Title: Urban Street Gang Enforcement.
Series: Monograph
Author: Bureau of Justice Assistance
Published: August 1999
Subject: Gangs, Crime Prevention
156 pages
319,000 bytes

----------------------------

Forms and tables are not included in this ASCII plain-text file. To view this
document in its entirety, download the Adobe Acrobat graphic file available
from this Web site or order a print copy from BJA at 800-688-4252.

----------------------------

January 1997

Reprinted August 1999

NCJ 161845

----------------------------

U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
810 Seventh Street NW.
Washington, DC 20531

Janet Reno
Attorney General

Raymond C. Fisher
Associate Attorney General

Laurie Robinson
Assistant Attorney General

Noel Brennan
Deputy Assistant Attorney General

Nancy E. Gist
Director, Bureau of Justice Assistance


Office of Justice Programs
World Wide Web Home Page
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov

Bureau of Justice Assistance
World Wide Web Home Page
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA

For grant and funding information contact
U.S. Department of Justice Response Center
1-800-421-6770

----------------------------

This document was prepared by the Institute for Law and Justice, Inc.,
supported by grant number 92-DD-CX-0014, awarded by the Bureau of
Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. The
opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this
document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official
position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.

----------------------------

The Bureau of Justice Assistance is a component of the Office of Justice
Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National
Institute of Justice, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention,
and the Office for Victims of Crime.

----------------------------

Foreword

Gangs have been a major contributor to the growth of violent crime in the past
decade. Heavily armed with sophisticated weapons, gangs are involved in
drug trafficking, murder, witness intimidation, robbery, extortion, and turf
battles. Gangs now operate in cities of all sizes, as well as suburban
communities throughout the United States; gang violence no longer is limited to
major cities. 

What is being done to stop gang activity? Federal, State, and local law
enforcement agencies across the country have implemented innovative and
resourceful initiatives to stop gangs from terrorizing our communities.
Interagency and multijurisdictional efforts range from special units dedicated to
investigating and prosecuting gang-related crimes to state-of-the-art surveillance
equipment and sophisticated data collection and analysis technologies. 

Our purpose in developing Model Strategies for Urban Street Gang
Enforcement was to create processes and strategies that would be useful in
many jurisdictions. No one method will solve the gang problem; however, some
methods are more effective and better suited to certain situations.

This monograph presents strategies to enhance prosecution of gang-related
crimes. It focuses exclusively on enforcement and prosecution strategies against
urban street gangs. The model programs introduced here offer strategies largely
based on the practical experiences of agencies that participated in a
demonstration program funded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) and
designed to establish model approaches to prevent and suppress gang violence. 

This monograph offers a step-by-step guide for designing and implementing a
program based on Model Strategies for Urban Street Gang Enforcement. It
identifies and explores innovative methods of prosecuting gang members
involved in criminal activities. Program examples and case studies from the
seven demonstration sites illustrate how local objectives were met. By
documenting and disseminating effective strategies to combat gang violence,
BJA hopes to assist law enforcement agencies. 

Nancy E. Gist
Director

----------------------------

Acknowledgments

The Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) wishes to thank the Institute for Law
and Justice (ILJ) staff for their efforts in writing this monograph. Specifically,
Edward Connors, Barbara Webster, Neal Miller, Claire Johnson, and Elizabeth
Fraser were responsible for the project research and document preparation.
Bill Falcon conducted research and drafted several sections, and Diana Saenz
and Peter Ohlhausen performed research and provided editorial support in
preparing the draft. Luke Galant was the BJA Program Manager responsible
for oversight of this document.

----------------------------

Contents


Executive Summary

Chapter 1: Introduction
 
Focus on Law Enforcement

Urban Street Gang Program

Gang Problems Addressed by This Prototype

Varying Levels of Law Enforcement Resources

Chapter 2: Key Elements of the Gang Suppression Prototype

Planning and Analysis

Gang Information and Intelligence Systems

Gang Suppression Strategies and Tactics

Interagency Cooperation and Collaboration

Legal Issues

Evaluation

Chapter 3: Planning and Analysis

The Need for Common Definitions

Analysis

o Types of Analysis

o Levels of Analysis

Assessment of Criminal Gang Activity

o The Nature and Extent of the Gang Problem

o Gang Patterns and Trends

o The Environment

-- The Jurisdiction as a Whole

-- Targeted Neighborhoods

o Information Sources

o Inventory of Resources

Implementation and Management Plan

o Department Organizational Issues

o Goals, Objectives, and Strategies

o Communication and Publicity

o Training

o Evaluation

Chapter 4: Gang Information and Intelligence Systems

Importance of the Gang Database

o Overcoming Denial

o Targeting Gangs

o Selecting Suppression Strategies and Tactics

o Increasing Officer Safety

o Tracking Gang Mobility

Determining Content of the Gang Database

o How Gang-Related Definitions Affect Database Content

-- Gang-Related Crime Versus Gang-Motivated Crime

-- Gang Members Versus Gang "Wannabes"


Data Elements for Intelligence and Management

o Strategic, Tactical, and Managerial 

o Information Needs

o Legal Requirements

o Manual Versus Automated Systems

Database Information Sources

o Patrol Officers

o Gang Specialists

o Confidential Informants

o Other Criminal Justice Agencies

o Community Organizations and Agencies

o Outside Databases

-- Regional Information Sharing Systems

-- The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms

-- Gang Reporting, Evaluation, and Tracking

-- Regional Databases

Disseminating Gang Information

o Within the Agency

o To Other Criminal Justice Agencies

Chapter 5: Gang Suppression Operations and Tactics

Developing Strategies Based on Gang Intelligence

o Street Gang Classifications and Characteristics

-- Asian Street Gangs

-- Hispanic Gangs

-- Crips and Bloods

-- Jamaican Posses

-- Chicago Gangs

-- Other Street Gangs

-- Other Criminal Gangs

Implications of Gang Characteristics for Law Enforcement Strategies

o Language and Cultural Barriers

o Control of Geographic Areas

o Insulation of Adult Leaders

o Knowledge of Police Operations and Policies

o Hidden Wealth

o Status as Illegal Residents

o Aggressive Attempts To Organize Local Gangs

An Overview of Suppression Tactics

o Use of Confidential Informants and Undercover Officers

-- Confidential Informants

--Undercover Officers

o Surveillance/Arrest, Buy/Bust, and Reverse Sting Operations

--Surveillance/Arrest


-- Buy/Bust

-- Reverse Stings

o Interdiction, Barriers, Sweeps, and Warrant Execution

-- Interdiction

-- Barriers

-- Sweeps

-- Execution of Warrants

o Other Investigative Approaches

-- Surveillance

-- Followup Investigations

-- Task Forces

-- Other Approaches

o Suppression Through Patrol

-- Directed Patrol

-- Community-Oriented Policing

o Suppression Through Enforcement of Codes and Abatement Ordinances

Chapter 6: Interagency Cooperation and Collaboration 

Police-Prosecutor Cooperation

o Vertical Prosecution

o Early Involvement and Advice

o Managing and Protecting Witnesses

Coordination With Probation and Parole

Coordination With Corrections and the Courts

o Alerting Officials to Gang Arrests

o Court Security

Cooperation With the Crime Laboratory

Cooperation With Federal Agencies

Chapter 7: Legal Issues

Criminal Code Law Enforcement

o Traditional Criminal Code Provisions

o Innovative Law Enforcement Provisions

-- Racketeering Enterprise Laws

-- Street Gang Laws

-- Enhanced Punishment

-- Aiding and Abetting

Law Enforcement Action

o Police Gang Suppression Operations

-- The Terry Stop

-- Arrest

o Criminal Investigations

-- Confidential Informants

-- Undercover Officers

-- Drug Buys and Sales


-- Forced Entry

-- Surveillance

o Interdiction

-- Roadblocks

--Traffic Stops

-- Street Barriers

o Gang Information Systems

Innovative Uses of Criminal and Civil Law

o Nuisance Abatement

o Gang Ordinances

o Building Code Requirements

o Parental Liability

o Curfew Laws

o School Regulations

Prosecution Issues

o Maximum Penalties

-- Cross Assignment

-- Enhancement Charges

-- Juvenile Records

o Witness Intimidation

--Witness Intimidation Laws

-- Protecting Testimony

--Victim Advocate

Chapter 8: Evaluation

Process Evaluation

o Describing the Program Environment

o Describing the Process

o Describing and Measuring Program Operations

o Identifying Intervening Events

o Collecting Process Data

Impact Evaluation

o Dependent Variables

o Comparison or Control Groups

o Basic Evaluation Procedures

-- Carefully State the Hypothesized Effects

-- Identify Possible Unintended Effects

-- Define Measurement Criteria

-- Determine Appropriate Time Periods

-- Monitor Program Implementation

-- Collect Data Systematically

-- Analyze Data

-- Replicate the Program

Endnotes


Appendix A: Bibliography

Appendix B: Sources for Further Information and Technical Assistance

----------------------------

Exhibits

1. Types of Analysis

2. Gang Member Identification Criteria

3. Data Elements Commonly Included in Gang Information Systems

4. Data Collection Instrument, Urban Street Gang Drug Trafficking
Enforcement Program

----------------------------

Executive Summary

According to the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) of the U.S. Department of
Justice, law enforcement agencies in the United States are confronted with the
presence of more than 4,800 gangs and 250,000 gang members. To help law
enforcement agencies combat this menace, this monograph presents a program
model, or prototype, for urban street gang enforcement that applies whether or
not a police department or prosecutor's office that wishes to implement the
model has a specialized gang enforcement unit. This model is called Model
Strategies for Urban Street Gang Enforcement (Model Strategies).

The Model Strategies are based largely on the practical experiences of agencies
that participated in the Urban Street Gang Drug Trafficking Enforcement
Program (Urban Street Gang Program) funded by the Bureau of Justice
Assistance (BJA), U.S. Department of Justice, from July 1989 through March
1996. Additional information was obtained through onsite interviews with police
departments, a mail survey with telephone followup, and a literature review.
The program strategies focus almost exclusively on enforcement and
prosecution of gangs. 

One challenge faced in developing a gang enforcement model is determining
those processes and strategies that may be useful in many jurisdictions and not
just in demonstration sites. Although gangs share characteristics such as
trafficking in illegal drugs, committing violent crimes, and intimidating witnesses,
they differ in others, such as degree of organization, ethnic background, and use
of profits. No one prescription is universal for treating the gang problem;
however, certain methods should prove more generally effective.

The intended audience for the monograph is primarily law enforcement
administrators, managers, supervisors, and prosecutors. Other criminal justice
and community leaders who may find this document useful include: Probation
and parole directors, judges, corrections administrators, city or county
managers, city or county council members, and public housing police and
security directors. 

----------------------------

Although gangs share characteristics such as trafficking in illegal drugs,
committing violent crimes, and intimidating witnesses, they differ in others, such
as degree of organization, ethnic background, and use of profits.

----------------------------

Model Strategies for Urban Street Gang Enforcement (Model Strategies) is
composed of six key elements: 

o Planning and analysis.

-- Performing groundwork to articulate the nature and scope of the
community's gang problem.

-- Developing or improving a macro-level gang intelligence database,
establishing realistic goals and objectives to counter gang problems, and
developing strategies to meet objectives.

o Gang information and intelligence systems, which gather, input, and
disseminate detailed (micro-level) database information.

o Gang suppression operations and tactics, which use gang data (for example,
on culture, method of operation (MO), and form of organization) to select
enforcement strategies.

o Interagency cooperation and collaboration with prosecutors' offices,
probation and parole agencies, jails and courts, crime laboratories, and
Federal agencies.

o Legal strategies.

-- Planning law enforcement efforts toward prosecution under the most punitive
charges available, based either on State laws (for example, felony drug
trafficking, homicide, assault, robbery, or special anti-gang laws) or Federal
laws (for example, Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO)
Act, weapons, drug, or other), including laws that take advantage of sentencing
enhancements. 

-- Using lesser charges that may be relatively easy to prove (for example,
violations of nuisance abatement statutes; ordinances against congregating; and
health, building, and zoning codes).

o Evaluation to assess strategy development and success.

-- Performing a process evaluation to document and analyze the early
development and actual implementation of the Urban Street Gang Drug
Trafficking Program (Urban Street Gang Program).

-- Performing an impact evaluation to measure the program's effect and the
extent to which its goals were attained. 

-- Studying evaluation results to find ways to improve or expand the effort.

------------------------------

Chapter 1: Introduction

This monograph is designed for law enforcement agencies interested in
developing or refining existing strategies to combat urban street gangs. The
primary audience is prosecutors and law enforcement administrators, managers,
and supervisors. Other criminal justice and community leaders who may find the
monograph useful include probation and parole directors, judges, corrections
administrators, city or county managers, major city or county council members,
and public housing police and security directors. The program model, or
prototype, presented herein for gang enforcement is applicable whether or not a
police department or prosecutor's office has a specialized gang enforcement
unit. The prototype is based largely on the practical experiences of agencies
that participated in the Urban Street Gang Drug Trafficking Enforcement
Program (Urban Street Gang Program), funded by BJA, U.S. Department of
Justice.

This chapter discusses the Urban Street Gang Program, explains its purpose
and recommended use, and describes its intended users. Listed below are
key elements of the gang suppression prototype, which are described in
Chapter 2 and then discussed in subsequent chapters in greater detail:

o Planning and Analysis (Chapter 3).

o Gang Information and Intelligence Systems (Chapter 4).

o Gang Suppression Operations and Tactics (Chapter 5).

o Interagency Cooperation and Collaboration (Chapter 6).

o Legal Issues (Chapter 7).

o Evaluation (Chapter 8).

This monograph provides a clear rationale for the recommendations presented.
An extensive bibliography in Appendix A details selected publications on topics
covering drugs and gangs; gang prevention and intervention; police response to
gangs; profiles of gangs in the United States; public housing, drugs, and crime;
schools and gangs; and youth gangs. For further information, readers are
encouraged to contact the agencies and gang specialists listed in Appendix B,
Sources for Further Information and Technical Assistance.

