Free Essay on Role of the Police in Combating Organized Crime and Methods Used

Police officers are tasked with maintaining law and order in society, which includes combatting organized crime. Organized crimes comprise of centralized organizations set up to engage in illegal activities. The groups may operate locally or internationally, engaging in activities such as kidnapping, robbery, drug trafficking, and fraud. The police are involved in detecting, investigating, and arresting members of such groups. In this case, law enforcement officers justify possible illegal activities within their jurisdiction and initiate a case report (Gamba, Immordino, & Piccolo, 2018). The case report is reviewed by investigative judges or prosecutors for sufficiency. After the cases have been approved, police investigate the matter to collect adequate evidence to prosecute the suspects.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Methods Used to Combat Organized Crime

The police utilize a myriad of strategies and techniques to control organized crimes in the country. Given that organized crime is an international concern, police often require to collaborate with other security agencies to find any evidence to facilitate the prosecution of the individuals. In the united states, the Attorney General’s Organized Crime Council (AGOCC) collaborates with the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) to track and apprehend key members of the gang (Albanese, 2009). Noticeably, given that the gangs have a network of criminals, money laundering schemes, and informers within the police departments, which make them stay ahead of investigators, police utilize clandestine methods to gather their evidence for prosecution. The methods may include intercepting illegal activities by use of force, gathering evidence through undercover officers, and conducting money trails. Firstly, undercover investigations are the most effective means to collect evidence and facilitate the arrest of criminals (Gamba et al., 2018). In this case, officers, with hidden profiles get involved directly with the criminal gangs to learn their moves and vital information concerning how the organizations are run. Notably, an undercover agent identifies the key suspects and improvises techniques to be part of the group and gain their trust. The agents work for the gang or engage them in illicit business to collect useful evidence and information that aid the prosecution (Albanese, 2009). For example, one can pretend to buy cocaine to lure the suspect into selling it to him, and in the process, the individual is arrested.

Secondly, organized crime groups are difficult to control since they are heavily funded. Their resources are from money laundering in which they clean their illegal money. For example, drug money is used to open retail shops of other legal businesses. The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act allows the FBI to assist local enforcement agencies to conduct trials for laundered money recover it, and facilitate forfeiture (“RICO charges,” 2020). In this case, the FBI uses the Enterprise Theory of Investigation to identify businesses and financial assets of criminal organizations forfeiture (Gamba et al., 2018). The practice cripples organized groups since they lack the resources to finance their criminal activities.

After law enforcement has gathered enough evidence or has identified the key suspects (often gang leaders whose identity is usually concealed from other gang members) they move in to arrest the individuals at the right time. The FBI may conduct a surprise ambush and catch the gang unaware (Albanese, 2009). Alternatively, the undercover agent may lure the suspects to a specific location to ease his or her arrest. Later, the Attorney General’s office prosecutes the persons.

I believe the methods, especially the undercover investigations and money trailing, are effective in controlling organized crimes. Through undercover operations, law enforcement can identify the real identities of crime lords and their networks to stay ahead in crime control. Nevertheless, given that undercover officers are human, they might be tempted to join the gangs for financial gains or bargain the security of their families if they are identified or perceive them to be in danger. In this case, the compromised officers may cause law enforcement efforts to be futile. Therefore, contingencies such as deploying several agents who do not know each other in the same case may be effective in ensuring the law enforcement is not compromised.

How Organized Crime Investigation Can Encroach on the Personal Freedoms of U.S. Citizens

Organized crime investigations can encroach of personal freedoms of the US citizens in several ways. The complexity of organized crime investigations in a free society creates legal challenges especially on suspect treatment and the use of private information. Just as other American citizens, suspects have their rights and freedoms, which are often infringed by law enforcement officers in their pursuit of evidence to facilitate prosecutions (Gamba et al., 2018). Additionally, intelligence work creates a high risk of violating the rights of innocent citizens due to frequent targeting people or entities that appear to be legitimate since they might be owned by criminals.

