ENT OF M JU U.S. Department of Justice T S R T A I P C E E D

B

O J C S Office of Justice Programs F A V M F O I N A C I J S R E BJ G O OJJ DP O F PR National Institute of Justice JUSTICE National Institute of Justice R e s e a r c h i n A c t i o n Jeremy Travis, Director October 1995

Highlights Victim and Witness Intimidation: Prosecutors in some jurisdictions re- port an increase in victim and wit- New Developments and Emerging Responses ness intimidation: some prosecutors have estimated intimidation as a by Kerry Murphy Healey factor in 75 to 100 percent of the violent crimes committed in some Intimidation of victims and witnesses witnesses by gangs or drug-selling groups gang-dominated neighborhoods. This Research in Action summarizes undermines the functioning of the justice promotes the communitywide perception recent developments in gang- and system by denying critical to that any cooperation with the criminal jus- drug-related intimidation of victims police and prosecutors. This long-stand- tice system is dangerous. and witnesses, current responses to ing problem also erodes confidence in the problem by police and prosecu- the government’s ability to protect citi- This Research in Action is based on struc- tors, and emerging models and zens. Victim and witness intimidation tured interviews with 32 criminal justice strategies for its prevention and has usually been associated with orga- professionals from 20 urban jurisdictions, suppression. nized crime and domestic violence including prosecutors; victim services di- cases. But this form of intimidation is rectors; Federal, State, and local law en- The nature of intimidation 1 developing new characteristics as its oc- forcement officers; judges; and scholars. ● Gang- and drug-related intimida- currence increases in urban drug- and Also included are the insights offered by a tion may be case-specific or gang-related violent crime. working group of 20 criminal justice pro- communitywide. The wholesale in- fessionals, who met in September 1994 timidation of neighborhoods can be Intimidation can be characterized as: to exchange information on emerging as harmful to witness cooperation responses to the problem of victim and ● as an explicit threat made against Case-specific—threats or violence in- witness intimidation. The preliminary an individual. Each case-specific act tended to dissuade a victim or witness findings of this National Institute of of violence against victims or witnesses from testifying in a specific case. Justice-sponsored project indicate many promotes the communitywide percep- recent developments in the nature of tion that any cooperation with the ● Communitywide—acts by gangs or criminal justice system is dangerous. drug-selling groups intended to foster a witness and victim intimidation and a wide general atmosphere of fear and noncoop- range of existing and emerging strategies ● Factors that contribute to the eration within a neighborhood or com- to address the problem. reluctance of witnesses to step munity. forward include fear, strong com- Characteristics of victim and wit- munity ties, or a deepseated distrust The wholesale intimidation of neighbor- of law enforcement. Community ness intimidation hoods by gangs or drug-selling groups members may also consider gang can be as harmful to witness cooperation Most interview respondents estimated that and drug crimes as outside the scope more victims were murdered and otherwise of their concern or responsibility. as an explicit threat against an indi- vidual. Communitywide and case-spe- intimidated in domestic violence cases in ● Factors that increase the likeli- cific intimidation may operate separately their jurisdictions each year than in gang or in tandem. However, each case-spe- or drug crime-related intimidation at- cific act of violence against victims or tempts. Respondents and working group continued . . . R e s e a r c h i n A c t i o n

Highlights members agreed that intimidation in tors noted that only unsuccessful intimi- dation ever came to the atten- continued . . . domestic violence cases is different in nature from gang-related intimidation tion of police or prosecutors.5 Today, because of the close relationship between prosecutors report that extremely violent hood of intimidation include the vio- domestic partners and the near univer- intimidation attempts—which are almost lent nature of the initial crime, a pre- sality of intimidation in domestic violence always successful—are coming to their vious personal connection to the cases. However, respondents agreed attention with increasing frequency. defendant, geographic proximity to the defendant, and membership in a that intimidation associated with gang- These extremely violent intimidation at- culturally vulnerable group. and drug-related violent crime was es- tempts are often gang- and drug-related. calating, while intimidation linked to Police and prosecutor approaches domestic violence was continuing at a A recent national assessment of gang steady rate. prosecution sponsored by NIJ provides ● Traditional approaches to the important new data supporting anecdotal problem of victim and witness intimi- The extent of the problem. A number estimates of the prevalence of victim and dation include warnings to the de- witness intimidation offered by police fendant concerning obstruction of of prosecutors linked the increase in vio- 6 justice laws, high bail, aggressive lent victim and witness intimidation to administrators and prosecutors. Accord- prosecution of reported intimidation the advent of gang-controlled crack sales ing to this assessment, 51 percent of attempts, and, in extreme cases, in the mid- to late-1980’s. As crack sales prosecutors in large jurisdictions and 43 threatened individuals’ entry in the grew, some urban prosecutors noted an up- percent in small jurisdictions said that Federal witness security program. turn in gang- and drug-related homicides.2 the intimidation of victims and witnesses was a major problem, while an additional ● Several prosecutors estimated that today Some innovative interventions to 30 percent of prosecutors in large gang- and drug-related intimidation victim and witness intimidation is sus- jurisdictions and 25 percent in small include emergency relocation and pected in up to 75-100 percent of the support for threatened witnesses, violent crimes committed in some gang- jurisdictions labeled intimidation a mod- innovative courtroom security mea- dominated neighborhoods.3 erate problem. sures, interagency cooperation to move threatened witnesses who re- The 1992 National Crime Victimization Causes of individuals’ reluctance to be side in public housing to new areas, Survey suggests that in neighborhoods witnesses. Examples of mass intimida- secure segregation of intimidated vic- not plagued by gangs and drug sales, tion given by police and prosecutors (see tims and witnesses in correctional fa- fear and intimidation play a much less “No One Is Willing to Testify”) suggest cilities, and community outreach and significant part in the failure to cooper- that fear is only one factor contributing collaboration among criminal justice, ate with police and prosecutors.4 The to the reluctance of witnesses to step for- social service, and community discrepancy between the perception of ward; strong community ties and a deep- groups. urban police and prosecutors and the seated distrust of law enforcement may ● Emerging strategies also empha- findings of the National Crime Victim- also be strong deterrents to cooperation. size intimidation prevention and con- ization Survey is important: victim and The communities in which many of these trol through community outreach witness intimidation is endemic in neigh- gangs operate are often worlds unto based on community policing and borhoods infested with gang activity and themselves—places where people live, prosecution approaches and en- drug sales and virtually invisible to attend school, and work, all within a ra- hanced communication among law people outside those neighborhoods. dius of only a few blocks—from which enforcement, prosecutors, and the The majority of citizens outside gang- they rarely venture out. More impor- judiciary. dominated neighborhoods learn about tantly, victims and witnesses usually know the gang members and defendants Target audience: Prosecutors; law victim and witness intimidation only enforcement officials; criminal justice through the media. against whom they are asked to testify; researchers in the fields of prosecu- typically, victims and witnesses are the tion, community policing, and crimi- Victim and witness intimidation resists children of the gang member’s friends or nal gangs; judges; and providers of quantitative analysis, but some data are relatives, members of the same church, victim services. emerging that give a clearer picture of classmates, or neighbors. Furthermore, the problem. A decade ago, commenta- the community may regard many of the