----------------------------

Although effective law enforcement is critical, it represents only one element of
a community's efforts to eliminate criminal street gangs.

----------------------------

Focus on Law Enforcement
 
To avoid duplicating other BJA materials, this monograph focuses almost
exclusively on enforcement and prosecution strategies against urban street
gangs. Although effective law enforcement is critical, it represents only one
element of a community's efforts to eliminate criminal street gangs. A
comprehensive approach is required--residents, prevention specialists, private
businesses and organizations, schools, and others must get involved. Therefore,
this monograph should be considered a companion to other gang suppression
planning documents that encourage interagency collaboration, resident
involvement, and problem-solving approaches.

Urban Street Gang Program

Many strategies described in this publication were used successfully by seven
agencies that were awarded demonstration grants from 1989 through 1992
under Track I of the Urban Street Gang Program. The prototype presented
draws upon the practical field experiences of these and other sites; program
examples and case studies from the demonstration sites are included to illustrate
how local objectives were met. 

Track II of the Urban Street Gang Program involved a technical assistance
grant to the Institute for Law and Justice (ILJ), which, in conjunction with BJA
and the demonstration sites, developed the prototype and then prepared this
monograph. In the context of the Urban Street Gang Program, a prototype is a
model, but an early version of one. The prototype as a whole has not yet been
rigorously evaluated, but it includes strategies that many sites have found
successful. 

The seven demonstration sites that contributed to development of the prototype
were Tucson, Arizona; San Diego, California; Atlanta, Georgia; Ft. Wayne,
Indiana; Kansas City, Missouri; Kings County (Brooklyn), New York; and
New York County (Manhattan), New York. The Tucson, Atlanta, Ft. Wayne,
and Kansas City grants were administered by the police departments in those
cities; the San Diego, Kings County, and New York County grants were
administered by the local prosecutors' offices. At all sites, ILJ reviewed
program data and documents; conducted onsite interviews; observed program
activities; and sought recommendations from local police, prosecutors, and
others knowledgeable in gang programs. 

Demonstration site key personnel discussed the manual outline at a grantee
cluster conference in December 1992. Prior to publication, BJA and a panel of
expert practitioners reviewed the final draft.

The Riverside and Oakland, California, Police Departments also assisted this
project by granting onsite interviews and permitting ILJ to review their
gang-related data and program materials. In addition, ILJ conducted a mail
survey of 175 law enforcement agencies in cities of 250,000 or more residents
and followup telephone interviews with gang unit commanders and other police
managers at 25 sites that responded to the survey. Some of the program
examples in this monograph were obtained from these sites. Finally, ILJ
conducted a literature review to evaluate the results of other gang and drug
enforcement programs sponsored by BJA.

Gang Problems Addressed by This Prototype


A challenge in developing the gang enforcement model was determining which
processes and strategies would be useful in many jurisdictions while recognizing
that each jurisdiction's resources and gang problems are unique. For example,
the types of gangs targeted by the demonstration sites included the following:

o Black Gangster Disciples (BGD's) and Vicelords from Detroit, Chicago, and
other midwestern cities.

o Crips and Bloods (San Diego, Kansas City, and Tucson).

o Dominican and Puerto Rican gangs (New York County (Manhattan)).

o Jamaican posses (Kansas City, New York County (Manhattan), and Kings
County (Brooklyn)). 

o Local African-American gangs (Atlanta and Ft. Wayne).

o Local Hispanic gangs (San Diego, Tucson, and Ft. Wayne).

These gangs had several characteristics in common, the most important being:

o Trafficking in illegal drugs.

o Committing violent crimes.

o Trafficking in or using illegally obtained firearms.

o Virtually overtaking certain neighborhoods, contributing to the economic and
social decline of these areas and causing fear and lifestyle changes among
law-abiding residents.

o Using force and threats of force to intimidate witnesses and victims.

This monograph will be most useful for jurisdictions with gangs that exhibit
some or all of the above characteristics. Some of the ways that the prototype
acknowledges that gangs differ, however, include:

o The degree to which the gang as a whole is organized as an illegal
drug-trafficking enterprise.

o Other types of crimes in which gang members specialize.

o Ethnic background and racial composition.

o Organizational structure, turf orientation, and migration patterns.

o Ways in which gang members use the profits from their illegal activities.

Not all gangs of interest to law enforcement are drug-trafficking organizations;
however, the gangs targeted by the BJA demonstration sites were all involved
in selling drugs. Furthermore, although examples in this monograph may focus
on drug-trafficking gangs, the prototype has broader application and may be
useful in suppressing gangs that commit other types of crimes or have a different
racial or ethnic composition than those targeted by the demonstration sites. For
example, gang-related crimes may include murder-for-hire (for example, the
Spangler posse), vehicle theft (for example, various local gangs and motorcycle
gangs), extortion (for example, gangs affiliated with Chinese secret societies or
tongs), home-invasion robberies (for example, Vietnamese gangs), and hate
crimes (for example, skinheads and motorcycle gangs).

According to a recent study sponsored by NIJ, more than 4,800 gangs exist
across the country, numbering nearly 250,000 members.[1] It is impossible,
however, to identify exact numbers because of differences in local definitions of
gang and gang member, differences in recordkeeping systems at all levels of
government, and the constant flow of individuals into and out of gang affiliations.
Some of these definitional problems are discussed in Chapter 3. However, a
primary distinction to make is between hardcore criminal gang members with
their criminally involved adult and juvenile associates and the young juveniles or
"wannabes" who may imitate certain gang behaviors but who are not involved in
serious crimes. This monograph is basically concerned with the first group--the
members and regular affiliates of criminal urban street gangs.

----------------------------

. . . more than 4,800 gangs exist across the country, numbering nearly
250,000 members.

----------------------------

Varying Levels of Law Enforcement Resources

Nearly half of this country's 175 largest police departments lack separate gang
units;[2] units that are in place vary considerably in size, function, and
placement within the overall organizational structure. Although more than 90
percent of U.S. police and sheriff's departments of all sizes participate in some
type of multijurisdictional law enforcement task force,[3] usually involving
Federal and State enforcement agencies, only about half of the 175 largest
departments report belonging to multijurisdictional task forces organized
specifically for gang suppression.[4]

Working relationships with other police and criminal justice agencies also vary
among departments. For example, housing authority police serve as a significant
resource in some cities but are nonexistent in others. Some police departments
(for example, Ft. Wayne and Tucson) foster solid relationships with probation
and parole agencies for the purpose of gang suppression. Another example is
San Diego, where two judges are designated to hear all major gang cases,
differing from most other jurisdictions that do not have special gang courts.

Although prosecutors in many cities do not distinguish between gang-related
and other cases, prosecutors in some areas, such as Los Angeles and San
Diego Counties, use a vertical prosecution approach in which one prosecutor
or a special team of prosecutors handles all gang-related cases from start to
finish. 

BJA's Urban Street Gang Program demonstration sites illustrate only a few of
the ways in which gang suppression efforts may be enacted. The Kansas City
Gang Narcotics Intelligence and Enforcement Program, for example, was
managed by the police major in charge of the narcotics division, with
investigative resources provided by the drug enforcement unit. In Atlanta,
where development of a computerized regional gang database was a major
objective, the project was supervised by a police lieutenant in charge of the
special investigations section within the intelligence and organized crime unit.
General oversight for the Ft. Wayne project was provided by the deputy chief
in the detective division, which included a project coordinator (a sergeant in
charge of crime analysis and database development) and a team of five career
criminal investigators, two of whom were gang specialists. In Tucson, the
deputy chief of the uniformed division was in charge of the gang suppression
effort. In San Diego, the district attorney's (DA's) office expanded its existing
gang unit by adding two attorneys to work closely with police and DA
investigators in developing gang case investigations. The New York County
DA's Office used BJA's Urban Street Gang Program resources to strengthen its
homicide investigation unit (HIU), which focused on Jamaican, Dominican, and
other violent drug gangs of Caribbean origin. In Kings County, the grant was
administered by the head of the Major Narcotics Investigation Bureau of the
Kings County Prosecutor's Office.

----------------------------

Gangs in the Year 2000

The California Attorney General's Office conducted a survey of criminal justice
authorities to assess the current gang situation and forecast gang trends
in the State of California for the year 2000. Published in 1993, the report,
entitled Gangs 2000: A Call to Action, estimates that there are as many as
175,000 to 200,000 criminal street gang members in California. By the year
2000, that number could rise to 250,000. They will remain a significant, violent
crime threat to all major metropolitan areas and will become a major crime
problem for many of the rural counties.

Specifically, by the year 2000:

o There could be as many as 135,000 Hispanic gang members; 90,000
African-American gang members, particularly Crips and Bloods; 20,000 Asian
gang members; and 5,000 white gang members, including approximately 600
skinheads. Gang size will range from a few individuals to more than 1,000
members.

o Due to the leniency of the juvenile justice system, gangs will recruit younger
new members who will be used to commit crimes. There will be
fourth-generation gang members. The age of gang members will range from 10
to 40, with many individuals in their late 30's, and members will stay involved
with their gangs for longer periods of time. There also will be more female gang
members and gangs.

o More gang members will become career criminals. Gang members will
recognize the benefits of structure, and a few will evolve into organized crime
groups.

o The number of serious crimes attributed to gangs will increase, and the
majority of crimes will be felonious. The number of gang-related assaults,
killings, and driveby shootings will reach an unprecedented high; police will
become targets of many gang shootings; and gang warfare will escalate. Gang
members will rely more on the use of concealable handguns and high-powered,
large-caliber automatic assault weapons, and they will begin to use incendiary
devices and bombs, including fragmentation and tear-gas grenades.

o Criminal justice agencies will be engulfed with gang-related investigations,
prosecutions, and incarcerations. Gang members will outnumber law
enforcement officers. Gang prosecutions will target only hardcore gang
members. Courts will be gridlocked with gang cases. There will be an
unprecedented number of gang members on probation and parole. The
agencies will become "dangerously close to being solely reactive--rather than
proactive--to the gang situation in California." 

Although the report provides a sobering glimpse of the future regarding street
gang crime and violence in California, it does not suggest that the situation is
hopeless. Rather, the purpose of the report is to motivate the State to fashion
bold solutions to prevent the future projected in the report.

For copies of Gangs 2000: A Call to Action, call 916-324-5500 or write to the
California Department of Justice, Bureau of Investigation, 4949 Broadway,
P.O. Box 163029, Sacramento, CA 95816-3029.

----------------------------

Chapter 2: Key Elements of the Gang Suppression Prototype

Although law enforcement resources, program administration, and type of gang
problems differed among Urban Street Gang Program demonstration
sites, each site was required to incorporate into its program the six key
elements listed in Chapter 1 and described further in this chapter. These
combined elements define the gang suppression prototype presented in this
monograph. As stated earlier, although the final model has been refined based
on the individual experiences of each demonstration program and other sites,
these six basic elements remain the same.

Planning and Analysis

In the earliest stages of planning and analysis for a gang suppression effort, law
enforcement officials must articulate the nature and scope of the community's
gang problem. In many communities--particularly those that have little
experience with gangs--the first reason for conducting a thorough assessment of
the problem is to overcome the commonly encountered denial that criminal
gangs even exist. Questions to ask to determine gang presence include the
following: Are warehouses and school baseball dugouts covered with the graffiti
of roving, loose-knit bands of mischievous but otherwise noncriminal youth? Is
the increase in shootings a statistical aberration? Is the local market for drugs
and weapons controlled by a handful of independent operators? Or, in
answering these questions, is it indicated that a real gang menace exists? Once
gang presence has been determined, questioning can become more directed.
For example, investigating questions such as what gangs exist and which are the
most violent, how large they are, how they are organized, who the leaders are,
and what territories they claim will help yield a clearer picture of the type of
gang problem that exists.


----------------------------

In the earliest stages of planning and analysis for a gang suppression effort, law
enforcement officials must articulate the nature and scope of the community's
gang problem.

----------------------------

Finding the answers to these and other questions about the nature and extent of
gang presence is an essential first step that leads to establishing realistic goals
and objectives (Chapter 3), developing or improving a gang intelligence
database (Chapter 4), and developing strategies aimed at meeting these goals
(Chapter 5). Many police departments have paid a high price for hastily
devised efforts such as neighborhood gang sweeps. Potential risks of such
efforts include injury to officers and innocent bystanders, recurrence of the
problem a few days or weeks later, legal problems, and alienation of witnesses
and residents who might otherwise provide valuable information and assistance.

A thorough analysis and carefully designed plan are essential for convincing
department administrators and other agency directors, elected officials, and the
public, among others, of the need to devote resources to a concerted gang
suppression effort. Furthermore, following a well-thought-out plan is likely to
have safer and longer lasting results. Chapter 3 details the planning and analysis
phase of a gang suppression effort.

Gang Information and Intelligence Systems

Intelligence gathering and database support are closely linked with the planning
and analysis phase. While the planning and analysis phase may be viewed as a
macro analysis, the intelligence and database support phase is concerned with a
finer level of detail. It addresses what information should be included in the gang
database (for example, names, affiliations, associates, monikers, criminal
histories, methods of operation (MO's), identifying marks, and addresses), how
the information should be gathered and from what sources, and how this
information may be disseminated to those who need it.

The intelligence gathering and database development phase also necessitates
the following:

o Using common definitions and establishing criteria for inclusion in a gang
database.

o Developing information sources (for example, patrol officers, gang specialists,
and informants) and systems for managing the information provided.

o Obtaining information from outside databases.

o Disseminating gang information.

Chapter 4 discusses the development of gang information systems to support
tactical and management decisions and presents examples and case studies.

----------------------------

While the planning and analysis phase may be viewed as a macro analysis, the
intelligence and database support phase is concerned with a finer level of detail.

----------------------------

Gang Suppression Strategies and Tactics

The third element of the prototype encourages the use of gang information
developed during the information support phase to select and implement
enforcement strategies and tactics. It encourages carefully planned enforcement
actions, with the goal of devising a comprehensive plan to eliminate the targeted
gang or gangs. Such a plan includes:

o Careful consideration of the gang's cultural background, MO, form of
organization, and unique characteristics. 

o Development of strategies that will ultimately incapacitate gang leaders and
the most violent and criminally involved members and associates.

o Specific agreements with other criminal justice agencies in support of the
overall strategy.

o Followup involving all possible resources to secure and strengthen targeted
neighborhoods and to prevent other gangs or gang members from filling the
void left by successful gang elimination efforts.

