AmericanProsecutorsResearchInstituteThe Research andDevelopment Divisionof NDAA

Volume 6Numbers 1 & 22008

Building Bridges is published semi-annually by the American Prosecutors Research Institute’s National Center for Community Prosecution.Items may be reprinted if attributed to American Prosecutors Research Institute. Please provide copies to Building Bridges. Direct inquiriesand news article suggestions to (703) 549-9222 or e-mail: communityprosecution@ndaa.org.

SPECIAL TOPIC SERIES

MONOGRAPHS

To order or download a copy of commu-nity prosecution monographs, go tohttp://www.ndaa.org/publications/apri/community_prosecution.html

Register Today:

4th National Community ProsecutionConferenceSt. Louis, MOOctober 7-9, 2008Hilton St. Louis at the BallparkDownload Registration Form at: http://www.ndaa.org/education/ndaa/com-munity_prosecution_training_schedule.html

NATIONAL CENTER FOR

COMMUNITY PROSECUTION

Contact InformationSteven Jansen, DirectorBrent Berkley, Senior AttorneyKelsey Doty, InternPhone: (703) 549-9222Fax: (703) 836-3195E-mail: communityprosecution@ndaa.org Web site: www.ndaa.org

C O M M U N I T Y P R O S E C U T I O N

Three thumps of a fist on the door of the courtroom sig-naled to those of us sitting in the courtroom on woodenbenches that court was getting ready to start. The frailbarefoot woman selling bananas from a platter balancedon her head exited the courtroom as the magistrate andher clerk entered the room. The prosecutor opened thetattered handwritten file tied together with a piece ofyarn and began to take notes.

Michelle Waymire, deputy prosecuting attorney forthe Marion County Prosecutor’s Office, Indi-anapolis, and Steven Jansen, director of the Na-

tional Center for Community Prosecution, NDAA, hadthe opportunity to witness this scene firsthand lastsummer in Lira, Uganda. The two were working with ateam of active and retired police officers (from Wash-ington D.C., Florida and California) on a CommunityJustice project sponsored by the U.S. Department ofJustice, International Criminal Investigative Trainingand Assistance Program (ICITAP). Lira, the third largestcity in Uganda, is approximately six hours north of thecapital city of Kampala. The town is located in the LiraDistrict, which covers an area of 7,200 square kilome-ters and has a population of over 757,000 people, mostof whom are subsistence farmers. This northern regionof Uganda suffered for 21 years under the brutal insur-gency of the Lord’s Resistance Army, which resulted inthe abduction of over 40,000 Ugandan children andthe displacement of 1.8 million northerners. As villagersreturned back to their homes in Lira, the court systembecame overwhelmed and bottle-necked with criminalcases.

ICITAP’s Community Justice project was designedto provide training and technical assistance to all crimi-nal justice partners in the Lira District. By supportingthe Ugandan Police Force (UPF), the State Attorney’s

Office, and the judiciary, designers of the project sur-mised that improvements throughout the criminal jus-tice system would occur and would be sustainable sinceall partners were involved. The police officers on theICITAP team concentrated on training the UPF to im-prove their problem-solving skills and investigative ca-pacities, and to promote the philosophy of communitypolicing. Meanwhile, Michelle and Steven focused onproviding training to the magistrates, as well as to thestate attorney and his prosecutors. First, the State Attor-ney’s Office was trained in the principles of communityprosecution, partnership development, crime scene in-vestigation, evidence and trial advocacy. Second,Michelle and Steven analyzed the flow of criminal casesthrough the courts, facilitated the signing of a memo-randum of understanding between the criminal justicepartners (in which they agreed to monthly meetings todiscuss their problems and challenges), and initiated theestablishment of a viable, non-custodial alternative dis-position for juvenile offenders.

The ICITAP team quickly discovered that the en-tire criminal justice system was lacking in resources andsupplies. Basic things that police, prosecutors and judgesin the U.S. take for granted were not available or af-fordable in Lira. The Lira District police department,comprised of a total of 156 UPF constables/officersand 378 lesser-trained special police constables, lackedtransportation for both the officers and the investiga-tors. There was only one vehicle and two motorcyclesfor the entire district and fuel allotment was only 100liters per month. This often prevented officers fromtraveling to outlying rural areas to complete investiga-tions or to serve victims and witnesses with court sum-mons. Police did not have essential equipment such ashandcuffs, flashlights, radios, or even handguns. Therewas a lack of basic investigative evidence gathering

Experiences in Northern Uganda By Michelle Waymire and Steven Jansen

equipment such as cameras, measuring tapes and evidence collection bags.The lack of equipment hindered not only the investigation, but also im-pacted the ability to achieve justice. A lack of computers and copy ma-chines at police headquarters, at the prosecutor’s office and in the courtmeant that files were handwritten, tied together with yarn and then passedback and forth between the police and prosecutor.