2 R e s e a r c h i n A c t i o n

crimes for which witnesses are sought from cooperating. Communitywide in- ● A previous personal connection to as private business matters among timidation was the most frustrating type the defendant. gang members or drug dealers, not of intimidation for prosecutors and po- crimes against the community. lice because, even if no actionable ● Geographic proximity to the defendant. threat is ever made, witnesses and vic- ● Cultural vulnerability—that is, Both case-specific and communitywide tims are still deterred from testifying. membership in an easily victimized fear of retaliation are fed by the growth Prosecutors and police emphasize that group, such as the elderly, children, of powerful prison gangs whose mem- the general atmosphere of intimidation or recent or illegal immigrants. bers return quickly to the community and violence common to drug- and because of brief sentences or are able gang-dominated neighborhoods—in- Residents of gang-dominated neigh- from behind bars to arrange for friends cluding frequent personal exposure to borhoods are likely to fall into more or family members to threaten any drive-by shootings, armed , than one of these categories, greatly potential witnesses. Due to the uninter- and drug sales—is itself sufficiently in- increasing their exposure to rupted connections between incarcer- timidating to dissuade many witnesses intimidation. ated and neighborhood gang members, from testifying. victims and witnesses no longer feel Most nonviolent crimes (such as drug that imprisonment of the defendant Targets of victim and witness sales or use, burglaries, or white collar pending trial or after conviction can intimidation. No typical victim of crimes) rarely involve victim and ensure their safety in the community. intimidation exists, but interview witness intimidation. By contrast, The knowledge that gangs have easy respondents and working group victims and witnesses in violent crime access to members of the community participants pointed to four factors cases (such as rape, murder, and gang deters many witnesses at once. Pros- that increase the chance that a victim assaults), where more severe penalties ecutors noted that the mere fact that a or witness will be intimidated: may be imposed, are at higher risk of crime is gang- related is often suffi- experiencing intimidation. ● cient to prevent an entire neighborhood The violent nature of the initial crime. In general, victims and witnesses who have no previous relationship and share no community ties with the No One Is Willing to Testify be dead” in the time it would take the police defendant or suspect are better insu- to respond. lated from intimidation. Victims and rosecutors and homicide investiga- witnesses who have been—and stay— P ● Such bold attempts at communitywide in- relocated and are able to keep their tors are now faced with crimes in which timidation are not limited to the largest juris- there are numerous known witnesses— home and work addresses secret are dictions. A similar drug-related takeover of a and in many cases known perpetrators— also generally immune to intimidation. public housing complex was reported by but no one is willing to testify. Prosecutors and police considered it housing police in a jurisdiction with a popu- extremely rare for a defendant or asso- ● lation of only 600,000. A drug-related shooting occurs at a soft- ciate to leave his or her own commu- ball game; three players are killed in full Law enforcement officers in the District of nity or socioeconomic milieu to view of the spectators, but no cooperative Columbia estimated that for each of the ap- witnesses can be found. intimidate a victim or witness in proximately 500 homicides reported in another jurisdiction. ● Drug-selling gangs regularly comman- 1993, there were 4 to 5 intended victims deer public housing buildings or com- who were shot, but survived, and another Given these characteristics of victim plexes—removing legitimate tenants from 15 to 25 intended victims who were shot at, and witness intimidation, prosecutors their apartments, threatening or bribing but not hit.7 If one considers that each of who handle primarily nonviolent or management, and terrorizing the elderly. these victims and intended victims is linked white collar crimes may be largely un- According to a homicide detective in the to families and neighbors, it is possible to en- affected by victim and witness intimi- San Francisco Bay area, the victimized ten- vision how entire communities can be si- lenced quickly by gang intimidation. dation, even in jurisdictions in which ants do not resist or report the takeovers, intimidation is rampant in isolated because gang members tell them “you can neighborhoods. But prosecutors who

3 R e s e a r c h i n A c t i o n specialize in gangs, homicide, violent tors and police in eight urban jurisdic- Other forms of intimidation. Less felonies, domestic violence, and child tions reported that violent acts of in- common forms of intimidation that often confront issues related to timidation—including homicides, prosecutors and police reported include victim and witness intimidation on a drive-by shootings, knee-cappings, economic threats (in domestic violence daily basis. and beatings—occur on a daily or or fraud cases) and threats concerning weekly basis. the custody of children, deportation, Types of victim and witness and the withholding of drugs from an Indirect intimidation. A third com- intimidation addicted victim or witness or from ad- mon form of intimidation, reported in dicted members of the person’s family. Intimidation of an individual or a com- almost every jurisdiction, involved in- direct intimidation, such as gang mem- munity may involve many of the same Primary actors in victim and tactics, including physical violence, bers parked outside the victim’s or witness intimidation explicit or implicit threats of physical witness’s house, nuisance phone calls, violence, property damage, and court- or vague verbal warnings by the defen- Interviews with prosecutors, police of- room intimidation. Attempts by gangs dant or his or her associates. ficers, and working group members or drug dealers to promote community- pointed to the types of individuals who wide noncooperation may include the Property damage. Only slightly less most commonly intimidate victims and execution, assault, or public humiliation common than the three types of intimi- witnesses: the defendant, his or her of victims or witnesses (or their families) dation described above was intimida- family, gang members (where the suspected of cooperation, and random tion involving the destruction of crime is gang-related), and non-gang public acts of extreme brutality intended property. Property destruction can in- friends and associates of the to terrify potential witnesses. volve drive-by shootings into a victim’s defendant. or witness’s house, fire bombing of Explicit threats of physical violence. cars, burning houses, or hurling bricks Other types of individuals reported to Prosecutors and police reported a high through the window of a car or home. be involved in intimidation included incidence of threatened physical vio- neighbors who condone or profit from lence either against victims or wit- Courtroom intimidation. Another the illegal activity of the defendant nesses or their families. These common form of intimidation involved (such as drug sales), inmates in the respondents stated that threats of vio- threatening looks or gestures directed same correctional facility as an incar- lence were much more common than by the defendant to the witness in the cerated victim or witness, and, infre- actual violence but were often just as courtroom during the preliminary quently, defense attorneys hired by effective in deterring cooperation be- hearing or trial. Court-packing by gang members. cause, in gang- and drug-dominated members of a gang can be a particu- communities, such threats are credible. larly effective form of intimidation. Some prosecutors expressed concerns Prosecutors said that threats against Gang members demonstrate solidarity about witness information that was the victim’s or witness’s mother, chil- with the defendant—and make clear given to defendants, including, in dren, wife, or partner were particularly their readiness and ability to harm the some instances, confidential court pa- effective forms of intimidation. witness—by wearing black (symboliz- pers. In many jurisdictions, prisoners ing death) or using threatening hand have unmonitored access to phones, Physical violence. While some inci- signals. Because the judge and pros- and their correspondence is not dents of physical violence were reported ecutors may not understand the mean- screened, making it easy for even in- by respondents in all 20 jurisdictions, ing of the gestures or other nonverbal carcerated defendants or offenders to physical violence was reported to be threats, they may overlook these explicit arrange intimidation attempts using much more common in some jurisdic- attempts to intimidate the witness. In improperly obtained information. Some tions than others. In addition, estimates other cases, the judge is aware of what gangs are said to hire attorneys to rep- of the frequency of physical violence the gang members are doing but feels resent incarcerated witnesses who may varied even within the same jurisdic- that ejecting the individuals from the be in custody as a result of the crime tion, depending on the responsibilities courtroom would violate the defendants’ in question or on another unrelated of the individual interviewed. Prosecu- constitutional right to a public trial. charge. The gangs hire these lawyers