This framework provides a range of options for devising strategies to address
local problems. For example, the San Diego County District Attorney's (DA's)
gang unit and the New York County DA's Homicide Investigation Unit (HIU)
used approaches appropriate to their individual situations. The San Diego
strategy used paid informants to make videotaped drug buys in targeted
neighborhoods, resulting in the eventual arrest of street-level and mid-level
members of the Crips, the Bloods, and another gang. The majority of gang
members arrested pleaded guilty and were sentenced to prison. In contrast, the
New York County strategy used undercover investigators who infiltrated the
organizations of targeted Jamaican and Puerto Rican gangs and made drug and
gun purchases that resulted in multiple indictments of gang leaders.

Chapter 5 summarizes key characteristics of various criminal gangs, including
cultural factors, criminal history, organizational type, and strengths and
vulnerabilities. It also offers general guidelines for selecting tactics in light of
these characteristics, discusses possible drug and gang investigation and
suppression tactics, and provides an overview of the role of directed patrol
activities, community policing, and enforcement of abatement ordinances and
various codes and statutes.

----------------------------

Collaboration with other criminal justice agencies is critical to the success of a
law enforcement agency spearheading a gang enforcement initiative.

----------------------------

Interagency Cooperation and Collaboration

Collaboration with other criminal justice agencies is critical to the success of a
law enforcement agency spearheading a gang enforcement initiative.
Cooperation between police and prosecutors and coordination with probation
and parole agencies, jails and courts, crime laboratories, and Federal agencies
are also essential. 

Chapter 6 discusses vertical prosecution strategies, using detailed examples
from Pima County, Arizona, and San Diego County, California. Prosecutor and
police strategies for witness identification and protection, essential in
gang-related cases, are presented. Also covered are motions to deny bail and
other measures used successfully by gang prosecutors. Included are examples
of police cooperation with probation and parole agencies to establish and
enforce conditions of probation. 

The gang suppression prototype recommends coordination with jail and prison
officials for several reasons: To enable jail officials to prepare for an influx of
arrested gang members, to attend to special courtroom security needs, to
arrange interviews of imprisoned gang members, and to facilitate the flow of
information gathered by jail and prison personnel. Coordination with the
crime laboratory can result in more efficient and accurate processing of physical
evidence as well as improve the scheduling and effectiveness of crime
laboratory personnel court testimony.

Finally, the prototype encourages cooperation with Federal agencies, which can
benefit from extensive gang information accumulated by local agencies and from
local agency experience in combating street gangs. Local agencies often find the
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) a valuable partner in street
gang enforcement because of its information about gun dealers, its ability to
provide intelligence and trace the origin of weapons, and its backing by
powerful Federal weapons statutes. Many functions of the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI), Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), and Immigration
and Naturalization Service (INS) also can be applied to specific local gang
problems. In addition, the U.S. Marshals Service may assist with witness
protection, fugitive apprehension, and asset seizure and forfeiture.

Legal Issues

As the discussion of interagency collaboration suggests, the gang suppression
prototype recommends exploring all possible legal avenues to incapacitate
gangs and remove violent gang members and associates from the community.
Often the most productive route is prosecution in State courts on felony drug
trafficking, homicide, assault, robbery, or other appropriate charges. Other
situations lend themselves to a collaborative effort with the U.S. Attorney and
other Federal resources toward prosecution under Federal weapons, drug,
Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO), or other laws.
Chapter 7 presents major considerations involved in pursuing these options,
along with case examples, including the Philadelphia Violent Drug Traffickers
Project. 

In recent years, many States have passed specialized gang statutes, with the
California Street Terrorism Enforcement and Prevention (STEP) Act serving as
a model. These statutes may make active membership in a street gang by itself a
separate offense; more often, they allow sentence enhancements for
gang-related crimes. Chapter 7 covers some of these laws, the extent of their
use, the results of their application in selected jurisdictions, and the burdens of
proof involved. It also covers the applicability of State and local laws to gang
problems, such as nuisance abatement statutes; ordinances against
congregating; and health, building, and zoning code violations. Finally, Chapter
7 relates the experiences of certain jurisdictions with administrative regulations,
such as school policies that ban pagers and the display of gang colors.

----------------------------


Without systematic evaluation, the police department and community cannot
adequately assess the effectiveness of the gang suppression strategy.

---------------------------

Evaluation

Regular monitoring of operations and ongoing assessment of progress toward
meeting stated objectives are essential features of the gang suppression
prototype. Without systematic evaluation, the police department and community
cannot adequately assess the effectiveness of the gang suppression strategy.
Careful evaluation will illuminate strategy strengths and weaknesses and suggest
ways for improvement. Evaluation results will also help other jurisdictions apply
the prototype in their own communities and, with evidence of success, provide
funding sources. 

Chapter 8 presents some basic concepts to consider in conducting evaluations.
Although evaluation is the last phase covered in this monograph, preparation for
evaluation must occur earlier during the project planning stage. As noted in
Chapter 3, planning and analysis will help describe the environment in which the
program is operating, as well as provide more specific information about gangs
and their impact on the community. It may also reveal areas where new data
collection procedures are needed. Because planners must determine up front
how they will measure project success, evaluation design is an important part of
establishing project objectives.

In general, the evaluation seeks to answer several critical questions:

o Was the program implemented as intended?

o What specific activities were implemented?

o Did these activities help attain specific objectives?

o Were the program goals achieved?

o To what extent were successes or failures a result of factors external to the
program?

To answer these questions, a two-stage approach to evaluation is needed:

o A process evaluation, documenting and analyzing the early development and
actual implementation of the program.

o An impact evaluation, measuring the program's effect and the extent to which
its goals were attained.

Although the evaluation need not be tedious or expensive to produce
meaningful results, it must consist of more than a simple listing of the number of
arrests, amount of drugs seized, and number of weapons confiscated. To be
effective, the evaluation should offer useful management information for the
constant revision and improvement of operations.

----------------------------

To be effective, the evaluation should offer useful management information for
the constant revision and improvement of operations.

----------------------------

Chapter 3

Planning and Analysis

Police managers and prosecutors emphasize the importance of planning before
launching any major anti-gang effort. In some cases, this advice follows an
agency's failure to plan carefully enough. At one extreme, the community--and
at times even the police--may simply refuse to admit that a gang problem exists.
At the other extreme, a recognized gang problem is attacked quickly through
crackdowns or street sweeps, but with little thought to the importance of
gaining community support beforehand and following up afterward.

This chapter reviews the main tasks associated with planning gang suppression
strategies, namely:

o Clearly defining common key terms such as gang, gang member, and
gang-related so that data comparisons across agencies will be meaningful.

o Using information and intelligence both from inside and outside the agency to
clarify the nature and extent of the gang problem.

o Using information and intelligence to target priorities (that is, specific gangs,
neighborhoods, and individuals) and then develop enforcement strategies
accordingly. 

o Inventorying all possible resources inside and outside the department that may
be used to address the gang problem.

o Keeping the effort focused by developing specific goals, objectives, and
priorities. 

o Ensuring that adequate management tools are in place, including a time/task
plan, written policies and procedures, and an evaluation plan.

The Need for Common Definitions

The way in which agencies define gang, gang member, hardcore gang member,
gang associate, gang-related crime, and other terms significantly affects planning
and analysis. For example, in the Chicago Police Department, a crime in which
one or more parties (that is, perpetrator, victim, and witness) have gang
affiliations is classified as gang related only if a gang motive is determined. By
contrast, in Los Angeles, gang affiliation alone is enough to apply the label "gang
related." 

Because information will be gathered from sources outside the department, as
well as outside the city or county, it is necessary to adopt common definitions,
at least within the jurisdiction and region. Agreeing on definitions is also critical
to the development of a uniform gang intelligence database, useful to all States
and agencies (see Chapter 4).

----------------------------

The way in which agencies define gang, gang member, hardcore gang member,
gang associate, gang-related crime, and other terms significantly affects planning
and analysis.

----------------------------

Analysis

"Every writer on warfare, from the time of the ancient Chinese warrior Sun Tzu
to the present, has stressed the principle of knowing your enemy and his
strengths and weaknesses as well as your own."[5] Analysis allows law
enforcement agencies to understand the mechanics of the "enemy"--violent
street gangs whose members often have more sophisticated weapons than the
police--by seeing it "from the inside out." This chapter is intended to help law
enforcement agencies ensure that gangs are not also armed with better planning
and analysis capabilities. To win the war on gang violence, community police
departments must have detailed information about the following:

o Nature and extent of the gang problem.

o Environment in which the gang problem exists.

o Resources available to combat the problem.

o Community and police department strengths and weaknesses and potential
pitfalls associated with planned solutions.

Analysis can help accomplish the following goals:

o Overcome denial of the gang problem within the community or police
department.

o Enable the department to develop a realistic plan of action.

o Ensure that the enforcement strategies selected are based on accurate
assessments of gang operations and accurate profiles of key gang members or
associates.

o Help develop or improve a computerized gang database (Chapter 4).

o Provide baseline information for developing performance standards and
evaluation measures (Chapter 8).

----------------------------

To win the war on gang violence, community police departments must have
detailed information . . . .

----------------------------

Types of Analysis

Experts at the Middle Atlantic Great Lakes Organized Crime Law Enforcement
Network encourage law enforcement to distinguish among three basic types of
analysis: crime analysis, including analysis of problems that contribute to crime
but are noncriminal in themselves; investigative analysis; and strategic
analysis.[6]

Each analytic type offers distinctive features. Crime analysis involves analyzing
data from the past (for example, a series of crimes committed in a particular
geographic area), with the objective of preventing similar crimes. Traditionally,
crime analysts have compiled such data from arrest reports, offense reports,
computer-assisted dispatch records of calls for service, and other official
records. However, police departments increasingly are embracing a
community-oriented policing philosophy that encourages not only crime
analysis, but also examination of noncriminal incidents that create community
problems (such as gang members congregating on street corners) and the
underlying causes of crimes and problems. Informational sources for problem
analysis include official criminal justice agency records and community residents
and agencies. Thus, the individual officer's gang-related problem analysis also
should be considered. 

Investigative analysis involves analyzing current data that may be useful in
completing an ongoing investigation or prosecution. This term actually
encompasses many types of analyses, including telephone toll, association,
financial, and flow analyses. 

Strategic analysis is conducted outside the course of a specific investigation and
is concerned with a particular criminal group (for example, criminal street
gangs) or criminal activity. The aim is to give decisionmakers information about
trends, predictions about future crimes, and recommendations for strategies and
policy. The differences among these three types of analysis as distinguished by
time, purpose, and subject are summarized in Exhibit 1.

Levels of Analysis

In planning the community's gang suppression strategy, it is useful to consider
strategic analysis on two levels: (1) global, involving an assessment of a criminal
group (for example, criminal gangs) or a particular crime type (for example,
drug trafficking), with a comprehensive gang suppression strategy end product,
and (2) specific, involving an analysis of a given group's involvement in a
specific type of crime (for example, the involvement of the 47 Hoover Crips in
drug trafficking), the end product being an operational plan targeted to a
specific gang or specific gang members.

The narrower the topic, the more specific is the information produced. Thus, a
specific level of strategic analysis, typically conducted by investigators, is
essential for planning enforcement actions aimed at specific gangs or gang
members. However, only by first conducting a global assessment of the
community's larger gang problem can the police department develop a
comprehensive strategy for gang suppression.

Of course, information must flow between the two levels of analysis.
Enforcement action planned at the specific level should complement the overall
suppression strategy. Similarly, the results of any such enforcement action
should be available to decisionmakers so that the overall strategy can be
modified accordingly.

Assessment of Criminal Gang Activity

Several basic tasks are involved in assessing criminal gang activity. These
include determining the nature and extent of the gang problem, considering
patterns and trends of gang activity, examining the environment in which gangs
operate, and using various information sources to collect useful raw data.

The Nature and Extent of the Gang Problem

The first assessment task is to determine the nature and extent of the
jurisdiction's gang problem. This assessment moves the department and
community away from generalities (for example, "We have a serious gang
problem" or "We have no gang problem") to specific information about the
number of criminal gangs, their main characteristics, the crimes in which they
are involved, and the neighborhoods that are in greatest jeopardy.

----------------------------

. . . assessment results can and should be available to other agencies and the
public to help ensure that the jurisdiction's gang problem as a whole is neither
understated nor overstated.

----------------------------

Compiling and analyzing information on specific gangs and gang members is
necessary to inform investigators as well as the public. Although certain details
about gang members and activities will be included in an intelligence database
but not released to the public, other assessment results can and should be
available to other agencies and the public to help ensure that the jurisdiction's
gang problem as a whole is neither understated nor overstated.

Information to be obtained and organized includes the following:

o General information.

-- Number and names of gangs and their subgroups (or sets).

-- Number of members and associates.

-- Locations of gang-related crime.

-- Types of gang-related crime.

-- Victims of gang-related crime.

o Information on specific gangs and gang members.

-- Names of leaders, violent members, and key associates (include information
such as identifying characteristics, criminal history, methods of operation
(MO's), probation or parole status, and anticipated release dates of
incarcerated members).

-- Age range of gang members.

-- Gender of gang members.

-- Ethnic composition of gang.

-- Organizational structure.

-- Recruiting process.

-- Identifying signs (for example, graffiti, tattoos, and colors or hand signs).

-- Geographic range of criminal activity.

-- Extent of involvement in drug trafficking (include information such as
drug-trafficking locations, including those beyond the agency's jurisdictional
boundaries; drug types and sources; and drug customers).

-- Extent of involvement in weapons offenses (include information such as
weapon types and sources).

-- Extent of involvement in other crimes.

-- Relationships with other local gangs.

-- Linkages to gangs in other jurisdictions.