Further, by attending resident meetings in the villages, a lack of trustbetween many of the residents and the police was discovered. The resi-dents complained of police corruption and torture. They indicated thatthey needed the police but could not afford to have them because the po-lice were forcing them to pay to get services. Residents also complainedof corruption in the court system and alleged that poor people couldnever win cases. As a result, the ICITAP curriculum included classes onEthics, Community Policing, Arriving at Crime Scenes, Physical Evidence,Interviewing Victims and Witnesses, Report Writing, Handcuffing andFirst Aid. Police were accompanied on investigations so that transportationand counsel could be provided to them.

The ICITAP’s assessment of the State Attorney’s Office revealed thatthere were only three prosecutors for the entire Lira District; one state at-torney and two state prosecutors. The Ugandan legal system is quite dif-ferent from the U.S. legal system in that state prosecutors are not attorneysbut are permitted to prosecute cases in court. They have received severalmonths of legal and prosecutorial training. The state attorney did most ofthe case filing (referred to as “sanctioning”) and also handled the capitalpunishment cases, while the state prosecutors handled most of the cases incourt on a daily basis. There was a noticeable lack of defense attorneys.Defendants represented themselves and conducted the questioning of vic-tims and witnesses under the supervision of the magistrate. Due to the se-vere lack of resources, the ICITAP team used their equipment to helpupdate and provide copies of legal documents to the prosecutors and thecourts.

The judiciary in the Lira District was comprised of three magistrates; achief magistrate, a Grade 1 Magistrate and a Grade 2 Magistrate, all ofwhom occupied the three courtrooms in the building down the streetfrom the police station. Because the courts had no recording equipment,the magistrates were forced to record all the court proceedings by hand.The magistrates heard both criminal and civil cases within the same courtsession. They also had trial jurisdiction over non-capital criminal cases andcivil cases up to $20 million shillings. Capital cases, such as murder or de-filement, had to be tried and sentenced by a high court judge who comesfrom Kampala one month each year to hear cases.

Since the end of the project in November 2007, ICITAP has con-ducted an evaluation and is in the process of finalizing a report to

USAID.1 Below are some of the comments made by the State AttorneyMartin Rukundu and Magistrate Juliet Hatonga:

• The ICITAP program had a positive impact in the following areas:movement of cases through the system, securing crime scenes, emphasiz-ing a rapid response to crime scenes, improving the coordination be-tween police and prosecutors, and prosecutors providing guidance topolice on cases.

• Rukundu and his prosecutors benefited greatly from Steven Jansen’scommunity prosecution and roll call training.

• As a result of the ICITAP program, UPF detectives started contactingprosecutors at the beginning of cases to get advice and guidance. Thishelped both the police and prosecutors in terms of crafting strongercases.

• The Juvenile Justice Program put forward by ICITAP has been imple-mented successfully in Lira. Hatonga advised that Anglican and Catholicclergy have both been supervising community service work programsfor juvenile offenders. On Friday, February 29, 2008, there was to havebeen a meeting in Lira to include magistrates from Kampala and the di-rector of the Community Service program to discuss how the Liramodel can be implemented in other districts throughout the country.

• Hatonga has noticed higher quality cases coming to court. Specifically,Hatonga said photographs are being included as exhibits and the casesare being presented in a more focused and understandable way becausethe criminal issues are clearly articulated.

1 Beinhart, Eric “Lira Evaluation Report” March 5, 2008.

Organized Retail Crime:An Increasingly Expensive Problem

By Steven Jansen and Robin Noble

Adecade ago, how would a person sell $35,000 in chewing gum,$500,000 in Legos or $200,000 in gift cards? It would be almost im-possible, so the demand to steal such items was unheard of at the

time. Today, professional criminals now steal these items in huge quantitiesbecause within a few hours they can anonymously auction off the mer-chandise for top-dollar over the internet. These items are just a few exam-ples of the merchandise stolen from shopping malls and retail “superstores,” such as Target, by organized retail crime rings. This growing phe-

nomenon costs the retail industry between $30 and $37 billion dollars ayear, according to FBI estimates, and 79% of retailers have been victimizedat some point.1 Even so, the risks to criminals are low, and the odds ofbeing prosecuted even lower. As a result, most of the criminals are gettingaway with it, and the honest consumers are left to pay the price.

Organized retail crime rings are not the “primitive” shopliftingschemes of years past. They have been compared to sophisticated compa-nies, complete with complex internal organizations and financial objec-

On a homicide investigation, Director Jansen observes as Ugandan detectivesapply investigative techniques taught through ICITAP's Community Justice Project.

2

tives. A “fence” (the head of the organization) sends a team of “boosters”(the thieves) into a store with a specific list of items to steal. Lists vary de-pending on the store being targeted, but “preferred” items often includebaby formula, Crest White Strips and over-the-counter medications likePrilosec or Tylenol. Thieves place the items in shopping bags lined withduct tape or aluminum foil, both of which deactivate the stores magneticanti-theft sensors. Because they are professionals, it is even harder to spotthese criminals than it is “regular” shoplifters, who tend to look just likenormal shoppers. The stolen items are then resold for profit at flea mar-kets, neighborhood convenience stores, and, increasingly, online.

