Posted on

Drugs as Coercion: Human Trafficking and Toxicology

Human traffickers control their victims through force, fraud, and/or coercion. Coercion, specifically, can take many forms, including seeking out vulnerable victims facing substance abuse. In other cases, traffickers may introduce victims to drugs and alcohol to facilitate their crimes and establish additional control. Understanding basic toxicology better allows law enforcement, prosecutors, and medical professionals to recognize how drugs and alcohol affect a victims’ ability to disclose, participate in the criminal justice system, and recover from the trauma of trafficking.

This webinar recording will identify common dynamics in sex and labor trafficking and describe how drugs and alcohol are used to assert and maintain control over victims and perpetrate trafficking and trafficking-related crimes. The presenter discusses the importance of and strategies for collaborating with service providers and medical professionals to identify drug-facilitated human trafficking, provide much-needed care, and educate other allied professionals about the effects of drug use in the context of trafficking dynamics.

Allied justice system professionals including (but not limited to) prosecutors, law enforcement officers, community-based service providers, probation and parole officers, judges, etc. are encouraged to view the recording.

CLE Credits
This webinar recording should qualify prosecutors for one (1.0) hour of continuing legal education credits. Prosecutors are encouraged to contact their state bar association in reference to application requirements and related fees.

Posted on

Restitution and Asset Forfeiture: A Focus on Human Trafficking

Human trafficking is tantamount to modern slavery and is a crime with devastating consequences. This resource summarizes the restitution and asset forfeiture laws related to human trafficking in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, U.S. Territories, and federal jurisdictions. An analysis of the laws was conducted, and summaries of the restitution and asset forfeiture laws are included within. The full text of these statutes is included, as well as the citation for the relevant human trafficking statute(s) for each jurisdiction.

Restitution-and-Asset-Forfeiture-A-Focus-on-Human-Trafficking

Posted on

To Record or Not To Record: Use of Body-Worn Cameras During Police Response to Crimes of Violence Against Women

For a variety of reasons—officer safety, public accountability, evidence collection, and departmental transparency—an increasing number of police departments have adopted, or are considering adopting, the use of body-worn cameras (BWCs). While BWCs can provide helpful evidence in cases involving gender-based violence (GBV), their use may also adversely impact victim safety and privacy. This article discusses many of the issues law enforcement, prosecutors, and allied professionals must consider when BWCs are used in GBV investigations. The article describes the importance of multidisciplinary collaboration – at the local, state, and federal levels – in order to develop effective BWC policies that address victim safety, privacy, and autonomy. The article also addresses issues such as deactivation of a BWC at appropriate points during the investigation; privacy and safety considerations; discovery, redaction, protective orders limiting dissemination; and requests under freedom of information or open records statutes.

To-Record-or-Not-To-Record-Use-of-Body-Worn-Cameras-During-Police-Response-to-Crimes-of-Violence-Against-Women-SIB29

Posted on

Understanding the U.S. Supreme Court’s Decision on Post-Trial DNA Testing in Osborne

On June 19, 2009, In District Attorney v. Osborne, the U.S. Supreme Court held that criminal defendants do not have a federal due process right to post–trial DNA testing. This article gives an overview of the facts and impacts of the case. Osborne’s supporters argued that if evidence existed that could conclusively show whether or not a defendant committed the crime then it should be tested. But these arguments ignore the fact that Osborne’s trial counsel’s decision to not request more specific pre-trial DNA testing was to avoid further incrimination of Osborne. This case is a reminder that prosecutors should strive to have policies that are fair and open-minded and place the interests of justice ahead of a desire to simply fight to preserve all convictions.

Understanding_the_U.S._Supreme_Courts_Decision_on_Post-Trial_DNA_Testing_in_Osborne_Issue_2

Posted on

Supreme Court Clarifies Miranda

On February 24, 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Maryland v. Shatzer, in which it reinstated a defendant’s child abuse conviction and announced a new rule that permits the police to resume questioning of suspects (who had previously invoked their right to remain silent) 14 days after they’re released from police custody. This ruling expands the ability of law enforcement officers to conduct suspect interviews in ongoing investigations where the body of evidence continues to build over time. The facts of Shatzer exemplify that a victim’s disclosure of sexual abuse is often a process that takes time, and the facts of this case presented the Court with an opportunity to create a common sense rule that appropriately balances the constitutional rights of the accused with the need to hold offenders accountable and seek justice for victims of crime.

Supreme_Court_Clarifies_Miranda_Issue_3

Posted on

Miranda Under the Microscope Again

This article provides an overview of Berghuis, Warden v. Thompkins, a case involving an individual’s waiver of his right to remain silent pursuant to Miranda v. Arizona. The Court held that after properly administering the Miranda warning, the police did not need an express or implied waiver of rights before they interrogated the subject and that the suspect in this case failed to clearly invoke his right to remain silent by simply remaining mostly silent during the interrogation. The case doesn’t appear to drastically impact Miranda, but it does offer law enforcement additional guidance on when and how they can proceed with questioning suspects.

Miranda_Under_the_Microscope_Again_Issue_4