-- Patterns of spending or investing profits of crime (for example, purchases of
luxury items, investment in real estate or legitimate business, and
transportation/transfer of funds out of the country).

Analysis of the above information can reveal important patterns and trends, the
usefulness of which is covered in the following sections.

----------------------------

To produce an accurate understanding of gang activity, the assessment process
must seek to identify patterns and trends, not simply compile raw crime
statistics.

----------------------------

Gang Patterns and Trends

To produce an accurate understanding of gang activity, the assessment process
must seek to identify patterns and trends, not simply compile raw crime
statistics. Descriptive information and data covering several recent years will be
needed to uncover patterns and trends. If important data are not available,
systems should be established to capture and track them.

Questions to ask in the process of uncovering patterns and trends of gang
activity include the following:

o Is gang activity confined to specific neighborhoods, or is it a communitywide
problem? Have the neighborhoods targeted by gangs shifted or remained the
same? 

o Have gang-related crimes increased or decreased in the past 5 years?
 
o Has the number of gangs and gang sets changed? Are they larger or smaller?
Are they more organized, more fragmented, or about the same?

o Are gangs recruiting younger persons than in the past?

o Have significant shifts occurred in gang leadership?

o Have changes in gang activity or crimes coincided with the imprisonment or
release of key gang members?

o Do gang members tend to live in one jurisdiction and commit crimes in
another? 


o Are there seasonal variations in the level or type of gang activity?

o What observations or data can schools provide about gangs, violence, drugs,
and guns on school grounds or involving students?

By examining patterns and trends, the assessment may uncover not only
generalizations about gang activity, but also exceptions to the rule. In 1991, the
then U.S. Attorney General characterized most criminal street gangs as
"relatively unsophisticated [compared with traditional organized crime groups],
typically with a cellular or horizontal rather than vertical structure. Their
leadership is often more exposed than insulated; their ill-gotten gains are seldom
protected by creative money laundering schemes; and their approach to conflict
resolution is frequently based on firepower."[7]

Although this general description may still hold true, a proactive local law
enforcement agency must be alert to change. In some cities, gangs committed to
making money (for example, through drug trafficking) have given up the
wearing of colors and other outward signs of gang affiliation in favor of the
greater safety of a low profile. Others have adopted more conventional
appearances as they move into legitimate businesses. Some gangs have
members or informants who apprise them of police policies, operations, and
schedules. Still others have gone high tech. They may use not only cellular
phones and pagers, but also computers, state-of-the-art surveillance equipment,
and sophisticated weapons.

----------------------------

An assessment of the environment begins with several broad questions to
identify conditions that could be addressed within a long-range gang
suppression strategy . . . .

----------------------------

The Environment

In addition to developing information about criminal gang member
characteristics and activities, the assessment process examines the environment
in which gangs operate, including relevant social, demographic, economic, and
legal factors in the community as a whole and in targeted neighborhoods.

The Jurisdiction as a Whole. An assessment of the environment begins with
several broad questions to identify conditions that could be addressed within a
long-range gang suppression strategy: 

o Why do some communities have gang problems while others do not?
 
o What factors have permitted gangs to gain a foothold in particular
jurisdictions? 

o What conditions have made specific neighborhoods particularly vulnerable to
gangs?

Regarding the community as a whole, the assessment must consider factors
such as the following: 

o Transportation systems by which gang members and/or drugs enter and leave
the jurisdiction, along with current interdiction efforts.

o Level and type of gang activity in nearby or easily accessible jurisdictions and
the anti-gang strategies employed by those jurisdictions.

o Federal and State laws (drug, weapons, conspiracy, and Racketeer
Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO)); specialized State anti-gang
legislation; State nuisance abatement laws; local codes, nuisance ordinances,
gang-free zones, and others (see Chapter 7).

o History of gang and drug enforcement efforts in the jurisdiction.

o Political climate (for example, public acknowledgment or denial of a gang
problem and history of police relationships with the community).

By examining the jurisdiction as a whole, the assessment can identify more
broad-based factors that may enhance the development of a long-range
gang suppression strategy. 

Targeted Neighborhoods. Although gang activity may extend throughout the
community, certain areas or neighborhoods may be hardest hit and will become
the targets of gang suppression efforts. For gang activity in specific
neighborhoods, an environmental assessment would address the following
factors:

o History of gang presence in the neighborhood (for example, have gangs
existed there since the turn of the century or are they a recent phenomenon). 

o Demographic changes in the neighborhood (for example, changes in average
age of the population). 

o Changes in economic conditions and employment opportunities in the
neighborhood. 

o Changes in social conditions, educational opportunities, and recreational and
other resources for residents and their children.

o Physical condition of dwellings, streets, and common areas (for example,
abandoned and boarded-up buildings, abandoned cars, accumulated trash, and
broken lighting); public housing areas; and parks.

o Types of businesses in the neighborhood (for example, bars and liquor
stores).

o Ownership of buildings in which gang members reside or gang activity takes
place. 

Following a criminal gang assessment process, such as one outlined above, will
help the community and police department develop an informational tool that
will aid in planning the overall gang suppression strategy. 

----------------------------

Although gang activity may extend throughout the community, certain areas or
neighborhoods may be hardest hit and will become the targets of gang
suppression efforts.

----------------------------

Information Sources

All information that may prove useful in eliminating gangs is of interest to police
departments. Some of this information will meet criteria for entry into a
computerized gang intelligence database (see Chapter 4). Other information will
be descriptive of the environments in which gangs operate or will portray
criminal gang activity, crime patterns, and trends.

----------------------------

All information that may prove useful in eliminating gangs is of interest to police
departments.

----------------------------

Information from police records (for example, offense reports) will be useful if it
is coded to indicate whether the incident is possibly gang related. Many
departments have a check-off box on their incident report forms for patrol
officers to indicate knowledge or belief that one or more parties (that is,
offender, victim, or witness) are affiliated with a gang. In Ft. Wayne, Indiana,
for example, each morning crime analysts review all reports from the previous
day that have been so marked and enter relevant information into the gang
database that is housed in the detective division. If the database is to be a
complete and reliable resource, patrol officers must be encouraged to report
gang activity on a consistent basis. 

Information sources to be explored during an assessment of the jurisdiction's
gang problem include those listed below. The use of undercover officers and
confidential informants is discussed in Chapter 5.

o Local law enforcement agency.

-- Call-for-service data.

-- Incident and arrest reports.

-- Field contact cards or reports.

-- Citizen complaints and neighborhood or business watch groups.

-- Analysis of community hot spots.

-- Internal reports.

-- Officer experiences and observations.

-- School liaison officers.

-- Crime tiplines or crime solvers programs.

-- Confidential informants.

-- Undercover officers.

-- Arrestee interviews.

o Other criminal justice sources.

-- Regional gang and drug enforcement task forces.

-- State police.

-- Police and sheriff's departments in surrounding jurisdictions.

-- Federal law enforcement agencies.

-- Prosecutors.

-- Juvenile probation officers.

-- Adult probation and parole officers.

-- Juvenile and adult court judges.

-- Court services workers.

-- U.S. Attorney General's office.

-- State department of criminal justice.

o Other sources.

-- Community-based organizations.

-- Social service agencies.

-- Schools.

-- Code enforcement, health, zoning, and other city or county agencies.

-- Crime victim assistance services.

-- Beat profiles.

-- Community.

Using a wide range of relevant informational resources, such as those listed
above, will provide a broad information base for conducting an assessment of
the jurisdiction's gang problem. 


----------------------------

The assessment process also involves taking an inventory of criminal justice and
other resources that are currently involved, or that might become involved, in
helping the department meet its gang suppression objectives.

----------------------------

Inventory of Resources

The assessment process also involves taking an inventory of criminal justice and
other resources that are currently involved, or that might become involved, in
helping the department meet its gang suppression objectives. Resources may be
grouped into three categories: Resources available to combat gangs in the
jurisdiction as a whole, resources available to address the gang problem in
specific neighborhoods, and resources available to aid in the investigation of
selected individuals.

In determining the availability of citywide or countywide resources, the
department will need to review the following:

o Internal divisions and units currently responsible for gang intelligence
gathering, investigations, database management, and enforcement.

o Support provided by other divisions and specialized units for current gang
suppression efforts, including patrol and community police officers; drug
enforcement; career criminal and organized crime; tactical (for example, special
weapons and tactics (SWAT)); juvenile investigators and school resource
officers; and crime analysis, research and planning, and records.

o Support from other criminal justice agencies, including Federal agencies such
as the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), U.S. Customs Service, U.S. attorneys'
offices, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF), the Federal
Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA),
and the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS); State police and
prosecutors; corrections; probation and parole and courts; housing authority
police and security personnel; and campus police.

o Support from law enforcement agencies in other jurisdictions.

o Current police/prosecutor agreements and systems regarding gang cases.

o Agreements and working relationships with other organizations involved in
gang issues (for example, schools, prevention programs, and victim assistance
agencies).

o Training resources.

o Technical assistance resources (for example, regional and national criminal
justice associations and organizations and colleges and universities).

o Equipment needed and available.

----------------------------

Gangs may become entrenched in a neighborhood because the neighborhood
lacks, or has lost, strong organization.

----------------------------

Resources to support police intervention in targeted neighborhoods may
include:

o Resident organizations.

o Business groups.

o Churches and church organizations.

o Community-based organizations such as gang prevention or intervention
programs. 

o Public housing tenant associations.

Potential resources such as these may require time to develop. Gangs may
become entrenched in a neighborhood because the neighborhood lacks, or has
lost, strong organization. Once gangs become established, many residents
become increasingly afraid to be seen talking to police. Still, a few strong
individuals may be identified and cultivated as sources of information and
potential leaders. These individuals and community organizations also
will be essential to achieving long-term stability after enforcement actions have
taken place.

Resources that aid in targeting selected individuals include:

o Departmental gang database and other records.

o Databases developed by other local jurisdictions.

o Federal gang, drug, and other databases (see resource organizations listed in
Appendix B).

o Development of new intelligence gathering sources (for example, school
resource officers and victim services units).

Cultivating criminal justice and other resource contacts that may help the
department meet its gang suppression objectives is essential to developing and
maintaining community stability.

----------------------------

Experienced police departments advise first to develop and analyze intelligence
and information about gangs in the jurisdiction and then determine organizational
implications.

----------------------------

Implementation and Management Plan

Another fundamental task in planning gang suppression strategies is ensuring
that adequate management tools are in place. Accomplishing this task requires
analysis of police department organizational issues once the department has
developed and analyzed intelligence and information about gangs in its
jurisdiction. It also requires setting goals, objectives, and priorities; developing
and implementing enforcement and communications strategies; assessing training
needs; and considering the type of data that would be meaningful for later
evaluation. 

Department Organizational Issues

When a serious problem emerges, often a department's first reaction--
occasionally under intense political pressure--is to form a special unit to deal
with it. However, special units are not always the most effective way to combat
gangs. Experienced police departments advise first to develop and analyze
intelligence and information about gangs in the jurisdiction and then determine
organizational implications. Although ongoing intelligence efforts are a must,
there are many alternatives to forming a gang unit. If the agency later determines
that a gang unit is needed, there are many ways in which the unit may be
structured and placed within the agency. 

The decision not to form a gang unit does not imply there is no need for gang
specialists (that is, officers whose experience and training give them a more
in-depth understanding of gang problems). However, the decision to place
these officers in a special unit or assign them to investigations, juvenile, patrol,
crime analysis, or another division should be a local decision based on thorough
analysis of the problem. All officers will require basic training on gang
characteristics, intelligence gathering and reporting, and special enforcement
considerations. 

Goals, Objectives, and Strategies

Goals and objectives express end results to be achieved, but they differ in
specificity. A goal is a broad statement of a desired result. An objective states
interim results needed to attain the goal. For example, a specified goal may be
to protect the community through long-term incarceration of hardcore gang
offenders. Objectives related to this goal might include the arrest and
prosecution of leaders of the gangs that control drug trafficking in the specified
area and, under Federal or other firearms statutes, the arrest and prosecution of
a specified number of hardcore criminal gang members.

Whenever possible, objectives should be stated in measurable terms so the
degree of progress can be assessed and the scope of work is readily apparent.
Strategies and tasks then may be developed to support each of the stated
objectives. For complex tasks, subtasks also will need to be stated.

Goals and objectives serve as the basis for an action plan that helps keep all
members of the enforcement team focused. Most comprehensive plans will
contain a combination of long- and short-term objectives that decisionmakers
will need to prioritize. Once the goals and objectives have been clearly stated,
the agency will be in a better position to select the most appropriate
enforcement strategies. The strategies employed will depend on factors such as
the degree to which the gang is organized as an illegal enterprise, the types of
crimes in which members specialize, cultural and language barriers, the ways in
which gang members spend or invest their illegally gained profits, and the
support of residents in a targeted community. Chapter 5, which covers
operations and tactics, discusses these issues more fully. The implementation
plan also should address how task accomplishment will be monitored. 

----------------------------

Goals and objectives serve as the basis for an action plan that helps keep all
members of the enforcement team focused.

----------------------------

Communication and Publicity

The implementation and management plan also should indicate how
departmental units and agencies, the community, and the media, among others,
will be informed about the gang suppression effort and its accomplishments. For
example, gang prosecutors often aggressively publicize convictions of major
gang figures, with the hope that the publicity will have a deterrent effect. The
Los Angeles District Attorney's (DA's) Office uses this approach, printing
photographs of convicted gang-member felons and posting them around the
offender's home turf. The implementation plan should consider all vehicles that
may be used to inform people of the gang suppression effort and its outcomes;
presentations at neighborhood meetings and newspaper and television coverage
are just two of such methods.

Training

It is also important to analyze the training needs of personnel involved in the
gang suppression effort. Training should emphasize the importance of
developing a multiagency, community-based approach to addressing the gang
problem and devising long-term strategies. 

Training should extend to practitioners throughout the criminal justice
community: patrol, narcotics, and gang unit supervisors; prosecution planners
and supervisors, including assistant DA's; and juvenile and adult probation
planners and supervisors. 

----------------------------

Training should emphasize the importance of developing a multiagency,
community-based approach to addressing the gang problem and devising long-
term strategies.