Some of these rings utilize paid “employees.” After a Massachusettsman named Herion Karbunara was arrested for selling fraudulent PotteryBarn and Victoria’s Secret gift cards on eBay, police discovered he hadbeen paying women between $50 and $200 a day to acquire the cards forhim. The women would either simply steal items and return them for thecards, or, if the store required a receipt upon return, they would purchaseone of the products, give the receipt to Karbunara, who would then scanit into a computer and print multiple duplicate receipts. This scheme net-ted him over $200,000 in less than a year. Highly skilled professionalthieves can make upwards of $100,000-$200,000 a year by being “em-ployed” in this manner.2

Additionally, the more advanced crime rings are picking up big-ticketitems for resale, like iPods, Dyson vacuum cleaners and plasma televisions,at a fraction of their actual cost. These “bar code swindlers” can downloadsoftware over the Internet and place phony bar codes over the real ones,allowing $100 Lego sets to ring up for $20, for example.3 Alternatively,some criminals use computers to scan the bar codes of different, lower-cost items within the store, print up phony stickers, and place those overthe regular bar codes. Using this strategy, a “family team,” made up of hus-band, wife and mother-in-law, stole over $100,000 of merchandise in onlysix months from a Target in Missouri.

Part of what makes these crime rings so profitable is their increaseduse of online auction sites, such as eBay. Described as the “online equiva-lent of pickpockets,” these organized shoplifters are making incredibleprofits while doing little to no work. The typical shoplifter makes 10 centson every dollar stolen; with the use of online auction houses, criminals inorganized crime rings are netting closer to 75 cents on every dollar.4

Realizing that without the proper contacts, it was difficult to sell stolengoods on the black market, and without a receipt, stores were unlikely tomake returns for cash, these organized crime rings began swapping stolenmerchandise for gift cards or store credit, and selling those items at a re-duced rate online. One California based group made over $200,000 in lessthan a year doing exactly that. Other groups simply turn around and sellthe stolen goods online. With little restrictions placed on sellers by the on-line auction sites, this is a fairly easy way for them to turn inventoryaround. In fact, many of these criminals are able to exploit the customerrating system found on these sites to increase their profit—Karbunara’s sitehad only glowing reviews and he was considered a very reliable seller byall of his customers.5

Although it may seem like a victimless crime, these organized shoplift-ing schemes pose a big threat to consumers, both financially and for safetyreasons. At the most basic level, increased retail theft leads to an increase inproduct prices. This obviously has an effect on people across the country,but can be particularly devastating for those already in need. Safety con-cerns have been raised as well. Fences frequently alter the expiration dateson over-the-counter medications, and there is no guarantee that the drugshave been kept in ideal conditions, both of which can diminish their ef-fectiveness. Of even more concern is the “routine practice” of tamperingwith the labels of baby food. Organized crime rings will steal the cheapercans of food and relabel them with the more expensive variety’s labels.These price differences typically reflect differences in formulation and inlevels of vitamin fortification and enrichment. As a result, unknowing

mothers will think they are feeding their babies one thing, when in realitythey will be giving them another. Finally, the money earned in many ofthese organized crime rings is often used to fund gang and terrorists activ-ities. In the Washington, D.C. area, one woman was caught stealing up to$50,000 a week in merchandise, the proceeds of which went to supporther fellow MS-13 gang members.

Unfortunately, a significant problem with these groups is the very lowrisk of getting caught. If a cashier catches a thief using a fake bar code andrings up the correct price, the thief can pay the regular price, or simplydecide they no longer want to purchase the item without raising any sus-picion. All too often by the time these fraudulent purchases are noticed,the thieves have already moved on to the next store on their list, the loca-tion of which can be impossible to predict. Stealing from stores allowsthieves to resell brand new, never-been-opened items, so little suspicion israised on the part of the purchasers. And of those that are caught, onlyone out of every 150 incidents results in prosecution. This is in part due tothe absence of a federal law defining and criminalizing organized retailcrime. Currently, in most states a shoplifter needs to steal a considerablesum to be charged with a felony, and these professionals make certain theysteal in quantities just below that limit.

Steps have been taken to address this problem. Collaboration betweenthe National Retail Federation, the Retail Industry Leaders Associationand the FBI resulted in the creation of the Law Enforcement Retail Part-nership Network (LERPnet). This program, which currently has a longlist of subscribers ranging from high-end stores like Coach and Barney’sto discount “super stores” like Target and Wal-Mart, is an information-sharing database, designed to encourage communication among retailersand law enforcement. Victims of retail theft enter the details of each inci-dent into the database, including any photos and/or videos they may have.This allows retailers and law enforcement to more easily spot trends andpatterns, and can lead to a more detailed suspect list. LERPnet also allowsretailers to sign up for e-mail alerts, putting them on notice when storesin their area have been victimized. Although predicting exactly when aspecific store will be hit is nearly impossible, these notices allow stores toincrease their security and to warn employees to be on the look-out forsuspicious behavior.

The Coalition Against Organized Retail Crime has made repeatedpresentations to Congress regarding the severity of retail crime, the mostrecent of which includes a statement of support for a federal initiative thatwould make organized retail crime a felony. Organized retail crime woulddefine within the federal criminal code, eliminating the “requirement”that criminals steal a certain monetary amount before they can be prose-cuted. This would also impose stricter regulations on Internet auctionsites. For example, currently a seller can post as much or as little informa-tion about a product as s/he wishes. Under this initiative, any seller of aproduct that has a serial number would need to post that information onthe website. This would make it easier for law enforcement and retailers totrack the stolen goods, and harder for criminals to dispose of them.