4 R e s e a r c h i n A c t i o n without the witness’s knowledge or enables them to avoid conviction and in an effort to control the incarceration (see “Timing of Intimi- Timing of Intimidation witness’s testimony. dation”), intimidation attempts in- crease and become more violent. P rosecutors and police agreed that, in There was no consensus among the in- However, victim and witness intimida- general, the most dangerous time for a vic- dividuals interviewed about which of tion does not seem to hamper success- tim or witness is between arrest and trial. the four principal types of intimidators ful prosecution if a reluctant but The long trial delays experienced in most ju- risdictions allow ample opportunity for in- was most frequently involved in victim cooperative witness can be offered se- and witness intimidation. They did timidation. The second most dangerous curity by prosecutors, police, or victim period for victims and witnesses is during the agree that, in smaller jurisdictions and services workers. Nevertheless, inter- domestic violence cases, the intimida- trial itself. Very few intimidation attempts are view respondents were able to identify made at the scene of the crime (although tor was most likely to be the defen- very few comprehensive witness secu- violent crime is in itself intimidating) or at the dant. However, if victim and witness rity programs; most jurisdictions that time of arrest. However, in cases involving intimidation is known to be aggres- confront the problem have only ad hoc communitywide intimidation, intimidation sively prosecuted in a given jurisdic- arrangements to provide security for begins the moment the victim or witness is tion, then the primary actors often victims and witnesses threatened by aware that the crime is gang- or drug-related. become the gang, family, or friends of gangs and drug sellers. As a result, the defendant. both prosecutors and police voiced more economical approaches to local In general, defendants having a frustration that a growing number of witness security. sophisticated understanding of the serious cases, including shootings and homicides, are not being presented for criminal justice system are much less A traditional approach to the intimida- willing to engage in any direct intimi- prosecution at all due to widespread tion experienced by victims of domestic dation attempts. This is particularly gang- and drug-related intimidation. violence is the use of civil restraining true where the defendant is in custody Traditional approaches to the problem orders and the provision of limited prior to trial. One prosecutor in Wash- of victim and witness intimidation counselling and other services. How- ington, D.C. reported success in dis- include: ever, only three jurisdictions relied covering victim and witness intimidation ● Warnings by the prosecutor and the solely on these types of interventions by executing search warrants in prison defense counsel to the defendant con- to combat gang- and drug-related victim when defendants were arranging an in- cerning laws. and witness intimidation. The other 17 timidation scheme through written cor- jurisdictions made at least some use of respondence with family or gang ● High bail. nontraditional responses discussed in members on the outside. the section “Innovative approaches,” ● Aggressive prosecution of reported page 6. In gang cases, intimidation is rarely intimidation attempts. carried out by the defendant himself; ● other gang members take on this Entry of threatened individuals in The role of victim services responsibility. Gangs may be ruthless the Federal witness security program— programs typically in extreme cases involving in their self-protection: sometimes the Almost all jurisdictions provided some (see “Federal Efforts incarcerated gang member himself support services for victims and wit- to Combat Intimidation”). may be seen as a potential threat to the nesses through the prosecutor’s office gang and targeted for intimidation or The strict requirements for entry to the or another local government agency. execution. Federal witness security program, the Most of these programs were founded high cost of providing lifelong services in the 1970’s and 1980’s in response Traditional police and to witnesses and their families, and the to increased concern for victims’ prosecutor strategies personal sacrifices involved in partici- rights, the Federal Victim and Witness Protection Act of 1982, American Bar Prosecutors observed that when pating in the program have led a num- Association recommendations regard- offenders discover that intimidation ber of prosecutors and police to seek shorter-term, less demanding, and ing victim services, and the Federal

5 R e s e a r c h i n A c t i o n

logical base for the extension of services constantly in touch with her other to victims of gang-related intimidation. clients. Federal Efforts to As a result, prosecutors often turn to Combat Intimidation victim services staff for assistance. More typical, however, were the con- I n the late 1960’s, the U.S. Depart- However, few programs are currently cerns expressed by overworked advo- ment of Justice recognized that victim and organized or funded to coordinate the cates in one large urban jurisdiction witness intimidation had become a serious temporary relocation, financial support, that many more intimidated victims impediment to obtaining testimony in orga- job and welfare services, and community and witnesses were in need of protec- 8 nized crime cases. In response, Congress outreach programs needed by these tion than could be helped and that enacted the Organized Crime Control Act of victims and witnesses. The result is limited funding prevented any out- 1970, laying the basis for the Federal witness reach efforts to reassure intimidated security program that operates today under that most victim services programs lack the resources to address victim communities. In particular, the advo- the Witness Security Reform Act of 1984. In cates cited a need for outreach and 1982, the Victim and Witness Protection Act and witness intimidation, especially intimidation protection for the Asian expanded Federal laws regarding witness se- communitywide intimidation. curity and victim services by establishing sig- community, the elderly, and illegal nificant penalties for witness tampering, In a majority of jurisdictions, victim immigrants. intimidation, and harassment; providing for services programs provide assistance civil restraining orders; authorizing restitution to victims of domestic violence, rape, Innovative approaches for crime victims; and outlining Federal and violent crime, and, to a lesser guidelines for the fair treatment of victims degree, to survivors of homicides. It is In the absence of programs or proto- and witnesses.9 in relation to serving the victims of cols to guide the protection of victims and witnesses from gang-related The Federal Witness Security Program cur- violent crime and homicide survivors that victim services agencies have intimidation, prosecutors and law rently provides comprehensive protective ser- enforcement have taken five principal vices—including new identities, relocation, become exposed to the increasing ad hoc steps to provide protection in employment assistance, and protective cus- problem of gang and drug crime- tody (for incarcerated witnesses)—to wit- related intimidation. violent crime and gang-related cases: nesses in Federal cases involving organized ● Emergency relocation and support. crime, racketeering, drug trafficking, and A few programs have begun using other serious felonies, as well as to some VOCA funds, State victim aid funds, ● Longer-term relocation, sometimes State-level witnesses in similar types of cases. private grant monies, and additional involving interagency cooperation to funding from local government sources move threatened witnesses or victims to piece together services to assist Victims of Crime Act of 1984 (VOCA). in public housing to new areas. prosecutors in retaining intimidated These initiatives, taken together, ● Pretrial and courtroom security prompted a number of States to adopt witnesses and combat communitywide victims’ “Bill of Rights” legislation, intimidation (see “Family Bereavement measures. Center”). which, in many States, mandated the ● Protective custody for victims and provision of specific services to victims Other programs provide additional witnesses who are in prison. and, in some cases, provided for limited services to gang-intimidated victims ● compensation for medical expenses and witnesses without additional fund- Community outreach. and other damages resulting from the ing. In such cases little institutional crime.10 The degree of protection and Emergency relocation and support may exist for these programs’ support. While funding for housing services these programs offer to victims work, and the existence of the services and witnesses varies widely from State and food for intimidated victims and may depend on one person’s continued witnesses is scarce, most prosecutors to State, and even among prosecutor involvement. For example, one victim offices within the same State. have access to some money for emer- services director reported spending gency and longer-term relocation, if Currently, victim services programs or weekends caring voluntarily for the the intimidation is sufficiently severe units in prosecutor offices provide a child of one witness—a drug abuser— and the witness’s testimony is essen- and wearing a beeper so that she was tial to winning the case. Some pros-

