) = 23.297, p = .002, V = .265. Table 43 presents a backward stepwise binary logistic regression model predicting conviction in alcohol-related police crime arrest cases. Bivariate correlations computed for each of the independent variables in the logistic regression model revealed that none of the variables were highly correlated with each other. Multicollinearity is not a problem as indicated by no tolerance scores below .849 and no variance inflation factors above 1.177. Autocorrelation is also not a problem as indicated by a Durbin-Watson score of 2.027. Logistic regression results indicate that the overall model of six predictors is statistically reliable in distinguishing between conviction in alcohol-related police crime arrest cases and nonconviction in alcohol-related police crime arrest cases. The model correctly classified 77.0% of the cases (AUC = .688, 95% 2 = .376). Wald statistics indicate that all of the independent variables in the CI [.641, .734], RROC binary logistic regression model significantly predict conviction in alcohol-related police crime arrest cases. Context for prediction of conviction in alcohol-related police crime arrest cases is provided by interpretation of odds ratios. Four of the independent variables in the model predict when conviction in alcohol-related cases is more likely than not. The simple odds of conviction in an alcohol-related arrest cases are 2.6 times greater if the arrested officer was arrested for DUI while driving a personally-owned vehicle (that is, not a police vehicle). The simple odds of conviction in alcohol-related arrest cases increase by 78.1% if the officer was arrested by a law enforcement agency that is not his or her employing agency. The simple odds of conviction in alcohol-related police crime arrest cases are two times more likely if the crime(s) for which the This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 130 officer was arrested is also sex-related. Final adverse employment outcomes also predict conviction in alcohol-related arrest cases. The simple odds of conviction in alcohol-related arrest cases are 1.5 times greater if the arrested officer ultimately loses his or her job as a sworn law enforcement officer after being arrested. Two of the independent variables in the model predict when conviction in alcohol-related police crime arrest cases is less likely to occur. The simple odds of conviction in an alcohol-related case go down by 93% if the crime(s) for which the officer was arrested involved a driving while female encounter. The simple odds of conviction in alcohol-related arrest cases goes down by 63.8% if the crime(s) for which the officer was arrested constituted officer-involved domestic violence where the officer used his or her hands or fist as a weapon. Figure 16 presents the results of predicting conviction and included a total of 654 police crime arrest cases. The tree had an overall classification score of 76.8% (AUC = .721, 95% CI 2 = .442) and selected the variable victim’s relationship to the offender as the [.673, .768], RROC splitting criterion. Cases that involved victims who were a stranger, unrelated child, ex-spouse, former boy/girlfriend, or a child/stepchild (node 1) received convictions in 77.5% of the cases. In contrast, cases that involved victims who were a current spouse, current boy/girlfriend, or relative of the offender (node 2) received convictions in 54.7% of the cases. Cases in node 1 were further partitioned by the variable job lost. Officers who had not lost their job were convicted in 71.3% of the cases and officers who had lost their job were convicted in 83% of the cases. Cases in node 2 were not further partitioned. The tree also included the following variables in tiers three through four: state and geographic division. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 131 Predicting Job Loss in Alcohol-related Police Crime Arrest Cases The next set of models predict job loss in alcohol-related police crime arrest cases. ChiSquare bivariate associations presented in Table 44 are statistically significant at p < .05 for 53 independent variables and the dependent variable, job loss. The strength of the statistically significant bivariate association is weak in 50 of the 53 predictors of job loss in alcohol-related arrest cases. There is a moderate bivariate association in the alcohol-related cases between job loss and each of the following three independent variables: the difference in years between the age of the arrested officer and the victim, where χ2 (67, N = 1,405) = 125.538, p < .001, V = .299; the state where the arrested officer’s employing law enforcement agency is located, where χ2 (50, N = 1,405) = 106.935, p < .001, V = .276; and, victim age (categorical), where χ2 (9, N = 1,405) = 59.634, p < .001, V = .206. Table 45 presents a backward stepwise binary logistic regression model predicting job loss in the aftermath of an officer’s arrest for an alcohol-related crime. Bivariate correlations computed for each of the independent variables in the logistic regression model revealed that none of the variables in the model were highly correlated with each other. None of the tolerance statistics were below .806 and none of the tolerance statistics were above 1.240. The DurbinWatson score of 1.782 indicates that there is no autocorrelation in the model. Logistic regression results indicate that the multivariate model of seven predictors is statistically reliable in distinguishing between officers who kept their job as a sworn law enforcement officer after being arrested for an alcohol-related crime and those officers who lost their job as a sworn officer subsequent to being arrested through either voluntary resignation or involuntary termination as a final adverse employment outcome. The logistic regression model correctly classified 71.6% of 2 = .322). Wald statistics indicate that all of the the cases (AUC = .661, 95% CI [.620, .702], RROC This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 132 independent variables in the binary logistic regression model significantly predict whether an officer will keep or lose his or her job as a sworn law enforcement officer after being arrested for an alcohol-related crime. Context for prediction of job loss in alcohol-related police crime arrest cases is provided by interpretation of the odds ratios in the binary logistic regression model. Five of the seven independent variables in the model predict when an officer is more likely to lose his or her job as a sworn officer after being arrested for an alcohol-related crime. The simple odds of job loss in alcohol-related arrest cases are 5.5 times greater if at some point during the officer’s law enforcement career, the officer was named as a party-defendant in a civil rights lawsuit that was originally filed in a state trial court and removed by the civil defendant to a United States District Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441. If the alcohol-related crime for which an officer was arrested is also violence-related, then the simple odds of job loss are 1.4 times greater than if the officer’s alcohol-related crime was not also violence-related. Similarly, the simple odds of job loss are 2.5 times greater if an officer was arrested for an alcohol-related crime that was also sexrelated. Duty status also predicts job loss in alcohol-related police crime arrest cases, as the simple odds of job loss are 1.9 times greater if the officer was arrested for an alcohol-related crime that occurred while the officer was on-duty. As with many of the other prediction models, conviction predicts job loss. The simple odds of job loss in alcohol-related arrest case are 1.6 times greater if an arrested officer is ultimately convicted of at least one of the criminal offenses for which they were prosecuted in a criminal court. Two of the independent variables in the logistic regression model predict a decrease in the likelihood of job loss following an arrest for an alcohol-related police crime. If an officer was reassigned from one position to another position in the officer’s employing law enforcement agency subsequent to being arrested for an This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 133 alcohol-related crime, then the simple odds of job loss decrease by 84.9%. Also, the method of crime detection predicts job loss in alcohol-related arrest cases, as the simple odds of job loss decrease by 65.1%. Figure 17 presents the results of predicting job loss and included a total of 1,405 cases. 2 The tree had an overall classification score of 68.3% (AUC = .710, 95% CI [.683, .738], RROC = .420) and selected the variable sex-related crime versus other crime type as the splitting criterion. Officers who were not involved in a sex-related case (node 1) lost their job in 35.5% of the cases. In contrast, officers involved in a sex-related case (node 2) lost their job in 75.6% of the cases. The officers who were convicted in node 1 were partitioned by the variable number of full-time sworn personnel. Officers in police departments from 1-99 sworn officers lost their job in 44.7% of the cases and officers in departments from 100-1000+ sworn officers lost their job in 29.8% of the cases. The cases in node 2 were not partitioned further. The tree also included the following variables in tiers three through five: organization versus against citizenry, victim age categorical, years of service categorical, geographic division, case disposition, officer was convicted of a crime, and state. Predicting Conviction in Police DUI Arrest Cases This section includes regression models predicting criminal conviction in an arrest case on at least one offense charged against an officer arrested for driving under the influence (DUI). Bivariate Chi-Square associations presented in Table 46 are statistically significant at p < .05 for 22 independent variables and the dependent variable, conviction on any offense charged. The statistically significant bivariate association is strong for the State where the arrested officer’s employing law enforcement agency is located, where χ2 (46, N = 378) = 85.253, p < .001, V = .475. The statistically significant bivariate association is moderate for Geographic Division, This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 134 where χ2 (8, N = 378) = 25.595, p = .001, V = .260, as well as Geographic Region, where χ2 (3, N = 378) = 18.376, p < .001, V = .220. The statistically significant bivariate associations are weak for each of the other 19 independent variables and the dependent variable. Table 47 presents a backward stepwise binary logistic regression model predicting conviction in police DUI arrest cases. Bivariate correlation computations for each of the independent variables in the model revealed that none of the variables were highly correlated with each other. None of the tolerance scores were below .936 and none of the variance inflation factors were above 1.068, indicating that multicollinearity is not a problem in the model. Autocorrelation is not a problem as indicated by the Durbin-Watson score of 2.155. Binary logistic regression results indicate that the overall model of six predictors is statistically reliable in distinguishing between conviction and nonconviction in police DUI arrest cases. The model 2 = .410). Wald correctly classified 81.7% of the cases (AUC = .705, 95% CI [.639, .771], RROC statistics indicate that all of the independent variables in the logistic regression model significantly predict conviction in police DUI arrest cases. Interpretation of the odds ratios provide context for prediction of conviction in police DUI arrest cases. Two of the independent variables in the logistic regression model predict when conviction is more likely than not in police DUI cases. The simple odds of conviction are 1.3 times greater if the arrested officer was involved in a DUI-related traffic accident resulting in his or her arrest. Once again, job loss predicts conviction, as the simple odds of conviction are 1.4 times greater if the arrested officer ultimately loses his or her job as a final adverse employment action in the aftermath of being arrested for DUI. The four other independent variables in the model predict when criminal conviction in a police DUI arrest case is less likely to occur. If an officer arrested for DUI was also charged with a liquor law violation, then the simple odds of This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 135 conviction on at least one criminal offense charged decreased by 94.5%. The simple odds of conviction decreased by 61.3% if the officer was acting in his or her official capacity as a sworn law enforcement officer when arrested for DUI. In cases where an officer denied driving after being involved in a DUI-related traffic accident, the simple odds of conviction decreased by 94.3%. In some instances, officers who were arrested for DUI refused to submit to a bloodalcohol content (BAC) test. The simple odds of conviction decreased by 53.9% when an officer arrested for DUI refused to submit to a BAC test. Figure 18 presents the results of predicting conviction and included a total of 390 cases. 2 = The tree had an overall classification score of 80.3% (AUC = .747, 95% CI [.684 .809], RROC .494) and selected the variable geographic division as the splitting criterion. Cases from East North Central, West North Central, and East South Central geographic divisions (node 1) had convictions in 92.6% of the cases. In contrast, cases from New England, South Atlantic, Pacific, Middle Atlantic, Mountain, and West South Central divisions (node 2) had convictions in 72.6% of the cases. The cases in node 1 were not partitioned further. The cases in node 2 were partitioned by the variable state. Cases in Massachusetts, Florida, South Carolina, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Washington, Texas, New Hampshire, Oregon, New Mexico, Connecticut, and Montana had convictions in 55.7% of the cases. Cases in California, New York, New Jersey, Virginia, West Virginia, Colorado, Arkansas, Nevada, Maryland, Georgia, Maine, Arizona, Idaho, Utah, Oklahoma, Hawaii, Delaware, Vermont, and the District of Columbia had convictions in 88.1% of the cases. The tree did not have any additional variables. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 136 Predicting Job Loss in Police DUI Arrest Cases The next set of models predict job loss in police DUI arrest cases. Chi-Square bivariate associations presented in Table 48 are statistically significant at the p < .05 level for 29 independent variables and the dependent variable, job loss. There is a moderate bivariate association between job loss and each of the following three independent variables: the State in which the arrested officer’s employing law enforcement agency is located, where χ2 (50, N = 960) = 107.344, p < .001, V = .334; the difference in years between the age of the arrested officer and the age of the victim, where χ2 (54, N = 960) = 80.423, p = .011, V = .289; and, Geographic division, where χ2 (8, N = 960) = 38.273, p < .001, V = .200. A backward stepwise binary logistic regression model predicting job loss in police DUI arrest cases is presented in Table 49. Bivariate correlations computed for each of the independent variables in the logistic regression model revealed that none of the variables in the model were highly correlated with each other. None of the tolerance scores were below .841 and none of the tolerance scores were above 1.190, indicating that multicollinearity is not a problem. The Durbin-Watson score of 1.975 indicates that there is no autocorrelation in the model. Binary logistic regression results indicate that the multivariate model of eight predictors is statistically reliable in distinguishing between officers who kept their jobs and officers who lost their jobs after being arrested for DUI. The logistic regression model only correctly classified 66.9% of 2 = .436). Wald statistics indicate that all of the the cases (AUC = .718, 95% CI [.666, .770], RROC independent variables in the logistic regression model significantly predict whether an officer will keep or lose his or her job after being arrested for DUI. Interpretation of odds ratios provides context for prediction of job loss as a final adverse employment action against an officer after being arrested for DUI. Six of the independent This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 137 variables in the logistic regression model predict when an officer is more likely than not to lose his or her job after being arrested for DUI. The simple odds of job loss are 7.5 times greater if an officer was involved in a DUI-related traffic accident after driving in the wrong direction on a roadway. If an officer was charged with murder or nonnegligent manslaughter in a DUI arrest case, the simple odds of job loss are 2.5 times greater. The simple odds of job loss are 1.9 times greater if the officer was acting in his or her official capacity when arrested for DUI. If the DUI arrest case incident was also violence-related, then the simple odds of job loss are 1.4 times greater. Here again, conviction predicts job loss, as the simple odds of job loss are 1.3 times greater if an officer arrested for DUI was ultimately convicted of one or more criminal offenses arising out of the incident. Experienced police officers are more likely to lose their jobs after being arrested for DUI than are inexperienced officers, as the simple odds of job loss increased by 4.3% for every one unit categorical (3 year) increase in years of service at time of arrest. Two of the independent variables in the logistic regression model predict when job loss is less likely to occur subsequent to an officer’s arrest for DUI. The simple odds of job loss decreased by 13.8% for every one unit categorical increase in the number of full-time sworn personal employed by the arrested officer’s employing law enforcement agency. Some law enforcement agencies require their officers to be available at all times, 24/7. The simple odds of job loss subsequent to an officer’s off-duty DUI arrest decreased by 89.5% if the officer’s employing agency requires 24/7 availability. Figure 19 presents the results of predicting job loss and included a total of 991 arrest cases. The tree had an overall classification score of 70.7% (AUC = .679, 95% CI [.642, .715], 2 = .358) and selected the variable geographic division as the splitting criterion. Officers RROC from New England, West North Central, South Atlantic, and Mountain division states (node 1) This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 138 lost their job in 41.8% of the cases. In contrast, officers from East North Central, Pacific, Middle Atlantic, West South Central, and East South Central divisions (node 2) lost their job in 25.7% of the cases. Cases in node 1 were partitioned by the variable state. Officers from Minnesota, Connecticut, Rhode Island, West Virginia, Montana, Nevada, North Dakota, Maryland, Wyoming, Maine, Iowa, Kansas, Delaware, Idaho, and Nebraska lost their job in 19.8% of the cases. Officers from Massachusetts, Florida, South Carolina, Colorado, Georgia, New Mexico, North Carolina, Virginia, Arizona, South Dakota, New Hampshire, Missouri, District of Columbia, Utah, and Vermont lost their job in 48.5% of the cases. Cases in node 2 were partitioned by the variable state. Officers from; Illinois, Texas, Michigan, Tennessee, Pennsylvania, Oklahoma, and Alabama lost their job in 37.4% of the cases. Officers from Ohio, Indiana, California, New York, Louisiana, Wisconsin, New Jersey, Kentucky, Washington, Arkansas, Oregon, Mississippi, Alaska, and Hawaii lost their job in 18.4% of the cases. The tree also included the following variables in tiers three though five: age (categorical) and state. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 139 Part IV: Drug-related Police Crime Data Set Models The data set includes 739 cases in which sworn law enforcement officers were arrested for drug-related crimes during the time period January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2011. The drug-related arrest cases involve 665 individual sworn officers employed by 432 nonfederal state, local, special, constable, and tribal law enforcement agencies located in 323 counties and independent cities in 45 states and the District of Columbia (all except Alaska, Maine, Montana, North Dakota, and Vermont). Of these, 44 (6.6%) of the arrested officers have more than one case ( X = 1.11, Mdn = 1.00, Mode = 1, SD = .724) because they have more than one victim (one criminal case per crime victim) and/or were arrested for a drug-related crime on more than one occasion. The majority of drug-related arrest cases involved an officer who is known to have ultimately lost their job (n = 520, 70.4%) as a sworn law enforcement officer as a result of being arrested. The known final employment outcomes in the drug-related cases include those in which there was no known adverse employment action (n = 64, 8.7%), where the officer was suspended (n = 155, 21.0%) for a period of time, where the officer was separated through voluntary resignation (n = 220, 29.8%), and those cases where the officer was separated through involuntary termination (n = 300, 40.6%). Approximately two-thirds of the drug-related police crime arrest cases resulted in a criminal conviction against the arrested officer (n = 485, 65.6%) on at least one offense. Officers Arrested for Drug-related Police Crime, Offenses Charged & Employing Agencies Table 50 presents information on the drug-related arrest cases in terms of the arrested officers and their employing nonfederal law enforcement agencies. Most of the drug-related cases involve male officers (n = 701, 94.9%). The modal category for known officer age at time This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 140 of arrest is 36-39 years of age (n = 136, 18.4%). The youngest officer was age 20 at time of arrest, and the oldest officer was 76 years old ( X age = 37.18, Mdn age = 36, Mode age = 28, SD = 8.182 years). The modal category for known years of service at time of arrest is three to five years (n = 116, 15.7%). Most of the drug-related arrest cases involve sworn officers employed in patrol or street-level rank including nonsupervisory officers, deputies, troopers, and detectives (n = 629, 85.1%). Other drug-related cases involve arrested line and field supervisors (n = 74, 10.0%) (i.e., corporals, sergeants, and lieutenants), as well as police executives and managers (n = 36, 4.9%) (i.e., captains, majors, deputy chiefs and chief deputies, and chiefs and sheriffs). Well over half of the drug-related arrest cases involve crimes that were committed while on-duty (n = 444, 60.1%) working in official capacity as a sworn officer. Many of the drug-related cases (n = 527, 71.3%) involve an officer who was arrested by a law enforcement agency other than the arrested officer’s employing nonfederal law enforcement agency. Most of the drug-related arrest cases involve sworn officers employed by municipal police departments (n = 527, 71.3%) or sheriff’s offices (n = 139, 18.8%). Officers arrested for drug-related crimes were also employed by primary state police agencies (n = 23, 3.1%), county police departments (n = 25, 3.4%), special law enforcement agencies (n = 20, 2.7%), constable agencies (n = 4, 0.5%), and a tribal police department (n = 1, 0.1%). The modal category for agency size by number of sworn officers employed is 1,000 or more full-time sworn officers (n = 236, 31.9%) and zero part-time sworn officers (n = 551, 74.6%). Most of the officers arrested in drug-related criminal cases were employed by a law enforcement agency located in a nonrural metropolitan county or independent city (n = 611, 82.7%). The employing law enforcement agencies are located throughout the United States, including in the Southern states (n = 346, This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 141 46.8%), Northeastern states (n = 154, 20.8%), Midwestern states (n = 145, 19.6%), and Western states (n = 94, 12.7%). Table 51 presents the drug-related cases in terms of the most serious offense charged. There are 37 separate offense categories represented as the most serious offense charged in drugrelated police crime arrest cases during the years 2005-2011. Most common in the drug-related cases as the most serious offense charged are drug offenses (n = 308, 41.7%), robbery (n = 60, 8.1%), driving under the influence (n = 38, 5.1%), unclassified theft/larceny offenses (n = 33, 4.5%), theft from a building (n = 28, 3.8%), and burglary (n = 26, 3.5%). Specific Drugs and Classes of Drugs in the Drug-related Police Crime Arrest Cases Table 52 presents information on the specific drugs as well as classes of drugs in the drug-related police crime arrest cases from years 2005-2011. In some cases it was not possible to determine specific drugs, or even classes of drugs, involved in the criminal behavior resulting in an officer’s arrest for a drug-related crime. All classes of commonly abused drugs are found, except inhalants, in the drug-related police crime arrest cases, including stimulants (n = 308, 41.7%), narcotics, (n = 197, 26.7%), cannabis (n = 177, 24.0%), depressants (n = 45, 6.1%), anabolic steroids (n = 44, 5.9%), and hallucinogens (n = 23, 3.1%). Some of the drug-related arrest cases involve two classes of drugs (n = 105, 14.2%), three classes of drugs (n = 22, 3.0%), or four classes of drugs (n = 13, 1.8%). Twenty specific drugs were mentioned in the case article narratives and/or court records of drug-related arrest cases analyzed in the current study. The most common drugs in these cases are cocaine (n = 233, 31.5%), marijuana (n = 177, 24.0%), oxycodone (n = 89, 12.0%), hydrocodone (n = 69, 9.3%), crack (n = 58, 7.8%), amphetamine and methamphetamine (n = 53, 7.2%), heroin (n = 50, 6.8%), unclassified narcotics (n = 29, 3.9%), anabolic steroids not This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 142 including testosterone (n = 29, 3.9%), unclassified depressants (n = 26, 3.5%), benzodiazepines (n = 19, 2.6%), and testosterone (n = 17, 2.3%). Some of the drug-related arrest cases involve four or more specific drugs (n = 22, 3.0%), three specific drugs (n = 35, 4.7%), two specific drugs (n = 136, 18.4%), or one specific drug (n = 415, 56.2%). In some drug-related cases it was not possible to determine any specific drug (n = 131, 17.7%). Victims of Drug-related Police Crime Victim characteristics in drug-related police crime arrest cases in years 2005-2011 are presented in Table 53. Victim information was not ascertainable in many of the drug-related police crime arrest cases. As such, missing data limits the findings as to victims of the drugrelated cases. Over half of the known victims of drug-related police crime are male (n = 57, 52.3%). The modal category for known victim age is 20-24 (n = 8). Most of the known victims were adults (n = 129, 90.2%) and almost none of the victims of drug-related police crime were also known to be police officers (n = 4, 2.9%). The relationship of the victim and the arrested officer could not be determined in most of the drug-related arrest cases (n = 601, 81.3%). Of known victims, most are strangers or nonstranger acquaintances (n = 112, 81.2%) to the arrested officer. Predicting Patterns of Drug-related Corruption in Police Crime Arrest Cases Table 54 presents patterns of drug-related corruption in police crime arrest cases during the years 2005-2011. The arrested officers were charged with drug-related crimes that involved a variety of recognized patterns of drug corruption, including drug trafficking (n = 299, 40.5%), personal use of drugs (n = 235, 31.8%), crimes that facilitate the drug trade (n = 172, 23.3%), drug-related shakedowns and thefts (n = 171, 23.1%), drug thefts from police evidence rooms (n = 60, 8.1%), drug-related falsification (n = 58, 7.8%), forged prescriptions (n = 33, 4.5%), This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 143 planting evidence (n = 33, 4.5%), and crimes that involve sexually-motivated drug corruption (n = 25, 3.4%). Drug-related shakedowns included thefts from street-level drug dealers (n = 75), thefts during warrantless searches (n = 69), thefts during traffic stops of cars and from drug couriers (n = 58), off-duty robberies (n = 35), illegitimate raids and searches (n = 33), and shakedowns and thefts during dispatched calls for service (n = 16). Some of the drug-related police crime arrest cases did not involve any patterns of drug corruption (n = 59, 8.0%). The largest number of the drug-related cases included one pattern (n = 316, 42.8%) or two patterns (n = 192, 26.0%) of drug corruption. A smaller percentage of the cases involved three patterns (n = 72, 9.7%), four patterns (n = 56, 7.6%), or five or more patterns (n = 44, 5.9%) of drug corruption criminal activities. Some of the drug-related police crime arrest cases also involved other types of police crime, including those that are also profit-motivated (n = 438, 59.3%), violence-related (n = 132, 17.9%), alcohol-related (n = 38, 5.1%), and/or sex-related (n = 37, 5.0%). Many of the drugrelated police crime arrest cases also involve at least one other type of police crime (n = 513, 69.4%). CART procedures were utilized to identify the causal pathways between the statistically significant variables to create classification estimates for six of the most prevalent forms of misconduct including drug trafficking, the three most prevalent types of theft/shakedown, drug use, and facilitation of the drug trade. Cocaine was the strongest predictor for three of the six decision trees where specific drugs were the independent variables. The CART analysis also identified numerous other drugs that all significantly contributed to classification estimates beyond the splitting criterion. The following drugs were represented in nodes below the splitting criterion: hydrocodone, heroin, marijuana, crack, anabolic steroids (other than testosterone), This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 144 phencyclidine and analogs, oxycodone, and cocaine. The CART models presented in Table 55 had varying levels of predictive power AUC of .685 to .792. The models that examined drug trafficking and facilitation of the drug trade had poor predictive power. In contrast, the models that examined various forms of theft/shakedown had the highest levels of predictive power. The tree predicting theft/shakedowns of street level dealers had the highest predictive power (AUC = 2 .792, 95% CI [.740, .844], RROC = .584). Cocaine was identified as the strongest predictor and, therefore, was selected as the splitting criterion for the data. The remaining branches of the tree were based on the responses to the splitting criterion. Marijuana and heroin were statistically significant, but only in cases where cocaine was present. A second set of decision tree analyses predicted the various patterns of corruption using drug classes instead of specific drugs is also presented in Table 55. Stimulants were selected as the splitting criterion, and were the strongest predictor for facilitation of the drug trade, drug trafficking, and shakedowns and thefts from car stops and drug couriers. Narcotics were the strongest predictor for drug use. Cannabis were the strong predictor for shakedowns and thefts from warrantless searches/seizures and street level dealers. CART trees that utilized drug classes as predictors had a large range of predicted power. The tree predicting facilitation of the drug trade had a low AUC score of .654, suggesting that the tree is barely able to predict 50% of the cases correctly. The trees predicting the specific types of shakedowns each have AUC scores that exceed 0.75. The strongest tree predicted thefts/shakedowns from street-level dealers based on cannabis as the strongest predictor and splitting variable (AUC = .755, 95% CI [.697, .814], 2 = .510). RROC This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 145 Predicting Conviction in Drug-related Police Crime Arrest Cases The regression models in this section predict criminal conviction on one or more offenses charged in drug-related police crime arrest cases versus nonconviction on any offense. Conviction data are available on approximately three-fourths of the drug-related cases (n = 562, 76.0%). Of those, most of the officers arrested in a drug-related case were convicted (n = 485, valid 86.3%) on at least one criminal offense charged in the case. Bivariate Chi-Square associations are statistically significant at the p < .05 level for 28 independent variables and the dependent variable, conviction on any offense charged. See Table 56. There are four bivariate moderate associations as indicated by the Cramer’s V scores for the statistically significant ChiSquare statistics. They are victim relationship to the arrested officer, where χ2 (6, N = 129) = 15.398, p = .017, V = .345; the state where the arrested officer’s employing agency is located, where χ2 (43, N = 562) = 65.220, p = .016, V = .341; the number of years difference in age between the arrested officer’s age at time of arrest and the age of their victim, where χ2 (25, N = 562) = 63.847, p < .001, V = .337; and, the age of the victim (in a categorical age recoded variable), where χ2 (9, N = 562) = 47.832, p < .001, V = .292. Table 57 presents a backward stepwise binary logistic regression model predicting conviction in drug-related police crime arrest cases. Bivariate correlations computed for each of the independent variables in the logistic regression model revealed that none of the variables were highly correlated with each other. Multicollinearity is not a problem as indicated by no tolerance scores below .928 and no variance inflation factors above 1.077. Autocorrelation is also not a problem as indicated by a Durbin-Watson score of 1.799. Logistic regression results indicate that the overall model of five predictors is statistically reliable in distinguishing between conviction in drug-related police crime arrest cases and nonconviction in drug-related police This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 146 crime arrest cases. The model correctly classified 85.3% of the cases (AUC = .849, 95% CI 2 [.761, .937], RROC = .698). Wald statistics indicate that all of the independent variables in the binary logistic regression model significantly predict conviction in drug-related police crime arrest cases. Odds ratio interpretations provide context for prediction of conviction on one or more criminal offenses charged in drug-related police crime arrest cases. The simple odds of conviction are 3.5 times greater if the officer ultimately loses their job as a sworn law enforcement officer subsequent to an arrest for a drug-related crime. Conversely, the simple odds of conviction decrease by 87.3% if the officer was suspended from their job as a sworn law enforcement officer after being arrested in a drug-related criminal case. If an officer is charged with obstruction of justice in a drug-related criminal case, the simple odds of conviction decrease by 81.8%. It is possible in drug-related cases where an officer is charged with obstruction of justice that criminal courts are skeptical of the officer’s criminality. The relationship of the victim in a drug-related police crime arrest case also impacts on whether an arrested officer will be convicted of at least one criminal offense charged in the case. The simple odds of conviction increase by 60.1% for every one step increase in our categorical variable of victim relationship. In that eight-category variable, 1 = victim is current spouse of the arrested officer, and 8 = stranger or nonstranger acquaintance to the arrested officer. Thus, an officer is more likely to be convicted in a drug-related police crime arrest case the more distant the relationship is between the arrested officer and their victim in a drug-related crime. The simple odds of conviction decrease by 9.1% for every one step increase in the categorical age of the victim in a drug-related police crime arrest case. That is to say, generally, as victim age goes This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 147 up, the likelihood of conviction of one or more criminal offenses charged in a drug-related police crime case goes down. Figure 20 presents the results of predicting conviction and included a total of 562 arrest cases. The tree had an overall classification score of 86.3% (AUC = .760, 95% CI [.703, .816], 2 = .520) and selected the variable officer was suspended as the splitting criterion. Officers RROC who had been previously suspended (node 1) were convicted in 80.9% of the cases. In contrast, officers who were not previously suspended (node 2) were convicted in 48.9% of the cases. The officers who had been previously suspended in node 1 were partitioned by the variable job loss. Officers who lost their job were convicted in 85.7% of the cases and officers who did not lose their job were suspended in only in 67.9% of the cases. The officers who had not been previously suspended in node 2 were partitioned by the variable profit-motivated police crime versus other crime. Officers who were involved in a profit-motivated case were convicted in 96.4% of the cases and officers who were not involved in a profit-motivated case were convicted in 86.1% of cases. The tree also included the following variables in tiers two through four: stimulants, arresting agency, drug/narcotic violation, and drugs: selling, dealing, or trafficking. Predicting Job Loss in Drug-related Police Crime Arrest Cases In this section, the models predict job loss in the drug-related police crime arrest cases. More than two-thirds of drug-related arrest cases are known to have resulted in the arrested officer losing his or her job (n = 520, 70.4%) as a sworn law enforcement officer subsequent to being arrested. Chi-Square bivariate associations are statistically significant at the p < .05 level for 41 independent variables and the dependent variable, job loss. See Table 58. The strength of the statistically significant bivariate association is, however, weak in 38 of the 41 predictors. There is a moderate association that is statistically significant between job loss and officer’s age This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 148 at time of arrest, where χ2 (45, N = 739) = 62.818, p = .041, V = .303; year of officer’s arrest (during the study period of officers who were arrested during the years 2005 through 2011), where χ2 (6, N = 739) = 56.885, p < .001, V = .277; and, difference in years between the age of the arrested officer at time of arrest and the age of the victim in a drug-related police crime arrest case, where χ2 (26, N = 739) = 39.386, p = .045, V = .231. Table 59 presents a backward stepwise binary logistic regression model predicting job loss subsequent to an officer’s arrest for a drug-related crime. Bivariate correlations computed for each of the independent variables in the logistic regression model revealed that none of the variables in the model were highly correlated with each other. None of the tolerance statistics are below .892, and none of the variance inflation factors are higher than 1.121, indicating that multicollinearity is not a problem. The Durbin-Watson score of 1.791 indicates that there is no autocorrelation in the model. Logistic regression results indicate that the multivariate model of nine predictors is statistically reliable in distinguishing between officers who kept their job after being arrested for a drug-related crime and officers who lost their jobs after being arrested through either involuntary termination or voluntary resignation. The model correctly classified 2 78.7% of the cases (AUC = .817, 95% CI [.776, .859], RROC = .634). Wald statistics indicate that all of the independent variables in the model significantly predict whether an officer lost or kept their job as a sworn law enforcement officer after being arrested for a drug-related police crime. Predictors of the final adverse employment outcomes in the drug-related police crime arrest cases are aided by interpretation of the odds ratios. Five of the independent variables predict when an officer is more likely to lose his or her job as a sworn law enforcement officer after being arrested for a drug-related crime. The simple odds of job loss are 5.6 times greater if the arrested officer has been sued (at some point during their law enforcement career) in a state This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 149 court for civil rights violations and the civil action was removed from state court to a federal district court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1441 because the lawsuit raised a federal question. These are cases where a cause of action arose under 42 U.S.C. §1983 (civil action for deprivation of civil rights under the color of law) that were originally filed in a state trial court and later removed by defense counsel to a United States District Court because the claim involves a federal statute or constitutional tort. Almost one-third of the drug-related police crime arrest cases (n = 232, 31.4%) involve an officer who has been sued in federal court pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983 at some point during their police career. The class of drug involved in the arrest case also impacts on the final adverse employment outcome (job loss). The simple odds of job loss are almost 3.3 times greater if the drug-related police crime arrest case involved a narcotic. Also, the level of rurality in the location of the arrested officer’s employer predicts job loss. The simple odds of job loss after being arrested for a drug-related police crime are approximately 1.6 times greater if the employing law enforcement agency is located in a nonmetropolitan (that is, rural) county or independent city. Four of the independent variables in the logistic regression model predict when an officer is more likely to keep his or her job subsequent to being arrested for a drug-related police crime. The simple odds of job loss decrease by 73.8% if the drug-related crime is also alcohol-related. Certain crimes predict a decrease in likelihood of job loss following an officer’s arrest for a drugrelated crime. The simple odds of job loss decrease by 82.1% if the officer is charged with counterfeiting and/or forgery offenses. Similarly, the simple odds of job loss decrease by 69.4% if the drug-related police crime case includes an allegation of falsification by the arrested officer. If the arrested officer’s chief is under scrutiny as a result of the drug-related police crime case, then the simple odds of job loss for the arrested officer go down by 62.8%. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 150 Figure 21 presents the results of predicting job loss and included a total of 739 arrest cases. The tree had an overall classification score of 71.3% (AUC = .733, 95% CI [.695, .770], 2 = .466) and selected the variable year of arrest as the splitting criterion. Officers who were RROC arrested before the year 2007 (node 1) lost their job in 54.0% of the cases. In contrast, officers who were arrested after 2007 (node 2) lost their job in 78.7% of the cases. The officers arrested prior to the year 2007 in node 1 were not partitioned by any variable. The officers arrested after the year 2007 in node 2 were partitioned by the variable criminal conviction. Officers who were convicted lost their jobs in 81.1% of the cases and officers who were not convicted lost their job in 57.4% of cases. The tree also included the following variables in tiers three through six: profit-motivated crime versus other crime type, officer was suspended for a period of time, year of arrest, and age. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 151 Part V: Violence-related Police Crime Data Set Models There are 3,328 cases in the data set where nonfederal sworn law enforcement officers were arrested for violence-related crimes during the years 2005-2011. The violence-related arrest cases involve 2,586 individual officers employed by 1,445 nonfederal state, local, special, constable, tribal, and regional law enforcement agencies located in 805 counties and independent cities in 49 states (all except Wyoming) and the District of Columbia. Of those, 407 of the arrested officers had more than one case ( X = 1.29, Mdn = 1.00, Mode = 1, SD = 1.044), because they had more than one victim (one criminal case per victim) and/or were arrested for a violence-related crime on more than one occasion during the study period years of 2005-2011. More than half of the violence-related arrest cases involve an officer who is known to have lost his or her job (n = 1,748, 52.5%) subsequent to being arrested. The known final employment outcomes in the violence-related arrest cases include those in which there was no known adverse employment action taken against the arrested officer (n = 419, 12.6%), cases resulting in the arrested officer being suspended from his or her job for a period of time (n = 1,161, 34.9%), cases in which the arrested officer was separated through voluntary resignation (n = 767, 23.0%), and cases in which the arrested officer was separated through involuntary termination of employment (n = 981, 29.5%). Less than half of the violence-related arrest cases are known to have resulted in criminal conviction of the arrested officer (n = 1,316, 39.5%) on at least one criminal offense, although the conviction rate is higher (66.3%) in the cases where the criminal case disposition is known. Included in the violence-related police crime cases are a subset of 961 officer-involved domestic violence arrest cases. The officer-involved domestic violence cases involve 849 individual officers employed by 604 nonfederal state, local, special, tribal, and regional law This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 152 enforcement agencies located in 436 counties and independent cities in 49 states (all except Wyoming) and the District of Columbia. Of these, 89 of the arrested officer had more than one officer-involved domestic violence arrest case ( X = 1.13, Mdn = 1.00, Mode = 1, SD = .449), because they had more than one victim and/or were arrested for a crime involving officerinvolved domestic violence (while still employed as a sworn law enforcement officer) on more than one occasion during the years 2005-2011. Just over one-third of the officer-involved domestic violence arrest cases involve an officer known to have lost his or her job (n = 360, 37.5%) as a sworn law enforcement officer after being arrested. The known final employment outcomes in the officer-involved domestic violence arrest cases include those in which there was no known adverse employment action taken against the arrested officer (n = 148, 15.4%), cases that resulted in the arrested officer being suspended from his or her job for a period of time (n = 453, 47.1%), cases in which the arrested officer was separated from his or her employing law enforcement agency through voluntary resignation (n = 150, 15.6%), and cases in which the arrested officer was separated through involuntary termination of employment (n = 210, 21.9%). Officers Arrested for Violence-related Police Crime, Offenses Charged & Employers Table 60 presents information on the violence-related police crime arrest cases in terms of the arrested officers and their employing law enforcement agencies. Most of the violencerelated cases involve male officers (n = 3,194, 96.0%) who were arrested. The youngest officer arrested for a violence-related crime was age 19 at time of arrest, and the oldest officer was 74 years old ( X age = 36.00, Mdn age = 36.00, Mode age = 35, SD = 8.232 years). Most of the violence-related arrest cases involve sworn officers employed in patrol or street-level nonsupervisory positions (n = 2,797, 84.0%). Less than two-thirds of the violence-related police This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 153 crime arrest cases involved crimes committed while the officer was off-duty (n = 2,155, 64.8%). Similarly, less than two-thirds of the violence-related arrest cases involve arrests effectuated by some other law enforcement agency (n = 2,100, 63.1%) and were not arrested by representatives of the agency where the arrested officer was employed. Most of the violence-related police crime arrest cases involved officers employed by municipal police departments (n = 2,504, 75.2%) or sheriff’s offices (n = 523, 15.7%). Officers arrested for violence-related crimes were also employed by primary state police agencies (n = 118, 3.5%), county police departments (n = 90, 2.7%), special police departments (n = 77, 2.3%), constable agencies (n = 6, 0.2%), tribal police departments (n = 9, 0.3%), or a regional police department (n = 1, 0.0%). The modal category for agency size by number of full-time sworn personnel is 1,000 or more sworn officers (n = 987, 29.7). Most of the employing law enforcement agencies were located in a nonrural metropolitan county or independent city (n = 2,880, 86.5%). The agencies employing officers arrested for violence-related police crime are located throughout the United States, including in Southern states (n = 1,386, 41.6%), Northeastern states (n = 715, 21.5%), Midwestern states (n = 664, 20.0%), and Western states (n = 563, 16.9%). Table 61 presents the violence-related police crime arrest cases in terms of the most serious offense charged. There are 40 separate criminal offense categories representing the most serious offense charged in each of the violence-related cases during the years 2005-2011. Most common offenses are simple assault (n = 870, 26.4%), aggravated assault (n = 570, 17.1%), forcible fondling (n = 352, 10.6%), forcible rape (n = 322, 9.7%), intimidation and harassment (n = 200, 6.0%), murder and nonnegligent manslaughter (n = 104, 3.1%), unclassified offenses (n = This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 154 99, 3.0%), forcible sodomy (n = 94, 2.8%), robbery (n = 92, 2.8%), and criminal deprivation of civil rights (n = 61, 1.8%). Victims of Violence-related Police Crime Table 62 presents victim characteristics in violence-related police crime arrest cases during the years 2005-2011. More than half of the cases involve a crime victim who is female (n = 1,841, 55.3%, known 62.1%). Most of the victims are adults (n = 2,416, 72.6%, known 78.1%) and are not law enforcement officers (n = 2,912, 87.5%, known 93.8%). Slightly more than half of the victims are strangers or nonstranger acquaintances (n = 1,668, 50.1%, valid 54.3%) to the officer who was arrested. Some of the victims of violence-related police crime arrest cases were family members of the arrested officer, including current spouse (n = 336, 10.1%), former spouse (n = 59, 1.8%), child or stepchild (n = 159, 4.8%), or some other relative (n = 84, 2.5%). Other victims include a child unrelated to the arrested officer (n = 451, 13.6%), current girlfriend or boyfriend (n = 195, 5.9%) and former girlfriend or boyfriend (n = 118, 3.5%). Predicting Conviction in Violence-related Police Crime Arrest Cases In this section the regression models predict conviction in violence-related police crime arrest cases. Bivariate Chi-Square associations presented in Table 63 are statistically significant at p < .05 for 75 independent variables and the dependent variable, conviction on any offense charged. Five of the bivariate associations are of moderate strength as indicated by the Cramer’s V score, including job loss, where χ2 (1, N = 1,984) = 254.985, p < .001, V = .358; victim age, where χ2 (73, N = 962) = 96.014, p = .037, V = .316; the State in which the arrested officer’s employing law enforcement agency is located, where χ2 (49, N = 1,984) = 98.550, p < .001, V = This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 155 .223; sex-related, where χ2 (1, N = 1,984) = 85.756, p < .001, V = .208; and, the relationship of the victim to the arrested officer, where χ2 (7, N = 1,855) = 77.089, p < .001, V = .204. Table 64 presents a backward stepwise binary logistic regression model predicting conviction in violence-related police crime arrest cases. Computation of bivariate correlations for each of the independent variables in the model revealed that none of the variables were highly correlated with each other. Multicollinearity is not a problem as indicated by no tolerance scores below .779 and no variance inflation factors above 1.285. The Durbin-Watson score of 1.748 indicates that autocorrelation is not a problem. Logistic regression results indicate that the overall model of ten predictors is statistically reliable in distinguishing between conviction and nonconviction in violence-related police crime arrest cases. The binary logistic regression model 2 = .482). Wald correctly classified 77.1% of the cases (AUC = .741, 95% CI [.718, .764], RROC statistics indicate that all of the independent variables in the model significantly predict criminal conviction in violence-related police crime arrest cases. Interpretation of the odds ratios in the logistic regression model provide context for prediction of conviction in violence-related police crime arrest cases. Nine of the independent variables in the regression model predict when conviction is more likely to occur when an officer was charged with one or more violence-related criminal offenses. The serious nature of the crimes for which officers were arrested impacts on criminal conviction. The simple odds of conviction are more than 11 times greater if the arrested officer was charged with either burglary or driving under the influence while driving a personally-owned vehicle. Similarly, the simple odds of conviction are eight times greater if the officer was arrested for pornography or obscene material. The simple odds of conviction in violence-related police crime arrest cases are 2.9 times greater if the officer was arrested for criminal deprivation of civil rights, and 1.7 times This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 156 greater if the arrested officer was charged with forcible sodomy. If the violence-related crime for which an officer was arrested is also sex-related, then the simple odds of conviction are 87% more likely than if the crime was not sex-related. Also, the level of an officer’s experience as a sworn law enforcement officer predicts conviction because it is a factor considered by the courts in criminal case adjudication. The simple odds of conviction in violence-related cases go up by 4.9% for every one unit categorical (three year) increase in years of service as a sworn officer at time of the officer’s arrest. The simple odds of conviction in violence-related police crime arrest cases are 6.3 times greater if the underlying incident was officer-involved domestic violence resulting in fatal injuries to the victim. As with most other prediction models in this study, job loss predicts criminal conviction, as the simple odds of conviction in violence-related police crime arrest cases is 4.5 times greater if the officer ultimately lost his or her job as a sworn law enforcement officer after being arrested. There is one independent variable in the logistic regression model that predicts when the odds of criminal conviction decrease; the simple odds of conviction in violence-related cases decrease by 8.3% for every one categorical unit increase in the number of full-time sworn personnel employed by the arrested officer’s employing law enforcement agency. The odds of conviction in violence-related police crime arrest cases go down as the size of the arrested officer’s employing agency goes up. Figure 22 presents the results of predicting conviction and included a total of 654 police officers. The tree had an overall classification score of 76.8% (AUC = .721, 95% CI [.673, 2 = .442) and selected the variable victim’s relationship to the offender as the splitting .768], RROC criterion. Cases that involved victims who were a stranger or nonstranger acquaintance, unrelated child, ex-spouse, former boyfriend or girlfriend, or a child/stepchild (node 1) to the offender resulted in a conviction in 77.5% of the cases. In contrast, cases that involved victims This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 157 who were a current spouse, current boyfriend or girlfriend, or some other relative of the offender (node 2) resulted in a conviction in 54.7% of the cases. Cases in node 1 were further partitioned by the variable job loss. Officers who lost their job were convicted in 83% of the cases and officers who did not lose their job were convicted in only in 71.3% of the cases. Cases in node 2 were not partitioned further. The tree also included the following variables in tiers two through four: geographic region and state. Predicting Job Loss in Violence-related Police Crime Arrest Cases The next set of regression models predict job loss in violence-related police crime arrest cases. Chi-Square bivariate associations presented in Table 65 are statistically significant at p < .05 for 90 independent variables and the dependent variable, job loss. The strength of the statistically significant bivariate associations is moderate for each of 8 independent variables and job loss: conviction, where χ2 (1, N = 1,984) = 254.985, p < .001, V = .358; sex-related, where χ2 (1, N = 3,328) = 284.771, p < .001, V = .293; victim age, where χ2 (76, N = 1,463) = 100.641, p = .031, V = .224; victim’s relationship to the arrested officer, where χ2 (7, N = 3,070) = 153.358, p < .001, V = 224; police sexual violence, where χ2 (1, N = 3.328) = 151.504, p < .001, V = .213; Year of arrest, where χ2 (49, N = 3,328) = 151.504, p < .001, V = .210; the difference in years from the age of the arrested officer to the age of the victim, where χ2 (99, N = 3,328) = 140.586, p = .004, V = 206; and, forcible fondling, where χ2 (1, N = 3,328) = 137.226, p < .001, V = .203. Table 66 presents a backward stepwise binary logistic regression model predicting job loss as a final adverse employment action against an officer after being arrested for a violencerelated crime. Bivariate correlations for each of the independent variables in the model indicate that none of the variables are highly correlated with each other. Multicollinearity is not a problem as indicated by no tolerance scores below .572 and no variance inflation factors above This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 158 1.747. Autocorrelation is not a problem as indicated by a Durbin-Watson score of 1.715. Logistic regression results indicate that the overall model of eleven predictors is statistically reliable in distinguishing between officers who kept their job after being arrested and officers who lost their job after being arrested in a violence-related arrest case. Wald statistics indicate that all of the independent variables in the model significantly predict job loss in violence-related cases. The binary logistic regression model correctly classified 79.5% of the cases (AUC = .768, 2 = .536). 95% CI [.744, .791], RROC Context for prediction of job loss in violence-related police crime arrest cases is provided through interpretation of the odds ratios. Five of the independent variables in the logistic regression model predict when an officer is more likely to lose his or her job as a sworn law enforcement officer after being arrested for a violence-related criminal offense. The year of the arrest (within the time period years, 2005-2011) predicts job loss, but this is likely an artifact of the data and potentially resulting from one of several threats to internal validity. The simple odds of job loss are 2.8 times greater if the violence-related crime for which the officer was arrested involved police sexual violence. The relationship of the arrested officer to his or her victim in violence-related police crime arrest cases predicts job loss, as the simple odds of job loss increase by 24.4% for every one unit categorical increase on the eight-point scale of victim relationship (but it is a nominal level variable, so the practical interpretation is imprecise). On that variable (V85 on the coding instrument) the categories are 1 = victim is current spouse, 2 = victim is former spouse, 3 = victim is current girlfriend or boyfriend, 4 = victim is former girlfriend or boyfriend, 5 = victim is child or stepchild, 6 = victim is other relative, 7 = victim is an unrelated child, and 8 = victim is a stranger or nonstranger acquaintance. As for most of the other prediction models in this study, conviction predicts job loss and job loss predicts This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 159 conviction. Here, the simple odds of job loss are 6 times greater in violence-related cases if the arrested officer is ultimately convicted in criminal court of at least one of the offenses charged against the officer. Some of the officers in the current study who were arrested were also named as a party-defendant in one or more federal court civil actions alleging civil rights violations at some point during an officer’s career as a sworn law enforcement officer. In this model, the simple odds of job loss in violence-related arrest cases are 2.4 times greater if the arrested officer was sued (at some point during the officer’s law enforcement career) in a state court civil action that was removed to a United States District Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1441. Six of the independent variables in the logistic regression model predict when job loss is less likely to occur in violence-related police crime arrest cases. As age goes up, the likelihood of job loss goes down: the simple odds of job loss go down by 10% for every one categorical unit (3 year) increase in the age of the officer at time of his or her arrest for a violence-related crime. The officer’s status at time of committing the crime for which he or she was arrested also predicts job loss. The simple odds of job loss decrease by 48.9% if the officer was acting in his or her official capacity as a sworn law enforcement officer when he or she committed the violence-related crime for which the officer was arrested. The employing agency’s response also predicts, in terms of adverse employment actions short of job loss after an officer’s arrest, when job loss is unlikely. The simple odds of job loss decrease by 70.6% if an officer was reassigned to another position within the agency after being arrested for a violence-related crime. Similarly, the simple odds of job loss decrease by 76.8% if an officer was suspended from his or her job for a period of time after being arrested for a violence-related crime. Interestingly, the simple odds of job loss go down by 94.2% if the violence-related arrest case also involved the drug cannabis. The sex of the victim in a violence-related police crime arrest case also predicts job loss, as the This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 160 simple odds of job loss in a violence-related case goes down by 43.6% if the victim is male (and not a female). Conversely stated, job loss subsequent to an arrest for a violence-related police crime is more likely if the crime victim is a woman or girl than a man or boy. Figure 23 presents the results of predicting job loss and included a total of 3,328 cases. 2 The tree had an overall classification score of 68.5% (AUC = .756, 95% CI [.740, .772], RROC = .512) and selected the variable criminal conviction as the splitting criterion. Officers who were convicted (node 1) lost their job in 55.6% of the cases. In contrast, officers who were not convicted (node 2) lost their job in 41.7% of the cases. The officers who were convicted in node 1 were partitioned by the variable sex-related police crime versus other crime type. Officers arrested in a sex-related case lost their job in 75.1% of the cases and officers arrested for crimes that were not sex-related lost their job in 45.4% of the cases. The officers who were not convicted in node 2 were partitioned by the variable sex-related versus other crime type. Here, officers arrested for a sex-related case lost their job in 68.1% of the cases and officers arrested for crimes that were not sex-related lost their job in 34.1% of the cases. The tree also included the following variables in tiers three through five: year, officer was suspended for a brief period of time, 42 U.S.C. §1983 civil defendant, duty status, simple assault, victim age categorical, age (of the officer), and years of service categorical. Predicting Conviction in Officer-involved Domestic Violence Arrest Cases The regression models in this section predict conviction in officer-involved domestic violence arrest cases. Bivariate Chi-Square associations presented in Table 67 are statistically significant at p < .05 for 26 independent variables and the dependent variable, conviction on any offense charged. There was a strong bivariate association between conviction and the State in which the arrested officer’s employing law enforcement agency is located, where χ2 (46, N = This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 161 497) = 80.273, p = .001, V = .402. There was a moderate bivariate association between conviction and each of the following independent variables: job loss, where χ2 (1, N = 497) = 62.928, p < .001, V = .356; sex-related, where χ2 (1, N = 497) = 34.222, p < .001, V = .356; simple assault, where χ2 (1, N = 497) = 29.509, p < .001, V = .244; victim age (categorical), where χ2 (9, N = 497) = 28.296, p = .001, V = .239; victim’s relationship to the arrested officer, where χ2 (7, N = 480) = 27.127, p < .001, V = .238; geographic division, where χ2 (8, N = 497) = 24.938, p = .002, V = .224; and, forcible fondling, where χ2 (1, N = 497) = 24.159, p < .001, V = .220. Table 68 presents a backward stepwise binary logistic regression model predicting conviction in officer-involved domestic violence arrest cases. Bivariate correlations computed for each of the independent variables in the model revealed that none of the variables were highly correlated with each other. Multicollinearity is not a problem as indicated by no tolerance scores below .775 and no variance inflation factors above 1.290. Autocorrelation is not a problem as indicated by a Durbin-Watson score of 1.956. Logistic regression results indicate that the overall model of ten predictors is statistically reliable in distinguishing between criminal conviction and nonconviction in officer-involved domestic violence arrest cases. Wald statistics indicate that all of the independent variables in the model significantly predict conviction in officer-involved domestic violence arrest cases. The logistic regression model correctly 2 = .640). classified 76.9% of the cases (AUC = .820, 95% CI [.782, .858], RROC Interpretation of the odds ratios provides context for prediction of conviction on at least one criminal offense charged against an officer in officer-involved domestic violence arrest cases. Eight of the independent variables in the model predict when an officer is more likely to be convicted versus nonconviction. The outcomes in officer-involved domestic violence arrest This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 162 cases demonstrate that the criminal courts are not willing to tolerate certain things from officers who are arrested. The simple odds of conviction in an officer-involved domestic violence arrest case are 18.1 times greater if the officer was charged with the offense of obstruction of justice. Similarly, the simple odds of conviction are 7.8 times greater in officer-involved domestic violence arrest cases if the officer was charged with vandalism (e.g., destruction of property, criminal mischief). The simple odds of conviction are 3.6 times greater in cases involving officer-involved domestic violence if the incident is also sex-related. The victim’s relationship to the arrested officer in officer-involved domestic violence arrest cases also predicts conviction. The simple odds of conviction increase by 14.2% for every one unit categorical increase on the eight-point scale of victim relationship. The interpretation of victim relationship can be better explained in the regression tree analysis directly below. There are several variables specific to cases involving officer-involved domestic violence that predict the odds of criminal conviction. First, the simple odds of conviction are 1.2 times greater if the officer uses or threatens to use a personally-owned gun. Second, the simple odds of conviction are 3.7 times greater if the arrested officer violated a domestic order of protection. Third, the simple odds of conviction are 6.7 times greater if the victim of the officer-involved domestic violence is fatally injured as a result of the crime for which the officer was arrested. Conversely, the simple odds of conviction decrease by 44.4% if the victim of an officer-involved domestic violence arrest case is injured (nonfatal injuries). Once again, in this model job loss predicts conviction. The simple odds of conviction are three times greater if the arrested officer ultimately loses his or her job in the aftermath of being arrested in a case of officer-involved domestic violence. Lastly, the location geographically predicts the criminal case disposition in officer-involved domestic violence arrest cases. Logistic regression provides no meaningful This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 163 interpretation of the odds ratio for geographic region within the United States, and the regression tree analysis in the next paragraph provides context for interpretation of geographic location. Figure 24 presents the results of predicting conviction and included a total of 499 arrest cases. The tree had an overall classification score of 73.9% (AUC = .781, 95% CI [.741, .822], 2 = .562) and selected the variable job lost as the splitting criterion. Officers who had not lost RROC their job (node 1) were convicted in 36.2% of the cases. In contrast, officers who lost their job (node 2) were convicted in 71.5% of the cases. Cases in node 1 were further partitioned by the variable year of arrest. Officers who were arrested during years 2005-2006 were convicted in 63.5% of the cases and officers who were arrested in years 2007-2011 were convicted in 26% of the cases. Cases in node 2 were further separated by the variable geographic division. Cases from the East North Central, West North Central, and Middle Atlantic divisions of the United States had convictions in 85% of the cases. In contrast, cases from the Pacific, East South Central, South Atlantic, West South Central, New England, and Mountain divisions of the country had convictions in 62.5% of the cases. The tree also included the following variables in tier three: state and victim’s relationship to the offender. Predicting Job Loss in Officer-involved Domestic Violence Arrest Cases The set of regression models in this section predict job loss in officer-involved domestic violence arrest cases. Chi-Square bivariate associations presented in Table 69 are statistically significant at p < .05 for 40 independent variables and the dependent variable, job loss. The strength of the statistically significant bivariate associations is moderate for each of six independent variables and job loss: criminal conviction, where χ2 (1, N = 497) = 62.928, p < .001, V = .356; the difference in years between the age of the arrested officer and the age of the victim, where χ2 (65, N = 961) = 85.555, p = .045, V = .298; the State in which the arrested This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 164 officer’s employing law enforcement agency was located, where χ2 (49, N = 961) = 81.166, p = .003, V = .291; sex-related, where χ2 (1, N = 961) = 51.384, p < .001, V = .231; year of arrest, where χ2 (6, N = 961) = 41.162, p < .001, V = .207; and, forcible fondling, where χ2 (1, N = 961) = 39.122, p < .001, V = .202. Table 70 presents a backward stepwise binary logistic regression model predicting job loss as a final adverse employment action against an officer after being arrested for an offense relating to officer-involved domestic violence. Bivariate correlations for each of the independent variables in the model indicate that none of the variables are highly correlated with each other. Multicollinearity is not a problem as indicated by no tolerance scores below .883 and no variance inflation factors above 1.132. Autocorrelation is not a problem as indicated by a Durbin-Watson score of 1.941. Logistic regression results indicate that the overall model of nine predictors is statistically reliable in distinguishing between police crime arrest cases where officers kept their job and cases where officers lost their job after being arrested for an incident of officer-involved domestic violence. Wald statistics indicate that all of the independent variables in the model significantly predict job loss in officer-involved domestic violence arrest cases. The logistic 2 regression model correctly classified 72.2% of the cases (AUC = .800, 95% CI [.762, .839], RROC = .600). Interpretation of odds ratios in officer-involved domestic violence arrest cases provides context for prediction of job loss. Duty status predicts job loss, as the simple of job loss are 5.3 times greater if the officer was on-duty when he or she was alleged to have committed officerinvolved domestic violence that resulted in the officer’s arrest. The simple odds of job loss in officer-involved domestic violence arrest cases are 1.6 times greater if the arrested officer used other body parts (not hands or fist) as a weapon against the crime victim. The simple odds of job This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 165 loss go down by 50.9% in officer-involved domestic violence arrest cases if the officer was charged with simple (misdemeanor) assault. The simple odds of job loss are 4.4 times greater if the officer arrested in an officer-involved domestic violence case was convicted of at least one criminal offense. The simple odds of job loss, however, decreased by 49% if an officer arrested for a crime stemming from officer-involved domestic violence was suspended from his or her job as a sworn officer for a period of time after being arrested. Officers arrested for crimes relating to officer-involved domestic violence are more likely to lose their job as a sworn law enforcement officer if their employing law enforcement agency is located in a rural area. The simple odds of job loss increase by 52.1% for every one unit increase in rurality of the county (or independent city) where the officer’s employing agency is located. Here again we also see a relationship between job loss in a police crime arrest case and instances where officers have been sued in federal court at some point during their career for violating someone’s civil rights. The simple odds of job loss in police crime arrest cases stemming from officer-involved domestic violence are 2.1 times greater if at some point during the arrested officer’s career, that officer was sued in a state court for violating someone’s civil rights and the civil case was removed by a civil defendant to a United States District Court pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. §1441. Figure 25 presents the results of predicting job loss and included a total of 965 arrest cases. The tree had an overall classification score of 69.2% (AUC = .739, 95% CI [.707, .770], 2 = .478) and selected the variable case disposition: officer was convicted of a crime as the RROC splitting criterion. Officers who were convicted of at least one criminal offense charged (node 1) lost their job in 51.8% of the cases. In contrast, officers who were not convicted of any offense charged (node 2) lost their job in 25% of the cases. The officers who were convicted in node 1 were further partitioned by the variable year of arrest. Officers arrested during the years 2005- This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 166 2007 lost their job in 37.8% of the cases and officers arrested during years 2008-2011 lost their job in 61.4% of the cases. The officers who were not convicted in node 2 were partitioned by the variable full-time sworn personnel. Arrested officers employed by law enforcement agencies with 1-249 sworn officers lost their job in 32.5% of the cases and arrested officers employed by agencies with 250-1000+ sworn officers lost their job in 16.7% of the cases. The tree also included the following variables in tiers three through five: age categorical and geographic division. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 167 Part VI: Profit-motivated Police Crime Data Set Models There are 1,592 cases in the data set in which sworn nonfederal law enforcement officers were arrested for profit-motivated crimes during the period January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2011. The profit-motivated arrest cases involve 1,396 individual officers employed by 782 state, local, special, constable, and tribal law enforcement agencies located in 531 counties and independent cities in 47 states and the District of Columbia (all states except Idaho, Maine, and North Dakota). Of these 1,396 officers who were arrested for profit-motivated crimes, 94 of the arrested officers have more than one case ( X = 1.14, Mdn = 1.00, Mode = 1, SD = .808) because they have more than one crime victim (one criminal case per crime victim) and/or were arrested for a profit-motivated crime on more than one occasion during the study years 2005-2011. More than two-thirds of the profit-motivated criminal cases involved an arrested officer who is known to have lost his or her job (n = 1,080, 67.9%). The known final adverse employment outcomes in these cases include no action against the arrested officer (n = 135, 8.5%), suspended (n = 376, 23.6%), voluntarily resigned (n = 503, 31.6%), and involuntarily terminated (n = 577, 36.3%). More than half of the profit-motivated arrest cases resulted in a conviction (n = 914, 57.4%) on one or more offenses charged in the case. Officers Arrested for Profit-motivated Police Crime, Offenses & Employing Agencies Table 71 presents descriptive information on the profit-motivated police crime arrest cases in terms of the arrested officer and the offenses charged, as well as information on the employing law enforcement agency and the arresting law enforcement agency. Most of the profit-motivated arrest cases involve male officers (n = 1,497, 94.1%). The modal category for known officer age at time of arrest is ages 36-39 (n = 244, 15.3%). The youngest officer arrested for a profit-motivated police crime was 20 years old at time of arrest, and the oldest was 79 years This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 168 old ( X age = 38.01, Mdn age = 37,00, Mode age = 41, SD = 9.097 years). The modal category for known years of service as a sworn law enforcement officer at time of arrest is 3-5 years (n = 197, 12.4%) ( X years of service = 10.90, Mdn years of service = 10.00, Mode years of service = 4, SD = 7.808 years). Most of the profit-motivated police crime arrest cases involve sworn officers in patrol and street-level ranks, including nonsupervisory officers, deputies, troopers, and detectives (n = 1,243, 78.1%). Other profit-motivated police crime arrest cases include midrank line and field supervisors (n = 208, 13.1%) and high-ranking police managers and executives (n = 140, 8.8%). More than two-thirds of the profit-motivated arrest cases involve crimes that were committed while on-duty (n = 1,093, 68.7%). Even so, two-thirds of the cases (n = 1,081, 67.9%) involve an arrest made by some law enforcement agency other than the agency employing the arrested officer. Most of the profit-motivated police crime arrest cases involve officers employed by municipal police departments (n = 1,162, 73.0%) or sheriff’s offices (n = 251, 15.8%). The arrest cases also involve officers who were employed by primary state police agencies (n = 62, 3.9%), county police departments (n = 66, 4.2%), special police departments (n = 42, 2.6%), constable agencies (n = 7, 0.4%), and tribal police departments (n = 1, 0.1%). The modal category for size of the employing law enforcement agency by the number of full-time sworn officers employed is 1,000 or more full-time sworn officers (n = 495, 31.1%) and zero part-time sworn officers (n = 1,209, 76.1%). The majority of officers arrested in profit-motivated police crime arrest cases were employed by a nonfederal law enforcement agency located in a nonrural metropolitan county or independent city (n = 1,312, 82.5%). The employing agencies are located throughout the United States, including agencies in the Southern states (n = 726, 45.6%), This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 169 Northeastern states (n = 362, 22.8%), Midwestern states (n = 329, 20.7%), and Western states (n = 174, 10.9%). Table 72 presents the profit-motivated police crime arrest cases in terms of the most serious offense charged in each case. There are 46 separate criminal offense categories represented as the most serious offense charged in the profit-motivated police crime arrest cases in years 2005-2011. Most common as the most serious offense charged in the profit-motivated cases are unclassified thefts (n = 255, 16.0%), false pretenses (known as theft by deception in Model Penal Code states) (n = 199, 12.5%), drug offenses (n = 189, 11.9%), robbery (n = 103, 6.4%), thefts from buildings (n = 92, 5.8%), and extortion and blackmail (n = 85, 5.3%). Victims of Profit-motivated Police Crime Table 73 presents victim characteristics in profit-motivated police crime arrest cases in years 2005-2011. Victim information was not ascertainable from the source documents in many of the profit-motivated police crime arrest cases. Most of the known victims are male (n = 195, 83.3%). Almost none of the known victims are children under the age of 18 (98.2% of the known victims are adults age 18 or older). Most of the known victims are strangers or nonstranger acquaintances (n = 350, 21.9%) to the arrested officer. Predicting Conviction in Profit-motivated Police Crime Arrest Cases In this section the regression models predict criminal conviction on any offense charged in profit-motivated police crime arrest cases versus nonconviction. Conviction data are available on over two-thirds of the profit-motivated cases (n = 1,105, 69.5%). Of those cases with known criminal case outcomes, most of the officers arrested for profit-motivated crimes were convicted (n = 914, valid 82.7%) on at one offense charged in the case. Bivariate Chi-Square associations, presented in Table 74, are statistically significant at the p < .05 level for 49 independent variables This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 170 and the dependent variables, conviction on any offense charged. There are six bivariate associations of moderate strength as indicated by the Cramer’s V scores for the statistically significant Chi-Square statistics. The statistically significant bivariate associations of moderate strength are the victim’s relationship to the arrested officer, where χ2 (6, N = 266) = 25.017, p < .001, V = .307; age of the officer at time of arrest, where χ2 (49, N = 1,010) = 85.828, p = .001, V = .292; the State where the arrested officer’s employing law enforcement agency is located, where χ2 (47, N = 1,105) = 88.251, p < .001, V = .283; years of service at time of arrest, where χ2 (39, N = 799) = 62.423, p = .010, V = .280; job loss, where χ2 (1, N = 1,105) = 82.094, p < .001, V = .273; and categorical age, where χ2 (10, N = 1,105) = 44.496, p < .001, V = .201. Table 75 presents a backward stepwise binary logistic regression model predicting conviction in profit-motivated police crime arrest cases. Bivariate correlations computed for each of the independent variables in the logistic regression model revealed that none of the variables were highly correlated with each other. Multicollinearity is not a problem as indicated by no tolerance scores below .696 and no variance inflation factors above 1.436. The DurbinWatson score of 1.659 indicates that autocorrelation is not a problem in the model. Logistic regression results indicate that the overall model of nine predictors is statistically reliable in distinguishing between conviction in profit-motivated police crime arrest cases and nonconviction in profit-motivated police crime arrest cases. The model correctly classified 2 = .186). Wald statistics indicate that 83.8% of the cases (AUC = .593, 95% CI [.547, .639], RROC all of the independent variables in the binary logistic regression model significantly predict conviction in profit-motivated police crime arrest cases. Odds ratio interpretations provide context for prediction of conviction in profit-motivated police crime arrest cases. The single largest predictor of conviction in the profit-motivated arrest This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 171 cases is whether the officer’s crime involved a drug-related shakedown. The simple odds of conviction are 109 times greater if the profit-motivated police crime involved a drug-related shakedown. Job loss also predicts conviction in profit-motivated police crime arrest cases. The simple odds of conviction in a profit-motivated case are 23.2 times greater if the arrested officer ultimately losses their job (either through involuntary termination or through voluntary resignation) as the final adverse employment outcome following an officer’s arrest for a profitmotivated police crime. Violence-related police crime also predicts criminal conviction in profit-motivated police crime arrest cases. The simple odds of conviction are 4.3 times higher if an officer’s profit-motivated police crime is also violence-related. The type of nonfederal law enforcement agency employing the arrested officer and the State where the employing agency is located also predict criminal conviction in profit-motivated police crime arrest cases. The simple odds of conviction in profit-motivated police crime arrest cases increase by 68% for every one unit increase in agency type. Agency type is a categorical variable where 1 = primary state police agency, 2 = primary state police agency, 3 = sheriff’s office, 4 = county police department, 5 = municipal police department, 6 = special police department, 7 = constable agency, 8 = tribal police department, and 9 = regional police department. As a literal interpretation (remembering that this variable is a nominal-level measurement), that means as you move away from primary state police agencies to other types of police departments, the greater the likelihood of conviction. There is no practical interpretation of the odds ratio for State where the officer’s employing nonfederal law enforcement agency was located, other than to note that the simple odds of conviction in profit-motivated police crime arrest cases varies from State to State. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 172 Several variables in the logistic regression model predict when criminal conviction (on any offense charged in the case against the arrested officer) is less likely. Here, the number of part-time sworn officers employed by the agency where the arrested officer works predicts conviction. The simple odds of conviction go down by 27.2% for every one unit categorical increase in the number of part-time sworn officers employed by the agency. The media and public perception surrounding an officer’s arrest for profit-motivated police crime also impacts on conviction. The simple odds of conviction goes down by 96.3% if the arrested officer’s chief is under scrutiny as a result of the officer’s arrest for a profit-motivated police crime. Although in the same model profit-motivated police crime arrest cases that involve a drug-related shakedown increases the simples odds of conviction, drug-related shakedowns in the form of offduty robberies decreases the odds of conviction. The simple odds of conviction decrease by 98.9% if the officer’s profit-motivated police crime arrest case involves a drug-related shakedown in the form of an off-duty robbery. Finally, the age of the victim in a profitmotivated police crime arrest case predicts the likelihood of conviction. The simple odds of conviction decrease by 30% for every one unit categorical increase in the age of the victim in a profit-motivated police crime arrest case. Figure 26 presents the results of predicting conviction for the profit-motivated cases and included a total of 1,105 police crime arrest cases. The tree had an overall classification score of 2 = .562) selected the variable job loss as the 85.2% (AUC = .781, 95% CI [.744, .818], RROC splitting criterion. Officers who had not lost their job (node 1) were convicted in 62.4% of the cases. In contrast, officers who lost their job (node 2) were convicted in 87.9% of the cases. The officers who had not lost their job in node 1 were partitioned by the variable year of arrest. Officers who were arrested from 2005-2006 were convicted in 83.6% of the cases. Officers who This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 173 were arrested in years 2007-2009 were convicted in 34.2% of the cases and officers who were arrested in years 2010- 2011 were convicted in 59.9% of the cases. The officers who had lost their job in node 2 were partitioned by the variable urban/rural continuum. Officers who were employed by agencies located metropolitan counties (or independent cities) of 250,000 to 1 million; a nonmetropolitan county with an urban population of 20,000 or more, not adjacent to a metro area; county in a metropolitan areas of fewer than 250,000 population, adjacent to a metropolitan area; or a nonmetropolitan county with an urban population of 20,000 or more, adjacent to a metropolitan area were convicted in 79.6% of the cases. Officers who were employed by a law enforcement agency located in a county within a metropolitan area of 1 million population or more; nonmetropolitan county with an urban population 2,500 to 19,999, adjacent to a metropolitan area; nonmetropolitan county with urban population of 2,500 to 19,999, not adjacent to a metropolitan area; nonmetropolitan county completely rural or less than 2,500 urban population, not adjacent to a metropolitan area; nonmetropolitan county completely rural or less than 2,500 urban population, adjacent to a metropolitan area were convicted in 92.6% of the cases. The tree also included the following variables in tier three: drug/narcotic violation, urban/rural continuum, arresting agency, and geographic region. Predicting Job Loss in Profit-motivated Police Crime Arrest Cases In this section the regression models predict job loss following an officer’s arrest for a profit-motivated police crime. Bivariate Chi-Square associations are statistically significant at the p < .05 level for 47 independent variables and the dependent variable, job loss binary (coded as 0 = kept job and 1 = lost job) and are presented in Table 76. There are five bivariate associations of moderate strength as indicated by the Cramer’s V scores for the statistically significant Chi-Square statistics. They are: year of arrest, where χ2 (6, N = 1,591) = 155.340, p < This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 174 .001, V = .312; State where the arrested officer’s employing law enforcement agency is located, where χ2 (47, N = 1,591) = 126.335, p < .001, V = .282; whether the officer was convicted (for any offense charged in the arrest case), where χ2 (1, N = 1,105) = 82.094, p < .001, V = .273; whether the officer was suspended for a period of time following his or her arrest for a profitmotivated crime, where χ2 (1, N = 1,591) = 87.439, p < .001, V = .234; and, years of service as a sworn law enforcement officer at time of arrest, where χ2 (39, N = 1,126) = 56.457, p = .035, V = .224. Table 77 presents a backward stepwise binary logistic regression model predicting job loss in profit-motivated police crime arrest cases. None of the independent variables are highly correlated with each other, as indicated by bivariate correlations that were computed for each of the independent variables in the logistic regression model. Multicollinearity is not a problem as indicated by no tolerance scores below .766 and no variance inflation factors above 1.306. Autocorrelation is not a problem in the model as indicated by a Durbin-Watson score of 1.523. Logistic regression results indicate that the overall model of seven predictors is statistically reliable in distinguishing between officers who lost their jobs after being arrested in a profitmotivated police crime case, and others who kept their jobs after being arrested in a profitmotivated police crime case. Wald Statistics indicate that all of the independent variables in the model significantly predict job loss in profit-motivated police crime arrest cases. The model 2 = .336). correctly classified 91.7% of the cases (AUC = .668, 95% CI [.626, .711], RROC Context for prediction of job loss in profit-motivated police crime arrest cases is provided through interpretation of odds ratios. Five of the independent variables in the logistic regression model predict when an officer is more likely to lose his or her job as a sworn law enforcement officer after being arrested for a profit-motivated police crime. The single largest predictor of This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 175 job loss is when the profit-motivated crime is also drug-related. The simple odds of job loss are 45.6 times greater in a profit-motivated police crime arrest case if the case also involves drug selling, dealing, and/or trafficking. Conviction also predicts job loss, but here again it is not possible to establish causal order between conviction and job loss with this data set. The simple odds of job loss are ten times greater in profit-motivated police crime arrest cases if the arrested officer is ultimately convicted on one or more criminal offenses charged in the case. Profitmotivated crimes that are committed by an officer in their official capacity as a sworn law enforcement officer (as opposed to profit-motivated crimes committed by an officer in their individual capacity) also predict job loss. The simple odds of job loss are nine times greater in profit-motivated police crime arrest cases if the crime was committed by the arrested officer in their official capacity. Similarly, profit-motivated crimes that are also internal crimes against the organization (that is, a crime against the arrested officer’s employing law enforcement agency) increase the simple odds of job loss by 46.4%. The geographic location of the arrested officer’s employing law enforcement agency also predicts job loss in profit-motivated police crime arrest cases. The simple odds of job loss increase by 69.5% in profit-motivated cases with every one unit increase in the category of geographic division across the United States. There is no practical interpretation of the odds ratio, however, for geographic division in this binary logistic regression model. Two independent variables in the logistic regression model predict when an officer is going to keep their job as a sworn law enforcement officer after being arrested in a profitmotivated police crime arrest case. The first of these is when an officer is charged with the offense of obstruction of justice in a profit-motivated case, where the simple of job loss decrease by 93.5%. In some of the profit-motivated police crime arrest cases there was discussion in the This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 176 news article narratives of an agency scandal or cover up in the aftermath of an officer being arrested. The simple odds of job loss decrease by 92.5% in profit-motivated police crime arrest cases if there is discussion of a scandal or cover up at the employing officer’s law enforcement agency. Figure 27 presents the results of predicting conviction for the profit-motivated cases and included a total of 1,591 arrest cases. The tree had an overall classification score of 76.6% 2 = .576) and selected the variable case disposition: (AUC = .788, 95% CI [.763, .812], RROC officer was convicted of a crime as the splitting criterion. Officers who were convicted (node 1) lost their job in 54.8% of the cases. In contrast, officers who were not convicted (node 2) lost their job in 87.9% of the cases. The officers who were convicted in node 1 were partitioned by the variable year of arrest. Officers who were arrested from 2005-2007 were convicted in 51.8% of the cases and officers who were arrested in years 2008-2011 were convicted in 81.3% of the cases. Officers who were not convicted in node 2 were partitioned by the variable discussion of an agency scandal or cover up. Officers involved in cases that discussed an agency scandal or cover up lost their job in 24.2% of the cases. In contrast, officers who were not involved in cases that involved some sort of an agency scandal or cover up lost their job in 60.8% of the cases. The tree also included the following variables in tiers three though five: geographic division, year, state, discussion of an agency scandal or cover up, years of service, and type of agency. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 177 Part VII: Employing Law Enforcement Agencies of Arrested Officers The 6,724 police crime arrest cases in this study involve 5,545 individual sworn law enforcement officers employed by 2,529 nonfederal law enforcement agencies located in headquartered in 1,166 counties and independent cities in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.5 In this part the unit of analysis is changed from arrest case to arrested individual officer. The purpose of changing the unit of analysis to individual officers is to provide rates of officers arrested per agency, per 1,000 officers, and per 100,000 population. Individual nonfederal sworn law enforcement officers were arrested at a rate of 0.72% officers arrested per 1,000 officers, and at a rate of 1.7 officers arrested per 100,000 population nationwide. We urge caution on one critically important point: the tables (and table appendices) presented in this part of the report, and the data from which they were compiled, cannot support a direct comparison of one agency to another nor indeed any cluster of agencies to others. Though it is a natural tendency to make such comparisons, the many localized conditions invisible to the research team in our data sources prevent accurate comparisons. Among the factors that data sources do not (and likely often cannot) discern are whether an officer’s arrest was instigated by his or her own department as a result of its internal standards for conduct and integrity; whether the arrested officer’s criminal offense(s) would not have resulted in the officer’s arrest if it had been less publicly visible; and whether arrests of police officers by outside law enforcement agencies were made at the request of an officer’s employing agency or 5 In Part I of this report we identified 2,529 nonfederal law enforcement agencies located in 1,205 counties and independent cities across the United States. In coding of police crime arrest cases for this study, the counties where an employing law enforcement agency was located were logged for both (a) the county (or independent city) where the employing agency was headquartered, and (b) the county (or independent city) where the arrested officer was stationed. In the case of a state trooper, for example, the county would be recorded for the location of the agency headquarters as well as the county where the arrested trooper’s assigned barracks was located. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 178 in spite of attempts by that agency to conceal the offense(s) and/or protect the officer’s (and thus, the employing agency’s) public image. Rates of Officers Arrested in the 200 Largest Agencies Table 78 presents the 200 largest employing state and local law enforcement agencies in terms of rates of officers arrested during the study period years 2005-2011. The table is sorted by the number of full-time sworn officers employed from largest agency to the smallest agency within the largest 200 agencies represented in the study. The same table is also presented in alternative versions as Appendix B-1 (200 largest agencies in the study sorted by rates of officers arrested per 1,000 officers) and Appendix C-1 (200 largest agencies in the study sorted by rates of officers arrested per 100,000 population). The ten large agencies with the highest rates of officers arrested per 1,000 officers are New Orleans Police Department (rate of 44.21 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Milwaukee Police Department (rate of 36.74 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Memphis Police Department (rate of 29.70 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), New Mexico State Police (rate of 24.62 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Pittsburgh Police Department (rate of 23.57 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Shreveport Police Department (rate of 23.48 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Polk County (FL) Sheriff’s Office (rate of 21.67 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Kern County (CA) Sheriff’s Office (rate of 21.48 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Indianapolis Police Department (rate of 20.87 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), and Minneapolis Police Department (rate of 19.96 officers arrested per 1,000 officers). See Appendix B-1. The ten large agencies with the highest rates of officers arrested per 100,000 population are New Orleans Police Department (rate of 18.32 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Baltimore Police Department (rate of 8.86 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Milwaukee This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 179 Police Department (rate of 7.70 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Norfolk Police Department (rate of 5.77 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Memphis Police Department (rate of 4.96 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Washington Metropolitan Police Department (rate of 4.82 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Shreveport Police Department (rate of 4.71 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Philadelphia Police Department (rate of 4.33 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Jackson Police Department (rate of 4.67 officers arrested per 100,000 population), and Indianapolis Police Department (rate of 3.65 officers arrested per 100,000 population. See Appendix C-1. Rates of Officers Arrested in Nonmetropolitan Agencies Table 79 presents the employing law enforcement agencies located in nonmetropolitan (rural) counties and independent cities in terms of rates of officers arrested during the study period years 2005-2011. The table is sorted by agency name in alphabetical order. The same table information is also presented in alternative versions as Appendix A-1 (sorted by the number of full-time sworn personnel employed), Appendix B-2 (sorted by rate of officers arrested per 1,000 officers), and Appendix C-2 (sorted by rate of officers arrested per 100,000 population). The law enforcement agencies located in nonmetropolitan counties and independent cities with the highest rates of officers arrested per 1,000 officers are Mounds (IL) Police Department (rate of 2000.00 officers arrested per 1,000 officers) and Atwater (MN) Police Department, Berlin Borough (PA) Police Department, Berlin Heights (OH) Police Department, Bowman (SC) Police Department, Burr Oak (MI) Police Department, Cooter (MO) Police Department, Elgin (ND) Police Department, Hamburg (IA) Police Department, Lamoure (ND) Police Department, Lockhart (AL) Police Department, Marion Township (WI) Police Department, Nicholas County (KY) Sheriff’s Office, Oakwood (OH) Police Department, Perryville (KY) Police Department, This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 180 Petroleum County (MT) Sheriff’s Office, Pineview (GA) Police Department, Tipton (OK) Police Department, Turkey Creek (LA) Police Department, Wakeman (OH) Police Department, Wilson (KS) Police Department, and Zolfo Springs (FL) Police Department (each with a rate of 1000.00 officers arrested per 1,000 police officers). See Appendix B-2. The law enforcement agencies located in nonmetropolitan counties and independent cities with the highest rates of officers arrested per 100,000 population are Petroleum County (MT) Sheriff’s Office (rate of 202.43 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Terrell County (TX) Sheriff’s Office (rate of 101.63 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Talbot County (GA) Sheriff’s Office (rate of 43.70 officers arrested per 100,000 population), La Salle County (TX) Sheriff’s Office (rate of 43.57 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Elgin (ND) Police Department (rate of 41.77 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Griggs County (ND) Sheriff’s Office (rate of 41.32 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Crystal City (TX) Police Department (rate of 34.26 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Mounds (IL) Police Department (rate of 32.46 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Pulaski County (IL) Sheriff’s Office (rate of 32.46 officers arrested per 100,000 population), and Carter County (MO) Sheriff’s Office (rate of 31.92 officers arrested per 100,000 population). See Appendix C-2. Rate of Officers Arrested in Primary State Police Agencies Table 80 presents the employing primary state police agencies in terms of rates of officers arrested during the study period years 2005-2011. The table is sorted by agency name in alphabetical order. The same table information is also presented in alternative versions as Appendix A-2 (sorted by the number of full-time sworn personnel employed), Appendix B-3 (sorted by rate of officers arrested per 1,000 officers), and Appendix C-3 (sorted by rate of officers arrested per 100,000 population). This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 181 The five primary state police agencies with the highest rates of officers arrested per 1,000 officers are New Mexico State Police (rate of 24.62 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Arkansas Highway Patrol (rate of 13.42 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), South Carolina Highway Patrol (rate of 10.34 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Mississippi Highway Safety Patrol (rate of 10.10 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), and Rhode Island State Police (rate of 9.95 officers arrested per 1,000 officers). See Appendix B-3. The five primary state police agencies with the highest rates of officers arrested per 100,000 population are New Mexico State Police (rate of 0.63 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Delaware State Police (rate of 0.33 officers arrested per 100,000 population), New Hampshire State Police (rate of 0.23 officers arrested per 100,000 population), South Carolina Highway Patrol (rate of 0.22 officers arrested per 100,000 population), and Mississippi Highway Safety Patrol (rate of 0.20 officers arrested per 100,000 population). See Appendix C-3. Rates of Officers Arrested in Sheriff’s Offices Table 81 presents the employing sheriff’s offices in terms of rates of officers arrested during the study period years 2005-2011. The table is sorted by agency name in alphabetical order. The same table information is also presented in alternative versions as Appendix A-3 (sorted by the number of full-time sworn personnel employed), Appendix B-4 (sorted by rate of officers arrested per 1,000 officers), and Appendix C-4 (sorted by rate of officers arrested per 100,000 population). The sheriff’s offices with the highest rates of officers arrested per 1,000 officers are Nicholas County (KY) Sheriff’s Office (rate of 1000.00 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Petroleum County (MT) Sheriff’s Office (rate of 1000.00 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Carter County (MO) Sheriff’s Office (rate of 666.67 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Oregon This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 182 County (MO) Sheriff’s Office (rate of 400.00 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Talbot County (GA) Sheriff’s Office (rate of 375.00 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Baker County (GA) Sheriff’s Office (rate of 333.33 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Butler County (AL) Sheriff’s Office (rate of 333.33 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Gallatin County (IL) Sheriff’s Office (rate of 333.00 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Griggs County (ND) Sheriff’s Office (rate of 333.00 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), and Guadalupe County (NM) Sheriff’s Office (rate of 333.00 officers arrested per 1,000 officers). See Table B-4. The sheriff’s offices with the highest rates of officers arrested per 100,000 population are Petroleum County (MT) Sheriff’s Office (rate of 202.43 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Terrell County (TX) Sheriff’s Office (rate of 101.63 officers arrested per 100,000 officers), Talbot County (GA) Sheriff’s Office (rate of 43.70 officers arrested per 100,000 officers), La Salle County (TX) Sheriff’s Office (rate of 43.57 officers arrested per 100,000 officers), Griggs County (ND) Sheriff’s Office (rate of 41.32 officers arrested per 100,000 officers), Pulaski County (IL) Sheriff’s Office (rate of 32.46 officers arrested per 100,000 officers), Carter County (MO) Sheriff’s Office (rate of 31.92 officers arrested per 100,000 officers), Baker County (GA) Sheriff’s Office (rate of 28.98 officers arrested per 100,000 officers), Lake County (CO) Sheriff’s Office (rate of 27.36 officers arrested per 100,000 officers), and Henry County (VA) Sheriff’s Office (rate of 25.85 officers arrested per 100,000 population). Rates of Officers Arrested in County Police Departments Table 82 presents the employing county police departments in terms of rates of officers arrested during the study period years 2005-2011. The table is sorted by agency name in alphabetical order. The same table information is also presented in alternative versions as This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 183 Appendix A-4 (sorted by the number of full-time sworn personnel employed), Appendix B-5 (sorted by rate of officers arrested per 1,000 officers), and Appendix C-5 (sorted by rate of officers arrested per 100,000 population). The county police departments included in the study with the highest rate of officers arrested per 1,000 officers are Polk County (GA) Police Department (rate of 85.71 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Oldham County (KY) Police Department (rate of 64.52 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Dougherty County (GA) Police Department (rate of 42.55 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Horry County (SC) Police Department (rate of 37.04 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Kauai (County) (HI) Police Department (rate of 24.00 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Indianapolis (IN) Metropolitan Police Department (rate of 20.86 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Fulton County (GA) Police Department (rate of 15.50 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Maui (County) (HI) Police Department (rate of 15.20 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Gaston County (NC) Police Department (rate of 15.04 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), and Roanoke County (VA) Police Department (rate of 14.81 officers arrested per 1,000 officers). See Appendix B-5. The county police departments included in the study with the highest rates of officers arrested per 100,000 population are Polk County (GA) Police Department (rate of 7.23 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Kauai (County) (HI) Police Department (rate of 4.47 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Indianapolis (IN) Metropolitan Police Department (rate of 3.65 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Horry County (SC) Police Department (rate of 3.34 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Oldham County (KY) Police Department (rate of 3.32 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Maui (County) (HI) Police Department (rate of 3.23 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Honolulu (City and County) (HI) Police Department This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 184 (rate of 2.73 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Savannah-Chatham (GA) Metropolitan Police Department (rate of 2.26 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Prince George’s County (MD) Police Department (rate of 2.20 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Roanoke County (VA) Police Department (rate of 2.17 officers arrested per 100,000 population), and Charlotte-Mecklenburg (NC) Police Department (rate of 2.17 officers arrested per 100,000 population). See Appendix C-5. Rates of Officers Arrested in 500 Largest Municipal Police Departments Table 83 presents the 500 largest employing municipal police departments in terms of rates of officers arrested during the study period years 2005-2011. The table is sorted by agency name in alphabetical order. The same table information is also presented in alternative versions as Appendix A-5 (sorted by the number of full-time sworn personnel employed), Appendix B-6 (sorted by rate of officers arrested per 1,000 officers), and Appendix C-6 (sorted by rate of officers arrested per 100,000 population). The large municipal police departments included in the study with the highest rates of officers arrested per 1,000 officers are Hackensack (NJ) Police Department (rate of 76.92 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Norwich (CT) Police Department (rate of 61.73 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Riviera Beach (FL) Police Department (rate of 55.56 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Lorain (OH) Police Department (rate of 50.0 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Charleston (WV) Police Department (rate of 49.45 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Schenectady (NY) Police Department (rate of 48.19 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Edinburg (TX) Police Department (rate of 45.45 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 185 Cleveland (TN) Police Department (rate of 44.94 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Muskogee (OK) Police Department (rate of 44.44 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), and New Orleans (LA) Police Department (rate of 44.21 officers arrested per 1,000 officers). See Appendix B-6. The large municipal police departments with the highest rates of officers arrested per 100,000 population are New Orleans (LA) Police Department (rate of 18.32 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Portsmouth (VA) Police Department (rate of 10.47 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Baltimore (MD) Police Department (rate of 8.86 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Milwaukee (WI) Police Department (rate of 7.70 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Clarksville (TN) Police Department (rate of 7.54 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Kansas City (KS) Police Department (rate of 6.35 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Petersburg (VA) Police Department (rate of 6.17 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Macon (GA) Police Department (rate of 5.79 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Norfolk (VA) Police Department (rate of 5.77 officers arrested per 100,000 population), and Muskogee (OK) Police Department (rate of 5.63 officers arrested per 100,000 population). See Appendix C-6. Rates of Officers Arrested in Special State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies Table 84 presents the special state and local employing law enforcement agencies in terms of rates of officers arrested during the study period years 2005-2011. The table is sorted by agency name in alphabetical order. The same table information is also presented in alternative versions as Appendix A-6 (sorted by the number of full-time sworn personnel employed), Appendix B-7 (sorted by rate of officers arrested per 1,000 officers), and Appendix C-7 (sorted by rate of officers arrested per 100,000 population). This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 186 The special law enforcement agencies with the highest rates of officers arrested per 1,000 officers are Connally I.S.D. (TX) Police Department (rate of 333.33 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Grambling State University (LA) Police Department (rate of 222.22 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Ennis I.S.D. (TX) Police Department (rate of 200.00 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Ventura College (CA) Police Department (rate of 200.00 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), California Exposition and State Fair (CA) Police (rate of 166.67 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Lancaster I.S.D. (TX) Police Department (rate of 166.67 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), University of Maryland Eastern Short (MD) Public Safety (rate of 166.67 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), University of West Alabama (AL) Police (rate of 166.67 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), Greenville Technical College (SC) Public Safety (rate of 111.11 officers arrested per 1,000 officers), and Lehigh-Northampton Airport Authority (PA) Police Department (rate of 111.11 officers arrested per 1,000 officers). See Appendix B-7. The special law enforcement agencies included in the study with the highest rates of officers arrested per 100,000 population are University of Tennessee at Knoxville (TN) Police (rate of 10.47 officers arrested per 100,000 population), University of West Alabama (AL) Police (rate of 7.27 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Tuskegee University (AL) Police Department (rate of 4.66 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Grambling State University (LA) Police Department (rate of 4.28 officers arrested per 100,000 population), University of Maryland Eastern Shore (MD) Public Safety (rate of 3.78 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Georgia Public Safety Training Center (GA) (rate of 3.78 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Ohio Department of Natural Resources (OH) Office of Law Enforcement (rate of 3.24 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Virginia Marine Resources Commission (VA) (rate of 3.02 officers arrested per 100,000 population), Brigham Young University – Idaho This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 187 (ID) Police Department (rate of 2.66 officers arrested per 100,000 population), and Missouri University of Science and Technology (MO) Police Department (rate of 2.21 officers arrested per 100,000 population). This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 188 CONCLUSION Cases in which sworn law enforcement officers act as criminals—whether dealing drugs, or driving drunk, or sexually molesting a vulnerable citizen—strike a direct blow to the law enforcement enterprise and the essence of what it means to be a law enforcement officer: protect and serve. These cases threaten to undermine public trust in both the authority and legitimacy of state and local law enforcement organizations, and the work of law-abiding sworn officers who go about their job selflessly, efficiently, and professionally every day. Police crime as a topic worthy of empirical study however is not clearly understood, and would probably best be described as untapped or at the very least not sufficiently explored. The contrast between the topic's substantive weight and comparatively light coverage within the scholarship is mostly due to an absence of suitable data. The traditional sources of data and methods of study, whether official statistics, self-report surveys, or direct observations, either do not exist in any usable format or are ill-equipped to identify, count, or provide the basis for empirical analyses of instances in which police perpetrate crimes themselves. These cases have thus far escaped large-scale empirical scrutiny, but they are intrinsically newsworthy events. Those in the news media need to identify stories that will be of interest to their audience, and cases of police crime typically include storylines that are clearly newsworthy. This project utilized a methodology designed to capitalize on the newsworthy character of police crime, identify these events, and subject them to analyses that have thus far been impossible. Given the previous unavailability of data and the relative absence of empirical studies dedicated to the topic, our work should be considered exploratory. The primary aim was to uncover cases of police crime arrests and to provide the basis for what we hope will become an important contribution to the establishment of a more substantive and useful line of research on the topic. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 189 The remainder of this section is divided into several parts. We initially discuss our findings in terms of both some general observations on the entire data set and selected results within the types of police crime that we believe justify further comment. The second section covers implications for policy and practice. Here, we discuss noteworthy results in regard to the analyses on final adverse employment actions, or the sorts of discipline imposed (if any) by police organizations in cases of police crime. The points on final adverse employment outcomes provides context for the identification and discussion of specific recommendations to law enforcement agencies based on our research. The final section is a discussion on the implications of our study for research. Discussion of Findings The identification of notable general observations in regard to the entire data set is complicated by the scope of the study and this report—the research study covers seven calendar years and describes 6,724 criminal cases involving the arrest of 5,545 individual police officers who perpetrated a wide range of criminal acts under varying circumstances. The arrested officers were employed by 2,529 state and local law enforcement agencies (see Appendix D) located in 1,205 counties and independent cities in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The project has revealed and confirmed at least three comprehensive truths about police crime. The first general observation is that police crimes are not uncommon. Police officers get arrested for crimes with some regularity in jurisdictions around the nation, including rural areas, small towns, suburbs, and large urban centers. Law enforcement officers in the current study were arrested at a rate of 0.72 officers arrested per 1,000 officers, and at a rate of 1.7 officers arrested per 100,000 population nationwide. Of course, only a small percentage of the total number of law enforcement officers will ever be arrested for a criminal offense, but our data This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 190 directly contradicts some of the prevailing assumptions and the proposition that only a small group of rotten apples perpetrate the vast majority of police crime. Those assumptions relate to previous studies, journalistic investigations, and special commissions that described the misconduct of a single and/or handful of rogue officers operating within a single and/or handful of jurisdictions. The assumption that only a small group of rogue officers perpetrate crimes also presumably stems from traditional notions and public expectations regarding the straight-laced, law-abiding police persona. In contrast, our method provided for the identification of an unprecedented number of police crimes that occurred within virtually every sort of place, and the opportunity to draw some conclusions about how often these events occur across the nation. The data demonstrate that police crimes are not isolated events, and that hundreds of police officers every year get arrested for crimes including assault, rape, robbery, and murder across the United States. The second general observation is that police crime is occupationally-derived. That is, the cases identified in our research are largely the product of opportunities and other factors inherent within the context of police work. Scholars have long recognized the occupationallyderived sources of police misconduct, including the reality that patrol officers operate within a context of low supervision, low public visibility, and face-to-face encounters in which officers enjoy considerable power and authority over vulnerable citizens. Our methodology involved the collection of data derived from published news stories that detailed these events rather than summary statistics or official reports, so the research team was able to discern how on-the-job realities contributed to the perpetration of these crimes. For example, the news accounts detailed how the existence of illicit markets for cocaine and face-to-face encounters with drug dealers facilitate opportunities for officers to engage in drug use, shakedown citizens who deal drugs, This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 191 and/or deal drugs themselves. The news accounts also describe how this context facilitates and promotes sex-related police crime, whereby police sexually abuse vulnerable citizens they encounter through their work, including young female drivers, prostituted women, or youths involved in police explorer programs. Evidence of the occupationally-derived context of these events is not limited to on-duty crimes. Almost 60% of all of the cases identified in the study occurred when the officer was technically off-duty. The data demonstrate that the source of a significant portion of these so-called off-duty crimes also lies within the context of police work and the perpetrator's role as a police officer, including instances where off-duty officers flash a badge, an official weapon, or otherwise use their power, authority, and the respect afforded to them as a means to commit crime. More broadly, the data show that police crime is not solely or even primarily the product of deviant or defective people; but rather, deviant or defective people who work within an occupational context that provides them unique and unprecedented opportunities to perpetrate crimes whether they are on or off-duty. The third general observation is that police crime is a complex and multi-dimensional phenomenon both within and across the five types of police crime: alcohol-related, drug-related, sex-related, violence-related, and profit-motivated police crime. The complex and multidimensional character of police crime was initially underscored within the context of the Mollen Commission's two-year investigation of drug corruption in New York City during the 1980s and early 1990s. The Commission identified a complex web of relationships among the operation of drug markets, drug corruption, and a long list of associated crimes perpetrated by police. Our data confirmed these observations across jurisdictions throughout the nation; we found that drugrelated police crime tends to spawn the perpetration of various other kinds of criminal behavior by police. Perhaps more importantly, both the findings of the Mollen Commission and those of This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 192 our own research suggest that the complexity of relationships involved in drug-related police crime extends to other kinds of police crime and the nature of the phenomenon in general. For example, the overall complexity of police crime is also demonstrated by the absence of any clearly discernible line between criminal behavior that occurs on- and off-duty. More evidence is provided by the analyses linking police crime arrests to federal civil rights lawsuits. These analyses suggest that at least a portion of those police arrested for a criminal offense are problem officers that exhibit shortcomings in other aspects of the job. Finally, and perhaps most clearly, the multi-dimensional character of police crime is demonstrated within the complex web of statistically significant relationship among variables in our data. For example, Chi-square analyses involving the entire data set identified 90 variables that were significantly associated with conviction, and 120 variables that were significantly associated with job loss. The multivariate analyses identified 16 significant predictors of conviction and 11 significant predictors of job loss. These points demonstrate the difficulties inherent in both the identification of clear-cut explanations of police crime and the interpretation of statistical models designed to isolate these relationships. Perhaps scholarship on the topic needs to start with the premise that recognizes the multivariate complexity of police crime and the difficulties associated with both explaining its etiology; and by extension, the formulation of mitigation strategies. Sex-related Police Crime Two points of discussion in regard to the sex-related police crimes include the serious nature of these offenses and the characteristics of the victims. There were a total of 1,475 cases of sex-related police crime that ranged widely in seriousness from peeping tom cases to those that involved murder. Perhaps most notable however is the fact that almost 30% of all the sex- This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 193 related cases were classified as cases of police sexual violence. A review of the most serious offenses charged in the cases reveals the serious and often-times egregious nature of these events. There were a total of 422 forcible and statutory rapes, 352 cases of forcible fondling, and 94 sodomy cases. The proportion of cases that involved sexual violence and the most serious kinds of sex-related offenses was larger than expected based on the existing research and the comparative absence of empirical studies on the problem of police sexual violence. The large proportion of serious cases in our data was clearly influenced in part by methodology, since news-based searches probably tend to capture cases that compelled an arrest because they were egregious and could not be ignored. No matter the methodology used to identify them, the sheer number of egregious cases constitutes prima facie evidence that these are not isolated events and should be the subject of additional organizational resources and empirical scrutiny. The second concern in regard to sex-related crimes is the age of the victims. Children seem to be particularly vulnerable to police who perpetrate sex-related crimes. Almost one-half of the known victims of sex-related crimes were children, and the second-most commonly occurring category in terms of the victim's relationship to the arrested officer was an unrelated child. Certain types of sex crime tend to involve victims who are children, including crimes involving pornography, obscene material, fondling, and promoting the sexual performance of a child. The sources of sex-related crimes against children are often occupationally derived. For example, the news-based content analyses identified various scenarios in which adults allowed sworn law enforcement officers both access and opportunity to victimize children under their care, presumably because they trusted them. The criminal courts seemed to respond to these cases severely, as a clear majority of the sex-related cases with known dispositions included a This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 194 conviction on at least one charge. The likelihood of conviction increased in cases that involved younger victims, suggesting the expression of some form of moral outrage against police who use their power and position to victimize children. Alcohol-related Police Crime There were 1,405 cases of alcohol-related police crime identified in the study. There were 960 cases where police were arrested for driving under the influence, and the most serious offense charged in close to 60% of the alcohol-related cases was DUI. Thus, police DUI is the major issue of concern in regard to alcohol-related police crime. The study seems to identify cases where an officer did something that compelled an official law enforcement response rather than some type of professional courtesy and non-arrest; there are comparatively few run-of-themill cases of DUI in our data. Some of the incident events that accompanied the DUI and seem to have influenced an arrest included a traffic accident, injuries (sometimes fatal), hit-and-run, and refusals to cooperate with BAC and/or field sobriety tests. These cases seemed to compel police action and an arrest because they required some sort of official documentation (e.g., a traffic accident report), included independent witnesses or victims, or were so egregious that police ignored the fact that they involved fellow police officers. Moreover, most of these cases involved a law enforcement agency other than the arrested officer's employer, suggesting that professional courtesies are more likely to occur among police who work together. In many instances, it should be noted however, when an officer was suspected of driving under the influence (and employed by the same agency as the officer conducting the traffic stop or handling a DUI traffic accident investigation), an outside agency was often brought in to conduct field sobriety tests and effectuate the arrest of an intoxicated officer. Police DUI criminal case outcomes seem to be significantly influenced by the geographic location of the case. State This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 195 location was the most influential predictor of conviction. State-level reforms of DUI laws obviously influence cases outcomes overall, so it seems likely that legislative changes also influence the disposition of cases of police DUI. Drug-related Police Crime There were 739 cases of drug-related police crime. In many ways, our findings both confirm and extend the findings of the Mollen Commission in regard to the etiology and impact of drug-related police crime in New York City several decades ago. For example, while all classes of commonly abused drugs were present, stimulants including cocaine and crack were the most prevalent category of drug involved in these cases. Cocaine was involved in close to onethird of all the drug-related cases; and taken together cocaine and crack were involved in almost 40% of all the drug-related cases. Moreover, cocaine was the strongest predictor for three of six decision trees to predict various forms of drug-related misconduct and crime. We found that— similar to New York City during the 1990s—officers involved in drug-related corruption around the nation often perpetrate various other kinds of crimes including drug trafficking, facilitation of the drug trade, shakedowns, and other forms of theft. Less than one-third of the drug-related cases involved the personal use of drugs by police officers. Our study also seems to suggest the potential for ongoing problems associated with offenses related to opioid analgesics including oxycodone and hydrocodone. More than 20% of all the drug-related cases involved either of these two prescription pain killers. Significant public attention has recently focused on problems related to opioid analgesics, including increases in overdose deaths and prescription violations involving these powerful drugs. Our data suggest that these issues also impact police officers and the nature and character of drug-related police crime. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 196 In terms of criminal case outcomes, police who perpetrate drug-related crimes are significantly more likely to be convicted if the officer ultimately loses their job subsequent to the drug-related arrest. More broadly, we found that job loss predicts conviction in just about every sort of case of police crime, including those that are sex-related, alcohol-related, drug-related, violence-related, and profit-motivated. The two primary outcomes analyzed in this study including criminal case disposition and employment outcome are not isolated events. Job loss and conviction influence one another in almost every case of police crime. Job loss provides a context to interpret the perceived need for a criminal conviction and vice versa. Violence-related Police Crime There were 3,328 violence-related police crimes identified in the study. These cases involved the most serious types of violent crime including 104 cases of murder or nonnegligent manslaughter and 92 robberies; but, they most commonly involved either a simple assault (n = 870) or aggravated assault (n = 570). Less than one-half of the violence-related cases are known to have resulted in a criminal conviction on at least one charge. But, if the case also involved the perpetration of a sex-related crime the odds of conviction increase significantly. Moreover, criminal convictions in violence-related police crimes seem to follow patterns that are consistent with those of violent crimes in general. For example, cases of violence-related police crime are significantly less likely to result in conviction if the officer knows the victim. This was also the case for alcohol-related police crimes, suggesting that in some ways court outcomes in cases of police crime are influenced by the same factors that shape court outcomes for any other type of defendant. Officer-involved domestic violence has become an important topic of concern for scholars and police executives, and there were 961 cases of the officer-involved domestic This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 197 violence included within the violence-related police crimes. Conviction on at least one charge is significantly more likely in cases that involve fatal injuries and/or those that involved a violation of a protection order. Other factors that increase the odds of conviction appear to relate to factors other than the specific act of domestic violence, including obstruction, vandalism, or if the case also involves a sex-related offense. Profit-motivated Police Crime There were 1,592 cases of profit-motivated police crime identified in the study. There were 46 different offense categories for the most serious offense charged in these cases, but the most serious offense charged in about 40% of these cases was unclassified theft, false pretense/swindle, and/or thefts that involved a drug violation. Most of these cases also occurred on the street-level—almost 80% of the profit-motivated crimes were perpetrated by officers in a patrol or other street-level function. Thus, the profit-motivated police crimes in our study more closely resembled the types of thefts perpetrated by traditional street-level criminals rather than business executives, professionals, or other societal elites who are commonly the subject of white-collar crime research. A conviction on at least one criminal charge in the profit-motivated cases depended significantly on whether the case involved a drug-related shakedown. The simple odds of conviction are 109 times greater if a profit-motivated case involved a drug-related shakedown. Similar to other types of police crime, profit-motivated cases that involved an officer who ultimately lost their job were significantly more likely to result in a criminal conviction on at least one charged offense. Civil Rights Litigation as a Correlate of Police Crime The study included analyses that involved a cross-check of the names of each of the arrested officers against the master name index in the federal court's PACER system. These This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 198 analyses were used to explore whether arrested officers had ever been named in their official capacity as a party defendant in a 42 U.S.C. §1983 federal court civil action at some point during their law enforcement career, and to identify the factors that predict these actions. More broadly, these analyses can be used to identify arrested officers who could potentially be described as problem-prone since the federal lawsuit(s) may be indicative of performance problems in a variety of job-related functions. We are aware of no previous empirical studies that attempt to link the perpetration of police crimes to other forms of misconduct using the PACER database. These types of analyses could potentially lead to new and improved mechanisms to identify and mitigate various forms of police misconduct. We found that many of the incidents giving rise to the federal court civil actions occurred years or even decades prior to the arrest, and the lawsuits often had nothing to do with the incident that prompted the arrest. Thus, the arrest case and the civil lawsuit(s) potentially indicate the existence of problems across multiple job-related functions, or at least separate instances of the same types of problems over time. The analyses designed to predict being named as a party-defendant in federal court civil actions involving claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983 seem to indicate at least three important facts. First, officers who are ultimately named as defendants in §1983 federal court civil actions tend to get sued more than once for a variety of civil rights causes of action. These lawsuits are not often isolated events. Second, officers who perpetrate crimes while on-duty are significantly more likely to have been named as a Section 1983 defendant. These are officers whose misconduct tends to occur on-the-job and within their official capacity, so their misdeeds are more likely to be the subject of civil rights litigation and defined as involving a specific denial of a citizen's civil rights acting within their state actor role as a police officer. Third, certain types of police crime tend to predict prior federal civil rights This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 199 litigation. Many of these predictors seemed to be acts that were predatory or at least in some ways violent or aggressive, including crimes involving cocaine, murder, non-negligent manslaughter, kidnapping/abduction, and cases of family violence. More research focused on the link between police crime and prior federal civil rights litigation is obviously necessary in order to more fully identify, describe, and explore these relationships. Implications for Policy and Practice Mechanisms designed to identify and mitigate police misconduct include those that originate both internal and external to the law enforcement organization. External controls include local government, citizen review boards, the media, civil lawsuits, and the criminal courts among others. These external controls clearly maintain certain advantages in terms of the identification and mitigation of police misconduct. For example, the media often serves to identify potential cases of misconduct. Likewise, local governments can and often do influence the budget of law enforcement agencies. So too, civilian review boards have the potential to integrate citizens and grass-roots organizations into the process of police discipline and reform. The various external controls, however, do share some problems. Civilian review of the streetlevel decisions of sworn law enforcement officers may engender a loss of trust and hesitancy in situations that require immediate judgments. Likewise, street-level law enforcement officers will probably mistrust any sort of external control. Also, external controls are in most cases limited because they do not exert direct control over the policies and disciplinary processes of state and local law enforcement organizations. Internal mechanisms to control police misconduct originate from within each law enforcement organization and primarily involve strategies to develop professionalism through hiring and training; and, the creation, maintenance, and enforcement of procedures and rules that This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 200 comprise much of the bureaucracy of the police organization. The advantages of internal controls are clear: members of the organization including law enforcement executives, first-line supervisors, and internal affairs units are likely in the best position to identify and punish most types of police crime. Thus, one of the primary goals of our research was to determine the degree to which state and local law enforcement organizations identify and respond to cases of police crime. These data are substantive in terms of policy and practice because they provide a point of reference in terms of how frequently agencies identify police crimes through an arrest and opportunities to assess the typical discipline imposed by law enforcement organizations in these cases—and ultimately, the basis upon which to devise strategies to improve the internal control of police misconduct. Our data indicate that in most cases of police crime the arrest is made by a law enforcement agency other than the officer's employing agency. Two-thirds of the 6,724 police crime arrest cases originated from an arrest made by an agency other than the employing agency. Why do employing law enforcement agencies often fail to make the arrest in cases of police crime? The content analyses identified clear cases in which the employing agency should have made the arrest and failed to do so. Policing scholars have always recognized that police do not typically arrest other police officers. Sworn officers are likely to use their discretion and extend a professional courtesy to other law enforcement officers, especially co-workers or in some cases their close friends. These kinds of cases represent a failure of internal control and demonstrate what has sometimes been referred to as a fox in the henhouse problem, one that illustrates the need for some type of external controls of police misconduct and crime. One the other hand, the low proportion of arrests made by the employing agency may also be legitimate. For example, officers in many cases do not live within the jurisdictions they police, or they may live within the This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 201 jurisdiction but choose to perpetrate their crimes elsewhere. The content analyses also identified many arrest cases in which law enforcement executives purposively contacted other state and local law enforcement agencies to investigate suspected police crimes or arrest one of their own sworn officers to promote objectivity and limit the potential for bias in the investigation. Clearly, determinations in regard to whether agencies can be relied upon to identify cases and the overall effectiveness of internal mechanisms of control in this regard cannot be made solely on the basis of whether the employing agency made the arrest in a case of police crime. The ultimate internal control involves the imposition of progressive discipline and final adverse employment outcomes, including reassignment, suspension, resignation, and termination from the job. Very little is known about the operation of internal mechanisms of control and the imposition of adverse employment outcomes in cases of police crime beyond perhaps studies focused on a single police agency. The next part of this section is a discussion on the imposition of adverse employment outcomes in terms of both the entire data set and selected results within the types of police crime that we believe justify further comment. We then provide specific recommendations to law enforcement agencies based on some of these findings. Overall, sworn state and local law enforcement officers are known to have lost their job as a result of the arrest in slightly more than one-half of the cases (54%). Clearly, law enforcement organizations do not automatically terminate sworn officers who perpetrate crimes. The organizational response to police crime varies rather widely across alcohol-related, drugrelated, sex-related, violence-related, and profit-motivated police crime. An arrest in and of itself matters much less than the type of underlying criminal behavior that prompted the arrest. For example, sworn law enforcement officers were known to have lost their job as a result of an arrest in only 38% of the alcohol-related cases, while officers were known to have lost their job This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 202 as a result of the arrest in 72% of the sex-related cases and 70% of the drug-related cases. The percentage of cases in which officers were known to have lost their jobs for violence-related and profit-motivated cases was in between these extremes (53% and 68% respectively). The odds of job loss decreased among drug-related cases when those cases also included an alcohol-related offense. Differential rates of job loss across types of police crime may reflect perceptions of threats to organizational legitimacy or degrees of outrage that vary considerably across crime types. For example, cases involving police sexual violence (i.e., both sex- and violence-related police crime) are significantly more likely to result in job loss than other types of police crime. Other specific types of police crime are significantly less likely to result in job loss, including drug-related crimes that involve marijuana and crimes of family violence. The comparatively low rate at which family violence crimes result in job loss seems particularly troubling given the fact that persons convicted of a qualifying misdemeanor crime of domestic violence—including sworn law enforcement officers—are prohibited from possessing any firearm or ammunition pursuant to the Lautenberg Amendment (1996). More broadly, the data clearly demonstrate that the imposition of adverse employment outcomes in cases of police crime is not an isolated event and depends upon other factors that provide a meaningful context to these decisions and shape the perceptions of law enforcement administrators and their determinations about appropriate levels of discipline. The most obvious of the contextual factors that influence the likelihood of job loss is the imposition of other forms of organizational discipline. State and local law enforcement organizations are significantly less likely to separate (through involuntary termination or voluntary resignation) sworn officers from the job who have instead been suspended and/or re-assigned as a result of an arrest. The operation of external mechanisms of control also influences organizational decisions on whether This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 203 or not to terminate the employment of arrested sworn officers, specifically criminal court dispositions and whether or not an officer had been sued in federal court for a civil rights violation. The odds that an officer will lose his or her job significantly increase if they are criminally convicted on at least one charged offense associated with the arrest. Law enforcement agencies are likely to view the conviction as a confirmation of both the criminal act and a degree of public condemnation that is impossible to dismiss or ignore. Likewise, law enforcement organizations clearly consider federal litigation and charges of other civil rights violations over the course of the career as a context relevant to determining whether the arrestee is a problemprone officer who is more trouble than he or she is worth to the organization. Law enforcement administrators and scholars interested in determining effective organizational responses to police misconduct and crime need to recognize organizational discipline as a multivariate phenomenon that should be interpreted within the context of other forms of control. Decisions in regard to adverse employment outcomes also seem to depend on the degree to which the arrested officer was engaged in his or her official role as a police officer at the time of the arrest. For example, the odds of job loss in cases involving alcohol-related crimes significantly increased if the officer was on-duty, and the odds of job loss significantly increased in cases involving sex-related crime and profit-motivated crime if the officer was acting in his or her official capacity. Criminal behavior that occurs on-duty and/or while an officer is acting in his or her official capacity relates more directly to the job and poses more significant threats to organizational legitimacy; and hence, tends to increase the likelihood that severe penalties will be imposed in any particular case of police crime. Finally, the likelihood of job loss sometimes depends on the closely associated factors of agency size and the character of the jurisdiction, particularly for cases that involve either alcohol This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 204 and/or drugs. For example, cases that involve alcohol-related crimes are significantly more likely to result in job loss as the size of the employing police agency decreases. Likewise, cases that involve drug-related crime are significantly more likely to result in job loss when they occur in non-metropolitan counties. Sworn law enforcement officers who perpetrate these types of crimes seem to be more vulnerable to the most punitive employment outcomes when they work in smaller police agencies located within nonmetropolitan jurisdictions than officers who patrol big-city beats. Crimes such as police DUI and or small-scale drug use are probably much more newsworthy and difficult to ignore when they occur in small towns or rural jurisdictions. On the other hand, these types of police crime may be less likely to be defined as a big deal by law enforcement executives and residents who live in large metropolitan areas. Officers employed by large urban law enforcement agencies may also in some ways be protected from the most severe penalties by the complexity of large bureaucratic structures and/or more intricate disciplinary procedures. The points on final adverse employment outcomes provide context for the identification and discussion of specific recommendations to law enforcement agencies based on our research. Our first and perhaps most salient general observation about the data was that police crimes are not uncommon and that they occur with some regularity in jurisdictions across the nation. The sheer number of police crimes directly contradicts the presumption that they are perpetrated by a small cadre of problem-prone officers; and, the fact that roughly two-thirds of all the cases originated from an arrest made by an agency other than the employing agency reveals that in at least some cases agencies are not aware of the crimes perpetrated by their own officers. State and local law enforcement organizations routinely compel applicants to disclose criminal arrests or orders of protection against them during pre-employment screening. Clearly, these This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 205 requirements need to be extended to all on-the-job sworn employees to compel them to disclose any criminal arrests or orders of protection so that police agencies can document and respond to known cases of police crime. Strategies to mitigate police crime cannot succeed without identification, and our research demonstrates the problems associated with the omission of obvious and necessary policies to compel the disclosure of criminal arrests and protection orders. Relatedly, state and local law enforcement organizations need to conduct routine annual criminal background checks of every sworn officer. Annual criminal background checks serve two primary purposes. First, they provide an additional check necessary to ensure compliance with self-report procedures outlined above and to identify cases in which officers fail to disclose arrests, convictions, or orders of protection lodged against them. Second, annual criminal background checks would increase compliance with the requirements of the Lautenberg Amendment (1996). Our data on sworn law enforcement officers arrested for crimes associated with domestic violence demonstrates how some officers escape appropriate penalties, and maintain their law enforcement job that requires them to carry a firearm. The problem stems at least in part from the absence of any central registry or database of persons convicted of misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence. Law enforcement agencies should require annual criminal background checks to ensure the identification and documentation of police crimes within the organization and to maintain compliance with federal law designed to protect victims of family violence—especially in cases where the abuser is among those expected to enforce domestic violence statutes. We found that the organizational response to police crime varies rather widely across jurisdictions, and that law enforcement agencies do not automatically terminate officers who perpetrate crimes. These disparities likely relate to a host of factors associated with This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 206 organizational characteristics, characteristics of the offense(s), and the need to consider disciplinary actions within the unique context of each individual case of police crime. So too, many state and local law enforcement agencies operate under terms of a collective bargaining agreement that structures organizational responses and acceptable forms of progressive discipline and imposition of adverse employment outcomes. However in most cases, law enforcement executives would benefit from some sort of formalized procedures designed to guide disciplinary decisions and organizational responses to police crimes within the ranks. The guidelines would necessarily be broad in scope and allow a degree of administrative discretion and case-by-case consideration, but their existence would at the least ensure that some type of process is in place and contribute to both regularity and consistency of organizational responses over time. Finally, state and local law enforcement agencies should move toward the integration of data on police crimes within existing systems designed to increase accountability as well as those intended to provide practical assistance to sworn law enforcement officers both on and off the job. Many law enforcement agencies have already implemented comprehensive personnel assessment systems that collect a wide range of data and have the means to address a broad range of problems, most commonly misconduct related to the use of force and citizen complaints. These early intervention systems need to include the collection of data on the criminal arrests of sworn law enforcement officers, because we know that police crimes occur with some regularity and that their occurrence can in some cases be used as an indicator of problems in other areas of the job. More bluntly, systems designed to provide an early warning of officers who are problem-prone cannot be considered complete if they are unable to identify sworn law enforcement officers who have perpetrated a criminal offense. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 207 Employee Assistance Programs (EAPs) could also utilize data on criminal arrests of sworn law enforcement officers to identify and target officers who need help. These programs typically provide personal and job-related counseling services. Police crime arrests are an obvious indicator of the need for services to address a host of occupationally-derived problems including psychological and mental health issues related to violence exposure, trauma, posttraumatic stress disorder, substance abuse, lob-related stress, and work-family spillover effects. This is especially true for sworn law enforcement officers who are combat veterans of the military. In this regard, the content analyses revealed numerous arrest cases that were obviously part of a much wider milieu and the build-up of long-term stressors—the proverbial tip of an iceberg of job-related and personal crises that can in some cases lead to complete psychological breakdowns that produce catastrophic consequences for the officer and his or her victims. These events and unraveling can occur across the life course of any sworn law enforcement officer’s career. Law enforcement agencies need to identify police crimes so they can use the information to help officers who obviously need it and refer them to programs designed to provide practical and in some cases life-saving assistance to them. Implications for Further Research The current research project identified and analyzed an unprecedented amount of data on the arrests of nonfederal sworn law enforcement officers in the United States. The research data collection methodology was designed by Stinson (2009) and allows for the aggregation of information on the phenomenon of police crime that would not otherwise been possible (Payne, 2013). It would also be very difficult to process and code the content of the vast amount of raw data analyzed in the current project without sophisticated database resources. The project is supported by OnBase, an enterprise content management (ECM) database system. Originally the This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 208 research team utilized OnBase solely to archive digital image files of all the paper-based news articles, court records, and coding sheets that were collected and analyzed by Stinson and colleagues as part of their research on police crime. Over the past several years Stinson has enhanced the project database with additional electronic files, including video files, audio files, and the ability to search the full text of all the digital images contained in the project’s digital imaging database. Appendix E presents an entity relationship of Stinson’s police crime database. Several database components were added to the project ECM database to support the current study, including an object-relational database that allows for data to be organized in tables (a relational database component), as well as seamless integration with the digital imaging and video files (an object-oriented database component) among others. Coding of content was completed with a customized PC-based coding instrument using the IBM/SPSS Data Collection software application. The coding instrument system pulls case-specific data from the relational database into the on-screen coding instrument for each case to be coded, thus reducing coder duplication of effort and the potential for coding errors. The data from the completed coding instrument for each case is converted to an SPSS data file for subsequent statistical analyses, and data files are also converted to an electronic coding sheet in an MS Word (a facsimile of our paper-based coding instrument) and indexed in OnBase with other case-specific electronic files. The data collection methodology and ECM research project database design deployed in the current study can serve as an integrated model for other social science research projects utilizing big data in a variety of structured and unstructured paper-based and electronic formats. Most large research universities already utilize ECM database systems for nonresearch applications (including admissions, operations, and administrative functions). These ECM database systems could be made available to faculty researchers for database development in This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 209 large-scale content analysis research projects and other research methodologies. Similarly, OnBase and other ECM database systems are often utilized by federal, state, and local government agencies, including courts and law enforcement agencies. The costs of making such systems available to research teams for research database projects would be de minimis when the ECM system is already deployed for other uses within an organization. Stinson and colleagues continue to collect data on the criminal arrests of sworn law enforcement officers at state and local law enforcement agencies across the United States at a rate of approximately 1,100 new arrest cases involving approximately 800-950 sworn law enforcement officers arrested annually. The project ECM database now includes 11,131 criminal arrest cases (as of this writing, for the eleven year period January 2005 through December 2015) involving the arrests of 9,391 individual sworn law enforcement officers who were employed by 3,666 nonfederal state and local law enforcement officers located in 1,543 counties and independent cities in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The research team plans to continue with the research project as a longitudinal trend study of police crime in the United States. We hope that the products disseminated from this study (and our larger project on police crime research) serve as a starting point for the research projects of other scholars and student researchers. An electronic copy of the data set (together with supporting documentation) for the current study will be deposited in SPSS portable files with the National Archives of Criminal Justice Data (NACJD) at the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR). This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 210 REFERENCES Abdollahi, M. K. (2002). Understanding police stress research. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 2(2), 1–24. http://doi.org/10.1300/J158v02n02_01 Alpert, G. P., & MacDonald, J. M. (2001). Police use of force: An analysis of organizational characteristics. Justice Quarterly, 18(2), 393–409. http://doi.org/10.1080/07418820100094951 Alpert, G. P., & Smith, M. R. (1999). Police use of force data: Where we are and where we should be going. Police Quarterly, 2(1), 57–78. http://doi.org/10.1177/109861119900200103 Anechiarico, F., & Jacobs, J. B. (1996). The pursuit of absolute integrity: How corruption control makes government ineffective. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. Anshel, M. H. (2000). A Conceptual Model and Implications for Coping with Stressful Events in Police Work. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 27(3), 375–400. http://doi.org/10.1177/0093854800027003006 Ayres, R. M., Flanagan, G. S., & Ayres, M. B. (1992). Preventing law enforcement stress: The organization’s role (No. NCJ 141934). Washington. DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance. Baer, Jr., H., & Armao, J. P. (1995). The Mollen Commission report: An overview. New York Law School Law Review, 40(1-2), 73–85. Banton. (1964). The policemen in the community. New York, NY: Basic Books. Barak, G. (1995). Media, Society, and Criminology. In Media, process, and the social construction of crime: Studies in newsmaking criminology (pp. 3–45). New York, NY: Garland. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 211 Barker, T. (1978). An empirical study of police deviance other than corruption. Journal of Police Science and Administration, 6(3), 264–272. Barker, T., & Carter, D. L. (1994). A typology of police deviance. In T. Barker & D. L. Carter (Eds.), Police deviance (3rd ed., pp. 3–11). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson. Barton, G. (2011, October 25). Milwaukee police often face minimal punishment for driving drunk. Journal Sentinel. Milwaukee, WI. Bayley, D. H., & Garofalo, J. (1989). The management of violence by police patrol officers. Criminology, 27(1), 1–26. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1989.tb00861.x Begg, D. J., Langley, J. D., & Stephenson, S. (2003). Identifying factors that predict persistent driving after drinking, unsafe driving after drinking, and driving after using cannabis among young adults. Accident; Analysis and Prevention, 35(5), 669–675. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-4575(02)00045-3 Bewick, V., Cheek, L., & Ball, J. (2004). Statistics review 13: Receiver operating characteristic curves. Critical Care, 8(6), 508–512. http://doi.org/10.1186/cc3000 Bharat, K. (2012, September 22). Google News turns 10. Retrieved from http://googlenewsblog.blogspot.com/2012/09/google-news-turns-10.html Binder, A., & Scharf, P. (1982). Deadly force in law enforcement. Crime & Delinquency, 28(1), 1–23. http://doi.org/10.1177/001112878202800101 Bittner, E. (1978). The functions of the police in modern society. In Policing: A view from the street (pp. 32–50). Santa Monica, CA: Goodyear. Black, D. J., & Reiss, A. J. (1967). Studies of crime and law enforcement in major metropolitan areas (Vol. 2, Field surveys III. Section I: Patterns of behavior in police and citizen transactions). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 212 Blumberg, M. (1983). The use of firearms by police officers: The impact of individuals, communities, and race. State University of New York, Albany, NY. Retrieved from http://0proquest.umi.com.maurice.bgsu.edu/pqdweb?did=753184011&sid=1&Fmt=2&clientId= 3340&RQT=309&VName=PQD Blumenstein, L., Fridell, L., & Jones, S. (2012). The link between traditional police sub-culture and police intimate partner violence. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 35(1), 147–164. http://doi.org/10.1108/13639511211215496 Box, S. (1983). Power, crime, and mystification. London: Routledge. Breiman, L., Friedman, J. H., Olshen, R. A., & Stone, C. J. (1984). Classification and regression trees. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Carlson, M. (2007). Order versus access: News search engines and the challenge to traditional journalistic roles. Media, Culture & Society, 29(6), 1014–1030. http://doi.org/10.1177/0163443707084346 Carter, D. L. (1990a). An overview of drug-related misconduct of police officers: Drug abuse and narcotic corruption. In Drugs, crime, and the criminal justice system (pp. 79–109). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson. Carter, D. L. (1990b). Drug-related corruption of police officers: A contemporary typology. Journal of Criminal Justice, 18(2), 85–98. http://doi.org/10.1016/0047-2352(90)90028-A Carter, D. L., & Stephens, D. W. (1994). An overview of issues concerning police officer drug use. In T. Barker & D. L. Carter (Eds.), Police deviance (3rd ed., pp. 101–122). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 213 Castaneda, R. (2008, December 17). DUI arrest is officer’s 4th this year: Prince George’s lieutenant allegedly asleep behind the wheel. Washington Post, p. B1. Cheh, M. M. (1996). Are lawsuits an answer to police brutality? In W. A. Geller & H. Toch (Eds.), Police violence: Understanding and controlling police abuse of force (pp. 247– 272). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Chermak, S. M., McGarrell, E., & Gruenewald, J. (2006). Media coverage of police misconduct and attitudes toward police. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 29(2), 261–281. http://doi.org/10.1108/13639510610667664 Chou, S. P., Dawson, D. A., Stinson, F. S., Huang, B., Pickering, R. P., Zhou, Y., & Grant, B. F. (2006). The prevalence of drinking and driving in the United States, 2001–2002: Results from the national epidemiological survey on alcohol and related conditions. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 83(2), 137–146. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2005.11.001 Christopher Commission. (1991). Report of the Independent Commission on the Los Angeles Police Department. Los Angeles, CA: City of Los Angeles. Collins, A. (1998). Shielded from justice: Police brutality and accountability in the United States. New York, NY: Human Rights Watch. Commission to Combat Police Corruption. (1998a). The New York City Police Department’s disciplinary system: How the department disciplines its members who engage in serious off-duty misconduct. New York: The City of New York. Commission to Combat Police Corruption. (1998b). Third annual report to the Commission. New York, NY: The City of New York. Commission to Combat Police Corruption. (2001a). Fifth annual report of the Commission. New York: The City of New York. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 214 Commission to Combat Police Corruption. (2001b). Sixth annual report of the Commission. New York: The City of New York. Commission to Combat Police Corruption. (2004). Seventh annual report of the Commission. New York, NY: The City of New York. Commission to Combat Police Corruption. (2009). Eleventh annual report to the Commission. New York, NY: The City of New York. Commission to Combat Police Corruption. (2010). Twelth annual report of the Commission. New York: The City of New York. Davis, A. C. (2008, December 20). Officer TASERed in one of four DUI incidents: Prosecutors dropped some charges. Washington Post, p. B3. De’ath, G., & Fabricius, K. E. (2000). Classification and regression trees: A powerful yet simple technique for ecological data analysis. Ecology, 81(11), 3178–3192. http://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9658(2000)081[3178:CARTAP]2.0.CO;2 Denno, D. W. (1993). Perspectives on disclosing rape victims’ names. Fordham Law Review, 61(5), 1113–1131. Dension, D. G. T., Mallick, B. K., & Smith, A. F. M. (1998). A Bayesian CART algorithm. Biometrika, 85(2), 363–377. http://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/85.2.363 Dietrich, J. F., & Smith, J. (1986). The nonmedical use of drugs including alcohol among police personnel: A critical literature review. Journal of Police Science and Administration, 14(4), 300–306. Dishlacoff, L. (1976). The drinking cop. Police Chief, 43(1), 32–39. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 215 Dolan, M. C., & Doyle, M. (2000). Violence risk prediction: Clinical and actuarial measures and the role of the Psychopathy Checklist. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 177(4), 303– 311. http://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.177.4.303 Fazlollah, M. (2001, March 25). How a top cop drank, drove, crashed and covered it up. The Philadelphia Inquirer, p. A1. Philadelphia, PA. Fazlollah, M. (2003, November 4). Captain involved in flap to head to 8th district. The Philadelphia Inquirer. Philadelphia, PA. Fennell, M. L., Rodin, M. B., & Kantor, G. K. (1981). Problems in the work setting, drinking, and reasons for drinking. Social Forces, 60(1), 114–132. Fishman, J. E. (1978). Measuring police corruption. [Monograph]. New York: John Jay College of Criminal Justice, Criminal Justice Center. Foster, G. P. (1966). Police administration and the control of police criminality: A case study approach. University of Southern California, Los Angeles. Retrieved from http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=757948991&sid=1&Fmt=1&clientId=63512&RQT =309&VName=PQD Frank, J., Novak, K. J., & Smith, B. W. (2001). Street-level policing in Cincinnati: The content of community and traditional policing and the perceptions of policing audiences (No. NCJ No. 194131) (p. 236). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice. Fyfe, J. J. (1980). Always prepared: Police off-duty guns. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 452, 72–81. http://doi.org/10.1177/000271628045200108 Fyfe, J. J. (1981). Observations on police deadly force. Crime & Delinquency, 27, 376–389. http://doi.org/10.1177/001112878102700305 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 216 Fyfe, J. J. (1987). Police shooting: Environment and license. In Controversial issues in crime and justice (pp. 79–94). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Fyfe, J. J. (1988). Police use of deadly force: Research and reform. Justice Quarterly, 5(2), 165– 205. http://doi.org/10.1080/07418828800089691 Fyfe, J. J., & Kane, R. J. (2006). Bad cops: A study of career-ending misconduct among New York City police officers. (NCJ No. 215795). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice. Garner, J. H., Maxwell, C. D., & Heraux, C. J. (2002). Characteristics associated with the prevalence and severity of force used by the police. Justice Quarterly, 19(4), 705–746. http://doi.org/10.1080/07418820200095401 Garrity v. New Jersey, 385 U.S. 493 (1967). Gershon, R. (2000). Project shields: Final Report (No. NCJ 185892). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/185892.pdf Gorta, A. (2009). Illegal drug use by police officers: Using research and investigations to inform prevention strategies. International Journal of Police Science & Management, 11(1), 85– 96. http://doi.org/10.1350/ijps.2009.11.1.112 Greene-Forsythe, C. L. (2000). Precursors of physical domestic violence in police families: Lessons from intensive psychotherapy of participants and investigating officers. In D. C. Sheehan (Ed.), Domestic violence by police officers: A compilation of papers submitted to the Domestic Violence by Police Officers Conference at the FBI Academy, Quantico, VA (pp. 163–180). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 217 Greene, J. R., Piquero, A. R., Hickman, M. J., & Lawton, B. A. (2004). Police integrity and accountability in Philadelphia: Predicting and assessing police misconduct. (NCJ No. 207823). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice. Griffin, S. P., & Bernard, T. J. (2003). Angry aggression among police officers. Police Quarterly, 6(1), 3–21. http://doi.org/10.1177/1098611102250365 Harris, C. J. (2009). Exploring the relationship between experience and problem behaviors: A longitudinal analysis of officers from a large cohort. Police Quarterly, 12(2), 192–213. http://doi.org/1098611108327314v1 Harris, C. J. (2011a). Problem behaviors in later portions of officers’ careers. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 34(1), 135–152. http://doi.org/10.1108/13639511111106650 Harris, C. J. (2011b). The relationship between career pathways of internal and citizen complaints. Police Quarterly, 14(2), 142–165. http://doi.org/10.1177/1098611111404141 Harris, C. J. (2012). The residual career patterns of police misconduct. Journal of Criminal Justice, 40(4), 323–332. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2012.06.010 Harris, D. A. (1997). Driving while black and all other traffic offenses: The Supreme Court and pretextual traffic stops. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 87(2), 544–582. Harris, D. A. (1999). The stories, the statistics, and the law: Why “driving while black” matters. University of Minnesota Law Review, 84(2), 265–326. Hayes, A. F., & Krippendorff, K. (2007). Answering the call for a standard reliability measure for coding data. Communication Methods and Measures, 1(1), 77–89. http://doi.org/10.1080/19312450709336664 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 218 Hingson, R., Mangione, T., & Barrett, J. (1981). Job characteristics and drinking practices in the Boston metropolitan area. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 42(9), 725–738. Hurrell, Jr., J. J., Pate, A., Kliesmet, R., Bowers, R. A., Lee, S., & Burg, J. A. (1984). Stress among police officers. Cincinnati, OH: US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Division of Biomedical and Behavioral Science. International Association of Chiefs of Police. (2003). Discussion paper on IACP’s police on domestic violence by police officers: A product of the IACP Police Response to Violence Against Women Project. Alexandria, VA: International Association of Chiefs of Police. Retrieved from http://www.theiacp.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=NzsLwlSvR2g%3d&tabid=87 Johnson, L. B. (1991). On the Front Lines: Police Stress and Family Well-Being. In Hearings before the Select Committee on Children, Youth, Families, House of Representatives, 102 Congress, First Session (pp. 32–48). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Johnson, L. B., Todd, M., & Subramanian, G. (2005). Violence in police families: Work-family spillover. Journal of Family Violence, 20(1), 3–12. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-0051504-4 Jupp, V. R., Davies, P., & Francis, P. (1999). The features of invisible crime. In Invisible crimes: Their victims and their regulation (pp. 1–28). London: Macmillan. Kane, R. J. (2007). Collect and release data on coercive police actions. Criminology & Public Policy, 6(4), 773–780. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2007.00485.x This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 219 Kane, R. J., & White, M. D. (2009). Bad cops: a study of career-ending misconduct among New York City police officers. Criminology & Public Policy, 8(4), 737–769. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2009.00591.x Kane, R. J., & White, M. D. (2013). Jammed up: Bad cops, police misconduct, and the New York City Police Department. New York, NY: New York University Press. Kappeler, V. E., Sluder, R. D., & Alpert, G. P. (1998). Forces of deviance: Understanding the dark side of policing. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press. Kass, G. V. (1980). An exploratory technique for investigating large quantities of categorical data. Applied Statistics, 29(2), 119–127. Klockars, C. B. (1996). A theory of excessive force and its control. In W. A. Geller & H. Toch (Eds.), Police violence: Understanding and controlling police abuse of force (pp. 1–22). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Klockars, C. B., Kutnjak Ivkovic, S., & Haberfield, M. R. (2006). Enhancing police integrity. New York, NY: Springer. Klockars, C. B., Kutnjak Ivkovic, S., Harver, W. E., & Haberfield, M. R. (1997). Measurement of police integrity, final report. (NCJ No. 171654). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice. Klockars, C. B., Kutnjak Ivkovic, S., Harver, W. E., & Haberfield, M. R. (2000). The measurement of police integrity (No. NCJ 181465). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice. Knapp Commission. (1972). Commission to Investigate Allegations of Police Corruption and the City’s Anti-Corruption Procedures: The Knapp Commission report on police corruption (p. 283). New York, NY: George Braziller. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 220 Kohan, A., & O’Connor, B. P. (2002). Police officer job satisfaction in relation to mood, wellbeing, and alcohol consumption. Journal of Psychology, 136(3), 307–319. http://doi.org/10.1080/00223980209604158 Kraska, P. B., & Kappeler, V. E. (1988). Police on-duty drug use: A Theoretical and descriptive examination. American Journal of Police, 7(1), 1–28. Kraska, P. B., & Kappeler, V. E. (1995). To serve and pursue: Exploring police sexual violence against women. Justice Quarterly, 12(1), 85–111. http://doi.org/10.1080/07418829500092581 Krippendorff, K. (2013). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage. Kutnjak Ivkovic, S. (2003). To serve and collect: Measuring police corruption. The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 93(2-3), 593–650. Kutnjak Ivkovic, S. (2005). Fallen blue knights: Controlling police corruption. New York: Oxford University Press. LaFree, G. (1989). Rape and criminal justice: The social construction of sexual assault. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. LaFree, G., & Dugan, L. (2007). Introducing the Global Terrorism Database. Terrorism and Political Violence, 19, 181–204. http://doi.org/10.1080/09546550701246817 Lautenberg Amendment. Gun Ban for Individuals Convicted of a Misdemeanor Crime of Domestic Violence, Pub. L. No. P.L. 104-208, §658 (1996). Lawrence, R. C. (2000). The politics of force: Media and the construction of police brutality. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 221 Leino, T., Eskelinen, K., Summala, H., & Virtanen, M. (2011). Work-related violence, debriefing and increased alcohol consumption among police officers. International Journal of Police Science & Management, 13(2), 149–157. http://doi.org/10.1350/ijps.2011.13.2.229 Lersch, K. M., & Feagin, J. R. (1996). Violent police-citizen encounters: An analysis of major newspaper accounts. Critical Sociology, 22(2), 29–49. http://doi.org/10.1177/089692059602200202 Lersch, K. M., & Mieczkowski, T. (2005a). Drug testing sworn law enforcement officers: One agency’s experience. Journal of Criminal Justice, 33(3), 289–297. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2005.02.008 Lersch, K. M., & Mieczkowski, T. (2005b). Violent police behavior: Past, present, and future research directions. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 10(5), 552–568. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2004.10.002 Liederbach, J. (2005). Addressing the “elephant in the living room”: An observational study of the work of suburban police. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 28(3), 415–434. http://doi.org/10.1108/13639510510614537 Liederbach, J., Boyd, L. M., Taylor, R. W., & Kawucha, S. K. (2007). Is it an inside job? An examination of internal affairs complaint investigation files and the production of nonsustained findings. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 18, 353–377. http://doi.org/10.1177/0887403407303799 Liederbach, J., & Frank, J. (2003). Policing Mayberry: The work routines of small-town and rural officers. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 28(1), 53–72. http://doi.org/10.1007/BF02885752 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 222 Lindsay, V., & Shelley, K. (2009). Social and stress-related influences of police officers’ alcohol consumption. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 24, 87–92. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-009-9048-9 Lonsway, K. A., & Harrington, P. (2003). Model policy for officer domestic violence. Law & Order, 51(10), 141–149. Los Angeles Police Department. (2000). Board of inquiry into the Rampart area corruption incident, public report. Los Angeles, CA: City of Los Angeles. Retrieved from http://www.lapdonline.org/assets/pdf/boi_pub.pdf Lundman, R. J., & Fox, J. C. (1978). Maintaining research access in police organizations. Criminology, 16(1), 87–98. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1978.tb01402.x Lundman, R. J., & Fox, J. C. (1979). Lundman and Fox reply to Bell. Criminology, 17(1), 119– 126. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1979.tb01280.x Macdonald, S., Wells, S., & Wild, T. C. (1999). Occupational risk factors associated with alcohol and drug problems. The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 25(2), 351–369. http://doi.org/10.1081/ADA-100101865 Maguire, E. R., & Mastrofski, S. D. (2000). Patterns of community policing in the United States. Police Quarterly, 3(1), 4–45. http://doi.org/10.1177/1098611100003001001 Maguire, E. R., & Uchida, C. D. (2000). Measurement and explanation in the comparative study of American police organizations. In Measurement and analysis of crime and justice (pp. 491–557). (NCJ No. 182411). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice. Retrieved from http://www.ncjrs.gov/criminal_justice2000/vol4/04j.pdf This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 223 Maher, T. M. (2003). Police sexual misconduct: Officers’ perceptions of its extent and causality. Criminal Justice Review, 28(2), 355–381. http://doi.org/10.1177/073401680302800209 Maher, T. M. (2008). Police chiefs’ views on police sexual misconduct. Police Practice and Research, 9(3), 239–250. http://doi.org/10.1080/15614260701797504 Manzoni, P., & Eisner, M. (2006). Violence between the police and the public: Influences of work-related stress, job satisfaction, burnout, and situational factors. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 33(5), 613–645. http://doi.org/10.1177/0093854806288039 Mastrofski, S. D., Parks, R. B., Reiss, A. J., Worden, R. E., DeJong, C., Snipes, J. B., & Terrill, W. (1998). Systematic observation of public police: Applying field research methods to policy issues. (NCJ No. 172859). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice. McGhee, T. (2011, October 27). Denver police chief proposes double-check on DUI stops of public officials. The Denver Post. Menard, S. (2002). Applied logistic regression analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Menard, S. (2010). Logistic regression: From introductory to advanced concepts and applications. Los Angeles, CA: Sage. Mieczkowski, T. (2002). Drug abuse, corruption, and officer drug testing: An overview. In K. M. Lersch (Ed.), Policing and misconduct (pp. 157–192). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Mieczkowski, T., & Lersch, K. M. (2002). Drug-testing police officers and police recruits: The outcome of urinalysis and hair analysis compared. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 25(3), 581–601. http://doi.org/10.1108/13639510210437041 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 224 Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). Mollen Commission. (1994). Commission to Investigate Allegations of Police Corruption and the Anti-Corruption Procedures of the Police Department: Commission report: Anatomy of failure: A path for success. New York, NY: The City of New York. Mullins, W. C., & McMains, M. J. (2000). Impact of traumatic stress on domestic violence in policing. In Domestic violence by police officers: A compilation of papers submitted to the Domestic Violence by Police Officers Conference at the FBI Academy, Quantico, VA (pp. 257–268). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. National Center for Women & Policing. (2005). Police family violence fact sheet. Beverly Hills, CA: National Center for Women & Policing. Retrieved from http://womenandpolicing.com/violenceFS.asp National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. (2008). Alcohol and other drugs (Alcohol Alert No. Alcohol Alert No. 76). Bethesda, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. Retrieved from http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/AA76/AA76.htm Neidig, P. H., Russell, H. E., & Seng, A. F. (1992). Interspousal aggression in law enforcement families: A preliminary investigation. Police Studies: The International Review of Police Development, 15(1), 30–38. Neidig, P. H., Seng, A. F., & Russell, H. E. (1992). Interspousal aggression in law enforcement personnel attending the FOP biennial conference. National FOP Journal, 25–28. Paddock, B., & Lesser, B. (2010, March 7). NYPD cops drive drunk, but no one puts on brakes: Even after messy crashes, police are still on job. New York Daily News. Retrieved from This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 225 http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/nypd-cops-drive-drunk-puts-brakes-messycrashes-police-job-article-1.176249 Payne, B. K. (2013). White-collar crime: The essentials. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Pennsylvania Crime Commission. (1974). Report on police corruption and the quality of law enforcement in Philadelphia. Saint Davids, PA: Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania Crime Commission. Punch, M. (2000). Police corruption and its prevention. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 8(3), 301–324. Rabe-Hemp, C. E., & Braithwaite, J. (2013). An exploration of recidivism and the officer shuffle in police sexual violence. Police Quarterly, 16(2), 127–147. http://doi.org/10.1177/1098611112464964 Ready, J., White, M. D., & Fisher, C. (2008). Shock value: A comparative analysis of news reports and official records on TASER deployments. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 31(1), 148–170. http://doi.org/10.1108/13639510810852620 Reaves, B. A. (2012). Hiring and retention of state and local law enforcement officers, 2008 Statistical tables (No. NCJ 238251). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Reiss, A. J. (1971). The police and the public. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Riffe, D., Lacy, S., & Fico, F. G. (2005). Analyzing media messages: Using quantitative content analysis in research (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Rokach, L., & Maimon, O. (2005). Decision trees. In O. Maimon & L. Rokach (Eds.), Data mining and knowledge discovery handbook (pp. 165–192). New York, NY: Springer. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 226 Ross, J. I. (2000). Making News of Police Violence: A Comparative Study of Toronto and New York City. Westport, CT: Praeger. Ross, J. I. (2001). Police crime & democracy: Demystifying the concept, research, and presenting a taxonomy. In Policing, security and democracy: Special aspects of democratic policing (pp. 177–200). Huntsville, TX: Office of International Criminal Justice. Sapp, A. D. (1994). Sexual misconduct by police officers. In T. Barker & D. L. Carter (Eds.), Police deviance (pp. 187–199). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson. Sechrest, D. K., & Burns, P. (1992). Police Corruption: The Miami case. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 19(3), 294–313. http://doi.org/10.1177/0093854892019003006 Sgambelluri, R. (2000). Police culture, police training, and police administration: Their impact on violence in police families. In Domestic violence by police officers: A compilation of papers submitted to the Domestic Violence by Police Officers Conference at the FBI Academy, Quantico, VA (pp. 309–322). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Sherman, L. W. (1974). Police corruption: A sociological perspective. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books. Sherman, L. W. (1978). Scandal and reform: Controlling police corruption. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Sherman, L. W. (1980). Perspectives on police and violence. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 452, 1–12. Sherman, L. W., & Langworthy, R. H. (1979). Measuring homicide by police officers. The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 70(4), 546–560. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 227 Shernock, S. K. (1995). Police solidarity. In W. G. Bailey (Ed.), The encyclopedia of police science (2nd ed., pp. 619–623). New York, NY: Garland. Shults, R. A., Beck, L. F., & Dellinger, A. M. (2011). Self-reported alcohol-impaired driving among adults in the United States, 2006 and 2008. Injury Prevention, 16(Supplement 1), A72–A73. http://doi.org/10.1136/ip.2010.029215.264 Skogan, W., & Frydl, K. (2004). Fairness and effectiveness in policing: The evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Skolnick, J. H. (1994). Justice without trial: Law enforcement in democratic society. New York: Macmillan. Smalley, S. (2006, July 30). 75 officers failed city drug tests: Cocaine use most prevalent, raising concern. Boston Globe, p. A1. Boston. Sonquist, J. A. (1970). Multivariate model building: The validation of a search strategy. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, Institute for Social Research, Survey Research Center. Stinson, P. M. (2009). Police crime: A newsmaking criminology study of sworn law enforcement officers arrested, 2005-2007. Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Indiana, PA. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/2069/207 Stinson, P. M., Brewer, S. L., Mathna, B. E., Liederbach, J., & Englebrecht, C. M. (2014). Police sexual misconduct: Arrested officers and their victims. Victims & Offenders, 10, 117– 151. http://doi.org/10.1080/15564886.2014.939798 Stinson, P. M., & Liederbach, J. (2013). Fox in the henhouse: A study of police officers arrested for crimes associated with domestic and/or family violence. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 24, 601–625. http://doi.org/10.1177/0887403412453837 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 228 Stinson, P. M., Liederbach, J., Brewer, S. L., & Mathna, B. E. (2014). Police sexual misconduct: A national scale study of arrested officers. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 26, 665–690. http://doi.org/10.1177/0887403414526231 Stinson, P. M., Liederbach, J., Brewer, S. L., Schmalzried, H. D., Mathna, B. E., & Long, K. L. (2013). A study of drug-related police corruption arrests. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 36(3), 491–511. http://doi.org/10.1108/PIJPSM-06-2012-0051 Stinson, P. M., Liederbach, J., Brewer, S. L., & Todak, N. E. (2014). Drink, drive, go to jail? A study of police officers arrested for drunk driving. Journal of Crime and Justice, 37(3), 356–376. http://doi.org/10.1080/0735648X.2013.805158 Stinson, P. M., Liederbach, J., & Freiburger, T. L. (2010). Exit strategy: An exploration of latestage police crime. Police Quarterly, 13(4), 413–435. http://doi.org/10.1177/1098611110384086 Stinson, P. M., Liederbach, J., & Freiburger, T. L. (2012). Off-duty and under arrest: A study of crimes perpetuated by off-duty police. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 23, 139–163. http://doi.org/10.1177/0887403410390510 Stinson, P. M., Reyns, B. W., & Liederbach, J. (2012). Police crime and less-than-lethal coercive force: A description of the criminal misuse of TASERs. International Journal of Police Science & Management, 14(1), 1–19. http://doi.org/10.1350/ijps.2012.14.1.237 Stinson, P. M., Todak, N. E., & Dodge, M. (2013). An exploration of crime by policewomen. Police Practice and Research. http://doi.org/10.1080/15614263.2013.846222 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 229 Stinson, P. M., Todak, N. E., & Dodge, M. (2015). An exploration of crime by policewomen. Police Practice and Research, 16(1), 79–93. http://doi.org/10.1080/15614263.2013.846222 Stinson, P. M., & Watkins, A. M. (2014). The nature of crime by school resource officers: Implications for SRO programs. Sage Open, 4(1), 1–10. http://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014521821 Stoddard, E. R. (1968). The informal code of police deviancy: A group approach to blue-coat crime. The Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology and Police Science, 59(2), 201–213. Swatt, M. L., Gibson, C. L., & Piquero, N. L. (2007). Exploring the utility of general strain theory in explaining problematic alcohol consumption by police officers. Journal of Criminal Justice, 35, 596–611. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2007.09.005 Terrill, W. (2003). Police use of force and suspect resistance: The micro process of the policesuspect encounter. Police Quarterly, 6(1), 51–83. http://doi.org/10.1177/1098611102250584 Terrill, W., & Mastrofski, S. D. (2002). Situational and officer-based determinants of police coercion. Justice Quarterly, 19(2), 215–248. http://doi.org/10.1080/07418820200095221 Terrill, W., Paoline, E. A., & Manning, P. K. (2003). Police culture and coercion. Criminology, 41(4), 1003–1034. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2003.tb01012.x Terrill, W., & Reisig, M. D. (2003). Neighborhood context and police use of force. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 40(3), 291–321. http://doi.org/10.1177/0022427803253800 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 230 U.S. Department of Agriculture. (2003). Measuring rurality: Rural-urban continuum codes. [Computer file]. Washington. DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. Retrieved from http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/rurality/ruralurbcon/ U.S. Department of Justice. (2000). National Incident-Based Reporting System: Data collection guidelines. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Criminal Justice Information Services Division. Retrieved from http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/nibrs/nibrs_dcguide.pdf/view U.S. Department of Justice. (2004). Uniform crime reporting handbook. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation. Retrieved from http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/additional-ucr-publications/ucr_handbook.pdf U.S. Department of Justice. (2008). Census of state and local enforcement agencies (CSLLEA). 2008 [ICPSR27681-v1 data set]. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2011-08-03. doi:10.3886/ICPSR27681.v1. U.S. General Accounting Office. (1998). Report to the Honorable Charles B. Rangel, House of Representatives: Law Enforcement: Information on drug-related police corruption. Washington, DC: U.S. General Accounting Office. Violanti, J. M., Marshall, J. R., & Howe, B. (1985). Stress, coping, and alcohol use: The police connection. Journal of Police Science and Administration, 13(2), 106–110. Violanti, J. M., Slaven, J. E., Charles, L. E., Burchfiel, C. M., Andrew, M. E., & Homish, G. G. (2011). Police and alcohol use: A descriptive analysis and associations with stress outcomes. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 36(4), 344–356. http://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-011-9121-7 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 231 Walker, S., & Irlbeck, D. (2002). Driving while female: A national problem in police misconduct. Omaha, NE: University of Nebraska at Omaha, Department of Criminal Justice, Police Professionalism Initiative. Retrieved from http://www.policeaccountability.org/drivingfemale.htm Walker, S., & Irlbeck, D. (2003). Police sexual abuse of teenage girls: A 2003 update on driving while female. Omaha, NE: University of Nebraska at Omaha, Department of Criminal Justice, Police Professionalism Initiative. Retrieved from internalpdf://PSA,%2520teenage%2520girls-1063221248/PSA,%2520teenage%2520girls.pdf Wetendorf, D. E. (2000). The impact of police-perpetuated domestic violence. In Domestic violence by police officers: A compilation of papers submitted to the Domestic Violence by Police Officers Conference at the FBI Academy, Quantico, VA (pp. 375–382). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. White, M. D., & Ready, J. (2009). Examining fatal and nonfatal incidents involving the TASER: Identifying predictors of suspect death reported in the media. Criminology & Public Policy, 8(4), 865–891. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2009.00600.x Wilkinson, L. (1992). Tree structured data analysis: AID, CHAID, and CART. Presented at the Sawtooth/SYSTAT Joint Software Conference, Sun Valley, ID. Wilson, J. Q. (1963). The police and their problems: A theory. Public Policy, 12, 189–216. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 232 DISSEMINATION OF RESEARCH FINDINGS Publications Journal Articles Stinson, P. M. (2015). Police crime: The criminal behavior of sworn law enforcement officers. Sociology Compass, 9(1), 1-13. doi:10.1111/soc4.12234 Stinson, P. M., Brewer, S. L., Mathna, B. E., Liederbach, J., & Englebrecht, C. M. (2014). Police sexual misconduct: Arrested officers and their victims. Victims & Offenders, 10(2), 117-151. doi:10.1080/15564886.2014.939798 Stinson, P. M., Liederbach, J., Brewer, S. L., Jr., & Mathna, B. E. (2014). Police sexual misconduct: A national scale study of arrested officers. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 26(7), 665-690. doi:10.1177/0887403414526231 Stinson, P. M., & Watkins, A. M. (2014). The nature of crime by school resource officers: Implications for SRO programs. Sage Open, 4(1), 1-10. doi:10.1177/2158244014521821 Stinson, P. M., Todak, N. E., & Dodge, M. (2013). An exploration of crime by policewomen. Police Practice and Research: An international journal, 16(1), 79-93. doi:10.1080/15614263.2013.846222 Stinson, P. M., Liederbach, J., Brewer, S. L., Jr., & Todak, N. E. (2013). Drink, drive, go to jail? A study of police officers arrested for drunk driving. Journal of Crime and Justice, 37(3), 356376. doi:10.1080/0735648X.2013.805158 Stinson, P. M., Liederbach, J., Brewer, S. L., Jr., Schmalzried, H. N., Mathna, B. E., & Long, K. L. (2013). A study of drug-related police corruption arrests. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 36(3), 491-511. doi:10.1108/PIJPSM-06-2012-0051 Stinson, P. M. & Liederbach, J. (2013). Fox in the henhouse: A study of police officers arrested for crimes associated with domestic and/or family violence. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 24, 601-625. doi:10.1177/0887403412453837 Non-refereed Articles Stinson, P. M. & Liederbach, J. (2013). Research-in-brief: Sex-related police misconduct. Police Chief, 80(8), 14-15. Stinson, P. M. & Liederbach, J. (2012). Research-in-brief: Misconduct by experienced police officers. Police Chief, 79(11), 12. Stinson, P. M. & Liederbach, J. (2012). Research-in-brief: Officer-involved domestic violence. Police Chief, 79(9), 14. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 233 Technical Reports Stinson, P. M., Calogeras, Z. J., DiChiro, N. L., & Hunter, R. K. (2015). California police sexual misconduct arrest cases, 2005-2011. Prepared for the California Research Bureau, California State Library, Sacramento, CA. Podcasts Stinson, P. M. (2015, December). Police shootings: Does video evidence matter? Police Integrity Lost (Audio podcast], Episode 27. Available at iTunes. Stinson, P. M. (2015, November). What we know about police crime. Police Integrity Lost (Audio podcast], Episode 26. Available at iTunes. Stinson, P. M. (2015, October). Violence by school resource officers. Police Integrity Lost (Audio podcast], Episode 25. Available at iTunes. Stinson, P. M. (2015, July). Police crime in America: Phil Stinson at Porcfest 2015. Police Integrity Lost [Audio podcast], Episode 24. Available at iTunes. Stinson, P. M. (2015, May). Police shootings in Albuquerque. Police Integrity Lost [Audio podcast], Episode 23. Available at iTunes. Stinson, P. M. (2015, January). Research on crimes committed by sworn police officers. Police Integrity Lost [Audio podcast], Episode 22. Available at iTunes. Stinson, P. M. (2014, December). Police crime: Grand juries, juries and conviction of officers. Police Integrity Lost [Audio podcast], Episode 21. Available at iTunes. Stinson, P. M. (2014, November). Constitutional torts, section 1983, and police misconduct: Presentation at 2014 ASC Conference. Police Integrity Lost [Audio podcast], Episode 20. Available at iTunes. Stinson, P. M. (2014, August). Gun-involved police crime arrests. Police Integrity Lost [Audio podcast], Episode 19. Available at iTunes. Stinson, P. M., & Brewer, S. L. (2014, February). Victims of police sexual misconduct: Presentation at 2014 ACJS conference. Police Integrity Lost [Audio podcast], Episode 18. Available at iTunes. Stinson, P. M. (2014, January). Research performance progress report for July-December 2013. Police Integrity Lost [Audio podcast], Episode 17. Available at iTunes. Stinson, P. M., & Watkins, A. M. (2013, December). Crime by school resource officers. Police Integrity Lost [Audio podcast], Episode 16. Available at iTunes. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 234 Stinson, P. M., & Brewer, S. L. (2013, November). Police integrity lost: Presentation at 2013 ASC conference. Police Integrity Lost [Audio podcast], Episode 15. Available at iTunes. Stinson, P. M., & Liederbach, J. (2013, October). Police sexual misconduct: Policy implications. Police Integrity Lost [Audio podcast], Episode 14. Available at iTunes. Stinson, P. M. (2013, August). Police Crime Research Findings. Police Integrity Lost [Audio podcast], Episode 13. Available at iTunes. Stinson, P. M. (2013, July). Research performance progress report for January-June 2013. Police Integrity Lost [Audio podcast], Episode 12. Available at iTunes. Stinson, P. M., & Liederbach, J. (2013, June). Police sexual misconduct arrests. Police Integrity Lost [Audio podcast], Episode 11. Available at iTunes. Stinson, P. M. (2013, May). Using a content management system: Police crime research methods part 3. Police Integrity Lost [Audio podcast], Episode 10. Available at iTunes. Stinson, P. M., Brewer, S. L., & Liederbach, J. (2013, April). Drunk driving cops. Police Integrity Lost [Audio podcast], Episode 9. Available at iTunes. Stinson, P. M., & Brewer, S. L. (2013, March). Using Google News for data collection: Police crime research methods part 2. Police Integrity Lost [Audio podcast], Episode 8. Available at iTunes. Stinson, P. M., & Brewer, S. L. (2013, February). Decision Tree Analysis: Police crime research methods part 1. Police Integrity Lost [Audio podcast], Episode 7. Available at iTunes. Stinson, P. M., & Liederbach, J. (2013, January). Late-stage police crime. Police Integrity Lost [Audio podcast], Episode 6. Available at iTunes. Stinson, P. M., & Todak, N. E. (2012, December). Crime by policewomen. Police Integrity Lost [Audio podcast], Episode 5. Available at iTunes. Stinson, P. M., & Liederbach, J. (2012, November). Police Criminal Misuse of TASERs. Police Integrity Lost [Audio podcast], Episode 4. Available at iTunes. Stinson, P. M., & Liederbach, J. (2012, October). Off-Duty police crime. Police Integrity Lost [Audio podcast], Episode 3. Available at iTunes. Stinson, P. M., & Liederbach, J. (2012, September). Officer-involved domestic violence. Police Integrity Lost [Audio podcast], Episode 2. Available at iTunes. Stinson, P. M., Liederbach, J., & Brewer, S. L. (2012, August). Police drug corruption. Police Integrity Lost [Audio podcast], Episode 1. Available at iTunes. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 235 Stinson, P. M. & Liederbach, J. (2012). Fox in the henhouse: A study of police officers arrested for crimes associated with domestic and/or family violence. Criminal Justice Policy Review [Audio podcast]. Available at: http://cjp.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/07/18/0887403412453837/suppl/DC1 Research Briefs Stinson, P. M., Liederbach, J., Brewer, S. L., & Todak, N. E. (2013). Officers arrested for drunk driving: Police Integrity Lost Research Brief One-Sheet, No. 6. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University. Available at: http://www.bgsu.edu/departments/dhs/crju/file129810.pdf Stinson, P. M., Reyns, B. W., & Liederbach, J. (2013). Police criminal misuse of conductive energy devices: Police Integrity Lost Research Brief One-Sheet, No. 5. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University. Available at: http://www.bgsu.edu/departments/dhs/crju/file129809.pdf Stinson, P. M., & Liederbach, J. (2012). Officer-involved domestic violence: Police Integrity Lost Research Brief One-Sheet, No. 4. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University. Available at: http://www.bgsu.edu/downloads/chhs/file118292.pdf Stinson, P. M., Liederbach, J., Brewer, S., Schmalzried, H., Mathna, B. E., & Long, K. (2012). Police drug corruption: What are the drugs of choice? Police Integrity Lost Research Brief OneSheet, No. 3. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University. Available at: http://www.bgsu.edu/downloads/chhs/file118291.pdf Stinson, P. M., Liederbach, J., & Freiburger, T. L. (2012). Off-duty crime by police officers: Police Integrity Lost Brief One-Sheet, No. 2. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University. Available at: http://www.bgsu.edu/downloads/chhs/file118290.pdf Stinson, P. M., Liederbach, J., & Freiburger, T. L. (2012). Late-stage police crime: Is it an exit Strategy? Police Integrity Lost Research Brief One-Sheet, No. 1. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University. Available at: http://www.bgsu.edu/downloads/chhs/file118289.pdf Presentations Stinson, P. M. (2015, November 4). Police crime: What we’ve learned and what we don’t know. Center for Family and Demographic Research, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, OH. Stinson, P. M. (2015, October 29). Police crime in the United States: From shootings to shoplifting. Owens Community College, Findlay, OH. Stinson, P. M. (2015, October 21). Use of data in research on police crime. Introduction to Data Science Seminar, Department of Mathematics & Statistics, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, OH. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 236 Ory, R. & Stinson, P. M. (2015, September 24). Intercoder reliability assessment of supplemental document coding in a quantitative content analysis study of police crime in the United States. Annual meeting of the Midwestern Criminal Justice Association, Chicago, IL. Stinson, P. M. (2015, June 27). Police integrity lost: Police crime in the United States. 12th Annual Porcupine Freedom Festival (“PorcFest”), Free State Project, Lancaster, NH. Buerger, M. E., & Stinson, P. M. (2015, March 16). Police misconduct & implicit bias research: Bridging the gap? Ohio Attorney General, Bureau of Criminal Investigation, Bowling Green, OH. Stinson, P. M., Brewer, S. L., & Bridges, J. (2015, March 5). Violence-related police crime arrests in the United States. Annual meeting of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences, Orlando, FL. Stinson, P. M., Brewer, S. L., Lanese, T., & Wilson, M. A. (2014, November 21). Federal civil rights litigation pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983 as a correlate of police misconduct. Annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, San Francisco, CA. Stinson, P. M., Carmack, E. J., Frankhouser, J. M., & Wilson, M. A. (2014, November 20). Police crime arrests in the United States, 2011. Annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, San Francisco, CA. Stinson, P.M., Brewer, S.L., Englebrecht, C.M., Liederbach, J., & Mathna, B.E. (2014, February 21). Police sexual misconduct: Arrested officers and their victims. Annual meeting of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences, Philadelphia, PA. Stinson, P. M. (2013, December 12). Police integrity lost: A study of law enforcement officers arrested: Lessons learned. Bowling Green State University, College of Health and Human Services, Colloquium. Stinson, P. M., Liederbach, J., Lab, S. P., & Brewer, S. L. (2013, November 21). Police integrity lost: A study of law enforcement officers arrested. Annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, Atlanta, GA. Stinson, P. M., Brewer, S. L., Englebrecht, C. M., Mathna, B. E., & Liederbach, J. (2013, November 21). Police sexual misconduct arrests: An exploratory CART analysis. Annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, Atlanta, GA. Stinson, P. M. (2013, July 30). Police integrity lost: Preliminary findings of a national study of law enforcement officers arrested. Conference on Police Misconduct sponsored by the APA Division on Psychologists in Public Service, Section on Police and Public Safety at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Honolulu, HI. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 237 Stinson, P. M., Liederbach, J., Brewer, S. L., Englebrecht, C. E., & Mathna, B. E. (2013, March 21). Police sexual misconduct arrests: An exploratory study. Annual meeting of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences, Dallas, TX. Stinson, P. M., Liederbach, J., Todak, E. N., & Brewer, S. L. (2012, November 15). Drunk driving cops: A study of police officers arrested for DUI, 2005-2010. Annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, Chicago, IL. Stinson, P. M., Liederbach, J., Brewer, S. L., Jr., Schmalzried, H. N., Mathna, B. E., & Long, K. L. (2012, November 15). CHAID analysis of drug-related police corruption arrests. Annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, Chicago, IL. Stinson, P. M. (2012, June 20). Police integrity lost: Preliminary findings from a study of law enforcement officers arrested, 2005-2011. 2012 National Institute of Justice (NIJ) Conference, Arlington, VA. Stinson, P. M., Liederbach, J., Schmalzried, H., Long, K. L., & Mathna, B. E. (2012, March 16). Officers’ drugs of abuse: A study of drug-related police crime. Annual meeting of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences, New York, NY. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 238 Table 1. Police Crime Arrest Cases, 2005-2011: Arrested Officers and Employing Agencies (N = 6,724) n (%) n (%) Sex Male Female 6,357 367 (94.5) (5.5) Age 19-23 24-27 28-31 32-35 36-39 40-43 44-47 48-51 52-55 56 or older Missing 136 603 886 967 1,081 885 614 343 178 170 861 (2.0) (9.0) (13.2) (14.4) (16.1) (13.2) (9.1) (5.1) (2.6) (2.5) (12.8) Years of Service 0-2 3-5 6-8 9-11 12-14 15-17 18-20 21-23 24-26 27 or more years Missing 756 954 666 622 507 409 387 194 129 156 1,944 (11.2) (14.2) (9.9) (9.3) (7.5) (6.1) (5.8) (2.9) (1.9) (2.3) (28.9) Arresting Agency Employing Agency Another Agency 2,277 4,447 (33.9) (66.1) Officer Duty Status On-Duty Off-Duty 2,793 3,931 (41.5) (58.5) Rank Officer Detective Corporal Sergeant Lieutenant Captain Major Colonel Deputy Chief Chief 5,095 369 123 581 177 63 12 4 49 251 (75.8) (5.5) (1.8) (8.7) (2.6) (0.9) (0.2) (0.1) (0.7) (3.7) Function Patrol & Street Level Line/Field Supervisor Management 5,464 881 379 (81.3) (13.1) (5.6) Region of United States Northeastern States Midwestern States Southern States Western States 1,430 1,380 2,906 1,008 (21.3) (20.5) (43.2) (15.0) Level of Rurality Metropolitan County Non-Metro County 5,711 1,013 (84.9) (15.1) n (%) Agency Type Primary State Police Sheriff's Office County Police Dept. Municipal Police Dept. Special Police Dept. Constable Tribal Police Dept. Regional Police Dept. 269 1,109 226 4,915 174 15 14 2 (4.0) (16.5) (3.4) (73.1) (2.6) (0.2) (0.2) (0.0) Full-Time Sworn Officers 0 1 2-4 5-9 10-24 25-49 50-99 100-249 250-499 500-999 1,000 or more 31 59 274 376 684 679 704 859 653 548 1,857 (0.4) (0.9) (4.1) (5.6) (10.2) (10.1) (10.5) (12.8) (9.7) (8.1) (27.6) Part-Time Sworn Officers 0 1 2-4 5-9 10-24 25-49 50-99 100-249 250-499 5,008 218 528 419 372 120 49 8 2 (74.5) (3.3) (7.9) (6.2) (5.5) (1.8) (0.7) (0.1) (0.0) This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 239 Table 2. Most Serious Offense Charged in Police Crime Arrest Cases, 2005-2011 (N = 6,724) n (%) Simple Assault Driving Under the Influence Aggravated Assault Forcible Fondling Forcible Rape Drug / Narcotic Violation All Other Larceny All Other Offenses Intimidation False Pretenses / Swindle Weapons Law Violation Official Misconduct / Oppression / Violation of Oath False Report / False Statement Murder / Nonnegligent Manslaughter Burglary / Breaking & Entering Robbery Theft from Building Statutory Rape Other Sex Crime Extortion / Blackmail Forcible Sodomy Obstructing Justice Pornography / Obscene Material Civil Rights Violation Bribery Embezzlement Disorderly Conduct Negligent Manslaughter Arson Counterfeiting/ Forgery Destruction of Property / Vandalism 877 841 572 352 322 308 274 265 255 218 143 139 129 125 112 109 103 100 98 95 94 93 86 84 80 79 67 62 57 51 46 (13.0) (12.5) (8.5) (5.2) (4.8) (4.6) (4.1) (3.9) (3.8) (3.2) (2.1) (2.1) (1.9) (1.9) (1.7) (1.6) (1.5) (1.5) (1.5) (1.4) (1.4) (1.4) (1.3) (1.2) (1.2) (1.2) (1.0) (0.9) (0.8) (0.8) (0.7) Online Solicitation of a Child Prostitution Stolen Property Offenses Indecent Exposure Kidnapping / Abduction Shoplifting Hit & Run Restraining Order Violation Impersonation Drunkenness Theft from Motor Vehicle Family Offenses, Nonviolent Liquor Law Violation Evidence: Destroying / Tampering Assisting or Promoting Prostitution Wire Fraud Sexual Assault with an Object Gambling: Operating / Promoting Credit Card Fraud / ATM Fraud Motor Vehicle Theft Trespass of Real Property Wiretapping, Illegal Incest Gambling: Betting / Wagering Theft of Motor Vehicle Parts or Accessories Peeping Tom Welfare Fraud Pocket-picking Theft from Coin-operated Machine Bad Checks Note . Table equals 99.9%. The last four categories collectively account for the missing 0.1%. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. n (%) 44 42 39 38 37 31 27 25 22 22 21 20 19 17 12 10 10 9 7 7 7 6 4 3 3 2 1 1 1 1 (0.7) (0.6) (0.6) (0.6) (0.6) (0.5) (0.4) (0.4) (0.3) (0.3) (0.3) (0.3) (0.3) (0.3) (0.2) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) 240 Table 3. Victim Characteristics in Police Crime Arrest Cases, 2005-2011 (N = 6,724) n (%) (Valid %) Victim's Sex Female Male Missing 2,246 1,422 3,056 (33.4) (21.2) (45.4) (61.2) (38.8) Victim's Age Birth-11 12-13 14-15 16-17 18-19 20-24 25-32 33-41 42 or older Missing 185 141 248 213 121 223 296 214 207 4,876 (2.7) (2.1) (3.7) (3.2) (1.8) (3.3) (4.4) (3.2) (3.1) (72.5) (10.0) (7.6) (13.4) (11.5) (6.6) (12.1) (16.0) (11.6) (11.2) n (%) (Valid %) Victim's Relationship Current Spouse Former Spouse Current Girlfriend or Boyfriend Former Girlfriend or Boyfriend Child or Stepchild Some Other Relative Unrelated Child Stranger or Acquaintance Missing 346 68 202 136 177 95 673 2,237 2,790 (5.1) (1.0) (3.0) (2.0) (2.7) (1.4) (10.0) (33.3) (41.5) (8.8) (1.7) (5.1) (3.5) (4.5) (2.4) (17.1) (56.9) Victim's Law Enforcement Status Victim is Not a Police Officer Victim is a Police Officer Missing 3,738 229 2,757 (55.6) (3.4) (41.0) (94.2) (5.8) Victim Adult or Child Adult Child Missing 3,051 939 2,734 (45.3) (14.0) (40.7) (76.5) (23.5) This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 241 Table 4. Chi-Square Predicting Conviction Variable Label Gender Rank FTSWORN cat State Urban to Rural Arresting Agency Aggravated Assault Simple Assault Intimidation Bribery Burglary Drug/Narcotic Embezzlement Extortion/Blackmail False Pretenses/Swindle Impersonation Wire Fraud Theft from Building Theft / all other larceny Pornography Robbery Forcible Rape Forcible Sodomy Forcible Fondling Statutory Rape Online Solicitation of a Child Stolen Property Offenses Weapons Law violation Criminal Civil Rights Violation Driving Under the Influence Evidence: Destroying/Tampering Family Offenses, Nonviolent Liquor Law violation Gender of Victim Variable V5 V7 V10 V11 V13 V14 V16 V17 V18 V19 V20 V23 V25 V26 V27 V29 V31 V43 V47 V49 V52 V53 V54 V56 V58 V60 V62 V63 V65 V67 V69 V71 V73 V81 N 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 2225 χ2 5.482 26.257 36.001 142.585 36.934 8.497 34.925 127.681 11.156 10.856 13.870 56.106 19.423 26.793 8.964 5.048 5.931 5.831 7.746 21.882 12.581 3.967 13.219 11.077 10.100 6.657 10.333 6.421 6.770 13.548 5.688 25.104 4.962 6.922 df 1 9 10 50 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 p .019 .002 .000 .000 .000 .004 .000 .000 .001 .001 .000 .000 .000 .000 .003 .025 .015 .016 .005 .000 .000 .046 .000 .001 .001 .010 .001 .011 .009 .000 .017 .000 .026 .009 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. V .037 .082 .096 .190 .097 .046 .094 .180 .053 .053 .059 .119 .070 .083 .048 .036 .039 .038 .044 .075 .057 .032 .058 .053 .051 .041 .051 .040 .041 .059 .038 .080 .036 .056 242 Age of Victim Is the Victim a Child? Victim's Relationship to Offender Internal vs. Organizational Drug-related Alcohol-related Sex-related Violence-related Profit-motivated Police Sexual Violence Driving While Female Encounter Officer was Reassigned Officer was Suspended Discussion of Agency Scandal/Coverup Citizen Complaint as Method of Detection DUI-related Traffic Accident Injuries in DUI-related Traffic Accident DUI in a Personally-owned Vehicle Off-Duty Intervened in Existing Dispute Family Violence Heroin Oxycodone Benzodiazepines Cocaine Crack Amphetamine/Methamphetamine Marijuana OIDV: Weapon: Gun dept-issued OIDV: Weapon: Hands / Fist OIDV: Weapon: Miscellaneous Objects OIDV: Verbal Threats / Violent Ultimatums OIDV: Gun was Confiscated OIDV: Confiscated Gun was Returned OIDV: Order of Protection Filed OIDV: Victim Injured, Nonfatal OIDV: Victim Injured, Fatal V83 V84 V85 V91 V93 V94 V95 V96 V97 V98 V99 V102 V104 V107 V108 V110 V111 V115 V125 V126 V129 V133 V137 V139 V140 V141 V148 V156 V164 V166 V167 V168 V169 V171 V173 V174 1186 2397 2374 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 110.509 34.675 114.234 20.205 64.029 3.794 41.888 72.332 82.610 14.144 4.130 13.688 28.227 4.408 18.048 20.021 13.864 15.255 5.234 84.832 8.206 8.108 3.833 40.311 7.553 5.265 12.971 4.004 90.491 8.456 12.370 7.587 15.729 12.261 97.134 4.710 1 1 7 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .005 .000 .000 .000 .000 .051 .000 .000 .000 .000 .042 .000 .000 .036 .000 .000 .000 .000 .022 .000 .004 .004 .050 .000 .006 .022 .000 .045 .000 .004 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .030 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. .305 .120 .219 .072 .128 .031 .103 .136 .145 .060 .032 .059 .085 .033 .068 .071 .059 .062 .036 .147 .046 .045 .031 .101 .044 .037 .057 .032 .152 .046 .056 .044 .063 .056 .157 .035 243 Most Serious Offense Charged Drugs: Personal Use / Using Drugs: Selling / Dealing / Trafficking Drugs: Sexually-motivated Drug Crime Drugs: Facilitating Drug Trade Drugs: Shakedowns from Street Dealers Drugs: Shakedowns from Warrantless Searches Drugs: Shakedowns from Legitimate Raids/Searches Drugs: Shakedowns from Car Stops & Drug Couriers Drugs: Shakedowns from Off-Duty Robberies Drugs: Theft from Evidence Room Drugs: Shakedown (Aggregate of V202 thru V207) Narcotics Stimulants Hallucinogens Cannabis Age Categorical Years of Service Categorical Geographic Region Geographic Division Victim Age Categorical V183 V196 V197 V199 V201 V202 V204 V205 V206 V207 V208 V210 Narcotics Stimulants Hallucinogens Cannabis AgeCategorical YearsServCat GeogRegion GeogDivision VictimAgeCat 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 3934 394.757 6.964 53.674 6.282 25.713 12.135 9.089 5.931 15.316 10.471 8.363 27.249 14.283 48.853 5.157 12.971 48.283 33.658 16.627 35.632 40.074 61 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 10 3 8 9 .000 .008 .000 .012 .000 .000 .003 .015 .000 .001 .004 .000 .000 .000 .023 .000 .000 .000 .001 .000 .000 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. .317 .042 .117 .040 .081 .056 .048 .039 .062 .052 .046 .083 .060 .111 .036 .057 .111 .092 .065 .095 .101 244 Table 5. Logistic Regression Model Predicting Conviction (N = 2,195) 95% CI for Exp(B) B SE Rank -0.097 Full-Time Sworn Personnel Categorical 0.025 Wald 15.141 p <.001 Exp(B) 0.908 LL UL 0.865 0.953 -0.061 0.020 8.987 .003 0.941 0.904 0.979 Child Victim 0.379 0.135 7.830 .005 1.461 1.120 1.905 Victim Relationship to Offender 0.074 0.028 7.111 .008 1.076 1.020 1.136 Alcohol-related Crime 0.463 0.162 8.178 .004 1.589 1.157 2.183 Sex-related Crime 0.792 0.128 38.390 <.001 2.208 1.719 2.837 Profit-motivated Crime 0.572 0.198 8.334 .004 1.772 1.202 2.612 Suspended -0.342 0.112 9.247 .002 0.710 0.570 0.886 DUI in a Personally-owned Vehicle 1.058 0.374 7.990 .005 2.880 1.383 5.998 OIDV: Weapon: Verbal Threat / Violent Ultimatum 0.566 0.255 4.925 .026 1.760 1.068 2.901 OIDV: Victim Injured, Nonfatal -0.491 0.184 7.152 .007 0.612 0.427 0.877 OIDV: Victim Injured, Fatal 2.068 0.629 10.794 .001 7.907 2.303 27.147 Most Serious Offense Charged 0.006 0.003 5.727 .017 1.006 1.001 1.011 Drug Shakedown 2.641 1.027 6.610 .010 14.024 1.873 104.991 Age Categorical 0.033 0.013 6.831 .009 1.034 1.008 1.060 Years of Service Categorical 0.034 0.009 14.985 <.001 1.035 1.017 1.053 - 2 Log Likelihood 2457.484 Model Chi-Square 299.873 Cox & Snell R Nagelkerke R ROC R AUC 2 2 2 <.001 .128 .179 95% CI for AUC .436 LL .718 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. UL .697 .740 245 Table 6. Chi-Square Predicting Job Loss Variable Label Age Years of Service Gender Duty Status Rank Type of Agency Fulltime Sworn Personnel State Parttime Sworn Personnel Urban to Rural Continuum Aggravated Assault Simple Assault Bribery Burglary Drug/Narcotic violation Drug Equipment violation Embezzlement Extortion False Pretenses/Swindle Wire Fraud Kidnapping/Abduction Theft from Building Theft / All Other Larceny Robbery Forcible Rape Forcible Sodomy Sexual Assault with an Object Forcible Fondling Statutory Rape Online Solicitation of a Child Other Sex Crime Stolen Property Offenses Criminal Civil Rights Violation Disorderly Conduct Variable V3 V4 V5 V6 V7 V9 V10 V11 V12 V13 V16 V17 V19 V20 V23 V24 V25 V26 V27 V31 V39 V43 V47 V52 V53 V54 V55 V56 V58 V60 V61 V62 V65 V66 N 5863 4780 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 χ2 77.984 69.760 11.162 207.332 50.971 40.599 112.921 220.807 65.610 105.161 14.486 126.794 46.927 13.198 78.436 3.841 14.052 22.444 7.341 16.759 21.085 13.043 36.182 24.813 51.500 13.908 6.851 111.539 25.744 6.775 60.635 18.218 40.001 35.365 df 56 43 1 1 9 7 10 50 8 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 p .028 .006 .001 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .050 .000 .000 .007 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 V .115 .121 .041 .176 .087 .078 .130 .181 .099 .125 .046 .137 .084 .044 .108 .024 .046 .058 .033 .050 .057 .044 .073 .061 .088 .045 .032 .129 .062 .032 .095 .052 .077 .073 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 246 Driving Under the Influence Drunkenness Evidence: Destroying/Tampering False Report / False Statement Family Offenses, Nonviolent Hit & Run Official Misconduct Gender of Victim Victim is a Police Officer Age of Victim Child Victim Victim Relationship to the Offender Organizational vs. Against Citizenry Internal vs. Organizational Official Capacity Drug-related Alcohol-related Sex-related Violence-related Profit-motivated Police Sexual Violence Driving While Female Encounter Officer was Reassigned Officer was Demoted Officer was Suspended Officer's Chief is Under Scrutiny DUI-related Traffic Accident Injuries in DUI-related Traffic Accident DUI in a Take-home Police Vehicle DUI in a Police Vehicle Out of Jurisdiction DUI in a Personally-Owned Vehicle DUI: Refused Field Sobriety Tests DUI: Refused BAC Test Off-Duty: Ordinance re On-Duty 24 Hours Off-Duty: Showed Police Weapon Off-Duty: Intervened in Existing Dispute V67 V68 V69 V70 V71 V72 V75 V81 V82 V83 V84 V85 V90 V91 V92 V93 V94 V95 V96 V97 V98 V99 V102 V103 V104 V106 V110 V111 V113 V114 V115 V116 V117 V118 V121 V125 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 223.713 6.544 6.992 4.776 7.468 5.191 41.620 13.138 5.541 111.533 41.756 173.685 84.564 74.138 213.535 91.325 181.978 246.197 5.439 162.689 120.585 63.373 111.394 11.856 178.976 4.045 68.821 15.669 4.246 4.277 127.325 21.562 27.880 14.671 17.053 4.690 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .000 .011 .008 .029 .006 .023 .000 .000 .000 .008 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .020 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .044 .000 .000 .039 .039 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .182 .031 .032 .027 .033 .028 .079 .060 .037 .247 .102 .210 .112 .105 .178 .117 .165 .191 .028 .156 .134 .097 .129 .042 .163 .025 .101 .048 .025 .025 .138 .057 .064 .047 .050 .026 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 247 Family Violence DUI: Officer Resisted Arrest DUI: In Possession of Firearm while DUI Heroin Hydrocodone Oxycodone Other Narcotics Benzodiazepines Cocaine Crack Amphetamine/Methamphetamine Marijuana OIDV: Weapon: Gun - Personally Owned OIDV: Weapon: Hands/Fist OIDV: Weapon: Miscellaneous Objects OIDV: Gun was Confiscated OIDV: Confiscated Gun was Later Returned OIDV: Order of Protection Files OIDV: Victim Injury: Nonfatal 42 USC 1981 Civil Defendant at Some Point 42 USC 1983 Civil Defendant at Some Point 42 USC 1985 Civil Defendant at Some Point 42 USC 1997 Civil Defendant at Some Point 28 USC 1441 Civil Action Removed Civil Rights Defendant - Aggregate 18 USC 242 Criminal Deprivation of Rights Most Serious Offense Charged Drugs: Using / Personal use Drugs: Selling / Dealing / Trafficking Drugs: Facilitating Drug Trade Drugs: Shakedowns from Street Dealers Drugs: Shakedowns from Radio Runs Drugs: Shakedowns from Legit Raids/Search Drugs: Shakedowns from Car Stops Drugs: Shakedowns from Off-Duty Robbery Drugs: Theft from Evidence Room V126 V127 V128 V129 V131 V133 V135 V137 V139 V140 V141 V148 V157 V164 V166 V168 V169 V171 V173 V175 V176 V177 V178 V179 V180 V181 V183 V196 V197 V201 V202 V203 V205 V206 V207 V208 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 121.166 6.174 7.087 21.896 14.659 20.173 9.726 7.020 24.365 6.594 9.954 27.796 4.191 60.566 13.953 9.579 5.859 5.811 38.573 4.963 18.643 7.043 5.469 17.956 19.365 63.724 752.849 15.137 60.761 49.058 11.463 4.809 6.345 19.536 11.829 28.799 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .000 .013 .008 .000 .000 .000 .002 .008 .000 .010 .002 .000 .041 .000 .000 .002 .015 .016 .000 .026 .000 .008 .019 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .001 .028 .012 .000 .001 .001 .134 .030 .032 .057 .047 .055 .038 .032 .060 .031 .038 .064 .025 .095 .046 .038 .030 .029 .076 .027 .053 .032 .029 .052 .054 .097 .335 .047 .095 .085 .041 .027 .031 .054 .042 .065 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 248 Drugs: Shakedowns - Aggregate Narcotics Depressants Stimulants Cannabis DUI in a Police Vehicle Age Categorical Years of Service Categorical Metro County versus Nonmetro County Geographic Region Geographic Division Rank Function Victim Age Categorical Victim Age Difference V210 Narcotics Depressants Stimulants Cannabis DUIPoliceVe AgeCat YearsServCat CountyDichot GeogRegion GeogDivision RankFunction VictimAgeCat VicAgeDiff 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 30.844 45.919 5.367 39.666 27.796 4.610 162.221 110.430 52.989 39.547 52.482 26.425 53.406 162.449 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 10 1 3 8 2 9 103 .001 .000 .021 .000 .000 .032 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .068 .083 .028 .077 .064 .026 .155 .128 .089 .077 .088 .063 .089 .155 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 249 Table 7. Logistic Regression Model Predicting Job Loss (N = 1,288) 95% CI for Exp(B) B SE Wald p Exp(B) LL UL Urban to Rural County Continuum (V13) 0.110 0.053 4.350 .037 1.116 1.007 1.237 Internal versus Organizational Crime (V91) 0.155 0.022 49.935 <.001 1.168 1.119 1.219 Alcohol-related Crime (V94) 0.431 0.173 6.204 .013 1.538 1.096 2.159 Sex-related Crime (V95) 0.857 0.150 32.577 <.001 2.356 1.755 3.162 Police Sexual Violence (V98) 0.548 0.213 6.621 .010 1.730 1.139 2.626 Officer was Reassigned (V102) -1.062 0.327 10.519 .001 0.346 0.182 0.657 Officer was Suspended (V104) -0.955 0.153 38.988 <.001 0.385 0.285 0.519 Family Violence (V126) -0.670 0.158 17.993 <.001 0.512 0.376 0.697 Marijuana (V148) -3.128 0.778 16.173 <.001 0.044 0.010 0.201 42 USC §1985 Civil Defendant at Some Point (V177) 1.251 0.485 6.670 .010 3.495 1.352 9.036 Geographic Division 0.053 0.026 4.286 .038 1.054 1.003 1.109 - 2 Log Likelihood 1502.588 Model Chi-Square 241.666 Cox & Snell R Nagelkerke