Organized retail crime is a serious and expensive problem throughoutthe U.S.. It affects all communities, financially and with respect to productsafety, and should be prosecuted aggressively. Through the use of systemssuch as LERPnet, law enforcement can more effectively go after thesecriminals and ensure that they receive the penalties they deserve.

1 Federal Bureau of Investigation Press Release, "Organized Retail Theft: New Ini-tiative to Tackle the Problem," 06 April 2007, http://www.fbi.gov7.

2 Cha,Ariana Eunjung. "Thieves find exactly what they're looking for on ebay."Washington Post 06 Jan. 2005, A:1.

3 Zimmerman, Ann. "Retail losses rise as shoplifters go high tech." Pittsburgh Post-Gazette 25 Oct. 2006, www. post-gazette.com.

4 Supra, note 2.5 Supra, note 2.

3

As community prosecutors, we are well-versed in the concepts ofproblem-solving and prevention. Community prosecution principlesteach us to identify the root of the problem by scanning, analyzing,

evaluating and responding instead of waiting for negative consequences tosurface. Inevitably, children become part of the discussion when we talkabout prevention. While most juvenile intervention programs revolvearound preventing youth from handling guns, tagging, or stealing, theseprograms focus on reacting to a specific behavior, rather than reintroduc-ing youth to their community and its value.

According to the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Preven-tion and the National Youth Violence Prevention Resource Center, com-munity policing strategies, school interventions, and situational crimeprevention are the most successful programmatic approaches to reducingrisk and enhancing protective factors for juveniles.1 San Diego’s Juvenilesand Justice Program (JAJ) employs those same strategies to introduce theconcept of community to middle school children, and to start building asense of community in their classes, schools, homes, and neighborhoods.JAJ plants the seed of community through mentoring and reinforcementof positive social behavior through close involvement of police, attorneys,administrators, and parents. The curriculum focuses on situational crimeprevention strategies that teach students how to make smarter choices andconsult appropriate guidance when conflict situations present themselves.

Developed in 1998 as a community safety initiative, JAJ began as apartnership between the San Diego City Attorney’s Office, the San DiegoPolice Department, and local schools. The eight-week curriculum pro-gram focused on educating fourth grade students about the criminal jus-tice system through a series of discussion groups, a tour of the courthouseand police headquarters, and a mock court trial.

Over time, community prosecution and community policing tech-niques expanded and new tools and strategies were also applied to the JAJcurriculum. This growth provided the opportunity to transform our pro-gram from an introduction to the criminal justice system, into a frame-work for teaching the concepts of valuing community andproblem-solving. We expanded our partnership to include officers fromthe Juvenile Services Team, a representative from Juvenile Hall, commu-nity relations officers, and parents. We have also added curriculum optionsfor fifth and sixth graders.

In addition to introducing the participants to crime investigation andthe life of a criminal case, JAJ now introduces students to the concepts ofcommunity policing, juvenile crime issues, and techniques for dealingwith challenging situations that every middle school child will face. It isstructured as a six to eight-week program, depending on the needs of thestudents and the curriculum that best fits the community. The studentsstill tour police headquarters and the courthouse as part of the program.Each week, the students meet with the JAJ team for up to an hour and ahalf, and each session focuses on a specific topic. Depending on the preva-lent issues at individual schools and/or the community, the topic or thememay range from theft and vandalism, to battery or bullying.

For example, Washington Elementary School, located just outsidedowntown San Diego, chose to highlight bullying scenarios because ofconflicts that have resulted in verbal and physical altercations on campus.During each weekly session, prosecutors related the teaching principles toa bullying scenario. This semester one prosecutor wrote a song to help thekids remember the process of one juvenile making his way through the

criminal justice system while realizing the poor choices he had made. Themock court trial focused on a battery charge filed against a school bullyfor hitting a classmate in the head with an orange juice container. The stu-dents became part of the discussion. They talked with representatives ofthe partnership about how to make better choices and who can helpthem make those smarter decisions.

Ruth Reyes, the fifth grade G.A.T.E. teacher at Washington Elemen-tary was passionate about her students participating in JAJ, “The connec-tion with the attorneys and the students was invaluable. The lessons in theprogram were presented with real life situations that students can under-stand. This is an outstanding program that all fifth graders should partici-pate in.”

Throughout the eight-week program, students practice the idea ofvaluing their community and they meet new members of that communitywho care about them. The development of a strong community infra-structure is essential as a protective factor against youth violence. It helpsstudents develop skills, increase self-confidence, and make good choices.“This program is sure to have an impact on the students’ lives long after

they complete their schooling,” commented Nestor Suarez, the principalat Washington Elementary.

Juvenile Services Team Officer, Linda Tousley, enthusiastically partici-pated in this spring’s JAJ program and hopes to see it continue, “It was agreat experience partnering with the Office of the San Diego City Attor-ney on such a unique program. It was nice to see the kids learn and be in-terested in concepts that they had only heard about on television. Beingable to positively interact with police officers, teachers and prosecutorswas a new experience for these students and they really embraced the op-portunity.”