----------------------------

Evaluation

Results of the planning and analysis tasks will provide the department with a
baseline portrait of the community's gang-related problems, without which
before-and-after comparisons cannot be made. The analysis task also can
pinpoint areas in which recordkeeping systems should complement the actual
needs for gang information.

During the planning process, the department must consider what type of data
would be meaningful for later evaluation. For example, if eliminating drug
trafficking by the 86th Street Crew is an objective, how will the department
know (or clearly demonstrate to the public) that the strategy has been
successful? Such questions must be considered during the planning phase.
Chapter 8 on evaluation should be reviewed in conjunction with this chapter
to help planners set up data collection systems that will be valuable for
evaluating the success of various gang suppression strategies.

------------------------------

Chapter 4

Gang Information and Intelligence Systems

According to experienced agencies, obtaining adequate intelligence data on a
gang is a prerequisite to any enforcement action. Intelligence gathering on gangs
and gang members supports proactive enforcement by patrol officers and gang
specialists; investigations by narcotics, homicide, and other units; and decisions
by individuals responsible for managing the agency's gang suppression strategy. 

In this chapter, the discussion of the gang intelligence gathering function centers
on collecting, processing, and disseminating information involving gang-related
crimes and criminal activities. The gang databases advocated herein contain
substantiated information.[8] 

Importance of the Gang Database

Discussed below are five key reasons why gathering gang information is the
essential first step in developing a gang suppression strategy:

----------------------------

Gang intelligence can help the agency gain the collaborative support needed to
deal decisively with gang issues.

----------------------------

Overcoming Denial

In some communities, gang enforcement and suppression actions are not
initiated because of the widespread denial of a gang problem. Government
leaders, influential members of the business community, and even elements
within law enforcement may deny the existence or understate the seriousness of
gang problems. The gang intelligence database together with other information
on gangs (see Chapter 3) often can overcome such skepticism and demonstrate
that the real danger is not to the reputation of the community, but to its
residents. Gang intelligence can help the agency gain the collaborative support
needed to deal decisively with gang issues.

Targeting Gangs

Law enforcement resources are limited. Therefore, prioritization based on
sound information is necessary. Addressing the following questions will help
target gangs: On which gang, gangs, or gang members should the agency focus?
Who are the violent, hardcore members who will be prime targets for
suppression tactics? Who are the youth at risk of becoming gang members and
who will be candidates for measures designed to divert them from gang
involvement? Determining such information will help prevent the misallocation of
resources as a result of misgauging or overstating the gang threat.

Selecting Suppression Strategies and Tactics 

Information on the nature, methods of operation (MO's), and crimes of each
targeted gang helps identify appropriate enforcement and investigative
tactics. For example:

o Whether a gang is turf oriented or primarily entrepreneurial (for example,
engaged in drug or weapons trafficking) determines which tactics will be used.
For instance, if a gang leader does not use or sell drugs, but is known to be
armed or interested in buying or selling guns, the investigation would be
developed accordingly.

o Knowledge of how tightly a gang is organized affects whether a Racketeer
Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO), conspiracy, or similarly
complex investigation would be worthwhile. 

o Use of infiltration by undercover officers would be determined by certain
critical information. For example, it would not be used for a gang of illegal
immigrants that admits only persons who have committed a capital offense in
their native land, a gang that requires new members to commit a felony, or a
gang whose members speak a language or dialect in which no investigating
officers are fluent. 


Increasing Officer Safety

Knowledge of specific gang MO's and gang member characteristics can alert
agencies to potential dangers. For example, some Indochinese (that is,
Cambodian, Laotian, and Vietnamese) street gangs have been reported to
employ tactics used by U.S. military forces in Vietnam; Jamaican gangs in
Brooklyn, street gangs in Oakland and Chicago, and others have taken
advantage of the physical layout of housing complexes, stationing armed
lookouts on rooftops and armed guards at entrances and in hallways; and the
Miami Boyz in Atlanta, among other gangs, have taken out a contract on an
officer's or prosecutor's life. These few examples illustrate the dangers involved
in gang suppression operations.

Tracking Gang Mobility

Certain street gangs are highly mobile, traveling from jurisdiction to jurisdiction,
while others reside in one community but commit crimes in a nearby city or
county. Such situations require considerable interagency cooperation and often
the formation of multiagency task forces. Similarly, interjurisdictional gang
problems make it necessary for adjacent jurisdictions to move away from
insular, agency-based information systems toward a gang database that allows
for information sharing among the affected jurisdictions within the region and
beyond, as needed (see The GREAT System). 

----------------------------

The GREAT System

The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department's (LASD's) Gang Reporting,
Evaluation, and Tracking (GREAT) System is a nonprofit computerized
database used by LASD as an investigative intelligence tool to identify and
track street gangs and their members. Out of an estimated 500,000 to 750,000
gang members in the United States, the GREAT database currently contains
200,000 records. 

GREAT links State and local GREAT databases nationwide and contains,
among other things, a master index of street gang member records that
participating law enforcement agencies may use to identify and access
information about subjects from one another's databases.

Since 1987, GREAT has maintained selected information on identified street
gang members principally in the Los Angeles area and to a lesser extent in areas
of participating law enforcement agencies nationwide. These agencies have
access to data in GREAT records through their computer systems for use in
investigating criminal activities by gang members in their areas.

GREAT uses Advanced Revelation, a user-friendly database application that
offers capabilities such as automatic report generation, security and password
encryption, and photo imaging. 

To access GREAT, agencies must request authorization, as defined in Federal
regulations. Before access is approved, the need for access based on the extent
of the gang problem in each jurisdiction is determined and reviewed. Access is
not granted to all requesting agencies. However, more than 130 law
enforcement agencies in 10 States have been granted direct access to GREAT.

Online users access GREAT through their computer systems using a series of
confidential system access codes and individual passwords. Offline users
(agencies without direct access) can obtain access by calling online users.
Online users are required to verify the identity of offline requesters and
determine their right and need to receive information from GREAT. Each
record contains an audit trail that records the names and agencies of online
users who queried or modified the record. This permanent and unalterable part
of GREAT records is designed to deter unauthorized access to and misuse of
records. Each record also displays a message to users emphasizing that the
information is never to be used as probable cause for arrest.

Another GREAT design feature is that records are purged automatically if they
have not been modified or updated for 5 years. However, each time a record is
modified or updated, the countdown begins anew. 

LASD emphasizes the importance of determining criteria to be used in
identifying gang members and indicating in each record which criteria were
used. A new record cannot be created in GREAT unless criteria are indicated.
GREAT also protects the associates and acquaintances of gang members by
preventing access to their names from the system unless they have also been
identified as gang members.

For more information about GREAT operations, contact LASD's Safe Streets
Bureau at 310-603-3105. To find out about GREAT software, contact the
Law Enforcement Communication Network at 310-543-3195.

----------------------------

Determining Content of the Gang Database


How one defines gang, gang member, and gang crime largely determines the
type and amount of information entered into the gang database. The matter of
definitions is not just academic--it has practical ramifications. For example,
some States have anti-gang statutes that contain definitions of some or all of
these terms for purposes of law enforcement, prosecution, and sentencing. If
agency definitions (and databases) do not include all elements of statutory
definitions, use of those special gang laws may be precluded. 

To survive court challenges, the definition of gang member must be constructed
carefully. Also important are definitions of the types of members or aspiring
members (for example, hardcore or associate). The definition of gang incident
or gang crime should be uniform across jurisdictions within a region, especially
if intelligence and a common database are shared. Differences in the definition
of gang crime can almost by themselves account for a reported higher rate of
gang incidents in one jurisdiction than in another.

How Gang-Related Definitions Affect Database Content

----------------------------

An analysis of reported gang crimes is critical in determining whether a gang
problem exists, assessing its scope, forming law enforcement's response, and
evaluating the effectiveness of that response.

----------------------------

Definitions of street gang usually include most or all of the following elements:

o Three or more individuals associate periodically as an ongoing criminal group
or organization, whether loosely or tightly structured. 

o The group or organization has identifiable leaders, although the leader for one
type of criminal activity may be different than the leader for another.

o The group has a name or identifying symbol.

o The organization's members, individually or collectively, currently engage in or
have engaged in violent or other criminal activity that includes homicide, assault
with a deadly weapon, aggravated battery and assault, arson, intimidation of
witnesses and others, robbery, forcible rape, kidnaping, vandalism (graffiti),
burglary and larceny, and drug trafficking. In most instances, gang crime
involves violence, drugs, weapons, or a combination thereof.


o The group frequently identifies with or claims control over specific territory
(turf) in the community, wears distinctive dress and colors, and communicates
through graffiti and hand signs, among other means.

An analysis of reported gang crimes is critical in determining whether a gang
problem exists, assessing its scope, forming law enforcement's response, and
evaluating the effectiveness of that response. But what factors determine if
crimes are gang crimes?

Gang-Related Crime Versus Gang-Motivated Crime. Agencies may classify a
crime as a gang crime if it is gang related, gang motivated, or both. A
gang-related crime is any crime in which a gang member is the suspect,
offender, or victim, regardless of motivation or circumstances. The theft of
clothing on a whim by a gang member acting alone or a home invasion by gang
members acting collectively would fall under the category of gang-related
crime. But only the home invasion would qualify as a gang crime if the agency
were counting only gang-motivated crimes--those committed at the direction of,
for the benefit of, or in association with a street gang--as gang crimes.
Gang-motivated crimes may involve intergang violence for retaliation or turf
protection and other criminal activity affecting the reputation or interests of the
gang as a whole. 

The definition of gang-motivated crime yields significantly fewer gang crimes
than does gang related. This is especially true if, under the definition of gang
motivated, an agency decides that, to qualify, both suspect and victim must be
gang members or the crime must be related to intergang encounters. It is
recommended to classify a crime as a gang crime if it is gang related and also to
indicate which gang-related crimes in the database are gang motivated. This
method will (1) provide a broad picture of gang member criminal
activity, (2) allow the agency to conform to whatever gang crime definitions are
used in new or amended anti-gang legislation, and (3) enable the agency to
more accurately compare gang crime across jurisdictions.

Gang Members Versus Gang "Wannabes." Answers to the question of who are
actually gang members affect the types of information to include in the gang
database. Generally, most gang members are males 24 years of age or younger,
with the older adolescents and young adults engaging in the most serious and
violent activity. However, veterans or original gangsters may be in their 50's.
Across the Nation, the average age of violent offenders (whether or not they
belong to gangs) is declining. Thus, gang databases must include data on both
juvenile and adult offenders. To omit criminally involved juveniles is to fail to
address a sizable part of the gang problem. Investigators and analysts also
should be alert to gangs led by and largely composed of females, whose
numbers are increasing. 

----------------------------

Criteria that indicate a person is a gang member, that meet the needs of law
enforcement, and that will survive court challenges need to be determined.

----------------------------

Gang member may be defined as any person who participates in or with a
criminal street gang; has knowledge that gang members engage in or have
engaged in criminal activity; and willfully promotes, furthers, or assists in any
criminal conduct by members of that gang.

Criteria that indicate a person is a gang member, that meet the needs of law
enforcement, and that will survive court challenges need to be determined.
Certain criminal justice agencies considered that issue and developed a number
of satisfactory criteria, which are incorporated into a form now used in 12
States (see Exhibit 2). The form permits some flexibility. For example, if the
criterion "subject admits gang affiliation" is not met, that person often must fit at
least two other criteria noted in the exhibit to warrant designation as a gang
member. Before deciding that a given criterion is applicable to an individual,
some agencies require the subject to have engaged in activity related to that
criterion on more than one occasion. For example, one agency states that the
subject must have associated with known gang members on at least three
different occasions before the criterion "subject associates with gang members"
is met. 

The gang database also should include information enabling agencies to
categorize gang members according to the extent to which they are committed
to a criminal lifestyle, gang values, and violence. This will aid the agency in
determining priorities, identifying appropriate strategies and tactics, and
allocating resources. Two common designations, hardcore members and
associate members, are often defined as follows:

o Hardcore gang members are the most dangerous and violence prone. These
are the gang leaders, enforcers, and shooters. Completely committed to gang
life, hardcore members tend to be older (late teens and beyond) and have had
numerous contacts with the criminal justice system. Frequently, not more than
10 percent of a gang's members are hardcore.

o Associate gang members are criminally active and claim allegiance to the gang
but usually participate in fewer gang activities than do hardcore members.

Generally in their teens, associates tend to exhibit violent or aggressive behavior
and often commit crimes to elevate their status within the gang. Associates'
commitment to gang life may not be as strong as that of the hardcore members;
some even may be looking for a way out of the gang.

Also of concern to law enforcement are gang wannabes, who should not be
included in a gang intelligence database unless they are criminally involved.
Typically in their early teens, these youth have not yet joined a gang but often
express gang values and may affect the outward signs of gang involvement (for
example, clothing and hand signs). Often on the fringes of criminal activity,
wannabes sometimes act as runners or weapons holders, and some can
become dangerous in their attempts to impress gang members. Wannabes
usually do not fully understand gang life or its consequences but are at risk of
becoming gang members. At-risk youth may be found in elementary schools,
often experimenting with gang attire and symbols as early as the second grade.

----------------------------

Too much or too little gang data may impede processing and analysis.
Determining how much is enough can start by conferring with other jurisdictions
facing gang problems.

----------------------------

Data Elements for Intelligence and Management

Too much or too little gang data may impede processing and analysis.
Determining how much is enough can start by conferring with other
jurisdictions facing gang problems. Ask what information is collected and why
and how it is organized in their files. In jurisdictions facing significant gang
problems, these files are often computerized. Also useful are hard-copy files
containing field reports, photographs, gang member criteria forms, arrest and
conviction data, probation and parole reports, and other information used to
back up and substantiate automated files. 