6 R e s e a r c h i n A c t i o n ecution offices were much more so- only in the most serious cases, where eral funding for witness protection and phisticated and organized about these immediate relocation was essential. relocation. efforts than others. Several jurisdic- Longer-term relocation. In many tions relied on the fact that victims In addition to housing and some finan- and witnesses with jobs or strong fam- cases, a longer-term, more independent cial support (such as a food allowance, ily support systems could often be relocation is needed following emer- money for transportation, or anything placed with relatives or friends, or gency relocation. Prosecutors and po- else essential for the witness and his moved out of State for short periods at lice reported working closely with the or her family), emergency and longer- limited cost to the prosecutor. By con- local public housing authorities to: term relocation usually involves some level of heightened police protection. trast, one prosecutor uses a highly or- ● Relocate victims and witnesses ganized emergency and longer-term None of the jurisdictions contacted swiftly from one public housing devel- was able to fund constant police pro- relocation program administered by opment into another. the victim services unit, with the tection for an intimidated victim or prosecutor’s office bearing only admin- ● Place witnesses from public housing witness, but most reported that they istrative costs of the program and State in private, subsidized housing. had some arrangement with law en- and Federal agencies paying $600,000 forcement for checking on the victim ● in annual relocation costs. Qualify poorly housed witnesses for or witness several times a day or for some form of housing assistance. providing the victim or witness with a Emergency relocation needs are most beeper or special contact number to frequently met by housing intimidated In each of these instances, police and ensure rapid police response. Pros- witnesses and their families in secure prosecutors sought housing that was a ecutors and police administrators em- hotels or motels. Witnesses are often safe distance from the threat; in some phasized that if the relocation is registered under false names, and pay- cases, housing resources in other genuinely confidential, there should ment is not made directly by the cities, counties, or States were used. be no need for additional police pro- prosecutor’s office or other easily iden- tection; it is only when the new ad- Some respondents had worked with the tifiable government agencies. Because dress of the victim or witness is U.S. Department of Housing and Urban the cost of this sort of emergency relo- disclosed that there is any danger. Development (HUD) to secure Section 8 cation accumulates rapidly, prosecu- certification for intimidated victims and tors reported using hotels and motels Differing opinions on relocation. Dif- witnesses. Section 8 certification quali- ferent jurisdictions appeared to have fies low-income families to receive different needs in terms of witness re- vouchers to subsidize private housing location. In some jurisdictions pros- Family Bereavement costs, in lieu of placement in public ecutors emphasized that entrenched, housing. Police and prosecutors consid- Center national gangs made it essential to ered placement in subsidized private provide witnesses with permanent re- he Family Bereavement Center in T housing to be more secure in some location services. However, many Baltimore, supported by a VOCA grant, pro- cases than the relocation of intimidated prosecutors noted that the lives of gang vides victim assistance and counselling for victims and witnesses within the public family members of homicide victims, many members were so insular that simply of whom are residents of neighborhoods housing system, because gang members moving a victim or witness to another dominated by local gangs and out-of-State and drug dealers are usually reluctant building or housing complex in the drug dealers. Graduates of the program to enter the types of middle-class neigh- same neighborhood would often pro- have recently organized a civic group to borhoods in which Section 8 units are vide sufficient protection (see “D.C. combat violence in their communities. The typically located. Although some juris- Emphasis on Short-Term Relocation”). Family Bereavement Center and programs dictions are able to take advantage of like it address witness security by fostering these outside resources, many jurisdic- By contrast, prosecutors in Los Ange- trust and communication between victim- tions rely exclusively on the les emphasized that anything less than ized community residents and the prosecutor’s office for funding emer- a permanent, long-term witness reloca- prosecutor’s office, thereby decreasing the gency and longer-term relocation, and tion program would be irresponsible in impact of communitywide intimidation. others are unaware of any State or Fed- their jurisdiction. Los Angeles pros-