Despite the recent growth of the program, there are plans for furtherexpansion. Teresa Fout, a deputy city attorney and neighborhood prosecu-tor who co-taught this spring’s JAJ program, will use her teaching back-ground to rework the current materials into a more developed lesson planfor each session of the program. “At this age, kids are innately receptive to

Students acting as jurors consult Neighborhood Prosecutor during themock-trial deliberation process.

Juveniles and Justice:Kids are Community Too!

By Regan Savalla, Head Deputy, Criminal Division of the San Diego City Attorney’s Office, San Diego, California

4

ideas about community, and making good decisions for their future,” saidDeputy City Attorney Fout. “A curriculum that blends proven teachingmethods with what we know as community prosecutors will help themessage really stick.”

The curriculum development will focus on incorporating differentlearning styles and types of activities that encourage creativity and criticalthinking so that each student can absorb the information in a way that ismeaningful to them. One possible change could involve an art project asan alternative to the mock court trial. We also plan to develop an appro-priate measurement for the effectiveness for the program.

The San Diego City Attorney’s Neighborhood Prosecution Unit uses

the Juvenile and Justice Program as a crime-prevention strategy, introduc-ing the concepts of community and community policing to students.Building this partnership fosters a sense of community pride in the partic-ipants, and teaches them how to make smarter and better decisions toprotect themselves and their neighborhood.

1 Youth Violence Prevention & Intervention, Youth Violence Prevention &Intervention Fact Sheet NYVPRC (visited March 10, 2008)http://www.safeyouth.org; Risk and Protective Factors for Youth Vio-lence, Risk and Protective Factors for Youth Violence Fact SheetNYVPRC (visited March 10, 2008) http://www.safeyouth.org.

Addressing ConcernsWithin Minority Communities:

The Role of the Citizen’s AcademyBy Karen Maxwell

Across the country, minority communities’ concerns relating to lawenforcement and the criminal justice system are not only very real,but surface every day. Community prosecutors are in a unique posi-

tion to assist in bridging the gap between law enforcement and minoritycommunities due to their day-to-day interactions with both groups. InSacramento, it was clear that there was a lack of trust and communicationbetween law enforcement and minority communities. Community polic-ing cannot achieve its full potential unless there is meaningful dialoguebetween community prosecutors, law enforcement, and the various ethnicand cultural minority communities they serve. The District Attorney’sCitizens Academy was created to address the following concerns withinthe minority communities:• Distrust and anger towards law enforcement • Lack of community participation in law enforcement efforts• Lack of information, education and access to the criminal justice system• Lack of multi-ethnic and multi-cultural sensitivity and representation

with law enforcement partnersCitizen’s Academy is a 10-week (two to three hours/one night/week)

course that goes beyond the traditional discussions of the roles of law en-forcement, district attorney, defense and judiciary. The Citizen’s Academyincludes a critical examination of diversity and racial issues, such as racialprofiling and disparate treatment in the criminal justice system. Classmembers represent the various ethnic, faith-based and diverse communi-ties in Sacramento. They are community leaders and individuals with astrong sense of community and commitment to building bridges betweenthe criminal justice agencies and these various communities. The academy’s mission is to foster better communication and to addressthe concerns that have been identified. In so doing, the academy hopes to:overcome distrust of law enforcement, improve community participationin community policing efforts, provide information, education and accessto the criminal justice system, enhance multi-ethnic and multi-culturalsensitivity and representation in law enforcement agencies, and learn fromthe interaction and education.

Citizens Academy Summary of ClassesWeek One: Welcome. Introduction on Citizens Academy and “It Takes aCommunity…” What can a concerned citizen do to make our commu-nity a better place to live?Summary: Welcome to Citizens Academy with an introduction and

overview of the Academy, mission and welcoming remarks, Grand JuryPresentation, Overview of Public Safety Agencies

Week Two: Role of the District Attorney and Challenges: “Law &Order.”Summary: An overview of the district attorney’s office and its mission:Seek Justice, Serve Justice, Do Justice. Learn about the various units in theoffice, including the juvenile unit, filing decisions, case resolutions andchallenges facing prosecutors today.

Week Three: Role of Law Enforcement and Internal Affairs: “To Serveand Protect.”Summary: Discuss with police and sheriff representatives the roles andperspectives of law enforcement, the review boards, and the district attor-ney’s role, as well as outreach to the diverse communities. Internal affairsrepresentatives will discuss their roles, departments and processes.

Week Four: Special Challenges of Prosecution—Three Strikes; SpecialCircumstances; 10/20/Life; Domestic Violence and Victim Witness Unit. Summary: What are some of the unique challenges faced by the districtattorney’s office? How are Three Strikes cases decided? How do we han-dle domestic violence cases? Talk about these issues and the services of-fered to victims.Field Trip: Sacramento Police Department’s Communication Center(9:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.); Tour of Communication Center and Use ofForce and Defense training, ACB and Taser demonstration—(arrest, con-trol, baton), verbal judo, canine demonstration.