Strategic, Tactical, and Managerial Information Needs

One way to help identify what should go into the database is to determine the
type of information or reports that the information system should generate for
strategic, tactical, and managerial purposes. Major factors to consider include
the following:


o Scope and patterns, as well as emerging trends, of gang activity in specific
neighborhoods or jurisdictions over time. The inability of gang information
systems to generate such big picture reports for administrators and
policymakers is a frequently cited weakness, according to a 1992 national
survey of law enforcement agencies.[9] 

o Effectiveness of prior enforcement strategies and tactics.

o Member profile of each gang member, especially the hardcore.

o Types of gang crimes by gang and location. Some agencies list the number of
gang crimes, such as homicide and assault, and break down the total for each
type by motive or circumstance (for example, retaliation, street fight,
recruitment, vice related, and turf violence). Stress maps (computer-generated
pin maps) depict types and locations of gang crimes during specified periods.

o Gang members on bail, probation, and parole (including their release
conditions) and gang members with outstanding warrants.

Legal Requirements

Other factors that may affect database content are local, State, and Federal
laws and regulations that may apply to the collection of gang data (as well as to
its storage, access, security, dissemination, audit, and purging). For example,
criminal intelligence systems operating through support under the Omnibus
Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, as amended, are subject to
Federal requirements in 28 CFR 23. (Note that 28 CFR 23 does not preclude
collection, storage, or dissemination of information about street gang members
who are juveniles, nor does it require separation of juvenile offender files from
adult files.)

The type of data that agencies may wish to enter into their gang databases is
presented in Exhibit 3. The exhibit organizes the data under various categories
or files; however, specific agency needs will determine whether more or fewer
files are required.

----------------------------

Other factors that may affect database content are local, State, and Federal
laws and regulations that may apply to the collection of gang data . . . .

----------------------------


Manual Versus Automated Systems

The number of files in the database also depends on whether the information
system is manual or automated and, if automated, on system design, especially
search capability. For instance, manual systems usually require a moniker file, in
which subjects are organized by moniker, so that street names can be linked to
true names more speedily than by searching through the gang member file for
monikers. 

Computerized systems may be designed to search for monikers and other
identifying information. The ability to search quickly for subjects associated with
specified characteristics is a strong argument for computerized systems (see
Electronic Manpower). For example, if the word eagle was associated with a
gang crime, a computerized search based on that word could identify gang
members owning Eagle cars, living on Eagle Street, having eagle tattoos, or
using Eagle as a moniker. Or eagle might be one of a number of characteristics
associated with an unidentified suspect (for example, Hispanic, eagle tattoo,
blue Chevy lowrider automobile, and associates with Rambo). A string search
could identify a gang member or members possessing all those characteristics.

The files noted in Exhibit 3 are likely to contain many gang member names that,
because of possible foreign origin, may be difficult to spell and, therefore,
difficult to search for in a database. For this reason, some system capabilities
display all names that may sound like the name (perhaps spelled phonetically)
for which a search is being conducted. 

Exhibit 3 contains references to photographs of individuals, identifying marks,
graffiti, and vehicles. Imaging capabilities of some computerized information
systems allow photographs to be generated electronically, thereby hastening
suspect identification (for example, via photo lineups).

----------------------------

The ability to search quickly for subjects associated with specified
characteristics is a strong argument for computerized systems.

----------------------------

Database Information Sources

Principal contributors to the gang database are patrol officers, gang specialists,
confidential informants, other criminal justice agencies, community agencies and
organizations, and outside databases. Each contributor's role is critical.

Patrol Officers

Beat officers are an essential source of gang information. For example, they can
identify gang members in accordance with agency-specified criteria, provide
current information on gang activities and those committing the most crimes, and
spot indicators of impending trouble. Some patrol officers routinely carry
cameras and photograph gang members. The quantity and quality of such
information largely depends on the following factors:

o The department leadership's emphasis on gang suppression and intelligence
gathering.

o Officer training in gang identification.

o Streamlined reporting processes and forms that reduce excessive paperwork
burdens.

o Availability of photographic and video equipment.

o An officer's observational skills.

o An officer's rapport with beat residents, business owners, mail carriers, and
others who know the neighborhood, as well as with current, former, and
aspiring gang members. 

Officer information may be recorded on field interview and observation cards
that contain a special section for gang data, on special gang contact forms, or
on standard agency incident and arrest report forms that are channeled to gang
specialists for evaluation and possible entry into the gang database. 

Through field contacts and observations, beat officers can supply confirmation
of gang membership and the name of the gang and colors, as well as a subject's
moniker, address, physical description, date of birth, school, employer,
hangouts, dress, jewelry, tattoos or other identifying marks, associates,
vehicles, and weapons. 

Officers also should submit reports describing graffiti and its location, whether
on walls, in notebooks, on clothing, and in photograph albums, among other
places. Photographs of graffiti are valuable to keep on file. Graffiti is a form of
gang communication and may indicate gang territory, turf in dispute, gang
leaders and other members, monikers, challenges by rival gangs, individuals
targeted for retaliation, and claimed responsibility for crimes committed by the
gang. As one moves away from the geographic center of a gang's power or
territory, the more the gang's graffiti may be replaced by that of a rival gang.
Many agencies report that they regret not paying more attention to graffiti
during the early stages of their gang problems.

Gang Specialists 

Agency gang specialists can contribute to the database in many ways. One
important way is to debrief arrested gang members. The gang unit of one
agency might ask such arrestees to identify the five most dangerous gang
members; eventually, a consensus among arrested gang members might become
evident. Gang specialists also review reports of crimes often associated with
gang involvement, such as homicides, assaults with guns or other weapons, and
sexual assaults. 

Surveillance of known gang drug-trafficking locations, hangouts, and residences
may yield information about customers, vehicles, associates, MO's, and
countersurveillance methods (such as lookouts). During surveillance, gang
officers usually take both still photographs and videos. One gang unit set up an
observation post above a city street and videotaped (with sound) gang
members on the opposite sidewalk reenacting homicides, displaying weapons,
getting payoffs for hits, receiving instructions for the day's activities, and
accepting treats (for example, gold chains) from gang leaders. Another gang
unit found aerial photographs of a gang's locale, such as a housing complex,
extremely useful. 

Gang officers, as well as personnel from other units, who enter gang member
vehicles and homes to make arrests or execute searches or bench warrants,
should be alert for items and information of value to the intelligence effort. For
example, gang members often take photographs and videos of each other.
These items and address books with telephone numbers of other gang members
may be located at the subjects' homes. See Search Warrant Affidavit excerpts
prepared by the Riverside, California, Police Department describing information
and items often obtained from gang member homes, safe houses, and vehicles.

Confidential Informants

Confidential informants cultivated by gang specialists and other officers also
provide information about gangs. Their motives for cooperating include the
following: 

o A gang member hopes to weaken a rival gang by providing tips to law
enforcement. 

o A nongang drug trafficker informs to help eliminate competition from gangs. 
 
o An arrested gang member hopes to gain a reduction in charges or sentence.
 
o A girlfriend of a gang member is mistreated or abused and retaliates by
supplying information to officers.

o An imprisoned gang member serving a long sentence is disgruntled because of
lack of continued support and communication from former associates. (See
Suppressing the Black Park Gang in Chapter 5 for a description of how the
Manhattan District Attorney's Homicide Investigation Unit (HIU) has worked
with imprisoned gang members.)

----------------------------

Confidential informants cultivated by gang specialists and other officers provide
information about gangs.

----------------------------

Search Warrant Affidavit Excerpts

Your affiant has found that gang members generally do not possess firearms
validly registered and held in their names . . . [but rather their weapons] are
often stolen. Your affiant has also found that gang members will use a weapon
in the commission of a crime and then take that weapon to a safe house or hide
it in a specific location within their own residence or at a fellow gang member's
or girlfriend's house. They then later retrieve the weapon and use it at a later
date. 

Your affiant knows that gang members frequently hide their weapons in vehicles
to which they have access . . . . [They use] vehicles or vehicles belonging to
their parents or friends to commit crimes. Your affiant personally knows that
gang members will frequently hide weapons inside of cars located at or near
locations where they live or [that they] have access to . . . . 

Additionally, your affiant knows that gang members and their families frequently
park their cars down the street from their residences to (1) avoid any rival gang
members being able to identify the location of their homes by virtue of seeing
their car parked at their residence and (2) minimize the chance of their car
being shot at or vandalized by rival gang members in case of a driveby shooting
of that person's residence. Your affiant therefore requests to search any
vehicles . . . parked directly on the [gang members'] property or on the street in
front of the property or adjacent to the property . . . .

Permission is requested [to search for weapons] and any miscellaneous gun
pieces, ammunition, gun cleaning items or kits, holsters or ammunition belts,
original box packaging, targets, expended pieces of lead, any photographs of
firearms or any paperwork showing the purchase, storage, disposition or
dominion and control over any guns, ammunition, or any of the above items.

Your affiant notes that whether or not the firearms sought are recovered, the
above items would tend to show that a firearm existed and may have once been
located in a place to which the suspect has access and that these items would
tend to connect the suspect with the weapons sought. It is your affiant's
experience that because of the value of firearms to the gang, the above items
are not normally disposed of after the commission of a crime, and that they are
therefore still likely to be found at any location or in vehicles to be searched, or
on the person of any suspect to be searched pursuant to this warrant. Gang
members rarely dispose of firearms entirely. Firearms are valuable to street
gangs as they help them to retain control of a geographical area, defend
themselves against rival gangs' attacks, and attack rival gangs. Gang members
are more likely to keep the weapon themselves or pass the weapon among
[gang members].

Gang members are known by your affiant to drape rags from their persons or
vehicles to denote association with a street gang. Your affiant knows that gang
members will often possess drawings or writings which contain their gang name
or their moniker. Gang members will often possess these writings or drawings in
notebooks or in photograph albums. Your affiant has seen gang members pose
for gang pictures. Gang members will often flash their gang's hand sign in
photographs and often can be seen wearing gang clothing and displaying drugs
and weapons in photographs. Gang members also tend to keep these items in
their residences and vehicles to which they have access. It is your affiant's
experience that most gang members are known by street names or monikers
and that their true identities are frequently not known to fellow gang members
or rival gang members. Gang members frequently write their gang moniker in
graffiti. Your affiant has seen this graffiti with the gang name and monikers of
gang members on numerous items. This would include clothing such as hats,
shirts, jackets, pants, and shoes; photographs; notebooks; papers; articles of
furniture such as dressers, mirrors, tables, lamps, and refrigerators; various
locations within and outside residences, such as closet doors, walls within
residences, windows, . . . exterior walls of residences, mailboxes, and garage
doors; computer programs and discs; and automobiles and trees. 


* * * *

Gang members also tend to keep newspaper clippings that make reference to
criminal activity. These members will sometimes place . . . newspaper clippings
in scrapbooks. These articles describe crimes committed by or against their
gang. Your affiant has seen newspaper clippings seized from gang members on
numerous occasions. It is your affiant's experience that gang members will write
graffiti on those clippings and will cross out the names of rival gang members....
Your affiant also knows that gang members tend to keep address books, lists
of gang members and monikers or lists of current telephone numbers and
addresses of fellow gang members as well as rival gang members. 

Your affiant also knows that with the advent of modern technology and
reasonably priced home computer equipment, it is possible that evidence of
gang membership, affiliation, association, locations, plans, correspondence, and
criminal intent may be located on the hard discs of computers as well as [on]
floppy discs . . . . 

Source: Riverside (California) Police Department

----------------------------

Other Criminal Justice Agencies

Both ad hoc contacts and formal arrangements among agencies yield valuable
information about criminal gang members and gang-related crime (see
Electronic Manpower). Although the information network among gang
investigators is often informal, about half of the country's largest departments
are represented on multijurisdictional task forces formed specifically to combat
gangs. 

----------------------------

Electronic Manpower

The Oxnard, California, Police Department's Gang Offender Comprehensive
Action Program (GOCAP) provides a central clearinghouse for information
about gang members, including their criminal record and current probation
status, to enable each officer in the patrol division to deal with gang-related
crime. GOCAP's premise is to have a gang intelligence officer conduct crime
analysis, collect and correlate gang information, and disseminate it to street
officers, thereby creating a departmentwide gang unit. The Oxnard Police
Department has 148 sworn officers. GOCAP is modeled after a U.S. Justice
Department-sponsored program that the department was already using to track

habitual offenders. This system helps law enforcement agencies identify the
worst gang offenders, track them, and prosecute more successfully when they
go to court. 

Essential to this program is the custom-designed computer and software
package that creates dossiers on the city's estimated 3,000 individual gang
members, associates, and wannabes and 500 taggers. GOCAP includes a small
computer with keyboard and monitor, a laser printer for reproducing
photographs and dossiers, and a video system for entry of gang members'
booking pictures and other photographs into the system. The video camera can
also be taken into the field to film suspects or graffiti samples.

Information for the system is gathered through field interview cards filled out by
patrol officers whenever they have contact with gang members. The
gang analyst then inputs the data into the computer and classifies the individual's
gang involvement into three levels, based on the number and type of contacts,
associates, dress, and criminal record.

GOCAP information is used for intervention efforts. Beat officers seek out and
contact the parents of youth who are identified as having gang involvement. For
parents who deny their child's involvement, the dossiers offer convincing
evidence. A similar approach helps other community organizations overcome
denial or ignorance of the gang problem. Officers regularly use GOCAP
information to present to Parent Teachers Associations (PTA's), Rotary and
Kiwanis clubs, and hospitals, among other groups. GOCAP began in 1991
with $90,000 in Federal grants from the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, which wanted an agency to
develop a computerized gang-tracking system for smaller police departments.

----------------------------

In some regions, gang investigators from criminal justice agencies form
associations that alert members to important developments and publicize
requests for information about recent gang crimes. For example, the minutes of
one association meeting included items such as the following: 

o Formation of new gang. Pee Wees. Some members 10 years old.

o Middle and high school gangs popping up.

o Graffiti found in restricted areas at airport.

o ABC gang is increasing its narcotics sales and may move east.

o Officer shooting. Posse attempting to take over north end of town. Gang
member known only as Pirate shot at officer. Missed. Believed hit by officer.

o Gathering of information on skinheads. Form attached to minutes will be
available at meetings. Please circulate in your agency and cooperate in
gathering information.