R ROC R AUC 2 2 2 <.001 .171 .231 95% CI for AUC .276 LL .638 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. UL .625 .652 250 Table 8. Chi-Square Predicting Sex-Related Police Crime Arrests Variable Label Years of Service Gender Duty Status Rank Arson Aggravated Assault Simple Assault Bribery Burglary Counterfeiting Destruction of Property / Vandalism Drug / Narcotic Violation Embezzlement Extortion / Blackmail False Pretenses / Swindle Impersonation Murder & Nonnegligent Manslaughter Kidnapping / Abduction Shoplifting Theft from Building Theft from Motor Vehicle Theft / All Other Larceny Robbery Stolen Property Offenses Weapons Law violations Criminal Civil Rights violations Disorderly Conduct Drunkenness Evidence: Destroying / Tampering False Report / False Statement Hit & Run Obstruction of Justice Official Misconduct Peeping Tom Variable V4 V5 V6 V7 V15 V16 V17 V19 V20 V21 V22 V23 V25 V26 V27 V29 V36 V39 V42 V43 V46 V47 V52 V62 V63 V65 V66 V68 V69 V70 V72 V74 V75 V76 N 4780 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 χ2 79.685 87.851 16.704 25.566 8.698 71.524 150.617 44.045 7.159 16.887 27.393 115.283 33.883 4.816 68.565 6.878 31.126 142.166 8.980 33.304 6.446 71.221 27.327 24.250 67.587 4.322 17.537 10.320 3.975 68.564 32.100 11.470 56.537 7.163 df 43 1 1 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 p .001 .000 .000 .002 .003 .000 .000 .000 .007 .000 .000 .000 .000 .028 .000 .009 .000 .000 .003 .000 .011 .000 .000 .000 .000 .038 .000 .001 .046 .000 .000 .001 .000 .007 V .129 .114 .050 .062 .036 .103 .150 .081 .033 .050 .064 .131 .071 .027 .101 .032 .068 .145 .037 .070 .031 .103 .064 .060 .100 .025 .051 .039 .024 .101 .069 .041 .092 .033 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 251 Restraining Order violation Trespass of Real Property All Other Offenses Gender of Victim Victim is a Police Officer Age of Victim Victim is a Child Relationship of Victim to Offender Organizational vs. Against Citizenry Internal vs. Organizational Official Capacity Drug-related Alcohol-related Violence-related Profit-motivated Driving While Female Encounter Officer was Reassigned Discussion of Agency Scandal or Cover up Citizen Complaint as Method of Detection Off-Duty: 24-Hour Ordinance Off-Duty: Identified Self as Police Officer Off-Duty: Showed a Police Weapon Off-Duty: Flashed Badge Off-Duty: Conducted a Search Off-Duty: Made an Arrest Family Violence Heroin Hydrocodone Oxycodone Other Narcotics Benzodiazepines Cocaine Crack Amphetamine / Methamphetamine Marijuana Testosterone V77 V78 V80 V81 V82 V83 V84 V85 V90 V91 V92 V93 V94 V96 V97 V99 V102 V107 V108 V118 V119 V121 V122 V123 V124 V126 V129 V131 V133 V135 V137 V139 V140 V141 V148 V151 6724 6724 6724 3668 3967 1848 3990 3934 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 4.596 6.388 48.023 651.711 58.859 592.004 684.979 909.238 182.373 84.426 8.465 137.383 260.078 357.899 492.036 587.698 5.261 28.459 520.439 3.865 12.151 30.300 4.592 5.322 5.884 57.839 8.841 12.488 25.191 8.135 5.322 56.932 11.586 12.453 19.006 4.760 1 1 1 1 1 79 1 7 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .032 .011 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .004 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .022 .000 .000 .049 .000 .000 .032 .021 .015 .000 .003 .000 .000 .000 .021 .000 .001 .000 .000 .029 .026 .031 .085 .422 .122 .566 .414 .481 .165 .112 .035 .143 .197 .231 .271 .296 .028 .065 .278 .024 .043 .067 .026 .028 .030 .093 .036 .043 .061 .035 .028 .092 .042 .043 .053 .027 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 252 Other Anabolic Steroid OIDV: Weapon: Dept-issued Gun OIDV: Weapon: Personal Gun OIDV: Weapon: Hands/Fist OIDV: Weapon: Other Body parts OIDV: Weapon: Miscellaneous Objects OIDV: Verbal Threats & Violent Ultimatums OIDV: Gun was Confiscated OIDV: Article Mentions DV gun prohibition OIDV: Order of Protection Filed OIDV: Officer Violated Order of Protection OIDV: Victim Injured, Nonfatal OIDV: Victim Injured, Fatal 42 USC 1981 Civil Defendant at Some Point 42 USC 1983 Civil Defendant at Some Point 42 USC 1985 Civil Defendant at Some Point 28 USC 1441 Civil Rights Case Removed Federal Civil Rights Defendant - Aggregate 18 USC 242 Criminal Defendant at Some Pt Most Serious Offense Charged Drugs: Personal Use Drugs: Selling / Dealing / Trafficking Drugs: Forge Prescription Drugs: Sexually-motivated Drug Crime Drugs: Planting Evidence Drugs: Facilitating Drug Trade Drugs: Shakedowns from Street Dealers Drugs: Shakedowns from Radio Runs Drugs: Shakedowns from Warrantless Searches Drugs: Shakedowns from Legit Searches Drugs: Shakedowns from Car Stops Drugs: Shakedowns from Off-Duty Robberies Drugs: Theft from Evidence Room Drugs: Falsification Drugs: Shakedowns - Aggregate Narcotics V152 V156 V157 V164 V165 V166 V167 V168 V170 V171 V172 V173 V174 V175 V176 V177 V179 V180 V181 V183 V196 V197 V198 V199 V200 V201 V202 V203 V204 V205 V206 V207 V208 V209 V210 Narcotics 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 5.768 13.016 13.098 66.856 54.637 13.858 11.503 6.235 7.923 11.052 7.700 18.431 8.698 9.284 6.376 10.874 10.452 6.649 4.816 5322.861 57.821 74.521 9.262 80.884 9.262 49.301 21.184 4.479 19.472 9.262 16.340 9.827 16.909 15.340 49.007 44.270 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 63 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .016 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .001 .013 .005 .001 .006 .000 .003 .002 .012 .001 .001 .010 .028 .000 .000 .000 .002 .000 .002 .000 .000 .034 .000 .002 .000 .002 .000 .000 .000 .000 .029 .044 .044 .100 .090 .045 .041 .030 .034 .041 .034 .052 .036 .037 .031 .040 .039 .031 .027 .890 .093 .105 .037 .110 .037 .086 .056 .026 .054 .037 .049 .038 .050 .049 .085 .081 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 253 Depressants Stimulants Hallucinogens Cannabis Anabolic Steroids Age Categorical Years of Service Categorical Geographic Region Geographic Division Victim Age Categorical Victim Age Difference Depressants Stimulants Hallucinogens Cannabis AnabolicSter AgeCat YearsServCat GeogRegion GeogDivision VictimAgeCat VictimAgeDif 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 8.026 74.783 6.446 19.006 9.929 105.671 109.107 81.554 106.705 1494.957 1406.902 1 1 1 1 1 10 10 3 8 9 103 .005 .000 .011 .000 .002 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .035 .105 .031 .053 .038 .125 .127 .110 .126 .472 .457 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 254 Table 9. Logistic Regression Model Predicting Sex-related Cases (N = 1,809) 95% CI for Exp(B) B Duty Status (V6) Gender of Victim (V81) SE Wald p Exp(B) LL UL 0.451 0.191 5.580 .018 1.570 1.080 2.282 -3.476 0.189 338.398 <.001 0.031 0.021 0.045 Child Victim (V84) 1.895 0.199 90.357 <.001 6.654 4.502 9.835 Victim Relationship to Offender (V85) 0.342 0.076 20.302 <.001 1.407 1.213 1.633 Alcohol-related Crime (V94) -1.403 0.251 31.300 <.001 0.246 0.150 0.402 Profit-motivated Crime (V97) -2.175 0.624 12.156 <.001 0.114 0.033 0.386 Agency Scandal / Cover up (V107) -0.851 0.365 5.423 .020 0.427 0.209 0.874 1.981 0.224 78.517 <.001 7.247 4.676 11.230 Citizen Complaint as Method of Crime Detection (V108) Off-Duty: Identified Self as an Officer (V119) -1.114 0.412 7.308 .007 0.328 0.146 0.736 Family Violence (V126) -1.320 0.343 14.793 <.001 0.267 0.136 0.524 OIDV: Weapon: Hands/Fist (V164) -1.470 0.394 13.955 <.001 0.230 0.106 0.497 OIDV: Weapon: Miscellaneous Objects (V166) -3.012 0.879 11.737 .001 0.049 0.009 0.276 42 USC §1983 Civil Defendant at Some Point (V176) -0.724 0.184 15.493 <.001 0.485 0.338 0.695 0.055 0.006 72.946 <.001 1.056 1.043 1.069 Victim Age Difference - 2 Log Likelihood 1051.788 Model Chi-Square 1433.190 Cox & Snell R Nagelkerke R ROC R AUC 2 2 2 <.001 .547 .733 95% CI for AUC .878 LL .939 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. UL .931 .947 255 Table 10. Chi-Square Predicting Alcohol-related Police Crime Arrests Variable Label Age Duty Status Type of Agency FT Sworn Categorical State Arresting Agency Arson Simple Assault Intimidation Bribery Burglary Counterfeiting/Forgery Property Damage / Vandalism Drug / Narcotic Violation Embezzlement Extortion / Blackmail False Pretenses / Swindle Credit Card / ATM Fraud Impersonation Wire Fraud Kidnapping / Abduction Shoplifting Theft from Building Theft from Motor Vehicle Theft / All Other Larceny Pornography Prostitution Assisting or Promoting Prostitution Robbery Forcible Rape Forcible Sodomy Forcible Fondling Statutory Rape Indecent Exposure Variable V3 V6 V9 V10 V11 V14 V15 V17 V18 V19 V20 V21 V22 V23 V25 V26 V27 V28 V29 V31 V39 V42 V43 V45 V47 V49 V50 V51 V52 V53 V54 V56 V58 V59 N 5863 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 χ2 89.049 630.074 23.819 34.433 182.106 25.529 5.855 10.496 50.668 39.829 22.387 20.501 9.494 111.902 34.343 34.669 66.634 5.544 8.144 8.197 22.804 8.463 28.843 6.074 73.232 19.694 10.571 4.312 27.760 35.279 25.952 70.116 23.282 4.173 df 56 1 7 10 50 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 p .003 .000 .001 .000 .000 .000 .016 .001 .000 .000 .000 .000 .002 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .004 .004 .000 .004 .000 .014 .000 .000 .001 .038 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .041 V .123 .306 .060 .072 .165 .062 .030 .040 .087 .077 .058 .055 .038 .129 .071 .072 .100 .029 .035 .035 .058 .035 .065 .030 .104 .054 .040 .025 .064 .072 .062 .102 .059 .025 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 256 Online Solicitation of a Child Other Sex Crime Stolen Property Offenses Criminal Civil Rights violation Disorderly Conduct Evidence: Destroying / Tampering False Report / False Statement Hit & Run Obstruction of Justice Official Misconduct Restraining Order violation Gender of the Victim Victim is a Police Officer Age of Victim Victim is a Child Victim Relationship to the Offender Organizational vs. Against Citizenry Internal vs. Organizational Official Capacity Drug-related Sex-related Violence-related Profit-motivated Police Sexual Violence Driving While Female Encounter Officer was Reassigned to Another Position Officer was Demoted in Rank Officer was Suspended Discussion of Agency Scandal or Cover up Citizen Complaint as Method of Detection Off-Duty: 24-Hour Ordinance Off-Duty: Identified Self as Police Officer Off-Duty: In Police Uniform Off-Duty: Flashed Badge Family Violence Heroin V60 V61 V62 V65 V66 V69 V70 V72 V74 V75 V77 V81 V82 V83 V84 V85 V90 V91 V92 V93 V95 V96 V97 V98 V99 V102 V103 V104 V107 V108 V118 V119 V120 V122 V126 V129 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 3668 3967 1848 3990 3934 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 11.504 25.129 27.531 41.862 33.555 15.061 71.120 240.993 27.167 197.410 7.940 20.668 25.498 172.884 46.606 74.902 656.028 957.118 619.269 124.399 259.429 199.445 498.804 100.204 24.961 52.795 10.025 23.848 21.420 109.416 64.099 69.862 7.750 13.457 50.784 12.770 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 79 1 7 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .001 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .005 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .002 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .005 .000 .000 .000 .041 .061 .064 .079 .071 .047 .103 .189 .064 .171 .034 .075 .080 .306 .108 .138 .312 .377 .303 .136 .196 .172 .272 .122 .061 .089 .039 .060 .056 .128 .098 .102 .034 .045 .087 .044 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 257 Hydrocodone Oxycodone Cocaine Crack Amphetamine / Methamphetamine Marijuana Testosterone Other Anabolic Steroids OIDV: Weapon: Hands/Fist OIDV: Weapon: Miscellaneous Object OIDV: Verbal Threats or Violent Ultimatum OIDV: Gun was Confiscated OIDV: Order of Protection Filed OIDV: Officer Violated Order of Protection OIDV: Victim Injured: Nonfatal OIDV: Victim Injured: Fatal 42 U.S.C. 1983 Defendant at Some Point 42 U.S.C. 1985 Defendant at Some Point 42 U.S.C. 1997 Plaintiff is a Prisoner 28 U.S.C. 1441 Civil Rights Case Removed Federal Civil Rights Defendant - Aggregate 18 U.S.C. 242 Criminal Defendant Most Serious Offense Charged Drugs: Using / Personal Use Drugs: Selling / Dealing / Trafficking Drugs: Forged Prescription Drugs: Planting Evidence Drugs: Facilitating Drug Trade Drugs: Shakedowns from Street Dealers Drugs: Shakedowns from Radio Runs Drugs: Shakedowns from Warrantless Search Drugs: Shakedowns from Legit Search/Raids Drugs: Shakedowns from Car Stops / Couriers Drugs: Shakedowns from Off-Duty Robberies Drugs: Theft from Evidence Room Drugs: Falsification V131 V133 V139 V140 V141 V148 V151 V152 V164 V166 V167 V168 V171 V172 V173 V174 V176 V177 V178 V179 V180 V181 V183 V196 V197 V198 V200 V201 V202 V203 V204 V205 V206 V207 V208 V209 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 18.415 21.331 46.465 13.009 11.678 21.913 4.502 5.364 17.435 5.920 6.447 4.227 8.370 9.560 23.276 5.883 42.196 6.191 12.140 9.198 38.788 26.456 3906.421 25.808 80.031 8.760 8.760 46.626 20.035 4.236 18.415 8.760 15.454 9.294 13.542 15.454 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 63 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .034 .021 .000 .015 .011 .040 .004 .002 .000 .015 .000 .013 .000 .002 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .003 .003 .000 .000 .040 .000 .003 .000 .002 .000 .000 .052 .056 .083 .044 .042 .057 .026 .028 .051 .030 .031 .025 .035 .038 .059 .030 .079 .030 .042 .037 .076 .063 .762 .062 .109 .036 .036 .083 .055 .025 .052 .036 .048 .037 .045 .048 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 258 Drugs: Shakedowns - Aggregate Narcotics Stimulants Cannabis Anabolic Steroids Age Categorical Geographic Region Geographic Division Age of Victim Categorical Victim Age Difference V210 Narcotics Stimulants Cannabis AnabolicSter AgeCat GeogRegion GeogDivision VicAgeCat VicAgeDiff 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 46.348 46.079 65.383 21.913 9.292 43.280 31.558 40.663 102.029 144.561 1 1 1 1 1 10 3 8 9 103 .000 .000 .000 .000 .002 .000 .000 .000 .000 .004 .083 .083 .099 .057 .037 .080 .069 .078 .123 .147 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 259 Table 11. Logistic Regression Model Predicting Alcohol-related Arrest Cases (N = 3,248) 95% CI for Exp(B) B SE Wald p Exp(B) LL UL Duty Status (V6) -2.511 0.183 189.197 <.001 0.081 0.057 0.116 Child Victim (V84) -1.323 0.219 36.481 <.001 0.266 0.173 0.409 Victim Relationship to Offender (V85) 0.161 0.025 42.205 <.001 1.175 1.119 1.234 Organizational Crime versus Against Citizenry (V90) -1.339 0.245 29.768 <.001 0.262 0.162 0.424 Sex-related Crime (V95) -1.359 0.210 41.766 <.001 0.257 0.170 0.388 Violence-related Crime (V96) -0.352 0.163 4.656 .031 0.703 0.511 0.968 Police Sexual Violence (V98) 0.974 0.277 12.401 <.001 2.649 1.540 4.557 Suspended (V104) 0.458 0.131 12.246 <.001 1.581 1.223 2.044 Agency Scandal / Cover Up (V107) 0.780 0.254 9.420 .002 2.181 1.326 3.589 Citizen Complaint as Method of Crime Detection (V108) -0.339 0.140 5.882 .015 0.713 0.542 0.937 Off-Duty: In Uniform (V120) -2.421 1.040 5.421 .020 0.089 0.012 0.682 1.792 0.512 12.247 <.001 6.000 2.200 16.369 OIDV: Victim Injured, Fatal (V174) -2.073 1.032 4.037 .045 0.126 0.017 0.951 42 USC §1997 Civil Defendant at Some Point (V178) -0.626 0.307 4.162 .041 0.535 0.293 0.976 18 USC §242 Criminal Defendant at Some Point (V181) -1.253 0.574 4.768 .029 0.286 0.093 0.880 Most Serious Offense Charged (V183) 0.012 0.003 16.185 <.001 1.012 1.006 1.018 Victim Age Difference 0.018 0.005 14.298 <.001 1.018 1.009 1.028 Marijuana (V148) - 2 Log Likelihood 2102.385 Model Chi-Square 532.900 Cox & Snell R Nagelkerke R ROC R AUC 2 2 2 <.001 .151 .272 95% CI for AUC .604 LL .802 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. UL .781 .823 260 Table 12. Chi-Square Predicting Drug-related Police Crime Arrests Variable Label Age Duty Status Rank Fulltime Sworn Personnel Categorical State Arresting Agency Aggravated Assault Simple Assault Intimidation Burglary Counterfeiting/Forgery Extortion Murder & Nonnegligent Manslaughter Negligent Manslaughter Shoplifting Theft from Building Pornography Robbery Forcible Rape Forcible Sodomy Forcible Fondling Statutory Rape Indecent Exposure Online Solicitation of a Child Other Sex Crime Weapons Law violation Criminal Deprivation of Civil Rights Disorderly Conduct Driving Under the Influence Evidence: Destroying / Tampering False Report / False Statement Hit & Run Liquor Law violation Obstruction of Justice Variable V3 V6 V7 V10 V11 V14 V16 V17 V18 V20 V21 V26 V36 V37 V42 V43 V49 V52 V53 V54 V56 V58 V59 V60 V61 V63 V65 V66 V67 V69 V70 V72 V73 V74 N 5863 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 χ2 87.066 116.700 34.999 29.917 100.646 9.770 44.880 130.214 17.812 16.056 5.766 62.225 8.114 8.469 3.964 60.149 4.434 236.476 23.288 10.810 38.806 14.219 8.973 5.492 16.635 62.083 22.141 17.395 43.269 53.036 8.320 5.154 5.460 31.418 df 56 1 9 10 50 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 p .005 .000 .000 .001 .000 .002 .000 .000 .000 .000 .016 .000 .004 .004 .046 .000 .035 .000 .000 .001 .000 .000 .003 .019 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .004 .023 .019 .000 V .122 .132 .072 .067 .122 .038 .082 .139 .051 .049 .029 .096 .035 .035 .024 .095 .026 .188 .059 .040 .076 .046 .037 .029 .050 .096 .057 .051 .080 .089 .035 .028 .028 .068 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 261 Official Misconduct Restraining Order violation Gender of Victim Age of Victim Child Victim Victim Relationship to Offender Organizational vs. Against Citizenry Internal vs. Organizational Official Capacity Alcohol-related Sex-related Violence-related Profit-motivated Police Sexual Violence Driving While Female Encounter Officer was Reassigned Officer was Suspended Officer's Supervisor was Disciplined Officer's Chief is Under Scrutiny Discussion of Agency Scandal / Cover Up Citizen Complaint as Method of Detection DUI-related Traffic Accident Injuries in DUI-related Traffic Accident DUI On-Duty in Police Vehicle DUI in Personally-owned Vehicle DUI: Refused Field Sobriety Tests DUI: Refused BAC Tests Off-Duty: Identified Self as Police Officer Off-Duty: Showed Police Weapon Off-Duty: Conducted a Search Family Violence OIDV: Weapon: Dept-issued Gun OIDV: Weapon: Personal Gun OIDV: Weapon: Hands / Fist OIDV: Weapon: Miscellaneous Objects OIDV: Verbal Threats / Violent Ultimatums V75 V77 V81 V83 V84 V85 V90 V91 V92 V94 V95 V96 V97 V98 V99 V102 V104 V105 V106 V107 V108 V110 V111 V112 V115 V116 V117 V119 V121 V123 V126 V156 V157 V164 V166 V167 6724 6724 3668 1848 3990 3994 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6.881 4.836 8.658 140.050 15.568 35.490 5.101 96.522 102.216 124.351 138.637 331.322 580.101 51.585 14.751 11.040 16.627 19.700 7.017 97.812 262.034 10.393 10.301 18.624 34.411 6.072 16.369 10.626 12.705 4.589 106.902 4.759 6.671 56.065 7.093 9.526 1 1 1 79 1 7 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .009 .028 .003 .000 .000 .000 .024 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .001 .000 .000 .008 .000 .000 .001 .001 .000 .000 .014 .000 .001 .000 .032 .000 .029 .010 .000 .008 .002 .032 .027 .049 .275 .062 .095 .028 .120 .123 .136 .144 .222 .294 .088 .047 .041 .050 .054 .032 .121 .197 .039 .039 .053 .072 .030 .049 .040 .043 .026 .126 .027 .031 .091 .032 .038 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 262 OIDV: Gun was Confiscated OIDV: Article Mentions Gun Prohibition OIDV: Order of Protection Files OIDV: Officer Violated Order of Protection OIDV: Victim Injured, Nonfatal OIDV: Victim Injured, Fatal 42 U.S.C. 1983 Civil Defendant at Some Point 42 U.S.C. 1985 Civil Defendant at Some Point 42 U.S.C. 1997 Civil Defendant at Some Point 28 U.S.C. 1441 Civil Rights Case Removed Federal Civil Rights Defendant - Aggregate 18 U.S.C. 242 Criminal Defendant Most Serious Offense Charged Age Categorical Geographic Division Rank by Function Victim Age Categorical Victim Age Difference V168 V170 V171 V172 V173 V174 V176 V177 V178 V179 V180 V181 V183 AgeCat GeogDiv RankFunc VicAgeCat VicAgeD 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 10.836 4.395 15.025 4.462 45.203 3.840 25.553 53.326 38.431 6.848 25.441 10.281 3127.330 52.409 22.297 8.329 209.599 217.928 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 63 10 8 2 9 103 .001 .036 .000 .035 .000 .050 .000 .000 .000 .009 .000 .001 .000 .000 .004 .016 .000 .000 .040 .026 .047 .026 .082 .240 .062 .089 .076 .032 .062 .039 .682 .088 .058 .035 .177 .180 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 263 Table 13. Logistic Regression Model Predicting Drug-related Arrest Cases (N = 1,697) 95% CI for Exp(B) B State (V11) SE -0.048 Wald p Exp(B) 0.015 10.621 .001 0.953 LL UL 0.926 0.981 Pornography (V49) 2.344 0.538 18.979 <.001 10.418 3.630 29.902 Forcible Rape (V53) 1.107 0.522 4.496 .034 3.026 1.087 8.422 False Report / False Statement (V70) 2.818 0.592 22.665 <.001 16.742 5.248 53.414 Obstruction of Justice (V74) 2.590 0.558 21.503 <.001 13.324 4.459 39.807 Alcohol-related Crime (V94) 1.532 0.507 9.125 .003 4.626 1.712 12.496 Sex-related Crime (V95) 1.396 0.563 6.149 .013 4.040 1.340 12.180 Profit-motivated Crime (V97) 3.629 0.691 27.598 <.001 37.691 9.731 145.984 Officer was Reassigned (V102) 1.374 0.674 4.154 .042 3.951 1.054 14.812 Injuries in DUI-related Traffic Accident (V111) 1.561 0.746 4.375 .036 4.764 1.103 20.569 - 2 Log Likelihood 254.464 Model Chi-Square 94.190 Cox & Snell R Nagelkerke R ROC R AUC 2 2 2 <.001 .054 .291 95% CI for AUC .290 LL .645 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. UL .622 .668 264 Table 14. Chi-Square Predicting Violence-related Police Crime Arrests Variable Label Age Years of Service Gender Duty Status Rank Type of Agency Full-Time Sworn Personnel - Categorical State Urban / Rural Continuum Arresting Agency Intimidation Bribery Counterfeiting / Forgery Destruction of Property / Vandalism Drug / Narcotic violation Drug Equipment violation Embezzlement Extortion / Blackmail False Pretenses / Swindle Credit Card / ATM Fraud Impersonation Wire Fraud Gambling: Betting / Wagering Gambling: Operating / Promoting Murder & Nonnegligent Manslaughter Negligent Manslaughter Kidnapping / Abduction Shoplifting Theft from Building Theft from Motor Vehicle Theft: All Other Larceny Pornography Prostitution Variable V3 V4 V5 V6 V7 V9 V10 V11 V13 V14 V18 V19 V21 V22 V23 V24 V25 V26 V27 V28 V29 V31 V32 V33 V36 V37 V39 V42 V43 V45 V47 V49 V50 N 5863 4780 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 χ2 111.463 81.581 26.172 107.403 82.183 22.106 33.913 133.605 31.404 27.106 223.928 8.133 72.379 21.213 296.215 18.245 116.048 47.265 233.199 16.863 31.433 26.671 3.922 11.781 57.019 13.992 197.344 31.509 103.792 22.617 251.356 30.348 19.132 df 56 43 1 1 9 7 10 50 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 p .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .002 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .004 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .048 .001 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 V .138 .131 .062 .126 .111 .057 .071 .141 .068 .063 .182 .035 .104 .056 .210 .052 .131 .084 .186 .050 .068 .063 .024 .042 .092 .046 .171 .068 .124 .058 .193 .067 .053 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 265 Assisting or Promoting Prostitution Stolen Property Offenses Weapons Law violation Criminal Deprivation of Civil Rights Disorderly Conduct Driving Under the Influence Evidence: Destroying / Tampering False Report / False Statement Hit & Run Liquor Law violation Obstruction of Justice Official Misconduct Restraining Order Violation Trespass of Real Property All Other Offenses Gender of Victim Victim is a Police Officer Age of Victim Child Victim Victim Relationship to Offender Organizational vs. Against Citizenry Internal vs. Organizational Official Capacity Drug-related Alcohol-related Sex-related Profit-motivated Driving While Female Encounter Officer was Suspended Officer's Chief is Under Scrutiny Discussion of Agency Scandal / Cover Up Citizen Complaint as Method of Detection DUI-related Traffic Accident Injuries in a DUI-related Traffic Accident DUI On-Duty in a Police Vehicle DUI in a Take-home Police Vehicle V51 V62 V63 V65 V66 V67 V69 V70 V72 V73 V74 V75 V77 V78 V80 V81 V82 V83 V84 V85 V90 V91 V92 V93 V94 V95 V97 V99 V104 V106 V107 V108 V110 V111 V112 V113 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 3668 3967 1848 3990 3934 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6.525 72.860 13.850 30.259 109.947 678.239 43.248 95.618 39.878 22.781 18.982 10.967 11.806 18.916 23.533 4.806 5.895 166.314 21.316 206.633 332.506 316.816 41.853 331.322 199.445 357.899 1280.268 110.448 33.976 4.688 10.187 1327.054 280.360 65.197 39.546 62.541 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 79 1 7 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .011 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .001 .001 .000 .000 .028 .015 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .030 .001 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .031 .104 .045 .067 .128 .318 .080 .119 .077 .058 .053 .040 .042 .053 .059 .036 .039 .300 .073 .229 .222 .217 .079 .222 .172 .231 .436 .128 .071 .026 .039 .444 .204 .098 .077 .096 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 266 DUI in Police Vehicle Out of Jurisdiction DUI in a Personally-owned Vehicle DUI: Refused Field Sobriety Tests DUI: Refused BAC Tests Off-Duty: 24-Hour Ordinance Off-Duty: Identified Self as Police Officer Off-Duty: Showed a Police Weapon Off-Duty: Flashed Badge Off-Duty: Conducted a Search Off-Duty: Made an Arrest DUI: In Possession of a Firearm Heroin Morphine Hydrocodone Hydromorphone Oxycodone Other Narcotics Benzodiazepines Other Depressants Cocaine Crack Amphetamine / Methamphetamine Other Stimulants MDMA & Analogs Phencyclidine & Analogs Other Hallucinogens Marijuana Testosterone Other Anabolic Steroids 42 USC 1981 Civil Defendant at Some Point 42 USC 1983 Civil Defendant at Some Point 28 USC 1441 Civil Rights Case Removed Federal Civil Rights Defendant - Aggregate 18 USC 242 Criminal Defendant Most Serious Offense Charged Drugs: Using / Personal Use V114 V115 V116 V117 V118 V119 V121 V122 V123 V124 V128 V129 V130 V131 V132 V133 V135 V137 V138 V139 V140 V141 V143 V144 V146 V147 V148 V151 V152 V175 V176 V179 V180 V181 V183 V196 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 26.671 330.073 51.479 123.689 6.828 28.844 199.916 11.715 4.460 17.634 41.105 28.330 4.385 40.060 4.904 49.756 28.542 11.575 12.148 68.269 39.100 41.062 3.922 10.797 7.849 3.922 32.825 16.702 17.858 22.193 103.675 52.819 104.219 26.437 4883.929 160.243 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 63 1 .000 .000 .000 .000 .009 .000 .000 .001 .035 .000 .000 .000 .036 .000 .027 .000 .000 .001 .000 .000 .000 .000 .048 .001 .005 .048 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .063 .222 .087 .136 .032 .065 .172 .042 .026 .051 .078 .065 .026 .077 .027 .086 .065 .041 .043 .101 .076 .078 .024 .040 .034 .024 .070 .050 .052 .057 .124 .089 .124 .063 .852 .154 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 267 Drugs: Selling / Dealing / Trafficking Drugs: Forged Prescription Drugs: Sexually-motivated Drug Crime Drugs: Planting Evidence Drugs: Facilitating Drug Trade Drugs: Shakedown from Radio Runs Drugs: Shakedown from Warrantless Search Drugs: Shakedown from Legit Raid/Search Drugs: Shakedown from Car Stops Drugs: Theft from Evidence Room Drugs: falsification Narcotics Depressants Stimulants Hallucinogens Cannabis Anabolic Steroids DUI in a Police Vehicle Age Categorical Years of Service Categorical Metro vs. Nonmetro County Geographic Region Geographic Division Rank by Function Victim Age Categorical Victim Age Difference V197 V198 V199 V200 V201 V203 V204 V205 V206 V208 V209 Narcotics Depress Stimula Hallucino Cannabis AnabSter DUIinaP AgeCat YrsServCa CountyDi GeogReg GeogDiv RankFunc VicAgeCat VicAgeDif 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 151.410 32.499 7.052 25.027 114.069 11.998 6.895 21.657 7.371 51.606 32.781 135.577 26.700 118.852 22.617 32.825 32.269 108.082 43.530 44.068 13.247 21.266 33.277 47.771 944.302 879.176 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 10 1 3 8 2 9 103 .000 .000 .008 .000 .000 .001 .009 .000 .007 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .150 .070 .032 .061 .130 .042 .032 .057 .033 .088 .070 .142 .063 .133 .058 .070 .069 .127 .080 .081 .044 .056 .070 .084 .375 .362 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 268 Table 15. Logistic Regression Model Predicting Violence-related Arrest Cases (N = 1,286) 95% CI for Exp(B) B Age (V3) SE 0.057 0.016 Wald 13.075 p <.001 Exp(B) 1.058 LL UL 1.026 1.092 Years of Service (V4) -0.040 0.017 5.230 .022 0.961 0.929 0.994 Type of Agency (V9) 0.163 0.080 4.143 .042 1.177 1.006 1.376 Child Victim (V84) -1.277 0.217 34.716 <.001 0.279 0.182 0.427 Victim Relationship to Offender (V85) -0.325 0.108 9.107 .003 0.723 0.585 0.892 0.064 0.026 6.239 .012 1.066 1.014 1.121 -3.998 0.477 70.258 <.001 0.018 0.007 0.047 Suspended (V104) 0.400 0.178 5.038 .025 1.492 1.052 2.115 Citizen Complaint as Method of Crime Detection (V108) 0.820 0.194 17.867 <.001 2.271 1.552 3.322 Internal versus Organizational Crime (V91) Profit-motivated Crime (V97) DUI-related Traffic Accident (V110) -2.287 0.303 56.845 <.001 0.102 0.056 0.184 Most Serious Offense Charged (V183) -0.054 0.006 84.071 <.001 0.948 0.937 0.959 - 2 Log Likelihood 948.709 Model Chi-Square 378.310 Cox & Snell R Nagelkerke R ROC R AUC 2 2 2 <.001 .255 .396 95% CI for AUC .688 LL .844 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. UL .826 .862 269 Table 16. Chi-Square Predicting Profit-Motivated Police Crime Arrests Variable Label Age Years of Service Duty Status Rank Full-Time Sworn Categorical State Part-Time Sworn Categorical Urban to Rural Continuum Arson Aggravated Assault Simple Assault Intimidation Burglary Property Destruction / Vandalism Drug / Narcotic violation Impersonation Murder & Nonnegligent Manslaughter Negligent Manslaughter Kidnapping / Abduction Pornography Prostitution Forcible Rape Forcible Sodomy Sexual Assault with an Object Forcible Fondling Incest Statutory Rape Indecent Exposure Online Solicitation of a Child Other Sex Crime Weapons Law violation Criminal Deprivation of Civil Rights Disorderly Conduct Variable V3 V4 V6 V7 V10 V11 V12 V13 V15 V16 V17 V18 V20 V22 V23 V29 V36 V37 V39 V49 V50 V53 V54 V55 V56 V57 V58 V59 V60 V61 V63 V65 V66 N 5863 4780 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 χ2 105.411 85.616 633.147 55.541 28.640 244.278 17.341 32.193 5.758 171.383 348.894 53.258 72.653 22.339 506.835 65.165 27.881 21.292 22.070 41.733 10.476 105.167 49.453 7.778 171.962 4.348 46.582 22.558 19.080 57.460 37.793 38.249 52.056 df 56 43 1 9 10 50 8 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 p .000 .000 .000 .000 .001 .000 .027 .000 .016 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .001 .000 .000 .005 .000 .037 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 V .134 .134 .307 .091 .065 .191 .051 .069 .029 .160 .228 .089 .104 .058 .275 .098 .064 .056 .057 .079 .039 .125 .086 .034 .160 .025 .083 .058 .053 .092 .075 .075 .088 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 270 Driving Under the Influence Drunkenness Evidence: Destroying / Tampering False Report / False Statement Family Offenses, Nonviolent Hit & Run Liquor Law violation Obstruction of Justice Official Misconduct Restraining Order Violation Trespass of Real Property Gender of Victim Victim is a Police Officer Age of Victim Victim is a Child Victim Relationship to the Offender Organizational vs. Against Citizenry Internal vs. Organizational Official Capacity Drug-related Alcohol-related Sex-related Violence-related Police Sexual Violence Driving While Female Encounter Officer was Reassigned Officer was Suspended Officer's Supervisor was Disciplined Officer's Chief is Under Scrutiny Discussion of Agency Scandal / Cover Up Citizen Complaint as Method of Detection DUI-related Traffic Accident Injuries in DUI-related Traffic Accident DUI On-Duty in Police Vehicle DUI in Take-Home Police Vehicle DUI in Police Vehicle Out of Jurisdiction V67 V68 V69 V70 V71 V72 V73 V74 V75 V77 V78 V81 V82 V83 V84 V85 V90 V91 V92 V93 V94 V95 V96 V98 V99 V102 V104 V105 V106 V107 V108 V110 V111 V112 V113 V114 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 3668 3967 1848 3990 3934 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 357.196 19.080 35.334 64.682 5.688 35.944 11.217 6.803 98.591 12.159 11.698 144.140 4.800 211.386 110.187 235.591 11.310 605.995 540.962 580.101 498.804 492.371 1280.268 182.244 52.721 31.477 41.137 35.912 7.628 183.301 445.610 171.858 74.117 17.188 25.730 9.653 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 79 1 7 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .000 .000 .000 .000 .017 .000 .001 .009 .000 .000 .000 .000 .028 .000 .000 .000 .001 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .006 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .002 .230 .053 .072 .098 .029 .073 .041 .032 .121 .043 .042 .198 .035 .338 .166 .245 .041 .300 .284 .294 .272 .271 .436 .165 .089 .068 .078 .073 .034 .165 .257 .160 .105 .051 .062 .038 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 271 DUI in Personally-owned Vehicle DUI-Refused BAC Test Off-Duty: 24-Hour Ordinance Off-Duty: Identified Self as Police Officer Off-Duty: Showed Police Weapon Off-Duty: Conducted a Search Family Violence DUI: Officer Resisted Arrest DUI: In Possession of a Firearm Heroin Hydrocodone Oxycodone Other Narcotics Gamma Hydroxybutyric Acid Cocaine Crack Amphetamine / Methamphetamine MDMA & Analogs Phencyclidine & Analogs Marijuana Testosterone Other Anabolic Steroids OIDV: Weapon: Dept-issued Gun OIDV: Weapon: Personally-owned Gun OIDV: Weapon: Knife OIDV: Weapon: Hands / Fist OIDV: Weapon: Other Body Parts OIDV: Weapon: Miscellaneous Objects OIDV: Verbal Threats / Violent Ultimatums OIDV: Gun was Confiscated OIDV: Confiscated Gun was Returned OIDV: Article Mentions Gun Prohibition OIDV: Order of Protection was Filed OIDV: Officer Violated Order of Protection OIDV: Victim Injured, Nonfatal OIDV: Victim Injured, Fatal V115 V117 V118 V119 V121 V123 V126 V127 V128 V129 V131 V133 V135 V136 V139 V140 V141 V144 V146 V148 V151 V152 V156 V157 V163 V164 V165 V166 V167 V168 V169 V170 V171 V172 V173 V174 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 206.189 62.246 11.218 32.075 26.293 5.929 331.114 14.042 28.911 82.346 19.915 36.133 12.698 6.454 380.676 76.983 57.944 27.585 18.071 176.476 11.666 38.325 14.648 27.001 4.660 170.143 22.830 20.619 38.805 37.870 5.906 16.243 38.163 11.218 136.696 9.653 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .000 .000 .001 .000 .000 .015 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .011 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .001 .000 .000 .000 .031 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .015 .000 .000 .001 .000 .002 .175 .096 .041 .069 .063 .030 .222 .046 .066 .111 .054 .073 .043 .031 .238 .107 .093 .064 .052 .162 .042 .075 .047 .063 .026 .159 .058 .055 .076 .075 .030 .049 .075 .041 .143 .038 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 272 42 U.S.C. 1985 Civil Defendant 42 U.S.C. 1997 Civil Defendant 18 U.S.C. 242 Criminal Defendant Most Serious Offense Charged Drugs: Personal Use / Using Drugs: Sexually-motivated Drug Crime Drugs: Planting Evidence Drugs: Falsification Narcotics Stimulants Hallucinogens Cannabis Anabolic Steroids DUI in a Police Vehicle Age Categorical Years of Service Categorical Metro or Nonmetro County Geographic Region Geographic Division Rank by Function Victim Age Categorical Victim Age Difference V177 V178 V181 V183 V196 V199 V200 V209 Narcotics Stimul Hallucin Cannab Anabol DUIinP AgeCat YrsServC CountyDi GeogReg GeogDiv RankFunc VicAgeCat VicAgeDiff 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 14.891 18.490 10.720 4449.343 5.059 5.370 14.244 25.507 112.680 441.677 44.397 176.476 43.764 44.963 31.473 24.044 9.943 27.852 54.990 39.513 637.177 603.574 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 10 1 3 8 2 9 103 .000 .000 .001 .000 .025 .020 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .007 .002 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .047 .052 .040 .813 .027 .028 .046 .062 .129 .256 .081 .162 .081 .082 .068 .060 .038 .064 .090 .077 .308 .300 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 273 Table 17. Logistic Regression Model Predicting Profit-motivated Arrest Cases (N = 1,330) 95% CI for Exp(B) B Duty Status (V6) SE 0.926 Age of Victim (V83) 0.398 Wald 5.417 p .020 Exp(B) 2.525 LL UL 1.158 5.510 0.076 0.024 9.953 .002 1.079 1.029 1.131 Sex-related Crime (V95) -2.340 0.655 12.784 <.001 0.096 0.027 0.347 Violence-related Crime (V96) -2.808 0.435 41.592 <.001 0.060 0.026 0.142 Citizen Complaint as Method of Crime Detection (V108) 1.777 0.596 8.900 .003 5.911 1.840 18.997 42 USC §1985 Civil Defendant at Some Point (V177) 1.662 0.784 4.496 .034 5.268 1.134 24.477 Victim Age Difference 0.046 0.022 4.557 .033 1.047 1.004 1.092 - 2 Log Likelihood 205.905 Model Chi-Square 110.546 Cox & Snell R Nagelkerke R ROC R AUC 2 2 2 <.001 .080 .377 95% CI for AUC .740 LL .870 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. UL .801 .939 274 Table 18. Chi-Square Predicting Being Named a Party-Defendant in 42 U.S.C. 1983 Litigation at Some Point Variable Label Age Years of Service Gender Duty Status Rank Type of Agency Full-Time Sworn Personnel Categorical State Part-Times Sworn Personnel Categorical Urban to Rural Continuum Code Arresting Agency Aggravated Assault Bribery Counterfeiting / Forgery Property Destruction / Vandalism Extortion / Blackmail Credit Card / ATM Fraud Murder & Nonnegligent Manslaughter Kidnapping / Abduction Pornography / Obscene Material Robbery Forcible Sodomy Forcible Fondling Incest Online Solicitation of a Child Weapons Law violation Criminal Civil Rights Deprivation Driving Under the Influence Drunkenness False Report / False Statement Family Offenses, Nonviolent Liquor Law violation Obstruction of Justice Official Misconduct Variable V3 V4 V5 V6 V7 V9 V10 V11 V12 V13 V14 V16 V19 V21 V22 V26 V28 V36 V39 V49 V51 V54 V56 V57 V60 V63 V65 V67 V68 V70 V71 V73 V74 V75 N 5863 4780 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 χ2 198.143 250.387 30.465 203.914 125.643 30.828 60.276 346.944 25.560 75.487 4.414 38.690 9.418 5.135 5.593 7.905 4.256 16.915 41.130 11.702 19.811 20.992 3.894 4.417 3.964 3.964 97.041 55.349 3.964 23.451 5.824 7.133 27.533 50.495 df 56 43 1 1 9 7 10 50 8 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 p .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .001 .000 .036 .000 .002 .023 .018 .005 .039 .000 .000 .001 .000 .000 .048 .036 .046 .046 .000 .000 .046 .000 .016 .008 .000 .000 V .184 .229 .067 .174 .137 .068 .095 .227 .062 .106 .026 .076 .037 .028 .029 .034 .025 .050 .078 .042 .054 .056 .024 .026 .024 .024 .120 .091 .024 .059 .029 .033 .064 .087 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 275 Gender of Victim Age of Victim Child Victim Victim Relationship to Offender Organizational vs. Against Citizenry Internal vs. Organizational Official Capacity Drug-related Alcohol-related Sex-related Violence-related Police Sexual Violence Driving While Female Encounter Officer was Reassigned Officer was Demoted in Rank Officer's Supervisor was Disciplined Officer's Chief is Under Scrutiny Discussion of Agency Scandal / Cover Up Citizen Complaint as Method of Detection DUI-related Traffic Accident Injuries in a DUI-related Traffic Accident DUI in Personally-owned Vehicle DUI: Refused Field Sobriety Tests DUI: Refused BAC Test Off-Duty: Identified Self as a Police Officer Off-Duty: Showed Police Weapon Off-Duty: Conducted a Search Off-Duty: Made an Arrest Family Violence DUI: Officer Resisted Arrest Oxycodone Cocaine Crack Marijuana OIDV: Weapon: Hands / Fist OIDV: Verbal Threats / Violent Ultimatums V81 V83 V84 V85 V90 V91 V92 V93 V94 V95 V96 V98 V99 V102 V103 V105 V106 V107 V108 V110 V111 V115 V116 V117 V119 V121 V123 V124 V126 V127 V133 V139 V140 V148 V164 V167 3668 1848 3990 3934 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 23.663 159.139 31.977 111.173 4.806 68.775 226.119 25.553 42.196 6.121 103.675 94.879 85.219 13.877 4.697 127.576 162.480 180.093 14.587 39.181 13.982 31.774 4.836 10.132 4.289 4.264 16.089 6.484 16.650 4.097 6.647 29.094 6.285 8.800 9.072 9.421 1 79 1 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .000 .000 .000 .000 .028 .000 .000 .000 .000 .013 .000 .000 .000 .000 .030 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .028 .001 .038 .039 .000 .011 .000 .043 .010 .000 .012 .003 .003 .002 .080 .293 .090 .168 .027 .101 .183 .062 .079 .030 .124 .119 .113 .045 .026 .138 .155 .164 .047 .076 .046 .069 .027 .039 .025 .025 .049 .031 .050 .025 .031 .066 .031 .036 .037 .037 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 276 OIDV: Victim Injury, Nonfatal 42 U.S.C. 1981 Civil Defendant 42 U.S.C. 1985 Civil Defendant 42 U.S.C. 1997 Civil Defendant 28 U.S.C. 1441 Civil Rights Action Removed 18 U.S.C. 242 Criminal Defendant Most Serious Offense Charged Drugs: Personal Use / Using Drugs: Planting Evidence Drugs: Facilitating Drug Trade Drugs: Shakedown from Street Dealers Drugs: Shakedown from Warrantless Search Drugs: Shakedown from Legit Search/Raid Drugs: Shakedown from Car Stops Drugs: Falsification Drugs: Shakedown - Aggregate Drugs: Stimulants Drugs: Cannabis Age Categorical Years of Service Categorical Metro or NonMetro County Geographic Region Geographic Division Rank by Function Victim Age Categorical Victim Age Difference V173 V175 V177 V178 V179 V181 V183 V196 V200 V201 V202 V204 V205 V206 V209 V210 Stimul Cannab AgeCat YrsServC CountyD GeogReg GeogDiv RankFunc VictimAg VicAgeDi 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 6724 8.627 435.624 632.692 1247.262 1192.487 171.608 320.050 6.408 38.120 3.833 118.716 95.587 28.690 75.474 31.330 99.877 21.921 8.800 108.469 155.578 15.672 65.296 123.337 55.134 90.534 157.015 1 1 1 1 1 1 63 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 10 1 3 8 2 9 103 .003 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .011 .000 .050 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .003 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .036 .255 .307 .431 .421 .160 .218 .031 .075 .024 .133 .119 .065 .106 .068 .122 .057 .036 .127 .152 .048 .099 .135 .091 .116 .153 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 277 Table 19. Logistic Regression Model Predicting Being Named a 42 USC §1983 Party-Defendant at Some Point (N = 1,278) 95% CI for Exp(B) B SE Wald p Exp(B) LL UL Years of Service (V4) 0.067 0.010 43.606 <.001 1.069 1.048 1.091 Duty Status (V6) 1.086 0.187 33.762 <.001 2.962 2.054 4.273 Full-Time Sworn Personnel Categorical (V10) 0.071 0.030 5.498 .019 1.073 1.012 1.139 Murder & Nonnegligent Manslaughter (V36) 0.692 0.282 6.011 .014 1.998 1.149 3.475 Kidnapping/Abduction (V39) 0.753 0.272 7.669 .006 2.123 1.246 3.617 Victim Relationship to Offender (V85) 0.175 0.065 7.308 .007 1.191 1.049 1.352 Driving While Female Encounter (V99) 0.934 0.346 7.285 .007 2.544 1.291 5.011 Officer was Assigned to Another Position (V102) 0.854 0.334 6.544 .011 2.349 1.221 4.518 Officer's Supervisor was Disiplined / Reassigned (V105) 2.369 0.488 23.592 <.001 10.686 4.108 27.796 -1.348 0.465 8.421 .004 0.260 0.104 0.645 DUI in a Privately-owned Vehicle (V115) Off-Duty: Identified Self as an Officer (V119) 1.060 0.301 12.374 <.001 2.885 1.599 5.208 Family Violence (V126) 0.737 0.285 6.688 .010 2.090 1.195 3.653 Cocaine (V139) 2.007 0.747 7.227 .007 7.440 1.722 32.140 42 USC §1981 Civil Defendant at Some Point (V175) 3.962 0.718 30.421 <.001 52.584 12.863 214.965 18 USC §242 Criminal Defendant at Some Point (V181) 1.837 0.639 8.264 .004 6.276 1.794 21.956 -0.019 0.004 23.805 <.001 0.981 0.974 0.989 Most Serious Offense Charged (V183) - 2 Log Likelihood 1177.989 Model Chi-Square 328.366 Cox & Snell R Nagelkerke R ROC R AUC 2 2 2 <.001 .227 .327 95% CI for AUC .486 LL .743 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. UL .723 .764 278 Table 20. Sex-related Police Crime Arrest Cases, 2005-2011: Arrested Officers and Employing Agencies (N = 1,475) n (%) n (%) Sex Male Female Age 19-23 24-27 28-31 32-35 36-39 40-43 44-47 48-51 52-55 56 or older Missing 1,467 8 (99.5) (0.5) 26 133 208 221 261 201 163 87 49 48 78 (1.8) (9.0) (14.1) (15.0) (17.6) (13.6) (11.1) (5.9) (3.3) (3.3) (5.3) Years of Service 0-2 3-5 6-8 9-11 12-14 15-17 18-20 21-23 24-26 27 or more years Missing 204 246 163 168 119 84 91 38 44 38 280 (13.8) (16.7) (11.0) (11.4) (8.1) (5.7) (6.1) (2.6) (3.0) (2.6) (19.0) Arresting Agency Employing Agency Another Agency 556 919 (37.7) (62.3) Officer Duty Status On-Duty Off-Duty 682 793 (46.2) (53.8) Rank Officer Detective Corporal Sergeant Lieutenant Captain Major Colonel Deputy Chief Chief 1,168 53 31 110 37 9 1 0 7 59 (79.2) (3.6) (2.0) (7.5) (2.5) (0.6) (0.1) (0.0) (0.5) (4.0) Function Patrol & Street Level Line/Field Supervisor Management 1,221 178 76 (82.8) (12.1) (5.1) 259 242 658 316 (17.6) (16.4) (44.6) (21.4) 1,229 246 (83.3) (16.7) Region of United States Northeastern States Midwestern States Southern States Western States Level of Rurality Metropolitan County Non-Metro County n (%) 61 280 30 1,040 56 4 3 1 (4.1) (19.0) (2.0) (70.5) (3.8) (0.3) (0.2) (0.1) Full-Time Sworn Officers 0 1 2-4 5-9 10-24 25-49 50-99 100-249 250-499 500-999 1,000 or more 20 12 85 112 145 165 140 178 144 125 349 (1.3) (0.8) (5.8) (7.6) (9.8) (11.2) (9.5) (12.1) (9.8) (8.5) (23.6) Part-Time Sworn Officers 0 1 2-4 5-9 10-24 25-49 50-99 100-249 250-499 1,031 64 162 99 77 28 10 4 0 (69.9) (4.3) (11.0) (6.7) (5.2) (1.9) (0.7) (0.3) (0.0) Agency Type Primary State Police Sheriff's Office County Police Dept. Municipal Police Dept. Special Police Dept. Constable Tribal Police Dept. Regional Police Dept. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 279 Table 21. Most Serious Offense Charged in Sex-related Police Crime Arrest Cases, 2005-2011 (N = 1,475) n (%) Forcible Fondling Forcible Rape Statutory Rape Unclassified Sex Crime Forcible Sodomy Pornography / Obscene Material Intimidation Online Solicitation of a Child Prostitution Simple Assault Indecent Exposure Official Misconduct / Oppression Aggravated Assault Bribery Kidnapping / Abduction Criminal Deprivation of Civil Rights Extortion / Blackmail Assisting or Promoting Prostitution Sexual Assault with an Object Other / Unclassified Offenses 352 322 100 98 94 86 52 44 42 37 37 35 25 19 13 13 12 12 10 10 (23.9) (21.8) (6.8) (6.6) (6.4) (5.8) (3.5) (3.0) (2.8) (2.5) (2.5) (2.4) (1.7) (1.3) (0.9) (0.9) (0.8) (0.8) (0.7) (0.7) Burglary / Breaking & Entering Disorderly Conduct Arson Unclassified Theft / Larceny Drug / Narcotic violation Incest False Report / False Statement Destroying / Tampering Evidence Obstruction of Justice False Pretenses / Swindle Wire Fraud Murder / Nonnegligent Manslaughter Theft from Building Robbery Liquor Law violation Peeping Tom Credit Card / ATM Fraud Stolen Property Offenses Weapons Law violation Restraining Order / Protection Order violation This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. n (%) 7 7 6 6 4 4 4 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 (0.5) (0.5) (0.4) (0.4) (0.3) (0.3) (0.3) (0.2) (0.2) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) 280 Table 22. Victim Characteristics in Sex-related Police Crime Arrest Cases, 2005-2011 (N = 1,475) n (%) (Valid %) Victim's Sex Female Male Missing Victim's Age Birth-11 12-13 14-15 16-17 18-19 20-24 25-32 33-41 42 or older Missing 1,160 143 172 (78.6) (9.7) (11.7) (89.0) (11.0) 108 118 202 139 54 73 64 42 14 661 (7.3) (8.0) (13.7) (9.4) (3.7) (4.9) (4.3) (2.8) (0.9) (44.8) (13.3) (14.5) (24.8) (17.1) (6.6) (8.9) (7.9) (5.2) (1.7) Victim's Relationship Current Spouse Former Spouse Current Girlfriend or Boyfriend Former Girlfriend or Boyfriend Child or Stepchild Some Other Relative Unrelated Child Stranger or Acquaintance Missing Victim's Law Enforcement Status Victim is Not a Police Officer Victim is a Police Officer Missing Victim Adult or Child Adult Child Missing n (%) (Valid %) 10 5 15 12 59 55 527 658 134 (0.7) (0.4) (1.0) (0.8) (4.0) (3.7) (35.7) (44.6) (9.1) (0.7) (0.4) (1.1) (0.9) (4.4) (4.1) (39.3) (49.1) 1,320 24 131 (89.5) (1.6) (8.9) (98.2) (1.8) 721 656 98 (48.9) (44.5) (6.6) (52.4) (47.6) This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 281 Table 23. Bivariate Associations of Conviction in Sex-related Arrest Cases Variable Label Year of Arrest Years of Service Gender Duty Status Rank Full-Time Sworn Personnel (categorical) State Part-Time Sworn Personnel (categorical) Urban / Rural Continuum Pornography Forcible Sodomy Indecent Exposure Drunkenness Age of Victim Child Victim Victim's Relationship to the Offender 28 U.S.C. §1441 Civil Case Removed 18 U.S.C. §242 Criminal Defendant Job Lost Geographic Region Geographic Division Rank Function Victim Age Categorical Variable V2 V4 V5 V6 V7 V10 V11 V12 V13 V49 V54 V59 V68 V83 V84 V85 V179 V181 joblostbin geogreg geogdiv rankfunc vicagecat N 986 820 986 986 986 986 986 986 986 986 986 986 986 541 920 905 986 986 986 986 986 986 986 2 χ 22.294 52.020 4.061 7.117 23.227 19.604 80.347 16.568 16.956 11.451 4.401 3.816 4.061 86.980 25.110 36.740 4.365 10.527 36.614 10.588 19.175 10.143 21.231 df 6 34 1 1 8 10 48 7 8 1 1 1 1 50 1 7 1 1 1 3 8 2 9 p .001 .025 .044 .008 .003 .033 .002 .020 .031 .001 .036 .051 .044 .001 .000 .000 .037 .001 .000 .014 .014 .006 .012 V .150 .252 .064 .085 .153 .141 .285 .130 .131 .108 .067 .062 .064 .401 .165 .201 .067 .103 .193 .104 .139 .101 .147 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 282 Table 24. Sex-related Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Conviction (N = 447) 95% CI for Exp(B) B SE Years of Service 0.056 Pornography / Obscene Material Child Victim Lost Job .007 1.737 0.769 5.107 0.728 0.279 6.832 1.661 0.293 32.044 354.228 Model Chi-Square 50.179 Cox & Snell R Nagelkerke R ROC R AUC 2 2 p 7.353 - 2 Log Likelihood 2 Wald 0.021 Exp(B) LL UL 1.058 1.016 1.102 .024 5.678 1.259 25.608 .009 2.071 1.200 3.575 < .001 5.266 2.963 9.360 <.001 .106 .178 95% CI for AUC .346 LL .673 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. UL .621 .725 283 Table 25. Bivariate Associations of Job Loss in Sex-related Police Crime Arrest Cases Variable Label Year of Arrest Age Years of Service Gender Duty Status Type of Agency Full-Time Sworn Personnel (categorical) State Part-Time Sworn Personnel (categorical) Urban / Rural Continuum Arresting Agency Bribery Kidnapping / Abduction Prostitution Forcible Fondling Incest Indecent Exposure Unclassified Sex Crime Criminal Deprivation of Civil Rights Internal Crime Against the Organization Official Capacity Violence-related Police Sexual Violence Driving While Female Encounter Suspended Crime Detected by Citizen Complaint Conviction Off-Duty: In Uniform Marijuana 42 U.S.C. §1983 Civil Defendant 42 U.S.C. §1985 Civil Defendant 28 U.S.C. §1441 Civil Case Removed 18 U.S.C. §242 Criminal Defendant Geographic Region Geographic Division Variable V2 V3 V4 V5 V6 V9 V10 V11 V12 V13 V14 V19 V39 V50 V56 V57 V59 V61 V65 V91 V92 V96 V98 V99 V104 V108 V109 V120 V148 V176 V177 V179 V181 geogreg geogdiv N 1,475 1,397 1,195 1,475 1,475 1,475 1,475 1,475 1,475 1,475 1,475 1,475 1,475 1,475 1,475 1,475 1,475 1,475 1,475 1,475 1,475 1,475 1,475 1,475 1,475 1,475 986 1,475 1,475 1,475 1,475 1,475 1,475 1,475 1,475 2 χ 135.487 68.062 62.775 20.753 5.692 15.908 41.867 111.725 39.503 20.333 5.911 13.207 5.104 9.096 6.148 5.991 7.600 8.111 4.892 34.420 7.595 6.956 4.849 15.105 42.412 9.246 36.614 5.478 4.857 9.706 6.845 5.434 7.627 21.667 27.896 df 6 46 36 1 1 7 10 48 7 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 8 p .000 .019 .004 .000 .017 .026 .000 .000 .000 .009 .015 .000 .024 .003 .013 .014 .006 .004 .027 .000 .006 .008 .028 .000 .000 .002 .000 .019 .028 .002 .009 .020 .006 .000 .000 V .303 .221 .229 .119 .062 .104 .168 .275 .164 .117 .063 .095 .059 .079 .065 .064 .072 .074 .058 .153 .072 .069 .057 .101 .170 .079 .193 .061 .057 .081 .068 .061 .072 .121 .138 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 284 Table 26. Sex-related Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Job Loss (N = 801) 95% CI for Exp(B) B Year of Arrest SE 0.339 Age 0.061 Wald 31.037 p < .001 Exp(B) 1.404 LL UL 1.246 1.582 -0.036 0.012 8.489 .004 0.965 0.942 0.988 Internal Crime Against the Organization 0.121 0.045 7.167 .007 1.129 1.033 1.234 Official Capacity 0.890 0.282 9.973 .002 2.435 1.402 4.231 Driving While Female Encounter 0.999 0.455 4.825 .028 2.715 1.114 6.620 Suspended -0.942 0.255 13.651 < .001 0.390 0.236 0.642 Conviction 1.341 0.237 31.918 < .001 3.824 2.401 6.089 Marijuana -1.929 0.693 7.740 .005 0.145 0.037 0.566 0.798 0.254 9.879 .002 2.221 1.350 3.653 42 U.S.C. §1983 Civil Defendant at Some Point - 2 Log Likelihood 625.507 Model Chi-Square 141.128 Cox & Snell R Nagelkerke R ROC R AUC 2 2 2 <.001 .162 .262 95% CI for AUC .544 LL .772 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. UL .733 .810 285 Table 27. Bivariate Associations of Child Victims in Sex-related Arrest Cases Variable Label Age Years of Service Duty Status Full-Time Sworn Personnel (categorical) State Urban to Rural Continuum Arresting Agency Aggravated Assault Simple Assault Intimidation Bribery Burglary Extortion Kidnapping / Abduction Unclassified Theft / Larceny Pornography Prostitution Forcible Rape Forcible Fondling Incest Statutory Rape Indecent Exposure On-Line Solicitation of a Child Unclassified Sex Crime Weapons Law violation Criminal Deprivation of Civil Rights Disorderly Conduct False Report / False Statement Obstruction of Justice Official Misconduct / Oppression Unclassified Offenses Gender of Victim Internal Crime Against the Organization Official Capacity Variable V3 V4 V6 V10 V11 V13 V14 V16 V17 V18 V19 V20 V26 V39 V47 V49 V50 V53 V56 V57 V58 V59 V60 V61 V63 V65 V66 V70 V74 V75 V80 V81 V91 V92 N 1,311 1,120 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,296 1,377 1,377 χ2 125.721 92.784 323.355 65.462 121.063 48.962 44.190 30.395 24.392 41.325 46.090 20.342 11.053 86.974 3.983 99.843 21.057 25.396 37.176 10.497 179.498 13.792 61.773 14.145 7.014 27.903 6.308 6.207 5.408 161.527 23.373 51.951 72.810 330.080 df 46 35 1 10 48 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 p .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .001 .000 .046 .000 .000 .000 .000 .001 .000 .000 .000 .000 .008 .000 .012 .013 .020 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 V .310 .288 .485 .218 .297 .189 .179 .149 .133 .173 .183 .122 .090 .251 .054 .269 .124 .136 .164 .087 .361 .100 .212 .101 .071 .142 .068 .067 .063 .342 .130 .200 .230 .490 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 286 Violence-related Profit-motivated Police Sexual Violence Driving While Female Encounter Discussion of Agency Scandal or Cover Up Method of Crime Detection Conviction Off-Duty: In Uniform Off-Duty: Showed Police Weapon Family Violence OIDV: Weapon: Personally Owned Gun OIDV: Weapon: Hands / Fists OIDV: Verbal Threats / Violent Ultimatums OIDV: Victim Injured, nonfatal 42 U.S.C. §1983 Civil Defendant Some Point 28 U.S.C. §1441 Civil Case Removed 18 U.S.C. §242 Criminal Defendant Age Categorical Years of Service Categorical Geographic Division V96 V97 V98 V99 V107 V108 V109 V120 V121 V126 V157 V164 V167 V173 V176 V179 V181 agecat yrsservcat geogdiv 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 920 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 1,377 57.564 9.394 290.300 142.850 5.352 28.531 25.110 6.308 13.870 20.034 4.566 4.361 6.308 6.194 60.897 12.257 11.053 50.515 31.988 36.261 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 10 8 .000 .002 .000 .000 .021 .000 .000 .012 .000 .000 .033 .037 .012 .013 .000 .000 .001 .000 .000 .000 .204 .083 .459 .322 .062 .144 .165 .068 .100 .121 .058 .056 .068 .067 .210 .094 .090 .192 .152 .162 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 287 Table 28. Sex-related Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Child Victims (N = 722) 95% CI for Exp(B) B Duty Status SE -1.798 Wald p 0.315 32.509 < .001 Exp(B) 0.166 LL UL 0.089 0.307 Full-Time Sworn Personnel (categorical) -0.195 0.054 13.134 < .001 0.823 0.741 0.915 Urban to Rural Continuum Code -0.194 0.087 5.004 .025 0.824 0.695 0.976 Aggravated Assault -2.688 0.771 12.155 < .001 0.068 0.015 0.308 Intimidation -1.556 0.561 7.692 .006 0.211 0.070 0.634 Kidnapping / Abduction -1.390 0.455 9.322 .002 0.249 0.102 0.608 1.357 0.652 4.336 .037 3.885 1.083 13.936 Pornography / Obscene Material Forcible Fondling 1.245 0.259 23.100 < .001 3.474 2.091 5.774 Indecent Exposure -1.357 0.517 6.880 .009 0.257 0.093 0.710 Unclassified Sex Crime 1.434 0.353 16.479 < .001 4.195 2.099 8.382 Weapons Law violation -3.054 1.125 7.367 .007 0.047 0.005 0.428 Obstruction of Justice -3.822 1.191 10.289 .001 0.022 0.002 0.226 Gender of Victim 1.816 0.452 16.148 < .001 6.144 2.535 14.896 Violence-related -1.658 0.402 17.046 < .001 0.191 0.087 0.419 Police Sexual Violence -0.986 0.312 10.008 .002 0.373 0.202 0.687 Driving While Female Encounter -1.744 0.578 9.115 .003 0.175 0.056 0.542 Discussion of Agency Scandal or Cover Up 1.861 0.577 10.412 .001 6.427 2.076 19.900 Conviction 0.799 0.285 7.869 .005 2.223 1.272 3.883 Family Violence 0.941 0.399 5.557 .018 2.563 1.172 5.606 Geographic Division 0.101 0.047 4.596 .032 1.106 1.009 1.212 - 2 Log Likelihood 492.641 Model Chi-Square 505.330 Cox & Snell R Nagelkerke R ROC R AUC 2 2 2 <.001 .503 .672 95% CI for AUC .840 LL .920 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. UL .902 .938 288 Table 29. Bivariate Associations of Conviction in Police Sexual Violence Arrest Cases Variable Label Year of Arrest Urban to Rural Continuum False Pretenses / Swindle Forcible Sodomy Forcible Fondling Statutory Rape Victim is a Police Officer Victim is a Child Victim's Relationship Violence-related Drugs: Personal Use / Using Job Lost Binary Georgraphic Division Variable V2 V13 V27 V54 V56 V58 V82 V84 V85 V96 V196 joblostbin geogdiv N 431 431 431 431 431 431 430 427 427 431 431 431 431 2 χ 18.185 20.573 4.021 6.671 6.754 3.966 4.112 9.742 20.988 4.955 4.021 22.139 15.821 df 6 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 1 1 1 8 p .006 .008 .045 .010 .009 .046 .043 .002 .002 .026 .045 .000 .045 V .205 .008 .097 .124 .125 .096 .098 .151 .222 .107 .097 .227 .192 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 289 Table 30. Police Sexual Violence Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Conviction (N = 427) 95% CI for Exp(B) B SE Wald p Exp(B) LL UL Forcible Sodomy 1.146 0.495 5.368 .021 3.146 1.193 8.297 Forcible Fondling -0.779 0.260 8.965 .003 0.459 0.276 0.764 Child Victim 1.321 0.389 11.529 .001 3.748 1.748 8.037 Lost Job 1.329 0.325 16.750 < .001 3.778 1.999 7.140 - 2 Log Likelihood 381.630 Model Chi-Square 44.602 Cox & Snell R Nagelkerke R ROC R AUC 2 2 2 <.001 .099 .157 95% CI for AUC .422 LL .711 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. UL .647 .774 290 Table 31. Bivariate Assocations of Job Loss in Police Sexual Violence Arrest Cases Variable Label Year of Arrest Years of Service Gender Type of Agency Full-Time Sworn (categorical) State Part-Time Sworn (categorical) Simple Assault Intimidation Bribery Burglary Kidnapping / Abduction Indecent Exposure Other / Unclassified Sex Crime Weapons Law violation Official Misconduct / Oppression All Other Offenses / Unclassified Internal Crime Against the Organization Alcohol-related Driving While Female Encounter Suspended Officer's Supervisor was Disciplined Conviction Years of Service Categorical Geographic Region Geographic Division Rank by Function Victim Age Categorical Variable V2 V4 V5 V9 V10 V11 V12 V17 V18 V19 V20 V39 V59 V61 V63 V75 V80 V91 V94 V99 V104 V105 V109 yrsservcat geogreg geogdiv rankfunc vicagecat N 622 495 622 622 622 622 622 622 622 622 622 622 622 622 622 622 622 622 622 622 622 622 431 622 622 622 622 622 2 χ 60.900 61.583 18.253 17.772 18.829 78.683 17.903 4.288 7.658 9.214 5.451 6.004 3.742 6.219 6.685 7.616 5.706 52.301 4.667 12.156 23.630 3.776 22.139 25.372 12.336 17.510 8.663 22.063 df 6 29 1 6 10 45 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 3 8 2 9 p .000 .000 .000 .007 .042 .001 .012 .038 .006 .002 .020 .014 .053 .013 .010 .006 .017 .000 .031 .000 .000 .052 .000 .005 .006 .025 .013 .009 V .313 .353 .171 .169 .174 .356 .170 .083 .111 .122 .094 .098 .078 .100 .104 .111 .096 .290 .087 .140 .195 .078 .227 .202 .141 .168 .118 .188 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 291 Table 32. Police Sexual Violence Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Job Loss (N = 354) 95% CI for Exp(B) B Part-Time Sworn Personnel (categorical) Weapons Law violation SE 0.639 0.217 Wald 8.682 p .003 Exp(B) LL UL 1.894 1.238 2.896 -2.504 1.137 4.846 .028 0.082 0.009 0.760 Internal Crime Against the Organization 0.260 0.051 25.790 < .001 1.297 1.173 1.433 Driving While Female Encounter 1.178 0.494 5.681 .017 3.249 1.233 8.560 1.741 0.434 16.068 < .001 5.705 2.435 13.366 -0.262 0.083 9.904 .002 0.770 0.654 0.906 Conviction Years of Service (categorical) - 2 Log Likelihood 201.017 Model Chi-Square 64.762 Cox & Snell R Nagelkerke R ROC R AUC 2 2 2 <.001 .167 .317 95% CI for AUC .470 LL .735 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. UL .651 .819 292 Table 33. Bivariate Associations of Conviction in Driving While Female Police Crime Arrest Cases Variable Label Year of Arrest Full-Time Sworn Personnel (categorical) Burglary Drug / Narcotic violation Unclassified Theft / Larceny Sexual Assault with an Object Forcible Fondling Economically-motivated Against the Citizenry Internal Crime Against the Organization Alcohol-related Cocaine 42 U.S.C. §1983 Drugs: Using / Personal Use Job Loss (binary) Stimulant Age Categorical Rank Function Variable V2 V10 V20 V23 V47 V55 V56 V88 V90 V91 V94 V139 V176 V196 joblossbin stimulant agecat rankfunc N 126 126 126 126 126 126 126 126 126 126 126 126 126 126 126 126 126 126 2 χ 14.407 22.232 9.101 4.514 4.827 6.081 5.277 4.514 4.514 7.204 9.895 4.514 3.728 4.514 3.967 4.514 18.588 5.769 df 6 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 1 p .025 .008 .003 .034 .028 .014 .022 .034 .034 .007 .002 .034 .054 .034 .046 .034 .017 .016 V .338 .420 .269 .189 .196 .220 .205 .189 .189 .239 .280 .189 .172 .189 .177 .189 .384 .214 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 293 Table 34. Driving While Female Encounters Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Conviction (N = 126) 95% CI for Exp(B) B SE UL 0.557 5.659 .017 0.266 0.089 0.792 0.207 0.072 8.337 .004 1.230 1.069 1.416 -2.705 0.993 7.416 .006 0.067 0.010 0.468 1.438 0.579 6.167 .013 4.214 1.354 13.113 - 2 Log Likelihood 88.550 Model Chi-Square 31.206 Cox & Snell R Nagelkerke R ROC R AUC 2 2 2 0.129 LL -1.324 42 U.S.C. §1983 Civil Defendant at Some Point .046 Exp(B) Forcible Fondling Alcohol-related 3.969 p -2.050 Internal Crime Against the Organization 1.029 Wald Sexual Assault with an Object 0.017 0.967 <.001 .219 .358 95% CI for AUC .662 LL .831 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. UL .741 .921 294 Table 35. Bivariate Assocations of Job Loss in Drving While Female Arrest Cases Variable Label Year of Arrest Age Years of Service Rank State Bribery Kidnapping / Abduction Forcible Rape Indecent Exposure Other / Unclassified Sex Crime Official Misconduct / Oppression Organizational versus Against Citizenry Internal versus Organizational Suspended Conviction Off-Duty: Identified Self as an Officer Victim Age Categorical Victim Age Difference Variable V2 V3 V4 V7 V11 V19 V39 V53 V59 V61 V75 V90 V91 V104 V109 V119 vicagecat vicagediff N 174 168 144 174 174 174 174 174 174 174 174 174 174 174 126 174 174 174 2 χ 15.536 47.043 42.173 14.145 53.896 6.714 4.631 4.293 12.402 5.870 5.792 5.476 13.514 4.094 3.967 5.476 22.217 51.795 df 6 33 22 4 33 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 28 p .016 .054 .006 .007 .012 .010 .031 .038 .000 .015 .016 .019 .000 .043 .046 .019 .002 .004 V .299 .529 .541 .285 .557 .196 .163 .157 .267 .184 .182 .177 .279 .153 .177 .177 .357 .546 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 295 Table 36. Driving While Female Encounters Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Job Loss (N = 105) 95% CI for Exp(B) B Internal Crime Against the Organization SE Wald p Exp(B) LL UL 0.357 0.141 6.441 .011 1.429 1.085 1.883 Victim Age Difference -0.072 0.031 5.258 .022 0.931 0.875 0.990 - 2 Log Likelihood 41.223 Model Chi-Square 15.344 Cox & Snell R Nagelkerke R ROC R AUC 2 2 2 <.001 .136 .326 95% CI for AUC .532 LL .766 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. UL .671 .860 296 Table 37. Alcohol-related Police Crime Arrest Cases, 2005-2011: Arrested Officers and Employing Agencies (N = 1,405) n (%) n (%) Sex Male Female Age 19-23 24-27 28-31 32-35 36-39 40-43 44-47 48-51 52-55 56 or older Missing Years of Service 0-2 3-5 6-8 9-11 12-14 15-17 18-20 21-23 24-26 27 or more years Missing Arresting Agency Employing Agency Another Agency 1,314 91 (93.5) (6.5) 41 152 175 172 216 172 144 66 30 21 216 (2.9) (10.8) (12.5) (12.2) (15.4) (12.2) (10.3) (4.7) (2.1) (1.5) (15.4) 167 198 139 133 114 82 78 46 29 27 392 (11.9) (14.1) (9.9) (9.5) (8.1) (5.8) (5.5) (3.3) (2.1) (1.9) (27.9) 396 1,009 (28.2) (71.8) Officer Duty Status On-Duty Off-Duty 170 1,235 (12.1) (87.9) Rank Officer Detective Corporal Sergeant Lieutenant Captain Major Colonel Deputy Chief Chief 1,051 87 23 139 37 15 4 1 14 34 (74.8) (6.2) (1.6) (9.9) (2.6) (1.1) (0.3) (0.1) (1.0) (2.4) Function Patrol & Street Level Line/Field Supervisor Management 1,138 199 68 (81.0) (14.2) (4.8) 309 358 548 190 (22.0) (25.5) (39.0) (13.5) 1,212 193 (86.3) (13.7) Region of United States Northeastern States Midwestern States Southern States Western States Level of Rurality Metropolitan County Non-Metro County n (%) 74 214 54 1,028 24 3 7 1 (5.3) (15.2) (3.8) (73.2) (1.7) (0.2) (0.5) (0.1) Full-Time Sworn Officers 0 1 2-4 5-9 10-24 25-49 50-99 100-249 250-499 500-999 1,000 or more 1 6 53 53 143 130 170 210 127 113 399 (0.1) (0.4) (3.8) (3.8) (10.2) (9.3) (12.1) (14.9) (9.0) (8.0) (28.4) Part-Time Sworn Officers 0 1 2-4 5-9 10-24 25-49 50-99 100-249 250-499 1,082 37 104 80 69 20 12 1 0 (77.0) (2.6) (7.4) (5.7) (4.9) (1.4) (0.9) (0.1) (0.0) Agency Type Primary State Police Sheriff's Office County Police Dept. Municipal Police Dept. Special Police Dept. Constable Tribal Police Dept. Regional Police Dept. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 297 Table 38. Most Serious Offense Charged in Alcohol-related Police Crime Arrest Cases, 2005-2011 (N = 1,405) n (%) Driving Under the Influence Simple Assault Aggravated Assault Weapons Law violation Forcible Fondling Disorderly Conduct Murder & Nonnegligent Manslaughter Forcible Rape Destruction of Property / Vandalism Drunkenness Liquor Law violation All Other / Unclassified Offenses Negligent Manslaughter Intimidation Hit & Run False Report / False Statement Forcible Sodomy Unclassified Sex Crime Family Offenses, nonviolent 817 149 103 47 27 27 26 26 23 22 19 16 14 11 9 6 5 5 5 (58.1) (10.6) (7.3) (3.3) (1.9) (1.9) (1.9) (1.9) (1.6) (1.6) (1.3) (1.1) (1.0) (0.7) (0.6) (0.4) (0.4) (0.4) (0.4) Obstructing Justice Burglary / Breaking & Entering Drug / Narcotic violation Extortion / Blackmail Statutory Rape Indecent Exposure Arson False Pretenses / Swindle Reckless Endangerment Impersonation Sexual Assault with an Object Official Misconduct / Official Oppression Theft from Building All Other / Unclassified Larceny Prostitution Robbery Criminal Civil Rights violation Evidence: Destroying / Tampering Trespass of Real Property This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. n (%) 5 4 5 4 4 4 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 (0.4) (0.3) (0.4) (0.3) (0.3) (0.3) (0.2) (0.2) (0.2) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) 298 Table 39. Victim Characteristics in Alcohol-related Police Crime Arrest Cases, 2005-2011 (N = 1,405) n (%) (Valid %) Victim's Sex Female Male Missing Victim's Age Birth-11 12-13 14-15 16-17 18-19 20-24 25-32 33-41 42 or older Missing 263 242 900 (18.7) (17.2) (64.1) (52.1) (47.9) 14 12 20 17 23 53 66 29 49 1,122 (1.0) (0.9) (1.4) (1.2) (1.6) (3.8) (4.7) (2.1) (3.5) (79.9) (5.0) (4.3) (7.1) (6.0) (8.1) (18.7) (23.3) (10.2) (17.3) n (%) (Valid %) Victim's Relationship Current Spouse Former Spouse Current Girlfriend or Boyfriend Former Girlfriend or Boyfriend Child or Stepchild Some Other Relative Unrelated Child Stranger or Acquaintance Missing 42 5 45 7 19 6 47 382 852 (3.0) (0.4) (3.2) (0.5) (1.4) (0.4) (3.3) (27.2) (60.6) (7.6) (0.9) (8.1) (1.3) (3.4) (1.1) (8.5) (69.1) Victim's Law Enforcement Status Victim is Not a Police Officer Victim is a Police Officer Missing 500 58 847 (35.6) (4.1) (60.3) (89.6) (10.4) Victim Adult or Child Adult Child Missing 495 69 841 (35.2) (4.9) (59.9) (87.8) (12.2) This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 299 Table 40: Police DUI Arrest Cases: Incident Events DUI in Privately-Owned Vehicle DUI Traffic Accident DUI Traffic Accident with Injuries Refused BAC Test DUI Traffic Accident: Officer Fled Scene Officer in Possession of Firearm while DUI Refused Field Sobriety Tests DUI in Take-Home Police Vehicle Off-Duty: Identified Self as Police Officer DUI Traffic Accident: Officer Charged with Hit & Run Officer Resisted Arrest DUI Actually On-Duty in Police Vehicle DUI Traffic Accident: Fatality Resulting DUI Traffic Accident: Flipped their Car DUI in Police Vehicle while Out of Jurisdiction Off-Duty: Officer's Employing Agency Requires 24/7 Availability DUI Traffic Accident: Driving in Wrong Direction Off-Duty: Flashed Badge DUI Traffic Accident: Driving a Motorcycle Off-Duty: Displayed Police Weapon DUI Traffic Accident: Officer Denied Driving Off-Duty: Family Violence DUI Traffic Accident: While Evading DUI Traffic Accident: Flipped Victim's Car Off-Duty: In Police Uniform Off-Duty: Made an Arrest Off-Duty: Intervened in Existing Dispute Per Policy n (%) 836 492 231 195 103 83 81 78 77 76 44 42 39 33 28 23 17 16 15 14 12 10 9 4 2 2 1 (87.1) (51.2) (24.1) (20.3) (10.7) (8.6) (8.4) (8.1) (8.0) (7.9) (4.6) (4.4) (4.1) (3.4) (2.9) (2.4) (1.8) (1.7) (1.6) (1.5) (1.3) (1.0) (0.9) (0.4) (0.2) (0.2) (0.1) This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 300 Table 41. Police DUI Arrest Cases: Drug-related (N = 49) n (%) Specific Drugs: Other Depressants (Depressant) Oxycodone (Narcotic) Cocaine (Stimulant) Hydrocodone (Narcotic) Other Narcotics (Narcotic) Benzodiazepines (Depressant) Amphetamine / Methamphetamine (Stimulant) Marijuana (Cannabis) Hydromorphone (Narcotic) Other Stimulants (Stimulant) Morphine (Narcotic) Codeine (Narcotic) MDMA & Analogs (Hallucinogen) Other Anabolic Steroids (Anabolic Steroid) 15 8 5 4 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 (30.6) (16.3) (10.2) (8.2) (8.2) (8.2) (6.1) (6.1) (4.1) (4.1) (2.0) (2.0) (2.0) (2.0) Arrested Officer and Agencies: Officer is Male On-Duty at Time of DUI Offense Arresting Agency is Not Officer's Employer 46 16 34 (93.9) (32.7) (69.4) Note. Categories are not mutually exclusive. Sum of (%) column ≠ 100 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 301 Table 42. Bivariate Associations of Conviction in Alcohol-related Police Crime Arrest Cases Variable Label Rank State Arresting Agency Simple Assault Property Destruction / Vandalism Forcible Fondling Driving Under the Influence Drunkenness Hit and Run Liquor Law violation Child Victim Victim's Relationship to the Officer Sex-related Driving While Female Encounter Officer was Demoted DUI-related Traffic Accident Injuries in a DUI-related Traffic Accident DUI in a Personally-owned Vehicle Off-Duty Ordinance On-Call 24/7 Family Violence OIDV: Hands / Fist OIDV: Victim Injured, nonfatal Job Lost Geographic Region Geographic Division Variable V7 V11 V14 V17 V22 V56 V67 V68 V72 V73 V84 V85 V95 V99 V103 V110 V111 V115 V118 V126 V164 V173 joblostbin geogreg geogdiv N 654 654 654 654 654 654 654 654 654 654 339 331 654 654 654 654 654 654 654 654 654 654 654 654 654 2 χ 20.366 95.625 5.294 7.182 4.327 3.681 11.679 4.477 3.987 6.721 4.004 23.297 3.913 6.187 4.653 17.885 11.293 12.756 3.612 10.441 21.157 13.340 12.462 11.270 19.323 df 8 48 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 8 p .009 .000 .021 .007 .038 .055 .001 .034 .046 .010 .045 .002 .048 .013 .031 .000 .001 .000 .057 .001 .000 .000 .000 .010 .013 V .176 .382 .090 .105 .081 .075 .134 .083 .078 .101 .109 .265 .077 .097 .084 .165 .131 .140 .074 .126 .180 .143 .138 .131 .172 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 302 Table 43. Alcohol-related Police Crime Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Conviction (N = 330) 95% CI for Exp(B) B SE Wald p Exp(B) LL UL Arresting Agency is Not Arrested Officer's Employer 0.577 0.291 3.924 .048 1.781 1.006 3.153 Sex-related 1.110 0.455 5.952 .015 3.035 1.244 7.406 -2.655 0.832 10.182 .001 0.070 0.014 0.359 Driving-While-Female Encounter DUI in a Personally-Owned-Vehicle OIDV: Weapon: Hands / Fist Lost Job 1.286 0.386 11.078 .001 3.619 1.697 7.719 -1.015 0.368 7.590 .006 0.362 0.176 0.746 0.937 0.288 10.601 .001 2.551 1.452 4.483 - 2 Log Likelihood 322.629 Model Chi-Square 7.486 Cox & Snell R Nagelkerke R ROC R AUC 2 2 2 <.001 .156 .229 95% CI for AUC .376 LL .688 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. UL .641 .734 303 Table 44. Bivariate Associations of Job Loss in Alcohol-related Arrest Cases Variable Label Duty Status Full-Time Sworn Personnel (categorical) State Part-Time Sworn Personnel (categorical) Urban-Rural County Continuum Aggravated Assault Bribery Extortion / Blackmail Murder & Nonnegligent Manslaughter Negligent Manslaughter Kidnapping / Abduction Pornography / Obscene Material Forcible Rape Forcible Sodomy Forcible Fondling Statutory Rape Unclassified Sex Crime Weapons Law violation Driving Under the Influence Destroying / Tampering Evidence False Report / False Statement Liquor Law violation Official Misconduct Victim is a Police Officer Child Victim Victim's Relationship to Arrested Officer Organizational versus Against Citizenry Internal Crime Against the Organization Official Capacity Sex-related Violence-related Profit-motivated Police Sexual Violence Driving While Female Encounter Variable V6 V10 V11 V12 V13 V16 V19 V26 V36 V37 V39 V49 V53 V54 V56 V58 V61 V63 V67 V69 V70 V73 V75 V82 V84 V85 V90 V91 V92 V95 V96 V97 V98 V99 N 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 558 564 553 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 χ2 26.456 48.473 106.935 29.408 32.022 8.017 4.919 8.209 10.863 6.527 14.689 4.300 20.642 9.988 9.468 8.395 19.762 5.803 52.293 4.398 4.148 8.634 6.270 5.634 8.325 15.616 23.750 21.321 40.030 55.140 39.284 6.527 40.277 5.700 df 1 10 50 7 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 p .