Week Five: Race as a Factor in the Criminal Justice System.Summary: Learn about law enforcement training on racial profiling andefforts to open lines of communication between law enforcement and thecommunities they serve. The commission addressing racial profiling, astudy on patrol stops and the relevance of race in prosecution will be dis-cussed. Topics include: Sheriff Outreach Community Advisory Board, In-Car Camera System, Racial Profiling Commission, and the districtattorney’s office.

Week Six: Federal Criminal Justice System. Summary: Focus on the federal system of justice and how it differs from

5

the state system. How is it decided whether a case is prosecuted federallyor in state court? Topics include: Judges School and Training, U.S. Attor-ney’s Office, Federal Bureau of Investigations, Federal and Local Task-forces.

Week Seven: The Hypothetical Case: Anatomy of a Criminal Case fromOffense, Investigation, Trial, to Sentencing—“The Big Picture.”Summary: Presenters engage in the analysis of a hypothetical case fromthe offense, investigation, arrest, trial (prosecution and defense), to sen-tencing and probation. The speakers talk about their various roles in thecriminal justice system and the issues involved. They demonstrate howthey would handle the hypothetical case and then discuss with the classtheir individual perspectives. Expert Consultants: Criminal investigator and patrol officer, criminal de-fense panel attorney, chief deputy public defender, superior court judge,probation, chief deputy district attorney. Field Trip: Visit/tour of district attorney’s office, jail facilities and bookingprocess, lunch with the judges, visit/tour of courthouse and jury commis-sioner and jury lounge, public defender’s office.

Week Eight: The Judicial System: “… and Justice for All.”Summary: Our court system exists to serve the people by providing an

impartial and accessible forum for prosecuting those charged with crimes,resolving the civil disputes of citizens and organizations, interpreting ourlaws, and protecting the rights and liberties guaranteed by our state andfederal constitutions. Consultants from week seven will share their insightbased on real life challenges of the various roles involved in the hypotheti-cal case.

Week Nine: Community Focus and Gangs.Summary: Learn about a special unit that focuses on street gangs. Whatconstitutes a gang? Who are the members? What does it mean to be a“gang member”? What can communities do to help prevent this problemand combat it today?

Week Ten: Building Bridges and Partnerships. Community Policing, andCommunity Participation. “Where do we go from here?”Graduation Summary: Closing remarks on community involvement andparticipation to achieve long-term public safety solutions and strategies;graduation reception and ceremony.Speakers: District attorney, chief of police, sheriff, chair of SacramentoDistrict Attorney’s Multicultural Community Council, law enforcementchaplaincy, neighborhood watch coordinators, volunteer coordinators,community members.

T he National Center for Community Prosecution and the Centerfor Court Innovation with support from the Bureau of Justice As-sistance has established a new online forum for community prose-

cutors. “Comm-Pros” is intended as a vehicle for peer-to-peerexchange of ideas, news, questions and suggestions. Subscribers mayjoin the “Comm-Pros” forum by sending an e-mail message to:COMM-PROS-SUBSCRIBE-REQUEST@home.ease.lsoft.com.

The National Center for Community Prosecution (NCCP) recom-

mends that all subscribers to the Building Bridges newsletter subscribeto the “Comm-Pros” online forum. By 2009, NCCP will be changingthe format of the distribution of its newsletter. Soon, subscribers willonly be able to receive the newsletter through two mediums either inelectronic format through the online forum or by accessing NCCP’sWeb site at: http://www.ndaa.org/publications/newsletters/building_bridges_contents.html.

COMMUNITY PROSECUTION ONLINE FORUM

Brooklyn’s district attorney, Charles J. Hynes, is a national leader andpioneer in diversion strategies used in courts across the country. In-deed, many of his diversion from incarceration programs have gar-

nered acclaim over recent years and have been replicated both nationallyand internationally. DA Hynes believes that violent criminals belong inprison but that non-violent offenders need sentences that contemplate re-habilitation, education and prevention strategies. Therefore, it is littlewonder that prosecutors are encouraged to use mediation whenever pos-sible. Mediation is an indisputably common sense option that not onlyhelps the victims and offenders but also helps the community. Resolvingdisputes in the community before they rise to the level of a crime is an

excellent prevention strategy. Moreover, disputes that have already endedup in the criminal justice system can easily escalate and, if not appropri-ately dealt with, can lead to a more serious crime.

Criminal court is an ideal place to look for mediation-appropriatecases. Many low-level criminal offenses involving threats and/or physicalviolence arise from conflicts between parties who not only know eachother but who must continue to co-exist beyond the life of the case. Forexample, parenting, housing, neighbor and employment disputes are oftenat the root of the violence. These underlying disputes are ripe for media-tion and are almost always better served by this strategy than by traditionalsentencing strategies. Indeed, mediation is the best way for the parties to

New Approaches to MediationBy Gerianne Abriano

6

move towards future positive interactions. There are also circumstances, al-beit more limited, where strangers can benefit from one of the variousmediation options. Presently, Kings County (Brooklyn) offers two uniquemediation opportunities, and their use in resolving both criminal casesand community conflicts is discussed below. A third variation of mediationthat will soon be used in Kings County is discussed as well.