Firstly, the investigations may infringe on individuals' rights to privacy. Noticeably, a lot of information is collected during the investigations concerning the suspects, which risk being used for unrelated activities. For instance, the central intelligence agency (CIA) can request a person’s information from the FBI to aid in another related investigation (Gamba et al., 2018). Nevertheless, the US and other countries have had bad experiences when investigative agencies can retrieve investigative files for use on unrelated activities. For example, investigators may sell suspects critical data leading to business damage or murder. Notably, the Privacy Act is often in jeopardy is investigative agencies decide to maintain information not necessary for the investigation (Campbell, 2017). The law prohibits the agencies from documenting how an individual exercises any of the freedoms and rights provided by the First Amendment of the US Constitution unless they are authorized (Campbell, 2017). However, through a utilitarian worldview, an investigator may collect a document of the prohibited information for the good of society, infringing the right to privacy, which is also against the Freedom of Information Act (Campbell, 2017).

Secondly, the investigations may lead to illegal detentions, damage to an individual’s reputation, or torture, which are against the provisions of the First Amendment. However, due to pressure to apprehend the criminals and close the cases, law enforcement agents may hold an individual illegally to force them to give information. In such cases, the officers may use lethal force, torture, or intimidation to compel a suspect to give certain information. The practices may lead to the illegal detention of a suspect which, violates the right to a fair trial (Campbell, 2017).

Thirdly, while in pursuit of illegal businesses or assets, federal agents often infringe privacy rules by breaking into a suspect's house without a warrant. The practice infringes on the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution, which prohibits unnecessary and unauthorized searches and seizures on a person’s property (Gamba et al., 2018). In this case, law enforcement is supposed to acquire a warrant from the court to facilitate the search and seizure of a suspect’s property. The law gives citizens the right to be secure in their premises or papers and stipulates that warrants of arrests, searches, or seizures should be given by the court after the presentation of justification or probable cause (Campbell, 2017).

If I was in charge of such an investigation, I would ensure that my team follows the criminal procedures and the rule of law to avoid infringing on civil liberties and rights. I would ensure that all suspects are handled humanly and their right to life and privacy is upheld. Additionally, I would seek authorization from the court concerning warrants of arrests, searches, or sharing of individuals' information. The practice would help me to maintain sanity in organized crime investigations and protect the constitutional rights of every citizen regardless of their crimes.

Effective Methods of Combating Organized Crime

I believe that organized crime can be controlled successfully in a given jurisdiction albeit not completely due to the complexities of the underworld organizations. The complexity of OC makes it challenging for any strategy to yield maximum benefits as the investigation process may come under public criticism, corruption, intimidation, lack of finances, or create new opportunities for other OC gangs (Albanese, 2009). For instance, taking out one OC group may create an opportunity for other rival gangs to control the territory. Therefore, controlling OC cannot be a one-time job; instead, it is a continuous process aimed at maintaining the societal fabrics and weeding out the misfits. Noticeably, strategies such as trailing money laundering and prosecuting individuals involved in OC are effective techniques to control crimes.

The most effective strategy in combatting organized crime is disrupting their operation networks and crippling their financial streams. Organized crimes generate huge profits in excess of billions annually in the United States. However, the criminals realize that the risk of holding such amounts of money in cash are high and may lead to prosecution or asset seizure. As a result, many launder their money into the American financial system by converting it to legitimate businesses. Offenders use legal businesses as dummy income streams that allow them to clean the proceeds of crime. Businesses with high-income streams such as restaurants, casinos, and bars are mostly preferred since they confer an image of respect for the owners. Additionally, money laundering can be done at the bank through the issuance of money orders and cashier checks in exchange for cash (Gamba et al., 2018). Notably, with money trails and prosecution of money launders, law enforcement can cripple OC operations, which are highly dependent on the cash. The most effective method of detecting money laundering schemes is through analysis of currency transactions. In this case, the law requires financial institutions to record and report any instances of suspicious or large transactions; often in excess of $10, 000. The United States Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network is responsible (FinCen) supplements the FBI efforts to combat OC internationally by providing intelligence to support cases (Gamba et al., 2018). When federal or local investigative bodies identify assets or businesses linked with organized crime, they prosecute the owner and forfeit the property. In this case, the groups are not only exposed but also their financial network is disrupted, crippling their operations.

Secondly, prosecution of any persons associated with racketeering or an organized crime under the RICO Act is also effective in combating OC. According to the RICO act, it is a crime to belong to a group that is expressing any racketeering pattern—two or more racketeering offenses within 10 years ("RICO charges,” 2020). Violating the law may lead to over 20 years’ imprisonment, a fine of up to $25, 000, or both. The AGOCC and the FBI target individuals of interests such as gang kingpins and open prosecution charges against them.