Paradox of Private Policing

• NCJ Number: 208928
• Journal: Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume: 95 Issue: 1 Dated: Fall 2004 Pages: 49-132
• Author(s): Elizabeth E. Joh
• Date Published: 2004
• Length: 84 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis; Issue Overview
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

Drawing on materials from ethnographic observation, sociology, and law, this paper argues that private police engage in much of the policing work done by their public counterparts.

Abstract

In order to define more precisely the term "private policing," part I of this paper presents a definition and the socio-legal context for the other sections of the paper. "Private policing" is defined as "lawful forms of organized, for-profit personnel services whose primary objectives include the control of crime, the protection of property and life, and the maintenance of order." Relying primarily on a case study, part II focuses on three features of the current state of private policing. First, the advocacy of private-public partnerships creates incentives for broadening operations that involve the two policing groups. Second, significant differences between "private" and "public" contexts in private police organizations are difficult to distinguish. Finally, private policing has become much more than the passive protection of private property, as private police agencies have become sophisticated organizations that are not subject to public direction or aid. Part III examines the law that regulates private policing, with attention to the rigid legal distinction between public and private. In part IV the paper concludes with the argument that the evolutionary direction of private policing is forcing a re-examination of conventional views on police and the law. Whereas the public police have a long history of legal precedents that govern their procedures and actions, private police actions are governed by an amalgam of laws from property, tort, and contract law. This not only raises the issue of double standards for how citizens are policed by private and public police, but also how accountability is to be measured when public and private police act in partnership. 369 notes