respond to each persons thread separately. Elizabetas thread : After reading the lecture notes: Difficult Decision-Making, I believe that the decision to search the house is correct. I believe that the officer should have done a very thorough job, and not only for ease of mind, especially since she said that the basement door was left unlocked, especially if she doesn't remember doing it. "We performed a very poor search to limit the time we spent easing her mind as we did not have any reason to believe this fugitive would have entered a stranger's home to evade capture" (Difficult Decision Making). Better safe than sorry, is always the situation. Because of the job that the officers did, she and her two kids' lives could have been in danger, knowing that the fugitive was heavily armed. However, what is done is done, and they should learn from this mistake. I think that as humans, we all have our moments, where we do things that we are not proud of. I know I have, multiple times. however, I cannot dwell on it, I learn from it and move on. But being that being in Law Enforcement is a very dangerous, and important thing we need to be on our toes the whole time, and we need to make sure and maybe think about the decision we make twice, because being a cop, is more than just a job. We are there to rescue people unless otherwise forced to. We as police officers, need to have that connection with the community, and being that there is high technology, and everything is being recorded nowadays, not only we will ruin the relationship between Law Enforcement and that one victim, but any other person who is watching and/or recording. I believe that as a leader, we should always set limits to bad behavior. But when will this behavior become problematic? As said previously, people make mistakes. Some learn from them, some do not. In this situation, I would argue that if a person did something against the law, or department policy for the first time, we need to let them know and tell them, that this behavior is unacceptable. If they repeat it, then it should be sent to the higher-ups for them to handle. however, if this person has done the same thing multiple times, it is very detrimental, that we make sure that our higher-ups know immediately. If nothing happens, and they get a slap on the wrist, it is not up to us, and we just need to report it whenever it happens. In the passage given to us at the begging of this discussion, verse 4 says that "you look not only to his interests, but also to the interests of others." By doing this not only we are looking into the interest of people who could get hurt by this behavior, but we are holding these officers reliable. As mentioned in previous discussions to be a leader, you have to be a servant, just like Jesus was. And this is because even as leaders we need to be humble because we are not where we are or who we are because of our doings, but because of God's. As mentioned in Philippians Jesus emptied himself, in the form of a servant. And that is what we need to do. References Bible Gateway. (n.d.). Bible Gateway passage: Philippians 2:4 - English standard version. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Philippians+2%3A3+%E2%80%93+8&version=ESVLinks to an external site. Zuidema, B. (2022). Difficult Decision-Making [DOCX]. Professor Brandon Zuidema. Patti's thread In the scenario presented, the investigator is faced with a difficult decision regarding how far they are willing to go to obtain crucial information from a suspect in order to locate a missing child. As outlined in Pollock's (2019) textbook, ethical dilemmas in criminal justice often involve balancing the pursuit of justice with adherence to legal and ethical standards. In this case, the investigator is confronted with the dilemma of whether or not to search the suspect's residence for the abducted child without a warrant. The investigator may feel a sense of urgency and desperation to locate the missing child, which could potentially lead them to take actions that are ethically questionable or even illegal in order to obtain the necessary information. However, it is important to remember that as law enforcement officials, they are bound by laws and regulations that protect the rights of individuals, including suspects. In this situation, it is crucial for the investigator to consider the potential consequences of their actions. Acting without a warrant could not only jeopardize the legality of any evidence obtained during the search but could also undermine the credibility of the investigation and potentially lead to the suspect walking free on a technicality. While the investigator's intentions may be noble, they must adhere to the rule of law in order to ensure that justice is served correctly. To address the dilemma presented in this scenario, it is important for the investigator to explore alternative methods of obtaining information from the suspect within the boundaries of the law. This could involve seeking legal advice, obtaining a warrant, or employing other investigative techniques that respect the suspect's rights while also striving to locate the missing child. In terms of personal conduct, it is important for law enforcement officials to conduct themselves as if they are on video at all times, as suggested in the lecture notes. This serves as a reminder to uphold ethical standards and behave in a manner that is consistent with the principles of justice and fairness. Setting limits on tolerable behavior is essential in maintaining the integrity and trustworthiness of law enforcement professionals, as it establishes clear boundaries that must not be crossed in the pursuit of justice. Philippians 2:3-8 says, Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves. Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others. Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. The leadership lesson outlined in Philippians 2:3-8 emphasizes the importance of humility, selflessness, and service in effective leadership. By prioritizing the needs of others above their own, leaders can inspire trust, loyalty, and respect from those they lead. This lesson encourages leaders to lead by example, demonstrating integrity, compassion, and a willingness to serve others for the greater good. In conclusion, the investigator in the scenario must carefully consider the ethical implications of their actions and strive to uphold legal and moral standards in the pursuit of justice. By maintaining a commitment to integrity, humility, and service, law enforcement officials can navigate ethical dilemmas with clarity and purpose, ultimately serving the interests of justice and the community. References: Pollock, J. M. (2017). Ethical Dilemmas and Decisions in Criminal Justice (10th ed.). Cengage. http://books.google.ie/books?id=oCIKswEACAAJ&dq=9781337558495&hl=&cd=2&source=gbs_api Links to an external site. King James Bible Online