Safe Horizon Mediation Project The first and most-often used option is the Safe Horizon Mediation proj-ect used by both the downtown criminal court and the criminal court atthe Red Hook Community Justice Center (RHCJC). Although the me-diators in both venues are trained by Safe Horizon, one of the largestproviders of conflict resolution services in the country, the Red HookMediation Center is administered by the Center for Court Innovation,and the downtown Mediation is run by Safe Horizon itself. The examplesand cases cited here are from Red Hook criminal court cases and RedHook neighborhood issues.

Mediation in the CourtroomIn criminal court, prosecutors are encouraged to consider mediation incross-complaint scenarios, that is, cases where both parties have been ar-rested. There, mediation is almost always desired by both parties becausethey are both in jeopardy of conviction in the respective criminal cases.Thus, there is a shared incentive to try to resolve the conflict with media-tion. As long as a mediator is available, it is not uncommon for the parties

in a cross-complaint to agree to and participate in mediation within hoursof their arrest. Typically, after a successful mediation, neither party desiresan order of protection so the case can be dismissed. In non-cross-com-plaint scenarios in which the victim still wants an order of protection de-spite a successful mediation, the defendant will typically plead guilty to aviolation so that the order of protection can remain intact for a period oftwo years. In some instances, an adjournment in contemplation of dis-missal (ACD) is granted, which allows for a six-month order of protection.

One example of a case where mediation was used involved twocousins. Both were ice cream sellers who wanted to sell on the same streetcorner. They had a verbal altercation that quickly became physical. Eachparty asserted that the other one “assaulted me first,” and that they weremerely defending themselves. The parties spent the night in jail and ap-peared in court the following morning, each with visible bruising. Theyinsisted that they did not want to go forward with the case and neitherwanted an order of protection. Despite this, it would not have been goodpractice to have dismissed the cases based only upon their mutual desire todo so without first engaging in some sort of meaningful intervention.Mediation was recommended. The parties agreed and went on to have asuccessful mediation. They reached a compromise on the underlying causeof the dispute. Their cases were dismissed, leaving both parties’ previouslyuntarnished records intact. Without mediation, which resolved the under-lying issue, there likely would have been future, and potentially more seri-ous, altercations.

Another example evolved out of a domestic dispute.1 A couple with ayoung child, in the process of divorcing, had multiple verbal altercations.The woman's cousin, the defendant in our case, threatened to physicallyhurt the husband if he continued to upset his cousin. Resolution becamedifficult as both parties were adamant about the incompatible outcomesthey each sought. The prosecutor encouraged the victim (the husband) to

agree to mediation by emphasizing that it was in the best interests of thechild. Moreover, the prosecutor helped the victim get beyond his angerand shifted the focus to the child’s future and the milestones in the child’slife that both parties wanted to share with the child (birthdays, gradua-tions, holidays, religious ceremonies, etc.). At that point, the victim’s de-meanor softened. In his anger, he had been unable to see beyond the case,but it was obvious that he began to realize what was really important. Me-diation was again successful and significantly increased the odds that futurecontact between the parties would be positive instead of hostile and po-tentially dangerous.

Mediation in the CommunityIn addition to using mediation in criminal cases, it is also used as a pre-ventive measure. All too often, situations in the community that could leadto a physical altercation or that simply cry out for neutral third party in-tervention are observed. Two examples of this played out at communitymeetings. The first involved amplified preaching at a local park. A religiousgroup used the amplifiers as a means of reaching out to homeless peoplein and around the park. They offered food and proselytized about religion.The nearby residents began to discuss this at the meeting, complainingthat the preaching was so loud it interfered with the quality of their timeat home. After several residents voiced their concerns to the police captain,a woman in the back stood up and identified herself as one of the preach-ers. The situation became contentious, but deescalated when the prosecu-tor intervened. The prosecutor offered to speak with the parties separatelyafter the meeting to determine if mediation would be an option. Ulti-mately, both parties agreed. Mediation was arranged, and included bothparties as well as representatives from several city agencies involved in parksafety and regulations. They reached a compromise on decibel levels andthe duration of time for amplified preaching during weekends. There wereno further problems.

Similarly, increased commercial development in another local area ledto problems encountered by residents. An increase of bars and restaurantsin the area brought a greater number of public urination, noise complaintsand other quality of life concerns. At one public meeting, the residentswere vocal about one bar in particular, and it turned out that the ownersof the establishment were, unbeknownst to anyone, at the meeting as well.Once again, the prosecutor at the meeting suggested mediation, whichwas immediately agreed to by both parties. As a result, each party gained abetter understanding of the other’s frustrations and a compromise wasreached.

Victim-Offender Dialogue Program The second unique mediation program is the Victim-Offender DialogueProgram that is run by Safe Horizon. This project, although very similarto typical mediation, has slight differences. The most significant distinctionis that Victim-Offender Dialogue is victim driven. It is more likely to beused when there is an obvious victim as opposed to a scenario where bothparties perceive the other as being the offending party. In fact, an admis-sion of guilt is required to ensure that the victim is not re-victimized byan offender who will not acknowledge the harm caused. Additionally, me-diation is usually viewed as the actual resolution or disposition of the casewhile Victim-Offender Dialogue can be either pre or post sentence.