Gang officer contacts with personnel from criminal justice agencies other than
law enforcement--such as probation and parole, corrections, courts, and
prosecutor offices--may also generate substantial information. One police
agency reports that most gang data in its computerized information system
originates from the local probation department. 

Agencies also stress the value of information obtained from jail and corrections
officials. For example, watchful jail personnel may be able to identify associates
of a jailed gang member, intercept communications, and report graffiti.

One Illinois State corrections official estimates that about 46 percent of the
inmates in the State's prisons are gang affiliated, including 90 percent of the
inmates in maximum security facilities. Beginning at intake, an offender-tracking
system records inmate gang affiliation, rank, and other information. Noting that
gang members in prison often maintain their community contacts, this official
recommends that investigators develop strong linkages with prison officials to
obtain gang information. 

Rather than affiliate with traditional prison gangs while incarcerated, some
members of various sets of Crips and Bloods have consolidated into all-Crips
and all-Bloods gangs, such as the Consolidated Crip Organization and the
United Blood Nation. The latter is said to be a significant force within prisons as
well as on the streets. Many investigators also note a link between some
traditional prison gangs (for example, the Black Guerrilla Family) and street
gang members on the outside regarding drug trafficking. Therefore, consulting
with corrections officials for gang information should be a priority for law
enforcement agencies.

----------------------------

Organizations outside the criminal justice system, such as grassroots community
organizations located in gang crime areas, are a source of gang-related
information.

----------------------------

Community Organizations and Agencies 

Organizations outside the criminal justice system, such as grassroots community
organizations located in gang crime areas, are a source of gang-related
information. In neighborhoods that consist of numerous recent immigrants,
however, misconceptions of the criminal justice system may have to be
addressed before residents come forth with information. Residents may be
distrustful of the police because they were oppressed by police in their native
lands, do not understand American criminal justice processes, or have had poor
relationships or few positive contacts with police in this country. For example,
they may believe that the release from custody of a recently arrested gang
member resulted from a bribe. In this case, the concept of bail would have to
be explained.

Schools are another major source of information, once contacts are established
through gang specialists or school resource officers. In some jurisdictions,
school administrators, teachers, security staff, and parent-teacher organizations
alert law enforcement by using gang information forms or special phone
numbers to report graffiti as well as gang-related violence and threats. Because
gang members frequently boast about their exploits, gang activity may come to
the attention of school personnel and students. 

Similarly, parks and recreation employees are aware of gang activities in their
areas and frequently can identify the more active gang members. Often,
children who use a recreation center will inform park employees about
gang-related matters before they will tell law enforcement officers. 

Citizen reports and complaints constitute a valuable source of gang-related
information. Although it may take time to overcome fear of retaliation by gang
members or distrust of the police, citizen reports can be encouraged by
establishing and publicizing a gang hotline, which should guarantee anonymity if
callers so desire. Gang specialists can assign code names to anonymous callers
so that, during subsequent calls, callers may receive feedback on how their
previous information has been used; this may motivate callers to continue their
assistance. Code names also permit gang officers to track the reliability and
value of a given caller's reports. 

Outside Databases

Because gang or gang member information is often collected by more than one
jurisdiction, agencies should consider expanding their focus by tapping into
regional, statewide, or even national gang databases. For example, many local
agencies link with information systems operated by State police, who can
access other regional or statewide databases. 

Agencies that are members of local or regional task forces benefit from the
expanded opportunity to share data. One jurisdiction, for instance, merged
all city and county narcotics units with personnel from the Drug Enforcement
Administration (DEA) and U.S. Customs Service and provided all task force
members access to a gang database. Gang investigators can enter subject
names and addresses into the task force's information network to determine
whether another agency is conducting an investigation of a particular target.

Regional Information Sharing Systems. Six regional project databases of the
Regional Information Sharing Systems (RISS) program contain gang
information available to RISS members. Participating agencies submit inquiries
and receive responses through callbacks. Due to complexities of various State
laws, not all RISS projects collect data on juveniles. Focusing on
multijurisdictional crime, RISS projects hold periodic information-sharing
meetings and disseminate information to member agencies through bulletins,
flyers, or other publications. The projects--based in Needham, Massachusetts;
Newtown, Pennsylvania; Phoenix, Arizona; Sacramento, California; Springfield,
Missouri; and Trenton, New Jersey--also conduct investigative, financial,
criminal activity, and telephone toll analyses for member agencies. RISS is
funded by the U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance
(BJA). 

----------------------------

Because gang or gang member information is often collected by more than one
jurisdiction, agencies should consider expanding their focus by tapping into
regional, statewide, or even national gang databases.

----------------------------

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. The Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) also maintains databases, some of which include
information on gangs (for example, motorcycle gangs, Bloods, Crips, Jamaican
posses, and prison gangs). ATF's gang data are available to law enforcement
agencies, which are encouraged to reciprocate by providing gang information to
ATF. Agencies seeking this information should initially contact the nearest ATF
district office. If that office does not have access to the requested data,
agencies may contact ATF's Tactical Intelligence Branch in Washington, D.C.
ATF either disseminates gang information directly to inquiring agencies or
provides referrals.

Gang Reporting, Evaluation, and Tracking. Nationwide implementation of a
gang-tracking system is an initial goal of the Law Enforcement Communication
Network (LECN), a nonprofit organization run by and exclusively for the
criminal justice community (for example, law enforcement, prosecution,
probation, parole, and corrections). Available from LECN is the PC-based
GREAT System (see The GREAT System), used by several hundred agencies
in 21 States from Hawaii to Massachusetts. GREAT contains more than 150
fields of gang-related information (for example, monikers, aliases, locations, and
tattoos) and includes a color photo system and an imaging capability for
fingerprints, graffiti, and reports. GREAT requires LECN-specified hardware
and software upgrades for agencies' existing PC-based systems. The GREAT
System can operate as a totally independent, stand-alone gang-tracking
workstation or as part of a regional network. Through its PC, an agency may
query other GREAT participants in the region by dialing the region's node,
which will automatically download to the agency's PC all requested records and
photographs held by other members of the regional network. When fully
developed nationally, GREAT will enable an agency to contact and receive
data from participants in other regions by dialing its regional node. (Currently,
agencies must dial other regions one at a time.) GREAT is said to provide
access to data on more than 200,000 gang members, including their vehicles
and associates. GREAT also includes a case management module, which
generates incident-based management information and statistics.[10]

----------------------------

When developing automated information systems, agencies might consider
outside databases . . . and determine the implications for compatible hardware
and software.

----------------------------

Regional Databases. Another option for some agencies is to convince adjoining
jurisdictions to form a centralized gang database that all share and to which all
contribute. Case Study: Developing a Regional Gang Intelligence System
outlines the process used by the Atlanta, Georgia, Police Department in
establishing such a database.

When developing automated information systems, agencies might consider into
which outside databases it would be useful to link and determine the
implications for compatible hardware and software.

----------------------------

Case Study: Developing a Regional Gang Intelligence System

By the late 1980's, Atlanta, Georgia, faced an emerging gang problem. To
benefit from better drug-trafficking profit margins, outside gangs moved into
metropolitan Atlanta and clashed with indigenous gangs, causing violence and
bloodshed. 

Two initial problems prevented effective gang suppression by law enforcement:
denial in some quarters that a gang problem existed and, for gang activity that
crossed jurisdictional boundaries, inadequate sharing of gang intelligence among
agencies in the metropolitan area, which has a population of more than 2
million. 

To help convince persons both within and outside law enforcement that a gang
problem existed, the Atlanta Police Department persuaded several gang
members to meet for a videotaping session. The conversation, hand signs, and
other characteristics recorded by videotape helped convince skeptics. 
Thereafter, submissions of field interview cards relating to gang members
increased from 2 to 200 per month. 

Because the gangs moved across jurisdictions, often residing in a suburban
community but conducting business in Atlanta, and because gang activity in
Atlanta spread into outlying areas, the Atlanta Police Department proposed that
all affected agencies establish a shared Gang Intelligence System (GANGIS),
from which all participants would receive information and to which all would
contribute data. More than 30 metropolitan area agencies now participate in
GANGIS, which was developed with financial assistance from BJA's Urban
Street Gang Program. The system provides automated information support
(text and image data) to law enforcement as well as to prosecution,
correctional, and parole agencies. GANGIS is housed within the Special
Investigations Section of the Atlanta Police Department, which provides direct
operational, technical, and administrative support. The objectives of this
computerized intelligence network include the following: 

o Transcending jurisdictional and political boundaries and increasing gang
suppression effectiveness by targeting important gang members, gang
associates, and gang criminal activities; tracking gang assets; and identifying
emerging gangs. Of particular concern are gang leaders, violence-prone
members, and mid- to upper-level drug traffickers.


o Enabling contiguous local, State, and Federal law enforcement agencies to
share information more effectively, thereby leading to better decisionmaking and
strategy development.

o Providing commanders, as well as patrol and investigative supervisors, with a
better understanding of gang-related problems in their areas of responsibility by
permitting them to access the GANGIS database from remote locations
throughout the metropolitan area.

o Supporting selective prosecution of gang leadership and membership and
depriving gang members of anonymity, even when they change jurisdictions.

o Discovering connections between incarcerated offenders and outside gang
activities and providing background information on gang members entering
correctional facilities so that officials may segregate members as appropriate.
 
o Providing information on parolees' involvement in gang activities and their
associations with gang members.

As part of the system's development, a lengthy requirements analysis was
performed, which covered the objectives; data entry, update, and purging;
data elements; search capability; reports; software and hardware; security;
backup and recovery; training; and definitions of key terms. The search
capability of GANGIS allows it to respond to queries ranging from simple to
complex. For instance: 

o Who is the leader of the Rolling 60's Crips? What is the address of John
Doe? Who are the members of the I-Refuse Posse?

o Which gang members have been arrested on beat 101 for trafficking crack
cocaine? Which gang members have been arrested for more than three
aggravated assaults? Which gangs are identified by the five-point star symbol? 
 
o Which gang members rented a vehicle between February 1 and February 10,
1992, and purchased less than one-quarter kilogram of cocaine from an
undercover agent in an auto detail shop in southwest Atlanta? 
 
The GANGIS bylaws and constitution govern the system's participants and
describe the membership application process; advisory board; and the
system's location, maintenance, operations, security, and dissemination
procedures. 

GANGIS is the cornerstone of a coordinated, multijurisdictional undertaking
designed to identify and monitor gang members, track gang-related activity,
generate analyses on emerging gang-related trends and patterns, target gang
leadership for selective enforcement, and help agencies evaluate their
performance. 

Source: Atlanta, Georgia, Police Department

----------------------------

Disseminating Gang Information

The basic principle governing dissemination of gang data is the need-to-know,
right-to-know principle. Its application depends on who receives the
information: gang specialists in the agency; other agency personnel, such as
investigators and patrol officers; outside criminal justice agencies; or others.

Within the Agency

Gang specialists, whether or not they are part of a gang unit, have routine
access to the gang database. In addition, to keep gang officers current, some
agencies maintain logs in which gang incidents are recorded daily. Informal
information sharing among gang specialists is another effective way to keep
current. Special bulletins or newsletters published by some agencies alert gang
officers and others about developments, cautions, information needs, and
priority targets. One newsletter included items such as the following: 

o Gang members are hiding weapons and contraband inside vehicle airbag
compartments and behind pullout radio slots.

o An officer identified a gang member by querying the GREAT System about
the neck tattoo ABC. 

o These are the 20 most-wanted gang members.

o The gang unit received information that subjects living at 123 Elm Street are
gang members. If contacts are made with subjects at or near that address,
please forward all field interview cards to the gang unit.

----------------------------
 
Special bulletins or newsletters published by some agencies alert gang officers
and others about developments, cautions, information needs, and priority
targets.

----------------------------

Whether other investigators and patrol officers should have routine access to
the gang database is a question each agency must address. Some agencies
permit all officers to gain direct access to gang data through remote computer
terminals. Others limit initial access to queries about whether a gang member is
in the database; if so, the requested information about the subject is released
in accordance with specific procedures, which may require release only after
approval by a gang officer. Another option is to routinely disseminate certain
information to specified officers, such as by notifying beat officers about gang
members who are on bail, probation, or parole or for whom bench warrants
have been issued. One agency disseminates weekly bulletins on gang activity to
officers throughout the agency and to city officials. These bulletins include: 

o A synopsis of each incident by area, other activity in the area, related offense
reports, victim and suspect information, and persons arrested.

o A listing of driveby shootings and charges filed.

o Gang offense reports filed for the week.

o Arrestees by gang, offense, and juvenile or adult status.

To Other Criminal Justice Agencies

Guidelines are required for disseminating gang data to outside criminal justice
entities, including prosecution and corrections departments, as well as other law
enforcement agencies. One police department's policy requires:

o Assurance that the information request is for a legitimate law enforcement
purpose. 

o Confirmation of the identity and authority of the requester if the request is
made orally.

o Routing of written reports to the requester through the head of the requester's
agency. 

o Inclusion on each report of the following release statement:

This document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of the [XYZ]
Agency. The document is the property of [XYZ] Agency and is loaned to your
agency. Neither the document nor its contents are to be distributed outside your
agency. 

CONFIDENTIAL

Issue To:

Date:

Another agency attaches the following statement to documents based on media
sources: 

The information in this publication has been obtained from mass media sources.
Any conclusions and inferences drawn by the author do not reflect the official
position of the [XYZ] Agency. 

Formal or informal dissemination of gang intelligence to noncriminal-justice
agencies should be prohibited, unless expressly authorized by the head of the
disseminating agency. When speaking to the media about a gang-related
incident, many agencies do not attribute it to a particular gang. These agencies
believe that to do so would tend to bestow unwarranted status on gangs,
legitimize them, and give them the publicity that they often seek. 

----------------------------

Chapter 5: Gang Suppression Operations and Tactics

Effective gang suppression is essential to establish an environment that remains
free of criminal gang activity. BJA's Urban Street Gang Program focuses
primarily on strategies leading to incarceration of hardcore and associate gang
members who commit felonies and virtually control neighborhoods. These
enforcement actions pave the way for longer term community and agency
interventions.

