论执法战术行动的警察意识

有效的警察执法战斗方式是缉捕犯罪嫌疑人最基本的途径。要达到效果,必须由执法的主体——人民警察来实施。而战术行动方式的警察意识、战术行动目的的警察意识和战术行动规律的警察意识是警察战斗行动必须包含并具备的,否则,再好的战术方案、战斗计划都是枉然。     

警察武力使用的困惑与教学训练的反思

使用武力是人民警察自卫和打击、制服犯罪分子、犯罪嫌疑人的强制措施和保障生命安全的必要手段。然而,在警察执法实践中,思想观念陈旧,安全意识、法律程序意识乃至人权意识淡薄,违法使用武力、使用武力过当造成的伤害事例时有发生。因此,改变观念,强化法治意识,强化警务技能与战术训练,建全法律保障制度势在必行。     

战术心理战在警察实施清查行动中的作用

公安机关实施清查行动是针对犯罪分子或重大犯罪嫌疑人可能藏身落脚或来往出没的地点、场所进行清理和检查的一类作战行动。警察通过清查行动其目的在于寻找、发现和缉捕违法、犯罪分子或犯罪嫌疑人。心理战是攻心战。警察心理战,是通过各种有效的途径、渠道,运用不同的方式、方法及手段,为了治理、防控、打击、制服社会违法犯罪,而积极地影响、作用或利用执法对象心理状态、品格及其心理弱点的活动过程。而清查行动中实施战术心理战,则是警察为了在执行清理和检查任务时,为达到战术目的而进行的心理攻势,这是一种对抗状态下的战术心理战运用。通过清查行动中战术心理战的应用,尽快识别作战对象,从而达到清查行动的战术组织实施目的,提高清理检查行动的适应性和效率效益。     

浅谈警务战术训练的内容和任务

警务战术是指人民警察指挥员对所属警力在执法中侦查、逮捕违法者的组织与指挥的警察行动。警务战术训练是警察实战一个重要的教育过程,是对警员法律、体能、技能、战术、心理、社会"六合一"的综合训练,使之达到和谐发展,以便提高能力,确保国家安全社会稳定。     

人民警察执法权益保障机制与对策研究

人民警察执法权益保障机制是指以法律形式赋予人民警察依法执行公务的权力，充分运用警察技术与警察战术改善执法环境，维护法律的严肃性和权威性，保证人民警察生命安全、减少伤亡的执法措施。通过保障机制，可以为处置“暴力袭警”和阻碍人民警察执法事件赢得时间和空间，使用有效的警察技术与警察战术，平息暴力危机现场的紧张与对峙状态。当前实际部门在处置此类突发性危机事件时采取的处置方法存在较多的问题。保障机制是法律化的具体体现，保障机制的灵活性体现了以人为本的价值理念。     

招录体制改革下的警务实战技能与战术课程教学改革的探讨

警务实战技能与战术是警察执行勤务活动中控制犯罪嫌疑人必须具备的执法能力,警务实战技能与战术教学与训练就是为了提高执法警察临场行动中的执法能力。各公安院校都将其作为一门重要的实训课程并进行了教学的改革的尝试,取得了一定的经验成果。随着《2008年政法     

浅析缉捕战术的类型与程序

人民警察在缉捕犯罪嫌疑人时,应根据情况选择缉捕战术类型和缉捕战术程序,从而保证自身安全,顺利完成缉捕任务。     

警务实战技能与战术教育训练研究

1.警务实战技能与警察实战战术的概念警务实战技能训练是提高警察执行公务必需、必备技术及战术能力的训练。我国公安民警的警务实战技能训练是指公安系统人民警察依法必备并别于其他国家公务执法人员的独特能力和特殊技能训练。警务实战技能训练的主要内容包括:警察     

警察战术的内涵及研究体系

在我国,伴随着刑事犯罪的暴力化、集团化和智能化的加剧以及打击刑事犯罪力度的加大,人民警察为此付出的伤亡代价愈来愈大。为了有力地打击犯罪,更好地保护人民群众和警察自身的生命财产安全,警察战术这门新兴的学科应运而生。目前,警察战术的理论与实践许多方面还不成熟,特别是在基本范畴和     

警察战术行动指挥与实施探讨

本文着重分析了研究了现代警察战术行动指挥以及相应的实施情况,探讨了目前警察战术方面所存在的部分问题以及其相应的解决方案,为广大警察提供了日后行动了理论依据和实践基础。     

影响警察武力使用的若干因素

警察武力使用是警察进行自我防护与打击制服罪犯或犯罪嫌疑人的重要手段。法律、技战术、心理以及装备等因素都对警察武力使用有影响,应提高警察武力使用的水平,增强警察武力使用的效果,使警察在执法实践中能依法、及时、有效地使用武力,确保自身安全,顺利完成职责任务。     

海峡两岸遣返刑事犯或刑事嫌疑犯的困境和范围

在两岸遣返实践中,两岸对遣返性质的争论、遣返规范缺乏可操作性以及两岸对遣返对象的争论,是制约两岸刑事犯遣返机制顺利进行的三大困境.遣返的对象主要是刑事犯或刑事嫌疑犯,但还存在一定的限制性条件.     