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .005 .027 .004 .001 .011 .000 .038 .000 .002 .002 .004 .000 .016 .000 .036 .042 .003 .012 .018 .004 .029 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .011 .000 .017 V .137 .186 .276 .145 .151 .076 .059 .076 .088 .068 .102 .055 .121 .084 .082 .077 .119 .064 .193 .056 .054 .078 .067 .100 .121 .168 .130 .123 .169 .198 .167 .068 .169 .064 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 304 Officer was Reassigned Officer was Demoted Officer's Supervisor was Disciplined Citizen Complaint as Method of Detection Conviction DUI in Personally-owned Vehicle Off-Duty: Agency has 24/7 On-Call Policy Off-Duty: In Uniform OIDV: Protection Order filed Against Officer 42 U.S.C. §1983 Civil Defendant Sometime 42 U.S.C. §1985 Civil Defendant Sometime 28 U.S.C. §1441 Civil Case Removed Age (categorical) Years of Service (categorical) Metropolitan vs. Non-Metro County Geographic Division Rank Function Victim Age (categorical) Victim Age Difference V102 V103 V105 V108 V109 V115 V118 V120 V171 V176 V177 V179 agecat yrservcat codichot geogdiv rankfunc vicagecat vicagediff 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 654 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 1,405 13.956 5.065 8.477 15.326 12.462 17.964 13.702 4.919 5.316 9.680 9.651 5.189 39.806 31.374 18.301 25.037 6.496 59.634 125.538 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 10 1 8 2 9 67 .000 .024 .004 .000 .000 .000 .000 .027 .021 .002 .002 .023 .000 .001 .000 .002 .039 .000 .000 .100 .060 .078 .104 .138 .113 .099 .059 .062 .083 .083 .061 .168 .149 .114 .133 .068 .206 .299 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 305 Table 45. Alcohol-related Police Crime Arrest Cases, 2005-2011: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Job Loss (N = 327) 95% CI for Exp(B) B SE Wald p Exp(B) LL UL Duty Status 1.066 0.473 5.091 .024 2.904 1.150 7.333 Sex-related 1.253 0.389 10.357 .001 3.499 1.632 7.503 Violence-related 0.866 0.310 7.802 .005 2.377 1.295 4.364 Officer was Reassigned to Another Position -1.893 0.711 7.093 .008 0.151 0.037 0.607 Citizen Complaint as Method of Crime Detection -1.075 0.303 12.566 < .001 0.341 0.188 0.618 0.965 0.295 10.660 .001 2.624 1.470 4.682 1.879 0.787 5.699 .017 6.549 1.400 30.639 Conviction 28 U.S.C. §1441 Civil Case Removed to Federal Court - 2 Log Likelihood 360.536 Model Chi-Square 68.251 Cox & Snell R Nagelkerke R ROC R AUC 2 2 2 <.001 .188 .258 95% CI for AUC .322 LL .661 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. UL .620 .702 306 Table 46. Bivariate Associations of Conviction in DUI Arrest Cases Variable Label Duty Status State Liquor Law violation Official Capacity Officer was Reassigned Officer was Demoted DUI-related Traffic Accident Injuries in a DUI-related Traffic Accident DUI in a Take-Home Police Vehicle DUI Refused BAC Test Off-Duty: Agency has 24/7 On-Call Policy Oxycodone Anabolic Steroids (excluding Testosterone) OIDV: Weapon: Verbal Threats OIDV: Victim Injured, nonfatal DUI Traffic Accident: Officer Denied Driving DUI in a Police Vehicle Geographic Division Geographic Region Job Lost Narcotics Anabolic Steroids Variable V6 V11 V73 V92 V102 V103 V110 V111 V113 V117 V118 V133 V152 V167 V173 V225 duipveh geogdiv geogreg joblostbin narcotics steroids N 378 378 378 378 378 378 378 378 378 378 378 378 378 378 378 378 378 378 378 378 378 378 2 χ 5.917 85.253 7.734 6.255 6.748 3.712 8.850 5.972 5.060 6.210 5.782 4.051 4.051 4.051 4.051 7.734 4.929 25.595 18.376 6.222 4.051 4.051 df 1 46 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 3 1 1 1 p .015 .000 .005 .012 .009 .054 .003 .015 .024 .013 .016 .044 .044 .044 .044 .005 .026 .001 .000 .013 .044 .044 V .125 .475 .143 .129 .134 .099 .153 .126 .116 .128 .124 .104 .104 .104 .104 .143 .114 .260 .220 .128 .104 .104 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 307 Table 47. Police DUI Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Conviction (N = 378) 95% CI for Exp(B) B SE Wald p Exp(B) LL UL Liquor Law violation -2.893 1.181 6.000 .014 0.055 0.005 0.561 Official Capacity -0.949 0.363 6.842 .009 0.387 0.190 0.788 0.861 0.283 9.239 .002 2.366 1.358 4.123 DUI-related Traffic Accident DUI Refused BAC Test -0.775 0.308 6.313 .012 0.461 0.252 0.843 DUI Traffic Accident: Officer Denied Driving -2.858 1.200 5.670 .017 0.057 0.005 0.603 0.892 0.310 8.283 .004 2.440 1.329 4.480 Job Loss - 2 Log Likelihood 334.792 Model Chi-Square 41.842 Cox & Snell R Nagelkerke R ROC R AUC 2 2 2 <.001 .105 .166 95% CI for AUC .410 LL .705 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. UL .639 .771 308 Table 48. Bivariate Associations of Job Loss in DUI Arrest Cases Variable Label Duty Status Full-Time Sworn Personnel (categorical) State Part-Time Sworn Personnel (categorical) Urban to Rural Continuum Murder and Nonnegligent Manslaughter Kidnapping / Abduction Organizational vs. Against Citizenry Internal Crime Against the Organization Official Capacity Violence-related Officer was Reassigned Discussion of Agency Scandal Conviction DUI-related Traffic Accident Injuries in DUI-related Traffic Accident DUI On-Duty in Police Vehicle Off-Duty: Agency has 24/7 On-Call Policy Off-Duty: In Police Uniform DUI Traffic Accident: Driving in Wrong Direction DUI Traffic Accident: Fatality DUI in a Police Vehicle Age (categorical) Years of Service (categorical) Metro vs. Non-Metro County Geographic Region Geographic Division Victim Age (categorical) Victim Age Difference Variable V6 V10 V11 V12 V13 V36 V39 V90 V91 V92 V96 V102 V107 V109 V110 V111 V112 V118 V120 V221 V222 DUIpveh agecat yrsservcat codichot geogreg geogdiv vicagecat vicagediff N 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 378 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 2 χ 6.657 29.056 107.344 24.362 31.714 6.222 4.346 4.555 7.764 17.856 14.195 5.850 9.773 6.222 6.759 9.618 6.912 8.080 4.346 16.158 12.230 10.788 32.467 33.388 9.812 14.578 38.273 21.306 80.423 df 1 10 50 7 8 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 10 10 1 3 8 8 54 p .010 .001 .000 .001 .000 .013 .037 .033 .021 .000 .000 .016 .002 .013 .009 .002 .009 .004 .037 .000 .007 .001 .000 .000 .002 .002 .000 .006 .011 V .083 .174 .334 .159 .182 .081 .067 .069 .090 .136 .122 .078 .101 .128 .084 .100 .085 .092 .067 .130 .113 .106 .184 .186 .101 .123 .200 .149 .289 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 309 Table 49. Police DUI Arrest Cases, 2005-2011: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Job Loss (N = 378) 95% CI for Exp(B) B SE Wald p Exp(B) LL UL Full-Time Sworn Personnel (categorical) -0.149 0.050 8.878 .003 0.862 0.781 0.950 Murder & Nonnegligent Manslaughter 1.254 0.634 3.909 .048 3.506 1.011 12.156 Official Capacity 1.076 0.332 10.525 .001 2.934 1.531 5.623 Violence-related 0.902 0.339 7.068 .008 2.465 1.268 4.794 Conviction 0.857 0.299 8.202 .004 2.357 1.311 4.238 -2.254 1.047 4.638 .031 0.105 0.013 0.817 Off-Duty: Employing Agency Requires 24/7 Availability DUI Traffic Accident: Driving in Wrong Direction 2.149 1.081 3.951 .047 8.576 1.030 71.382 Years of Service (categorical) 0.043 0.021 4.278 .039 1.043 1.002 1.086 - 2 Log Likelihood 444.563 Model Chi-Square 69.892 Cox & Snell R Nagelkerke R ROC R AUC 2 2 2 <.001 .169 .227 95% CI for AUC .436 LL .718 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. UL .666 .770 310 Table 50. Drug-related Police Crime Arrest Cases, 2005-2011: Arrested Officers and Employing Agencies (N = 739) n (%) n (%) Sex Male Female 701 38 (94.9) (5.1) Age 19-23 24-27 28-31 32-35 36-39 40-43 44-47 48-51 52-55 56 or older Missing 5 53 130 129 136 84 72 37 21 17 55 (0.7) (7.2) (17.6) (17.5) (18.4) (11.4) (9.7) (5.0) (2.8) (2.3) (7.4) Years of Service 0-2 3-5 6-8 9-11 12-14 15-17 18-20 21-23 24-26 27 or more years Missing 72 116 87 76 64 50 37 21 8 21 187 (9.7) (15.7) (11.8) (10.3) (8.7) (6.8) (5.0) (2.8) (1.1) (2.8) (25.3) Arresting Agency Employing Agency Another Agency 212 527 (28.7) (71.3) Officer Duty Status On-Duty Off-Duty 444 295 (60.1) (39.9) Rank Officer Detective Corporal Sergeant Lieutenant Captain Major Colonel Deputy Chief Chief 559 70 7 45 22 5 1 0 3 27 (75.6) (9.5) (0.9) (6.1) (3.0) (0.7) (0.1) (0.0) (0.4) (3.7) Function Patrol & Street Level Line/Field Supervisor Management 629 74 36 (85.1) (10.0) (4.9) Region of United States Northeastern States Midwestern States Southern States Western States 154 145 346 94 (20.9) (19.6) (46.8) (12.7) Level of Rurality Metropolitan County Non-Metro County 611 128 (82.7) (17.3) n (%) Agency Type Primary State Police Sheriff's Office County Police Dept. Municipal Police Dept. Special Police Dept. Constable Tribal Police Dept. Regional Police Dept. 23 139 25 527 20 4 1 0 (3.1) (18.8) (3.4) (71.3) (2.7) (0.5) (0.2) (0.0) Full-Time Sworn Officers 0 1 2-4 5-9 10-24 25-49 50-99 100-249 250-499 500-999 1,000 or more 1 8 24 33 73 84 84 58 80 58 236 (0.1) (1.1) (3.3) (4.5) (9.9) (11.4) (11.4) (7.8) (10.8) (7.8) (31.9) Part-Time Sworn Officers 0 1 2-4 5-9 10-24 25-49 50-99 100-249 250-499 551 28 47 48 49 11 4 1 0 (74.6) (3.8) (6.4) (6.5) (6.6) (1.5) (0.5) (0.1) (0.0) This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 311 Table 51. Most Serious Offense Charged in Drug-related Police Crime Arrest Cases, 2005-2011 (N = 739) n (%) Drug / Narcotic violation Robbery Driving Under the Influence All Other Larceny Theft from a Building Burglary / Breaking and Entering All Other Offenses Weapons Law violation False Pretenses / Swindle Extortion / Blackmail Official Misconduct / Oppression /Violation of Oath Aggravated Assault Obstruction of Justice False Statement / False Report Embezzlement Forcible Fondling Civil Rights violation Bribery Counterfeiting / Forgery 308 60 38 33 28 26 24 22 19 15 15 14 13 11 10 10 10 9 9 (41.7) (8.1) (5.1) (4.5) (3.8) (3.5) (3.2) (3.0) (2.6) (2.0) (2.0) (1.9) (1.8) (1.5) (1.4) (1.4) (1.4) (1.2) (1.2) Forcible Rape Simple Assault Intimidation Stolen Property Offenses Evidence: Destroying / Tampering Arson Murder and Nonnegligent Manslaughter Kidnapping / Abduction Impersonation Theft from a Motor Vehicle Destruction of Property / Vandalism Sexual Assaul with an Object Other Sex Crime Statutory Rape Online Solicitation of a Child Disorderly Conduct Hit & Run Wiretapping, illegal This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. n (%) 8 7 7 7 6 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 (1.1) (0.9) (0.9) (0.9) (0.8) (0.7) (0.6) (0.6) (0.4) (0.4) (0.3) (0.3) (0.3) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) 312 Table 52. Specific Drugs in Drug-related Police Crime Arrest Cases, 2005-2011 (N = 739) n (%) Specific Drugs Cocaine (Stimulant) Marijuana (Cannabis) Oxycodone (Narcotic) Hydrocodone (Narcotic) Crack (Stimulant) Amphetamine / Methamphetamine (Stimulant) Heroin (Narcotic) Narcotics (other) Anabolic Steroids (not testosterone) Depressants (other) Benzodiazapines (Depressant) Testosterone (Anabolic Steroid) MDMA & Analogs (Hallucinogen) Morphine (Narcotic) Phencyclidine & Analogs (Hallucinogen) Hydromorphone (Narcotic) Stimulants (other) Hallucinogens (other) Codeine (Narcotic) Gamma Hydroxybutyric Acide (Depressant) 233 177 89 69 58 53 50 29 29 26 19 17 11 8 8 5 4 4 2 2 (31.5) (24.0) (12.0) (9.3) (7.8) (7.2) (6.8) (3.9) (3.9) (3.5) (2.6) (2.3) (1.5) (1.1) (1.1) (0.7) (0.5) (0.5) (0.3) (0.3) n (%) Drug Classes Stimulants Narcotics Cannabis Depressants Anabolic Steroids Hallucinogens 308 197 177 45 44 23 (41.7) (26.7) (24.0) (6.1) (6.0) (3.1) Cases with Multiple Types of Drug Classes Present 0 Drug Classes 1 Drug Class 2 Drug Classes 3 Drug Classes 4 Drug Classes 133 466 105 22 13 (18.0) (63.1) (14.2) (3.0) (1.8) Cases with Multiple Specific Drugs Present 0 Specific Drugs 1 Specific Drug 2 Specific Drugs 3 Specific Drugs 4 Specific Drugs 5 Specific Drugs 6 Specific Drugs 131 415 136 35 10 11 1 (17.7) (56.2) (18.4) (4.7) (1.4) (1.5) (0.1) Note . Categories are not mutually exclusive. Sum of (%) columns ≠ 100 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 313 Table 53. Victim Characteristics in Drug-related Police Crime Arrest Cases, 2005-2011 (N = 739) n (%) (Valid %) Victim's Sex Female Male Missing 52 57 630 (7.0) (7.7) (85.3) (47.7) (52.3) Victim's Age Birth-11 12-13 14-15 16-17 18-19 20-24 25-32 33-41 42 or older Missing 1 4 7 1 4 8 5 3 5 701 (0.1) (0.5) (1.0) (0.1) (0.5) (1.1) (0.7) (0.4) (0.7) (94.9) (2.6) (10.5) (18.4) (2.6) (10.5) (21.1) (13.2) (7.9) (13.2) n (%) (Valid %) Victim's Relationship Current Spouse Former Spouse Current Girlfriend or Boyfriend Former Girlfriend or Boyfriend Child or Stepchild Some Other Relative Unrelated Child Stranger or Acquaintance Missing 6 0 3 1 2 2 12 112 601 (0.8) (0.0) (0.4) (0.1) (0.3) (0.3) (1.6) (15.2) (81.3) (4.4) (0.0) (2.2) (0.7) (1.4) (1.4) (8.7) (81.2) Victim's Law Enforcement Status Victim is Not a Police Officer Victim is a Police Officer Missing 136 4 599 (18.4) (0.5) (81.1) (97.1) (2.9) Victim Adult or Child Adult Child Missing 129 14 596 (17.5) (1.9) (80.6) (90.2) (9.8) This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 314 Table 54. Patterns of Drug-related Corruption in Police Crime Arrest Cases, 2005-2011 (N = 739) n (%) Drug Selling / Dealing / Trafficking Drug Personal Use Facilitation of the Drug Trade Theft / Shakedown Street-Level Dealer (n = 75, 10.1%) Warrantless Searches (n = 69, 9.3%) Car Stops & Drug Couriers (n = 58, 7.8%) Off-Duty Robberies (n = 35, 4.7%) Illegitimate Raids / Searches (n = 33, 4.5%) Calls for Service / Radio Runs (n = 16, 2.2%) Theft from Police Evidence Room Falsification Forged Prescription Planting Evidence Sexually-motivated Drug Corruption Cases with Multiple Patterns of Drug Corruption 0 Drug Corruption Patterns Present 1 Drug Corruption Pattern Present 2 Drug Corruption Patterns Present 3 Drug Corruption Patterns Present 4 Drug Corruption Patterns Present 5 Drug Corruption Patterns Present 6 Drug Corruption Patterns Present 7 Drug Corruption Patterns Present 299 235 172 171 (40.5) (31.8) (23.3) (23.1) 60 58 33 33 25 (8.1) (7.8) (4.5) (4.5) (3.4) 59 316 192 72 56 35 6 3 (8.0) (42.8) (26.0) (9.7) (7.6) (4.7) (0.8) (0.4) n (%) Other Types of Police Crime Present in Drug Cases Profit-motivated Police Crime Violence-related Police Crime Alcohol-related Police Crime Sex-related Police Crime 438 132 38 37 (59.3) (17.9) (5.1) (5.0) Drug Cases with Multiple Types of Police Crime 1 Type of Police Crime Present (just Drug-related) 2 Types of Police Crime Present 3 Types of Police Crime Present 4 Types of Police Crime Present 226 390 114 9 (30.6) (52.8) (15.4) (1.2) Note . Categories are not mutually exclusive. Sum of (%) column ≠ 100 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 315 Table 55. CART Analysis Patterns of Drug-related Police Corruption (N = 739) 95% CI Splitting Variabl Node 1 Variable(s) Node 2 Variable(s) AUC LL UL Cocaine Marijuana Cocaine Hydrocodone Cocaine Cocaine Heroin/Marijuana Cocaine Hydrocodone/Marijuana Oxycodone Heroin/Marjiuana Heroin/Marjiuana Crack Heroin/Crack Amphetamine/Crack Testosterone Testosterone Marijuana .774 .769 .792 .701 .685 .737 .705 .714 .740 .660 .646 .697 .843 .824 .844 .724 .725 .777 Stimulants Cannabis Cannabis Stimulants Narcotics Stimulants Cannabis/Depressants Narcotics/Stimulants Narcotics/Stimulants Cannabis/Anabolic Steroids* Stimulants Cannabis Narcotics/Hallucinogens Anabolic Steroids/Narcotics/Hallucinogens Anabolic Steroids/Hallucinogens Hallucinogens/Narcotics Anabolic Steroids/Hallucinogens Depressants .753 .753 .755 .696 .675 .654 .685 .695 .697 .658 .632 .608 .821 .812 .814 .734 .717 .699 Specific Drugs Theft/Shakedown - Car Stops & Drug Couriers Theft/Shakedown - Warrantless Search/Seizures Theft/Shakedown - Street-Level Dealer Drug Use Drug Trafficking Facilitation of the Drug Trade Drug Classes Theft/Shakedown - Car Stops & Drug Couriers Theft/Shakedown - Warrantless Search/Seizures Theft/Shakedown - Street-Level Dealer Drug Trafficking Drug Use Facilitation of the Drug Trade *Anabolic steroids other than testosterone This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 316 Table 56. Bivariate Associations of Conviction in Drug-related Police Crime Arrest Cases, 2005-2011 Variable Label State Arresting Agency Burglary / Breaking and Entering Drug / Narcotic Violation Extortion / Blackmail Gambling: Betting / Wagering Weapons Law Violation Obstruction of Justice Victim Relationship to the Arrested Officer Profit-motivated Police Sexual Violence Arrested Officer was Reassigned Officer was Suspended DUI: Refused BAC Test Family Violence Other Depressants Cocaine OIDV: Weapon: Hands Fists OIDV: Weapon: Other Body Parts OIDV: Victim Injured, Nonfatal Drugs: Personal Use / Using Drugs Drugs: Selling / Dealing / Trafficking Drugs: Shakedown from Car Stops Job Lost binary Drugs: Stimulants Metropolitan vs. NonMetro County Victim Age Categorical Victim Age Difference Variable V11 V14 V20 V23 V26 V32 V63 V74 V85 V97 V98 V102 V104 V117 V126 V138 V139 V164 V165 V173 V196 V197 V206 joblossb stimulant codichot vicagecat vicagediff N 562 562 562 562 562 562 562 562 129 562 562 562 562 562 562 562 562 562 562 562 562 562 562 562 562 562 562 562 2 χ 65.220 13.219 4.328 5.962 3.870 6.310 4.694 5.436 15.398 15.513 5.024 9.568 17.595 7.156 9.044 4.289 8.535 9.146 4.489 6.758 3.762 15.265 4.878 12.267 9.442 5.843 47.832 63.847 df 43 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 25 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. p .016 .000 .037 .015 .049 .012 .030 .020 .017 .000 .025 .002 .000 .007 .003 .038 .003 .002 .034 .009 .052 .000 .027 .000 .002 .016 .000 .000 V .341 .153 .088 .103 .083 .106 .091 .098 .345 .166 .095 .130 .177 .113 .127 .087 .123 .128 .089 .110 .082 .165 .093 .148 .130 .102 .292 .337 317 Table 57. Drug-related Police Crime Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Conviction (N = 129) 95% CI for Exp(B) B Obstruction of Justice Victim Relationship to Arrested Officer SE Wald p Exp(B) LL UL -1.703 0.751 5.141 .023 0.182 0.042 0.794 0.471 0.171 7.545 .006 1.601 1.144 2.240 -2.061 0.699 8.687 .003 0.127 0.032 0.501 1.521 0.606 6.302 .012 4.575 1.396 14.996 Victim Age Categorical -0.096 0.040 5.795 .016 0.909 0.840 0.982 - 2 Log Likelihood 86.361 Model Chi-Square 34.589 Suspended from Job Lost Job Cox & Snell R Nagelkerke R ROC R AUC 2 2 2 <.001 .235 .387 95% CI for AUC .698 LL .849 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. UL .761 .937 318 Table 58. Bivariate Associations of Job Loss in Drug-related Police Crime Arrest Cases, 2005-2011 Variable Label Year of Arrest Age Duty Status Full-Time Sworn Personnel Arresting Agency Counterfeiting / Forgery Drug / Narcotic Violation Theft from a Building Theft / All Other Larceny Pornography / Obscene Material Weapons Law Violation Driving Under the Influence Drunkenness Trespass of Real Property Official Capacity Alcohol-related Profit-motivated Reassigned Suspended Supervisor was Disciplined Chief is Under Scrutiny Officer was Convicted DUI-related Traffic Accident DUI On-Duty in a Pollice Vehicle DUI in Police Vehicle Outside Jurisdiction Off-Duty: Identified Self as an Officer DUI in Possession of a Firearm Heroin Other Hullucinogens 28 USC §1441 Civil Action Removed 18 USC §242 Criminal Deprivation of Rights Drugs: Selling / Dealing / Trafficking Drugs: Forged Prescription Drugs: faciltating Drug Trade Drugs: Shakedowns from Car Stops Drugs: Theft from Evidence Room Drugs: Falsification Drugs: Narcotics DUI in a Police Vehicle Metropolitan County vs. Nonmetro County Victim Age Difference Variable V2 V3 V6 V10 V14 V21 V23 V43 V47 V49 V63 V67 V68 V78 V92 V94 V97 V102 V104 V105 V106 V109 V110 V112 V114 V119 V128 V129 V147 V179 V181 V197 V198 V201 V206 V208 V209 Narcotic DUI in Pol CoDichot VicAgeDif N 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 739 2 χ 56.885 62.818 12.598 26.219 7.304 4.142 4.854 4.684 4.227 16.780 13.652 19.044 7.152 7.152 18.828 21.590 13.973 20.894 25.124 11.138 8.228 12.267 4.555 8.471 7.152 4.533 4.818 7.998 3.969 5.019 4.709 7.430 15.890 10.467 4.636 10.110 4.163 6.864 7.843 4.470 39.386 df 6 45 1 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 26 p .000 .041 .000 .003 .007 .042 .028 .030 .040 .000 .000 .000 .007 .007 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .001 .004 .000 .033 .004 .007 .033 .028 .005 .046 .025 .030 .006 .000 .001 .031 .001 .041 .009 .005 .034 .045 V .277 .303 .131 .188 .099 .075 .081 .080 .076 .151 .136 .161 .090 .098 .160 .171 .138 .168 .184 .123 .106 .148 .079 .107 .098 .078 .081 .104 .073 .082 .080 .100 .147 .119 .079 .117 .075 .096 .103 .078 .231 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 319 Table 59. Drug-related Police Crime Arrest Cases, 2005-2011: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Job Loss (N = 535) 95% CI for Exp(B) B SE Wald p Exp(B) LL UL Year of Officer's Arrest 0.544 0.075 52.053 < .001 1.723 1.486 1.997 Counterfeiting / Forgery -1.718 0.818 4.405 .036 0.179 0.036 0.893 Alcohol-related Police Crime -1.341 0.455 8.668 .003 0.262 0.107 0.639 Officer's Chief is Under Scrutiny as a Result of Arrest -0.989 0.413 5.738 .017 0.372 0.166 0.836 Conviction on Any Offense Charged 28 U.S.C. §1441 Civil Rights Case Removed 0.917 0.314 8.538 .003 2.503 1.353 4.631 1.895 0.532 12.678 < .001 6.654 2.344 18.886 Falsification in a Drug-related Criminal Case -1.183 0.405 8.521 .004 0.306 0.138 0.678 Narcotics 1.452 0.390 13.882 < .001 4.272 1.990 9.169 Non-Metropolitan County 0.946 0.397 5.694 .017 2.576 1.184 5.603 - 2 Log Likelihood 440.566 Model Chi-Square 131.461 Cox & Snell R Nagelkerke R ROC R AUC 2 2 2 <.001 .218 .332 95% CI for AUC .634 LL .817 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. UL .776 .859 320 Table 60. Violence-related Police Crime Arrest Cases, 2005-2011: Arrested Officers and Employing Agencies (N = 3,328) n (%) n (%) Sex Male Female Age 19-23 24-27 28-31 32-35 36-39 40-43 44-47 48-51 52-55 56 or older Missing Years of Service 0-2 3-5 6-8 9-11 12-14 15-17 18-20 21-23 24-26 27 or more years Missing Arresting Agency Employing Agency Another Agency 3,194 134 (96.0) (4.0) 74 305 489 513 542 441 288 149 75 67 385 (2.2) (9.2) (14.7) (15.4) (16.3) (13.3) (8.7) (4.5) (2.3) (2.0) (11.6) 398 514 350 296 262 193 174 68 57 60 956 (12.0) (15.4) (10.5) (8.9) (7.9) (5.8) (5.2) (2.0) (1.7) (1.8) (28.7) 1,228 2,100 (36.9) (63.1) Officer Duty Status On-Duty Off-Duty 1,173 2,155 (35.2) (64.8) Rank Officer Detective Corporal Sergeant Lieutenant Captain Major Colonel Deputy Chief Chief 2,656 141 64 269 69 21 3 0 16 89 (79.8) (4.2) (1.9) (8.1) (2.1) (0.6) (0,1) (0.0) (0.5) (2.7) Function Patrol & Street Level Line/Field Supervisor Management 2,797 402 129 (84.0) (12.1) (3.9) Region of United States Northeastern States Midwestern States Southern States Western States 715 664 1,386 563 (21.5) (20.0) (41.6) (16.9) Level of Rurality Metropolitan County Non-Metro County 2,880 448 (86.5) (13.5) n (%) 118 523 90 2,504 77 6 9 1 (3.5) (15.7) (2.7) (75.2) (2.3) (0.2) (0.3) (0.0) Full-Time Sworn Officers 0 1 2-4 5-9 10-24 25-49 50-99 100-249 250-499 500-999 1,000 or more 24 31 130 190 311 338 317 399 329 272 987 (0.7) (0.9) (3.9) (5.7) (9.3) (10.2) (9.5) (12.0) (9.9) (8.2) (29.7) Part-Time Sworn Officers 0 1 2-4 5-9 10-24 25-49 50-99 100-249 250-499 2,489 90 282 207 165 63 26 5 1 (74.8) (2.7) (8.5) (6.2) (5.0) (1.9) (0.8) (0.2) (0.0) Agency Type Primary State Police Sheriff's Office County Police Dept. Municipal Police Dept. Special Police Dept. Constable Tribal Police Dept. Regional Police Dept. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 321 Table 61. Most Serious Offense Charged in Violence-related Police Crime Arrest Cases, 2005-2011 (N = 3,328) n (%) Simple Assault Aggravated Assault Forcible Fondling Forcible Rape Intimidation Murder / Nonnegligent Manslaughter Unclassified / All Other Offenses Forcible Sodomy Robbery Civil Rights violation (criminal) Weapons Law violation Disorderly Conduct Unclassified / Other Sex Crime Negligent Manslaughter Burglary / Breaking & Entering Official Misconduct / Official Oppression Arson Driving Under the Influence Kidnapping / Abduction Destruction of Property / Vandalism 870 570 352 322 200 104 99 94 92 61 57 55 47 43 38 38 32 32 30 24 (26.4) (17.1) (10.6) (9.7) (6.0) (3.1) (3.0) (2.8) (2.8) (1.8) (1.7) (1.7) (1.4) (1.3) (1.1) (1.1) (1.0) (1.0) (0.9) (0.7) Statutory Rape Obstruction of Justice Restraining Order violation False Report / False Statement Bribery Vehicular Hit & Run Sexual Assault with an Object Drug / Narcotic violation Unclassified / All Other Larceny Extortion / Blackmail False Pretenses / Swindle Indecent Exposure Family Offenses, nonviolent Pornography / Obscene Material Prostitution Drunkennness Trespass of Real Property Incest Impersonation Online Solicitation of a Child This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. n (%) 24 18 17 14 12 12 10 9 8 7 5 5 4 3 3 3 3 2 1 1 (0.7) (0.5) (0.5) (0.4) (0.4) (0.4) (0.3) (0.3) (0.2) (0.2) (0.2) (0.2) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.0) (0.0) 322 Table 62. Victim Characteristics in Violence-related Police Crime Arrest Cases, 2005-2011 (N = 3,328) n (%) (Valid %) Victim's Sex Female Male Missing 1,841 1,124 363 (55.3) (33.8) (10.9) (62.1) (37.9) Victim's Age Birth-11 12-13 14-15 16-17 18-19 20-24 25-32 33-41 42 or older Missing 163 112 174 134 96 180 252 187 165 1,865 (4.9) (3.4) (5.2) (4.0) (2.9) (5.4) (7.6) (5.6) (5.0) (56.0) (11.1) (7.7) (11.9) (9.1) (6.6) (12.3) (17.2) (12.8) (11.3) n (%) (Valid %) Victim's Relationship Current Spouse Former Spouse Current Girlfriend or Boyfriend Former Girlfriend or Boyfriend Child or Stepchild Some Other Relative Unrelated Child Stranger or Acquaintance Missing 336 59 195 118 159 84 451 1,668 258 (10.1) (1.8) (5.9) (3.5) (4.8) (2.5) (13.6) (50.1) (7.8) (10.9) (1.9) (6.4) (3.8) (5.2) (2.7) (14.7) (54.3) Victim's Law Enforcement Status Victim is Not a Police Officer Victim is a Police Officer Missing 2,912 194 3,106 (87.5) (5.8) (93.3) (93.8) (6.2) Victim Adult or Child Adult Child Missing 2,416 676 3,092 (72.6) (20.3) (7.1) (78.1) (21.9) This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 323 Table 63. Bivariate Associations of Conviction in Violence-related Arrest Cases Variable Label Year of Arrest Gender Rank Full-Time Sworn Personnel (categorical) State Part-Time Sworn Personnel (categorical) Aggravated Assault Simple Assault Bribery Burglary Drug / Narcotic violation Extortion / Blackmail Murder & Nonnegligent Manslaughter Kidnapping / Abduction Pornography / Obscene Material Robbery Forcible Rape Forcible Sodomy Forcible Fondling Statutory Rape Stolen Property Offenses Weapons Law violation Criminal Deprivation of Civil Rights Driving Under the Influence Family Offenses, nonviolent Gender of Victim Victim Age Child Victim Victim's Relationship to Arrested Officer Internal Crime Against the Organization Drug-related Alcohol-related Sex-related Profit-motivated Variable V2 V5 V7 V10 V11 V12 V16 V17 V19 V20 V23 V26 V36 V39 V49 V52 V53 V54 V56 V58 V62 V63 V65 V67 V71 V81 V83 V84 V85 V91 V93 V94 V95 V97 N 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,798 962 1,864 1,855 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 χ2 28.951 3.830 21.647 31.265 98.550 15.057 11.233 69.186 8.886 7.994 14.321 13.069 5.960 3.587 13.069 20.997 16.238 23.453 36.773 5.342 4.077 6.206 6.702 9.695 7.876 6.885 96.014 23.214 77.089 14.666 20.845 4.524 85.756 33.007 df 6 1 8 10 49 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 73 1 7 2 1 1 1 1 p .000 .050 .006 .001 .000 .035 .001 .000 .003 .005 .000 .000 .015 .058 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .021 .043 .013 .010 .002 .005 .009 .037 .000 .000 .001 .000 .033 .000 .000 V .121 .044 .104 .126 .223 .087 .075 .187 .067 .063 .085 .081 .055 .043 .081 .103 .090 .109 .136 .052 .045 .056 .058 .070 .063 .062 .316 .112 .204 .086 .103 .048 .208 .129 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 324 Police Sexual Violence Driving While Female Encounter Suspension DUI-related Traffic Accident Injuries in a DUI-related Traffic Accident DUI in a Privately-owned Vehicle DUI Refused BAC Test Off-Duty: Agency has 24/7 On-Call Policy Off-Duty: Intervened in Existing Dispute Family Violence Hydrocodone Cocaine Marijuana OIDV: Weapon: Hands / Fist OIDV: Weapon: Miscellaneous Objects OIDV: Weapon: Verbal Threats OIDV: Confiscated Gun was Returned OIDV: Protection Order Filed OIDV: Victim Injured, nonfatal OIDV: Victim Injured, fatal 42 U.S.C. §1981 Civil Defendant 42 U.S.C. §1997 Civil / Plaintiff is Prisoner Drugs: Selling / Dealing / Trafficking Drugs: Sexually-motivated Drug Crime Drugs: Facilitating Drug Trade Drugs: Shakedown from Street Dealers Drugs: Shakedown from Warrantless Search Drugs: Shakedown from Car Stops Drugs: Shakedown from Off-Duty Robbery Drugs: Theft from Police Evidence Room Drugs: Shakedowns (aggregate) Job Lost Narcotics Stimulants Cannabis Age (categorical) V98 V99 V104 V110 V111 V115 V117 V118 V125 V126 V131 V139 V148 V164 V166 V167 V169 V171 V173 V174 V175 V178 V197 V199 V201 V202 V204 V206 V207 V208 V210 joblostbin narcotics stimulants cannabis agecat 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 38.540 11.554 9.249 8.644 7.891 8.452 4.589 4.485 3.944 38.595 4.077 21.445 16.049 50.787 3.739 4.901 10.465 4.372 55.748 7.641 3.673 4.268 17.235 6.931 6.642 16.055 14.022 18.611 9.980 3.944 25.915 254.985 4.935 21.792 16.049 33.356 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 .000 .001 .002 .003 .005 .004 .032 .034 .047 .000 .043 .000 .000 .000 .053 .027 .001 .037 .000 .006 .055 .039 .000 .008 .010 .000 .000 .000 .002 .047 .000 .000 .026 .000 .000 .000 .139 .076 .068 .066 .063 .065 .048 .048 .045 .139 .045 .104 .090 .160 .043 .050 .073 .047 .168 .062 .043 .046 .093 .059 .058 .090 .084 .097 .071 .045 .114 .358 .050 .105 .090 .130 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 325 Years of Service (categorical) Geographic Region Geographic Division Rank Function Victim Age (categorical) yrservcat geogreg geogdiv rankfunc vicagecat 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 1,984 40.562 8.678 20.397 9.786 27.714 10 3 8 2 9 .000 .034 .009 .007 .001 .143 .066 .101 .070 .118 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 326 Table 64. Violence-related Police Crime Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Conviction (N = 954) 95% CI for Exp(B) B Full-Time Sworn Personnel (categorical) SE Wald p Exp(B) LL UL -0.086 0.031 7.915 .005 0.917 0.864 0.974 Burglary / Breaking & Entering 2.526 1.097 5.307 .021 12.506 1.458 107.281 Pornography / Obscene Material 2.206 1.048 4.433 .035 9.079 1.165 70.781 Forcible Sodomy 0.997 0.422 5.592 .018 2.711 1.186 6.197 Criminal Deprivation of Civil Rights 1.370 0.469 8.543 .003 3.934 1.570 9.858 Sex-related 0.626 0.626 0.181 .001 1.870 1.310 2.668 DUI in a Personally-Owned Vehichle 2.560 1.071 5.713 .017 12.936 1.585 105.554 OIDV Victim Injured, fatal 1.995 0.650 9.432 .002 7.351 2.058 26.257 Job Loss 1.726 0.165 108.819 < .001 5.619 4.063 7.772 Years of Service (categorical) 0.047 0.014 11.794 .001 1.049 1.021 1.077 - 2 Log Likelihood 948.456 Model Chi-Square 256.077 Cox & Snell R Nagelkerke R ROC R AUC 2 2 2 <.001 .235 .328 95% CI for AUC .482 LL .741 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. UL .718 .764 327 Table 65. Bivariate Associations of Job Loss in Violence-related Arrest Cases Variable Label Year of Arrest Age Years of Service Gender Duty Status Rank Type of Agency Full-Time Sworn Personnel (categorical) State Part-Time Sworn Personnel (categorical) Urban to Rural Continuum Aggravated Assault Simple Assault Bribery Burglary Drug / Narcotic violation Impersonation Kidnapping / Abduction Theft from a Building Pornography / Obscene Material Robbery Forcible Rape Forcible Sodomy Sexual Assault with an Object Forcible Fondling Statutory Rape On-Line Solicitation of a Child Unclassified Sex Crimes Stolen Property Offenses Criminal Deprivation of Civil Rights Disorderly Conduct Evidence: Destroying / Tampering Official Misconduct Victim Gender Variable V2 V3 V4 V5 V6 V7 V9 V10 V11 V12 V13 V16 V17 V19 V20 V23 V29 V39 V43 V49 V52 V53 V54 V55 V56 V58 V60 V61 V62 V65 V66 V69 V75 V81 N 3,328 2,943 2,372 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 2,965 χ2 146.477 67.607 55.941 8.369 91.844 18.818 25.826 55.100 141.569 39.679 42.904 10.964 128.940 35.502 4.699 14.424 4.526 25.636 5.433 7.899 19.475 62.366 17.201 7.626 137.226 13.894 4.786 54.740 7.249 20.843 34.355 4.641 21.145 12.413 df 6 50 38 1 1 8 7 10 49 8 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 p .000 .049 .030 .004 .000 .016 .001 .000 .000 .000 .000 .001 .000 .000 .030 .000 .033 .000 .020 .005 .000 .000 .000 .006 .000 .000 .029 .000 .007 .000 .000 .031 .000 .000 V .210 .152 .154 .050 .166 .075 .088 .129 .206 .109 .114 .057 .197 .103 .038 .066 .037 .088 .040 .049 .076 .137 .072 .048 .203 .065 .038 .128 .047 .079 .102 .037 .080 .065 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 328 Victim is a Police Officer Victim Age Child Victim Victim's Relationship to Arrested Officer Organizational vs. Against Citizenry Internal Crime Against the Organization Official Capacity Drug-related Sex-related Profit-motivated Police Sexual Violence Driving While Female Encounter Officer was Reassigned Officer was Demoted Officer was Suspended Officer's Supervisor was Disciplined Officer's Chief is Under Scrutiny Crime Detected by Citizen Complaint Conviction DUI: Officer Resisted Arrest Off-Duty: Showed a Police Weapon Family Violence Heroin Hydrocodone Oxycodone Cocaine Marijuana OIDV: Weapon: Hands / Fist OIDV: Weapon: Other Body Parts OIDV: Weapon: Misc. Objects OIDV: Gun was Confiscated OIDV: Confiscated Gun was Later Returned OIDV: Protection Order Filed OIDV: Victim Injured, nonfatal OIDV: Victim Injured, fatal 42 U.S.C. §1981 Civil Defendant V82 V83 V84 V85 V90 V91 V92 V93 V95 V97 V98 V99 V102 V103 V104 V105 V106 V108 V109 V127 V121 V126 V129 V131 V133 V139 V148 V164 V165 V166 V168 V169 V171 V173 V174 V175 3,106 1,463 3,092 3,070 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 1,984 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3.870 100.641 38.888 153.358 7.809 18.888 83.335 9.875 284.771 21.423 151.504 71.090 46.978 6.491 58.545 9.467 15.225 7.273 254.985 3.808 12.422 122.943 5.433 7.249 6.521 3.944 7.722 54.925 4.143 12.252 7.830 5.264 4.365 32.927 4.269 8.082 1 76 1 7 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .049 .031 .000 .000 .005 .000 .000 .002 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .011 .000 .002 .000 .007 .000 .051 .000 .000 .020 .007 .011 .047 .005 .000 .042 .000 .005 .022 .037 .000 .039 .004 .035 .262 .112 .224 .048 .075 .158 .054 .293 .080 .213 .146 .119 .044 .133 .053 .068 .047 .358 .034 .061 .192 .040 .047 .044 .034 .048 .128 .035 .061 .049 .040 .036 .099 .036 .049 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 329 42 U.S.C. §1983 Civil Defendant 42 U.S.C. §1997 Civil Plaintiff is a Prisoner 28 U.S.C. §1441 Civil Case Removed 18 U.S.C. §242 Criminal Defendant Drugs: Using / Personal Use Drugs: Selling / Dealing / Trafficking Drugs: Shakedown from Car Stops Drugs: Shakedown from Off-Duty Robbery Drugs: Shakedown (aggregate) Narcotics Depressants Stimulants Cannabis Age (categorical) Years of Service (categorical) Metro versus Non-Metro County Geographic Region Geographic Division Victim Age (categorical) Victim Age Difference V176 V178 V179 V181 V196 V197 V206 V207 V210 narcotic depress stimulant cannabis agecat yrservcat codichot geogreg geogdiv vicagecat vicagediff 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 3,328 15.066 5.053 28.434 46.552 9.336 17.818 9.421 8.384 5.489 11.855 4.526 6.935 7.722 91.126 90.546 13.177 48.162 53.265 49.257 140.586 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 10 1 3 8 9 99 .000 .025 .000 .000 .002 .000 .002 .004 .019 .001 .033 .008 .005 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .004 .067 .039 .092 .118 .053 .073 .053 .050 .041 .060 .037 .046 .048 .165 .165 .063 .120 .127 .122 .206 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 330 Table 66. Violence-related Police Crime Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Job Loss (N = 692) 95% CI for Exp(B) B SE Wald p Exp(B) LL UL Year of Arrest 0.411 0.059 49.043 < .001 1.509 1.345 1.693 Victim Gender -0.572 0.260 4.858 .028 0.564 0.339 0.939 0.219 0.062 12.561 < .001 1.244 1.103 1.404 Victim's Relationship to the Arrested Officer Official Capacity -0.672 0.253 7.029 .008 0.511 0.311 0.839 1.352 0.351 14.843 < .001 3.864 1.943 7.685 Officer was Reassigned to Another Position -1.224 0.503 5.930 .015 0.294 0.110 0.787 Officer was Suspended -1.462 0.291 25.230 < .001 0.232 0.131 0.410 1.943 0.219 78.621 < .001 6.978 4.542 10.721 Police Sexual Violence Conviction 28 U.S.C. §1441 Civil Case Removed to Federal Court 1.215 0.383 10.079 .001 3.370 1.592 7.136 Cannabis -2.841 0.852 11.105 .001 0.058 0.011 0.310 Age (categorical) -0.105 0.052 4.046 .044 0.900 0.813 0.997 - 2 Log Likelihood 617.555 Model Chi-Square 250.874 Cox & Snell R Nagelkerke R ROC R AUC 2 2 2 <.001 .304 .425 95% CI for AUC .536 LL .768 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. UL .744 .791 331 Table 67. Bivariate Associations of Conviction in Officer-involved Domestic Violence Arrest Cases Variable Label Year of Arrest State Simple Assault Burglary Property Destruction / Vandalism Murder and Nonnegligent Manslaughter Pornogaphy / Obscene Material Forcible Rape Forcible Sodomy Forcible Fondling Obstruction of Justice Official Misconduct Child Victim Victim's Relationship to Arrested Officer Sex-related OIDV: Weapon: Personally-owned Gun OIDV: Weapon: Hands / Fist OIDV: Weapon: Other Body Parts OIDV: Confiscated Gun was Returned OIDV: Officer Violated Protection Order OIDV: Victim Injured, nonfatal OIDV: Victim Injured, fatal Lost Job Geographic Region Geographic Division Victim Age (categorical) Variable V2 V11 V17 V20 V22 V36 V49 V53 V54 V56 V74 V75 V84 V85 V95 V157 V164 V165 V169 V172 V173 V174 joblost geogreg geogdiv vicagecat N 497 497 497 497 497 497 497 497 497 497 497 497 486 480 497 497 497 497 497 497 497 497 497 497 497 497 2 χ 15.413 80.273 29.509 3.927 9.992 14.147 5.826 11.871 4.626 24.159 7.533 7.521 13.968 27.127 34.222 7.379 14.263 14.351 5.982 4.603 17.631 15.862 62.928 19.175 24.938 28.296 df 6 46 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 8 9 p .017 .001 .000 .048 .002 .000 .016 .001 .031 .000 .006 .006 .000 .000 .000 .007 .000 .000 .014 .032 .000 .000 .000 .000 .002 .001 V .176 .402 .244 .089 .142 .169 .108 .155 .096 .220 .123 .123 .170 .238 .262 .122 .169 .170 .110 .096 .188 .179 .356 .196 .224 .239 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 332 Table 68. Officer-involved Domestic Violence Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Conviction (N = 480) 95% CI for Exp(B) B SE Wald p Exp(B) LL UL Destruction of Property / Vandalism 2.176 0.682 10.178 .001 8.807 2.314 33.516 Obstruction of Justice 2.950 1.106 7.118 .008 19.115 2.188 167.003 Victim's Relationship to the Arrested Officer 0.133 0.058 5.141 .023 1.142 1.018 1.280 Sex-related 1.526 0.326 21.909 < .001 4.602 2.428 8.720 OIDV: Weapon: Personally-owned Gun 0.809 0.401 4.074 .044 2.246 1.024 4.927 OIDV: Officer Violated an Order of Protection 1.547 0.599 6.663 .010 4.699 1.451 15.213 OIDV: Victim Injured, nonfatal OIDV: Victim Injured, fatal Job Loss Geographic Region -0.587 0.228 6.620 .010 0.556 0.356 0.870 2.048 0.660 9.622 .002 7.752 2.125 28.278 1.385 0.226 37.730 < .001 3.996 2.568 6.216 -0.287 0.110 6.764 .009 0.751 0.605 0.932 - 2 Log Likelihood 497.342 Model Chi-Square 163.272 Cox & Snell R Nagelkerke R ROC R AUC 2 2 2 <.001 .288 .386 95% CI for AUC .640 LL .820 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. UL .782 .858 333 Table 69. Bivariate Associations of Job Loss in Officer-involved Domestic Violence Arrest Cases Variable Label Year of Arrest Duty Status Full-Time Sworn Personnel (categorical) State Part-Time Sworn Personnel (categorical) Urban to Rural County Continuum Simple Assault Murder & Nonnegligent Manslaughter Kidnapping / Abduction Pornography / Obscene Material Forcible Rape Forcible Fondling Indecent Exposure Unclassified Sex Crime Stolen Property Offenses Official Misconduct Unclassified / All Other Offenses Child Victim Victim's Relationship to Arrested Officer Official Capacity Drug-related Sex-related Police Sexual Violence Officer was Reassigned Officer was Suspended Officer was Convicted Unclassified / Other Depressants OIDV: Weapon: Other Body Parts OIDV: Weapon: Verbal Threats OIDV: Officer Violated Protection Order OIDV: Victim Injured, fatal 28 U.S.C. §1441 Civil Case Removed Drugs: Sexually-motivated Drug Crime Depressants Variable V2 V6 V10 V11 V12 V13 V17 V36 V39 V49 V53 V56 V59 V61 V62 V75 V80 V84 V85 V92 V93 V95 V98 V102 V104 V109 V138 V165 V167 V172 V173 V179 V199 depress N 961 961 961 961 961 961 961 961 961 961 961 961 961 961 961 961 961 929 910 961 961 961 961 961 961 497 961 961 961 961 961 961 961 961 χ2 41.162 4.876 31.600 81.166 15.748 19.372 25.197 12.668 8.129 7.008 22.061 39.122 4.567 10.256 6.706 7.309 11.681 18.080 26.984 4.583 5.677 51.384 6.706 11.172 14.446 62.928 5.024 25.743 5.311 4.389 15.351 4.908 5.024 5.024 df 6 1 10 49 8 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 p .000 .027 .000 .003 .046 .013 .000 .000 .004 .008 .000 .000 .033 .001 .010 .007 .001 .000 .000 .032 .017 .000 .010 .001 .000 .000 .025 .000 .021 .036 .000 .027 .025 .025 V .207 .071 .181 .291 .128 .142 .162 .115 .092 .085 .152 .202 .069 .103 .084 .087 .110 .140 .172 .069 .077 .231 .084 .108 .123 .356 .072 .164 .074 .068 .126 .071 .072 .072 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 334 Age (categorical) Metro vs. Non-Metro County Geographic Region Geographic Division Victim Age (categorical) Victim Age Difference agecat codichot geogreg geogdiv vicagecat vicagediff 961 961 961 961 961 961 31.396 7.658 12.289 30.704 38.094 85.555 10 1 3 8 9 65 .000 .006 .006 .000 .000 .045 .181 .089 .113 .179 .199 .298 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 335 Table 70. Officer-involved Domestic Violence Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Job Loss (N = 486) 95% CI for Exp(B) B SE Wald p Exp(B) LL UL Year of Arrest 0.420 0.067 38.770 < .001 1.521 1.333 1.736 Duty Status 1.848 0.714 6.704 .010 6.347 1.567 25.710 -0.018 0.007 5.742 .017 0.982 0.968 0.997 State Rurality Continuum (categorical) 0.248 0.089 7.826 .005 1.282 1.077 1.525 Simple Assault -0.711 0.228 9.712 .002 0.491 0.314 0.768 Suspended -0.673 0.254 7.006 .008 0.510 0.310 0.840 Conviction 1.689 0.231 53.587 < .001 5.414 3.445 8.510 OIDV: Weapon: Other Body Parts (not hands or fist) 0.946 0.352 7.215 .007 2.576 1.291 5.138 28 U.S.C. §1441 Civil Case Removed to Federal Court 1.150 0.432 7.101 .008 3.159 1.356 7.360 - 2 Log Likelihood 525.053 Model Chi-Square 146.577 Cox & Snell R Nagelkerke R ROC R AUC 2 2 2 <.001 .260 .348 95% CI for AUC .600 LL .800 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. UL .762 .839 336 Table 71. Profit-motivated Police Crime Arrest Cases, 2005-2011: Arrested Officers and Employing Agencies (N = 1,591) n (%) n (%) Sex Male Female Age 19-23 24-27 28-31 32-35 36-39 40-43 44-47 48-51 52-55 56 or older Missing Years of Service 0-2 3-5 6-8 9-11 12-14 15-17 18-20 21-23 24-26 27 or more years Missing Arresting Agency Employing Agency Another Agency 1,497 94 (94.1) (5.9) 24 137 207 233 244 231 144 90 48 62 171 (1.5) (8.6) (13.0) (14.6) (15.3) (14.5) (9.1) (5.7) (3.0) (3.9) (10.8) 148 197 162 155 126 104 111 55 25 43 465 (9.3) (12.4) (10.2) (9.7) (7.9) (6.5) (7.0) (3.5) (1.6) (2.7) (29.2) 510 1,081 (32.1) (67.9) Officer Duty Status On-Duty Off-Duty 1,093 498 (68.7) (31.3) Rank Officer Detective Corporal Sergeant Lieutenant Captain Major Colonel Deputy Chief Chief 1,132 111 25 141 42 18 5 2 18 97 (71.2) (7.0) (1.6) (8.9) (2.6) (1.1) (0.3) (0.1) (1.1) (6.1) Function Patrol & Street Level Line/Field Supervisor Management 1,243 208 140 (78.1) (13.1) (8.8) 362 329 726 174 (22.8) (20.7) (45.6) (10.9) 1,312 279 (82.5) (17.5) Region of United States Northeastern States Midwestern States Southern States Western States Level of Rurality Metropolitan County Non-Metro County n (%) 62 251 66 1,162 42 7 1 0 (3.9) (15.8) (4.2) (73.0) (2.6) (0.4) (0.1) (0.0) Full-Time Sworn Officers 0 1 2-4 5-9 10-24 25-49 50-99 100-249 250-499 500-999 1,000 or more 7 16 67 77 176 152 167 169 161 104 495 (0.4) (1.0) (4.2) (4.9) (11.1) (9.6) (10.5) (10.6) (10.1) (6.5) (31.1) Part-Time Sworn Officers 0 1 2-4 5-9 10-24 25-49 50-99 100-249 250-499 1,209 46 104 111 94 19 6 1 1 (76.) (2.9) (6.5) (7.0) (5.9) (1.2) (0.3) (0.1) (0.1) Agency Type Primary State Police Sheriff's Office County Police Dept. Municipal Police Dept. Special Police Dept. Constable Tribal Police Dept. Regional Police Dept. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 337 Table 72. Most Serious Offense Charged in Profit-motivated Police Crime Arrest Cases, 2005-2011 (N = 1,591) n (%) Unclassified Theft / Larceny False Pretenses / Swindle Drug / Narcotic violation Robbery Theft from Building Extortion / Blackmail Embezzlement Burglary / Breaking & Entering Bribery All Other Offenses False Report / False Statement Weapons Law violation Counterfeiting / Forgery Stolen Property Offenses Shoplifting Official Misconduct / Oppression / Violation of Oath Civil Rights violation Intimidation Theft from Motor Vehicle Arson Impersonation Obstruction of Justice Aggravated Assault 255 199 189 103 92 85 77 72 56 49 46 40 39 38 31 29 26 21 21 16 14 11 10 (16.0) (12.5) (11.9) (6.4) (5.8) (5.3) (4.8) (4.5) (3.5) (3.1) (2.9) (2.5) (2.5) (2.4) (1.9) (1.8) (1.6) (1.3) (1.3) (1.0) (0.9) (0.7) (0.6) Wire Fraud Gambling: Operating / Promoting Simple Assault Motor Vehicle Theft Credit Card Fraud / ATM Fraud Murder & Nonnegligent Manslaughter Assisting or Promoting Prostitution Evidence: Destroying / Tampering Gambling: Betting / Wagering Theft of Motor Vehicle Parts / Accessories Kidnapping / Abduction Unclassified Sex Crime Welfare Fraud Pocket-Picking Theft from a Coin-operated Machine Prostitution Forcible Sodomy Forcible Fondling Bad Checks Disorderly Conduct Family Offenses, nonviolent Liquor Law violation Wiretapping, illegal This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. n (%) 9 9 7 7 6 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 (0.6) (0.6) (0.4) (0.4) (0.4) (0.3) (0.3) (0.3) (0.2) (0.2) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) 338 Table 73. Victim Characteristics in Profit-motivated Police Crime Arrest Cases, 2005-2011 (N = 1,591) n (%) (Valid %) Victim's Sex Female Male Missing 71 195 1,325 (4.4) (83.3) (16.7) (26.7) (73.3) Victim's Age Birth-11 12-13 14-15 16-17 18-19 20-24 25-32 33-41 42 or older Missing 0 1 0 2 1 9 11 9 13 1,545 (0.0) (0.1) (0.0) (0.1) (0.1) (0.6) (0.7) (0.6) (0.8) (97.0) (0.0) (2.2) (0.0) (4.3) (2.2) (19.5) (24.0) (19.5) (28.3) n (%) (Valid %) Victim's Relationship Current Spouse Former Spouse Current Girlfriend or Boyfriend Former Girlfriend or Boyfriend Child or Stepchild Some Other Relative Unrelated Child Stranger or Acquaintance Missing 1 4 1 6 0 5 6 350 1,218 (0.1) (0.3) (0.1) (0.4) (0.0) (0.3) (0.4) (21.9) (76.5) (0.3) (1.1) (0.3) (1.6) (0.0) (1.3) (1.6) (93.8) Victim's Law Enforcement Status Victim is Not a Police Officer Victim is a Police Officer Missing 358 12 1,221 (22.5) (0.8) (76.7) (96.8) (3.2) Victim Adult or Child Adult Child Missing 374 7 1,210 (23.5) (0.4) (76.1) (98.2) (1.8) This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 339 Table 74. Bivariate Associations of Conviction in Profit-motivated Police Crime Arrest Cases Variable Label Year Age Years of Service Type of Agency State Part-Time Sworn Personnel (categorical) Urban to Rural Continuum Code Arresting Agency Burglary Drug / Narcotic violation Embezzlement Extortion / Blackmail Pocket-Picking Shoplifting Weapons Law violation Civil Rights violation Victim's Relationship to the Offender Organizational vs. Against Citizenry Drug-related Police Crime Violence-related Police Crime Officer was Reassigned Officer was Suspended Officer's Supervisor was Disciplined Officer's Chief is Under Scrutiny Family Violence Oxycodone Cocaine Marijuana OIDV: Weapon: Dept-issued Gun OIDV: Weapon: Hands / Fist OIDV: Weapon: Miscellaneous Objects OIDV: Weapon: Verbal Threats OIDV: Protection Order was Filed OIDV: Victim Injured, nonfatal Variable V2 V3 V4 V9 V11 V12 V13 V14 V20 V23 V25 V26 V40 V42 V63 V65 V85 V90 V93 V96 V102 V104 V105 V106 V126 V133 V139 V148 V156 V164 V166 V167 V171 V173 N 1,105 1,010 799 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 266 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 χ2 23.832 85.828 62.423 14.237 88.251 21.871 43.579 22.569 5.262 28.447 7.204 5.654 4.790 7.668 5.992 5.402 25.017 5.729 23.074 4.100 18.365 22.939 6.340 4.178 9.353 5.048 19.749 4.436 4.790 4.790 4.790 9.588 9.588 14.395 df 6 49 39 6 47 8 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 p .001 .001 .010 .027 .000 .005 .000 .000 .022 .000 .007 .017 .029 .006 .014 .020 .000 .017 .000 .043 .000 .000 .012 .041 .002 .025 .000 .035 .029 .029 .029 .002 .002 .000 V .147 .292 .280 .114 .283 .141 .199 .143 .069 .160 .081 .072 .066 .083 .074 .070 .307 .072 .145 .061 .129 .144 .076 .061 .092 .068 .134 .063 .066 .066 .066 .093 .093 .114 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 340 18 U.S.C. §242 Criminal Defendant Drugs: Trafficking Drugs: Facilitation of Drug Trade Drugs: Shakedown from Car Stops Drugs: Shakedown from Off-Duty Robberies Drugs: Shakedown (aggregate) Lost Job Narcotics Stimulants Cannabis Age (categorical) Geographic Region Geographic Division Victim Age (categorical) Victim Age Difference V181 V197 V201 V206 V207 V210 joblossb narcotics stimulant cannabis agecat geogreg geogdiv vicagecat vicagediff 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 1,105 6.282 20.696 11.065 6.252 3.988 7.766 82.094 6.347 18.068 4.436 44.496 12.647 16.063 21.614 39.147 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 3 8 6 21 .012 .000 .001 .012 .046 .005 .000 .012 .000 .035 .000 .005 .041 .001 .009 .075 .137 .100 .075 .060 .084 .273 .076 .128 .063 .201 .107 .121 .140 .188 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 341 Table 75. Profit-motivated Police Crime Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Conviction (N = 197) 95% CI for Exp(B) B Type of Agency State Part-time Sworn Personnel (categorical) Violence-related SE Wald p Exp(B) LL UL 0.519 0.224 5.381 .020 1.681 1.084 2.606 0.070 0.020 12.566 < .001 1.073 1.032 1.115 -0.318 0.160 3.931 .047 0.728 0.532 0.996 1.666 0.732 5.177 .023 5.292 1.260 22.234 Officer's Chief is Under Scrutiny -3.293 1.398 5.549 .018 0.037 0.002 0.575 Drugs: Shakedown / Theft from Off-duty Robbery -4.517 2.035 4.927 .026 0.011 0.000 0.589 4.702 1.648 8.141 .004 110.177 4.358 2785.279 3.187 0.679 22.041 < .001 24.216 6.401 91.605 -0.357 0.123 8.439 .004 0.700 0.550 0.890 Drugs: Any Shakedown / Theft ) Job Lost Victim Age Categorical - 2 Log Likelihood 133.494 Model Chi-Square 82.984 Cox & Snell R Nagelkerke R ROC R AUC 2 2 2 <.001 .344 .516 95% CI for AUC .186 LL .593 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. UL .547 .639 342 Table 76. Bivariate Associations of Job Loss in Profit-motivated Police Crime Arrest Cases Variable Label Year Years of Service Gender Rank Type of Agency Full-Time Sworn Personnel (categorical) State Urban to Rural Continuum Arresting Agency Arson Drug / Narcotic violation Credit Card / ATM Fraud Wire Fraud Gambling: Operating / Promoting Robbery Weapons Law violation Civil Rights violation Obstruction of Justice Victim is a Police Officer Internal versus Organizational Official Capacity Drug-related Police Crime Officer was Reassigned Officer was Suspended Officer's Supervisor was Disciplined Officer's Chief is Under Scrutiny Discussion of Agency Scandal Conviction Heroin Hydrocodone Oxycodone Other Narcotics 28 U.S.C. §1441 Civil Rights Case Removed Variable V2 V4 V5 V7 V9 V10 V11 V13 V14 V15 V23 V28 V31 V33 V52 V63 V65 V74 V82 V91 V92 V93 V102 V104 V105 V106 V107 V109 V129 V131 V133 V135 V179 N 1,591 1,126 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 370 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,105 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 χ2 155.340 56.457 7.232 23.219 13.075 33.267 126.335 21.745 4.878 5.204 17.469 5.860 6.423 6.619 4.630 7.182 15.304 6.705 4.516 14.997 7.175 16.389 23.675 87.439 15.083 4.366 9.010 82.094 8.764 5.765 5.827 4.499 3.922 df 6 39 1 9 6 10 47 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 p .000 .035 .007 .006 .042 .000 .000 .005 .027 .023 .000 .015 .011 .010 .031 .007 .000 .010 .034 .000 .007 .000 .000 .000 .000 .037 .003 .000 .003 .016 .016 .034 .048 V .312 .224 .067 .121 .091 .145 .282 .117 .055 .057 .105 .061 .064 .065 .054 .067 .098 .065 .110 .097 .067 .101 .122 .234 .097 .052 .075 .273 .074 .060 .061 .053 .050 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 343 18 U.S.C. §242 Criminal Defendant Drugs: Using / Personal Use Drugs: Selling / Trafficking Drugs: Facilitation of Drug Trade Drugs: Shakedowns from Car Stops Drugs: Theft from Police Evidence Room Narcotics Depressants Age Categorical Years of Service Categorical Metropolitan versus Nonmetro County Geographic Region Geographic Division Rank by Function V181 V196 V197 V201 V206 V208 narcotics depress agecat yrsservcat countydic geogreg geogdiv rankfunc 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 1,591 20.538 6.163 11.652 9.870 4.095 5.085 18.086 4.761 49.034 28.444 8.468 17.057 33.167 15.232 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 10 1 3 8 2 .000 .013 .001 .002 .043 .024 .000 .029 .000 .002 .004 .001 .000 .000 .114 .062 .086 .079 .051 .057 .107 .055 .176 .134 .073 .104 .144 .098 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 344 Table 77. Profit-motivated Police Crime Arrest Cases: Logistic Regression Model Predicting Job Loss (N = 206) 95% CI for Exp(B) B Internal Crime Against the Organization Official Capacity SE Wald p Exp(B) LL UL 0.381 0.093 16.830 < .001 1.464 1.220 1.756 2.302 0.781 8.692 .003 9.995 2.163 46.179 -2.597 0.824 9.922 .002 0.075 0.015 0.375 Conviction 2.404 0.633 14.413 < .001 11.070 3.200 38.301 Drugs: Selling / Dealing / Trafficking 3.839 1.235 9.666 .002 46.459 4.132 522.381 Geographic Division 0.528 0.152 12.104 .001 1.695 1.259 2.283 Obstruction of Justice -2.741 1.073 6.530 .011 0.065 0.008 0.528 - 2 Log Likelihood 99.126 Model Chi-Square 111.933 Discussion of an Agency Scandal or Cover Up Cox & Snell R Nagelkerke R ROC R AUC 2 2 2 <.001 .419 .654 95% CI for AUC .336 LL .668 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. UL .626 .711 345 Table 78. 200 Largest State & Local Law Enforcement Agencies in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted by # Full-Time Sworn Personnel) # of Full-Time Per Per 1,000 Per 100,000 Agency County State Sworn Personnel Agency Officers Population New York City Police Department Chicago Police Department Los Angeles Police Department Los Angeles County Sheriff's Office California Highway Patrol Philadelphia Police Department Cook County Sheriff's Office Houston Police Department New York State Police New York State Courts Officers Pennsylvania State Police Washington Metropolitan Police Department Texas Department of Public Safety Dallas Police Department Phoenix Police Department Miami-Dade (County) Police Department New Jersey State Police Baltimore Police Department Las Vegas Metro Police Department Nassau County Police Department Suffolk County Police Department Harris County Sheriff's Office Massachusetts State Police Detroit Police Department Boston Police Department Riverside County Sheriff's Office Illinois State Police San Antonio Police Department Milwaukee Police Department San Diego Police Department San Francisco Police Department Honolulu (City & County) Police Department New York Cook Los Angeles Los Angeles Sacramento Philadelphia Cook Harris Albany New York Dauphin DC Travis Dallas Maricopa Miami-Dade Mercer Baltimore City Clark Nassau Suffolk Harris Middlesex Wayne Suffolk Riverside Sangamon Bexar Milwaukee San Diego San Francisco Honolulu NY IL CA CA CA PA IL TX NY NY PA DC TX TX AZ FL NJ MD NV NY NY TX MA MI MA CA IL TX WI CA CA HI 36023 13354 9727 9461 7202 6624 5655 5053 4847 4500 4458 3742 3529 3389 3388 3093 3053 2990 2942 2732 2622 2558 2310 2250 2181 2147 2105 2020 1987 1951 1940 1934 196 83 30 14 13 66 8 35 5 1 26 29 6 39 17 25 13 55 8 6 6 3 10 23 14 11 10 30 73 12 7 26 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 5.44 6.22 3.08 1.48 1.81 9.96 1.41 6.93 1.03 0.22 5.83 7.75 1.70 11.51 5.02 8.08 4.26 18.39 2.72 2.20 2.29 1.17 4.33 10.22 6.42 5.12 4.75 14.85 36.74 6.15 3.61 13.44 2.40 1.60 0.31 0.14 0.03 4.33 0.15 0.86 0.03 0.01 0.20 4.82 0.02 1.65 0.45 1.00 0.15 8.86 0.41 0.45 0.40 0.07 0.15 1.26 1.94 0.50 0.08 1.75 7.70 0.39 0.87 2.73 346 Baltimore County Police Department Columbus Police Department Virginia State Police North Carolina State Highway Patrol San Bernardino County Sheriff's Office Orange County Sheriff-Coroner Department Michigan State Police Atlanta Police Department Charlotte - Mecklenburg Police Department Port Authority of New York & New Jersey Police Jacksonville Sheriff's Office Broward County Sheriff's Office Cleveland Police Department Florida Highway Patrol Indianapolis Police Prince George's County Police Department Ohio State Highway Patrol Memphis Police Department Denver Police Department Austin Police Department Fort Worth Police Department Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office Maryland State Police New Orleans Police Department Kansas City Police Department Fairfax County Police Department Sacramento County Sheriff's Office Orange County Sheriff's Office San Jose Police Department St. Louis (city) Police Dept San Diego County Sheriff's Office Indiana State Police Nashville Metro Police Department Newark Police Seattle Police Department Arizona Department of Public Safety Baltimore Franklin Chesterfield Wake San Bernardino Orange Ingham Fulton Mecklenburg Hudson Duval Broward Cuyahoga Leon Marion Prince Georges Franklin Shelby Denver Travis Tarrant Palm Beach Baltimore Orleans Jackson Fairfax Sacramento Orange Santa Clara St. Louis City San Diego Marion Davidson Essex King Maricopa MD OH VA NC CA CA MI GA NC NJ FL FL OH FL IN MD OH TN CO TX TX FL MD LA MO VA CA FL CA MO CA IN TN NJ WA AZ 1910 1886 1873 1827 1797 1794 1732 1719 1672 1667 1662 1624 1616 1606 1582 1578 1560 1549 1525 1515 1489 1447 1440 1425 1421 1419 1409 1398 1382 1351 1322 1315 1315 1310 1283 1244 4 9 3 8 11 14 9 22 20 1 12 16 27 14 33 19 4 46 13 10 20 12 9 63 5 7 6 16 9 10 7 4 18 8 9 3 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 2.09 4.77 1.60 4.38 6.12 7.80 5.20 12.80 11.96 0.60 7.22 9.85 16.71 8.72 20.86 12.04 2.56 29.70 8.52 6.60 13.43 8.29 6.25 44.21 3.52 4.93 4.26 11.44 6.51 7.40 5.30 3.04 13.69 6.11 7.01 2.41 0.50 0.77 0.04 0.08 0.54 0.47 0.09 2.39 2.17 0.01 1.39 0.92 2.11 0.07 3.65 2.20 0.03 4.96 2.17 0.98 1.11 0.91 0.16 18.32 0.74 0.65 0.42 1.40 0.51 3.13 0.23 0.06 2.87 1.02 0.47 0.05 347 Connecticut State Police Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office Louisiana State Police Montgomery County Police Department Louisville Metro Police Department Washington State Patrol El Paso Police Department Miami Police Department Cincinnati Police Department DeKalb County Police Department Wayne County Sheriff's Office Georgia Department of Public Safety Oklahoma City Police Department Tucson Police Department Albuquerque Police Department Tampa Police Department Long Beach Police Department South Carolina Highway Patrol Tennessee Department of Safety Alameda County Sheriff's Office Portland Police Bureau Minneapolis Police Department Jersey City Police Pittsburgh Police Department Kentucky State Police Pinellas County Sheriff's Office Mesa Police Department Fresno Police Department Tulsa Police Department Oklahoma Department of Public Safety Jefferson Parish Sheriff's Office Birmingham Police Department Virginia Beach Police Department Buffalo Police Department St. Louis County Police Dept Oakland Police Department Middlesex Hillsborough E. Baton Rouge Montgomery Jefferson Thurston El Paso Miami-Dade Hamilton DeKalb Wayne Fulton Oklahoma Pima Bernalillo Hillsborough Los Angeles Richland Davidson Alameda Multnomah Hennepin Hudson Allegheny Franklin Pinellas Maricopa Fresno Tulsa Oklahoma Jefferson Jefferson VA Beach City Erie St. Louis Alameda CT FL LA MD KY WA TX FL OH GA MI GA OK AZ NM FL CA SC TN CA OR MN NJ PA KY FL AZ CA OK OK LA AL VA NY MO CA 1227 1223 1215 1206 1197 1132 1132 1104 1082 1074 1062 1048 1046 1032 1020 980 968 967 942 928 928 902 900 891 882 863 831 828 826 825 825 816 813 793 781 773 4 10 2 16 16 2 15 14 10 13 1 1 12 6 13 3 4 10 4 2 10 18 12 21 3 8 2 7 11 5 12 8 9 4 2 3 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 3.26 8.18 1.65 13.27 13.37 1.77 13.25 12.68 9.24 12.10 0.94 0.95 11.47 5.81 12.75 3.06 4.13 10.34 4.25 2.16 10.78 19.96 13.33 23.57 3.40 9.27 2.41 8.45 13.32 6.06 14.55 9.80 11.07 5.04 2.56 3.88 0.11 0.81 0.04 1.65 2.16 0.03 1.87 0.56 1.25 1.88 0.05 0.01 1.67 0.61 1.96 0.24 0.04 0.22 0.06 0.13 1.36 1.56 1.89 1.72 0.07 0.87 0.05 0.75 1.82 0.13 2.77 1.21 2.05 0.44 0.20 0.20 348 Norfolk Police Department Maricopa County Sheriff's Office Alabama Department of Public Safety Orlando Police Department Ventura County Sheriff's Office Richmond Police Department Omaha Police Dept Colorado State Patrol Marion County Sheriff's Office Denver County Sheriff's Office King County Sheriff's Office Rochester Police Department Raleigh Police Department Sacramento Police Department New York State Metro Transportation Auth. Police Gwinnett County Police Department Contra Costa County Sheriff's Office Iowa Department of Public Safety Colorado Springs Police Department Wichita Police Department Delaware State Police Yonkers Police Department Toledo Police Department Anne Arundel County Police Department Baton Rouge Police Department Collier County Sheriff's Office Aurora Police Department Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission Lee County Sheriff's Office Arlington Police Department Polk County Sheriff's Office St. Paul Police Department Mississippi Highway Safety Patrol Greensboro Police Department Calcasieu Parish Sheriff's Office Cobb County Police Department Norfolk City Maricopa Montgomery Orange Ventura Richmond City Douglas Jefferson Marion Denver King Monroe Wake Sacramento New York Gwinnett Contra Costa Polk El Paso Sedgwick Kent Westchester Lucas Anne Arundel E. Baton Rouge Collier Arapahoe Leon Lee Tarrant Polk Ramsey Hinds Guilford Calcasieu Cobb VA AZ AL FL CA VA NE CO IN CO WA NY NC CA NY GA CA IA CO KS DE NY OH MD LA FL CO FL FL TX FL MN MS NC LA GA 772 766 763 757 755 752 747 742 740 739 721 703 702 701 694 682 679 669 668 662 658 641 640 633 630 628 627 626 621 610 600 598 594 593 592 590 14 2 2 8 1 7 6 4 7 5 5 3 8 5 2 4 1 2 5 2 3 2 12 3 6 6 6 4 7 3 13 8 6 5 1 5 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 18.13 2.61 2.62 10.57 1.32 9.31 8.03 5.39 9.46 6.77 6.93 4.27 11.40 7.13 2.88 5.87 1.47 2.99 7.49 3.02 4.56 3.12 18.75 4.74 9.52 9.55 9.57 6.39 11.27 4.92 21.67 13.38 10.10 8.43 1.69 8.47 5.77 0.05 0.04 0.70 0.12 3.43 1.16 0.08 0.77 0.83 0.26 0.40 0.89 0.35 0.02 0.50 0.10 0.07 0.80 0.40 0.33 0.21 2.72 0.56 1.36 1.87 1.05 0.02 1.13 0.17 2.16 1.57 0.20 1.02 0.52 0.73 349 Pima County Sheriff's Dept. Henrico County Division of Police Prince William County Police Department Savannah-Chatham Metropolitan Police Dept Gwinnett County Sheriff's Office Minnesota State Patrol Passaic County Sheriff's Office New Mexico State Police Bexar County Sheriff's Office Arkansas State Police Milwaukee County Sheriff's Office Little Rock Police Department Fulton County Sheriff's Office Shelby County Sheriff's Office Mobile Police Department Tulare County Sheriff's Office Kern County Sheriff's Office Richland County Sheriff's Office Shreveport Police Department St. Petersburg Police Department Winston-Salem Police Department Orleans Parish Sheriff's Office (Criminal Division) Montgomery Police Department Fairfax County Sheriff's Office Brevard County Sheriff's Office Paterson Police Monmouth County Sheriff's Office Durham Police Department Nebraska State Patrol Syracuse Police Department Pasco County Sheriff's Office District of Columbia Protective Services Police Providence Police Department Fort Lauderdale Police Department Worcester Police Department Jackson Police Department Pima Henrico Prince William Chatham Gwinnett Ramsey Passaic Santa Fe Bexar Pulaski Milwaukee Pulaski Fulton Shelby Mobile Tulare Kern Richland Caddo Pinellas Forsyth Orleans Montgomery Fairfax Brevard Passaic Monmouth Durham Lancaster Onondaga Pasco DC Providence Broward Worcester Hinds AZ VA VA GA GA MN NJ NM TX AR WI AR GA TN AL CA CA SC LA FL NC LA AL VA FL NJ NJ NC NE NY FL DC RI FL MA MS 554 554 546 534 531 530 530 528 526 525 524 520 516 516 515 513 512 512 511 510 508 505 500 499 497 497 494 494 491 489 485 484 483 482 482 480 1 4 3 6 3 4 6 13 5 2 7 2 4 8 4 3 11 3 12 6 3 4 6 3 2 3 1 9 1 3 4 1 7 6 5 9 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 1.81 7.22 5.49 11.24 5.65 7.55 11.32 24.62 9.51 3.81 13.36 3.85 7.75 15.50 7.77 5.85 21.48 5.86 23.48 11.76 5.91 7.92 12.00 6.01 4.02 6.04 2.02 18.22 2.04 6.13 8.25 2.07 14.49 12.45 10.37 18.75 0.10 1.30 0.75 2.26 0.37 0.08 1.20 0.63 0.29 0.07 0.74 0.52 0.43 0.86 0.97 0.68 1.31 0.78 4.71 0.65 0.86 1.16 2.62 0.28 0.37 0.60 0.16 3.36 0.05 0.64 0.86 0.17 1.12 0.34 0.63 3.67 350 Manatee County Sheriff's Office Utah Department of Public Safety Chesterfield County Police Department Akron Police Department North Las Vegas Police Department Springfield Police Department Fresno County Sheriff's Office Knox County Sheriff's Office Maryland Transportation Authority Police Franklin County Sheriff's Office El Paso County Sheriff's Office Dane County Sheriff's Office Santa Clara County Sheriff's Office Volusia County Sheriff's Office School District of Philadelphia Police Richmond County Sheriff's Office Dallas County Sheriff's Office Loudoun County Sheriff's Office Corpus Christi Police Department Fort Wayne Police Will County Sheriff's Office Leon County Sheriff's Office Washington Metro Area Transit Auth. Police Madison Police Department Manatee Salt Lake Chesterfield Summit Clark Hampden Fresno Knox Baltimore Franklin El Paso Dane Santa Clara Volusia Philadelphia Richmond Dallas Loudoun Nueces Allen Will Leon DC Dane FL UT VA OH NV MA CA TN MD OH CO WI CA FL PA GA TX VA TX IN IL FL DC WI 476 475 475 472 471 464 461 456 456 455 454 454 450 450 450 449 449 448 448 447 445 443 442 437 4 2 1 8 2 9 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 4 1 5 1 2 3 4 1 3 2 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 8.40 4.21 2.11 16.95 4.25 19.40 2.17 2.19 2.19 4.40 2.20 4.41 2.22 8.89 2.22 11.14 2.23 4.46 6.70 8.95 2.25 6.77 4.52 2.29 1.24 0.07 0.32 1.48 0.10 1.94 0.11 0.23 0.02 0.17 0.16 0.41 0.06 0.81 0.07 2.49 0.04 0.64 0.88 1.13 0.15 1.09 0.33 0.20 351 Table 79. Nonmetropolitan State & Local Law Enforcement Agencies in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted Alphabetically) # of Full-Time Per Per 1,000 Agency County State Sworn Personnel Agency Officers Accomack County Sheriff's Office Ada Police Department Alamogordo Department of Public Safety Albert Lea Police Department Algood Police Department Alice Police Department Allegan County Sheriff's Office Allendale Police Department Allenstown Police Department Alma Police Department Andalusia Police Dept. Andrews Police Department Appalachian State University Police Dept Appling County Sheriff's Office Arcade Police Department Aspen Police Department Assumption Parish Sheriff's Office Athena Police Department Atwater Police Department Auburn Police Department Austin Police Department Bainbridge Police Department Barre Police Department Bartlesville Police Department Baxter County Sheriff's Office Beardstown Police Dept Beeville Police Department Belle Police Department Belpre Police Department Bennettsville Police Department Benzie County Sheriff's Office Berea Police Department Accomack Pontotoc Otero Freeborn Putnam Jim Wells Allegan Allendale Merrimack Bacon Covington Georgetown Watauga Appling Jackson Pitkin Assumption Umatilla Kandiyohi Cayuga Mower Decatur Washington Washington Baxter Cass Bee Maries Washington Marlboro Benzie Madison VA OK NM MN TN TX MI SC NH GA AL SC NC GA GA CO LA OR MN NY MN GA VT OK AR IL TX MO OH SC MI KY 27 42 71 29 11 37 59 10 10 10 30 9 25 14 9 23 50 2 1 70 31 40 18 54 32 9 23 3 9 36 13 30 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 37.04 23.81 14.08 34.48 90.91 27.03 16.95 200.00 100.00 100.00 33.33 111.11 40.00 71.43 111.11 86.96 40.00 500.00 1000.00 14.29 32.26 50.00 55.56 74.07 31.25 111.11 43.48 333.33 111.11 27.78 76.92 33.33 Per 100,000 Population 3.02 2.67 1.57 3.20 1.38 2.45 0.90 19.20 0.68 9.01 2.65 1.66 1.96 5.48 1.65 11.66 8.54 1.32 2.37 1.25 2.55 7.18 1.68 7.85 2.41 7.33 3.14 10.90 1.62 3.46 5.71 1.21 352 Berlin Borough Police Department Berlin Heights Police Department Big Horn County Sheriff's Office Big Spring Police Department Bingen-White Salmon Police Department Birchwood Police Department Bishopville Police Department Bismarck Police Department Black Mountain Police Department Black River Falls Police Department Blackford County Sheriff's Office Bloomville Police Department Blountstown Police Dept. Blue Lake Police Department Bluefield Police Department Bogalusa Police Department Bolivar County Sheriff's Office Bolivar Police Department Boone Police Department Boswell Police Department Bowman Police Department Braselton Police Department Bridgeport Police Department Brownwood Police Department Bunkie Police Department Burr Oak Police Department Butler County Sheriff's Office Butler Township Police Department Butte - Silver Bow County Sheriff's Office Byron Police Dept BYU-Idaho Police Department Caddo Police Department Calhoun County Sheriff's Office Calhoun Police Department Campbell County Sheriff's Office Canton Police Dept Somerset Erie Big Horn Howard Klickitat Washburn Lee St. Francois Buncombe Jackson Blackford Seneca Calhoun Humboldt Mercer Washington Bolivar Hardeman Watauga Choctaw Orangeburg Jackson Jackson Brown Avoyelles St. Joseph Butler Schuylkill Silver Bow Ogle Madison Bryan Calhoun Gordon Campbell Fulton PA OH MT TX WA WI SC MO NC WI IN OH FL CA WV LA MS TN NC OK SC GA AL TX LA MI AL PA MT IL ID OK FL GA WY IL 1 1 8 40 6 2 16 3 18 7 8 0 8 4 21 37 18 21 38 2 3 12 6 38 12 1 9 4 45 7 10 3 18 44 58 23 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 2 1 1 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 1000.00 1000.00 125.00 25.00 166.67 500.00 62.50 333.33 55.56 142.86 125.00 125.00 250.00 47.62 27.03 55.56 47.62 26.32 500.00 1000.00 83.33 166.67 52.63 83.33 1000.00 333.33 250.00 44.44 142.86 100.00 333.33 55.56 22.73 17.24 43.48 1.29 1.30 7.77 2.86 4.92 6.28 5.20 1.53 2.22 4.89 7.83 1.76 6.84 0.74 1.61 2.12 2.93 3.67 1.96 6.58 3.24 1.65 1.88 5.25 2.38 1.63 14.32 0.67 5.85 1.87 2.66 2.36 6.84 1.81 2.17 2.70 353 Canton Village Police Department Caribou Police Department Carlisle Police Department Carter County Sheriff's Office Caruthersville Police Department Central Michigan University Police Department Chaffee Police Department Chandler Police Department Cherokee County Sheriff's Office Cherokee Police Department Chesterfield County Sheriff's Office Chilhowie Police Department Chillicothe Police Department Clarksdale Police Department Clay County Sheriff's Office Clayton County Sheriff's Office Clearlake Police Department Clewiston Police Department Clovis Police Department Clyde Police Department Cochran Police Department Coeburn Police Department Columbiana County Sheriff's Office Columbus Police Department Columbus Police Department Columbus Police Department Columbus Police Department Commerce Police Department Commerce Police Department Concord Police Department Conneaut Police Department Cookeville Police Department Cooter Police Department Corbin Police Department Corinth Police Department Cortland Police Department St. Lawrence Aroostook Nicholas Carter Pemiscot Isabella Scott Henderson Cherokee Alfalfa Chesterfield Smyth Ross Coahoma Clay Clayton Lake Hendry Curry Sandusky Bleckley Wise Columbiana Lowndes Colorado Polk Luna Jackson Ottawa Merrimack Ashtabula Putnam Pemiscot Whitley Alcorn Cortland NY ME KY MO MO MI MO TX SC OK SC VA OH MS AR IA CA FL NM OH GA VA OH MS TX NC NM GA OK NH OH TN MO KY MS NY 8 14 5 3 21 21 5 8 48 2 41 6 47 35 7 12 21 20 53 14 14 7 22 62 10 6 4 24 5 77 19 70 1 19 39 44 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 1 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 125.00 71.43 200.00 666.67 95.24 47.62 200.00 125.00 41.67 500.00 24.39 666.67 21.28 28.57 142.86 83.33 47.62 100.00 56.60 71.43 214.29 142.86 90.91 16.13 100.00 166.67 250.00 41.67 200.00 12.99 52.63 28.57 1000.00 52.63 25.64 22.73 0.89 1.39 14.02 31.92 10.93 1.42 2.55 1.27 3.61 17.72 2.14 12.42 1.28 3.82 6.22 5.52 1.55 5.11 6.20 1.64 22.97 2.41 1.85 1.67 4.79 4.88 3.98 1.65 3.14 0.68 0.99 2.77 5.47 2.81 2.70 2.03 354 Craig Police Department Crescent City Police Department Creston Police Department Cross County Sheriff's Office Crossett Police Department Crystal City Police Department Cullman County Sheriff's Office Custer County Sheriff's Office Dale County Sheriff's Office Danville (City) Sheriff's Office Danville Police Department Daviess County Sheriff's Office DeKalb County Sheriff's Office Del Norte County Sheriff's Office Del Rio Police Department Delavan Police Department Delhi Police Department Delhi Village Police Department Demopolis Police Department Denton Police Department Deridder Police Department Dewitt Police Department Dillon Police Department Dillon Police Department Dixon Police Department Dodge City Police Department Douglas County Sheriff's Office Dunn Police Department Durand Police Department Durango Police Department Durant Police Department Duval County Sheriff's Office Earlville Police Dept East Brewton Police Department Eastman Police Department Eatonton Police Department Moffat Putnam Union Cross Ashley Zavala Cullman Custer Dale Danville City Pittsylvania Daviess DeKalb Del Norte Val Verde Walworth Richland Delaware Marengo Caroline Beauregard Clinton Dillon Summit Pulaski Ford Douglas Harnett Shiawassee La Plata Bryan Duval La Salle Escambia Dodge Putnam CO FL IA AR AR TX AL OK AL VA VA IN AL CA TX WI LA NY AL MD LA IA SC CO MO KS NV NC MI CO OK TX IL AL GA GA 22 5 10 17 15 11 78 12 0 69 126 19 34 30 65 19 5 4 19 13 24 10 25 9 5 49 100 37 5 50 36 18 3 6 11 16 1 1 2 1 1 4 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 45.45 200.00 200.00 58.82 66.67 363.64 12.82 83.33 43.48 7.94 52.63 29.41 66.67 15.38 52.63 200.00 250.00 52.63 76.92 41.67 100.00 40.00 111.11 200.00 20.41 10.00 27.03 200.00 20.00 27.78 55.56 333.33 166.67 90.91 62.50 7.25 1.34 15.96 5.60 4.58 34.26 1.24 3.64 1.99 6.97 1.57 3.16 1.41 6.99 2.05 0.98 4.83 2.08 4.76 3.02 2.80 2.04 3.12 3.57 1.91 2.95 2.13 0.87 1.42 1.95 2.36 8.49 0.88 2.61 4.59 4.71 355 Edenton Police Department Elgin Police Department Elkin Police Department Elko County Sheriff's Office Elmore Police Department Emery County Sheriff's Office Emmet County Sheriff's Office Ephrata Police Department Errol Police Department Estill County Sheriff's Office Eunice Police Department Eunice Police Department Eureka Police Department Fair Bluff Police Department Fairfax Police Department Fairland Police Department Fairmont Police Department Farmville Police Department Fayette County Sheriff's Office Fayette Police Department Ferriday Police Department Ferry County Sheriff's Office Flemingsburg Police Department Florala Police Department Floyd County Sheriff's Office Forest City Police Department Forks Police Department Fort Dodge Police Department Fort Gibson Police Department Fort Madison Police Department Fort Payne Police Department Foster Township Police Department Frankfort Police Department Franklin County Sheriff's Office Franklin Police Dept Freedom Police Department Chowan Grant Surry Elko Ottawa Emery Emmet Grant Coos Estill St. Landry Lea Humboldt Columbus Allendale Ottawa Robeson Prince Edward Fayette Fayette Concordia Ferry Fleming Covington Floyd Winnebago Clallam Webster Muskogee Lee DeKalb McKean Franklin Franklin Franklin Carroll NC ND NC NV OH UT MI WA NH KY LA NM CA NC SC OK NC VA OH AL LA WA KY AL IA IA WA IA OK IA AL PA KY IN NE NH 12 1 17 57 4 26 23 15 0 5 32 8 46 3 6 4 13 27 22 12 10 10 7 6 11 9 9 37 11 17 34 4 65 12 2 3 3 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 250.00 1000.00 58.82 17.54 250.00 76.92 43.48 66.67 200.00 156.25 125.00 21.74 333.33 166.67 250.00 76.92 37.04 136.36 83.33 100.00 100.00 142.86 166.67 90.91 111.11 111.11 27.03 90.91 58.82 29.41 250.00 15.38 83.33 500.00 333.33 20.28 41.77 1.36 2.05 2.41 18.22 3.06 1.12 3.03 6.82 6.00 1.54 0.74 1.72 9.60 3.14 0.75 4.28 10.33 5.80 4.80 13.24 6.97 2.65 6.13 9.20 1.40 2.63 1.41 2.79 1.41 2.30 2.03 4.33 31.01 2.09 356 Fremont County Sheriff's Office Frisco Police Department Fryeburg Police Department Gaffney Police Department Gage County Sheriff's Office Galesburg Police Dept Gallatin County Sheriff's Office Gallup Police Department Gatlinburg Police Department Geneva Township Police Department Georgetown County Sheriff's Office Gillette Police Department Glendive Police Department Gold Beach Police Department Graham County Sheriff's Office Grambling State University Police Dept. Grand Rapids Police Department Grand Traverse County Sheriff's Office Grant County Sheriff's Office Grant County Sheriff's Office Grants Police Department Great Bend Police Department Greenbrier County Sheriff's Office Greene County Sheriff's Office Greene County Sheriff's Office Greensburg Police Greenville Police Department Griggs County Sheriff's Office Guadalupe County Sheriff's Office Halifax County Sheriff's Office Hamburg Police Department Hampton County Sheriff's Office Hanceville Police Department Hannahville Tribal Police Department Hardeman County Sheriff's Office Harrison County Sheriff's Office Fremont Summit Oxford Cherokee Gage Knox Gallatin McKinley Sevier Walworth Georgetown Campbell Dawson Curry Graham Lincoln Wood Grand Traverse Grant Grant Cibola Barton Greenbrier Greene Greene Decatur Washington Griggs Guadalupe Halifax Fremont Hampton Cullman Menominee Hardeman Harrison IA CO ME SC NE IL IL NM TN WI SC WY MT OR AZ LA WI MI IN OK NM KS WV AR AL IN MS ND NM VA IA SC AL MI TN TX 7 13 5 37 12 53 3 62 45 6 78 45 9 4 23 9 5 64 45 5 14 30 30 15 11 18 96 3 3 29 1 26 9 11 22 45 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 142.86 76.92 200.00 54.05 83.33 18.87 333.33 16.13 22.22 166.67 12.82 22.22 111.11 250.00 43.48 222.22 200.00 31.25 22.22 200.00 71.43 33.33 33.33 66.67 90.91 55.56 20.83 333.33 333.33 34.48 1000.00 38.46 111.11 90.91 45.45 22.22 13.44 3.57 1.73 3.61 4.48 1.89 17.89 1.40 1.11 0.98 1.66 2.17 11.15 4.47 2.69 4.28 1.34 2.30 1.43 22.09 3.67 3.61 2.82 2.38 11.06 3.89 3.91 41.32 21.34 2.76 13.44 4.74 1.24 4.16 3.67 1.52 357 Harrodsburg Police Department Haskell Police Department Haskell Police Department Hastings Police Dept Haynesville Police Dept Haywood County Sheriff's Office Hegins Township Police Department Helen Police Department Helena\/West Helena Police Department Hemingway Police Department Hempstead County Sheriff's Office Hendry County Sheriff's Office Hennessey Police Department Henry County Sheriff's Office Hermann Police Department Hockley County Sheriff's Office Holly Hill Police Department Holmes County Sheriff's Office Holt County Sheriff's Office Homer City Borough Police Department Hooksett Police Department Hornell Police Department Humboldt Police Department Hunter Police Department Huron Police Department Indiana Borough Police Department Inman Police Department Ishpeming Police Department Jackson County Sheriff's Office Jackson County Sheriff's Office Jaffrey Police Department Jamestown Police Department Jennings Police Department Jim Wells County Sheriff's Office Juneau County Sheriff's Office Juneau Police Dept. Mercer Muskogee Haskell Adams Claiborne Haywood Schuylkill White Phillips Williamsburg Hempstead Hendry Kingfisher Henry Gasconade Hockley Orangeburg Holmes Holt Indiana Merrimack Steuben Gibson Greene Beadle Indiana McPherson Marquette Jackson Jackson Cheshire Chautauqua Jefferson Davis Jim Wells Juneau Juneau KY OK TX NE LA TN PA GA AR SC AR FL OK VA MO TX SC OH NE PA NH NY TN NY SD PA KS MI FL TN NH NY LA TX WI AK 16 5 3 36 7 22 2 10 30 4 13 67 3 112 7 11 7 33 5 2 28 22 26 2 24 22 2 10 61 14 10 62 24 27 45 44 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 14 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 62.50 200.00 333.33 55.56 142.86 45.45 500.00 100.00 133.33 250.00 76.92 14.93 333.33 125.00 142.86 181.82 142.86 30.30 200.00 500.00 35.71 45.45 76.92 500.00 41.67 45.45 500.00 100.00 16.39 214.29 100.00 32.26 41.67 37.04 22.22 22.73 4.69 1.41 16.95 6.38 5.82 5.32 0.67 3.68 18.38 2.91 4.42 2.55 6.65 25.85 6.57 8.72 1.08 2.36 9.58 1.13 0.68 1.01 4.03 2.03 5.75 1.13 3.43 1.49 2.01 25.78 1.30 1.48 3.17 2.45 3.75 3.20 358 Kahoka Police Department Kalispell Police Department Kauai (County) Police Department Kaw Nation Tribal Police Kendallville Police Kenton Police Department Keokuk County Sheriff's Office Kermit Police Department Kerrville Police Department Ketchikan Police Dept. Kingfisher County Sheriff's Office Kings Mountain Police Department Kingsland Police Dept Kingsville Police Department Kitty Hawk Police Department Klamath Falls Police Department La Salle County Sheriff's Office La Salle County