7 R e s e a r c h i n A c t i o n ecutors gave numerous examples of able—may not be essential in jurisdic- noted that her clients were afraid to witnesses who were killed after leaving tions where gangs are loosely orga- use public transportation when travel- witness security programs and return- nized, small, and poorly established. ing to the courthouse. In extreme ing to their old neighborhoods. However, in jurisdictions where gangs cases, the witness may attend court are entrenched in communities—areas under guard. Thus, when designing a relocation pro- where several generations may have gram for intimidated witnesses, pros- participated in gang activity, or where ● Use of metal detectors and covered ecutors considered the type of gang national, highly organized gangs domi- windows to protect victims and threat faced by witnesses. Permanent nate—permanent relocation of threat- witnesses. relocation—although always prefer- ened witnesses is essential to ensure ● Video cameras taping people com- safety. ing into the courtroom to discourage Los Angeles prosecutors point out that gang attendance at trials. Gang mem- D.C. Emphasis on Short- permanent relocation is not a long- bers who are on probation want to Term Relocation term commitment by the prosecutor or avoid documentary evidence of their association with known gang mem- rosecutors, police administrators, police to support witnesses financially, P bers—typically a violation of probation and victim service professionals in Washing- but rather an agreement to establish ton, D.C., emphasized that short-term relo- them in a secure environment where conditions that could land them in jail. cation—a few days to a year—has been they are expected to provide for their adequate to protect most intimidated victims Another innovative courtroom ap- own support. Of course, should a fur- proach was the formation of commu- and witnesses, due to the small size and ther threat to the witness arise, the loose organization of most gangs or nity support groups for victims and police or prosecutor has a responsibil- “crews” in their jurisdiction. In their experi- witnesses who wished to testify. The ence, long-term relocation, like that pro- ity to re-establish the person in a safe support group attends the trial so that vided by the Federal witness security location. the witness sees friendly as well as program, is not necessary in most local in- Judicial policies that assign a high pri- threatening faces in the audience. A timidation cases. They estimated that in ority to the expeditious resolution of variation on this approach was to inter- most of their cases relocation for between 4 view and bring in large numbers of months and 1 year was enough to carry the cases involving intimidated victims witnesses from a community to tes- victim or witness past the critical stages of and witnesses can further reduce the trial preparation and testimony. In the Dis- cost of providing all types of emer- tify—one prosecutor brought 100 trict of Columbia, witnesses have been able gency and longer-term relocation. grand witnesses into the court- to return to their communities without retri- room in a case against drug gangs op- bution after the conclusion of a trial. Pretrial and courtroom security erating in a housing project. Despite measures. Prosecutors and police the amount of work involved for the Police and prosecutors in Washington, D.C., described an array of small safety police and prosecutors, this approach noted practical advantages to short-term re- measures that have been undertaken had the dual advantage of providing location. Victims and witnesses are rarely to decrease victim and witness intimi- increased security for the witnesses willing to sever all ties with their community, abandon jobs, and never again see old dation in and around the courtroom: and building community solidarity. Following another approach, a police friends and relatives. When asked to make ● Provision of a separate waiting area these sacrifices, many witnesses may not inspector reported scheduling the an- help the prosecutor because: for victims and witnesses—a relatively nual visit to court of a uniformed po- common practice. In some jurisdic- lice cadet class to coincide with a trial • They decided that cooperation is too tions, however, the witness waiting in which witnesses had already been onerous. area and the defendant and public intimidated by a strong gang presence waiting areas are separate but not se- • They agree initially to relocate but then en- in the courtroom. cure—simply a room or area set apart. danger themselves by recontacting friends or Several jurisdictions expressed inter- relatives from their old community. As one ● Safe transportation to and from est in finding legal ways to shield the prosecutor observed, “people want to be court. One victim services advocate safe in their own homes, not have to move.” victims’ or witnesses’ identities and

8 R e s e a r c h i n A c t i o n addresses up to or throughout their ap- danger them more than if they were al- vices, and what the funding source pearance in court. To prevent would- lowed to maintain anonymity in the for these services will be. Compre- be intimidators from figuring out who general prison population. hensive strategies also emphasize in- the key witnesses were, some prosecu- timidation prevention, through tors tried to reinterview key witnesses Community outreach. Prosecutors had community policing and community in the company of large numbers of attempted to collaborate with a broad outreach, education, and empower- less important or even uncooperative range of law enforcement, social ser- ment. witnesses. One jurisdiction used re- vice, and community groups in their ef- mote testimony on closed circuit tele- forts to combat victim and witness Key elements of witness security and vision to interview witnesses. Some intimidation. Jurisdictions had under- assistance12 build on many of the ar- prosecutors found videotaped grand taken cooperative efforts with local eas discussed earlier, such as basic jury testimony and audiotaped witness housing authorities, the U.S. Depart- victim services, access to emergency statements to be particularly useful for ment of Housing and Urban Develop- and long-term relocation, and com- discouraging witnesses on the stand ment (HUD), the Federal Bureau of munity outreach. Not only do they from altering their testimony once Investigation (FBI), various U.S. Attor- build on existing strategies, but they their identities were about to become ney Offices, the Federal Bureau of call for protocols for interagency co- known. Prisons, jails in neighboring counties, operation and enhanced legislation. shelters, domestic violence groups, the A special emphasis is placed on Protective custody for victims and Travellers AID Society, the YMCA, intimidation prevention and control witnesses in prison.11 While witnesses rape crisis groups, and homicide survi- through cooperation among law in government cases constitute only a vor groups. enforcement, prosecutors, and the small part of the Federal and local judiciary. Several prosecutors had begun limited prison population, prosecutors consid- community outreach efforts, including The following efforts at developing a ered protective custody a valuable tool public speaking engagements aimed at comprehensive plan are at an early for assisting incarcerated victims and educating teachers, guidance counse- stage of development and have not witnesses. The cooperation of incar- lors, community groups, and elderly been evaluated; the next pages high- cerated witnesses is often essential in Asian immigrants about victim and wit- light the major aspects of emerging gang- and drug-related cases. One ness intimidation. One prosecutor had strategies for witness security and prosecutor favored the use of incarcer- appeared on a Spanish-language radio assistance. ated witnesses in gang trials rather station to discuss cases in which his of- than witnesses at liberty because it fice was seeking witnesses. Protocols for interagency cooperation. rendered useless—and therefore mini- Current witness protection programs mized—gang efforts to intimidate emphasize the value of formalized, Emerging models and members of the community who were cooperative relationships among the innocent of any criminal offense. Most strategies prosecutor’s office, local enforcement prosecutors tried either to arrange A few jurisdictions have begun to build agencies, social service agencies (es- some form of protective custody for in- on the traditional practices, victim ser- pecially those concerned with hous- carcerated witnesses or to transfer vices, and ad hoc strategies described ing and public assistance), the FBI, them to a facility where the defendant above to construct comprehensive pro- Federal agencies such as HUD, and was not housed. Prosecutors also ar- grams for the security of victims and local counselling groups and shelters. ranged for witnesses to be transported witnesses. These programs formalize The specific agencies with which to court separately from the defendant. relationships between the prosecutor’s agreements are needed may vary from In New York City, however, a gang office and law enforcement agencies, jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but the prosecutor noted that procedures used community groups, and social service agreements should identify the ser- to place inmates in protective custody, agencies. In addition, the programs vices to be provided, the agencies or separate one inmate from another, specify procedures for determining that will bear the cost, and the allow- may draw attention to the fact that in- which victims and witnesses will re- able expenses or services. The agree- mates are witnesses and, therefore, en- ceive a given level of security and ser- ments should be used to speed and