Victim-Offender Dialogue offers opportunities for those most directlyaffected by crime—the victim, the offender, their families and the com-munity—to be directly involved in responding to the harm caused by acrime. It is an opportunity for them to talk directly with each other in asafe setting. Safe Horizon emphasizes that the potential benefits for vic-tims are empowerment, healing and holding the offenders accountablethrough restitution and other means. Offenders, likewise, benefit from thedialogue as it allows them to learn the impact of the offense, to develop aplan for making amends and to gain a sense of closure.

Studies consistently show that offenders involved in Victim-OffenderMediation programs have lower recidivism rates than offenders who donot participate in Victim-Offender Mediation, and that those who do re-

In criminal court, prosecutors areencouraged to consider mediation incross-complaint scenarios, that is, caseswhere both parties have been arrested.

7

National District Attorneys AssociationAmerican Prosecutors Research InstituteAPRI's National Center for Community Prosecution 99 Canal Center Plaza, Suite 510Alexandria, Virginia 22314www.ndaa.org

The National Center for Community Prosecution is a program of the American Prosecu-tors Research Institute, the research and development division of the National District At-torneys Association. This publication was prepared under Grant No. 2007-DD-BX-K173from the Bureau of Justice Assistance, U.S. Department of Justice. The Bureau of JusticeAssistance is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bu-reau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, the Office of Juvenile Justice andDelinquency Prevention, and the Office for Victims of Crime. Points of view or opinionsin this document are those of the authors and do not represent the official position orpolicies of the United States Department of Justice, NDAA or APRI.

Non ProfitOrganizationU.S. Postage

PAIDMerrifield, VA

Permit No. 795

offend are more likely to commit less serious crimes than their non-pro-gram counterparts. Further, studies also reveal that victims who participatein Victim-Offender Mediation experience high levels of satisfaction withthe process.

Kings County used Victim-Offender Dialogue in the following matter:A 16-year-old male was arrested for assaulting a 15-year-old. The disputerelated to a young woman who was the object of the romantic attentionof both. There was a minor injury to the victim, but the victim’s motherdid not want to proceed with prosecution because of empathy for the de-fendant. She asked if there was a way that the two boys and their motherscould sit down together, talk about what happened, and develop a plan toavoid future conflict. Because the young men were students at the sameschool, it was essential to resolve the underlying issues. Since it seemedclear that the defendant was the primary aggressor, Victim-Offender Me-diation was more appropriate than any other type of mediation. This op-tion holds an offender accountable for his actions and also benefits thevictim by allowing him to hear an expression of remorse, learn about theoffenders’ motives and provides a better sense of closure. The Victim-Of-fender Dialogue was successful in this case.

Finally, the Kings County District Attorney’s Office is partnering withthe Vera Institute of Justice on a very novel and exciting Participatory Jus-tice Initiative. Kings County will be the demonstration site for what mayvery well become a national model. The initiative involves the implemen-tation of a Victim-Offender-Mediation strategy that will function as a di-version program for young offenders. The target population for thisinitiative is young adults ages 16-24 who are facing serious charges thathave victimized individuals who elect to participate in this program. Theprogram will also require restitution and community service with a pleaof guilt.

This Participatory Justice Initiative will be similar to Victim-OffenderDialogue in that it will also be victim driven and only used with the ex-

press consent of the victim. However, there will be many significant dif-ferences between the Participatory Justice Initiative and the other media-tion programs. Not only will the offenders be young, they will be facingfelony and serious misdemeanor convictions. This method will be usedonly if it is more likely that the process will ultimately have a positive ef-fect on the victim.

When the victim agrees, the case will be diverted from a jail or prisonresolution for mediation. This compares with existing programs that me-diate with misdemeanor offenders who do not typically face incarceration.Rather, they would more likely be sentenced to a community-based sen-tence. Here, the offenders would be facing significant jail/prison terms.Therefore, due to the seriousness of the offenses, there will be extensivepreparation prior to the onset of the mediation. One of the primary goalsof the mediation will be to formulate an agreed-upon sentence that willserve justice and meet the needs of all the parties. As previously noted,many cases are dismissed pursuant to successful mediation—the mediationitself is the resolution. In the Participatory Justice model, this will not bethe case. The mediation will include the formulation of an agreed uponsentence in which the victim retains a voice. This promises to serve as astrong source of empowerment for victims.

Most significantly, the Participatory Justice Initiative joins other suc-cessful diversion programs in Brooklyn to diminish reliance on incarcera-tion when it does not serve the public interest, to address the negative andharmful experience of crime victims, and to promote the public safety.The research demonstrates consistent results in satisfaction, sense of safety,recidivism, and mental health outcomes. Therefore, Kings County expectsnationwide replication of these innovative programs.

1 For many reasons, mediation is not appropriate in domestic violence cases be-tween intimate partners. An imbalance of power is often found in those relation-ships, and the victims would be significantly disadvantaged because of that.