Differences in personality and mental state between suspects and witnesses immediately after being interviewed by the police

Abstract

There is increased recognition that people interviewed by the police are often psychologically vulnerable due to modest intelligence, mental health problems, disturbed mental state, and personality problems. The current study aimed to investigate differences in the mental state and personality between suspects and witnesses. The participants were 78 individuals (47 suspects and 31 witnesses) who had been interviewed by the Icelandic police. They were assessed psychologically immediately after the interview with the police was completed. Significant differences emerged between the two groups with the suspects being more depressed, hopeless, compliant and personality disordered than the witnesses. Four of the suspects claimed to have made a false confession to the police due to their immediate need or psychological problems.     

Exploring the Disclosure of Forensic Evidence in Police Interviews with Suspects

Despite many years of empirical research focusing on investigative interviewing and detecting deception, very little research attention has been paid to the various types of evidence which feature in police interviews with suspects. In particular, the use of forensic evidence in the context of police interviews has not been previously considered, although in recent years the availability of various types of forensic analyses has dramatically increased. In the current study 398 experienced police interviewers from various countries completed a questionnaire about their experience of using various types of forensic evidence in interviews with suspects, as well as their perceptions regarding the strength of various sources of forensic information and how this may affect their interviewing strategy. The results indicated that although the participants have forensic evidence available in a large proportion of their interviews with suspects, the vast majority of police interviewers have received no training about how to interpret or use such forensic information. However, the perceived strength of forensic evidence was reported by some participants to affect their interview strategy and specifically the timing of the disclosure of such evidence during an interview. These findings are discussed with reference to police training and interview techniques, and suggestions for further research are offered.     

A study of the potential risk of gunshot residue transfer from special units of the police to arrested suspects

The presence of gunshot residues (GSRs) on arrested suspects can help the Court to form an opinion regarding the possibility of utilization of firearms by these suspects. Since the presence of a few particles can in some cases already have a strong indicative value, the GSR experts have to evaluate in their daily work the risk of a potential contamination of these suspects during their arrest. A few studies conducted on police officers and police facilities concluded that the risk of secondary transfer on arrested suspects is quite negligible. However, the case of special force units of the police should be taken into account, since these units can be assumed to be highly contaminated by GSR due to their intensive training. The aim of this study is to evaluate this possibility of particle transfer by performing simulations of arrests by special force police units, according to both low and high contamination scenarios. The results show that secondary transfers of GSR during these simulations are in most cases not negligible, even for the low contamination scenario. This is especially apparent on the vests of the target persons, with an average of 7 GSR particles (2 PbBaSb and 5 TiZn) found on the stubs used on these materials. Of course, the major contamination levels were observed in the case of the high contamination scenario, due to the use of highly contaminated gloves by the police officers during the arrests. Some recommendations are proposed to take into account this risk of contamination and to try to minimize it, or at least to better identify it.     

Police officers’ judgements of veracity,tenseness, cognitive load and attempted behavioural control in real-life police interviews

Abstract

The present experiment examined the apparently incongruent findings that police officers (i) believe that suspects show nervous behaviour when they lie but (ii) seem able to detect deceit in suspects who do not show nervous behaviours. It was hypothesized that police officers’ judgements about whether a suspect is lying would not be correlated with their judgements regarding whether the suspect is tense, but, instead, would be correlated with their judgements regarding whether suspects are having to think hard or attempting to control their behaviour.

Each of 84 police officers saw seven truths and seven lies told by suspects during their police interviews. Participants in Condition 1 were asked to indicate after each clip whether the suspect was lying, whereas participants in Condition 2 were asked to note after each clip to what extent the suspect appeared to be tense, having to think hard or attempting to control their behaviour. Condition 3 was a combination of Conditions 1 and 2 and participants were asked all the above questions. The findings support the hypotheses and therefore negate the assumption that police officers primarily look for cues of nervousness when they attempt to detect deceit.     

Can Making It Harder to Convict Criminals Ever Reduce Crime?

This paper attempts to find the optimal level of the burden of proof needed in criminal cases in order to minimize crime. It also aims to provide an explanation for the higher burden of proof required in criminal cases than civil cases. It assumes that police officers receive incentive payments for convictions in cases they investigate. Although the direct effect of a higher burden of proof requirement is to reduce the probability of conviction, the indirect effect is to force police officers to build stronger cases and put more effort into finding suspects who are more likely to be guilty. Moreover, the increase in the marginal probability of conviction potential criminals face when they actually commit a crime increases. These factors imply that a reduction in the burden of proof will not necessarily reduce crime.