9 R e s e a r c h i n A c t i o n coordinate emergency services to vic- security for intimidated victims and younger children to facilitate drug tims and witnesses, and to place a witnesses. Some jurisdictions reported sales and even executions, some broader array of resources at the dis- needing to relocate witnesses only a method of tracking juvenile gang of- posal of the prosecutor. few times a year, but others needed to fenders was essential. move victims and witnesses daily. An Enhanced basic victim services. All effective emergency and longer-term Community empowerment. In an- prosecutors recognized the value of relocation program would provide a se- other approach to empowering commu- basic victim services (such as provid- cure residence, transportation to the nities, prosecutors and police educate ing emergency short-term relocation new site, some food money if needed, tenant and community groups about assistance) for allaying many of the counselling, speedy access to social civil remedies they can use to regain nonspecific fears of victims and wit- services, and enhanced police protec- control of their neighborhoods, and nesses. Ideally services available to all tion. A long-term program might also they provide contacts with pro bono witnesses who need them should in- assist witnesses in finding employ- legal workers who might assist with the clude the following: ment. The prosecutor’s office should injunctive relief process. Prosecutors and police have also assisted some ● not be considered under any obligation Emergency and longer-term tenant groups to establish “gate counselling. to provide services beyond those in the security agreement, except where a re- checks” at housing projects with gang and drug problems. By providing an ● Assistance with victim compensation, newed or continued threat requires ad- where appropriate. ditional assistance. All prosecutors added measure of security, the gate funding relocation of witnesses empha- check volunteers have been expected ● Information concerning the criminal sized the need to have a clear agree- to “keep the good tenants in” and dis- justice system. ment concerning what services are to courage admission to outside gang be provided and a limit to the length of members who had no family or con- ● Notification concerning important time that the government is respon- tacts in the building. trial dates and the outcome of trials. sible for funding living expenses and Community awareness. Almost every ● A specific contact person who other witness needs. respondent emphasized the need for can assist the victim or witness with Enhanced legislation. A recent ordi- better public relations for victim and intimidation concerns throughout the witness security and assistance efforts. trial and relocation. nance in the District of Columbia that increased penalties for obstruction of Many respondents believed that, de- spite the seriousness of the victim and ● A 24-hour emergency contact justice was considered essential to witnesses intimidation problem, public number. better victim and witness security in that jurisdiction. Many prosecutors perceptions of the dangers involved in One additional service recommended and police across the country sug- testifying were exaggerated. For this by working group participants was the gested that setting higher penalties for reason, both prosecutors and victim funding of secure debriefing rooms, re- intimidation, requiring that penalties services counselors felt that once a mote from police stations and prosecu- be served consecutively, and exacting workable model for victim and witness tor offices, for victims and witnesses higher bail and tighter bond restric- protection was in place, it would be who were not participating in tempo- tions would be useful. Another con- critical to take the program to gang- rary relocation. Participants had used cern of prosecutors and police was the dominated communities and inform hotel rooms and even boats as secure legal barriers inhibiting the exchange law-abiding residents of the services locations to interview intimidated vic- of information among criminal justice and safeguards available to them. Po- tims and witnesses. agencies concerning the records and lice and prosecutors from all parts of gang affiliations of minors. Although the country emphasized the need for Increased access to emergency and no consensus was reached concerning special public relations efforts (com- longer-term relocation. Another need the best approach to this difficult pri- bined with community outreach) to that prosecutors recognized was the vacy issue, study participants agreed give Asian and illegal immigrant com- ability to provide additional methods that, as gangs used younger and munities information about the Ameri- for swift, emergency, and longer-term

10 R e s e a r c h i n A c t i o n can criminal justice system and about approximately 200 violent, gang- and threats against victims and witnesses immigration law. It is important, how- drug-related crimes that had not been seriously, prosecutors were much more ever, that police and prosecutors not presented to the prosecutor due to confident in their ability to deter in- promise a level of safety that they are witness intimidation. With better com- timidation and secure witness testi- not absolutely sure they can provide. munication between police and pros- mony. Prosecutors and police sugges- In some jurisdictions, injured victims ecutors, these witnesses might have ted that gang-related victim and wit- and witnesses, or the families of mur- been persuaded to enter the new wit- ness intimidation could be reduced in dered victims and witnesses, have suc- ness security program and testify. court when judges were knowledgeable cessfully brought civil lawsuits against about gang characteristics and were prosecutors and police, alleging that Community outreach. Community willing to exclude members who wore witnesses were inadequately warned outreach is critical to establishing co- identifying colors or made threatening about the danger of testifying. Large operative relationships with potential hand signs. In some jurisdictions, ad- damages have been awarded in some witnesses and preventing intimidation. ditional judicial resources were made cases.13 Both prosecutors and police need to available to expedite cases where vic- find ways to build confidence in gang- tim and witness intimidation had be- dominated communities that witness Intimidation prevention and come a factor. Prompt disposition of security is available (see “Community control cases involving victim and witness in- Policing and Community-Based Pros- timidation not only reduces the oppor- Prosecutors, law enforcement, and the ecution”). A number of outreach strat- tunity for intimidation before and judiciary have critical roles to play in egies were considered promising: any program to prevent victim and wit- ● ness intimidation. Law enforcement Community policing. Community Policing officers are better positioned than ● Assigning prosecutors to specific and Community-Based prosecutors to foresee and prevent communities or police units. Prosecution intimidation at the street level. Law ne of the most important elements enforcement officers can inform pros- ● O Vertical prosecution of cases involv- of intimidation prevention is community po- ecutors about repeat offenders and ing gangs or victim intimidation (i.e., licing, and when possible, community-based potential intimidators, alert prosecu- one prosecutor or team of prosecutors prosecution. The advantages of community tors to potential witnesses who are be- assumes responsibility for a case from policing and prosecution are many: ing intimidated, and reduce gang start to finish). income and intimidation by disrupting • Prosecutors and police are able to build long-term relationships with citizen and ten- gang operations with intensive policing ● Aggressive gang suppression. ant groups, and these contacts are likely to tactics. In one small jurisdiction, com- ● Matching the cultural knowledge lead to witness cooperation. munity police officers found it effec- and linguistic skills of law enforce- tive to visit the families of potential ment and outreach personnel to that • A consistent police and prosecutor pres- ence helps to build a greater sense of trust intimidators and explain the laws con- of the neighborhoods they serve. cerning obstruction of justice. In an- and accountability between the community and the criminal justice system. other community where intimidation Finding outreach personnel who can was severe, police officers were able to communicate with intimidated victims • Community prosecutors and police are reassure tenants in gang-dominated and witnesses in their own language is more likely to see links between related housing projects by establishing field especially important in the case of re- cases and to detect new crime trends before precincts in empty apartments or store cent immigrants and non-English they have the opportunity to develop fully. fronts, or by bringing in a mobile pre- speaking residents, who may not be cinct, in order to decrease response aware of their rights and the services • Community prosecutors and police are better attuned to the needs of victims and time. In one jurisdiction where a com- available to them. witnesses from their jurisdictions, and can prehensive witness security program Cooperation with the judiciary. In ju- work with victim services representatives was being established by the to design programs that respond to local prosecutor’s office, police reported risdictions where the judiciary takes concerns.