Sheriff's Office LaGrange Police Department Lake County Sheriff's Office Lake County Sheriff's Office Lake County Sheriff's Office Lakeport Police Department Lamesa Police Department Lamoure Police Department Lancaster Police Department Lander University Public Safety Las Vegas Police Department Lawrence County Sheriff's Office Lawrence Township Police Department Lebanon Police Department Lebanon Police Department Lee County Sheriff's Office Lee County Sheriff's Office Leesville Police Department Leland Police Department Clark Flathead Kauai Kay Noble Obion Keokuk Winkler Kerr Ketchikan Gateway Kingfisher Cleveland Camden Kleberg Dare Klamath La Salle La Salle Troup Lake Lake Lake Lake Dawson LaMoure Garrard Greenwood San Miguel Lawrence Clearfield Grafton Laclede Lee Lee Vernon Washington MO MT HI OK IN TN IA TX TX AK OK NC GA TX NC OR IL TX GA CA CO SD CA TX ND KY SC NM IN PA NH MO NC SC LA MS 3 36 125 6 18 5 4 10 51 22 8 30 43 45 17 39 36 10 83 61 9 5 12 16 1 10 10 27 25 9 35 30 47 28 28 18 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 333.33 27.78 24.00 166.67 55.56 200.00 250.00 100.00 19.61 45.45 125.00 66.67 23.26 22.22 58.82 25.64 27.78 300.00 12.05 32.79 222.22 200.00 83.33 62.50 1000.00 100.00 100.00 37.04 40.00 111.11 28.57 33.33 21.28 35.71 35.71 55.56 6.58 1.10 4.47 2.15 2.10 3.14 9.51 14.06 2.02 7.42 6.65 2.04 1.98 3.12 2.95 1.51 0.88 43.57 1.49 3.09 27.36 8.93 1.55 7.23 24.16 5.91 1.44 3.40 2.17 1.22 1.12 2.81 1.73 5.20 1.91 1.96 359 Lenawee County Sheriff's Office Lenoir County Sheriff's Office Level Plains Police Department Lewis County Sheriff's Office Lincoln County Sheriff's Office Lincoln Parish Sheriff's Office Lockhart Police Department Lumberton Police Department Luna County Sheriff's Office Madill Police Department Madison County Sheriff's Office Mahanoy City Borough Police Department Malakoff Police Department Manitowoc Police Department Marble Falls Police Department Marble Head Police Department Marion County Sheriff's Office Marion Police Department Marion Police Department Marion Township Police Department Marksville Police Department Marlboro County Sheriff's Office Marlow Police Department Marshallville Police Dept. Martin County Sheriff's Office Marvell Police Department Mason City Police Department Mason County Sheriff's Office McArthur Police Department McDowell County Sheriff's Office McDowell County Sheriff's Office McIntosh County Sheriff's Office McKinley County Sheriff's Office Medina Police Department Meigs Police Department Meridian Police Department Lenawee Lenoir Dale Lewis Lincoln Lincoln Covington Robeson Luna Marshall Madison Schuylkill Henderson Manitowoc Burnet Ottawa Marion Marion Smyth Waushara Avoyelles Marlboro Stephens Macon Martin Phillips Cerro Gordo Mason Vinton McDowell McDowell McIntosh McKinley Gibson Thomas Lauderdale MI NC AL MO OR LA AL NC NM OK MO PA TX WI TX OH WV SC VA WI LA SC OK GA NC AR IA WV OH NC WV OK NM TN GA MS 44 58 5 5 65 46 1 73 30 12 8 4 4 64 27 4 27 24 18 1 20 25 10 4 34 3 46 21 4 40 15 17 35 11 3 99 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 3 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 22.73 34.48 200.00 200.00 15.38 21.74 1000.00 13.70 33.33 83.33 125.00 250.00 250.00 31.25 37.04 250.00 37.04 41.67 55.56 1000.00 50.00 80.00 100.00 250.00 29.41 333.33 21.74 142.86 250.00 25.00 66.67 117.65 28.57 90.91 333.33 30.30 1.00 3.36 1.99 9.79 2.17 2.14 2.65 0.75 3.98 6.31 8.18 0.67 1.27 2.46 2.34 2.41 1.77 3.02 3.10 4.08 2.38 6.91 2.22 6.78 4.08 4.60 2.26 10.98 7.44 2.22 4.52 9.88 1.40 2.01 2.24 3.74 360 Meyersdale Borough Police Department Miami Police Department Middlesex County Sheriff's Office Middletown Police Miller County Sheriff's Office Millersburg Police Department Mineral Wells Police Department Minocqua Police Department Missouri University of Science & Tech Police Dept Moab Police Department Moberly Police Department Monroe County Sheriff's Office Monroe County Sheriff's Office Monroeville Police Department Montague County Sheriff's Office Montezuma Police Department Monticello Police Montpelier Police Department Mora County Sheriff's Office Morrow County Sheriff's Office Mounds Police Dept Mount Airy Police Department Mount Pleasant Police Department Murphy Police Department Murray Police Department Muscatine Police Department Muskogee County Sheriff's Office Muskogee Police Department Nashville Police Department Natchez Police Dept. Natchitoches Parish Sheriff's Office Navajo Nation Tribal Dept of Law Enforcement Nebraska City Police Dept New Athens Police Department New Castle (city) Police Department New Castle Police Somerset Ottawa Middlesex Henry Miller Holmes Palo Pinto Oneida Phelps Grand Randolph Monroe Monroe Huron Montague Macon White Bear Lake Mora Morrow Pulaski Surry Titus Cherokee Calloway Muscatine Muskogee Muskogee Berrien Adams Natchitoches Apache Otoe Harrison Lawrence Henry PA OK VA IN MO OH TX WI MO UT MO FL WI OH TX GA IN ID NM OR IL NC TX NC KY IA OK OK GA MS LA AZ NE OH PA IN 2 30 17 5 16 10 30 9 11 15 32 189 23 4 10 11 12 5 5 14 1 38 29 7 31 39 37 90 15 48 45 393 15 0 35 35 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 4 1 3 2 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 500.00 33.33 58.82 200.00 62.50 100.00 66.67 111.11 90.91 66.67 31.25 15.87 43.48 250.00 100.00 181.82 83.33 200.00 200.00 71.43 2000.00 26.32 34.48 142.86 32.26 25.64 27.03 44.44 66.67 83.33 22.22 7.63 133.33 28.57 28.57 1.29 3.14 9.12 2.02 4.04 2.36 7.11 2.78 2.21 10.84 3.93 4.10 2.24 1.68 5.07 13.57 4.06 16.71 20.49 8.95 32.46 1.36 3.09 3.64 2.69 2.34 1.41 5.63 5.19 12.39 2.53 4.19 12.71 6.30 1.10 2.02 361 New Castle Police Department New Lisbon Police Department New Martinsville Police Department New Milford Police Department New York City Dept of Env. Protection Police Newaygo County Sheriff's Office Newbury Police Department Newport Police Department Nicholas County Sheriff's Office Nogales Police Department North Kingsville Police Department Norton Police Department Norwich Police Department Nye County Sheriff's Office Oakdale Police Department Oakwood Police Department Ocean Shores Police Department Ogdensburg Police Department Oglesby Police Dept Oglethorpe Police Department Okanogan County Sheriff's Office Olean Police Department Olney Police Department Onley Police Department Ontario Police Department Opelousas Police Department Orangeburg County Sheriff's Office Orangeburg Public Safety Oregon County Sheriff's Office Osceola County Sheriff's Office Osceola Police Department Otero County Sheriff's Office Page County Sheriff's Office Palatka Police Department Paris Police Department Pauls Valley Police Department Garfield Juneau Wetzel Litchfield Westchester Newaygo Merrimack Sullivan Nicholas Santa Cruz Ashtabula Norton Chenango Nye Allen Paulding Grays Harbor St. Lawrence La Salle Macon Okanogan Cattaraugus Young Accomack Malheur St. Landry Orangeburg Orangeburg Oregon Osceola Clarke Otero Page Putnam Lamar Garvin CO WI WV CT NY MI NH NH KY AZ OH KS NY NV LA OH WA NY IL GA WA NY TX VA OR LA SC SC MO MI IA NM VA FL TX OK 7 4 10 46 168 25 3 14 1 60 5 6 19 108 20 1 14 25 8 5 30 32 5 4 22 58 92 72 5 18 9 30 49 37 54 13 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 142.86 250.00 100.00 21.74 5.95 40.00 333.33 71.43 1000.00 33.33 200.00 166.67 52.63 27.78 50.00 1000.00 71.43 40.00 125.00 200.00 33.33 31.25 200.00 250.00 45.45 17.24 10.87 41.67 400.00 55.56 111.11 33.33 20.41 27.03 18.52 76.92 1.77 3.75 6.03 0.53 1.29 2.06 0.68 2.29 14.02 4.22 0.99 17.63 1.98 6.83 3.88 5.10 1.37 0.89 0.88 6.78 2.43 1.25 5.39 3.02 3.19 1.20 1.08 3.24 18.38 4.25 10.77 1.57 4.16 1.34 2.01 3.63 362 Pearson Police Department Pelham Police Department Perry County Sheriff's Office Perryville Police Department Petroleum County Sheriff's Office Philadelphia Police Department Phillips County Sheriff's Office Pineland Police Department Pineview Police Department Pink Hill Police Department Plainview Police Department Platteville Police Department Plattsburgh Police Department Pocahontas County Sheriff's Office Polk County Police Department Polk County Sheriff's Office Poplar Bluff Police Department Port Barre Police Dept Port Jefferson Police Department Powell County Sheriff's Office Princeton Police Department Providence Police Department Pulaski County Sheriff's Office Putnam County Sheriff's Office Quincy Police Department Rainsville Police Department Randolph County Sheriff's Office Ranger Police Department Ravalli County Sheriff's Office Ravenna Police Dept Red Springs Police Department Richland Police Dept Richmond Police Department Ridgeville Police Ridgeville Police Department Rio Arriba County Sheriff's Office Atkinson Mitchell Perry Boyle Petroleum Neshoba Phillips Sabine Wilcox Lenoir Hale Grant Clinton Pocahontas Polk Polk Butler St. Landry Shelby Powell Mercer Webster Pulaski Putnam Grant DeKalb Randolph Eastland Ravalli Buffalo Robeson Pulaski Madison Randolph Dorchester Rio Arriba GA GA IL KY MT MS AR TX GA NC TX WI NY WV GA GA MO LA OH MT WV KY IL TN WA AL IL TX MT NE NC MO KY IN SC NM 5 14 12 1 1 27 16 2 1 2 34 20 47 5 35 27 43 7 0 10 17 7 11 58 12 11 13 5 29 3 16 5 65 2 2 22 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 200.00 71.43 83.33 1000.00 1000.00 37.04 62.50 500.00 1000.00 500.00 29.41 50.00 21.28 200.00 85.71 74.07 23.26 142.86 100.00 117.65 142.86 181.82 34.48 83.33 90.91 76.92 200.00 34.48 333.33 62.50 200.00 15.38 500.00 500.00 45.45 11.94 4.26 4.47 3.52 202.43 3.37 4.60 9.23 10.80 1.68 2.76 1.95 1.22 11.47 7.23 4.82 2.34 1.20 2.02 14.23 3.21 7.34 32.46 2.77 1.12 1.41 2.99 5.38 2.49 2.17 0.75 1.91 1.21 3.82 2.57 2.48 363 Ripley Police Department Robbins Police Department Robeson County Sheriff's Office Rochelle Police Department Rockmart Police Department Roodhouse Police Dept Roosevelt County Sheriff's Office Roseboro Police Department Rosebud Sioux Tribal Police Rosedale Police Department Roswell Police Department Routt County Sheriff's Office Royston Police Department Ruidoso Police Department Russellville Police Department Rutland Police Department. Saline County Sheriff's Office Saline County Sheriff's Office San Jacinto County Sheriff's Office Sandusky Police Department Sanford Police Department Santa Clara Police Department Santee Police Department Sauk County Sheriff's Office Sault Ste. Marie Police Department Scotts Hill Police Department Scottsbluff Police Dept Scottsboro Police Department Seadrift Police Department Searcy Police Department Seaside Police Department Sedalia Police Dept Selma Police Department Selmer Police Department Seneca County Sheriff's Office Seneca Police Department Jackson Moore Robeson Wilcox Polk Greene Roosevelt Sampson Todd Bolivar Chaves Routt Franklin Lincoln Franklin Rutland Saline Saline San Jacinto Erie Lee Grant Orangeburg Sauk Chippewa Henderson Scotts Bluff Jackson Calhoun White Clatsop Pettis Dallas McNairy Seneca Oconee WV NC NC GA GA IL MT NC SD MS NM CO GA NM AL VT KS IL TX OH NC NM SC WI MI TN NE AL TX AR OR MO AL TN NY SC 9 5 128 4 18 4 11 5 27 5 80 22 15 26 25 41 44 42 21 54 81 5 6 118 25 3 30 44 2 41 18 44 50 18 23 34 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 6 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 111.11 200.00 23.44 250.00 55.56 250.00 90.91 400.00 37.04 200.00 25.00 45.45 66.67 38.46 80.00 24.39 22.73 23.81 47.62 37.04 12.35 200.00 333.33 8.47 40.00 333.33 33.33 22.73 500.00 24.39 55.56 22.73 40.00 55.56 260.87 29.41 3.42 1.13 2.24 10.80 2.41 7.20 9.59 3.15 10.40 2.93 3.05 4.25 4.53 4.88 6.31 1.62 1.80 4.01 3.79 2.59 1.73 3.39 2.16 1.61 2.60 3.60 2.70 1.88 4.68 1.30 2.70 2.37 4.56 3.84 17.02 1.35 364 Sevierville Police Department Seymour Police Shawnee Police Department Shelby County Sheriff's Office Shelby County Sheriff's Office Shelby Police Department Shelby Police Department Shenandoah Borough Police Department Shinnston Police Department Simpson County Sheriff's Office Sleepy Eye Police Department Socorro County Sheriff's Office Spencer Police Department Springfield Police Department Springfield Police Department St. George Police Department St. Landry Parish Sheriff's Office St. Marys Police Department St. Paul Police Department Stanly County Sheriff's Office Stark County Sheriff's Office Starr County Sheriff's Office Stephens County Sheriff's Office Stephens County Sheriff's Office Steuben County Sheriff's Office Stillwater Police Department Stover Police Department Sturgis Police Department Sugarcreek Borough Police Department Sugarcreek Police Department Sullivan County Sheriff's Office Sweetwater Police Department Tabor City Police Department Tahlequah Police Department Talbot County Sheriff's Office Terrell County Sheriff's Office Sevier Jackson Pottawatomie Shelby Shelby Cleveland Bolivar Schuylkill Harrison Simpson Redwood Socorro Clay Windsor Orangeburg Dorchester St. Landry Auglaize Wise Stanly Stark Starr Stephens Stephens Steuben Payne Morgan St. Joseph Venango Tuscarawas Sullivan Monroe Columbus Cherokee Talbot Terrell TN IN OK OH TX NC MS PA WV KY MN NM IA VT SC SC LA OH VA NC ND TX GA OK NY OK MO MI PA OH NY TN NC OK GA TX 55 39 52 30 15 70 7 7 7 11 6 10 18 15 2 10 90 15 6 49 11 31 31 11 26 74 3 19 5 5 44 18 9 32 8 5 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 4 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 18.18 25.64 19.23 33.33 133.33 14.29 285.71 571.43 285.71 90.91 166.67 100.00 55.56 66.67 500.00 100.00 44.44 66.67 166.67 20.41 90.91 32.26 32.26 181.82 38.46 13.51 333.33 52.63 200.00 200.00 22.73 55.56 222.22 31.25 375.00 200.00 1.11 2.36 1.44 2.02 7.86 1.02 5.86 2.70 2.89 5.77 3.86 5.60 6.00 1.76 1.08 2.57 4.80 2.18 2.41 1.65 4.13 1.64 3.82 4.44 1.01 1.29 4.86 1.63 1.82 1.08 1.29 2.25 3.44 2.13 43.70 101.63 365 Thief River Falls Police Department Thomas County Sheriff's Office Tipton Police Department Torrington Police Department Towns County Sheriff's Office Traverse City Police Department Tucumcari Police Department Tupelo Police Department Turkey Creek Police Department Tuscola County Sheriff's Office Tuskegee Police Department Tuskegee University Police Department Tutwiler Police Department Twin Falls Police Department Union City Police Department Union Police Department University of West Alabama Police Upper Sandusky Police Department Vail Police Department Vergennes Police Department Vernal Police Department Vernon Parish Sheriff's Office Vidalia Police Department Vinita Police Department Virginia Marine Resources Commission Wakeman Police Department Wallace Police Department Warren County Sheriff's Office Washington Court House Police Dept. Washington Police Department Waukomis Police Department Waynesburg Borough Police Department West Yellowstone Police Department Wheeler Police Department White Cloud Police Department White County Sheriff's Office Pennington Thomas Tillman Litchfield Towns Grand Traverse Quay Lee Evangeline Tuscola Macon Macon Tallahatchie Twin Falls Obion Newton Sumter Wyandot Eagle Addison Uintah Vernon Concordia Craig Newport News City Huron Duplin Warren Fayette Beaufort Garfield Greene Gallatin Dunn Newaygo White MN GA OK CT GA MI NM MS LA MI AL AL MS ID TN MS AL OH CO VT UT LA LA OK VA OH NC NC OH NC OK PA MT WI MI GA 15 47 1 79 18 32 13 115 1 25 23 33 4 64 36 7 6 13 28 5 22 64 20 15 60 1 12 30 22 36 3 8 5 0 2 40 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 66.67 42.55 1000.00 12.66 55.56 31.25 76.92 8.70 1000.00 40.00 86.96 30.30 250.00 15.63 27.78 142.86 166.67 76.92 35.71 200.00 45.45 31.25 50.00 66.67 16.67 1000.00 83.33 33.33 45.45 27.78 333.33 125.00 200.00 500.00 25.00 7.18 4.47 12.51 0.53 9.55 1.15 11.06 1.21 2.94 1.79 9.32 4.66 6.50 1.29 3.14 4.60 7.27 4.42 1.92 2.72 3.07 3.82 4.80 6.65 3.02 1.68 1.71 4.77 3.44 2.09 1.65 2.58 1.12 2.28 2.06 3.68 366 White County Sheriff's Office Whiteville Police Department Whitley County Sheriff's Office Wilkesboro Police Department Williams Police Department Williamsburg Police Department Wilson Police Department Wilson Police Department Windber Borough Police Department Winkler County Sheriff's Office Winn Parish Sheriff's Office Winnemucca Police Department Winnfield Police Dept Winnsboro Police Department Winsted Police Department Wolfeboro Police Department Woodruff County Sheriff's Office Woodstock Police Department Yemassee Police Department Zanesville Police Department Zapata County Sheriff's Office Zolfo Springs Police Department White Hardeman Whitley Wilkes Colusa Whitley Wilson Ellsworth Somerset Winkler Winn Humboldt Winn Franklin Litchfield Carroll Woodruff Grafton Hampton Muskingum Zapata Hardee TN TN KY NC CA KY NC KS PA TX LA NV LA LA CT NH AR NH SC OH TX FL 28 8 12 20 10 12 114 1 2 10 23 18 13 7 4 12 6 5 7 53 44 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 35.71 125.00 83.33 50.00 100.00 83.33 17.54 1000.00 500.00 100.00 43.48 55.56 76.92 142.86 250.00 83.33 166.67 200.00 142.86 56.60 22.73 1000.00 3.87 3.67 2.81 1.44 4.67 2.81 2.46 15.39 1.29 14.06 6.53 6.05 6.53 4.82 0.53 2.09 13.77 1.12 4.74 3.49 7.13 3.61 367 Table 80. Primary State Police Agencies in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted Alphabetically) # of Full-Time Agency County State Sworn Personnel Alabama Department of Public Safety Alaska State Troopers Arizona Department of Public Safety Arkansas Highway Police Arkansas State Police California Highway Patrol Colorado State Patrol Connecticut State Police Delaware State Police Florida Highway Patrol Georgia Department of Public Safety Idaho State Police Illinois State Police Indiana State Police Iowa Department of Public Safety Kentucky State Police Louisiana State Police Maine State Police Maryland State Police Massachusetts State Police Michigan State Police Minnesota State Patrol Mississippi Highway Safety Patrol Nebraska State Patrol Nevada Highway Patrol New Hampshire State Police New Jersey State Police New Mexico State Police New York State Police North Carolina State Highway Patrol Ohio State Highway Patrol Oklahoma Department of Public Safety Montgomery Anchorage Maricopa Pulaski Pulaski Sacramento Jefferson Middlesex Kent Leon Fulton Ada Sangamon Marion Polk Franklin East Baton Rouge Kennebec Baltimore Middlesex Ingham Ramsey Hinds Lancaster Carson Merrimack Mercer Santa Fe Albany Wake Franklin Oklahoma AL AK AZ AR AR CA CO CT DE FL GA ID IL IN IA KY LA ME MD MA MI MN MS NE NV NH NJ NM NY NC OH OK Per Agency 763 274 1244 149 525 7202 742 1227 658 1606 1048 264 2105 1315 669 882 1215 334 1440 2310 1732 530 594 491 417 350 3053 528 4847 1827 1560 825 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 2 1 3 2 2 13 4 4 3 14 1 1 10 4 2 3 2 1 9 10 9 4 6 1 3 3 13 13 5 8 4 5 Per 1,000 Officers 2.62 3.65 2.41 13.42 3.81 1.81 5.39 3.26 4.56 8.72 0.95 3.79 4.75 3.04 2.99 3.40 1.65 2.99 6.25 4.33 5.20 7.55 10.10 2.04 7.19 8.57 4.26 24.62 1.03 4.38 2.56 6.06 Per 100,000 Population 0.04 0.14 0.05 0.07 0.07 0.03 0.08 0.11 0.33 0.07 0.01 0.06 0.08 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.04 0.08 0.16 0.15 0.09 0.08 0.20 0.05 0.11 0.23 0.15 0.63 0.03 0.08 0.03 0.13 368 Pennsylvania State Police Rhode Island State Police South Carolina Highway Patrol Tennessee Department of Safety Texas Department of Public Safety Utah Department of Public Safety Vermont State Police Virginia State Police Washington State Patrol Wyoming Highway Patrol Dauphin Providence Richland Davidson Travis Salt Lake Washington Chesterfield Thurston Laramie PA RI SC TN TX UT VT VA WA WY 4458 201 967 942 3529 475 307 1873 1132 204 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 26 2 10 4 6 2 1 3 2 1 5.83 9.95 10.34 4.25 1.70 4.21 3.26 1.60 1.77 4.90 0.20 0.19 0.22 0.06 0.02 0.07 0.16 0.04 0.03 0.18 369 Table 81. Sheriff's Offices in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted Alphabetically) # of Full-Time Agency County State Sworn Personnel Acadia Parish Sheriff's Office Accomack County Sheriff's Office Adams County Sheriff's Office Alachua County Sheriff's Office Alameda County Sheriff's Office Allegan County Sheriff's Office Allegheny County Sheriff's Office Anderson County Sheriff's Office Anoka County Sheriff's Office Arapahoe County Sheriff's Office Assumption Parish Sheriff's Office Atlantic County Sheriff's Office Baker County Sheriff's Office Baltimore (City) Sheriff's Office Baltimore County Sheriff's Office Barnstable County Sheriff's Office Barrow County Sheriff's Office Baxter County Sheriff's Office Bay County Sheriff's Office Beaufort County Sheriff's Office Bedford County Sheriff's Office Benton County Sheriff's Office Benzie County Sheriff's Office Bernalillo County Sheriff's Office Bexar County Sheriff's Office Bibb County Sheriff's Office Bibb County Sheriff's Office Big Horn County Sheriff's Office Blackford County Sheriff's Office Bolivar County Sheriff's Office Boone County Sheriff's Office Bossier Parish Sheriff's Office Acadia Accomack Adams Alachua Alameda Allegan Allegheny Anderson Anoka Arapahoe Assumption Atlantic Baker Baltimore City Baltimore Barnstable Barrow Baxter Bay Beaufort Bedford Benton Benzie Bernalillo Bexar Bibb Bibb Big Horn Blackford Bolivar Boone Bossier LA VA CO FL CA MI PA SC MN CO LA NJ GA MD MD MA GA AR FL SC VA AR MI NM TX AL GA MT IN MS KY LA 105 27 364 276 928 59 151 191 133 407 50 103 3 99 84 254 127 32 213 209 77 103 13 279 526 12 290 8 8 18 130 300 Per Agency Per 1,000 Officers 1 1 2 1 2 1 3 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 5 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 3 5 1 3 1 1 1 1 3 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 9.52 37.04 5.49 3.62 2.16 16.95 19.87 10.47 7.52 4.91 40.00 9.71 333.33 20.20 11.90 19.69 7.87 31.25 9.39 4.78 25.97 9.71 76.92 10.75 9.51 83.33 10.34 125.00 125.00 55.56 7.69 10.00 Per 100,000 Population 1.62 3.02 0.45 0.40 0.13 0.90 0.25 1.07 0.30 0.35 8.54 0.36 28.98 0.32 0.12 2.32 1.44 2.41 1.18 0.62 2.91 0.45 5.71 0.45 0.29 4.36 1.93 7.77 7.83 2.93 0.84 2.56 370 Boulder County Sheriff's Office Bracken County Sheriff's Office Brazoria County Sheriff's Office Brevard County Sheriff's Office Broward County Sheriff's Office Brunswick County Sheriff's Office Bucks County Sheriff's Office Bullitt County Sheriff's Office Burke County Sheriff's Office Burleigh County Sheriff's Office Butler County Sheriff's Office Butte County Sheriff's Office Calcasieu Parish Sheriff's Office Calhoun County Sheriff's Office Cameron County Sheriff's Office Campbell County Sheriff's Office Caroline County Sheriff's Office Carter County Sheriff's Office Carver County Sheriff's Office Catawba County Sheriff's Office Centre County Sheriff's Office Chambers County Sheriff's Office Charleston County Sheriff's Office Charlotte County Sheriff's Office Cherokee County Sheriff's Office Chesapeake (City) Sheriff's Office Chesterfield County Sheriff's Office Chesterfield County Sheriff's Office Clackamas County Sheriff's Office Clark County Sheriff's Office Clark County Sheriff's Office Clarke County Sheriff's Office Clay County Sheriff's Office Clay County Sheriff's Office Clay County Sheriff's Office Clay County Sheriff's Office Boulder Bracken Brazoria Brevard Broward Brunswick Bucks Bullitt Burke Burleigh Butler Butte Calcasieu Calhoun Cameron Campbell Caroline Carter Carver Catawba Centre Chambers Charleston Charlotte Cherokee Chesapeake City Chesterfield Chesterfield Clackamas Clark Clark Clarke Clay Clay Clay Clay CO KY TX FL FL NC PA KY NC ND AL CA LA FL TX WY VA MO MN NC PA TX SC FL SC VA SC VA OR IN OH VA AR FL IN MO 174 4 127 497 1624 114 50 40 86 40 9 110 592 18 107 58 49 3 87 126 17 44 259 285 48 358 41 225 319 35 134 18 7 284 30 115 1 1 1 2 16 2 2 1 1 2 3 1 1 1 2 1 3 2 1 1 1 1 4 3 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 5.75 250.00 7.87 4.02 9.85 17.54 40.00 25.00 11.63 50.00 333.33 9.09 1.69 55.56 18.69 17.24 61.22 666.67 11.49 7.94 58.82 22.73 15.44 10.53 41.67 5.59 24.39 4.44 6.27 28.57 7.46 55.56 142.86 10.56 33.33 8.70 0.34 11.78 0.32 0.37 0.92 1.86 0.32 1.35 1.10 2.46 14.32 0.45 0.52 6.84 0.49 2.17 10.51 31.92 1.10 0.65 0.65 2.85 1.14 1.88 3.61 0.90 2.14 0.32 0.53 0.91 0.72 7.13 6.22 1.57 3.72 0.45 371 Clayton County Sheriff's Office Cleveland County Sheriff's Office Cobb County Sheriff's Office Collier County Sheriff's Office Columbia County Sheriff's Office Columbia County Sheriff's Office Columbiana County Sheriff's Office Contra Costa County Sheriff's Office Cook County Sheriff's Office Coweta County Sheriff's Office Crawford County Sheriff's Office Cross County Sheriff's Office Cullman County Sheriff's Office Custer County Sheriff's Office Cuyahoga County Sheriff's Office Dade County Sheriff's Office Dakota County Sheriff's Office Dale County Sheriff's Office Dallas County Sheriff's Office Dallas County Sheriff's Office Dane County Sheriff's Office Darlington County Sheriff's Office Dauphin County Sheriff's Office Davie County Sheriff's Office Daviess County Sheriff's Office Dearborn County Sheriff's Office DeKalb County Sheriff's Office DeKalb County Sheriff's Office Del Norte County Sheriff's Office Delaware County Sheriff's Office Delaware County Sheriff's Office Denver County Sheriff's Office Dewitt County Sheriff's Office Douglas County Sheriff's Office Duval County Sheriff's Office East Baton Rouge Parish Sheriff's Office Clayton Cleveland Cobb Collier Columbia Columbia Columbiana Contra Costa Cook Coweta Crawford Cross Cullman Custer Cuyahoga Dade Dakota Dale Dallas Dallas Dane Darlington Dauphin Davie Daviess Dearborn DeKalb DeKalb Del Norte Delaware Delaware Denver De Witt Douglas Duval East Baton Rouge IA OK GA FL GA OR OH CA IL GA AR AR AL OK OH GA MN AL IA TX WI SC PA NC IN IN AL GA CA OH PA CO IL NV TX LA 12 70 435 628 206 41 22 679 5655 137 27 17 78 12 141 25 77 0 23 449 454 64 36 45 19 29 34 325 30 86 58 739 16 100 18 359 1 1 1 6 2 1 2 1 8 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 3 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 5 1 1 1 3 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 83.33 14.29 2.30 9.55 9.71 24.39 90.91 1.47 1.41 7.30 37.04 58.82 12.82 83.33 21.28 40.00 12.99 86.96 2.23 4.41 15.63 55.56 66.67 52.63 68.97 29.41 6.15 66.67 11.63 34.48 6.77 62.50 10.00 55.56 8.36 5.52 0.39 0.15 1.87 1.61 2.03 1.85 0.10 0.15 0.79 1.61 5.60 1.24 3.64 0.23 0.04 0.25 1.99 3.02 0.04 0.41 1.46 0.75 7.27 3.16 4.00 1.41 0.29 6.99 0.57 0.36 0.83 6.04 2.13 8.49 0.68 372 Eaton County Sheriff's Office El Paso County Sheriff's Office El Paso County Sheriff's Office Elko County Sheriff's Office Emery County Sheriff's Office Emmet County Sheriff's Office Escambia County Sheriff's Office Estill County Sheriff's Office Fairfax County Sheriff's Office Fayette County Sheriff's Office Ferry County Sheriff's Office Flagler County Sheriff's Office Floyd County Sheriff's Office Forsyth County Sheriff's Office Forsyth County Sheriff's Office Franklin County Sheriff's Office Franklin County Sheriff's Office Franklin County Sheriff's Office Frederick County Sheriff's Office Fremont County Sheriff's Office Fresno County Sheriff's Office Fulton County Sheriff's Office Gage County Sheriff's Office Gallatin County Sheriff's Office Galveston County Sheriff's Office Graham County Sheriff's Office Grand Traverse County Sheriff's Office Grant County Sheriff's Office Grant County Sheriff's Office Greenbrier County Sheriff's Office Greene County Sheriff's Office Greene County Sheriff's Office Greenville County Sheriff's Office Griggs County Sheriff's Office Guadalupe County Sheriff's Office Gwinnett County Sheriff's Office Eaton El Paso El Paso Elko Emery Emmet Escambia Estill Fairfax Fayette Ferry Flagler Floyd Forsyth Forsyth Franklin Franklin Franklin Frederick Fremont Fresno Fulton Gage Gallatin Galveston Graham Grand Traverse Grant Grant Greenbrier Greene Greene Greenville Griggs Guadalupe Gwinnett MI CO TX NV UT MI FL KY VA OH WA FL IA GA NC IN OH VA MD IA CA GA NE IL TX AZ MI IN OK WV AL AR SC ND NM GA 77 454 248 57 26 23 388 5 499 22 10 130 11 253 217 12 455 78 177 7 461 516 12 3 240 23 64 45 5 30 11 15 397 3 3 531 1 1 2 1 2 1 3 1 3 3 1 2 1 5 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 12.99 2.20 8.06 17.54 76.92 43.48 7.73 200.00 6.01 136.36 100.00 15.38 90.91 19.76 9.22 83.33 4.40 12.82 5.65 142.86 2.17 7.75 83.33 333.33 4.17 43.48 31.25 22.22 200.00 33.33 90.91 66.67 5.04 333.33 333.33 5.65 0.93 0.16 0.25 2.05 18.22 3.06 1.01 6.82 0.28 10.33 13.24 2.09 6.13 2.85 0.57 4.33 0.17 1.78 0.43 13.44 0.11 0.43 4.48 17.89 0.34 2.69 2.30 1.43 22.09 2.82 11.06 2.38 0.44 41.32 21.34 0.37 373 Halifax County Sheriff's Office Hall County Sheriff's Office Hamilton County Sheriff's Office Hamilton County Sheriff's Office Hamilton County Sheriff's Office Hampton County Sheriff's Office Hancock County Sheriff's Office Hardeman County Sheriff's Office Harford County Sheriff's Office Harris County Sheriff's Office Harrison County Sheriff's Office Harrison County Sheriff's Office Harrison County Sheriff's Office Hawkins County Sheriff's Office Haywood County Sheriff's Office Hempstead County Sheriff's Office Hendry County Sheriff's Office Henry County Sheriff's Office Henry County Sheriff's Office Hernando County Sheriff's Office Hidalgo County Sheriff's Office Highlands County Sheriff's Office Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office Hockley County Sheriff's Office Hoke County Sheriff's Office Holmes County Sheriff's Office Holt County Sheriff's Office Horry County Sheriff's Office Hudson County Sheriff's Office Hunterdon County Sheriff's Office Iberia Parish Sheriff's Office Indian River County Sheriff's Office Isle of Wight County Sheriff's Office Jackson County Sheriff's Office Jackson County Sheriff's Office Jackson County Sheriff's Office Halifax Hall Hamilton Hamilton Hamilton Hampton Hancock Hardeman Harford Harris Harrison Harrison Harrison Hawkins Haywood Hempstead Hendry Henry Henry Hernando Hidalgo Highlands Hillsborough Hockley Hoke Holmes Holt Horry Hudson Hunterdon Iberia Indian River Isle of Wight Jackson Jackson Jackson VA GA IN OH TN SC IN TN MD TX IN MS TX TN TN AR FL AL VA FL TX FL FL TX NC OH NE SC NJ NJ LA FL VA FL KS TN 29 257 64 330 146 26 40 22 280 2558 22 90 45 42 22 13 67 8 112 249 262 130 1223 11 50 33 5 55 221 17 242 226 40 61 15 14 1 2 1 1 2 1 3 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14 1 5 1 10 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 6 3 1 1 1 3 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 34.48 7.78 15.63 3.03 13.70 38.46 75.00 45.45 3.57 1.17 45.45 11.11 22.22 23.81 45.45 76.92 14.93 125.00 125.00 4.02 19.08 7.69 8.18 181.82 20.00 30.30 200.00 18.18 13.57 58.82 24.79 13.27 25.00 16.39 66.67 214.29 2.76 1.11 0.36 0.12 0.59 4.74 4.29 3.67 0.41 0.07 2.54 0.53 1.52 1.76 5.32 4.42 2.55 5.78 25.85 0.58 0.65 1.01 0.81 8.72 2.13 2.36 9.58 0.37 0.47 0.78 8.19 2.17 2.84 2.01 7.43 25.78 374 Jefferson Parish Sheriff's Office Jim Wells County Sheriff's Office Johnston County Sheriff's Office Juneau County Sheriff's Office Kane County Sheriff's Office Kenosha County Sheriff's Office Kent County Sheriff's Office Keokuk County Sheriff's Office Kern County Sheriff's Office Kershaw County Sheriff's Office King County Sheriff's Office Kingfisher County Sheriff's Office Kitsap County Sheriff's Office Knox County Sheriff's Office La Crosse County Sheriff's Office La Porte County Sheriff's Office La Salle County Sheriff's Office La Salle County Sheriff's Office Lafourche Parish Sheriff's Office Lake County Sheriff's Office Lake County Sheriff's Office Lake County Sheriff's Office Lake County Sheriff's Office Lake County Sheriff's Office Lake County Sheriff's Office Lancaster County Sheriff's Office Laurens County Sheriff's Office Lawrence County Sheriff's Office Lee County Sheriff's Office Lee County Sheriff's Office Lee County Sheriff's Office Lenawee County Sheriff's Office Lenoir County Sheriff's Office Leon County Sheriff's Office Lewis County Sheriff's Office Liberty County Sheriff's Office Jefferson Jim Wells Johnston Juneau Kane Kenosha Kent Keokuk Kern Kershaw King Kingfisher Kitsap Knox La Crosse La Porte La Salle La Salle Lafourche Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lancaster Laurens Lawrence Lee Lee Lee Lenawee Lenoir Leon Lewis Liberty LA TX NC WI IL WI DE IA CA SC WA OK WA TN WI IN IL TX LA CA CO FL IL IN SD SC SC IN FL NC SC MI NC FL MO TX 825 27 97 45 92 122 5 4 512 61 721 8 121 456 43 58 36 10 287 61 9 286 188 170 5 93 65 25 621 47 28 44 58 443 5 37 12 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 2 2 3 1 5 1 1 1 1 7 1 1 1 2 3 1 2 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 14.55 37.04 10.31 22.22 10.87 8.20 200.00 250.00 21.48 16.39 6.93 125.00 8.26 2.19 23.26 17.24 27.78 300.00 10.45 32.79 222.22 10.49 5.32 29.41 200.00 10.75 15.38 40.00 11.27 21.28 35.71 22.73 34.48 6.77 200.00 54.05 2.77 2.45 0.59 3.75 0.19 0.60 0.62 9.51 1.31 1.62 0.26 6.65 0.40 0.23 0.87 0.90 0.88 43.57 3.11 3.09 27.36 1.01 0.14 1.01 8.93 1.30 1.50 2.17 1.13 1.73 5.20 1.00 3.36 1.09 9.79 2.64 375 Lincoln County Sheriff's Office Lincoln County Sheriff's Office Lincoln County Sheriff's Office Lincoln County Sheriff's Office Lincoln Parish Sheriff's Office Livingston County Sheriff's Office Livingston Parish Sheriff's Office Long County Sheriff's Office Los Angeles County Sheriff's Office Loudoun County Sheriff's Office Lowndes County Sheriff's Office Lowndes County Sheriff's Office Lucas County Sheriff's Office Luna County Sheriff's Office Luzerne County Sheriff's Office Macomb County Sheriff's Office Madera County Sheriff's Office Madison County Sheriff's Office Madison County Sheriff's Office Madison County Sheriff's Office Manatee County Sheriff's Office Marathon County Sheriff's Office Maricopa County Sheriff's Office Marin County Sheriff's Office Marion County Sheriff's Office Marion County Sheriff's Office Marion County Sheriff's Office Marion County Sheriff's Office Marlboro County Sheriff's Office Martin County Sheriff's Office Martin County Sheriff's Office Mason County Sheriff's Office McDowell County Sheriff's Office McDowell County Sheriff's Office McHenry County Sheriff's Office McIntosh County Sheriff's Office Lincoln Lincoln Lincoln Lincoln Lincoln Livingston Livingston Long Los Angeles Loudoun Lowndes Lowndes Lucas Luna Luzerne Macomb Madera Madison Madison Madison Manatee Marathon Maricopa Marin Marion Marion Marion Marion Marlboro Martin Martin Mason McDowell McDowell McHenry McIntosh GA NC OR SD LA MI LA GA CA VA AL GA OH NM PA MI CA AL GA MO FL WI AZ CA FL IN OR WV SC FL NC WV NC WV IL OK 12 98 65 17 46 65 125 15 9461 448 14 145 289 30 38 245 78 107 34 8 476 67 766 202 349 740 255 27 25 414 34 21 40 15 134 17 1 4 1 1 1 2 1 1 14 2 1 1 4 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 2 1 3 7 1 1 2 1 1 3 1 1 2 2 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 83.33 40.82 15.38 58.82 21.74 30.77 8.00 66.67 1.48 4.46 71.43 6.90 13.84 33.33 52.63 4.08 12.82 9.35 29.41 125.00 8.40 14.93 2.61 4.95 8.60 9.46 3.92 37.04 80.00 2.42 29.41 142.86 25.00 66.67 14.93 117.65 12.51 5.11 2.17 2.23 2.14 1.11 0.78 6.91 0.14 0.64 8.85 0.92 0.91 3.98 0.62 0.12 0.66 0.30 3.56 8.18 1.24 0.75 0.05 0.40 0.91 0.77 0.32 1.77 6.91 0.68 4.08 10.98 2.22 4.52 0.65 9.88 376 McKinley County Sheriff's Office Mesilla Marshal's Office Middlesex County Sheriff's Department Middlesex County Sheriff's Office Miller County Sheriff's Office Milwaukee County Sheriff's Office Minnehaha County Sheriff's Office Monmouth County Sheriff's Office Monroe County Sheriff's Office Monroe County Sheriff's Office Monroe County Sheriff's Office Montague County Sheriff's Office Montgomery County Sheriff's Office Montgomery County Sheriff's Office Mora County Sheriff's Office Morgan County Sheriff's Office Morgan County Sheriff's Office Morris County Sheriff's Office Morrow County Sheriff's Office Muskogee County Sheriff's Office Nassau County Sheriff's Office New Hanover County Sheriff's Office New York City Sheriff's Office Newaygo County Sheriff's Office Newton County Sheriff's Office Nez Perce County Sheriff's Office Niagara County Sheriff's Office Nicholas County Sheriff's Office Norfolk (City) Sheriff's Office Nye County Sheriff's Office Oglethorpe County Sheriff's Office Okaloosa County Sheriff's Office Okanogan County Sheriff's Office Onondaga County Sheriff's Office Orange County Sheriff-Coroner Department Orange County Sheriff's Office McKinley Dona Ana Middlesex Middlesex Miller Milwaukee Minnehaha Monmouth Monroe Monroe Monroe Montague Montgomery Montgomery Mora Morgan Morgan Morris Morrow Muskogee Nassau New Hanover New York Newaygo Newton Nez Perce Niagara Nicholas Norfolk City Nye Oglethorpe Okaloosa Okanogan Onondaga Orange Orange NM NM NJ VA MO WI SD NJ FL NY WI TX OH TN NM AL IN NJ OR OK FL NC NY MI GA ID NY KY VA NV GA FL WA NY CA FL 35 5 170 17 16 524 69 494 189 273 23 10 222 287 5 55 26 262 14 37 109 315 120 25 152 25 110 1 414 108 19 258 30 242 1794 1398 1 1 4 1 1 7 1 1 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 3 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 3 1 3 1 1 14 16 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 28.57 200.00 23.53 58.82 62.50 13.36 14.49 2.02 15.87 10.99 43.48 100.00 4.50 3.48 200.00 18.18 76.92 3.82 71.43 27.03 18.35 9.52 16.67 40.00 6.58 80.00 9.09 1000.00 2.42 27.78 52.63 11.63 33.33 4.13 7.80 11.44 1.40 0.48 0.49 9.12 4.04 0.74 0.59 0.16 4.10 0.40 2.24 5.07 0.19 0.58 20.49 0.84 2.90 0.20 8.95 1.41 2.73 1.48 2.44 2.06 1.00 5.09 0.46 14.02 0.41 6.83 6.71 1.66 2.43 0.21 0.47 1.40 377 Orange County Sheriff's Office Orange County Sheriff's Office Orangeburg County Sheriff's Office Oregon County Sheriff's Office Orleans County Sheriff's Office Orleans Parish Sheriff's Office (Criminal Division) Osceola County Sheriff's Office Osceola County Sheriff's Office Otero County Sheriff's Office Ouachita Parish Sheriff's Office Outagamie County Sheriff's Office Ozaukee County Sheriff's Office Page County Sheriff's Office Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office Pasco County Sheriff's Office Passaic County Sheriff's Office Paulding County Sheriff's Office Pawnee County Sheriff's Office Pender County Sheriff's Office Pennington County Sheriff's Office Perry County Sheriff's Office Petroleum County Sheriff's Office Phillips County Sheriff's Office Pierce County Sheriff's Office Pima County Sheriff's Dept. Pinal County Sheriff's Office Pinellas County Sheriff's Office Pitt County Sheriff's Office Placer County Sheriff's Office Plaquemines Parish Sheriff's Office Pocahontas County Sheriff's Office Polk County Sheriff's Office Polk County Sheriff's Office Polk County Sheriff's Office Portage County Sheriff's Office Porter County Sheriff's Office Orange Orange Orangeburg Oregon Orleans Orleans Osceola Osceola Otero Ouachita Outagamie Ozaukee Page Palm Beach Pasco Passaic Paulding Pawnee Pender Pennington Perry Petroleum Phillips Pierce Pima Pinal Pinellas Pitt Placer Plaquemines Pocahontas Polk Polk Polk Portage Porter NY NC SC MO NY LA FL MI NM LA WI WI VA FL FL NJ GA OK NC SD IL MT AR WA AZ AZ FL NC CA LA WV FL GA IA OH IN 99 115 92 5 29 505 388 18 30 431 74 83 49 1447 485 530 175 19 57 65 12 1 16 292 554 218 863 125 228 145 5 600 27 143 66 61 1 1 1 2 1 4 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 12 4 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 8 3 1 1 1 13 2 3 1 2 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 10.10 8.70 10.87 400.00 34.48 7.92 5.15 55.56 33.33 2.32 13.51 12.05 20.41 8.29 8.25 11.32 5.71 52.63 17.54 15.38 83.33 1000.00 62.50 6.85 1.81 9.17 9.27 24.00 4.39 6.90 200.00 21.67 74.07 20.98 15.15 32.79 0.27 0.75 1.08 18.38 2.33 1.16 0.74 4.25 1.57 0.65 0.57 1.16 4.16 0.91 0.86 1.20 0.70 6.03 1.92 0.99 4.47 202.43 4.60 0.25 0.10 0.53 0.87 1.78 0.29 4.34 11.47 2.16 4.82 0.70 0.62 1.22 378 Pottawattamie County Sheriff's Office Potter County Sheriff's Office Powell County Sheriff's Office Prince George's County Sheriff's Office Prince William County Sheriff's Office Pulaski County Sheriff's Office Putnam County Sheriff's Office Queen Anne's County Sheriff's Office Ramsey County Sheriff's Office Randolph County Sheriff's Office Rapides Parish Sheriff's Office Ravalli County Sheriff's Office Richland County Sheriff's Office Richmond (City) Sheriff's Office Richmond County Sheriff's Office Rio Arriba County Sheriff's Office Riverside County Sheriff's Office Robeson County Sheriff's Office Rock County Sheriff's Office Rockingham County Sheriff's Office Roosevelt County Sheriff's Office Routt County Sheriff's Office Russell County Sheriff's Office Rutherford County Sheriff's Office Sacramento County Sheriff's Office Saginaw County Sheriff's Office Salem County Sheriff's Office Saline County Sheriff's Office Saline County Sheriff's Office San Benito County Sheriff's Office San Bernardino County Sheriff's Office San Diego County Sheriff's Office San Jacinto County Sheriff's Office San Juan County Sheriff's Office San Luis Obispo County Sheriff's Office Sandoval County Sheriff's Office Pottawattomie Potter Powell Prince Georges Prince William Pulaski Putnam Queen Annes Ramsey Randolph Rapides Ravalli Richland Richmond City Richmond Rio Arriba Riverside Robeson Rock Rockingham Roosevelt Routt Russell Rutherford Sacramento Saginaw Salem Saline Saline San Benito San Bernardino San Diego San Jacinto San Juan San Luis Obispo Sandoval IA TX MT MD VA IL TN MD MN IL LA MT SC VA GA NM CA NC WI VA MT CO AL TN CA MI NJ IL KS CA CA CA TX NM CA NM 50 93 10 233 75 11 58 50 235 13 212 29 512 424 449 22 2147 128 94 46 11 22 32 189 1409 71 157 42 44 29 1797 1322 21 94 156 45 1 2 1 3 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 3 2 5 1 11 3 2 1 1 1 2 2 6 1 1 1 1 1 11 7 1 2 2 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 20.00 21.51 100.00 12.88 13.33 181.82 34.48 20.00 8.51 76.92 4.72 34.48 5.86 4.72 11.14 45.45 5.12 23.44 21.28 21.74 90.91 45.45 62.50 10.58 4.26 14.08 6.37 23.81 22.73 34.48 6.12 5.30 47.62 21.28 12.82 22.22 1.07 1.65 14.23 0.35 0.25 32.46 2.77 2.09 0.39 2.99 0.76 2.49 0.78 0.98 2.49 2.48 0.50 2.24 1.25 1.31 9.59 4.25 3.78 0.76 0.42 0.50 1.51 4.01 1.80 1.81 0.54 0.23 3.79 1.54 0.74 0.76 379 Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Office Santa Clara County Sheriff's Office Santa Fe County Sheriff's Office Santa Rosa County Sheriff's Office Sarasota County Sheriff's Office Sauk County Sheriff's Office Seminole County Sheriff's Office Seneca County Sheriff's Office Shelby County Sheriff's Office Shelby County Sheriff's Office Simpson County Sheriff's Office Smith County Sheriff's Office Snohomish County Sheriff's Office Socorro County Sheriff's Office Solano County Sheriff's Office Spartanburg County Sheriff's Office Spokane County Sheriff's Office St. Bernard Parish Sheriff's Office St. Charles County Sheriff's Office St. Charles Parish Sheriff's Office St. Croix County Sheriff's Office St. Helena Parish Sheriff's Office St. John The Baptist Parish Sheriff's Office St. Joseph County Sheriff's Office St. Louis County Sheriff's Office St. Lucie County Sheriff's Office St. Martin Parish Sheriff's Office St. Mary's County Sheriff's Office St. Tammany Parish Sheriff's Office Stanislaus County Sheriff's Office Stanly County Sheriff's Office Stark County Sheriff's Office Starr County Sheriff's Office Stephens County Sheriff's Office Stephens County Sheriff's Office Steuben County Sheriff's Office Santa Barbara Santa Clara Santa Fe Santa Rosa Sarasota Sauk Seminole Seneca Shelby Shelby Simpson Smith Snohomish Socorro Solano Spartanburg Spokane St. Bernard St. Charles St. Charles St. Croix St. Helena St. John the Baptist St. Joseph St. Louis St. Lucie St. Martin St. Marys St. Tammany Stanislaus Stanly Stark Starr Stephens Stephens Steuben CA CA NM FL FL WI FL NY OH TN KY TX WA NM CA SC WA LA MO LA WI LA LA IN MO FL LA MD LA CA NC ND TX GA OK NY 294 450 75 190 409 118 355 23 30 516 11 88 287 10 113 297 244 189 153 291 44 22 150 116 200 259 45 120 409 230 49 11 31 31 11 26 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 6 1 8 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 3 3 4 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 3.40 2.22 13.33 5.26 2.44 8.47 5.63 260.87 33.33 15.50 90.91 11.36 6.97 100.00 8.85 6.73 8.20 5.29 13.07 3.44 22.73 45.45 20.00 25.86 20.00 7.72 22.22 8.33 4.89 4.35 20.41 90.91 32.26 32.26 181.82 38.46 0.24 0.06 0.69 0.66 0.26 1.61 0.47 17.02 2.02 0.86 5.77 0.48 0.28 5.60 0.24 0.70 0.42 2.79 0.55 1.89 1.19 8.93 6.53 1.12 0.40 0.72 1.92 0.95 0.86 0.19 1.65 4.13 1.64 3.82 4.44 1.01 380 Sullivan County Sheriff's Office Sullivan County Sheriff's Office Summit County Sheriff's Office Sutter County Sheriff's Office Talbot County Sheriff's Office Terrebonne Parish Sheriff's Office Terrell County Sheriff's Office Thomas County Sheriff's Office Towns County Sheriff's Office Tulare County Sheriff's Office Tuscola County Sheriff's Office Ulster County Sheriff's Office Union County Sheriff's Office Union County Sheriff's Office Upshur County Sheriff's Office Valencia County Sheriff's Office Ventura County Sheriff's Office Vernon Parish Sheriff's Office Vigo County Sheriff's Office Volusia County Sheriff's Office Wake County Sheriff's Office Walker County Sheriff's Office Walton County Sheriff's Office Warren County Sheriff's Office Washington County Sheriff's Office Washington County Sheriff's Office Washoe County Sheriff's Office Washtenaw County Sheriff's Office Waukesha County Sheriff's Office Wayne County Sheriff's Office Wayne County Sheriff's Office Weld County Sheriff's Office Westmoreland County Sheriff's Office White County Sheriff's Office White County Sheriff's Office Whitfield County Sheriff's Office Sullivan Sullivan Summit Sutter Talbot Terrebonne Terrell Thomas Towns Tulare Tuscola Ulster Union Union Upshur Valencia Ventura Vernon Vigo Volusia Wake Walker Walton Warren Washington Washington Washoe Washtenaw Waukesha Wayne Wayne Weld Westmoreland White White Whitfield NY TN OH CA GA LA TX GA GA CA MI NY IN NC TX NM CA LA IN FL NC GA FL NC MD TN NV MI WI MI NC CO PA GA TN GA 44 183 393 105 8 300 5 47 18 513 25 57 6 170 45 37 755 64 38 450 354 80 165 30 94 86 414 133 150 1062 85 121 0 40 28 115 1 1 1 1 3 2 1 2 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 4 4 2 4 1 1 1 4 4 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 22.73 5.46 2.54 9.52 375.00 6.67 200.00 42.55 55.56 5.85 40.00 17.54 166.67 5.88 22.22 27.03 1.32 31.25 26.32 8.89 11.30 25.00 24.24 33.33 10.64 11.63 9.66 30.08 6.67 0.94 23.53 8.26 25.00 35.71 8.70 1.29 0.64 0.18 1.06 43.70 1.79 101.63 4.47 9.55 0.68 1.79 0.55 13.30 0.50 2.54 1.31 0.12 3.82 0.93 0.81 0.44 2.91 7.27 4.77 0.68 0.81 0.95 1.16 0.26 0.05 1.63 0.40 0.27 3.68 3.87 0.97 381 Whitley County Sheriff's Office Wicomico County Sheriff's Office Will County Sheriff's Office Williamson County Sheriff's Office Williamson County Sheriff's Office Williamson County Sheriff's Office Wilson County Sheriff's Office Winkler County Sheriff's Office Winn Parish Sheriff's Office Winnebago County Sheriff's Office Wood County Sheriff's Office Woodford County Sheriff's Office Woodruff County Sheriff's Office Yakima County Sheriff's Office Yamhill County Sheriff's Office Yellowstone County Sheriff's Office Zapata County Sheriff's Office Whitley Wicomico Will Williamson Williamson Williamson Wilson Winkler Winn Winnebago Wood Woodford Woodruff Yakima Yamhill Yellowstone Zapata KY MD IL IL TN TX TN TX LA IL WV IL AR WA OR MT TX 12 0 445 29 99 206 202 10 23 142 40 37 6 69 36 55 44 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 83.33 2.25 68.97 20.20 9.71 4.95 100.00 43.48 7.04 25.00 27.03 166.67 28.99 27.78 18.18 22.73 2.81 1.01 0.15 3.01 1.09 0.47 0.88 14.06 6.53 0.34 1.15 2.59 13.77 0.82 1.01 0.68 7.13 382 Table 82. County Police Departments in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted Alphabetically) # of Full-Time Agency County State Sworn Personnel Allegheny County Police Department. Anne Arundel County Police Department Arlington County Police Department Athens-Clarke County Police Dept Baltimore County Police Department Charlotte - Mecklenburg Police Department Chesterfield County Police Department Clayton County Police Department Cobb County Police Department DeKalb County Police Department Dougherty County Police Dept. Fairfax County Police Department Floyd County Police Department Fulton County Police Department Gaston County Police Department Gwinnett County Police Department Henrico County Division of Police Henry County Police Department Honolulu (City and County) Police Department Horry County Police Department Howard County Police Department Indianapolis Police James City County Police Dept. Kauai (County) Police Department Maui (County) Police Department Miami-Dade (County) Police Department Montgomery County Police Department Nassau County Police Department New Castle County Police Department Oldham County Police Department Polk County Police Department Allegheny Anne Arundel Arlington Clarke Baltimore Mecklenburg Chesterfield Clayton Cobb DeKalb Dougherty Fairfax Floyd Fulton Gaston Gwinnett Henrico Henry Honolulu Horry Howard Marion James City Kauai Maui Miami-Dade Montgomery Nassau New Castle Oldham Polk PA MD VA GA MD NC VA GA GA GA GA VA GA GA NC GA VA GA HI SC MD IN VA HI HI FL MD NY DE KY GA 202 633 364 213 1910 1672 475 336 590 1074 47 1419 71 129 133 682 554 225 1934 243 424 1582 94 125 329 3093 1206 2732 358 31 35 Per Agency 2 3 1 2 4 20 1 3 5 13 2 7 1 2 2 4 4 1 26 9 3 33 1 3 5 25 16 6 2 2 3 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. Per 1,000 Officers 9.90 4.74 2.75 9.39 2.09 11.96 2.11 8.93 8.47 12.10 42.55 4.93 14.08 15.50 15.04 5.87 7.22 4.44 13.44 37.04 7.08 20.86 10.64 24.00 15.20 8.08 13.27 2.20 5.59 64.52 85.71 Per 100,000 Population 0.16 0.56 0.48 1.71 0.50 2.17 0.32 1.16 0.73 1.88 2.11 0.65 1.04 0.22 0.97 0.50 1.30 0.49 2.73 3.34 1.04 3.65 1.49 4.47 3.23 1.00 1.65 0.45 0.37 3.32 7.23 383 Prince George's County Police Department Prince William County Police Department Riley County Police Department Roanoke County Police Department Savannah-Chatham Metropolitan Police Department St. Louis County Police Dept Suffolk County Police Department Westchester County Department of Public Safety Prince Georges Prince William Riley Roanoke Chatham St. Louis Suffolk Westchester MD VA KS VA GA MO NY NY 1578 546 101 135 534 781 2622 270 19 3 1 2 6 2 6 3 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 12.04 5.49 9.90 14.81 11.24 2.56 2.29 11.11 2.20 0.75 1.41 2.17 2.26 0.20 0.40 0.32 384 Table 83. 500 Largest Municipal Police Departments in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted Alphabetically by Agency Name) # of Full-Time Per Per 1,000 Agency County State Sworn Personnel Agency Officers Akron Police Department Alameda Police Department Albany Police Department Albany Police Department Albuquerque Police Department Alexandria Police Department Alhambra Police Department Allen Police Department Allentown Police Department Altamonte Springs Police Dept Anaheim Police Department Anchorage Police Department Anderson Police Anderson Police Department Ann Arbor Police Department Apopka Police Department Arlington Police Department Atlanta Police Department Aurora Police Department Austin Police Department Bakersfield Police Department Baltimore Police Department Barnstable Police Department Bartlett Police Department Baton Rouge Police Department Baytown Police Department Beaumont Police Department Beaverton Police Department Belleville Police Dept Bellevue Police Dept Bend Police Department Summit Alameda Dougherty Albany Bernalillo Alexandria City Los Angeles Collin Lehigh Seminole Orange Anchorage Madison Anderson Washtenaw Orange Tarrant Fulton Arapahoe Travis Kern Baltimore City Barnstable Shelby East Baton Rouge Harris Jefferson Washington St. Clair Sarpy Deschutes OH CA GA NY NM VA CA TX PA FL CA AK IN SC MI FL TX GA CO TX CA MD MA TN LA TX TX OR IL NE OR 472 94 184 328 1020 315 83 106 200 124 398 372 117 91 160 85 610 1719 627 1515 348 2990 110 105 630 136 246 124 81 92 86 8 2 4 7 13 3 1 2 1 1 3 4 4 3 4 1 3 22 6 10 8 55 2 1 6 1 2 1 1 1 2 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 16.95 21.28 21.74 21.34 12.75 9.52 12.05 18.87 5.00 8.06 7.54 10.75 34.19 32.97 25.00 11.76 4.92 12.80 9.57 6.60 22.99 18.39 18.18 9.52 9.52 7.35 8.13 8.06 12.35 10.87 23.26 Per 100,000 Population 1.48 0.13 4.23 2.30 1.96 2.14 0.01 0.26 0.29 0.24 0.10 1.37 3.04 1.60 1.16 0.09 0.17 2.39 1.05 0.98 0.95 8.86 0.93 0.11 1.36 0.02 0.79 0.19 0.37 0.63 1.27 385 Bensalem Township Police Dept Berkeley Police Department Berwyn Police Dept Bethlehem Police Department Billings Police Department Biloxi Police Department Binghamton Police Department Birmingham Police Department Bloomington Police Dept Boise Police Department Bolingbrook Police Dept Bossier City Police Dept Boston Police Department Boulder Police Department Boynton Beach Police Department Brick Township Police Bridgeport Police Department Bristol Police Department Brockton Police Department Broken Arrow Police Department Brookline Police Department Broomfield Police Department Brownsville Police Department Buffalo Police Department Burlington Police Department Calumet City Police Dept Cambridge Police Department Camden Police Canton Police Department Cape Coral Police Department Carmel Police Cedar Rapids Police Department Champaign Police Dept Chandler Police Department Charleston Police Department Charleston Police Department Bucks Alameda Cook Northampton Yellowstone Harrison Broome Jefferson McLean Ada Will Bossier Suffolk Boulder Palm Beach Ocean Fairfield Hartford Plymouth Tulsa Norfolk Broomfield Cameron Erie Alamance Cook Middlesex Camden Stark Lee Hamilton Linn Champaign Maricopa Kanawha Charleston PA CA IL PA MT MS NY AL IL ID IL LA MA CO FL NJ CT CT MA OK MA CO TX NY NC IL MA NJ OH FL IN IA IL AZ WV SC 104 186 105 154 138 133 139 816 122 306 122 178 2181 165 165 127 422 119 197 124 129 105 230 793 105 91 272 397 172 220 104 197 122 333 182 382 1 1 3 4 2 2 1 8 2 2 3 3 14 1 7 1 3 1 3 2 3 1 1 4 3 1 1 10 1 2 3 2 1 2 9 2 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 9.62 5.38 28.57 25.97 14.49 15.04 7.19 9.80 16.39 6.54 24.59 16.85 6.42 6.06 42.42 7.87 7.11 8.40 15.23 16.13 23.26 9.52 4.35 5.04 28.57 10.99 3.68 25.19 5.81 9.09 28.85 10.15 8.20 6.01 49.45 5.24 0.16 0.07 0.06 1.34 1.35 1.07 0.50 1.21 1.18 0.51 0.44 2.56 1.94 0.34 0.53 0.17 0.33 0.11 0.61 0.33 0.45 1.79 0.25 0.44 1.99 0.02 0.07 1.95 0.27 0.32 1.09 0.95 0.50 0.05 4.66 0.57 386 Charlottesville Police Dept. Chattanooga Police Department Chelsea Police Department Cherry Hill Police Chesapeake Police Department Chicago Police Dept Chico Police Department Chicopee Police Department Chula Vista Police Department Cicero Police Dept Cincinnati Police Department Citrus Heights Police Department Clarksville Police Department Clearwater Police Department Cleveland Police Department Cleveland Police Department Clifton Police Coconut Creek Police Department College Park Police Department Colonie Town Police Department Colorado Springs Police Department Columbia Police Department Columbia Police Department Columbus Police Department Columbus Police Department Concord Police Department Concord Police Department Conroe Police Department Coral Gables Police Department Corpus Christi Police Department Costa Mesa Police Department Council Bluffs Police Department Covington Police Department Cranston Police Department Cuyahoga Falls Police Department Dallas Police Department Charlottesville City Hamilton Suffolk Camden Chesapeake City Cook Butte Hampden San Diego Cook Hamilton Sacramento Montgomery Pinellas Bradley Cuyahoga Passaic Broward Fulton Albany El Paso Richland Boone Muscogee Franklin Cabarrus Contra Costa Montgomery Miami-Dade Nueces Orange Pottawattomie Kenton Providence Summit Dallas VA TN MA NJ VA IL CA MA CA IL OH CA TN FL TN OH NJ FL GA NY CO SC MO GA OH NC CA TX FL TX CA IA KY RI OH TX 115 434 92 145 376 13354 88 133 244 146 1082 83 238 255 89 1616 158 89 93 109 668 351 155 400 1886 153 161 99 184 448 158 105 112 148 86 3389 1 14 1 2 3 83 2 1 1 4 10 1 5 1 4 27 1 3 1 2 5 8 1 6 9 1 1 2 2 3 1 1 1 3 2 39 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 8.70 32.26 10.87 13.79 7.98 6.22 22.73 7.52 4.10 27.40 9.24 12.05 21.01 3.92 44.94 16.71 6.33 33.71 10.75 18.35 7.49 22.79 6.45 15.00 4.77 6.54 6.21 20.20 10.87 6.70 6.33 9.52 8.93 20.27 23.26 11.51 2.30 4.16 0.14 0.39 1.35 1.60 0.91 0.22 0.03 0.08 1.25 0.07 7.54 0.11 4.04 2.11 0.20 0.17 0.11 0.66 0.80 2.08 0.61 3.16 0.77 0.56 0.10 0.44 0.08 0.88 0.03 1.07 0.63 1.81 0.37 1.65 387 Daly City Police Department Danbury Police Department Danville Police Department Davie Police Department Dayton Police Department Daytona Beach Police Department Dearborn Police Department Decatur Police Department Decatur Police Dept Delray Beach Police Department Denton Police Department Denver Police Department Des Moines Police Department Des Plaines Police Dept Detroit Police Department Dothan Police Department Dover Police Department Downers Grove Police Dept Dubuque Police Department Durham Police Department East Chicago Police East Orange Police East Point Police Department East Providence Police Department Eau Claire Police Department Edinburg Police Department Edison Police Edmond Police Department Egg Harbor Township Police El Cajon Police Department El Paso Police Department Elgin Police Dept Elizabeth Police Elk Grove Police Department Elkhart Police Elyria Police Department San Mateo Fairfield Pittsylvania Broward Montgomery Volusia Wayne Morgan Macon Palm Beach Denton Denver Polk Cook Wayne Houston Kent Du Page Dubuque Durham Lake Essex Fulton Providence Eau Claire Hidalgo Middlesex Oklahoma Atlantic San Diego El Paso Kane Union Sacramento Elkhart Lorain CA CT VA FL OH FL MI AL IL FL TX CO IA IL MI AL DE IL IA NC IN NJ GA RI WI TX NJ OK NJ CA TX IL NJ CA IN OH 113 153 126 164 421 250 198 133 166 152 155 1525 385 102 2250 148 90 81 100 494 110 283 116 98 96 110 189 110 95 120 1132 181 348 126 124 86 1 1 1 2 1 6 4 1 1 1 1 13 6 1 23 2 2 1 3 9 2 3 2 1 1 5 7 2 2 1 15 5 1 1 4 2 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 8.85 6.54 7.94 12.20 2.38 24.00 20.20 7.52 6.02 6.58 6.45 8.52 15.58 9.80 10.22 13.51 22.22 12.35 30.00 18.22 18.18 10.60 17.24 10.20 10.42 45.45 37.04 18.18 21.05 8.33 13.25 27.62 2.87 7.94 32.26 23.26 0.14 0.11 1.57 0.11 0.19 1.21 0.22 0.84 0.90 0.08 0.15 2.17 1.39 0.02 1.26 1.97 1.23 0.11 3.20 3.36 0.40 0.38 0.22 0.16 1.01 0.65 0.86 0.28 0.73 0.03 1.87 0.97 0.19 0.38 2.02 0.66 388 Enfield Police Department Erie Police Department Euclid Police Department Euless Police Department Evansville Police Everett Police Department Fall River Police Department Farmington Police Department Fayetteville Police Department Fayetteville Police Department Federal Way Police Department Flagstaff Police Department Flint Police Department Florence Police Department Florence Police Department Folsom Police Department Fort Collins Police Department Fort Lauderdale Police Department Fort Myers Police Department Fort Pierce Police Department Fort Smith Police Department Fort Wayne Police Fort Worth Police Department Framingham Police Department Frederick Police Department Fremont Police Department Fresno Police Department Fullerton Police Department Gainesville Police Department Galveston Police Department Garden Grove Police Department Gary Police Gastonia Police Department Glendale Police Department Gloucester Township Police Goldsboro Police Department Hartford Erie Cuyahoga Tarrant Vanderburgh Snohomish Bristol San Juan Washington Cumberland King Coconino Genesee Florence Lauderdale Sacramento Larimer Broward Lee St. Lucie Sebastian Allen Tarrant Middlesex Frederick Alameda Fresno Orange Alachua Galveston Orange Lake Gaston Los Angeles Camden Wayne CT PA OH TX IN WA MA NM AR NC WA AZ MI SC AL CA CO FL FL FL AR IN TX MA MD CA CA CA FL TX CA IN NC CA NJ NC 95 167 100 83 277 198 237 129 117 341 133 113 204 109 94 88 162 482 170 126 158 447 1489 118 138 182 828 159 275 161 166 243 166 264 111 101 4 1 1 1 3 1 1 5 2 2 1 1 6 2 1 2 3 6 4 4 3 4 20 1 1 1 7 3 4 1 2 10 2 1 2 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 42.11 5.99 10.00 12.05 10.83 5.05 4.22 38.76 17.09 5.87 7.52 8.85 29.41 18.35 10.64 22.73 18.52 12.45 23.53 31.75 18.99 8.95 13.43 8.47 7.25 5.49 8.45 18.87 14.55 6.21 12.05 41.15 12.05 3.79 18.02 9.90 0.45 0.36 0.08 0.06 1.67 0.14 0.18 3.84 0.98 0.63 0.05 0.74 1.41 1.46 1.08 0.14 1.00 0.34 0.65 1.44 2.39 1.13 1.11 0.07 0.43 0.07 0.75 0.10 1.62 0.34 0.07 2.02 0.97 0.01 0.39 0.82 389 Grand Junction Police Department Grand Rapids Police Department Grapevine Police Department Greece Town Police Department Greeley Police Department Greensboro Police Department Greenville Police Department Greenville Police Department Gresham Police Department Gulfport Police Department Hackensack Police Hagerstown Police Department Hamden Police Department Hamilton Police Department Hampton Police Department Harlingen Police Department Harrisburg Police Department Hartford Police Department Hattiesburg Police Department Haverhill Police Department Hayward Police Department Hempstead Village Police Department Henderson Police Department Hialeah Police Department Hickory Police Department Hoboken Police Hollywood Police Department Holyoke Police Department Homestead Police Department Houston Police Department Huntington Beach Police Department Huntsville Police Department Idaho Falls Police Department Independence Police Department Inglewood Police Department Irvine Police Department Mesa Kent Tarrant Monroe Weld Guilford Greenville Washington Multnomah Harrison Bergen Washington New Haven Butler Hampton City Cameron Dauphin Hartford Forrest Essex Alameda Nassau Clark Miami-Dade Catawba Hudson Broward Hampden Miami-Dade Harris Orange Madison Bonneville Jackson Los Angeles Orange CO MI TX NY CO NC SC MS OR MS NJ MD CT OH VA TX PA CT MS MA CA NY NV FL NC NJ FL MA FL TX CA AL ID MO CA CA 108 319 90 94 146 593 178 96 129 193 117 105 105 135 232 123 155 408 126 93 185 112 336 338 114 156 316 123 106 5053 223 405 89 206 187 197 2 1 1 4 2 5 4 2 1 1 9 1 2 1 2 1 1 10 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 8 1 3 35 1 3 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 18.52 3.13 11.11 42.55 13.70 8.43 22.47 20.83 7.75 5.18 76.92 9.52 19.05 7.41 8.62 8.13 6.45 24.51 15.87 10.75 5.41 8.93 5.95 2.96 8.77 19.23 25.32 8.13 28.30 6.93 4.48 7.41 11.24 4.85 5.35 5.08 1.36 0.17 0.06 0.54 0.79 1.02 0.89 3.91 0.14 0.53 0.99 0.68 0.23 0.27 1.46 0.25 0.37 1.12 2.67 0.13 0.07 0.07 0.10 0.04 0.65 0.47 0.46 0.22 0.12 0.86 0.03 0.90 0.96 0.15 0.01 0.03 390 Irving Police Department Irvington Police Jackson Police Department Jackson Police Department Jacksonville Sheriff's Office Jefferson City Police Department Jersey City Police Johnson City Police Department Joliet Police Dept Joplin Police Department Jupiter Police Department Kalamazoo Dept of Public Safety Kansas City Police Department Kansas City Police Department Kenner Police Department Kennewick Police Department Killeen Police Department Kingsport Police Department Kissimmee Police Department Kokomo Police Lafayette Police Lafayette Police Department LaGrange Police Department Lake Charles Police Department Lakeland Police Department Lakewood Police Department Lancaster Police Department Lansing Police Department Laredo Police Department Largo Police Department Las Cruces Police Department Las Vegas Metro Police Department Lauderhill Police Department Lawrence Police Department Lawton Police Department Lincoln Police Dept Dallas Essex Madison Hinds Duval Cole Hudson Washington Will Jasper Palm Beach Kalamazoo Wyandotte Jackson Jefferson Benton Bell Sullivan Osceola Howard Tippecanoe Lafayette Troup Calcasieu Polk Pierce Lancaster Ingham Webb Pinellas Dona Ana Clark Broward Essex Comanche Lancaster TX NJ TN MS FL MO NJ TN IL MO FL MI KS MO LA WA TX TN FL IN IN LA GA LA FL WA PA MI TX FL NM NV FL MA OK NE 344 190 204 480 1662 88 900 146 302 92 102 244 354 1421 162 90 190 111 136 100 128 243 83 153 226 103 161 240 430 140 167 2942 115 151 165 308 2 2 4 9 12 1 12 1 3 1 1 1 10 5 1 1 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 2 5 1 2 3 4 1 1 8 1 4 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 5.81 10.53 19.61 18.75 7.22 11.36 13.33 6.85 9.93 10.87 9.80 4.10 28.25 3.52 6.17 11.11 15.79 27.03 22.06 10.00 7.81 4.12 12.05 13.07 22.12 9.71 12.42 12.50 9.30 7.14 5.99 2.72 8.70 26.49 6.06 3.25 0.08 0.26 4.07 3.67 1.39 1.32 1.89 0.81 0.44 0.85 0.08 0.40 6.35 0.74 0.23 0.57 0.97 1.91 1.12 1.21 0.58 0.45 1.49 1.04 0.83 0.13 0.39 1.07 1.60 0.11 0.48 0.41 0.06 0.54 0.81 0.35 391 Little Rock Police Department Long Beach Police Department Longmont Police Department Lorain Police Department Los Angeles Police Department Louisville Metro Police Department Lowell Police Department Lubbock Police Department Lynn Police Department Macon Police Department Madison Police Department Manchester Police Department Manchester Police Department Marietta Police Department McAllen Police Department Medford Police Department Medford Police Department Melbourne Police Department Memphis Police Department Mentor Police Department Merced Police Department Meriden Police Department Meridian Police Department Mesa Police Department Mesquite Police Department Miami Beach Police Department Miami Police Department Michigan City Police Middletown Police Department Midland Police Department Milford Police Department Milwaukee Police Department Minneapolis Police Department Miramar Police Department Mission Police Department Missoula Police Department Pulaski Los Angeles Boulder Lorain Los Angeles Jefferson Middlesex Lubbock Essex Bibb Dane Hartford Hillsborough Cobb Hidalgo Jackson Middlesex Brevard Shelby Lake Merced New Haven Lauderdale Maricopa Dallas Miami-Dade Miami-Dade La Porte Middlesex Midland New Haven Milwaukee Hennepin Broward Hidalgo Missoula AR CA CO OH CA KY MA TX MA GA WI CT NH GA TX OR MA FL TN OH CA CT MS AZ TX FL FL IN CT TX CT WI MN FL TX MT 520 968 136 100 9727 1197 239 376 178 270 437 116 218 133 273 103 110 163 1549 82 105 113 99 831 226 374 1104 86 99 153 110 1987 902 171 125 100 2 4 1 5 30 16 2 5 2 9 1 2 1 1 3 2 1 1 46 1 1 1 3 2 1 3 14 1 2 1 1 73 18 2 2 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 3.85 4.13 7.35 50.00 3.08 13.37 8.37 13.30 11.24 33.33 2.29 17.24 4.59 7.52 10.99 19.42 9.09 6.13 29.70 12.20 9.52 8.85 30.30 2.41 4.42 8.02 12.68 11.63 20.20 6.54 9.09 36.74 19.96 11.70 16.00 10.00 0.52 0.04 0.34 1.66 0.31 2.16 0.13 1.79 0.27 5.79 0.20 0.22 0.25 0.15 0.39 0.98 0.07 0.18 4.96 0.43 0.39 0.12 3.74 0.05 0.04 0.12 0.56 0.90 1.21 0.73 0.12 7.70 1.56 0.11 0.26 0.91 392 Mobile Police Department Modesto Police Department Moline Police Department Monroe Police Department Montgomery Police Department Mount Pleasant Police Department Mount Vernon Police Department Muncie Police Murfreesboro Police Department Muskogee Police Department Myrtle Beach Police Department Naperville Police Dept Nashua Police Department Nashville Metro Police Department New Bedford Police Department New Bern Police Department New Braunfels Police Department New Britain Police Department New Brunswick Police New Haven Police Department New London Police Department New Orleans Police Department New Rochelle Police Department New York City Police Department Newark Police Newburgh City Police Department Newport Beach Police Department Newport News Police Department Newton Police Department Niagara Falls Police Department Norfolk Police Department North Bergen Police North Brunswick Police North Charleston Police Department North Las Vegas Police Department Norwalk Police Department Mobile Stanislaus Rock Island Ouachita Montgomery Charleston Westchester Delaware Rutherford Muskogee Horry Du Page Hillsborough Davidson Bristol Craven Comal Hartford Middlesex New Haven New London Orleans Westchester New York Essex Orange Orange Newport News City Middlesex Niagara Norfolk City Hudson Middlesex Charleston Clark Fairfield AL CA IL LA AL SC NY IN TN OK SC IL NH TN MA NC TX CT NJ CT CT LA NY NY NJ NY CA VA MA NY VA NJ NJ SC NV CT 515 262 85 188 500 137 205 102 213 90 179 184 172 1315 288 90 92 160 138 436 90 1425 185 36023 1310 105 140 415 136 145 772 123 83 325 471 167 4 5 1 1 6 1 1 3 5 4 5 1 1 18 2 1 2 2 2 8 2 63 2 196 8 1 1 10 1 3 14 1 1 5 2 5 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 7.77 19.08 11.76 5.32 12.00 7.30 4.88 29.41 23.47 44.44 27.93 5.43 5.81 13.69 6.94 11.11 21.74 12.50 14.49 18.35 22.22 44.21 10.81 5.44 6.11 9.52 7.14 24.10 7.35 20.69 18.13 8.13 12.05 15.38 4.25 29.94 0.97 0.97 0.68 0.65 2.62 0.29 0.11 2.55 1.90 5.63 1.86 0.11 0.25 2.87 0.36 0.97 1.84 0.22 0.25 0.93 0.73 18.32 0.21 2.40 1.02 0.27 0.03 5.53 0.07 1.39 5.77 0.16 0.12 1.43 0.10 0.55 393 Norwich Police Department Oak Lawn Police Dept Oak Park Police Dept Oakland Police Department Ocala Police Department Ocean City Police Department Oceanside Police Department O'Fallon Police Department Ogden Police Department Oklahoma City Police Department Olathe Police Department Omaha Police Dept Orangetown Town Police Department Orem Department of Public Safety Orlando Police Department Oro Valley Police Department Ottawa County Sheriff's Office Oxnard Police Department Palm Bay Police Department Palm Beach Gardens Police Department Palm Springs Police Department Palo Alto Police Department Panama City Police Department Parma Police Department Pasadena Police Department Paterson Police Pawtucket Police Department Pembroke Pines Police Department Pensacola Police Department Peoria Police Department Peoria Police Dept Petersburg Police Department Pharr Police Department Philadelphia Police Department Phoenix Police Department Pine Bluff Police Department New London Cook Cook Alameda Marion Worcester San Diego St. Charles Weber Oklahoma Johnson Douglas Rockland Utah Orange Pima Ottawa Ventura Brevard Palm Beach Riverside Santa Clara Bay Cuyahoga Harris Passaic Providence Broward Escambia Maricopa Peoria Petersburg City Hidalgo Philadelphia Maricopa Jefferson CT IL IL CA FL MD CA MO UT OK KS NE NY UT FL AZ MI CA FL FL CA CA FL OH TX NJ RI FL FL AZ IL VA TX PA AZ AR 81 106 115 773 155 107 210 107 137 1046 161 747 90 90 757 103 115 228 159 114 93 93 86 92 260 497 153 238 146 189 246 82 96 6624 3388 140 5 1 1 3 2 1 4 1 2 12 1 6 1 1 8 1 1 3 1 2 1 1 1 3 5 3 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 66 17 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 61.73 9.43 8.70 3.88 12.90 9.35 19.05 9.35 14.60 11.47 6.21 8.03 11.11 11.11 10.57 9.71 8.70 13.16 6.29 17.54 10.75 10.75 11.63 32.61 19.23 6.04 13.07 4.20 6.85 5.29 4.07 24.39 20.83 9.96 5.02 7.14 1.82 0.02 0.02 0.20 0.60 1.94 0.13 0.28 0.86 1.67 0.18 1.16 0.32 0.19 0.70 0.10 0.38 0.36 0.18 0.15 0.05 0.06 0.59 0.23 0.12 0.60 0.32 0.06 0.34 0.03 0.54 6.17 0.26 4.33 0.45 1.29 394 Pinellas Park Police Department Piscataway Township Police Pittsburgh Police Department Plainfield Police Department Plano Police Department Pleasanton Police Department Port Orange Police Department Port St. Lucie Police Department Portland Police Bureau Portland Police Department Portsmouth Police Department Poughkeepsie Police Department Providence Police Department Provo Police Department Pueblo Police Dept Quincy Police Department Racine Police Department Raleigh Police Department Ramapo Town Police Department Rapid City Police Department Redding Police Department Redondo Beach Police Department Reno Police Department Revere Police Department Richmond Police Department Richmond Police Department Riverside Police Department Riviera Beach Police Department Roanoke City Police Department Rochester Police Department Rochester Police Department Rock Hill Police Department Rockford Police Dept Rocky Mount Police Department Rogers Police Department Round Rock Police Department Pinellas Middlesex Allegheny Union Collin Alameda Volusia St. Lucie Multnomah Cumberland Portsmouth City Dutchess Providence Utah Pueblo Norfolk Racine Wake Rockland Pennington Shasta Los Angeles Washoe Suffolk Contra Costa Richmond City Riverside Palm Beach Roanoke City Olmsted Monroe York Winnebago Nash Benton Williamson FL NJ PA NJ TX CA FL FL OR ME VA NY RI UT CO MA WI NC NY SD CA CA NV MA CA VA CA FL VA MN NY SC IL NC AR TX 99 90 891 151 343 85 83 245 928 159 235 105 483 99 195 205 195 702 120 107 118 99 362 86 165 752 385 108 264 125 703 121 300 143 99 133 2 1 21 5 1 1 2 1 10 3 10 1 7 3 4 1 1 8 1 2 1 1 3 1 3 7 4 6 2 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 20.20 11.11 23.57 33.11 2.92 11.76 24.10 4.08 10.78 18.87 42.55 9.52 14.49 30.30 20.51 4.88 5.13 11.40 8.33 18.69 8.47 10.10 8.29 11.63 18.18 9.31 10.39 55.56 7.58 8.00 4.27 8.26 3.33 6.99 10.10 7.52 0.22 0.12 1.72 0.93 0.13 0.07 0.40 0.36 1.36 1.07 10.47 0.34 1.12 0.58 2.51 0.15 0.51 0.89 0.32 1.98 0.56 0.01 0.71 0.14 0.29 3.43 0.18 0.45 2.06 0.69 0.40 0.44 0.34 1.77 0.45 0.24 395 Royal Oak Police Department Sacramento Police Department Saginaw Police Department Salem Police Department Salem Police Department Salinas Police Department Salisbury Police Department Salisbury Police Department Salt Lake City Police Department Salt Lake County Sheriff's Office San Antonio Police Department San Bernardino Police Department San Diego Police Department San Francisco Police Department San Jose Police Department San Leandro Police Department San Marcos Police Department Sandy Police Department Sandy Springs Police Department Sanford Police Department Sanford Police Department Santa Barbara Police Department Santa Clara Police Department Santa Fe Police Department Schenectady Police Department Scottsdale Police Dept Scranton Police Department Seattle Police Department Shreveport Police Department Sioux Falls Police Department Somerville Police Department South Bend Police Southampton Town Police Department Spokane Police Department Springfield Police Department Springfield Police Department Oakland Sacramento Saginaw Essex Marion Monterey Rowan Wicomico Salt Lake Salt Lake Bexar San Bernardino San Diego San Francisco Santa Clara Alameda Hays Salt Lake Fulton Lee Seminole Santa Barbara Santa Clara Santa Fe Schenectady Maricopa Lackawanna King Caddo Minnehaha Middlesex St. Joseph Suffolk Spokane Hampden Clark MI CA MI MA OR CA NC MD UT UT TX CA CA CA CA CA TX UT GA NC FL CA CA NM NY AZ PA WA LA SD MA IN NY WA MA OH 85 701 92 83 187 177 86 88 433 342 2020 345 1951 1940 1382 95 95 110 120 81 131 136 141 150 166 417 155 1283 511 221 130 255 102 295 464 127 1 5 1 2 1 4 1 1 1 1 30 2 12 7 9 2 1 1 3 1 1 1 2 2 8 1 4 9 12 1 2 8 1 6 9 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 11.76 7.13 10.87 24.10 5.35 22.60 11.63 11.36 2.31 2.92 14.85 5.80 6.15 3.61 6.51 21.05 10.53 9.09 25.00 12.35 7.63 7.35 14.18 13.33 48.19 2.40 25.81 7.01 23.48 4.52 15.38 31.37 9.80 20.34 19.40 7.87 0.08 0.35 0.50 0.27 0.32 0.96 0.72 1.01 0.10 0.10 1.75 0.10 0.39 0.87 0.51 0.13 0.64 0.10 0.33 1.73 0.24 0.24 0.11 1.39 5.17 0.03 1.87 0.47 4.71 0.59 0.13 3.00 0.07 1.27 1.94 0.72 396 Springfield Police Dept Springfield Police Dept St. Charles Police Dept St. Joseph Police Dept St. Louis (city) Police Dept St. Paul Police Department St. Petersburg Police Department Stamford Police Department Stockton Police Department Stratford Police Department Suffolk Police Department Sugar Land Police Department Sumter Police Department Sunrise Police Department Surprise Police Department Syracuse Police Department Tacoma Police Department Tallahassee Police Department Tampa Police Department Tempe Police Department Texarkana Police Department Texas City Police Department Tinley Park Police Dept Titusville Police Department Toledo Police Department Topeka Police Department Trenton Police Troy Police Department Tucson Police Department Tulsa Police Department Tupelo Police Department Tuscaloosa Police Department Union City Police Utica Police Department Vacaville Police Department Valdosta Police Department Greene Sangamon St. Charles Buchanan St. Louis City Ramsey Pinellas Fairfield San Joaquin Fairfield Suffolk Fort Bend Sumter Broward Maricopa Onondaga Pierce Leon Hillsborough Maricopa Bowie Galveston Cook Brevard Lucas Shawnee Mercer Rensselaer Pima Tulsa Lee Tuscaloosa Hudson Oneida Solano Lowndes MO IL MO MO MO MN FL CT CA CT VA TX SC FL AZ NY WA FL FL AZ TX TX IL FL OH KS NJ NY AZ OK MS AL NJ NY CA GA 306 273 112 114 1351 598 510 292 415 111 171 130 107 175 127 489 371 364 980 357 94 85 81 88 640 283 361 121 1032 826 115 263 165 179 111 133 3 1 1 1 10 8 6 3 2 3 1 2 3 1 1 3 3 1 3 1 1 2 2 1 12 4 6 1 6 11 1 1 3 2 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 9.80 3.66 8.93 8.77 7.40 13.38 11.76 10.27 4.82 27.03 5.85 15.38 28.04 5.71 7.87 6.13 8.09 2.75 3.06 2.80 10.64 23.53 24.69 11.36 18.75 14.13 16.62 8.26 5.81 13.32 8.70 3.80 18.18 11.17 9.01 7.52 1.09 0.51 0.28 1.12 3.13 1.57 0.65 0.33 0.29 0.33 1.18 0.34 2.79 0.06 0.03 0.64 0.38 0.36 0.24 0.03 1.08 0.69 0.04 0.18 2.72 2.25 1.64 0.63 0.61 1.82 1.21 0.51 0.47 0.85 0.24 0.92 397 Victoria Police Department Vineland Police Virginia Beach Police Department Visalia Department of Public Safety Waco Police Department Warren Police Department Washington Metropolitan Police Dept Washington Township Police Waterbury Police Department Waterloo Police Department Waukegan Police Dept Wayne Township Police West Bloomfield Township Police West Chester Police Department West Haven Police Department West Jordan Police Department West New York Police West Palm Beach Police Department West Valley City Police Department Westminster Police Department Westminster Police Dept Weymouth Police Department Wheeling Police Department White Plains Police Department Wichita Falls Police Department Wichita Police Department Wilkes Barre City Police Department Wilmington Police Department Wilmington Police Department Wilson Police Department Winston-Salem Police Department Woodbridge Police Woonsocket Police Department Worcester Police Department Yakima Police Department Yonkers Police Department Victoria Cumberland Virginia Beach City Tulare McLennan Macomb District of Columbia Gloucester New Haven Black Hawk Lake Passaic Oakland Butler New Haven Salt Lake Hudson Palm Beach Salt Lake Orange Adams Norfolk Ohio Westchester Wichita Sedgwick Luzerne New Hanover New Castle Wilson Forsyth Middlesex Providence Worcester Yakima Westchester TX NJ VA CA TX MI DC NJ CT IA IL NJ MI OH CT UT NJ FL UT CA CO MA WV NY TX KS PA NC DE NC NC NJ RI MA WA NY 106 157 813 136 246 230 3742 86 256 120 155 117 81 90 122 102 119 310 186 100 178 96 84 210 177 662 92 266 306 114 508 206 99 482 134 641 2 2 9 1 8 1 29 1 4 4 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 3 1 2 4 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 3 1 4 5 1 2 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 18.87 12.74 11.07 7.35 32.52 4.35 7.75 11.63 15.63 33.33 12.90 8.55 12.35 11.11 16.39 19.61 8.40 9.68 5.38 20.00 22.47 10.42 23.81 4.76 11.30 3.02 10.87 7.52 6.54 17.54 5.91 4.85 40.40 10.37 7.46 3.12 2.30 1.27 2.05 0.23 3.41 0.12 4.82 0.35 0.46 3.05 0.28 0.20 0.08 0.27 0.23 0.19 0.16 0.23 0.10 0.07 0.91 0.15 4.50 0.11 1.52 0.40 0.31 0.99 0.37 2.46 0.86 0.12 0.64 0.63 0.41 0.21 398 York Police Department Yuma Police Department York Yuma PA AZ 110 167 1 2 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 9.09 11.98 0.23 1.02 399 Table 84. Special State & Local Law Enforcement Agencies in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted Alphabetically) # of Full-Time Per Agency County State Sworn Personnel Agency Allegheny Port Authority Transit Police Anchorage International Airport Police Appalachian State University Police Dept Arkansas State University Police Dept. Austin I.S.D. Police Department Baltimore City School Police Dept. BART Police Department Beaumont I.S.D. Police Dept. Boston School Police Bowie State University Dept. of Public Safety Buffalo State College Police BYU-Idaho Police Department California Bureau of Narcotics Enforcement California Dept. of Justice California Exposition And State Fair Police Cameron Co. District Attorney Investigations Div Central Michigan University Police Department College of Lake County Police Dept Connally I.S.D. Police Dept. Dallas I.S.D. Police Dept. Dayton International Airport Police Dept Delaware River & Bay Authority Police Delaware River Port Authority - Transit Police District of Columbia Protective Services Police Duke University Police Department Ennis I.S.D. Police Department Florida Atlantic University Police Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission Florida International University Police George Mason University Police Dept. Georgia Public Safety Training Center Allegheny Anchorage Watauga Craighead Travis Baltimore City Alameda Jefferson Suffolk Prince Georges Erie Madison Sacramento Sacramento Sacramento Cameron Isabella Lake McLennan Dallas Montgomery New Castle Camden District of Columbia Durham Ellis Palm Beach Leon Miami-Dade Fairfax Monroe PA AK NC AR TX MD CA TX MA MD NY ID CA CA CA TX MI IL TX TX OH DE NJ DC NC TX FL FL FL VA GA 42 65 25 17 70 142 192 22 80 14 30 10 73 419 6 30 21 13 3 88 29 50 144 484 60 5 39 626 39 52 19 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. Per 1,000 Officers 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 23.81 15.38 40.00 58.82 14.29 7.04 5.21 45.45 12.50 71.43 33.33 100.00 27.40 2.39 166.67 33.33 47.62 76.92 333.33 11.36 34.48 20.00 6.94 2.07 16.67 200.00 25.64 6.39 25.64 19.23 52.63 Per 100,000 Population 0.08 0.34 1.96 1.04 0.10 0.16 0.07 0.40 0.14 0.12 0.11 2.66 0.02 0.10 0.07 0.25 1.42 0.14 0.43 0.04 0.19 0.51 0.19 0.17 0.37 0.67 0.08 0.44 0.04 0.09 3.78 400 Georgia State University Police Grambling State University Police Dept. Greenville Technical College Public Safety Houston Baptist University Police Department Houston Community College System Humble I.S.D. Police Dept. Indiana State Excise Police Indiana University Purdue U. Fort Wayne U. Police Kansas State Law Enforcement Training Center Kentucky Alcoholic Beverage Control Lafayette College Office of Public Safety Lancaster I.S.D. Police Dept. Lander University Public Safety Lehigh-Northampton Airport Auth. Police Dept Los Angeles School Police Department Louisiana State Univ. Health Sciences Center Police Dept Louisiana State University Police Department Maryland Department of General Services Police Maryland National Capital Park Police - Montgomery Co Maryland Natural Resources Police Maryland Transit Administration Police Maryland Transportation Authority Police Massachusetts Dept of Mental Health Police Dept MBTA Transit Police McAllen I.S.D. Police Dept. Medical College of Georgia Medical University of South Carolina Public Safety Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority Police Middlesex County Prosecutor's Office Midland I.S.D. Police Dept. Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries & Parks Missouri Department of Corrections Missouri Univ. of Science & Technology Police Dept MIT Police Department Morrisville State College Police New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Fulton Lincoln Greenville Harris Harris Harris Marion Allen Reno Franklin Northampton Dallas Greenwood Lehigh Los Angeles Caddo East Baton Rouge Baltimore City Montgomery Anne Arundel Baltimore City Baltimore Suffolk Suffolk Hidalgo Richmond Charleston Arlington Middlesex Midland Hinds Cole Phelps Middlesex Madison Burlington GA LA SC TX TX TX IN IN KS KY PA TX SC PA CA LA LA MD MD MD MD MD MA MA TX GA SC VA NJ TX MS MO MO MA NY NJ 68 9 9 30 48 24 88 18 39 30 18 6 10 9 340 49 62 68 86 224 140 456 40 256 43 32 62 206 80 11 230 13 11 59 11 90 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14.71 222.22 111.11 33.33 20.83 41.67 11.36 55.56 25.64 66.67 55.56 166.67 100.00 111.11 5.88 20.41 16.13 14.71 11.63 4.46 7.14 2.19 50.00 7.81 23.26 31.25 16.13 4.85 12.50 90.91 4.35 76.92 90.91 16.95 90.91 11.11 0.11 4.28 0.22 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.11 0.28 0.20 0.27 0.34 0.04 1.44 0.29 0.02 0.39 0.23 0.16 0.41 0.19 0.16 0.16 0.28 0.28 0.13 0.50 0.29 0.09 0.12 0.73 1.05 1.32 2.21 0.07 1.36 0.11 401 New Jersey Transit Police New Mexico Department Of Game & Fish New York City Dept of Environmental Protection Police New York State Metro Transportation Auth. Police New York State Park Police North Forest I.S.D. Police Dept. Northern Illinois University Police Northside I.S.D. Police Dept. Ohio Dept of Natural Resources - Ofc. of Law Enf. Ohio Department of Taxation - Enforcement Division Ohio State University Police Department Palm Beach County School District Police Pennsylvania Dept of Conservation & Natural Resources Port Authority of New York & New Jersey Police Dept San Antonio Park Rangers Santa Ana Unified School District Police Dept. Santa Rosa I.S.D. Police Department School District of Philadelphia Police Shippensburg University of Pennsylvania Police Socorro I.S.D. Police Dept. South Carolina Dept of Mental Health-Public Safety South Carolina Department of Natural Resources Southern University and A & M College Police St. Edward's University Police Department St. Joseph County Airport Police St. Mary's University Police Department State University at Albany Police Tennessee State University Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission Tuskegee University Police Department United I.S.D. Police Dept. University of Alabama - Birmingham Police Dept University of Arkansas Medical Sciences Dept of Pub University of California - Los Angeles Police University of Colorado - Colorado Springs Police Dept. University of Florida Police Essex Santa Fe Westchester New York Albany Harris DeKalb Bexar Franklin Franklin Franklin Palm Beach Dauphin Hudson Bexar Orange Cameron Philadelphia Cumberland El Paso Richland Richland East Baton Rouge Travis St. Joseph Bexar Albany Davidson Travis Macon Webb Jefferson Pulaski Los Angeles El Paso Alachua NJ NM NY NY NY TX IL TX OH OH OH FL PA NJ TX CA TX PA PA TX SC SC LA TX IN TX NY TN TX AL TX AL AR CA CO FL 201 106 168 694 305 21 59 83 394 30 51 176 136 1667 112 21 3 450 17 30 120 238 43 14 17 20 41 27 277 33 51 79 36 57 14 85 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 4 1 1 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14.93 9.43 5.95 2.88 3.28 47.62 16.95 24.10 5.08 33.33 19.61 22.73 7.35 0.60 26.79 95.24 333.33 2.22 58.82 33.33 8.33 4.20 23.26 71.43 58.82 50.00 24.39 74.07 3.61 30.30 19.61 12.66 27.78 17.54 71.43 11.76 0.47 0.69 1.29 0.13 0.21 0.02 0.95 0.12 3.24 0.18 0.09 0.30 0.79 0.16 0.17 0.07 0.25 0.07 0.42 0.12 0.26 0.26 0.23 0.10 0.37 0.06 0.33 0.32 0.10 4.66 0.40 0.15 0.26 0.01 0.16 0.40 402 University of Illinois Police Dept University of Maryland Eastern Shore Public Safety University of North Texas Police Department University of Pittsburgh - Main Campus Police University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown Police University of South Carolina - Upstate Police Dept University of Tennessee at Knoxville Police University of Texas - Austin Police University of West Alabama Police Vanderbilt University Police Department Ventura College Virginia Commonwealth University Police Dept. Virginia Marine Resources Commission Volusia County Beach Patrol Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Auth. Police Wayne State University Dept of Public Safety Wisconsin Dept of Justice - Criminal Investigation Div. Champaign Somerset Denton Allegheny Cambria Spartanburg Knox Travis Sumter Davidson Ventura Richmond City Newport News City Volusia District of Columbia Wayne Dane IL MD TX PA PA SC TN TX AL TN CA VA VA FL DC MI WI 54 6 40 73 13 12 52 62 6 91 5 74 60 60 442 49 92 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 18.52 166.67 25.00 13.70 76.92 83.33 38.46 16.13 166.67 10.99 200.00 27.03 16.67 33.33 4.52 20.41 10.87 0.50 3.78 0.15 0.08 0.70 0.35 10.47 0.10 7.27 0.16 0.12 0.98 3.02 0.40 0.33 0.05 0.20 403 Figure 1. Police Crime Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Conviction This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 404 Figure 2. Police Crime Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Job Loss This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 405 Figure 3. Police Crime: CART Model Predicting Sex-related Arrest Cases This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 406 Figure 4. Police Crime: CART Model Predicting Alcohol-related Arrest Cases This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 407 Figure 5. Police Crime: CART Model Predicting Drug-related Arrest Cases This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 408 Figure 6. Police Crime: CART Model Predicting Violence-related Arrest Cases This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 409 Figure 7. Police Crime: CART Model Predicting Profit-motivated Arrest Cases This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 410 Figure 8. CART Model Predicting Being Named as a Party Defendant in a Section 1983 Civil Action at Some Point during Career This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 411 Figure 9. Sex-related Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Conviction This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 412 Figure 10. Sex-related Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Job Loss This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 413 Figure 11. Sex-related Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Child Victims This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 414 Figure 12. Police Sexual Violence Arrest Cases: CHAID Model Predicting Conviction This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 415 Figure 13. Police Sexual Violence Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Job Loss This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 416 Figure 14. Driving While Female Encounters Arrest Cases: CHAID Model Predicting Conviction This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 417 Figure 15. Driving While Female Encounters Arrest Cases: CHAID Model Predicting Job Loss This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 418 Figure 16. Alcohol-related Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Conviction This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 419 Figure 17. Alcohol-related Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Job Loss This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 420 Figure 18. DUI Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Conviction This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 421 Figure 19. DUI Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Job Loss This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 422 Figure 20. Drug-related Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Conviction This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 423 Figure 21. Drug-related Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Job Loss This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 424 Figure 22. Violence-related Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Conviction This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 425 Figure 23. Violence-related Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Job Loss This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 426 Figure 24. Officer-involved Domestic Violence Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Conviction This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 427 Figure 25. Officer-involved Domestic Violence Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Job Loss This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 428 Figure 26. Profit-motivated Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Conviction This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 429 Figure 27. Profit-motivated Arrest Cases: CART Model Predicting Job Loss This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 430 Appendix A-1. Nonmetropolitan State & Local Law Enforcement Agencies in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted by # FT Sworn) # of Full-Time Per Per 1,000 Agency County State Sworn Personnel Agency Officers Navajo Nation Tribal Dept of Law Enforcement Monroe County Sheriff's Office New York City Dept of Env. Protection Police Robeson County Sheriff's Office Danville Police Department Kauai (County) Police Department Sauk County Sheriff's Office Tupelo Police Department Wilson Police Department Henry County Sheriff's Office Nye County Sheriff's Office Douglas County Sheriff's Office Meridian Police Department Greenville Police Department Orangeburg County Sheriff's Office Muskogee Police Department St. Landry Parish Sheriff's Office LaGrange Police Department Sanford Police Department Roswell Police Department Torrington Police Department Cullman County Sheriff's Office Georgetown County Sheriff's Office Concord Police Department Stillwater Police Department Lumberton Police Department Orangeburg Public Safety Alamogordo Department of Public Safety Auburn Police Department Cookeville Police Department Shelby Police Department Apache Monroe Westchester Robeson Pittsylvania Kauai Sauk Lee Wilson Henry Nye Douglas Lauderdale Washington Orangeburg Muskogee St. Landry Troup Lee Chaves Litchfield Cullman Georgetown Merrimack Payne Robeson Orangeburg Otero Cayuga Putnam Cleveland AZ FL NY NC VA HI WI MS NC VA NV NV MS MS SC OK LA GA NC NM CT AL SC NH OK NC SC NM NY TN NC 393 189 168 128 126 125 118 115 114 112 108 100 99 96 92 90 90 83 81 80 79 78 78 77 74 73 72 71 70 70 70 3 3 1 3 1 3 1 1 2 14 3 1 3 2 1 4 4 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 2 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 7.63 15.87 5.95 23.44 7.94 24.00 8.47 8.70 17.54 125.00 27.78 10.00 30.30 20.83 10.87 44.44 44.44 12.05 12.35 25.00 12.66 12.82 12.82 12.99 13.51 13.70 41.67 14.08 14.29 28.57 14.29 Per 100,000 Population 4.19 4.10 1.29 2.24 1.57 4.47 1.61 1.21 2.46 25.85 6.83 2.13 3.74 3.91 1.08 5.63 4.80 1.49 1.73 3.05 0.53 1.24 1.66 0.68 1.29 0.75 3.24 1.57 1.25 2.77 1.02 431 Danville (City) Sheriff's Office Hendry County Sheriff's Office Del Rio Police Department Frankfort Police Department Lincoln County Sheriff's Office Richmond Police Department Grand Traverse County Sheriff's Office Manitowoc Police Department Twin Falls Police Department Vernon Parish Sheriff's Office Columbus Police Department Gallup Police Department Jamestown Police Department Jackson County Sheriff's Office Lake County Sheriff's Office Nogales Police Department Virginia Marine Resources Commission Allegan County Sheriff's Office Campbell County Sheriff's Office Lenoir County Sheriff's Office Opelousas Police Department Putnam County Sheriff's Office Elko County Sheriff's Office Sevierville Police Department Bartlesville Police Department Paris Police Department Sandusky Police Department Clovis Police Department Galesburg Police Dept Zanesville Police Department Shawnee Police Department Kerrville Police Department Assumption Parish Sheriff's Office Durango Police Department Selma Police Department Dodge City Police Department Danville City Hendry Val Verde Franklin Lincoln Madison Grand Traverse Manitowoc Twin Falls Vernon Lowndes McKinley Chautauqua Jackson Lake Santa Cruz Newport News City Allegan Campbell Lenoir St. Landry Putnam Elko Sevier Washington Lamar Erie Curry Knox Muskingum Pottawatomie Kerr Assumption La Plata Dallas Ford VA FL TX KY OR KY MI WI ID LA MS NM NY FL CA AZ VA MI WY NC LA TN NV TN OK TX OH NM IL OH OK TX LA CO AL KS 69 67 65 65 65 65 64 64 64 64 62 62 62 61 61 60 60 59 58 58 58 58 57 55 54 54 54 53 53 53 52 51 50 50 50 49 3 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 4 1 2 3 1 3 1 1 2 1 2 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 43.48 14.93 15.38 15.38 15.38 15.38 31.25 31.25 15.63 31.25 16.13 16.13 32.26 16.39 32.79 33.33 16.67 16.95 17.24 34.48 17.24 34.48 17.54 18.18 74.07 18.52 37.04 56.60 18.87 56.60 19.23 19.61 40.00 20.00 40.00 20.41 6.97 2.55 2.05 2.03 2.17 1.21 2.30 2.46 1.29 3.82 1.67 1.40 1.48 2.01 3.09 4.22 3.02 0.90 2.17 3.36 1.20 2.77 2.05 1.11 7.85 2.01 2.59 6.20 1.89 3.49 1.44 2.02 8.54 1.95 4.56 2.95 432 Page County Sheriff's Office Stanly County Sheriff's Office Cherokee County Sheriff's Office Natchez Police Dept. Chillicothe Police Department Lee County Sheriff's Office Plattsburgh Police Department Thomas County Sheriff's Office Eureka Police Department Lincoln Parish Sheriff's Office Mason City Police Department New Milford Police Department Butte - Silver Bow County Sheriff's Office Gatlinburg Police Department Gillette Police Department Grant County Sheriff's Office Harrison County Sheriff's Office Juneau County Sheriff's Office Kingsville Police Department Natchitoches Parish Sheriff's Office Calhoun Police Department Cortland Police Department Juneau Police Dept. Lenawee County Sheriff's Office Saline County Sheriff's Office Scottsboro Police Department Sedalia Police Dept Sullivan County Sheriff's Office Zapata County Sheriff's Office Kingsland Police Dept Poplar Bluff Police Department Ada Police Department Saline County Sheriff's Office Chesterfield County Sheriff's Office Rutland Police Department. Searcy Police Department Page Stanly Cherokee Adams Ross Lee Clinton Thomas Humboldt Lincoln Cerro Gordo Litchfield Silver Bow Sevier Campbell Grant Harrison Juneau Kleberg Natchitoches Gordon Cortland Juneau Lenawee Saline Jackson Pettis Sullivan Zapata Camden Butler Pontotoc Saline Chesterfield Rutland White VA NC SC MS OH NC NY GA CA LA IA CT MT TN WY IN TX WI TX LA GA NY AK MI KS AL MO NY TX GA MO OK IL SC VT AR 49 49 48 48 47 47 47 47 46 46 46 46 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 43 43 42 42 41 41 41 1 1 2 4 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 20.41 20.41 41.67 83.33 21.28 21.28 21.28 42.55 21.74 21.74 21.74 21.74 44.44 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.73 22.73 22.73 22.73 22.73 22.73 22.73 22.73 22.73 23.26 23.26 23.81 23.81 24.39 24.39 24.39 4.16 1.65 3.61 12.39 1.28 1.73 1.22 4.47 0.74 2.14 2.26 0.53 5.85 1.11 2.17 1.43 1.52 3.75 3.12 2.53 1.81 2.03 3.20 1.00 1.80 1.88 2.37 1.29 7.13 1.98 2.34 2.67 4.01 2.14 1.62 1.30 433 Bainbridge Police Department Big Spring Police Department McDowell County Sheriff's Office White County Sheriff's Office Corinth Police Department Klamath Falls Police Department Muscatine Police Department Seymour Police Boone Police Department Brownwood Police Department Mount Airy Police Department Alice Police Department Bogalusa Police Department Dunn Police Department Fort Dodge Police Department Gaffney Police Department Muskogee County Sheriff's Office Palatka Police Department Bennettsville Police Department Durant Police Department Hastings Police Dept Kalispell Police Department La Salle County Sheriff's Office Union City Police Department Washington Police Department Clarksdale Police Department Lebanon Police Department McKinley County Sheriff's Office New Castle (city) Police Department New Castle Police Polk County Police Department DeKalb County Sheriff's Office Fort Payne Police Department Martin County Sheriff's Office Plainview Police Department Seneca Police Department Decatur Howard McDowell White Alcorn Klamath Muscatine Jackson Watauga Brown Surry Jim Wells Washington Harnett Webster Cherokee Muskogee Putnam Marlboro Bryan Adams Flathead La Salle Obion Beaufort Coahoma Grafton McKinley Lawrence Henry Polk DeKalb DeKalb Martin Hale Oconee GA TX NC GA MS OR IA IN NC TX NC TX LA NC IA SC OK FL SC OK NE MT IL TN NC MS NH NM PA IN GA AL AL NC TX SC 40 40 40 40 39 39 39 39 38 38 38 37 37 37 37 37 37 37 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 35 35 35 35 35 35 34 34 34 34 34 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 50.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.64 25.64 25.64 25.64 26.32 52.63 26.32 27.03 27.03 27.03 27.03 54.05 27.03 27.03 27.78 27.78 55.56 27.78 27.78 27.78 27.78 28.57 28.57 28.57 28.57 28.57 85.71 29.41 29.41 29.41 29.41 29.41 7.18 2.86 2.22 3.68 2.70 1.51 2.34 2.36 1.96 5.25 1.36 2.45 2.12 0.87 2.63 3.61 1.41 1.34 3.46 2.36 6.38 1.10 0.88 3.14 2.09 3.82 1.12 1.40 1.10 2.02 7.23 1.41 1.41 4.08 2.76 1.35 434 Holmes County Sheriff's Office Tuskegee University Police Department Baxter County Sheriff's Office Eunice Police Department Moberly Police Department Olean Police Department Tahlequah Police Department Traverse City Police Department Austin Police Department Murray Police Department Starr County Sheriff's Office Stephens County Sheriff's Office Andalusia Police Dept. Berea Police Department Del Norte County Sheriff's Office Great Bend Police Department Greenbrier County Sheriff's Office Helena\/West Helena Police Department Kings Mountain Police Department Lebanon Police Department Luna County Sheriff's Office Miami Police Department Mineral Wells Police Department Okanogan County Sheriff's Office Otero County Sheriff's Office Scottsbluff Police Dept Shelby County Sheriff's Office Warren County Sheriff's Office Albert Lea Police Department Halifax County Sheriff's Office Mount Pleasant Police Department Ravalli County Sheriff's Office Hooksett Police Department Lee County Sheriff's Office Leesville Police Department Vail Police Department Holmes Macon Baxter St. Landry Randolph Cattaraugus Cherokee Grand Traverse Mower Calloway Starr Stephens Covington Madison Del Norte Barton Greenbrier Phillips Cleveland Laclede Luna Ottawa Palo Pinto Okanogan Otero Scotts Bluff Shelby Warren Freeborn Halifax Titus Ravalli Merrimack Lee Vernon Eagle OH AL AR LA MO NY OK MI MN KY TX GA AL KY CA KS WV AR NC MO NM OK TX WA NM NE OH NC MN VA TX MT NH SC LA CO 33 33 32 32 32 32 32 32 31 31 31 31 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 29 29 29 29 28 28 28 28 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 4 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 30.30 30.30 31.25 156.25 31.25 31.25 31.25 31.25 32.26 32.26 32.26 32.26 33.33 33.33 66.67 33.33 33.33 133.33 66.67 33.33 33.33 33.33 66.67 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 34.48 34.48 34.48 34.48 35.71 35.71 35.71 35.71 2.36 4.66 2.41 6.00 3.93 1.25 2.13 1.15 2.55 2.69 1.64 3.82 2.65 1.21 6.99 3.61 2.82 18.38 2.04 2.81 3.98 3.14 7.11 2.43 1.57 2.70 2.02 4.77 3.20 2.76 3.09 2.49 0.68 5.20 1.91 1.92 435 White County Sheriff's Office Accomack County Sheriff's Office Farmville Police Department Jim Wells County Sheriff's Office Las Vegas Police Department Marble Falls Police Department Marion County Sheriff's Office Philadelphia Police Department Polk County Sheriff's Office Rosebud Sioux Tribal Police Emery County Sheriff's Office Hampton County Sheriff's Office Humboldt Police Department Ruidoso Police Department Steuben County Sheriff's Office Appalachian State University Police Dept Dillon Police Department Lawrence County Sheriff's Office Marlboro County Sheriff's Office Newaygo County Sheriff's Office Ogdensburg Police Department Russellville Police Department Sault Ste. Marie Police Department Tuscola County Sheriff's Office Commerce Police Department Deridder Police Department Huron Police Department Jennings Police Department Marion Police Department Aspen Police Department Beeville Police Department Canton Police Dept Emmet County Sheriff's Office Graham County Sheriff's Office Monroe County Sheriff's Office Seneca County Sheriff's Office White Accomack Prince Edward Jim Wells San Miguel Burnet Marion Neshoba Polk Todd Emery Hampton Gibson Lincoln Steuben Watauga Dillon Lawrence Marlboro Newaygo St. Lawrence Franklin Chippewa Tuscola Jackson Beauregard Beadle Jefferson Davis Marion Pitkin Bee Fulton Emmet Graham Monroe Seneca TN VA VA TX NM TX WV MS GA SD UT SC TN NM NY NC SC IN SC MI NY AL MI MI GA LA SD LA SC CO TX IL MI AZ WI NY 28 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 26 26 26 26 26 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 24 24 24 24 24 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 6 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 35.71 37.04 37.04 37.04 37.04 37.04 37.04 37.04 74.07 37.04 76.92 38.46 76.92 38.46 38.46 40.00 40.00 40.00 80.00 40.00 40.00 80.00 40.00 40.00 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 86.96 43.48 43.48 43.48 43.48 43.48 260.87 3.87 3.02 4.28 2.45 3.40 2.34 1.77 3.37 4.82 10.40 18.22 4.74 4.03 4.88 1.01 1.96 3.12 2.17 6.91 2.06 0.89 6.31 2.60 1.79 1.65 2.80 5.75 3.17 3.02 11.66 3.14 2.70 3.06 2.69 2.24 17.02 436 Tuskegee Police Department Winn Parish Sheriff's Office Columbiana County Sheriff's Office Craig Police Department Fayette County Sheriff's Office Hardeman County Sheriff's Office Haywood County Sheriff's Office Hornell Police Department Indiana Borough Police Department Ketchikan Police Dept. Ontario Police Department Rio Arriba County Sheriff's Office Routt County Sheriff's Office Vernal Police Department Washington Court House Police Dept. Bluefield Police Department Bolivar Police Department Caruthersville Police Department Central Michigan University Police Department Clearlake Police Department Mason County Sheriff's Office San Jacinto County Sheriff's Office Clewiston Police Department Marksville Police Department Oakdale Police Department Platteville Police Department Vidalia Police Department Wilkesboro Police Department Conneaut Police Department Corbin Police Department Daviess County Sheriff's Office Delavan Police Department Demopolis Police Department Norwich Police Department Sturgis Police Department Barre Police Department Macon Winn Columbiana Moffat Fayette Hardeman Haywood Steuben Indiana Ketchikan Gateway Malheur Rio Arriba Routt Uintah Fayette Mercer Hardeman Pemiscot Isabella Lake Mason San Jacinto Hendry Avoyelles Allen Grant Concordia Wilkes Ashtabula Whitley Daviess Walworth Marengo Chenango St. Joseph Washington AL LA OH CO OH TN TN NY PA AK OR NM CO UT OH WV TN MO MI CA WV TX FL LA LA WI LA NC OH KY IN WI AL NY MI VT 23 23 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 20 20 20 20 20 20 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 18 2 1 2 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 86.96 43.48 90.91 45.45 136.36 45.45 45.45 45.45 45.45 45.45 45.45 45.45 45.45 45.45 45.45 47.62 47.62 95.24 47.62 47.62 142.86 47.62 100.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 52.63 52.63 52.63 52.63 52.63 52.63 52.63 55.56 9.32 6.53 1.85 7.25 10.33 3.67 5.32 1.01 1.13 7.42 3.19 2.48 4.25 3.07 3.44 1.61 3.67 10.93 1.42 1.55 10.98 3.79 5.11 2.38 3.88 1.95 4.80 1.44 0.99 2.81 3.16 0.98 4.76 1.98 1.63 1.68 437 Black Mountain Police Department Bolivar County Sheriff's Office Calhoun County Sheriff's Office Duval County Sheriff's Office Greensburg Police Kendallville Police Leland Police Department Marion Police Department Osceola County Sheriff's Office Rockmart Police Department Seaside Police Department Selmer Police Department Spencer Police Department Sweetwater Police Department Towns County Sheriff's Office Winnemucca Police Department Cross County Sheriff's Office Elkin Police Department Fort Madison Police Department Kitty Hawk Police Department McIntosh County Sheriff's Office Middlesex County Sheriff's Office Princeton Police Department Bishopville Police Department Eatonton Police Department Harrodsburg Police Department Lamesa Police Department Miller County Sheriff's Office Phillips County Sheriff's Office Red Springs Police Department Crossett Police Department Ephrata Police Department Greene County Sheriff's Office McDowell County Sheriff's Office Moab Police Department Nashville Police Department Buncombe Bolivar Calhoun Duval Decatur Noble Washington Smyth Osceola Polk Clatsop McNairy Clay Monroe Towns Humboldt Cross Surry Lee Dare McIntosh Middlesex Mercer Lee Putnam Mercer Dawson Miller Phillips Robeson Ashley Grant Greene McDowell Grand Berrien NC MS FL TX IN IN MS VA MI GA OR TN IA TN GA NV AR NC IA NC OK VA WV SC GA KY TX MO AR NC AR WA AR WV UT GA 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 15 15 15 15 15 15 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 58.82 58.82 58.82 58.82 117.65 58.82 117.65 62.50 62.50 62.50 62.50 62.50 62.50 62.50 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 2.22 2.93 6.84 8.49 3.89 2.10 1.96 3.10 4.25 2.41 2.70 3.84 6.00 2.25 9.55 6.05 5.60 1.36 2.79 2.95 9.88 9.12 3.21 5.20 4.71 4.69 7.23 4.04 4.60 0.75 4.58 1.12 2.38 4.52 10.84 5.19 438 Nebraska City Police Dept Royston Police Department Shelby County Sheriff's Office Springfield Police Department St. Marys Police Department Thief River Falls Police Department Vinita Police Department Appling County Sheriff's Office Caribou Police Department Clyde Police Department Cochran Police Department Grants Police Department Jackson County Sheriff's Office Morrow County Sheriff's Office Newport Police Department Ocean Shores Police Department Pelham Police Department Benzie County Sheriff's Office Denton Police Department Fairmont Police Department Frisco Police Department Hempstead County Sheriff's Office Pauls Valley Police Department Randolph County Sheriff's Office Tucumcari Police Department Upper Sandusky Police Department Winnfield Police Dept Braselton Police Department Bunkie Police Department Clayton County Sheriff's Office Custer County Sheriff's Office Edenton Police Department Fayette Police Department Franklin County Sheriff's Office Gage County Sheriff's Office Lakeport Police Department Otoe Franklin Shelby Windsor Auglaize Pennington Craig Appling Aroostook Sandusky Bleckley Cibola Jackson Morrow Sullivan Grays Harbor Mitchell Benzie Caroline Robeson Summit Hempstead Garvin Randolph Quay Wyandot Winn Jackson Avoyelles Clayton Custer Chowan Fayette Franklin Gage Lake NE GA TX VT OH MN OK GA ME OH GA NM TN OR NH WA GA MI MD NC CO AR OK IL NM OH LA GA LA IA OK NC AL IN NE CA 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 133.33 66.67 133.33 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 71.43 71.43 71.43 214.29 71.43 214.29 71.43 71.43 71.43 71.43 76.92 76.92 76.92 76.92 76.92 76.92 76.92 76.92 76.92 76.92 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33 250.00 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33 12.71 4.53 7.86 1.76 2.18 7.18 6.65 5.48 1.39 1.64 22.97 3.67 25.78 8.95 2.29 1.37 4.26 5.71 3.02 0.75 3.57 4.42 3.63 2.99 11.06 4.42 6.53 1.65 2.38 5.52 3.64 20.28 5.80 4.33 4.48 1.55 439 Madill Police Department Monticello Police Perry County Sheriff's Office Quincy Police Department Wallace Police Department Whitley County Sheriff's Office Williamsburg Police Department Wolfeboro Police Department Algood Police Department Crystal City Police Department Eastman Police Department Floyd County Sheriff's Office Fort Gibson Police Department Greene County Sheriff's Office Hannahville Tribal Police Department Hockley County Sheriff's Office Medina Police Department Missouri University of Science & Tech Police Dept Montezuma Police Department Pulaski County Sheriff's Office Rainsville Police Department Roosevelt County Sheriff's Office Simpson County Sheriff's Office Stark County Sheriff's Office Stephens County Sheriff's Office Allendale Police Department Allenstown Police Department Alma Police Department BYU-Idaho Police Department Columbus Police Department Creston Police Department Dewitt Police Department Ferriday Police Department Ferry County Sheriff's Office Helen Police Department Ishpeming Police Department Marshall White Perry Grant Duplin Whitley Whitley Carroll Putnam Zavala Dodge Floyd Muskogee Greene Menominee Hockley Gibson Phelps Macon Pulaski DeKalb Roosevelt Simpson Stark Stephens Allendale Merrimack Bacon Madison Colorado Union Clinton Concordia Ferry White Marquette OK IN IL WA NC KY KY NH TN TX GA IA OK AL MI TX TN MO GA IL AL MT KY ND OK SC NH GA ID TX IA IA LA WA GA MI 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33 90.91 363.64 90.91 90.91 90.91 90.91 90.91 181.82 90.91 90.91 181.82 181.82 90.91 90.91 90.91 90.91 181.82 200.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 200.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 6.31 4.06 4.47 1.12 1.71 2.81 2.81 2.09 1.38 34.26 4.59 6.13 1.41 11.06 4.16 8.72 2.01 2.21 13.57 32.46 1.41 9.59 5.77 4.13 4.44 19.20 0.68 9.01 2.66 4.79 15.96 2.04 4.80 13.24 3.68 1.49 440 Jaffrey Police Department Kermit Police Department La Salle County Sheriff's Office Lancaster Police Department Lander University Public Safety Marlow Police Department Millersburg Police Department Montague County Sheriff's Office New Martinsville Police Department Powell County Sheriff's Office Socorro County Sheriff's Office St. George Police Department Williams Police Department Winkler County Sheriff's Office Andrews Police Department Arcade Police Department Beardstown Police Dept Belpre Police Department Butler County Sheriff's Office Dillon Police Department Forest City Police Department Forks Police Department Glendive Police Department Grambling State University Police Dept. Hanceville Police Department Lake County Sheriff's Office Lawrence Township Police Department Minocqua Police Department Osceola Police Department Ripley Police Department Tabor City Police Department Big Horn County Sheriff's Office Blackford County Sheriff's Office Blountstown Police Dept. Canton Village Police Department Chandler Police Department Cheshire Winkler La Salle Garrard Greenwood Stephens Holmes Montague Wetzel Powell Socorro Dorchester Colusa Winkler Georgetown Jackson Cass Washington Butler Summit Winnebago Clallam Dawson Lincoln Cullman Lake Clearfield Oneida Clarke Jackson Columbus Big Horn Blackford Calhoun St. Lawrence Henderson NH TX TX KY SC OK OH TX WV MT NM SC CA TX SC GA IL OH AL CO IA WA MT LA AL CO PA WI IA WV NC MT IN FL NY TX 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 8 8 8 8 8 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 100.00 100.00 300.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 111.11 111.11 111.11 111.11 333.33 111.11 111.11 111.11 111.11 222.22 111.11 222.22 111.11 111.11 111.11 111.11 222.22 125.00 125.00 125.00 125.00 125.00 1.30 14.06 43.57 5.91 1.44 2.22 2.36 5.07 6.03 14.23 5.60 2.57 4.67 14.06 1.66 1.65 7.33 1.62 14.32 3.57 9.20 1.40 11.15 4.28 1.24 27.36 1.22 2.78 10.77 3.42 3.44 7.77 7.83 6.84 0.89 1.27 441 Eunice Police Department Kingfisher County Sheriff's Office Madison County Sheriff's Office Oglesby Police Dept Talbot County Sheriff's Office Waynesburg Borough Police Department Whiteville Police Department Black River Falls Police Department Byron Police Dept Clay County Sheriff's Office Coeburn Police Department Flemingsburg Police Department Fremont County Sheriff's Office Haynesville Police Dept Hermann Police Department Holly Hill Police Department Murphy Police Department New Castle Police Department Port Barre Police Dept Providence Police Department Shelby Police Department Shenandoah Borough Police Department Shinnston Police Department Union Police Department Winnsboro Police Department Yemassee Police Department Bingen-White Salmon Police Department Bridgeport Police Department Chilhowie Police Department Columbus Police Department East Brewton Police Department Fairfax Police Department Florala Police Department Geneva Township Police Department Kaw Nation Tribal Police Norton Police Department Lea Kingfisher Madison La Salle Talbot Greene Hardeman Jackson Ogle Clay Wise Fleming Fremont Claiborne Gasconade Orangeburg Cherokee Garfield St. Landry Webster Bolivar Schuylkill Harrison Newton Franklin Hampton Klickitat Jackson Smyth Polk Escambia Allendale Covington Walworth Kay Norton NM OK MO IL GA PA TN WI IL AR VA KY IA LA MO SC NC CO LA KY MS PA WV MS LA SC WA AL VA NC AL SC AL WI OK KS 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 4 2 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 125.00 125.00 125.00 125.00 375.00 125.00 125.00 142.86 142.86 142.86 142.86 142.86 142.86 142.86 142.86 142.86 142.86 142.86 142.86 142.86 285.71 571.43 285.71 142.86 142.86 142.86 166.67 166.67 666.67 166.67 166.67 166.67 166.67 166.67 166.67 166.67 1.54 6.65 8.18 0.88 43.70 2.58 3.67 4.89 1.87 6.22 2.41 6.97 13.44 5.82 6.57 1.08 3.64 1.77 1.20 7.34 5.86 2.70 2.89 4.60 4.82 4.74 4.92 1.88 12.42 4.88 2.61 9.60 2.65 0.98 2.15 17.63 442 Santee Police Department Sleepy Eye Police Department St. Paul Police Department University of West Alabama Police Woodruff County Sheriff's Office Carlisle Police Department Chaffee Police Department Commerce Police Department Crescent City Police Department Delhi Police Department Dixon Police Department Durand Police Department Estill County Sheriff's Office Fryeburg Police Department Grand Rapids Police Department Grant County Sheriff's Office Haskell Police Department Holt County Sheriff's Office Kenton Police Department Lake County Sheriff's Office Level Plains Police Department Lewis County Sheriff's Office Middletown Police Montpelier Police Department Mora County Sheriff's Office North Kingsville Police Department Oglethorpe Police Department Olney Police Department Oregon County Sheriff's Office Pearson Police Department Pocahontas County Sheriff's Office Ranger Police Department Richland Police Dept Robbins Police Department Roseboro Police Department Rosedale Police Department Orangeburg Redwood Wise Sumter Woodruff Nicholas Scott Ottawa Putnam Richland Pulaski Shiawassee Estill Oxford Wood Grant Muskogee Holt Obion Lake Dale Lewis Henry Bear Lake Mora Ashtabula Macon Young Oregon Atkinson Pocahontas Eastland Pulaski Moore Sampson Bolivar SC MN VA AL AR KY MO OK FL LA MO MI KY ME WI OK OK NE TN SD AL MO IN ID NM OH GA TX MO GA WV TX MO NC NC MS 6 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 333.33 166.67 166.67 166.67 166.67 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 400.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 400.00 200.00 2.16 3.86 2.41 7.27 13.77 14.02 2.55 3.14 1.34 4.83 1.91 1.42 6.82 1.73 1.34 22.09 1.41 9.58 3.14 8.93 1.99 9.79 2.02 16.71 20.49 0.99 6.78 5.39 18.38 11.94 11.47 5.38 1.91 1.13 3.15 2.93 443 Santa Clara Police Department Sugarcreek Borough Police Department Sugarcreek Police Department Terrell County Sheriff's Office Vergennes Police Department West Yellowstone Police Department Woodstock Police Department Blue Lake Police Department Butler Township Police Department Columbus Police Department Delhi Village Police Department Elmore Police Department Fairland Police Department Foster Township Police Department Gold Beach Police Department Hemingway Police Department Keokuk County Sheriff's Office Mahanoy City Borough Police Department Malakoff Police Department Marble Head Police Department Marshallville Police Dept. McArthur Police Department Monroeville Police Department New Lisbon Police Department Onley Police Department Rochelle Police Department Roodhouse Police Dept Tutwiler Police Department Winsted Police Department Belle Police Department Bismarck Police Department Bowman Police Department Caddo Police Department Carter County Sheriff's Office Earlville Police Dept Fair Bluff Police Department Grant Venango Tuscarawas Terrell Addison Gallatin Grafton Humboldt Schuylkill Luna Delaware Ottawa Ottawa McKean Curry Williamsburg Keokuk Schuylkill Henderson Ottawa Macon Vinton Huron Juneau Accomack Wilcox Greene Tallahatchie Litchfield Maries St. Francois Orangeburg Bryan Carter La Salle Columbus NM PA OH TX VT MT NH CA PA NM NY OH OK PA OR SC IA PA TX OH GA OH OH WI VA GA IL MS CT MO MO SC OK MO IL NC 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 333.33 333.33 1000.00 333.33 666.67 333.33 333.33 3.39 1.82 1.08 101.63 2.72 1.12 1.12 0.74 0.67 3.98 2.08 2.41 3.14 2.30 4.47 2.91 9.51 0.67 1.27 2.41 6.78 7.44 1.68 3.75 3.02 10.80 7.20 6.50 0.53 10.90 1.53 3.24 2.36 31.92 0.88 1.72 444 Freedom Police Department Gallatin County Sheriff's Office Griggs County Sheriff's Office Guadalupe County Sheriff's Office Haskell Police Department Hennessey Police Department Kahoka Police Department Marvell Police Department Meigs Police Department Newbury Police Department Ravenna Police Dept Scotts Hill Police Department Stover Police Department Waukomis Police Department Athena Police Department Birchwood Police Department Boswell Police Department Cherokee Police Department Franklin Police Dept Hegins Township Police Department Homer City Borough Police Department Hunter Police Department Inman Police Department Meyersdale Borough Police Department Pineland Police Department Pink Hill Police Department Ridgeville Police Ridgeville Police Department Seadrift Police Department Springfield Police Department White Cloud Police Department Windber Borough Police Department Atwater Police Department Berlin Borough Police Department Berlin Heights Police Department Burr Oak Police Department Carroll Gallatin Griggs Guadalupe Haskell Kingfisher Clark Phillips Thomas Merrimack Buffalo Henderson Morgan Garfield Umatilla Washburn Choctaw Alfalfa Franklin Schuylkill Indiana Greene McPherson Somerset Sabine Lenoir Randolph Dorchester Calhoun Orangeburg Newaygo Somerset Kandiyohi Somerset Erie St. Joseph NH IL ND NM TX OK MO AR GA NH NE TN MO OK OR WI OK OK NE PA PA NY KS PA TX NC IN SC TX SC MI PA MN PA OH MI 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 333.33 333.33 333.33 333.33 333.33 333.33 333.33 333.33 333.33 333.33 333.33 333.33 333.33 333.33 500.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 2.09 17.89 41.32 21.34 16.95 6.65 6.58 4.60 2.24 0.68 2.17 3.60 4.86 1.65 1.32 6.28 6.58 17.72 31.01 0.67 1.13 2.03 3.43 1.29 9.23 1.68 3.82 2.57 4.68 1.08 2.06 1.29 2.37 1.29 1.30 1.63 445 Cooter Police Department Elgin Police Department Hamburg Police Department Lamoure Police Department Lockhart Police Department Marion Township Police Department Mounds Police Dept Nicholas County Sheriff's Office Oakwood Police Department Perryville Police Department Petroleum County Sheriff's Office Pineview Police Department Tipton Police Department Turkey Creek Police Department Wakeman Police Department Wilson Police Department Zolfo Springs Police Department Bloomville Police Department Dale County Sheriff's Office Errol Police Department New Athens Police Department Port Jefferson Police Department Wheeler Police Department Pemiscot Grant Fremont LaMoure Covington Waushara Pulaski Nicholas Paulding Boyle Petroleum Wilcox Tillman Evangeline Huron Ellsworth Hardee Seneca Dale Coos Harrison Shelby Dunn MO ND IA ND AL WI IL KY OH KY MT GA OK LA OH KS FL OH AL NH OH OH WI 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 2000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 5.47 41.77 13.44 24.16 2.65 4.08 32.46 14.02 5.10 3.52 202.43 10.80 12.51 2.94 1.68 15.39 3.61 1.76 1.99 3.03 6.30 2.02 2.28 446 Appendix A-2. Primary State Police Agencies in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted by # FT Sworn) # of Full-Time Agency County State Sworn Personnel California Highway Patrol New York State Police Pennsylvania State Police Texas Department of Public Safety New Jersey State Police Massachusetts State Police Illinois State Police Virginia State Police North Carolina State Highway Patrol Michigan State Police Florida Highway Patrol Ohio State Highway Patrol Maryland State Police Indiana State Police Arizona Department of Public Safety Connecticut State Police Louisiana State Police Washington State Patrol Georgia Department of Public Safety South Carolina Highway Patrol Tennessee Department of Safety Kentucky State Police Oklahoma Department of Public Safety Alabama Department of Public Safety Colorado State Patrol Iowa Department of Public Safety Delaware State Police Mississippi Highway Safety Patrol Minnesota State Patrol New Mexico State Police Arkansas State Police Sacramento Albany Dauphin Travis Mercer Middlesex Sangamon Chesterfield Wake Ingham Leon Franklin Baltimore Marion Maricopa Middlesex East Baton Rouge Thurston Fulton Richland Davidson Franklin Oklahoma Montgomery Jefferson Polk Kent Hinds Ramsey Santa Fe Pulaski CA NY PA TX NJ MA IL VA NC MI FL OH MD IN AZ CT LA WA GA SC TN KY OK AL CO IA DE MS MN NM AR Per Agency 7202 4847 4458 3529 3053 2310 2105 1873 1827 1732 1606 1560 1440 1315 1244 1227 1215 1132 1048 967 942 882 825 763 742 669 658 594 530 528 525 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 13 5 26 6 13 10 10 3 8 9 14 4 9 4 3 4 2 2 1 10 4 3 5 2 4 2 3 6 4 13 2 Per 1,000 Officers 1.81 1.03 5.83 1.70 4.26 4.33 4.75 1.60 4.38 5.20 8.72 2.56 6.25 3.04 2.41 3.26 1.65 1.77 0.95 10.34 4.25 3.40 6.06 2.62 5.39 2.99 4.56 10.10 7.55 24.62 3.81 Per 100,000 Population 0.03 0.03 0.20 0.02 0.15 0.15 0.08 0.04 0.08 0.09 0.07 0.03 0.16 0.06 0.05 0.11 0.04 0.03 0.01 0.22 0.06 0.07 0.13 0.04 0.08 0.07 0.33 0.20 0.08 0.63 0.07 447 Nebraska State Patrol Utah Department of Public Safety Nevada Highway Patrol New Hampshire State Police Maine State Police Vermont State Police Alaska State Troopers Idaho State Police Wyoming Highway Patrol Rhode Island State Police Arkansas Highway Police Lancaster Salt Lake Carson Merrimack Kennebec Washington Anchorage Ada Laramie Providence Pulaski NE UT NV NH ME VT AK ID WY RI AR 491 475 417 350 334 307 274 264 204 201 149 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 1 2 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2.04 4.21 7.19 8.57 2.99 3.26 3.65 3.79 4.90 9.95 13.42 0.05 0.07 0.11 0.23 0.08 0.16 0.14 0.06 0.18 0.19 0.07 448 Appendix A-3. Sheriff's Offices in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted by # FT Sworn) # of Full-Time Agency County State Sworn Personnel Los Angeles County Sheriff's Office Cook County Sheriff's Office Harris County Sheriff's Office Riverside County Sheriff's Office San Bernardino County Sheriff's Office Orange County Sheriff-Coroner Department Broward County Sheriff's Office Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office Sacramento County Sheriff's Office Orange County Sheriff's Office San Diego County Sheriff's Office Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office Wayne County Sheriff's Office Alameda County Sheriff's Office Pinellas County Sheriff's Office Jefferson Parish Sheriff's Office Maricopa County Sheriff's Office Ventura County Sheriff's Office Marion County Sheriff's Office Denver County Sheriff's Office King County Sheriff's Office Contra Costa County Sheriff's Office Collier County Sheriff's Office Lee County Sheriff's Office Polk County Sheriff's Office Calcasieu Parish Sheriff's Office Pima County Sheriff's Dept. Gwinnett County Sheriff's Office Passaic County Sheriff's Office Bexar County Sheriff's Office Milwaukee County Sheriff's Office Fulton County Sheriff's Office Los Angeles Cook Harris Riverside San Bernardino Orange Broward Palm Beach Sacramento Orange San Diego Hillsborough Wayne Alameda Pinellas Jefferson Maricopa Ventura Marion Denver King Contra Costa Collier Lee Polk Calcasieu Pima Gwinnett Passaic Bexar Milwaukee Fulton CA IL TX CA CA CA FL FL CA FL CA FL MI CA FL LA AZ CA IN CO WA CA FL FL FL LA AZ GA NJ TX WI GA 9461 5655 2558 2147 1797 1794 1624 1447 1409 1398 1322 1223 1062 928 863 825 766 755 740 739 721 679 628 621 600 592 554 531 530 526 524 516 Per Agency 14 8 3 11 11 14 16 12 6 16 7 10 1 2 8 12 2 1 7 5 5 1 6 7 13 1 1 3 6 5 7 4 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. Per 1,000 Officers 1.48 1.41 1.17 5.12 6.12 7.80 9.85 8.29 4.26 11.44 5.30 8.18 0.94 2.16 9.27 14.55 2.61 1.32 9.46 6.77 6.93 1.47 9.55 11.27 21.67 1.69 1.81 5.65 11.32 9.51 13.36 7.75 Per 100,000 Population 0.14 0.15 0.07 0.50 0.54 0.47 0.92 0.91 0.42 1.40 0.23 0.81 0.05 0.13 0.87 2.77 0.05 0.12 0.77 0.83 0.26 0.10 1.87 1.13 2.16 0.52 0.10 0.37 1.20 0.29 0.74 0.43 449 Shelby County Sheriff's Office Tulare County Sheriff's Office Kern County Sheriff's Office Richland County Sheriff's Office Orleans Parish Sheriff's Office (Criminal Division) Fairfax County Sheriff's Office Brevard County Sheriff's Office Monmouth County Sheriff's Office Pasco County Sheriff's Office Manatee County Sheriff's Office Fresno County Sheriff's Office Knox County Sheriff's Office Franklin County Sheriff's Office Dane County Sheriff's Office El Paso County Sheriff's Office Santa Clara County Sheriff's Office Volusia County Sheriff's Office Dallas County Sheriff's Office Richmond County Sheriff's Office Loudoun County Sheriff's Office Will County Sheriff's Office Leon County Sheriff's Office Cobb County Sheriff's Office Ouachita Parish Sheriff's Office Richmond (City) Sheriff's Office Martin County Sheriff's Office Norfolk (City) Sheriff's Office Washoe County Sheriff's Office Sarasota County Sheriff's Office St. Tammany Parish Sheriff's Office Arapahoe County Sheriff's Office Greenville County Sheriff's Office Summit County Sheriff's Office Escambia County Sheriff's Office Osceola County Sheriff's Office Adams County Sheriff's Office Shelby Tulare Kern Richland Orleans Fairfax Brevard Monmouth Pasco Manatee Fresno Knox Franklin Dane El Paso Santa Clara Volusia Dallas Richmond Loudoun Will Leon Cobb Ouachita Richmond City Martin Norfolk City Washoe Sarasota St. Tammany Arapahoe Greenville Summit Escambia Osceola Adams TN CA CA SC LA VA FL NJ FL FL CA TN OH WI CO CA FL TX GA VA IL FL GA LA VA FL VA NV FL LA CO SC OH FL FL CO 516 513 512 512 505 499 497 494 485 476 461 456 455 454 454 450 450 449 449 448 445 443 435 431 424 414 414 414 409 409 407 397 393 388 388 364 8 3 11 3 4 3 2 1 4 4 1 1 2 2 1 1 4 1 5 2 1 3 1 1 2 1 1 4 1 2 2 2 1 3 2 2 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 15.50 5.85 21.48 5.86 7.92 6.01 4.02 2.02 8.25 8.40 2.17 2.19 4.40 4.41 2.20 2.22 8.89 2.23 11.14 4.46 2.25 6.77 2.30 2.32 4.72 2.42 2.42 9.66 2.44 4.89 4.91 5.04 2.54 7.73 5.15 5.49 0.86 0.68 1.31 0.78 1.16 0.28 0.37 0.16 0.86 1.24 0.11 0.23 0.17 0.41 0.16 0.06 0.81 0.04 2.49 0.64 0.15 1.09 0.15 0.65 0.98 0.68 0.41 0.95 0.26 0.86 0.35 0.44 0.18 1.01 0.74 0.45 450 East Baton Rouge Parish Sheriff's Office Chesapeake (City) Sheriff's Office Seminole County Sheriff's Office Wake County Sheriff's Office Marion County Sheriff's Office Hamilton County Sheriff's Office DeKalb County Sheriff's Office Clackamas County Sheriff's Office New Hanover County Sheriff's Office Bossier Parish Sheriff's Office Terrebonne Parish Sheriff's Office Spartanburg County Sheriff's Office Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Office Pierce County Sheriff's Office St. Charles Parish Sheriff's Office Bibb County Sheriff's Office Lucas County Sheriff's Office Lafourche Parish Sheriff's Office Montgomery County Sheriff's Office Snohomish County Sheriff's Office Lake County Sheriff's Office Charlotte County Sheriff's Office Clay County Sheriff's Office Harford County Sheriff's Office Bernalillo County Sheriff's Office Alachua County Sheriff's Office Monroe County Sheriff's Office Hidalgo County Sheriff's Office Morris County Sheriff's Office Charleston County Sheriff's Office St. Lucie County Sheriff's Office Okaloosa County Sheriff's Office Hall County Sheriff's Office Marion County Sheriff's Office Barnstable County Sheriff's Office Forsyth County Sheriff's Office East Baton Rouge Chesapeake City Seminole Wake Marion Hamilton DeKalb Clackamas New Hanover Bossier Terrebonne Spartanburg Santa Barbara Pierce St. Charles Bibb Lucas Lafourche Montgomery Snohomish Lake Charlotte Clay Harford Bernalillo Alachua Monroe Hidalgo Morris Charleston St. Lucie Okaloosa Hall Marion Barnstable Forsyth LA VA FL NC FL OH GA OR NC LA LA SC CA WA LA GA OH LA TN WA FL FL FL MD NM FL NY TX NJ SC FL FL GA OR MA GA 359 358 355 354 349 330 325 319 315 300 300 297 294 292 291 290 289 287 287 287 286 285 284 280 279 276 273 262 262 259 259 258 257 255 254 253 3 2 2 4 3 1 2 2 3 3 2 2 1 2 1 3 4 3 1 2 3 3 3 1 3 1 3 5 1 4 2 3 2 1 5 5 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 8.36 5.59 5.63 11.30 8.60 3.03 6.15 6.27 9.52 10.00 6.67 6.73 3.40 6.85 3.44 10.34 13.84 10.45 3.48 6.97 10.49 10.53 10.56 3.57 10.75 3.62 10.99 19.08 3.82 15.44 7.72 11.63 7.78 3.92 19.69 19.76 0.68 0.90 0.47 0.44 0.91 0.12 0.29 0.53 1.48 2.56 1.79 0.70 0.24 0.25 1.89 1.93 0.91 3.11 0.58 0.28 1.01 1.88 1.57 0.41 0.45 0.40 0.40 0.65 0.20 1.14 0.72 1.66 1.11 0.32 2.32 2.85 451 Hernando County Sheriff's Office El Paso County Sheriff's Office Macomb County Sheriff's Office Spokane County Sheriff's Office Iberia Parish Sheriff's Office Onondaga County Sheriff's Office Galveston County Sheriff's Office Ramsey County Sheriff's Office Prince George's County Sheriff's Office Stanislaus County Sheriff's Office Placer County Sheriff's Office Indian River County Sheriff's Office Chesterfield County Sheriff's Office Montgomery County Sheriff's Office Hudson County Sheriff's Office Pinal County Sheriff's Office Forsyth County Sheriff's Office Bay County Sheriff's Office Rapides Parish Sheriff's Office Beaufort County Sheriff's Office Columbia County Sheriff's Office Williamson County Sheriff's Office Marin County Sheriff's Office Wilson County Sheriff's Office St. Louis County Sheriff's Office Anderson County Sheriff's Office Santa Rosa County Sheriff's Office Monroe County Sheriff's Office Rutherford County Sheriff's Office St. Bernard Parish Sheriff's Office Lake County Sheriff's Office Sullivan County Sheriff's Office Frederick County Sheriff's Office Paulding County Sheriff's Office Boulder County Sheriff's Office Lake County Sheriff's Office Hernando El Paso Macomb Spokane Iberia Onondaga Galveston Ramsey Prince Georges Stanislaus Placer Indian River Chesterfield Montgomery Hudson Pinal Forsyth Bay Rapides Beaufort Columbia Williamson Marin Wilson St. Louis Anderson Santa Rosa Monroe Rutherford St. Bernard Lake Sullivan Frederick Paulding Boulder Lake FL TX MI WA LA NY TX MN MD CA CA FL VA OH NJ AZ NC FL LA SC GA TX CA TN MO SC FL FL TN LA IL TN MD GA CO IN 249 248 245 244 242 242 240 235 233 230 228 226 225 222 221 218 217 213 212 209 206 206 202 202 200 191 190 189 189 189 188 183 177 175 174 170 1 2 1 2 6 1 1 2 3 1 1 3 1 1 3 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 4 2 1 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 4.02 8.06 4.08 8.20 24.79 4.13 4.17 8.51 12.88 4.35 4.39 13.27 4.44 4.50 13.57 9.17 9.22 9.39 4.72 4.78 9.71 9.71 4.95 4.95 20.00 10.47 5.26 15.87 10.58 5.29 5.32 5.46 5.65 5.71 5.75 29.41 0.58 0.25 0.12 0.42 8.19 0.21 0.34 0.39 0.35 0.19 0.29 2.17 0.32 0.19 0.47 0.53 0.57 1.18 0.76 0.62 1.61 0.47 0.40 0.88 0.40 1.07 0.66 4.10 0.76 2.79 0.14 0.64 0.43 0.70 0.34 1.01 452 Middlesex County Sheriff's Department Union County Sheriff's Office Walton County Sheriff's Office Salem County Sheriff's Office San Luis Obispo County Sheriff's Office St. Charles County Sheriff's Office Newton County Sheriff's Office Allegheny County Sheriff's Office St. John The Baptist Parish Sheriff's Office Waukesha County Sheriff's Office Hamilton County Sheriff's Office Lowndes County Sheriff's Office Plaquemines Parish Sheriff's Office Polk County Sheriff's Office Winnebago County Sheriff's Office Cuyahoga County Sheriff's Office Coweta County Sheriff's Office Clark County Sheriff's Office McHenry County Sheriff's Office Anoka County Sheriff's Office Washtenaw County Sheriff's Office Boone County Sheriff's Office Flagler County Sheriff's Office Highlands County Sheriff's Office Robeson County Sheriff's Office Barrow County Sheriff's Office Brazoria County Sheriff's Office Catawba County Sheriff's Office Livingston Parish Sheriff's Office Pitt County Sheriff's Office Kenosha County Sheriff's Office Kitsap County Sheriff's Office Weld County Sheriff's Office New York City Sheriff's Office St. Mary's County Sheriff's Office Sauk County Sheriff's Office Middlesex Union Walton Salem San Luis Obispo St. Charles Newton Allegheny St. John the Baptist Waukesha Hamilton Lowndes Plaquemines Polk Winnebago Cuyahoga Coweta Clark McHenry Anoka Washtenaw Boone Flagler Highlands Robeson Barrow Brazoria Catawba Livingston Pitt Kenosha Kitsap Weld New York St. Marys Sauk NJ NC FL NJ CA MO GA PA LA WI TN GA LA IA IL OH GA OH IL MN MI KY FL FL NC GA TX NC LA NC WI WA CO NY MD WI 170 170 165 157 156 153 152 151 150 150 146 145 145 143 142 141 137 134 134 133 133 130 130 130 128 127 127 126 125 125 122 121 121 120 120 118 4 1 4 1 2 2 1 3 3 1 2 1 1 3 1 3 1 1 2 1 4 1 2 1 3 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 23.53 5.88 24.24 6.37 12.82 13.07 6.58 19.87 20.00 6.67 13.70 6.90 6.90 20.98 7.04 21.28 7.30 7.46 14.93 7.52 30.08 7.69 15.38 7.69 23.44 7.87 7.87 7.94 8.00 24.00 8.20 8.26 8.26 16.67 8.33 8.47 0.49 0.50 7.27 1.51 0.74 0.55 1.00 0.25 6.53 0.26 0.59 0.92 4.34 0.70 0.34 0.23 0.79 0.72 0.65 0.30 1.16 0.84 2.09 1.01 2.24 1.44 0.32 0.65 0.78 1.78 0.60 0.40 0.40 2.44 0.95 1.61 453 St. Joseph County Sheriff's Office Clay County Sheriff's Office Orange County Sheriff's Office Whitfield County Sheriff's Office Brunswick County Sheriff's Office Solano County Sheriff's Office Henry County Sheriff's Office Butte County Sheriff's Office Niagara County Sheriff's Office Nassau County Sheriff's Office Nye County Sheriff's Office Cameron County Sheriff's Office Madison County Sheriff's Office Acadia Parish Sheriff's Office Sutter County Sheriff's Office Atlantic County Sheriff's Office Benton County Sheriff's Office Douglas County Sheriff's Office Baltimore (City) Sheriff's Office Orange County Sheriff's Office Williamson County Sheriff's Office Lincoln County Sheriff's Office Johnston County Sheriff's Office Rock County Sheriff's Office San Juan County Sheriff's Office Washington County Sheriff's Office Lancaster County Sheriff's Office Potter County Sheriff's Office Kane County Sheriff's Office Orangeburg County Sheriff's Office Harrison County Sheriff's Office Smith County Sheriff's Office Carver County Sheriff's Office Burke County Sheriff's Office Delaware County Sheriff's Office Washington County Sheriff's Office St. Joseph Clay Orange Whitfield Brunswick Solano Henry Butte Niagara Nassau Nye Cameron Madison Acadia Sutter Atlantic Benton Douglas Baltimore City Orange Williamson Lincoln Johnston Rock San Juan Washington Lancaster Potter Kane Orangeburg Harrison Smith Carver Burke Delaware Washington IN MO NC GA NC CA VA CA NY FL NV TX AL LA CA NJ AR NV MD NY TN NC NC WI NM MD SC TX IL SC MS TX MN NC OH TN 116 115 115 115 114 113 112 110 110 109 108 107 107 105 105 103 103 100 99 99 99 98 97 94 94 94 93 93 92 92 90 88 87 86 86 86 3 1 1 1 2 1 14 1 1 2 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 4 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 25.86 8.70 8.70 8.70 17.54 8.85 125.00 9.09 9.09 18.35 27.78 18.69 9.35 9.52 9.52 9.71 9.71 10.00 20.20 10.10 20.20 40.82 10.31 21.28 21.28 10.64 10.75 21.51 10.87 10.87 11.11 11.36 11.49 11.63 11.63 11.63 1.12 0.45 0.75 0.97 1.86 0.24 25.85 0.45 0.46 2.73 6.83 0.49 0.30 1.62 1.06 0.36 0.45 2.13 0.32 0.27 1.09 5.11 0.59 1.25 1.54 0.68 1.30 1.65 0.19 1.08 0.53 0.48 1.10 1.10 0.57 0.81 454 Wayne County Sheriff's Office Baltimore County Sheriff's Office Ozaukee County Sheriff's Office Walker County Sheriff's Office Cullman County Sheriff's Office Franklin County Sheriff's Office Madera County Sheriff's Office Bedford County Sheriff's Office Dakota County Sheriff's Office Eaton County Sheriff's Office Prince William County Sheriff's Office Santa Fe County Sheriff's Office Outagamie County Sheriff's Office Saginaw County Sheriff's Office Cleveland County Sheriff's Office Minnehaha County Sheriff's Office Yakima County Sheriff's Office Hendry County Sheriff's Office Marathon County Sheriff's Office Portage County Sheriff's Office Laurens County Sheriff's Office Lincoln County Sheriff's Office Livingston County Sheriff's Office Pennington County Sheriff's Office Darlington County Sheriff's Office Grand Traverse County Sheriff's Office Hamilton County Sheriff's Office Vernon Parish Sheriff's Office Jackson County Sheriff's Office Kershaw County Sheriff's Office Lake County Sheriff's Office Porter County Sheriff's Office Allegan County Sheriff's Office Campbell County Sheriff's Office Delaware County Sheriff's Office La Porte County Sheriff's Office Wayne Baltimore Ozaukee Walker Cullman Franklin Madera Bedford Dakota Eaton Prince William Santa Fe Outagamie Saginaw Cleveland Minnehaha Yakima Hendry Marathon Portage Laurens Lincoln Livingston Pennington Darlington Grand Traverse Hamilton Vernon Jackson Kershaw Lake Porter Allegan Campbell Delaware La Porte NC MD WI GA AL VA CA VA MN MI VA NM WI MI OK SD WA FL WI OH SC OR MI SD SC MI IN LA FL SC CA IN MI WY PA IN 85 84 83 80 78 78 78 77 77 77 75 75 74 71 70 69 69 67 67 66 65 65 65 65 64 64 64 64 61 61 61 61 59 58 58 58 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 23.53 11.90 12.05 25.00 12.82 12.82 12.82 25.97 12.99 12.99 13.33 13.33 13.51 14.08 14.29 14.49 28.99 14.93 14.93 15.15 15.38 15.38 30.77 15.38 15.63 31.25 15.63 31.25 16.39 16.39 32.79 32.79 16.95 17.24 34.48 17.24 1.63 0.12 1.16 2.91 1.24 1.78 0.66 2.91 0.25 0.93 0.25 0.69 0.57 0.50 0.39 0.59 0.82 2.55 0.75 0.62 1.50 2.17 1.11 0.99 1.46 2.30 0.36 3.82 2.01 1.62 3.09 1.22 0.90 2.17 0.36 0.90 455 Lenoir County Sheriff's Office Putnam County Sheriff's Office Elko County Sheriff's Office Pender County Sheriff's Office Ulster County Sheriff's Office Horry County Sheriff's Office Morgan County Sheriff's Office Yellowstone County Sheriff's Office Assumption Parish Sheriff's Office Bucks County Sheriff's Office Hoke County Sheriff's Office Pottawattamie County Sheriff's Office Queen Anne's County Sheriff's Office Caroline County Sheriff's Office Page County Sheriff's Office Stanly County Sheriff's Office Cherokee County Sheriff's Office Lee County Sheriff's Office Thomas County Sheriff's Office Lincoln Parish Sheriff's Office Rockingham County Sheriff's Office Davie County Sheriff's Office Grant County Sheriff's Office Harrison County Sheriff's Office Juneau County Sheriff's Office Sandoval County Sheriff's Office St. Martin Parish Sheriff's Office Upshur County Sheriff's Office Chambers County Sheriff's Office Lenawee County Sheriff's Office Saline County Sheriff's Office St. Croix County Sheriff's Office Sullivan County Sheriff's Office Zapata County Sheriff's Office La Crosse County Sheriff's Office Hawkins County Sheriff's Office Lenoir Putnam Elko Pender Ulster Horry Morgan Yellowstone Assumption Bucks Hoke Pottawattomie Queen Annes Caroline Page Stanly Cherokee Lee Thomas Lincoln Rockingham Davie Grant Harrison Juneau Sandoval St. Martin Upshur Chambers Lenawee Saline St. Croix Sullivan Zapata La Crosse Hawkins NC TN NV NC NY SC AL MT LA PA NC IA MD VA VA NC SC NC GA LA VA NC IN TX WI NM LA TX TX MI KS WI NY TX WI TN 58 58 57 57 57 55 55 55 50 50 50 50 50 49 49 49 48 47 47 46 46 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 44 44 44 44 44 44 43 42 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 3 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 34.48 34.48 17.54 17.54 17.54 18.18 18.18 18.18 40.00 40.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 61.22 20.41 20.41 41.67 21.28 42.55 21.74 21.74 66.67 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.73 22.73 22.73 22.73 22.73 22.73 23.26 23.81 3.36 2.77 2.05 1.92 0.55 0.37 0.84 0.68 8.54 0.32 2.13 1.07 2.09 10.51 4.16 1.65 3.61 1.73 4.47 2.14 1.31 7.27 1.43 1.52 3.75 0.76 1.92 2.54 2.85 1.00 1.80 1.19 1.29 7.13 0.87 1.76 456 Saline County Sheriff's Office Chesterfield County Sheriff's Office Columbia County Sheriff's Office Bullitt County Sheriff's Office Burleigh County Sheriff's Office Hancock County Sheriff's Office Isle of Wight County Sheriff's Office McDowell County Sheriff's Office White County Sheriff's Office Wood County Sheriff's Office Luzerne County Sheriff's Office Vigo County Sheriff's Office Liberty County Sheriff's Office Muskogee County Sheriff's Office Valencia County Sheriff's Office Woodford County Sheriff's Office Dauphin County Sheriff's Office La Salle County Sheriff's Office Yamhill County Sheriff's Office Clark County Sheriff's Office McKinley County Sheriff's Office DeKalb County Sheriff's Office Madison County Sheriff's Office Martin County Sheriff's Office Holmes County Sheriff's Office Baxter County Sheriff's Office Russell County Sheriff's Office Starr County Sheriff's Office Stephens County Sheriff's Office Clay County Sheriff's Office Del Norte County Sheriff's Office Greenbrier County Sheriff's Office Luna County Sheriff's Office Okanogan County Sheriff's Office Otero County Sheriff's Office Shelby County Sheriff's Office Saline Chesterfield Columbia Bullitt Burleigh Hancock Isle of Wight McDowell White Wood Luzerne Vigo Liberty Muskogee Valencia Woodford Dauphin La Salle Yamhill Clark McKinley DeKalb Madison Martin Holmes Baxter Russell Starr Stephens Clay Del Norte Greenbrier Luna Okanogan Otero Shelby IL SC OR KY ND IN VA NC GA WV PA IN TX OK NM IL PA IL OR IN NM AL GA NC OH AR AL TX GA IN CA WV NM WA NM OH 42 41 41 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 38 38 37 37 37 37 36 36 36 35 35 34 34 34 33 32 32 31 31 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 1 1 1 1 2 3 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 23.81 24.39 24.39 25.00 50.00 75.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 52.63 26.32 54.05 27.03 27.03 27.03 55.56 27.78 27.78 28.57 28.57 29.41 29.41 29.41 30.30 31.25 62.50 32.26 32.26 33.33 66.67 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 4.01 2.14 2.03 1.35 2.46 4.29 2.84 2.22 3.68 1.15 0.62 0.93 2.64 1.41 1.31 2.59 0.75 0.88 1.01 0.91 1.40 1.41 3.56 4.08 2.36 2.41 3.78 1.64 3.82 3.72 6.99 2.82 3.98 2.43 1.57 2.02 457 Warren County Sheriff's Office Dearborn County Sheriff's Office Halifax County Sheriff's Office Orleans County Sheriff's Office Ravalli County Sheriff's Office San Benito County Sheriff's Office Williamson County Sheriff's Office Lee County Sheriff's Office White County Sheriff's Office Accomack County Sheriff's Office Crawford County Sheriff's Office Jim Wells County Sheriff's Office Marion County Sheriff's Office Polk County Sheriff's Office Emery County Sheriff's Office Hampton County Sheriff's Office Morgan County Sheriff's Office Steuben County Sheriff's Office Dade County Sheriff's Office Lawrence County Sheriff's Office Marlboro County Sheriff's Office Newaygo County Sheriff's Office Nez Perce County Sheriff's Office Tuscola County Sheriff's Office Dallas County Sheriff's Office Emmet County Sheriff's Office Graham County Sheriff's Office Monroe County Sheriff's Office Seneca County Sheriff's Office Winn Parish Sheriff's Office Columbiana County Sheriff's Office Fayette County Sheriff's Office Hardeman County Sheriff's Office Harrison County Sheriff's Office Haywood County Sheriff's Office Rio Arriba County Sheriff's Office Warren Dearborn Halifax Orleans Ravalli San Benito Williamson Lee White Accomack Crawford Jim Wells Marion Polk Emery Hampton Morgan Steuben Dade Lawrence Marlboro Newaygo Nez Perce Tuscola Dallas Emmet Graham Monroe Seneca Winn Columbiana Fayette Hardeman Harrison Haywood Rio Arriba NC IN VA NY MT CA IL SC TN VA AR TX WV GA UT SC IN NY GA IN SC MI ID MI IA MI AZ WI NY LA OH OH TN IN TN NM 30 29 29 29 29 29 29 28 28 27 27 27 27 27 26 26 26 26 25 25 25 25 25 25 23 23 23 23 23 23 22 22 22 22 22 22 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 6 1 2 3 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 33.33 68.97 34.48 34.48 34.48 34.48 68.97 35.71 35.71 37.04 37.04 37.04 37.04 74.07 76.92 38.46 76.92 38.46 40.00 40.00 80.00 40.00 80.00 40.00 86.96 43.48 43.48 43.48 260.87 43.48 90.91 136.36 45.45 45.45 45.45 45.45 4.77 4.00 2.76 2.33 2.49 1.81 3.01 5.20 3.87 3.02 1.61 2.45 1.77 4.82 18.22 4.74 2.90 1.01 0.04 2.17 6.91 2.06 5.09 1.79 3.02 3.06 2.69 2.24 17.02 6.53 1.85 10.33 3.67 2.54 5.32 2.48 458 Routt County Sheriff's Office St. Helena Parish Sheriff's Office Mason County Sheriff's Office San Jacinto County Sheriff's Office Daviess County Sheriff's Office Oglethorpe County Sheriff's Office Pawnee County Sheriff's Office Bolivar County Sheriff's Office Calhoun County Sheriff's Office Clarke County Sheriff's Office Duval County Sheriff's Office Osceola County Sheriff's Office Towns County Sheriff's Office Centre County Sheriff's Office Cross County Sheriff's Office Hunterdon County Sheriff's Office Lincoln County Sheriff's Office McIntosh County Sheriff's Office Middlesex County Sheriff's Office Dewitt County Sheriff's Office Miller County Sheriff's Office Phillips County Sheriff's Office Greene County Sheriff's Office Jackson County Sheriff's Office Long County Sheriff's Office McDowell County Sheriff's Office Jackson County Sheriff's Office Lowndes County Sheriff's Office Morrow County Sheriff's Office Benzie County Sheriff's Office Hempstead County Sheriff's Office Randolph County Sheriff's Office Bibb County Sheriff's Office Clayton County Sheriff's Office Custer County Sheriff's Office Franklin County Sheriff's Office Routt St. Helena Mason San Jacinto Daviess Oglethorpe Pawnee Bolivar Calhoun Clarke Duval Osceola Towns Centre Cross Hunterdon Lincoln McIntosh Middlesex De Witt Miller Phillips Greene Jackson Long McDowell Jackson Lowndes Morrow Benzie Hempstead Randolph Bibb Clayton Custer Franklin CO LA WV TX IN GA OK MS FL VA TX MI GA PA AR NJ SD OK VA IL MO AR AR KS GA WV TN AL OR MI AR IL AL IA OK IN 22 22 21 21 19 19 19 18 18 18 18 18 18 17 17 17 17 17 17 16 16 16 15 15 15 15 14 14 14 13 13 13 12 12 12 12 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 45.45 45.45 142.86 47.62 52.63 52.63 52.63 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 58.82 58.82 58.82 58.82 117.65 58.82 62.50 62.50 62.50 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 214.29 71.43 71.43 76.92 76.92 76.92 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33 4.25 8.93 10.98 3.79 3.16 6.71 6.03 2.93 6.84 7.13 8.49 4.25 9.55 0.65 5.60 0.78 2.23 9.88 9.12 6.04 4.04 4.60 2.38 7.43 6.91 4.52 25.78 8.85 8.95 5.71 4.42 2.99 4.36 5.52 3.64 4.33 459 Gage County Sheriff's Office Lincoln County Sheriff's Office Perry County Sheriff's Office Whitley County Sheriff's Office Floyd County Sheriff's Office Greene County Sheriff's Office Hockley County Sheriff's Office Pulaski County Sheriff's Office Roosevelt County Sheriff's Office Simpson County Sheriff's Office Stark County Sheriff's Office Stephens County Sheriff's Office Ferry County Sheriff's Office La Salle County Sheriff's Office Montague County Sheriff's Office Powell County Sheriff's Office Socorro County Sheriff's Office Winkler County Sheriff's Office Butler County Sheriff's Office Lake County Sheriff's Office Big Horn County Sheriff's Office Blackford County Sheriff's Office Henry County Sheriff's Office Kingfisher County Sheriff's Office Madison County Sheriff's Office Talbot County Sheriff's Office Clay County Sheriff's Office Fremont County Sheriff's Office Union County Sheriff's Office Woodruff County Sheriff's Office Estill County Sheriff's Office Grant County Sheriff's Office Holt County Sheriff's Office Kent County Sheriff's Office Lake County Sheriff's Office Lewis County Sheriff's Office Gage Lincoln Perry Whitley Floyd Greene Hockley Pulaski Roosevelt Simpson Stark Stephens Ferry La Salle Montague Powell Socorro Winkler Butler Lake Big Horn Blackford Henry Kingfisher Madison Talbot Clay Fremont Union Woodruff Estill Grant Holt Kent Lake Lewis NE GA IL KY IA AL TX IL MT KY ND OK WA TX TX MT NM TX AL CO MT IN AL OK MO GA AR IA IN AR KY OK NE DE SD MO 12 12 12 12 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 10 10 10 10 10 10 9 9 8 8 8 8 8 8 7 7 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 1 1 1 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33 90.91 90.91 181.82 181.82 90.91 90.91 90.91 181.82 100.00 300.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 333.33 222.22 125.00 125.00 125.00 125.00 125.00 375.00 142.86 142.86 166.67 166.67 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 4.48 12.51 4.47 2.81 6.13 11.06 8.72 32.46 9.59 5.77 4.13 4.44 13.24 43.57 5.07 14.23 5.60 14.06 14.32 27.36 7.77 7.83 5.78 6.65 8.18 43.70 6.22 13.44 13.30 13.77 6.82 22.09 9.58 0.62 8.93 9.79 460 Mesilla Marshal's Office Mora County Sheriff's Office Oregon County Sheriff's Office Pocahontas County Sheriff's Office Terrell County Sheriff's Office Bracken County Sheriff's Office Keokuk County Sheriff's Office Baker County Sheriff's Office Carter County Sheriff's Office Gallatin County Sheriff's Office Griggs County Sheriff's Office Guadalupe County Sheriff's Office Nicholas County Sheriff's Office Petroleum County Sheriff's Office Dale County Sheriff's Office Westmoreland County Sheriff's Office Wicomico County Sheriff's Office Dona Ana Mora Oregon Pocahontas Terrell Bracken Keokuk Baker Carter Gallatin Griggs Guadalupe Nicholas Petroleum Dale Westmoreland Wicomico NM NM MO WV TX KY IA GA MO IL ND NM KY MT AL PA MD 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 200.00 200.00 400.00 200.00 200.00 250.00 250.00 333.33 666.67 333.33 333.33 333.33 1000.00 1000.00 0.48 20.49 18.38 11.47 101.63 11.78 9.51 28.98 31.92 17.89 41.32 21.34 14.02 202.43 1.99 0.27 1.01 461 Appendix A-4. County Police Departments in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted by # FT Sworn) # of Full-Time Per Agency County State Sworn Personnel Agency Miami-Dade (County) Police Department Nassau County Police Department Suffolk County Police Department Honolulu (City and County) Police Department Baltimore County Police Department Charlotte - Mecklenburg Police Department Indianapolis Police Prince George's County Police Department Fairfax County Police Department Montgomery County Police Department DeKalb County Police Department St. Louis County Police Dept Gwinnett County Police Department Anne Arundel County Police Department Cobb County Police Department Henrico County Division of Police Prince William County Police Department Savannah-Chatham Metropolitan Police Department Chesterfield County Police Department Howard County Police Department Arlington County Police Department New Castle County Police Department Clayton County Police Department Maui (County) Police Department Westchester County Department of Public Safety Horry County Police Department Henry County Police Department Athens-Clarke County Police Dept Allegheny County Police Department. Roanoke County Police Department Gaston County Police Department Fulton County Police Department Miami-Dade Nassau Suffolk Honolulu Baltimore Mecklenburg Marion Prince Georges Fairfax Montgomery DeKalb St. Louis Gwinnett Anne Arundel Cobb Henrico Prince William Chatham Chesterfield Howard Arlington New Castle Clayton Maui Westchester Horry Henry Clarke Allegheny Roanoke Gaston Fulton FL NY NY HI MD NC IN MD VA MD GA MO GA MD GA VA VA GA VA MD VA DE GA HI NY SC GA GA PA VA NC GA 3093 2732 2622 1934 1910 1672 1582 1578 1419 1206 1074 781 682 633 590 554 546 534 475 424 364 358 336 329 270 243 225 213 202 135 133 129 Per 1,000 Officers 25 6 6 26 4 20 33 19 7 16 13 2 4 3 5 4 3 6 1 3 1 2 3 5 3 9 1 2 2 2 2 2 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 8.08 2.20 2.29 13.44 2.09 11.96 20.86 12.04 4.93 13.27 12.10 2.56 5.87 4.74 8.47 7.22 5.49 11.24 2.11 7.08 2.75 5.59 8.93 15.20 11.11 37.04 4.44 9.39 9.90 14.81 15.04 15.50 Per 100,000 Population 1.00 0.45 0.40 2.73 0.50 2.17 3.65 2.20 0.65 1.65 1.88 0.20 0.50 0.56 0.73 1.30 0.75 2.26 0.32 1.04 0.48 0.37 1.16 3.23 0.32 3.34 0.49 1.71 0.16 2.17 0.97 0.22 462 Kauai (County) Police Department Riley County Police Department James City County Police Dept. Floyd County Police Department Dougherty County Police Dept. Polk County Police Department Oldham County Police Department Kauai Riley James City Floyd Dougherty Polk Oldham HI KS VA GA GA GA KY 125 101 94 71 47 35 31 3 1 1 1 2 3 2 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 24.00 9.90 10.64 14.08 42.55 85.71 64.52 4.47 1.41 1.49 1.04 2.11 7.23 3.32 463 Appendix A-5. 