11 R e s e a r c h i n A c t i o n

during trial, but also conserves witness ● Design a manual to meet the needs ● Become familiar with the most protection resources, allowing more of prosecutors, police, and victim current literature on gangs and victims and witnesses to benefit from services workers. Once cooperative gang suppression.14 short-term relocation or security services. agreements and procedures are devel- oped to implement a new witness secu- ● Make technology an ally. Gang prosecutors recommended the use Additional considerations rity plan, it is important that the information be made available in a of gang-tracking software and the In establishing a comprehensive wit- simple, clear format for every indi- computerized identification of bullets ness security and assistance program, vidual and group that may need to use involved in gang incidents, so that participants in this project offered spe- the program. Sample court or adminis- crimes using the same guns may be cific ideas that could be considered in trative papers could be provided to linked, even when those crimes planning and implementing such a may have occurred outside the prosecutors seeking funding authoriza- strategy: boundaries of a given neighborhood tion for protective services; resource or community policing district.15 ● Find a highly qualified leader. An and contact lists should be easily ac- cessible. effective witness security and assis- ● Target top gang members and tance program needs an energetic, ● Build an evaluation design into any repeat offenders for aggressive dedicated leader knowledgeable about new program. While the effectiveness prosecution. Gang prosecutors legal issues, the local gang problem, of victim and witness intimidation pre- suggested that the aggressive pros- victim rights, and the needs of con- vention efforts is not easily assessed ecution of all crimes committed by cerned intimidated communities. by traditional quantitative research top gang members and by repeat Effective leaders can be found in any methods, it is essential to identify what offenders linked with gangs helped agency, and the program can be measures may be meaningful barom- to disrupt gang activity in intimi- housed with the leader in the police eters of program impact. Some working dated neighborhoods. department, in the prosecutor’s office, or group participants suggested that sur- with existing victim services programs. ● Maximize the number of defen- veys of attitudes in gang-dominated dants indicted in each gang case. ● Have the program protocols communities might be used as a mea- Prosecutors in one of the toughest endorsed by public officials at the sure of program success. Other urban jurisdictions advised that in- highest level. In order to secure the approaches may be to monitor pros- dicting large numbers of defen- greatest possible cooperation from ecutor and police perceptions of the dants in each gang case benefits public and private agencies, the mis- problem and to ask participants in the the community by disrupting gang sion of the witness security program witness security program to comment activity and drug sales on the and the protocols for interagency coop- on the program’s effectiveness. What- street. Community-wide intimidation eration should be presented to the ever tools are used, evaluative data are is reduced because more indicted highest ranking local officials for their critical to securing continued or in- or incarcerated, gang-affiliated public endorsement and support. creased funding and to determining witnesses are available to testify, These officials may include the mayor, how the program needs to be improved. in lieu of potentially vulnerable the city council or other governing ● Make use of established gang sup- community residents. body, the administrative judge, the pression techniques. Gang-related district attorney, the police commis- ● Focus on truancy reduction as a victim and witness intimidation cannot means of controlling juvenile sioner or chief, the heads of local so- be addressed effectively in isolation cial services and public housing, the gang participation. Gang special- from the larger issue of gang suppres- ists noted the connection between superintendent of schools, church sion. Police and prosecutors who spe- leaders in the target communities, and truancy and gang involvement in cialize in gang crimes offered the some neighborhoods. Active law any other community leaders whose following suggestions for dealing with cooperation may be important. enforcement support for truancy gangs: reduction programs may reduce intimidation.

12 R e s e a r c h i n A c t i o n

● Seek long-term, renewable Baltimore City, Maryland (1); Borough to report crimes is small—3.8 percent funding sources to support witness of Manhattan, New York (1); Borough for violent crimes involving a stranger protection programs. Individuals con- of Queens, New York (4); Bridgeport, and 5.6 percent for violent crimes in- tacted for this project advised that Connecticut (1); Brockton, Massachu- volving non-strangers. However, the short-term or nonrenewable funding setts (1); Charlotte, North Carolina (1); survey does not include data on homi- had closed a number of promising Chicago, Illinois (3); Cleveland, Ohio cide witnesses. Criminal Victimization criminal justice initiatives in their ju- (1); Dade County, Florida (1); Detroit, in the United States, 1992. Bureau of risdictions. Where adequate funding Michigan (1); Houston, Texas (2); Kan- Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of is not available from local sources, sas City, Missouri (2); Los Angeles, Justice, March 1994. working group participants suggested California (2); Missoula, Montana (1); exploring possibilities for funding from Montgomery County, Maryland (1); 5. Stark, James and Howard W. local or Federal drug-related asset Oakland, California (1); Pittsburgh, Goldstein, The Rights of Crime Vic- tims. New York: Bantam and Ameri- forfeiture programs; contacting the lo- Pennsylvania (1); Portland, Oregon (1); cal FBI office for loans of equipment San Francisco, California (1); and the can Civil Liberties Union, 1985. or other resources; cooperating with District of Columbia (5). 6. Johnson, Claire, Barbara Webster, Federal agencies, such as HUD and and Edward Connors, “Prosecuting the U.S. Marshal’s Service; establish- 2. Some research findings support the Gangs: A National Assessment,” ing cooperative agreements with local perceived connection between gang Research in Brief, National Institute of agencies and programs; and applying activity and certain violent crimes, Justice, U.S. Department of Justice, for free technical assistance from such as murder and aggravated assault February 1995. The study surveyed a agencies such as the National Victim in specific neighborhoods. See Com- total of 192 prosecutors, 80 percent of Center (NVC) in Arlington, Virginia prehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent, whom said that gangs were a problem (703) 276-2880. and Chronic Juvenile Offenders: Pro- gram Summary. Office of Juvenile Jus- in their jurisdiction although the defi- Gang-related victim and witness in- tice and Delinquency Prevention, U.S. nition of gang varied from State to timidation is a serious, growing con- Department of Justice, June 1994, p. 31. State. Other related findings include: cern for prosecutors, judges, police, 94 percent of local gangs in large ju- and victim services workers, but, as 3. Although there is no recent research risdictions and 84 percent of gangs in this study has demonstrated, innova- to substantiate these estimates, a 1990 small jurisdictions committed violent tive and proactive interventions are study by the Victim Services Agency crimes and trafficked in drugs. beginning to emerge. in New York City concluded that 36 percent of victims and witnesses stud- 7. For related data, see Handgun ied in the Bronx Criminal Court in Crime Victims, Special Report. Bureau Notes 1988 had been threatened; 57 percent of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department 1. Because none of the recently-estab- of those who had not been threatened of Justice, July 1990. lished practices discussed by the in- feared reprisals; and 71 percent of all 8. Statement of Gerald Shur, Senior terview respondents and working respondents said that they would feel Associate Director, Office of Enforce- group members has been formally threatened if the defendants were out ment Operations, Criminal Division, evaluated, these practices are offered on bail. Davis, Robert C., et al. Vic- before the Subcommittee on Crime and only as examples of current practice. tim/Witness Intimidation in the Bronx Criminal Justice, Committee on the Ju- Once these practices have been in op- Courts: How Common Is It, and What diciary, U.S. House of Representa- eration for a longer period, further Are Its Consequences? Unpublished tives, concerning witness intimidation, study can determine their effective- monograph, Victim Services Agency, August 4, 1994. ness. The following 20 jurisdictions June 1990. were contacted for this project. The 9. The problem of victim and witness 4. The National Crime Victimization number of individuals interviewed in intimidation was also highlighted by Survey reports that the percent of vic- each jurisdiction (either in person or the American Bar Association and the tims of violent crimes who cite “fear of by phone) is indicated in parentheses: Victim Services Agency, New York reprisal” as the main factor in failing City, in the early 1980s. See, Ameri-

13 R e s e a r c h i n A c t i o n

can Bar Association, Criminal Justice failed to warn Carpenter was fatally Kerry Murphy Healey, Ph.D., is a Section. Reducing Victim/Witness In- shot by the defendant following his consultant to the Law and Public timidation: A Package. Washington, own testimony in the case. See also Policy Area of Abt Associates D.C.: American Bar Association, Wallace v. City of Los Angeles, 12 CAL Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts. 1982; and, Connick, Elizabeth and APP 4th 1315, 1993, which estab- Robert Davis, “Examining the problem lished a duty to protect a witness en- of witness intimidation.” Judicature, listed to testify, even if the case is This report was supported by Research Appli- 66, 439-447, 1983. later declined, and awarded the plain- cations contract #OJP–94–C–007 from the tiff $750,000 in damages. National Institute of Justice to Abt Associates 10. Stark and Goldstein, The Rights of Inc. Findings and conclusions of the research reported here are those of the authors and do Crime Victims. 14. Working group participants recom- not necessarily reflect the official position or mended the California District Attor- policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 11. A 1991 study of protective custody neys Association’s Gang Resource in adult correctional facilities found Guide, available by calling (916) 443- that 5.6 percent of all U.S. prison in- 2017; studies by Irving Spergel and The National Institute of Justice is a mates were in some form of protective Ron Chance; and publications avail- component of the Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau custody. Henderson, James D. Protec- able through the National Criminal tive Custody Management in Adult of Justice Assistance, Bureau of Justice Justice Reference Service (NCJRS), Statistics, Office of Juvenile Justice and Correctional Facilities. Washington, Rockville, Maryland, (800) 851-3420. Delinquency Prevention, and the Office for D.C.: National Institute of Corrections, For a discussion of gang suppression Victims of Crime. 1991. techniques, see Ehrensaft, Kenneth, NCJ 156555 12. The term “security and assistance” Prosecutors Model, unpublished mono- is preferable to “protection” because graph prepared for the Office of Juve- the phrase “witness protection” sug- nile Justice and Delinquency gests a higher level of financial main- Prevention, U.S. Department of Jus- tenance and policy commitment than tice, 1993. is possible in most jurisdictions. Fur- 15. Gang prosecutors recommended thermore, the term “protection” may the use of gang member tracking soft create unrealistic expectations on the ware, the “Gang Tracking System,” part of victims and witnesses, opening developed by and available from the the door to claims of civil liability Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Depart- against police departments, prosecutor ment by calling (310) 603-3106. offices, or the city or county, should such efforts fail to protect the victim or witness adequately.

13. While litigation is not common na- tionally, cases were reported in Los Angeles, California; Washington, D.C.; and Florida. See Carpenter v. City of Los Angeles, 230 Cal. App. 3rd 923, 1991, where the court awarded 1.2 million dollars to a witness who was not warned that the defendant in a rob- bery case had contracted to have him killed. The witness, Carpenter, was subsequently wounded by the defen- dant, and the police officer who had

14 The LatestR Criminal e s e a Justicer c h i n A c t i o n Videotape Series from NIJ: Research in Progress

Learn about the latest developments in criminal justice research from prominent criminal justice experts. Each 60-minute tape presents a well-known scholar discussing his or her current studies and how they relate to existing criminal justice research and includes the lecturer’s responses to audience questions.

NCJ 152235—Alfred Blumstein, Ph.D., cine, Emory University: Understanding and NCJ 153272—Cathy Spatz Widom, J. Erik Jonsson University Professor of Preventing Violence: A Public Health Perspective. Ph.D., Professor, School of Criminal Urban Systems and Operations Research, Justice, State University of New H. John Heinz III School of Public NCJ 152692—James Inciardi, Ph.D., York—Albany: The Cycle of Violence Policy Management, Carnegie Mellon Director, Drug and Alcohol Center, Uni- Revisited Six Years Later. University: Youth Violence, Guns, and Illicit versity of Delaware: A Corrections-Based Drug Markets. Continuum of Effective Drug Abuse Treatment. NCJ 157273—Wesley Skogan, Ph.D., Professor, Political Science and Urban NCJ 152236—Peter W. Greenwood, Ph.D., NCJ 153270—Adele Harrell, Ph.D., Affairs, Northwestern University: Com- Director, Criminal Justice Research Pro- Director, Program on Law and Behavior, munity Policing in Chicago: Fact or Fiction? gram, The RAND Corporation: Three Strikes, The Urban Institute: Intervening with High- You’re Out: Benefits and Costs of California’s New Risk Youth: Preliminary Findings from the NCJ 153850—Scott H. Decker, Ph.D., Mandatory-Sentencing Law. Children-at-Risk Program. Professor and Chair, Department of Criminal Justice and Criminology, NCJ 152237—Christian Pfeiffer, Ph.D., NCJ 153271—Marvin Wolfgang, Ph.D., University of Missouri–St. Louis, and Director of the Krimino–logisches Director, Legal Studies and Criminology, Susan Pennell, Director, Criminal Jus- Forschungsinstitut Niedersachsen: Sen- University of Pennsylvania: Crime in a tice Research Unit, San Diego Associa- tencing Policy and Crime Rates in Reunified Birth Cohort: A Replication in the People’s tion of Governments: Monitoring the Germany. Republic of China. Illegal Firearms Market.

NCJ 152238—Arthur L. Kellerman, NCJ 153730—Lawrence W. Sherman, NCJ 154277—Terrie Moffitt, Ph.D., M.D., M.P.H., Director of the Center for Ph.D., Chief Criminologist, Indianapolis Professor, Department of Psychology, Injury Control, School of Public Health Police Department, Professor of Criminology, University of Wisconsin: Partner Violence and Associate Professor in the Division University of Maryland: Reducing Gun Violence: Among Adults. of Emergency Medicine, School of Medi- Community Policing Against Gun Crime. ✂

To order any of these tapes, please complete and return this form with your payment to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service, P.O. Box 6000, Rockville, MD 20849–6000. Individual titles are available for only $19 in the United States and $24 in Canada and other countries. Call 800–851–3420, or e-mail [email protected] if you have any questions.

Please send me the following tapes:

Qty. Presenter Name and NCJ Number Subtotal

Name Address City State ZIP Daytime phone ( ) ___ Payment enclosed (U.S. dollars) ___ Deduct this item from my NCJRS Deposit Account, account no. Charge my: ___ MasterCard ___VISA Account no. Exp. Date ______Signature 15 U.S. Department of Justice BULK RATE Office of Justice Programs POSTAGE & FEES PAID National Institute of Justice DOJ/NIJ Permit No. G–91

Washington, D.C. 20531 ______

Official Business Penalty for Private Use $300