500 Largest Municipal Police Departments in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted by # FT Sworn) # of Full-Time Per Per 1,000 Agency County State Sworn Personnel Agency Officers New York City Police Department Chicago Police Dept Los Angeles Police Department Philadelphia Police Department Houston Police Department Washington Metropolitan Police Dept Dallas Police Department Phoenix Police Department Baltimore Police Department Las Vegas Metro Police Department Detroit Police Department Boston Police Department San Antonio Police Department Milwaukee Police Department San Diego Police Department San Francisco Police Department Columbus Police Department Atlanta Police Department Jacksonville Sheriff's Office Cleveland Police Department Memphis Police Department Denver Police Department Austin Police Department Fort Worth Police Department New Orleans Police Department Kansas City Police Department San Jose Police Department St. Louis (city) Police Dept Nashville Metro Police Department Newark Police Seattle Police Department Louisville Metro Police Department New York Cook Los Angeles Philadelphia Harris District of Columbia Dallas Maricopa Baltimore City Clark Wayne Suffolk Bexar Milwaukee San Diego San Francisco Franklin Fulton Duval Cuyahoga Shelby Denver Travis Tarrant Orleans Jackson Santa Clara St. Louis City Davidson Essex King Jefferson NY IL CA PA TX DC TX AZ MD NV MI MA TX WI CA CA OH GA FL OH TN CO TX TX LA MO CA MO TN NJ WA KY 36023 13354 9727 6624 5053 3742 3389 3388 2990 2942 2250 2181 2020 1987 1951 1940 1886 1719 1662 1616 1549 1525 1515 1489 1425 1421 1382 1351 1315 1310 1283 1197 196 83 30 66 35 29 39 17 55 8 23 14 30 73 12 7 9 22 12 27 46 13 10 20 63 5 9 10 18 8 9 16 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. Per 100,000 Population 5.44 6.22 3.08 9.96 6.93 7.75 11.51 5.02 18.39 2.72 10.22 6.42 14.85 36.74 6.15 3.61 4.77 12.80 7.22 16.71 29.70 8.52 6.60 13.43 44.21 3.52 6.51 7.40 13.69 6.11 7.01 13.37 2.40 1.60 0.31 4.33 0.86 4.82 1.65 0.45 8.86 0.41 1.26 1.94 1.75 7.70 0.39 0.87 0.77 2.39 1.39 2.11 4.96 2.17 0.98 1.11 18.32 0.74 0.51 3.13 2.87 1.02 0.47 2.16 464 El Paso Police Department Miami Police Department Cincinnati Police Department Oklahoma City Police Department Tucson Police Department Albuquerque Police Department Tampa Police Department Long Beach Police Department Portland Police Bureau Minneapolis Police Department Jersey City Police Pittsburgh Police Department Mesa Police Department Fresno Police Department Tulsa Police Department Birmingham Police Department Virginia Beach Police Department Buffalo Police Department Oakland Police Department Norfolk Police Department Orlando Police Department Richmond Police Department Omaha Police Dept Rochester Police Department Raleigh Police Department Sacramento Police Department Colorado Springs Police Department Wichita Police Department Yonkers Police Department Toledo Police Department Baton Rouge Police Department Aurora Police Department Arlington Police Department St. Paul Police Department Greensboro Police Department Little Rock Police Department El Paso Miami-Dade Hamilton Oklahoma Pima Bernalillo Hillsborough Los Angeles Multnomah Hennepin Hudson Allegheny Maricopa Fresno Tulsa Jefferson Virginia Beach City Erie Alameda Norfolk City Orange Richmond City Douglas Monroe Wake Sacramento El Paso Sedgwick Westchester Lucas East Baton Rouge Arapahoe Tarrant Ramsey Guilford Pulaski TX FL OH OK AZ NM FL CA OR MN NJ PA AZ CA OK AL VA NY CA VA FL VA NE NY NC CA CO KS NY OH LA CO TX MN NC AR 1132 1104 1082 1046 1032 1020 980 968 928 902 900 891 831 828 826 816 813 793 773 772 757 752 747 703 702 701 668 662 641 640 630 627 610 598 593 520 15 14 10 12 6 13 3 4 10 18 12 21 2 7 11 8 9 4 3 14 8 7 6 3 8 5 5 2 2 12 6 6 3 8 5 2 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 13.25 12.68 9.24 11.47 5.81 12.75 3.06 4.13 10.78 19.96 13.33 23.57 2.41 8.45 13.32 9.80 11.07 5.04 3.88 18.13 10.57 9.31 8.03 4.27 11.40 7.13 7.49 3.02 3.12 18.75 9.52 9.57 4.92 13.38 8.43 3.85 1.87 0.56 1.25 1.67 0.61 1.96 0.24 0.04 1.36 1.56 1.89 1.72 0.05 0.75 1.82 1.21 2.05 0.44 0.20 5.77 0.70 3.43 1.16 0.40 0.89 0.35 0.80 0.40 0.21 2.72 1.36 1.05 0.17 1.57 1.02 0.52 465 Mobile Police Department Shreveport Police Department St. Petersburg Police Department Winston-Salem Police Department Montgomery Police Department Paterson Police Durham Police Department Syracuse Police Department Providence Police Department Fort Lauderdale Police Department Worcester Police Department Jackson Police Department Akron Police Department North Las Vegas Police Department Springfield Police Department Corpus Christi Police Department Fort Wayne Police Madison Police Department New Haven Police Department Chattanooga Police Department Salt Lake City Police Department Laredo Police Department Bridgeport Police Department Dayton Police Department Scottsdale Police Dept Newport News Police Department Stockton Police Department Hartford Police Department Huntsville Police Department Columbus Police Department Anaheim Police Department Camden Police Des Moines Police Department Riverside Police Department Charleston Police Department Chesapeake Police Department Mobile Caddo Pinellas Forsyth Montgomery Passaic Durham Onondaga Providence Broward Worcester Hinds Summit Clark Hampden Nueces Allen Dane New Haven Hamilton Salt Lake Webb Fairfield Montgomery Maricopa Newport News City San Joaquin Hartford Madison Muscogee Orange Camden Polk Riverside Charleston Chesapeake City AL LA FL NC AL NJ NC NY RI FL MA MS OH NV MA TX IN WI CT TN UT TX CT OH AZ VA CA CT AL GA CA NJ IA CA SC VA 515 511 510 508 500 497 494 489 483 482 482 480 472 471 464 448 447 437 436 434 433 430 422 421 417 415 415 408 405 400 398 397 385 385 382 376 4 12 6 3 6 3 9 3 7 6 5 9 8 2 9 3 4 1 8 14 1 4 3 1 1 10 2 10 3 6 3 10 6 4 2 3 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 7.77 23.48 11.76 5.91 12.00 6.04 18.22 6.13 14.49 12.45 10.37 18.75 16.95 4.25 19.40 6.70 8.95 2.29 18.35 32.26 2.31 9.30 7.11 2.38 2.40 24.10 4.82 24.51 7.41 15.00 7.54 25.19 15.58 10.39 5.24 7.98 0.97 4.71 0.65 0.86 2.62 0.60 3.36 0.64 1.12 0.34 0.63 3.67 1.48 0.10 1.94 0.88 1.13 0.20 0.93 4.16 0.10 1.60 0.33 0.19 0.03 5.53 0.29 1.12 0.90 3.16 0.10 1.95 1.39 0.18 0.57 1.35 466 Lubbock Police Department Miami Beach Police Department Anchorage Police Department Tacoma Police Department Tallahassee Police Department Reno Police Department Trenton Police Tempe Police Department Kansas City Police Department Columbia Police Department Bakersfield Police Department Elizabeth Police San Bernardino Police Department Irving Police Department Plano Police Department Salt Lake County Sheriff's Office Fayetteville Police Department Hialeah Police Department Henderson Police Department Chandler Police Department Albany Police Department North Charleston Police Department Grand Rapids Police Department Hollywood Police Department Alexandria Police Department West Palm Beach Police Department Lincoln Police Dept Boise Police Department Springfield Police Dept Wilmington Police Department Joliet Police Dept Rockford Police Dept Spokane Police Department Stamford Police Department New Bedford Police Department East Orange Police Lubbock Miami-Dade Anchorage Pierce Leon Washoe Mercer Maricopa Wyandotte Richland Kern Union San Bernardino Dallas Collin Salt Lake Cumberland Miami-Dade Clark Maricopa Albany Charleston Kent Broward Alexandria City Palm Beach Lancaster Ada Greene New Castle Will Winnebago Spokane Fairfield Bristol Essex TX FL AK WA FL NV NJ AZ KS SC CA NJ CA TX TX UT NC FL NV AZ NY SC MI FL VA FL NE ID MO DE IL IL WA CT MA NJ 376 374 372 371 364 362 361 357 354 351 348 348 345 344 343 342 341 338 336 333 328 325 319 316 315 310 308 306 306 306 302 300 295 292 288 283 5 3 4 3 1 3 6 1 10 8 8 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 2 2 7 5 1 8 3 3 1 2 3 2 3 1 6 3 2 3 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 13.30 8.02 10.75 8.09 2.75 8.29 16.62 2.80 28.25 22.79 22.99 2.87 5.80 5.81 2.92 2.92 5.87 2.96 5.95 6.01 21.34 15.38 3.13 25.32 9.52 9.68 3.25 6.54 9.80 6.54 9.93 3.33 20.34 10.27 6.94 10.60 1.79 0.12 1.37 0.38 0.36 0.71 1.64 0.03 6.35 2.08 0.95 0.19 0.10 0.08 0.13 0.10 0.63 0.04 0.10 0.05 2.30 1.43 0.17 0.46 2.14 0.23 0.35 0.51 1.09 0.37 0.44 0.34 1.27 0.33 0.36 0.38 467 Topeka Police Department Evansville Police Gainesville Police Department McAllen Police Department Springfield Police Dept Cambridge Police Department Macon Police Department Wilmington Police Department Glendale Police Department Roanoke City Police Department Tuscaloosa Police Department Modesto Police Department Pasadena Police Department Waterbury Police Department Clearwater Police Department South Bend Police Daytona Beach Police Department Beaumont Police Department Peoria Police Dept Waco Police Department Port St. Lucie Police Department Chula Vista Police Department Kalamazoo Dept of Public Safety Gary Police Lafayette Police Department Lansing Police Department Lowell Police Department Clarksville Police Department Pembroke Pines Police Department Fall River Police Department Portsmouth Police Department Hampton Police Department Brownsville Police Department Warren Police Department Oxnard Police Department Lakeland Police Department Shawnee Vanderburgh Alachua Hidalgo Sangamon Middlesex Bibb New Hanover Los Angeles Roanoke City Tuscaloosa Stanislaus Harris New Haven Pinellas St. Joseph Volusia Jefferson Peoria McLennan St. Lucie San Diego Kalamazoo Lake Lafayette Ingham Middlesex Montgomery Broward Bristol Portsmouth City Hampton City Cameron Macomb Ventura Polk KS IN FL TX IL MA GA NC CA VA AL CA TX CT FL IN FL TX IL TX FL CA MI IN LA MI MA TN FL MA VA VA TX MI CA FL 283 277 275 273 273 272 270 266 264 264 263 262 260 256 255 255 250 246 246 246 245 244 244 243 243 240 239 238 238 237 235 232 230 230 228 226 4 3 4 3 1 1 9 2 1 2 1 5 5 4 1 8 6 2 1 8 1 1 1 10 1 3 2 5 1 1 10 2 1 1 3 5 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 14.13 10.83 14.55 10.99 3.66 3.68 33.33 7.52 3.79 7.58 3.80 19.08 19.23 15.63 3.92 31.37 24.00 8.13 4.07 32.52 4.08 4.10 4.10 41.15 4.12 12.50 8.37 21.01 4.20 4.22 42.55 8.62 4.35 4.35 13.16 22.12 2.25 1.67 1.62 0.39 0.51 0.07 5.79 0.99 0.01 2.06 0.51 0.97 0.12 0.46 0.11 3.00 1.21 0.79 0.54 3.41 0.36 0.03 0.40 2.02 0.45 1.07 0.13 7.54 0.06 0.18 10.47 1.46 0.25 0.12 0.36 0.83 468 Mesquite Police Department Huntington Beach Police Department Sioux Falls Police Department Cape Coral Police Department Manchester Police Department Murfreesboro Police Department Oceanside Police Department White Plains Police Department Independence Police Department Woodbridge Police Mount Vernon Police Department Quincy Police Department Flint Police Department Jackson Police Department Allentown Police Department Dearborn Police Department Everett Police Department Brockton Police Department Cedar Rapids Police Department Irvine Police Department Pueblo Police Dept Racine Police Department Gulfport Police Department Irvington Police Killeen Police Department Edison Police Peoria Police Department Monroe Police Department Inglewood Police Department Salem Police Department Berkeley Police Department West Valley City Police Department Hayward Police Department New Rochelle Police Department Albany Police Department Coral Gables Police Department Dallas Orange Minnehaha Lee Hillsborough Rutherford San Diego Westchester Jackson Middlesex Westchester Norfolk Genesee Madison Lehigh Wayne Snohomish Plymouth Linn Orange Pueblo Racine Harrison Essex Bell Middlesex Maricopa Ouachita Los Angeles Marion Alameda Salt Lake Alameda Westchester Dougherty Miami-Dade TX CA SD FL NH TN CA NY MO NJ NY MA MI TN PA MI WA MA IA CA CO WI MS NJ TX NJ AZ LA CA OR CA UT CA NY GA FL 226 223 221 220 218 213 210 210 206 206 205 205 204 204 200 198 198 197 197 197 195 195 193 190 190 189 189 188 187 187 186 186 185 185 184 184 1 1 1 2 1 5 4 1 1 1 1 1 6 4 1 4 1 3 2 1 4 1 1 2 3 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 4 2 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 4.42 4.48 4.52 9.09 4.59 23.47 19.05 4.76 4.85 4.85 4.88 4.88 29.41 19.61 5.00 20.20 5.05 15.23 10.15 5.08 20.51 5.13 5.18 10.53 15.79 37.04 5.29 5.32 5.35 5.35 5.38 5.38 5.41 10.81 21.74 10.87 0.04 0.03 0.59 0.32 0.25 1.90 0.13 0.11 0.15 0.12 0.11 0.15 1.41 4.07 0.29 0.22 0.14 0.61 0.95 0.03 2.51 0.51 0.53 0.26 0.97 0.86 0.03 0.65 0.01 0.32 0.07 0.10 0.07 0.21 4.23 0.08 469 Naperville Police Dept Charleston Police Department Fremont Police Department Elgin Police Dept Myrtle Beach Police Department Utica Police Department Bossier City Police Dept Greenville Police Department Lynn Police Department Westminster Police Dept Salinas Police Department Wichita Falls Police Department Sunrise Police Department Canton Police Department Nashua Police Department Miramar Police Department Suffolk Police Department Fort Myers Police Department Erie Police Department Las Cruces Police Department Norwalk Police Department Yuma Police Department Decatur Police Dept Garden Grove Police Department Gastonia Police Department Schenectady Police Department Boulder Police Department Boynton Beach Police Department Lawton Police Department Richmond Police Department Union City Police Davie Police Department Melbourne Police Department Fort Collins Police Department Kenner Police Department Concord Police Department Du Page Kanawha Alameda Kane Horry Oneida Bossier Greenville Essex Adams Monterey Wichita Broward Stark Hillsborough Broward Suffolk Lee Erie Dona Ana Fairfield Yuma Macon Orange Gaston Schenectady Boulder Palm Beach Comanche Contra Costa Hudson Broward Brevard Larimer Jefferson Contra Costa IL WV CA IL SC NY LA SC MA CO CA TX FL OH NH FL VA FL PA NM CT AZ IL CA NC NY CO FL OK CA NJ FL FL CO LA CA 184 182 182 181 179 179 178 178 178 178 177 177 175 172 172 171 171 170 167 167 167 167 166 166 166 166 165 165 165 165 165 164 163 162 162 161 1 9 1 5 5 2 3 4 2 4 4 2 1 1 1 2 1 4 1 1 5 2 1 2 2 8 1 7 1 3 3 2 1 3 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 5.43 49.45 5.49 27.62 27.93 11.17 16.85 22.47 11.24 22.47 22.60 11.30 5.71 5.81 5.81 11.70 5.85 23.53 5.99 5.99 29.94 11.98 6.02 12.05 12.05 48.19 6.06 42.42 6.06 18.18 18.18 12.20 6.13 18.52 6.17 6.21 0.11 4.66 0.07 0.97 1.86 0.85 2.56 0.89 0.27 0.91 0.96 1.52 0.06 0.27 0.25 0.11 1.18 0.65 0.36 0.48 0.55 1.02 0.90 0.07 0.97 5.17 0.34 0.53 0.81 0.29 0.47 0.11 0.18 1.00 0.23 0.10 470 Galveston Police Department Lancaster Police Department Olathe Police Department Ann Arbor Police Department New Britain Police Department Fullerton Police Department Palm Bay Police Department Portland Police Department Clifton Police Costa Mesa Police Department Fort Smith Police Department Vineland Police Hoboken Police Columbia Police Department Denton Police Department Harrisburg Police Department Ocala Police Department Scranton Police Department Waukegan Police Dept Bethlehem Police Department Concord Police Department Danbury Police Department Lake Charles Police Department Midland Police Department Pawtucket Police Department Delray Beach Police Department Lawrence Police Department Plainfield Police Department Santa Fe Police Department Cranston Police Department Dothan Police Department Cicero Police Dept Greeley Police Department Johnson City Police Department Pensacola Police Department Cherry Hill Police Galveston Lancaster Johnson Washtenaw Hartford Orange Brevard Cumberland Passaic Orange Sebastian Cumberland Hudson Boone Denton Dauphin Marion Lackawanna Lake Northampton Cabarrus Fairfield Calcasieu Midland Providence Palm Beach Essex Union Santa Fe Providence Houston Cook Weld Washington Escambia Camden TX PA KS MI CT CA FL ME NJ CA AR NJ NJ MO TX PA FL PA IL PA NC CT LA TX RI FL MA NJ NM RI AL IL CO TN FL NJ 161 161 161 160 160 159 159 159 158 158 158 157 156 155 155 155 155 155 155 154 153 153 153 153 153 152 151 151 150 148 148 146 146 146 146 145 1 2 1 4 2 3 1 3 1 1 3 2 3 1 1 1 2 4 2 4 1 1 2 1 2 1 4 5 2 3 2 4 2 1 1 2 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 6.21 12.42 6.21 25.00 12.50 18.87 6.29 18.87 6.33 6.33 18.99 12.74 19.23 6.45 6.45 6.45 12.90 25.81 12.90 25.97 6.54 6.54 13.07 6.54 13.07 6.58 26.49 33.11 13.33 20.27 13.51 27.40 13.70 6.85 6.85 13.79 0.34 0.39 0.18 1.16 0.22 0.10 0.18 1.07 0.20 0.03 2.39 1.27 0.47 0.61 0.15 0.37 0.60 1.87 0.28 1.34 0.56 0.11 1.04 0.73 0.32 0.08 0.54 0.93 1.39 1.81 1.97 0.08 0.79 0.81 0.34 0.39 471 Niagara Falls Police Department Rocky Mount Police Department Santa Clara Police Department Largo Police Department Newport Beach Police Department Pine Bluff Police Department Binghamton Police Department Billings Police Department Frederick Police Department New Brunswick Police Mount Pleasant Police Department Ogden Police Department Baytown Police Department Kissimmee Police Department Longmont Police Department Newton Police Department Santa Barbara Police Department Visalia Department of Public Safety Hamilton Police Department Yakima Police Department Biloxi Police Department Chicopee Police Department Decatur Police Department Federal Way Police Department Marietta Police Department Round Rock Police Department Valdosta Police Department Sanford Police Department Somerville Police Department Sugar Land Police Department Brookline Police Department Farmington Police Department Gresham Police Department Lafayette Police Brick Township Police Springfield Police Department Niagara Nash Santa Clara Pinellas Orange Jefferson Broome Yellowstone Frederick Middlesex Charleston Weber Harris Osceola Boulder Middlesex Santa Barbara Tulare Butler Yakima Harrison Hampden Morgan King Cobb Williamson Lowndes Seminole Middlesex Fort Bend Norfolk San Juan Multnomah Tippecanoe Ocean Clark NY NC CA FL CA AR NY MT MD NJ SC UT TX FL CO MA CA CA OH WA MS MA AL WA GA TX GA FL MA TX MA NM OR IN NJ OH 145 143 141 140 140 140 139 138 138 138 137 137 136 136 136 136 136 136 135 134 133 133 133 133 133 133 133 131 130 130 129 129 129 128 127 127 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 5 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 20.69 6.99 14.18 7.14 7.14 7.14 7.19 14.49 7.25 14.49 7.30 14.60 7.35 22.06 7.35 7.35 7.35 7.35 7.41 7.46 15.04 7.52 7.52 7.52 7.52 7.52 7.52 7.63 15.38 15.38 23.26 38.76 7.75 7.81 7.87 7.87 1.39 1.77 0.11 0.11 0.03 1.29 0.50 1.35 0.43 0.25 0.29 0.86 0.02 1.12 0.34 0.07 0.24 0.23 0.27 0.41 1.07 0.22 0.84 0.05 0.15 0.24 0.92 0.24 0.13 0.34 0.45 3.84 0.14 0.58 0.17 0.72 472 Surprise Police Department Danville Police Department Elk Grove Police Department Fort Pierce Police Department Hattiesburg Police Department Mission Police Department Rochester Police Department Altamonte Springs Police Department Beaverton Police Department Broken Arrow Police Department Elkhart Police Harlingen Police Department Holyoke Police Department North Bergen Police Bloomington Police Dept Bolingbrook Police Dept Champaign Police Dept West Haven Police Department Rock Hill Police Department Troy Police Department El Cajon Police Department Ramapo Town Police Department Sandy Springs Police Department Waterloo Police Department Bristol Police Department West New York Police Framingham Police Department Redding Police Department Anderson Police Fayetteville Police Department Hackensack Police Wayne Township Police East Point Police Department Manchester Police Department Charlottesville Police Dept. Lauderhill Police Department Maricopa Pittsylvania Sacramento St. Lucie Forrest Hidalgo Olmsted Seminole Washington Tulsa Elkhart Cameron Hampden Hudson McLean Will Champaign New Haven York Rensselaer San Diego Rockland Fulton Black Hawk Hartford Hudson Middlesex Shasta Madison Washington Bergen Passaic Fulton Hartford Charlottesville City Broward AZ VA CA FL MS TX MN FL OR OK IN TX MA NJ IL IL IL CT SC NY CA NY GA IA CT NJ MA CA IN AR NJ NJ GA CT VA FL 127 126 126 126 126 125 125 124 124 124 124 123 123 123 122 122 122 122 121 121 120 120 120 120 119 119 118 118 117 117 117 117 116 116 115 115 1 1 1 4 2 2 1 1 1 2 4 1 1 1 2 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 4 1 1 1 1 4 2 9 1 2 2 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 7.87 7.94 7.94 31.75 15.87 16.00 8.00 8.06 8.06 16.13 32.26 8.13 8.13 8.13 16.39 24.59 8.20 16.39 8.26 8.26 8.33 8.33 25.00 33.33 8.40 8.40 8.47 8.47 34.19 17.09 76.92 8.55 17.24 17.24 8.70 8.70 0.03 1.57 0.38 1.44 2.67 0.26 0.69 0.24 0.19 0.33 2.02 0.25 0.22 0.16 1.18 0.44 0.50 0.23 0.44 0.63 0.03 0.32 0.33 3.05 0.11 0.16 0.07 0.56 3.04 0.98 0.99 0.20 0.22 0.22 2.30 0.06 473 Oak Park Police Dept Ottawa County Sheriff's Office Tupelo Police Department Hickory Police Department Palm Beach Gardens Police Department St. Joseph Police Dept Wilson Police Department Daly City Police Department Flagstaff Police Department Meriden Police Department Covington Police Department Hempstead Village Police Department St. Charles Police Dept Gloucester Township Police Kingsport Police Department Stratford Police Department Vacaville Police Department Barnstable Police Department East Chicago Police Edinburg Police Department Edmond Police Department Medford Police Department Milford Police Department Sandy Police Department York Police Department Colonie Town Police Department Florence Police Department Grand Junction Police Department Riviera Beach Police Department Ocean City Police Department O'Fallon Police Department Rapid City Police Department Sumter Police Department Allen Police Department Homestead Police Department Oak Lawn Police Dept Cook Ottawa Lee Catawba Palm Beach Buchanan Wilson San Mateo Coconino New Haven Kenton Nassau St. Charles Camden Sullivan Fairfield Solano Barnstable Lake Hidalgo Oklahoma Middlesex New Haven Salt Lake York Albany Florence Mesa Palm Beach Worcester St. Charles Pennington Sumter Collin Miami-Dade Cook IL MI MS NC FL MO NC CA AZ CT KY NY MO NJ TN CT CA MA IN TX OK MA CT UT PA NY SC CO FL MD MO SD SC TX FL IL 115 115 115 114 114 114 114 113 113 113 112 112 112 111 111 111 111 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 109 109 108 108 107 107 107 107 106 106 106 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 3 1 2 2 5 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 6 1 1 2 3 2 3 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 8.70 8.70 8.70 8.77 17.54 8.77 17.54 8.85 8.85 8.85 8.93 8.93 8.93 18.02 27.03 27.03 9.01 18.18 18.18 45.45 18.18 9.09 9.09 9.09 9.09 18.35 18.35 18.52 55.56 9.35 9.35 18.69 28.04 18.87 28.30 9.43 0.02 0.38 1.21 0.65 0.15 1.12 2.46 0.14 0.74 0.12 0.63 0.07 0.28 0.39 1.91 0.33 0.24 0.93 0.40 0.65 0.28 0.07 0.12 0.10 0.23 0.66 1.46 1.36 0.45 1.94 0.28 1.98 2.79 0.26 0.12 0.02 474 Victoria Police Department Bartlett Police Department Berwyn Police Dept Broomfield Police Department Burlington Police Department Council Bluffs Police Department Hagerstown Police Department Hamden Police Department Merced Police Department Newburgh City Police Department Poughkeepsie Police Department Bensalem Township Police Department Carmel Police Lakewood Police Department Medford Police Department Oro Valley Police Department Des Plaines Police Dept Jupiter Police Department Muncie Police Southampton Town Police Department West Jordan Police Department Goldsboro Police Department Dubuque Police Department Euclid Police Department Kokomo Police Lorain Police Department Missoula Police Department Westminster Police Department Conroe Police Department Meridian Police Department Middletown Police Department Pinellas Park Police Department Provo Police Department Redondo Beach Police Department Rogers Police Department Woonsocket Police Department Victoria Shelby Cook Broomfield Alamance Pottawattomie Washington New Haven Merced Orange Dutchess Bucks Hamilton Pierce Jackson Pima Cook Palm Beach Delaware Suffolk Salt Lake Wayne Dubuque Cuyahoga Howard Lorain Missoula Orange Montgomery Lauderdale Middlesex Pinellas Utah Los Angeles Benton Providence TX TN IL CO NC IA MD CT CA NY NY PA IN WA OR AZ IL FL IN NY UT NC IA OH IN OH MT CA TX MS CT FL UT CA AR RI 106 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 104 104 103 103 103 102 102 102 102 102 101 100 100 100 100 100 100 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 2 1 3 1 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 1 1 1 3 1 2 1 3 1 1 5 1 2 2 3 2 2 3 1 1 4 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 18.87 9.52 28.57 9.52 28.57 9.52 9.52 19.05 9.52 9.52 9.52 9.62 28.85 9.71 19.42 9.71 9.80 9.80 29.41 9.80 19.61 9.90 30.00 10.00 10.00 50.00 10.00 20.00 20.20 30.30 20.20 20.20 30.30 10.10 10.10 40.40 2.30 0.11 0.06 1.79 1.99 1.07 0.68 0.23 0.39 0.27 0.34 0.16 1.09 0.13 0.98 0.10 0.02 0.08 2.55 0.07 0.19 0.82 3.20 0.08 1.21 1.66 0.91 0.07 0.44 3.74 1.21 0.22 0.58 0.01 0.45 0.64 475 East Providence Police Department Eau Claire Police Department Greenville Police Department Pharr Police Department Weymouth Police Department Egg Harbor Township Police Enfield Police Department San Leandro Police Department San Marcos Police Department Alameda Police Department Florence Police Department Greece Town Police Department Texarkana Police Department College Park Police Department Haverhill Police Department Palm Springs Police Department Palo Alto Police Department Bellevue Police Dept Chelsea Police Department Joplin Police Department New Braunfels Police Department Parma Police Department Saginaw Police Department Wilkes Barre City Police Department Anderson Police Department Calumet City Police Dept Dover Police Department Grapevine Police Department Kennewick Police Department Muskogee Police Department New Bern Police Department New London Police Department Orangetown Town Police Department Orem Department of Public Safety Piscataway Township Police West Chester Police Department Providence Eau Claire Washington Hidalgo Norfolk Atlantic Hartford Alameda Hays Alameda Lauderdale Monroe Bowie Fulton Essex Riverside Santa Clara Sarpy Suffolk Jasper Comal Cuyahoga Saginaw Luzerne Anderson Cook Kent Tarrant Benton Muskogee Craven New London Rockland Utah Middlesex Butler RI WI MS TX MA NJ CT CA TX CA AL NY TX GA MA CA CA NE MA MO TX OH MI PA SC IL DE TX WA OK NC CT NY UT NJ OH 98 96 96 96 96 95 95 95 95 94 94 94 94 93 93 93 93 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 91 91 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 1 1 2 2 1 2 4 2 1 2 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 1 1 3 1 2 1 1 4 1 2 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 10.20 10.42 20.83 20.83 10.42 21.05 42.11 21.05 10.53 21.28 10.64 42.55 10.64 10.75 10.75 10.75 10.75 10.87 10.87 10.87 21.74 32.61 10.87 10.87 32.97 10.99 22.22 11.11 11.11 44.44 11.11 22.22 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 0.16 1.01 3.91 0.26 0.15 0.73 0.45 0.13 0.64 0.13 1.08 0.54 1.08 0.11 0.13 0.05 0.06 0.63 0.14 0.85 1.84 0.23 0.50 0.31 1.60 0.02 1.23 0.06 0.57 5.63 0.97 0.73 0.32 0.19 0.12 0.27 476 Cleveland Police Department Coconut Creek Police Department Idaho Falls Police Department Chico Police Department Folsom Police Department Jefferson City Police Department Salisbury Police Department Titusville Police Department Bend Police Department Cuyahoga Falls Police Department Elyria Police Department Michigan City Police Panama City Police Department Revere Police Department Salisbury Police Department Washington Township Police Apopka Police Department Moline Police Department Pleasanton Police Department Royal Oak Police Department Texas City Police Department Wheeling Police Department Alhambra Police Department Citrus Heights Police Department Euless Police Department LaGrange Police Department North Brunswick Police Port Orange Police Department Salem Police Department Mentor Police Department Petersburg Police Department Belleville Police Dept Downers Grove Police Dept Norwich Police Department Sanford Police Department Tinley Park Police Dept Bradley Broward Bonneville Butte Sacramento Cole Wicomico Brevard Deschutes Summit Lorain La Porte Bay Suffolk Rowan Gloucester Orange Rock Island Alameda Oakland Galveston Ohio Los Angeles Sacramento Tarrant Troup Middlesex Volusia Essex Lake Petersburg City St. Clair Du Page New London Lee Cook TN FL ID CA CA MO MD FL OR OH OH IN FL MA NC NJ FL IL CA MI TX WV CA CA TX GA NJ FL MA OH VA IL IL CT NC IL 89 89 89 88 88 88 88 88 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 85 85 85 85 85 84 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 82 82 81 81 81 81 81 4 3 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 5 1 2 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 44.94 33.71 11.24 22.73 22.73 11.36 11.36 11.36 23.26 23.26 23.26 11.63 11.63 11.63 11.63 11.63 11.76 11.76 11.76 11.76 23.53 23.81 12.05 12.05 12.05 12.05 12.05 24.10 24.10 12.20 24.39 12.35 12.35 61.73 12.35 24.69 4.04 0.17 0.96 0.91 0.14 1.32 1.01 0.18 1.27 0.37 0.66 0.90 0.59 0.14 0.72 0.35 0.09 0.68 0.07 0.08 0.69 4.50 0.01 0.07 0.06 1.49 0.12 0.40 0.27 0.43 6.17 0.37 0.11 1.82 1.73 0.04 477 West Bloomfield Township Police Dept Oakland MI 81 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 12.35 0.08 478 Appendix A-6. Special State & Local Law Enforcement Agencies in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted by # FT Sworn) # of Full-Time Per Per 1,000 Agency County State Sworn Personnel Agency Officers Port Authority of New York & New Jersey Police Dept New York State Metro Transportation Auth. Police Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission District of Columbia Protective Services Police Maryland Transportation Authority Police School District of Philadelphia Police Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Auth. Police California Dept. of Justice Ohio Dept of Natural Resources - Ofc. of Law Enf. Los Angeles School Police Department New York State Park Police Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission MBTA Transit Police South Carolina Department of Natural Resources Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries & Parks Maryland Natural Resources Police Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority Police New Jersey Transit Police BART Police Department Palm Beach County School District Police New York City Dept of Environmental Protection Police Delaware River Port Authority - Transit Police Baltimore City School Police Dept. Maryland Transit Administration Police Pennsylvania Dept of Conservation & Natural Resources South Carolina Dept of Mental Health-Public Safety San Antonio Park Rangers New Mexico Department Of Game & Fish Wisconsin Dept of Justice - Criminal Investigation Div. Vanderbilt University Police Department New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Dallas I.S.D. Police Dept. Hudson New York Leon District of Columbia Baltimore Philadelphia District of Columbia Sacramento Franklin Los Angeles Albany Travis Suffolk Richland Hinds Anne Arundel Arlington Essex Alameda Palm Beach Westchester Camden Baltimore City Baltimore City Dauphin Richland Bexar Santa Fe Dane Davidson Burlington Dallas NJ NY FL DC MD PA DC CA OH CA NY TX MA SC MS MD VA NJ CA FL NY NJ MD MD PA SC TX NM WI TN NJ TX 1667 694 626 484 456 450 442 419 394 340 305 277 256 238 230 224 206 201 192 176 168 144 142 140 136 120 112 106 92 91 90 88 1 2 4 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 0.60 2.88 6.39 2.07 2.19 2.22 4.52 2.39 5.08 5.88 3.28 3.61 7.81 4.20 4.35 4.46 4.85 14.93 5.21 22.73 5.95 6.94 7.04 7.14 7.35 8.33 26.79 9.43 10.87 10.99 11.11 11.36 Per 100,000 Population 0.16 0.13 0.44 0.17 0.16 0.07 0.33 0.10 3.24 0.02 0.21 0.10 0.28 0.26 1.05 0.19 0.09 0.47 0.07 0.30 1.29 0.19 0.16 0.16 0.79 0.26 0.17 0.69 0.20 0.16 0.11 0.04 479 Indiana State Excise Police Maryland National Capital Park Police - Montgomery Co University of Florida Police Northside I.S.D. Police Dept. Boston School Police Middlesex County Prosecutor's Office University of Alabama - Birmingham Police Dept Virginia Commonwealth University Police Dept. California Bureau of Narcotics Enforcement University of Pittsburgh - Main Campus Police Austin I.S.D. Police Department Georgia State University Police Maryland Department of General Services Police Anchorage International Airport Police Louisiana State University Police Department Medical University of South Carolina Public Safety University of Texas - Austin Police Duke University Police Department Virginia Marine Resources Commission Volusia County Beach Patrol MIT Police Department Northern Illinois University Police University of California - Los Angeles Police University of Illinois Police Dept George Mason University Police Dept. University of Tennessee at Knoxville Police Ohio State University Police Department United I.S.D. Police Dept. Delaware River & Bay Authority Police Louisiana State Univ. Health Sciences Center Police Dept Wayne State University Dept of Public Safety Houston Community College System McAllen I.S.D. Police Dept. Southern University and A & M College Police Allegheny Port Authority Transit Police State University at Albany Police Marion Montgomery Alachua Bexar Suffolk Middlesex Jefferson Richmond City Sacramento Allegheny Travis Fulton Baltimore City Anchorage East Baton Rouge Charleston Travis Durham Newport News City Volusia Middlesex DeKalb Los Angeles Champaign Fairfax Knox Franklin Webb New Castle Caddo Wayne Harris Hidalgo East Baton Rouge Allegheny Albany IN MD FL TX MA NJ AL VA CA PA TX GA MD AK LA SC TX NC VA FL MA IL CA IL VA TN OH TX DE LA MI TX TX LA PA NY 88 86 85 83 80 80 79 74 73 73 70 68 68 65 62 62 62 60 60 60 59 59 57 54 52 52 51 51 50 49 49 48 43 43 42 41 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 11.36 11.63 11.76 24.10 12.50 12.50 12.66 27.03 27.40 13.70 14.29 14.71 14.71 15.38 16.13 16.13 16.13 16.67 16.67 33.33 16.95 16.95 17.54 18.52 19.23 38.46 19.61 19.61 20.00 20.41 20.41 20.83 23.26 23.26 23.81 24.39 0.11 0.41 0.40 0.12 0.14 0.12 0.15 0.98 0.02 0.08 0.10 0.11 0.16 0.34 0.23 0.29 0.10 0.37 3.02 0.40 0.07 0.95 0.01 0.50 0.09 10.47 0.09 0.40 0.51 0.39 0.05 0.02 0.13 0.23 0.08 0.33 480 Massachusetts Dept of Mental Health Police Dept University of North Texas Police Department Florida Atlantic University Police Florida International University Police Kansas State Law Enforcement Training Center University of Arkansas Medical Sciences Dept of Pub Tuskegee University Police Department Medical College of Georgia Buffalo State College Police Cameron Co. District Attorney Investigations Div Houston Baptist University Police Department Kentucky Alcoholic Beverage Control Ohio Department of Taxation - Enforcement Division Socorro I.S.D. Police Dept. Dayton International Airport Police Dept Tennessee State University Appalachian State University Police Dept Humble I.S.D. Police Dept. Beaumont I.S.D. Police Dept. Central Michigan University Police Department North Forest I.S.D. Police Dept. Santa Ana Unified School District Police Dept. St. Mary's University Police Department Georgia Public Safety Training Center Indiana University Purdue U. Fort Wayne U. Police Lafayette College Office of Public Safety Arkansas State University Police Dept. Shippensburg University of Pennsylvania Police St. Joseph County Airport Police Bowie State University Dept. of Public Safety St. Edward's University Police Department University of Colorado - Colorado Springs Police Dept. College of Lake County Police Dept Missouri Department of Corrections University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown Police University of South Carolina - Upstate Police Dept Suffolk Denton Palm Beach Miami-Dade Reno Pulaski Macon Richmond Erie Cameron Harris Franklin Franklin El Paso Montgomery Davidson Watauga Harris Jefferson Isabella Harris Orange Bexar Monroe Allen Northampton Craighead Cumberland St. Joseph Prince Georges Travis El Paso Lake Cole Cambria Spartanburg MA TX FL FL KS AR AL GA NY TX TX KY OH TX OH TN NC TX TX MI TX CA TX GA IN PA AR PA IN MD TX CO IL MO PA SC 40 40 39 39 39 36 33 32 30 30 30 30 30 30 29 27 25 24 22 21 21 21 20 19 18 18 17 17 17 14 14 14 13 13 13 12 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 50.00 25.00 25.64 25.64 25.64 27.78 30.30 31.25 33.33 33.33 33.33 66.67 33.33 33.33 34.48 74.07 40.00 41.67 45.45 47.62 47.62 95.24 50.00 52.63 55.56 55.56 58.82 58.82 58.82 71.43 71.43 71.43 76.92 76.92 76.92 83.33 0.28 0.15 0.08 0.04 0.20 0.26 4.66 0.50 0.11 0.25 0.02 0.27 0.18 0.12 0.19 0.32 1.96 0.02 0.40 1.42 0.02 0.07 0.06 3.78 0.28 0.34 1.04 0.42 0.37 0.12 0.10 0.16 0.14 1.32 0.70 0.35 481 Midland I.S.D. Police Dept. Missouri Univ. of Science & Technology Police Dept Morrisville State College Police BYU-Idaho Police Department Lander University Public Safety Grambling State University Police Dept. Greenville Technical College Public Safety Lehigh-Northampton Airport Auth. Police Dept California Exposition And State Fair Police Lancaster I.S.D. Police Dept. University of Maryland Eastern Shore Public Safety University of West Alabama Police Ennis I.S.D. Police Department Ventura College Connally I.S.D. Police Dept. Santa Rosa I.S.D. Police Department Midland Phelps Madison Madison Greenwood Lincoln Greenville Lehigh Sacramento Dallas Somerset Sumter Ellis Ventura McLennan Cameron TX MO NY ID SC LA SC PA CA TX MD AL TX CA TX TX 11 11 11 10 10 9 9 9 6 6 6 6 5 5 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 90.91 90.91 90.91 100.00 100.00 222.22 111.11 111.11 166.67 166.67 166.67 166.67 200.00 200.00 333.33 333.33 0.73 2.21 1.36 2.66 1.44 4.28 0.22 0.29 0.07 0.04 3.78 7.27 0.67 0.12 0.43 0.25 482 Appendix B-1. 200 Largest State & Local Law Enforcement Agencies in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted by Rate per 1,000 Officers) # of Full-Time Per Per 1,000 Per 100,000 Agency County State Sworn Personnel Agency Officers Population New Orleans Police Department Milwaukee Police Department Memphis Police Department New Mexico State Police Pittsburgh Police Department Shreveport Police Department Polk County Sheriff's Office Kern County Sheriff's Office Indianapolis Police Minneapolis Police Department Springfield Police Department Toledo Police Department Jackson Police Department Baltimore Police Department Durham Police Department Norfolk Police Department Akron Police Department Cleveland Police Department Shelby County Sheriff's Office San Antonio Police Department Jefferson Parish Sheriff's Office Providence Police Department Nashville Metro Police Department Honolulu (City & County) Police Department Fort Worth Police Department St. Paul Police Department Louisville Metro Police Department Milwaukee County Sheriff's Office Jersey City Police Tulsa Police Department Montgomery County Police Department El Paso Police Department Orleans Milwaukee Shelby Santa Fe Allegheny Caddo Polk Kern Marion Hennepin Hampden Lucas Hinds Baltimore City Durham Norfolk City Summit Cuyahoga Shelby Bexar Jefferson Providence Davidson Honolulu Tarrant Ramsey Jefferson Milwaukee Hudson Tulsa Montgomery El Paso LA WI TN NM PA LA FL CA IN MN MA OH MS MD NC VA OH OH TN TX LA RI TN HI TX MN KY WI NJ OK MD TX 1425 1987 1549 528 891 511 600 512 1582 902 464 640 480 2990 494 772 472 1616 516 2020 825 483 1315 1934 1489 598 1197 524 900 826 1206 1132 63 73 46 13 21 12 13 11 33 18 9 12 9 55 9 14 8 27 8 30 12 7 18 26 20 8 16 7 12 11 16 15 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 44.21 36.74 29.70 24.62 23.57 23.48 21.67 21.48 20.86 19.96 19.40 18.75 18.75 18.39 18.22 18.13 16.95 16.71 15.50 14.85 14.55 14.49 13.69 13.44 13.43 13.38 13.37 13.36 13.33 13.32 13.27 13.25 18.32 7.70 4.96 0.63 1.72 4.71 2.16 1.31 3.65 1.56 1.94 2.72 3.67 8.86 3.36 5.77 1.48 2.11 0.86 1.75 2.77 1.12 2.87 2.73 1.11 1.57 2.16 0.74 1.89 1.82 1.65 1.87 483 Atlanta Police Department Albuquerque Police Department Miami Police Department Fort Lauderdale Police Department DeKalb County Police Department Prince George's County Police Department Montgomery Police Department Charlotte - Mecklenburg Police Department St. Petersburg Police Department Dallas Police Department Oklahoma City Police Department Orange County Sheriff's Office Raleigh Police Department Passaic County Sheriff's Office Lee County Sheriff's Office Savannah-Chatham Metropolitan Police Dept Richmond County Sheriff's Office Virginia Beach Police Department Portland Police Bureau Orlando Police Department Worcester Police Department South Carolina Highway Patrol Detroit Police Department Mississippi Highway Safety Patrol Philadelphia Police Department Broward County Sheriff's Office Birmingham Police Department Aurora Police Department Collier County Sheriff's Office Baton Rouge Police Department Bexar County Sheriff's Office Marion County Sheriff's Office Richmond Police Department Pinellas County Sheriff's Office Cincinnati Police Department Fort Wayne Police Fulton Bernalillo Miami-Dade Broward DeKalb Prince Georges Montgomery Mecklenburg Pinellas Dallas Oklahoma Orange Wake Passaic Lee Chatham Richmond VA Beach City Multnomah Orange Worcester Richland Wayne Hinds Philadelphia Broward Jefferson Arapahoe Collier E. Baton Rouge Bexar Marion Richmond City Pinellas Hamilton Allen GA NM FL FL GA MD AL NC FL TX OK FL NC NJ FL GA GA VA OR FL MA SC MI MS PA FL AL CO FL LA TX IN VA FL OH IN 1719 1020 1104 482 1074 1578 500 1672 510 3389 1046 1398 702 530 621 534 449 813 928 757 482 967 2250 594 6624 1624 816 627 628 630 526 740 752 863 1082 447 22 13 14 6 13 19 6 20 6 39 12 16 8 6 7 6 5 9 10 8 5 10 23 6 66 16 8 6 6 6 5 7 7 8 10 4 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 12.80 12.75 12.68 12.45 12.10 12.04 12.00 11.96 11.76 11.51 11.47 11.44 11.40 11.32 11.27 11.24 11.14 11.07 10.78 10.57 10.37 10.34 10.22 10.10 9.96 9.85 9.80 9.57 9.55 9.52 9.51 9.46 9.31 9.27 9.24 8.95 2.39 1.96 0.56 0.34 1.88 2.20 2.62 2.17 0.65 1.65 1.67 1.40 0.89 1.20 1.13 2.26 2.49 2.05 1.36 0.70 0.63 0.22 1.26 0.20 4.33 0.92 1.21 1.05 1.87 1.36 0.29 0.77 3.43 0.87 1.25 1.13 484 Volusia County Sheriff's Office Florida Highway Patrol Denver Police Department Cobb County Police Department Fresno Police Department Greensboro Police Department Manatee County Sheriff's Office Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office Pasco County Sheriff's Office Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office Miami-Dade (County) Police Department Omaha Police Dept Orleans Parish Sheriff's Office (Criminal Division) Orange County Sheriff-Coroner Department Mobile Police Department Washington Metropolitan Police Department Fulton County Sheriff's Office Minnesota State Patrol Colorado Springs Police Department St. Louis (city) Police Dept Jacksonville Sheriff's Office Henrico County Division of Police Sacramento Police Department Seattle Police Department Houston Police Department King County Sheriff's Office Denver County Sheriff's Office Leon County Sheriff's Office Corpus Christi Police Department Austin Police Department San Jose Police Department Boston Police Department Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission Maryland State Police Chicago Police Department San Diego Police Department Volusia Leon Denver Cobb Fresno Guilford Manatee Palm Beach Pasco Hillsborough Miami-Dade Douglas Orleans Orange Mobile DC Fulton Ramsey El Paso St. Louis City Duval Henrico Sacramento King Harris King Denver Leon Nueces Travis Santa Clara Suffolk Leon Baltimore Cook San Diego FL FL CO GA CA NC FL FL FL FL FL NE LA CA AL DC GA MN CO MO FL VA CA WA TX WA CO FL TX TX CA MA FL MD IL CA 450 1606 1525 590 828 593 476 1447 485 1223 3093 747 505 1794 515 3742 516 530 668 1351 1662 554 701 1283 5053 721 739 443 448 1515 1382 2181 626 1440 13354 1951 4 14 13 5 7 5 4 12 4 10 25 6 4 14 4 29 4 4 5 10 12 4 5 9 35 5 5 3 3 10 9 14 4 9 83 12 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 8.89 8.72 8.52 8.47 8.45 8.43 8.40 8.29 8.25 8.18 8.08 8.03 7.92 7.80 7.77 7.75 7.75 7.55 7.49 7.40 7.22 7.22 7.13 7.01 6.93 6.93 6.77 6.77 6.70 6.60 6.51 6.42 6.39 6.25 6.22 6.15 0.81 0.07 2.17 0.73 0.75 1.02 1.24 0.91 0.86 0.81 1.00 1.16 1.16 0.47 0.97 4.82 0.43 0.08 0.80 3.13 1.39 1.30 0.35 0.47 0.86 0.26 0.83 1.09 0.88 0.98 0.51 1.94 0.02 0.16 1.60 0.39 485 Syracuse Police Department San Bernardino County Sheriff's Office Newark Police Oklahoma Department of Public Safety Paterson Police Fairfax County Sheriff's Office Winston-Salem Police Department Gwinnett County Police Department Richland County Sheriff's Office Tulare County Sheriff's Office Pennsylvania State Police Tucson Police Department Gwinnett County Sheriff's Office Prince William County Police Department New York City Police Department Colorado State Patrol San Diego County Sheriff's Office Michigan State Police Riverside County Sheriff's Office Buffalo Police Department Phoenix Police Department Fairfax County Police Department Arlington Police Department Columbus Police Department Illinois State Police Anne Arundel County Police Department Delaware State Police Washington Metro Area Transit Auth. Police Loudoun County Sheriff's Office Dane County Sheriff's Office Franklin County Sheriff's Office North Carolina State Highway Patrol Massachusetts State Police Rochester Police Department New Jersey State Police Sacramento County Sheriff's Office Onondaga San Bernardino Essex Oklahoma Passaic Fairfax Forsyth Gwinnett Richland Tulare Dauphin Pima Gwinnett Prince William New York Jefferson San Diego Ingham Riverside Erie Maricopa Fairfax Tarrant Franklin Sangamon Anne Arundel Kent DC Loudoun Dane Franklin Wake Middlesex Monroe Mercer Sacramento NY CA NJ OK NJ VA NC GA SC CA PA AZ GA VA NY CO CA MI CA NY AZ VA TX OH IL MD DE DC VA WI OH NC MA NY NJ CA 489 1797 1310 825 497 499 508 682 512 513 4458 1032 531 546 36023 742 1322 1732 2147 793 3388 1419 610 1886 2105 633 658 442 448 454 455 1827 2310 703 3053 1409 3 11 8 5 3 3 3 4 3 3 26 6 3 3 196 4 7 9 11 4 17 7 3 9 10 3 3 2 2 2 2 8 10 3 13 6 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 6.13 6.12 6.11 6.06 6.04 6.01 5.91 5.87 5.86 5.85 5.83 5.81 5.65 5.49 5.44 5.39 5.30 5.20 5.12 5.04 5.02 4.93 4.92 4.77 4.75 4.74 4.56 4.52 4.46 4.41 4.40 4.38 4.33 4.27 4.26 4.26 0.64 0.54 1.02 0.13 0.60 0.28 0.86 0.50 0.78 0.68 0.20 0.61 0.37 0.75 2.40 0.08 0.23 0.09 0.50 0.44 0.45 0.65 0.17 0.77 0.08 0.56 0.33 0.33 0.64 0.41 0.17 0.08 0.15 0.40 0.15 0.42 486 Tennessee Department of Safety North Las Vegas Police Department Utah Department of Public Safety Long Beach Police Department Brevard County Sheriff's Office Oakland Police Department Little Rock Police Department Arkansas State Police San Francisco Police Department Kansas City Police Department Kentucky State Police Connecticut State Police Yonkers Police Department Los Angeles Police Department Tampa Police Department Indiana State Police Wichita Police Department Iowa Department of Public Safety New York State Metro Transportation Auth. Police Las Vegas Metro Police Department Alabama Department of Public Safety Maricopa County Sheriff's Office Ohio State Highway Patrol St. Louis County Police Dept Arizona Department of Public Safety Mesa Police Department Suffolk County Police Department Madison Police Department Will County Sheriff's Office Dallas County Sheriff's Office Santa Clara County Sheriff's Office School District of Philadelphia Police Nassau County Police Department El Paso County Sheriff's Office Knox County Sheriff's Office Maryland Transportation Authority Police Davidson Clark Salt Lake Los Angeles Brevard Alameda Pulaski Pulaski San Francisco Jackson Franklin Middlesex Westchester Los Angeles Hillsborough Marion Sedgwick Polk New York Clark Montgomery Maricopa Franklin St. Louis Maricopa Maricopa Suffolk Dane Will Dallas Santa Clara Philadelphia Nassau El Paso Knox Baltimore TN NV UT CA FL CA AR AR CA MO KY CT NY CA FL IN KS IA NY NV AL AZ OH MO AZ AZ NY WI IL TX CA PA NY CO TN MD 942 471 475 968 497 773 520 525 1940 1421 882 1227 641 9727 980 1315 662 669 694 2942 763 766 1560 781 1244 831 2622 437 445 449 450 450 2732 454 456 456 4 2 2 4 2 3 2 2 7 5 3 4 2 30 3 4 2 2 2 8 2 2 4 2 3 2 6 1 1 1 1 1 6 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 4.25 4.25 4.21 4.13 4.02 3.88 3.85 3.81 3.61 3.52 3.40 3.26 3.12 3.08 3.06 3.04 3.02 2.99 2.88 2.72 2.62 2.61 2.56 2.56 2.41 2.41 2.29 2.29 2.25 2.23 2.22 2.22 2.20 2.20 2.19 2.19 0.06 0.10 0.07 0.04 0.37 0.20 0.52 0.07 0.87 0.74 0.07 0.11 0.21 0.31 0.24 0.06 0.40 0.07 0.02 0.41 0.04 0.05 0.03 0.20 0.05 0.05 0.40 0.20 0.15 0.04 0.06 0.07 0.45 0.16 0.23 0.02 487 Fresno County Sheriff's Office Alameda County Sheriff's Office Chesterfield County Police Department Baltimore County Police Department District of Columbia Protective Services Police Nebraska State Patrol Monmouth County Sheriff's Office California Highway Patrol Pima County Sheriff's Dept. Washington State Patrol Texas Department of Public Safety Calcasieu Parish Sheriff's Office Louisiana State Police Virginia State Police Los Angeles County Sheriff's Office Contra Costa County Sheriff's Office Cook County Sheriff's Office Ventura County Sheriff's Office Harris County Sheriff's Office New York State Police Georgia Department of Public Safety Wayne County Sheriff's Office Port Authority of New York & New Jersey Police New York State Courts Officers Fresno Alameda Chesterfield Baltimore DC Lancaster Monmouth Sacramento Pima Thurston Travis Calcasieu E. Baton Rouge Chesterfield Los Angeles Contra Costa Cook Ventura Harris Albany Fulton Wayne Hudson New York CA CA VA MD DC NE NJ CA AZ WA TX LA LA VA CA CA IL CA TX NY GA MI NJ NY 461 928 475 1910 484 491 494 7202 554 1132 3529 592 1215 1873 9461 679 5655 755 2558 4847 1048 1062 1667 4500 1 2 1 4 1 1 1 13 1 2 6 1 2 3 14 1 8 1 3 5 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 2.17 2.16 2.11 2.09 2.07 2.04 2.02 1.81 1.81 1.77 1.70 1.69 1.65 1.60 1.48 1.47 1.41 1.32 1.17 1.03 0.95 0.94 0.60 0.22 0.11 0.13 0.32 0.50 0.17 0.05 0.16 0.03 0.10 0.03 0.02 0.52 0.04 0.04 0.14 0.10 0.15 0.12 0.07 0.03 0.01 0.05 0.01 0.01 488 Appendix B-2. Nonmetropolitan State & Local Law Enforcement Agencies in Study: Rates of Officers Arrested, 2005-2011 (Sorted by Rate per 1,000 Officers) # of Full-Time Per Per 1,000 Per 100,000 Agency County State Sworn Personnel Agency Officers Population Mounds Police Dept Atwater Police Department Berlin Borough Police Department Berlin Heights Police Department Bowman Police Department Burr Oak Police Department Cooter Police Department Elgin Police Department Hamburg Police Department Lamoure Police Department Lockhart Police Department Marion Township Police Department Nicholas County Sheriff's Office Oakwood Police Department Perryville Police Department Petroleum County Sheriff's Office Pineview Police Department Tipton Police Department Turkey Creek Police Department Wakeman Police Department Wilson Police Department Zolfo Springs Police Department Carter County Sheriff's Office Chilhowie Police Department Shenandoah Borough Police Department Athena Police Department Birchwood Police Department Boswell Police Department Cherokee Police Department Franklin Police Dept Hegins Township Police Department Pulaski Kandiyohi Somerset Erie Orangeburg St. Joseph Pemiscot Grant Fremont LaMoure Covington Waushara Nicholas Paulding Boyle Petroleum Wilcox Tillman Evangeline Huron Ellsworth Hardee Carter Smyth Schuylkill Umatilla Washburn Choctaw Alfalfa Franklin Schuylkill IL MN PA OH SC MI MO ND IA ND AL WI KY OH KY MT GA OK LA OH KS FL MO VA PA OR WI OK OK NE PA 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 6 7 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 2000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 666.67 666.67 571.43 500.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 32.46 2.37 1.29 1.30 3.24 1.63 5.47 41.77 13.44 24.16 2.65 4.08 14.02 5.10 3.52 202.43 10.80 12.51 2.94 1.68 15.39 3.61 31.92 12.42 2.70 1.32 6.28 6.58 17.72 31.01 0.67 489 Homer City Borough Police Department Hunter Police Department Inman Police Department Meyersdale Borough Police Department Pineland Police Department Pink Hill Police Department Ridgeville Police Ridgeville Police Department Seadrift Police Department Springfield Police Department White Cloud Police Department Windber Borough Police Department Oregon County Sheriff's Office Roseboro Police Department Talbot County Sheriff's Office Crystal City Police Department Belle Police Department Bismarck Police Department Butler County Sheriff's Office Caddo Police Department Earlville Police Dept Fair Bluff Police Department Freedom Police Department Gallatin County Sheriff's Office Griggs County Sheriff's Office Guadalupe County Sheriff's Office Haskell Police Department Hennessey Police Department Kahoka Police Department Marvell Police Department Meigs Police Department Newbury Police Department Ravenna Police Dept Santee Police Department Scotts Hill Police Department Stover Police Department Indiana Greene McPherson Somerset Sabine Lenoir Randolph Dorchester Calhoun Orangeburg Newaygo Somerset Oregon Sampson Talbot Zavala Maries St. Francois Butler Bryan La Salle Columbus Carroll Gallatin Griggs Guadalupe Haskell Kingfisher Clark Phillips Thomas Merrimack Buffalo Orangeburg Henderson Morgan PA NY KS PA TX NC IN SC TX SC MI PA MO NC GA TX MO MO AL OK IL NC NH IL ND NM TX OK MO AR GA NH NE SC TN MO 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 5 5 8 11 3 3 9 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 6 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 4 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 500.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 400.00 400.00 375.00 363.64 333.33 333.33 333.33 333.33 333.33 333.33 333.33 333.33 333.33 333.33 333.33 333.33 333.33 333.33 333.33 333.33 333.33 333.33 333.33 333.33 1.13 2.03 3.43 1.29 9.23 1.68 3.82 2.57 4.68 1.08 2.06 1.29 18.38 3.15 43.70 34.26 10.90 1.53 14.32 2.36 0.88 1.72 2.09 17.89 41.32 21.34 16.95 6.65 6.58 4.60 2.24 0.68 2.17 2.16 3.60 4.86 490 Waukomis Police Department La Salle County Sheriff's Office Shelby Police Department Shinnston Police Department Seneca County Sheriff's Office Blue Lake Police Department Butler Township Police Department Columbus Police Department Delhi Village Police Department Edenton Police Department Elmore Police Department Fairland Police Department Foster Township Police Department Gold Beach Police Department Hemingway Police Department Keokuk County Sheriff's Office Mahanoy City Borough Police Department Malakoff Police Department Marble Head Police Department Marshallville Police Dept. McArthur Police Department Monroeville Police Department New Lisbon Police Department Onley Police Department Rochelle Police Department Roodhouse Police Dept Tutwiler Police Department Winsted Police Department Grambling State University Police Dept. Lake County Sheriff's Office Tabor City Police Department Cochran Police Department Jackson County Sheriff's Office Allendale Police Department Carlisle Police Department Chaffee Police Department Garfield La Salle Bolivar Harrison Seneca Humboldt Schuylkill Luna Delaware Chowan Ottawa Ottawa McKean Curry Williamsburg Keokuk Schuylkill Henderson Ottawa Macon Vinton Huron Juneau Accomack Wilcox Greene Tallahatchie Litchfield Lincoln Lake Columbus Bleckley Jackson Allendale Nicholas Scott OK TX MS WV NY CA PA NM NY NC OH OK PA OR SC IA PA TX OH GA OH OH WI VA GA IL MS CT LA CO NC GA TN SC KY MO 3 10 7 7 23 4 4 4 4 12 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 9 9 9 14 14 10 5 5 1 3 2 2 6 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 2 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 333.33 300.00 285.71 285.71 260.87 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 222.22 222.22 222.22 214.29 214.29 200.00 200.00 200.00 1.65 43.57 5.86 2.89 17.02 0.74 0.67 3.98 2.08 20.28 2.41 3.14 2.30 4.47 2.91 9.51 0.67 1.27 2.41 6.78 7.44 1.68 3.75 3.02 10.80 7.20 6.50 0.53 4.28 27.36 3.44 22.97 25.78 19.20 14.02 2.55 491 Commerce Police Department Crescent City Police Department Creston Police Department Delhi Police Department Dixon Police Department Durand Police Department Estill County Sheriff's Office Fryeburg Police Department Grand Rapids Police Department Grant County Sheriff's Office Haskell Police Department Holt County Sheriff's Office Kenton Police Department Lake County Sheriff's Office Level Plains Police Department Lewis County Sheriff's Office Middletown Police Montpelier Police Department Mora County Sheriff's Office North Kingsville Police Department Oglethorpe Police Department Olney Police Department Pearson Police Department Pocahontas County Sheriff's Office Ranger Police Department Richland Police Dept Robbins Police Department Rosedale Police Department Santa Clara Police Department Sugarcreek Borough Police Department Sugarcreek Police Department Terrell County Sheriff's Office Vergennes Police Department West Yellowstone Police Department Woodstock Police Department Hockley County Sheriff's Office Ottawa Putnam Union Richland Pulaski Shiawassee Estill Oxford Wood Grant Muskogee Holt Obion Lake Dale Lewis Henry Bear Lake Mora Ashtabula Macon Young Atkinson Pocahontas Eastland Pulaski Moore Bolivar Grant Venango Tuscarawas Terrell Addison Gallatin Grafton Hockley OK FL IA LA MO MI KY ME WI OK OK NE TN SD AL MO IN ID NM OH GA TX GA WV TX MO NC MS NM PA OH TX VT MT NH TX 5 5 10 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 11 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 181.82 3.14 1.34 15.96 4.83 1.91 1.42 6.82 1.73 1.34 22.09 1.41 9.58 3.14 8.93 1.99 9.79 2.02 16.71 20.49 0.99 6.78 5.39 11.94 11.47 5.38 1.91 1.13 2.93 3.39 1.82 1.08 101.63 2.72 1.12 1.12 8.72 492 Montezuma Police Department Pulaski County Sheriff's Office Stephens County Sheriff's Office Bingen-White Salmon Police Department Bridgeport Police Department Columbus Police Department East Brewton Police Department Fairfax Police Department Florala Police Department Geneva Township Police Department Kaw Nation Tribal Police Norton Police Department Sleepy Eye Police Department St. Paul Police Department University of West Alabama Police Woodruff County Sheriff's Office Eunice Police Department Black River Falls Police Department Byron Police Dept Clay County Sheriff's Office Coeburn Police Department Flemingsburg Police Department Fremont County Sheriff's Office Haynesville Police Dept Hermann Police Department Holly Hill Police Department Mason County Sheriff's Office Murphy Police Department New Castle Police Department Port Barre Police Dept Providence Police Department Union Police Department Winnsboro Police Department Yemassee Police Department Fayette County Sheriff's Office Helena\/West Helena Police Department Macon Pulaski Stephens Klickitat Jackson Polk Escambia Allendale Covington Walworth Kay Norton Redwood Wise Sumter Woodruff St. Landry Jackson Ogle Clay Wise Fleming Fremont Claiborne Gasconade Orangeburg Mason Cherokee Garfield St. Landry Webster Newton Franklin Hampton Fayette Phillips GA IL OK WA AL NC AL SC AL WI OK KS MN VA AL AR LA WI IL AR VA KY IA LA MO SC WV NC CO LA KY MS LA SC OH AR 11 11 11 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 32 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 21 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 22 30 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 4 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 181.82 181.82 181.82 166.67 166.67 166.67 166.67 166.67 166.67 166.67 166.67 166.67 166.67 166.67 166.67 166.67 156.25 142.86 142.86 142.86 142.86 142.86 142.86 142.86 142.86 142.86 142.86 142.86 142.86 142.86 142.86 142.86 142.86 142.86 136.36 133.33 13.57 32.46 4.44 4.92 1.88 4.88 2.61 9.60 2.65 0.98 2.15 17.63 3.86 2.41 7.27 13.77 6.00 4.89 1.87 6.22 2.41 6.97 13.44 5.82 6.57 1.08 10.98 3.64 1.77 1.20 7.34 4.60 4.82 4.74 10.33 18.38 493 Nebraska City Police Dept Shelby County Sheriff's Office Big Horn County Sheriff's Office Blackford County Sheriff's Office Blountstown Police Dept. Canton Village Police Department Chandler Police Department Eunice Police Department Henry County Sheriff's Office Kingfisher County Sheriff's Office Madison County Sheriff's Office Oglesby Police Dept Waynesburg Borough Police Department Whiteville Police Department McIntosh County Sheriff's Office Princeton Police Department Andrews Police Department Arcade Police Department Beardstown Police Dept Belpre Police Department Dillon Police Department Forest City Police Department Forks Police Department Glendive Police Department Hanceville Police Department Lawrence Township Police Department Minocqua Police Department Osceola Police Department Ripley Police Department Allenstown Police Department Alma Police Department BYU-Idaho Police Department Clewiston Police Department Columbus Police Department Dewitt Police Department Ferriday Police Department Otoe Shelby Big Horn Blackford Calhoun St. Lawrence Henderson Lea Henry Kingfisher Madison La Salle Greene Hardeman McIntosh Mercer Georgetown Jackson Cass Washington Summit Winnebago Clallam Dawson Cullman Clearfield Oneida Clarke Jackson Merrimack Bacon Madison Hendry Colorado Clinton Concordia NE TX MT IN FL NY TX NM VA OK MO IL PA TN OK WV SC GA IL OH CO IA WA MT AL PA WI IA WV NH GA ID FL TX IA LA 15 15 8 8 8 8 8 8 112 8 8 8 8 8 17 17 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 10 10 10 20 10 10 10 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 14 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 133.33 133.33 125.00 125.00 125.00 125.00 125.00 125.00 125.00 125.00 125.00 125.00 125.00 125.00 117.65 117.65 111.11 111.11 111.11 111.11 111.11 111.11 111.11 111.11 111.11 111.11 111.11 111.11 111.11 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 12.71 7.86 7.77 7.83 6.84 0.89 1.27 1.54 25.85 6.65 8.18 0.88 2.58 3.67 9.88 3.21 1.66 1.65 7.33 1.62 3.57 9.20 1.40 11.15 1.24 1.22 2.78 10.77 3.42 0.68 9.01 2.66 5.11 4.79 2.04 4.80 494 Ferry County Sheriff's Office Helen Police Department Ishpeming Police Department Jaffrey Police Department Kermit Police Department Lancaster Police Department Lander University Public Safety Marlow Police Department Millersburg Police Department Montague County Sheriff's Office New Martinsville Police Department Powell County Sheriff's Office Socorro County Sheriff's Office St. George Police Department Williams Police Department Winkler County Sheriff's Office Caruthersville Police Department Algood Police Department Columbiana County Sheriff's Office Eastman Police Department Floyd County Sheriff's Office Fort Gibson Police Department Greene County Sheriff's Office Hannahville Tribal Police Department Medina Police Department Missouri Univ. of Science & Tech Police Dept Rainsville Police Department Roosevelt County Sheriff's Office Simpson County Sheriff's Office Stark County Sheriff's Office Aspen Police Department Tuskegee Police Department Polk County Police Department Braselton Police Department Bunkie Police Department Clayton County Sheriff's Office Ferry White Marquette Cheshire Winkler Garrard Greenwood Stephens Holmes Montague Wetzel Powell Socorro Dorchester Colusa Winkler Pemiscot Putnam Columbiana Dodge Floyd Muskogee Greene Menominee Gibson Phelps DeKalb Roosevelt Simpson Stark Pitkin Macon Polk Jackson Avoyelles Clayton WA GA MI NH TX KY SC OK OH TX WV MT NM SC CA TX MO TN OH GA IA OK AL MI TN MO AL MT KY ND CO AL GA GA LA IA 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 21 11 22 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 23 23 35 12 12 12 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 95.24 90.91 90.91 90.91 90.91 90.91 90.91 90.91 90.91 90.91 90.91 90.91 90.91 90.91 86.96 86.96 85.71 83.33 83.33 83.33 13.24 3.68 1.49 1.30 14.06 5.91 1.44 2.22 2.36 5.07 6.03 14.23 5.60 2.57 4.67 14.06 10.93 1.38 1.85 4.59 6.13 1.41 11.06 4.16 2.01 2.21 1.41 9.59 5.77 4.13 11.66 9.32 7.23 1.65 2.38 5.52 495 Custer County Sheriff's Office Fayette Police Department Franklin County Sheriff's Office Gage County Sheriff's Office Lakeport Police Department Madill Police Department Monticello Police Natchez Police Dept. Perry County Sheriff's Office Quincy Police Department Wallace Police Department Whitley County Sheriff's Office Williamsburg Police Department Wolfeboro Police Department Marlboro County Sheriff's Office Russellville Police Department Benzie County Sheriff's Office Denton Police Department Emery County Sheriff's Office Fairmont Police Department Frisco Police Department Hempstead County Sheriff's Office Humboldt Police Department Pauls Valley Police Department Randolph County Sheriff's Office Tucumcari Police Department Upper Sandusky Police Department Winnfield Police Dept Bartlesville Police Department Polk County Sheriff's Office Appling County Sheriff's Office Caribou Police Department Clyde Police Department Grants Police Department Morrow County Sheriff's Office Newport Police Department Custer Fayette Franklin Gage Lake Marshall White Adams Perry Grant Duplin Whitley Whitley Carroll Marlboro Franklin Benzie Caroline Emery Robeson Summit Hempstead Gibson Garvin Randolph Quay Wyandot Winn Washington Polk Appling Aroostook Sandusky Cibola Morrow Sullivan OK AL IN NE CA OK IN MS IL WA NC KY KY NH SC AL MI MD UT NC CO AR TN OK IL NM OH LA OK GA GA ME OH NM OR NH 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 48 12 12 12 12 12 12 25 25 13 13 26 13 13 13 26 13 13 13 13 13 54 27 14 14 14 14 14 14 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 4 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33 80.00 80.00 76.92 76.92 76.92 76.92 76.92 76.92 76.92 76.92 76.92 76.92 76.92 76.92 74.07 74.07 71.43 71.43 71.43 71.43 71.43 71.43 3.64 5.80 4.33 4.48 1.55 6.31 4.06 12.39 4.47 1.12 1.71 2.81 2.81 2.09 6.91 6.31 5.71 3.02 18.22 0.75 3.57 4.42 4.03 3.63 2.99 11.06 4.42 6.53 7.85 4.82 5.48 1.39 1.64 3.67 8.95 2.29 496 Ocean Shores Police Department Pelham Police Department Crossett Police Department Del Norte County Sheriff's Office Ephrata Police Department Greene County Sheriff's Office Kings Mountain Police Department McDowell County Sheriff's Office Mineral Wells Police Department Moab Police Department Nashville Police Department Royston Police Department Springfield Police Department St. Marys Police Department Thief River Falls Police Department Vinita Police Department Bishopville Police Department Eatonton Police Department Harrodsburg Police Department Lamesa Police Department Miller County Sheriff's Office Phillips County Sheriff's Office Red Springs Police Department Cross County Sheriff's Office Elkin Police Department Fort Madison Police Department Kitty Hawk Police Department Middlesex County Sheriff's Office Clovis Police Department Zanesville Police Department Barre Police Department Black Mountain Police Department Bolivar County Sheriff's Office Calhoun County Sheriff's Office Duval County Sheriff's Office Greensburg Police Grays Harbor Mitchell Ashley Del Norte Grant Greene Cleveland McDowell Palo Pinto Grand Berrien Franklin Windsor Auglaize Pennington Craig Lee Putnam Mercer Dawson Miller Phillips Robeson Cross Surry Lee Dare Middlesex Curry Muskingum Washington Buncombe Bolivar Calhoun Duval Decatur WA GA AR CA WA AR NC WV TX UT GA GA VT OH MN OK SC GA KY TX MO AR NC AR NC IA NC VA NM OH VT NC MS FL TX IN 14 14 15 30 15 15 30 15 30 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 17 17 17 17 17 53 53 18 18 18 18 18 18 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 71.43 71.43 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 62.50 62.50 62.50 62.50 62.50 62.50 62.50 58.82 58.82 58.82 58.82 58.82 56.60 56.60 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 1.37 4.26 4.58 6.99 1.12 2.38 2.04 4.52 7.11 10.84 5.19 4.53 1.76 2.18 7.18 6.65 5.20 4.71 4.69 7.23 4.04 4.60 0.75 5.60 1.36 2.79 2.95 9.12 6.20 3.49 1.68 2.22 2.93 6.84 8.49 3.89 497 Hastings Police Dept Kendallville Police Leland Police Department Marion Police Department Osceola County Sheriff's Office Rockmart Police Department Seaside Police Department Selmer Police Department Spencer Police Department Sweetwater Police Department Towns County Sheriff's Office Winnemucca Police Department Gaffney Police Department Brownwood Police Department Conneaut Police Department Corbin Police Department Daviess County Sheriff's Office Delavan Police Department Demopolis Police Department Norwich Police Department Sturgis Police Department Bainbridge Police Department Marksville Police Department Oakdale Police Department Platteville Police Department Vidalia Police Department Wilkesboro Police Department Bluefield Police Department Bolivar Police Department Central Michigan University Police Dept Clearlake Police Department San Jacinto County Sheriff's Office Craig Police Department Hardeman County Sheriff's Office Haywood County Sheriff's Office Hornell Police Department Adams Noble Washington Smyth Osceola Polk Clatsop McNairy Clay Monroe Towns Humboldt Cherokee Brown Ashtabula Whitley Daviess Walworth Marengo Chenango St. Joseph Decatur Avoyelles Allen Grant Concordia Wilkes Mercer Hardeman Isabella Lake San Jacinto Moffat Hardeman Haywood Steuben NE IN MS VA MI GA OR TN IA TN GA NV SC TX OH KY IN WI AL NY MI GA LA LA WI LA NC WV TN MI CA TX CO TN TN NY 36 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 37 38 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 40 20 20 20 20 20 21 21 21 21 21 22 22 22 22 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 54.05 52.63 52.63 52.63 52.63 52.63 52.63 52.63 52.63 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 47.62 47.62 47.62 47.62 47.62 45.45 45.45 45.45 45.45 6.38 2.10 1.96 3.10 4.25 2.41 2.70 3.84 6.00 2.25 9.55 6.05 3.61 5.25 0.99 2.81 3.16 0.98 4.76 1.98 1.63 7.18 2.38 3.88 1.95 4.80 1.44 1.61 3.67 1.42 1.55 3.79 7.25 3.67 5.32 1.01 498 Indiana Borough Police Department Ketchikan Police Dept. Ontario Police Department Rio Arriba County Sheriff's Office Routt County Sheriff's Office Vernal Police Department Washington Court House Police Dept. Butte - Silver Bow County Sheriff's Office Muskogee Police Department St. Landry Parish Sheriff's Office Beeville Police Department Canton Police Dept Danville (City) Sheriff's Office Emmet County Sheriff's Office Graham County Sheriff's Office Monroe County Sheriff's Office Winn Parish Sheriff's Office Thomas County Sheriff's Office Cherokee County Sheriff's Office Commerce Police Department Deridder Police Department Huron Police Department Jennings Police Department Marion Police Department Orangeburg Public Safety Appalachian State University Police Dept Assumption Parish Sheriff's Office Dillon Police Department Lawrence County Sheriff's Office Newaygo County Sheriff's Office Ogdensburg Police Department Sault Ste. Marie Police Department Selma Police Department Tuscola County Sheriff's Office Hampton County Sheriff's Office Ruidoso Police Department Indiana Ketchikan Gateway Malheur Rio Arriba Routt Uintah Fayette Silver Bow Muskogee St. Landry Bee Fulton Danville City Emmet Graham Monroe Winn Thomas Cherokee Jackson Beauregard Beadle Jefferson Davis Marion Orangeburg Watauga Assumption Dillon Lawrence Newaygo St. Lawrence Chippewa Dallas Tuscola Hampton Lincoln PA AK OR NM CO UT OH MT OK LA TX IL VA MI AZ WI LA GA SC GA LA SD LA SC SC NC LA SC IN MI NY MI AL MI SC NM 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 45 90 90 23 23 69 23 23 23 23 47 48 24 24 24 24 24 72 25 50 25 25 25 25 25 50 25 26 26 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 4 4 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 45.45 45.45 45.45 45.45 45.45 45.45 45.45 44.44 44.44 44.44 43.48 43.48 43.48 43.48 43.48 43.48 43.48 42.55 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 38.46 38.46 1.13 7.42 3.19 2.48 4.25 3.07 3.44 5.85 5.63 4.80 3.14 2.70 6.97 3.06 2.69 2.24 6.53 4.47 3.61 1.65 2.80 5.75 3.17 3.02 3.24 1.96 8.54 3.12 2.17 2.06 0.89 2.60 4.56 1.79 4.74 4.88 499 Steuben County Sheriff's Office Accomack County Sheriff's Office Farmville Police Department Jim Wells County Sheriff's Office Las Vegas Police Department Marble Falls Police Department Marion County Sheriff's Office Philadelphia Police Department Rosebud Sioux Tribal Police Sandusky Police Department Hooksett Police Department Lee County Sheriff's Office Leesville Police Department Vail Police Department White County Sheriff's Office Albert Lea Police Department Halifax County Sheriff's Office Lenoir County Sheriff's Office Mount Pleasant Police Department Putnam County Sheriff's Office Ravalli County Sheriff's Office Andalusia Police Dept. Berea Police Department Great Bend Police Department Greenbrier County Sheriff's Office Lebanon Police Department Luna County Sheriff's Office Miami Police Department Nogales Police Department Okanogan County Sheriff's Office Otero County Sheriff's Office Scottsbluff Police Dept Shelby County Sheriff's Office Warren County Sheriff's Office Lake County Sheriff's Office Austin Police Department Steuben Accomack Prince Edward Jim Wells San Miguel Burnet Marion Neshoba Todd Erie Merrimack Lee Vernon Eagle White Freeborn Halifax Lenoir Titus Putnam Ravalli Covington Madison Barton Greenbrier Laclede Luna Ottawa Santa Cruz Okanogan Otero Scotts Bluff Shelby Warren Lake Mower NY VA VA TX NM TX WV MS SD OH NH SC LA CO TN MN VA NC TX TN MT AL KY KS WV MO NM OK AZ WA NM NE OH NC CA MN 26 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 54 28 28 28 28 28 29 29 58 29 58 29 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 60 30 30 30 30 30 61 31 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 38.46 37.04 37.04 37.04 37.04 37.04 37.04 37.04 37.04 37.04 35.71 35.71 35.71 35.71 35.71 34.48 34.48 34.48 34.48 34.48 34.48 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 32.79 32.26 1.01 3.02 4.28 2.45 3.40 2.34 1.77 3.37 10.40 2.59 0.68 5.20 1.91 1.92 3.87 3.20 2.76 3.36 3.09 2.77 2.49 2.65 1.21 3.61 2.82 2.81 3.98 3.14 4.22 2.43 1.57 2.70 2.02 4.77 3.09 2.55 500 Jamestown Police Department Murray Police Department Starr County Sheriff's Office Stephens County Sheriff's Office Baxter County Sheriff's Office Grand Traverse County Sheriff's Office Manitowoc Police Department Moberly Police Department Olean Police Department Tahlequah Police Department Traverse City Police Department Vernon Parish Sheriff's Office Holmes County Sheriff's Office Meridian Police Department Tuskegee University Police Dept DeKalb County Sheriff's Office Fort Payne Police Department Martin County Sheriff's Office Plainview Police Department Seneca Police Department Clarksdale Police Department Cookeville Police Department Lebanon Police Department McKinley County Sheriff's Office New Castle (city) Police Department New Castle Police Bennettsville Police Department Durant Police Department Kalispell Police Department La Salle County Sheriff's Office Nye County Sheriff's Office Union City Police Department Washington Police Department Alice Police Department Bogalusa Police Department Dunn Police Department Chautauqua Calloway Starr Stephens Baxter Grand Traverse Manitowoc Randolph Cattaraugus Cherokee Grand Traverse Vernon Holmes Lauderdale Macon DeKalb DeKalb Martin Hale Oconee Coahoma Putnam Grafton McKinley Lawrence Henry Marlboro Bryan Flathead La Salle Nye Obion Beaufort Jim Wells Washington Harnett NY KY TX GA AR MI WI MO NY OK MI LA OH MS AL AL AL NC TX SC MS TN NH NM PA IN SC OK MT IL NV TN NC TX LA NC 62 31 31 31 32 64 64 32 32 32 32 64 33 99 33 34 34 34 34 34 35 70 35 35 35 35 36 36 36 36 108 36 36 37 37 37 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 32.26 32.26 32.26 32.26 31.25 31.25 31.25 31.25 31.25 31.25 31.25 31.25 30.30 30.30 30.30 29.41 29.41 29.41 29.41 29.41 28.57 28.57 28.57 28.57 28.57 28.57 27.78 27.78 27.78 27.78 27.78 27.78 27.78 27.03 27.03 27.03 1.48 2.69 1.64 3.82 2.41 2.30 2.46 3.93 1.25 2.13 1.15 3.82 2.36 3.74 4.66 1.41 1.41 4.08 2.76 1.35 3.82 2.77 1.12 1.40 1.10 2.02 3.46 2.36 1.10 0.88 6.83 3.14 2.09 2.45 2.12 0.87 501 Fort Dodge Police Department Muskogee County Sheriff's Office Palatka Police Department Boone Police Department Mount Airy Police Department Corinth Police Department Klamath Falls Police Department Muscatine Police Department Seymour Police Big Spring Police Department McDowell County Sheriff's Office Roswell Police Department White County Sheriff's Office Chesterfield County Sheriff's Office Rutland Police Department. Searcy Police Department Kauai (County) Police Department Ada Police Department Saline County Sheriff's Office Robeson County Sheriff's Office Kingsland Police Dept Poplar Bluff Police Department Calhoun Police Department Cortland Police Department Juneau Police Dept. Lenawee County Sheriff's Office Saline County Sheriff's Office Scottsboro Police Department Sedalia Police Dept Sullivan County Sheriff's Office Zapata County Sheriff's Office Gatlinburg Police Department Gillette Police Department Grant County Sheriff's Office Harrison County Sheriff's Office Juneau County Sheriff's Office Webster Muskogee Putnam Watauga Surry Alcorn Klamath Muscatine Jackson Howard McDowell Chaves White Chesterfield Rutland White Kauai Pontotoc Saline Robeson Camden Butler Gordon Cortland Juneau Lenawee Saline Jackson Pettis Sullivan Zapata Sevier Campbell Grant Harrison Juneau IA OK FL NC NC MS OR IA IN TX NC NM GA SC VT AR HI OK IL NC GA MO GA NY AK MI KS AL MO NY TX TN WY IN TX WI 37 37 37 38 38 39 39 39 39 40 40 80 40 41 41 41 125 42 42 128 43 43 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 45 45 45 45 45 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 27.03 27.03 27.03 26.32 26.32 25.64 25.64 25.64 25.64 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 24.39 24.39 24.39 24.00 23.81 23.81 23.44 23.26 23.26 22.73 22.73 22.73 22.73 22.73 22.73 22.73 22.73 22.73 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 2.63 1.41 1.34 1.96 1.36 2.70 1.51 2.34 2.36 2.86 2.22 3.05 3.68 2.14 1.62 1.30 4.47 2.67 4.01 2.24 1.98 2.34 1.81 2.03 3.20 1.00 1.80 1.88 2.37 1.29 7.13 1.11 2.17 1.43 1.52 3.75 502 Kingsville Police Department Natchitoches Parish Sheriff's Office Eureka Police Department Lincoln Parish Sheriff's Office Mason City Police Department New Milford Police Department Chillicothe Police Department Lee County Sheriff's Office Plattsburgh Police Department Greenville Police Department Dodge City Police Department Page County Sheriff's Office Stanly County Sheriff's Office Durango Police Department Kerrville Police Department Shawnee Police Department Galesburg Police Dept Paris Police Department Sevierville Police Department Elko County Sheriff's Office Wilson Police Department Campbell County Sheriff's Office Opelousas Police Department Allegan County Sheriff's Office Virginia Marine Resources Commission Jackson County Sheriff's Office Columbus Police Department Gallup Police Department Monroe County Sheriff's Office Twin Falls Police Department Del Rio Police Department Frankfort Police Department Lincoln County Sheriff's Office Richmond Police Department Hendry County Sheriff's Office Auburn Police Department Kleberg Natchitoches Humboldt Lincoln Cerro Gordo Litchfield Ross Lee Clinton Washington Ford Page Stanly La Plata Kerr Pottawatomie Knox Lamar Sevier Elko Wilson Campbell St. Landry Allegan Newport News City Jackson Lowndes McKinley Monroe Twin Falls Val Verde Franklin Lincoln Madison Hendry Cayuga TX LA CA LA IA CT OH NC NY MS KS VA NC CO TX OK IL TX TN NV NC WY LA MI VA FL MS NM FL ID TX KY OR KY FL NY 45 45 46 46 46 46 47 47 47 96 49 49 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 57 114 58 58 59 60 61 62 62 189 64 65 65 65 65 67 70 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 22.22 22.22 21.74 21.74 21.74 21.74 21.28 21.28 21.28 20.83 20.41 20.41 20.41 20.00 19.61 19.23 18.87 18.52 18.18 17.54 17.54 17.24 17.24 16.95 16.67 16.39 16.13 16.13 15.87 15.63 15.38 15.38 15.38 15.38 14.93 14.29 3.12 2.53 0.74 2.14 2.26 0.53 1.28 1.73 1.22 3.91 2.95 4.16 1.65 1.95 2.02 1.44 1.89 2.01 1.11 2.05 2.46 2.17 1.20 0.90 3.02 2.01 1.67 1.40 4.10 1.29 2.05 2.03 2.17 1.21 2.55 1.25 503 Shelby Police Department Alamogordo Department of Public Safety Lumberton Police Department Stillwater Police Department Concord Police Department Cullman County Sheri