The tactics outlined in this chapter are intended as a basic presentation of
options. Their use may or may not be appropriate, depending on local
circumstances--including gang characteristics and methods of operation (MO's)
and the characteristics and criminal histories of targeted gang members.

----------------------------

. . . unless hardcore gang members face the consequences of their actions, the
community will not become or stay involved in combating the problem.

----------------------------

Only by conceptualizing gang suppression in that broader context will law
enforcement make a significant difference. Although this monograph
focuses mostly on suppression, many law enforcement agencies consulted
during its development are concerned with a broad-based approach, as
expressed below by the Tucson, Arizona, Police Department: 

The roots of the gang drug lifestyle are embedded in the social fabric of the
community. This makes a broad-based, multifaceted effort critical. [Short-term]
goals . . . target hardcore gang members, the individuals firmly committed to a
variety of criminal enterprises including drug dealing and violence . . . .
[Long-term goals] attempt to "target harden" the community and its children in
order to prevent the gang drug lifestyle from easily taking root or growing in
neighborhoods and schools.

From experience, the local criminal justice system has learned that unless it is
effective in ensuring that hardcore gang members face the consequences of
their actions, the community will not become or stay involved in combating the
problem. The simple fact is that providing tutoring, recreation programs, or
even jobs will not work if intimidation by drug-dealing gang members forces
people into unacceptable choices. On the other hand, even the most effective
criminal justice system cannot make up for the lack of opportunity for a decent
life. The overall plan strives to integrate these activities to achieve the balance
necessary to effect substantive changes.[11]

Developing Strategies Based on Gang Intelligence

Developing enforcement strategies requires consideration of the unique nature
of each targeted gang. This section examines how agencies use reliable gang
intelligence to characterize gangs and then select appropriate suppression
tactics. Gang characteristics are described for several groups encountered by
the demonstration sites. 

Street Gang Classifications and Characteristics

Because gangs frequently organize along ethnic lines (that is, by racial, national,
linguistic, and cultural background), most agencies classify gangs initially by
ethnicity. Next, they select and refine tactics by examining gang characteristics
such as geographic range, history of violence, crimes committed, organizational
structure, rituals, members' citizenship status, and whether the gang is turf
oriented or entrepreneurial and indigenous or new to the jurisdiction. Violent
groups that fit the legal definition of a criminal gang but are not generally
considered street gangs include groups that commit rape, child abuse,
murder, desecration of churches and graveyards, and other crimes in
connection with satanism or the occult. 

Agencies that classify gangs by members' ethnicity commonly use broad
classifications such as African American, Asian, Chinese, Hispanic, Jamaican,
and Caucasian, although some classifications relate to a common interest (for
example, motorcycle gangs and white supremacist gangs). These groupings will
vary depending on the gangs that predominate in the jurisdiction. Many
subcategories may exist within these classifications, and the subcategories may
contain hundreds of specific gangs. For example, the Crips and the Bloods,
whose members are primarily African American, have formed hundreds of
factions or sets in the Los Angeles area, where they originated, and in other
cities. Asian gangs may include Vietnamese gangs with factions such as the
Natoma Boyz, Nip Family, and Oriental Boyz. White supremacist gangs may
include skinheads, Posse Comitatus, and others. 

Some of the more violent gangs encountered by the BJA Urban Street Gang
Program demonstration sites and other jurisdictions are highlighted below. The
discussion is not exhaustive, and there are many exceptions to the
generalizations made herein. However, the discussion uses experienced gang
investigators as its main source and illustrates the diversity among criminal gangs
in this country. 

----------------------------

Many subcategories may exist within classifications, and the subcategories may
contain hundreds of specific gangs.

----------------------------

Asian Street Gangs. Although the cultural differences among gangs with ethnic
ties to China, Korea, Laos, Vietnam, and other Asian countries are important
and should be examined in depth, some common trends can be noted. For
example, Asian street gang members tend not to dress in a distinctive manner,
display colors, bear tattoos (with the exception of the Japanese Yakuza), or
adopt other visible indicia of gang membership, and they are not inclined to
claim gang affiliation when questioned by law enforcement. Law enforcement
agencies consider Asian gangs particularly difficult to investigate for other
reasons that include language barriers, a lack of Asian investigators, a limited
understanding of Asian cultures and Asian gang formation, a poor or distant
relationship with Asian communities in general, and the mobility of Asian gang
members across State and national lines.

At the most basic level of investigation, the many languages and dialects spoken
by Asian gang members represent a formidable obstacle, making electronic
surveillance more time consuming and costly. Infiltration by undercover officers
is virtually impossible unless the officers thoroughly understand the nuances of
the language, dialect, and culture. Even when this obstacle is removed, initiation
rituals that require commission of a crime are likely to block undercover
infiltration. 

As a rule, Asian gangs are more profit motivated than turf oriented. Violence to
protect territory per se is not common. When violence does erupt, it is more
likely for defense of profitable criminal activity in a locality, not an expression of
a proprietary claim to a neighborhood. Asian gangs can be highly mobile,
especially Vietnamese and other Indochinese gangs. Often described as
criminally sophisticated and violent, Indochinese gangs tend to be familiar with
States' extradition laws and sometimes use this knowledge to select areas for
criminal activity. Such mobility and criminal expertise support the development
of tactics based on interregional cooperation and coordination among agencies. 

The types of crimes associated with Asian gangs have obvious implications for
suppression tactics. These crimes include hit-and-run home invasions, drug
trafficking (often involving large quantities), extortion of merchants and other
business owners, auto theft, and insurance fraud. Victims are likely to be
members of the Asian community who often do not report crimes because of
intimidation, a culturally based distrust of law enforcement, or an acceptance of
some forms of victimization (for example, Chinese business owners who regard
extortion as a customary way of doing business).

Hispanic Gangs. This broad category generally refers to gangs with cultural ties
to Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Mexico, Central American countries, and
Puerto Rico. Hispanic gang members often dress distinctively, use monikers,
display colors, communicate through graffiti, and bear tattoos (frequently
denoting monikers or gang affiliations). Often intergenerational, the gangs
usually have a long tradition that inspires extreme loyalty by members, including
a strict code of silence. This unwritten code emphasizes that members never
cooperate with law enforcement or other authorities and never inform. For this
reason, many agencies regard Hispanic gangs as more difficult to investigate
than relatively newer gangs. As with many other gangs, membership may
require commission of a crime.

Hispanic gangs, whose names frequently refer to their territories (such as
streets), tend to be highly turf oriented, a characteristic that often triggers
violence when the neighborhood or barrio is perceived as threatened by rival
gangs or government agencies. Violence toward rivals is often regarded as
legitimate behavior, with no insult too small to go unanswered. Crimes
committed by Hispanic gangs include homicide, assault, drug trafficking,
robbery, and auto theft. Particularly in the Western States, agencies observe
that Hispanic gang leadership is quite fluid and may be assumed by any member
who has the skills required at any given moment. 

Crips and Bloods. The Crips originated in Los Angeles in the mid- to late
1960's, and the Bloods were formed in reaction to the Crips.[12] Both
gangs have loosely structured subgroups or sets, most of which are from
specific neighborhoods. Typically, members dress in a distinctive fashion,
display colors (with blue associated with Crips and red with Bloods), use
monikers, sometimes display gang names or monikers on clothing, and
communicate through graffiti. However, when individual members or sets
become more serious about drug trafficking, they also may become more
cautious about calling attention to themselves with these outward signs of gang
affiliation.

In the early 1980's, members of both gangs surfaced outside Los Angeles and
the rest of California, primarily to sell cocaine. Investigative reports in 1991
placed Crips or Bloods in 32 States and 113 cities.[13] However, these
migrations are not orchestrated by any sort of national leadership. Instead,
criminal acts often are committed or directed by individual leaders (who change
frequently), rather than as the result of some hierarchical or collective
decisionmaking process.[14] The Los Angeles District Attorney (DA) provides
this description: 

The Crips is a loose association of some 200 gangs, many of which are at war
with one another, and none of whom recognizes or exerts any kind of central
authority. Individual gangs are equally marginal in their organization. Most are
loosely knit coalitions of small, autonomous cliques.

The DA also states that no evidence shows that youngsters are routine
participants in gang violence. The average age of shooters in their gang-related
homicides is around age 20. 

Jamaican Posses. Jamaican street gangs (posses) formed during the 1970's
around Kingston, Jamaica. Although members of a given posse tend to
originate from the same neighborhood in Jamaica, notable exceptions include
the Rat Posse, all of whose members have killed Jamaican police officers; the
Hotsteppers, composed only of Jamaican prison escapees who have been
convicted of a capital offense;[15] and the Shower Posse, so named from
its practice of showering victims with bullets.[16] Between 1985 and 1992,
more than 4,000 U.S. homicides were attributed to Jamaican gangs.[17] 

Similar to the Crips and the Bloods, Jamaican posses are not hierarchical
organizations. Leadership appears to be based on criteria such as "status and
reputation in Jamaica and access to money, weapons, and drugs."[18]
Nevertheless, many posses have successfully imported, distributed, and
directed street sales of vast quantities of drugs, with a focus on crack cocaine
having occurred by the mid-1980's. Although drug trafficking is the major
source of income, some posses are organized for other purposes, including
firearms trafficking, robbery, shoplifting, and murder for hire.

Most U.S. posse members are illegal aliens. They change their names frequently
(although they retain their street names) and have easy access in Jamaica to
illegal immigration documents and other forms of identification. Within this
country, they are highly mobile and are found in rural as well as urban areas.
From points of entry in Florida and New York City and, more recently,
Houston and New Orleans, Jamaican posses have spread throughout the
United States. An estimated 40 posses, with a total membership of 22,000,
now operate in 35 States.

----------------------------

The Chicago Police Department's gang crimes unit . . . estimates that 75
percent of gang crime arrests are drug related.

----------------------------

Chicago Gangs. Among the most notorious of Chicago's street gangs are the
BGD's (The Black Gangster Disciples), El Rukns, Latin Kings, and Vicelords.
The Chicago Police Department's gang crimes unit considers these gangs
inseparable from drugs and estimates that 75 percent of gang crime arrests are
drug related.[19] Their crimes are generally characterized as well organized but
with gang splinter factions that often undermine their enterprises. Low-level
members acquire criminal histories and have few assets, while higher ups often
invest in real estate acquired in the names of family members. In recent years,
loose alliances among gangs have formed. The BGD's, Latin Kings, and
Vicelords have been encountered in other States, primarily in the Midwest.
However, they do not appear to engage in much interstate communication.[20]
For example, members of the BGD's and Vicelords who were based in Detroit
went to Ft. Wayne, Indiana, in the mid-1980's and were able to organize local
gangs for drug trafficking and other criminal activity. 


The El Rukns have a 25-year criminal history under the leadership of Jeff Fort,
who began serving a 75-year sentence in 1987 for conspiring to commit
terrorist acts for the Libyan government. The gang began as the Blackstone
Rangers in the 1960's and later became known as the Black P Stone Nation, a
large amalgamation of gangs. In the mid-1970's, Fort formed the El Rukns, and
by the 1980's the gang had more in common with organized crime than with
most other street gangs. With drug profits as their primary income, gang
members bought buildings and businesses, bribed public officials, and sought
out national and international criminal connections. 

The El Rukns were dealt a severe blow when, as a result of 7 separate Federal
trials in 1991, 62 members were convicted of racketeering, drug 
trafficking, and other charges, with 12 defendants receiving life sentences. 

Other Street Gangs. Virtually all large jurisdictions, and many small ones,
contend with indigenous criminal gangs. Some are relatively well organized and
have factions outside their home jurisdictions (for example, the Miami Boyz in
Florida and several southern States). Others have small territories and are
loosely organized. Some develop their own indicia (for example, clothing style
and hand signs), while others copy those of nationally known gangs. Some
engage in violent confrontations with other gangs over turf or drug-trafficking
rights, while others are organized by members of BGD's, Crips or Bloods sets,
Vicelords, or others. 

Most local gangs tend to organize along racial or ethnic lines (although some are
multiracial), with many homegrown gangs composed of either
African-American or Hispanic members. 

Other Criminal Gangs. Today, law enforcement is increasingly concerned about
the criminal activities of several types of gangs whose members are primarily
Caucasian, some of whom are distinguished by their affinity for a particular type
of music (for example, punk and heavy metal). Others (for example, skinheads
and various neo-Nazi groups) advocate white supremacy and perpetrate hate
crimes. Agencies have associated both groups with drugs, assault, burglary,
vandalism, shoplifting, petty theft, and other crimes.

Although outlaw motorcycle gangs were not targeted by the Urban Street Gang
Program demonstration projects, many biker gangs are well organized and
involved extensively in drug and weapons trafficking, murder, rape, and other
violent crimes. The major biker gangs operate nationally or regionally in urban,
suburban, and rural communities. Also, more members in recent years have
purchased legitimate businesses as fronts for their illegal operations.


Implications of Gang Characteristics for Law Enforcement Strategies

Factors that influence the development of law enforcement strategies include
language and cultural barriers, gang control of geographic areas, insulation of
adult leaders, knowledge of police operations and policies, hidden wealth of
some gang leaders and hardcore members, status as illegal residents, and
aggressive attempts by gang members to organize local gangs.

Language and Cultural Barriers. Investigating gangs whose members are recent
immigrants or first-generation Americans and who therefore have strong ties to
foreign cultures often presents difficulties that surpass those encountered with
second-generation American gangs. The reasons include language barriers,
insufficient understanding of cultures and gang formation, the law enforcement
agency's historical relationship with the community in general, and the mobility
of crime group members across State and national borders.

The following example considers the problems associated with investigating
Asian gangs. At the most basic level of investigation, local police are often
poorly equipped to deal with Asian victims (and others), witnesses, and
perpetrators who speak little or no English. Asian witnesses and victims may be
reluctant to report crimes to the police or to cooperate in investigations for
reasons such as fear of retaliation. They may have a poor understanding of the
American criminal justice system (believing, for example, that a person released
on bail must have paid off the authorities). They may also simply distrust police
because of poor relations with them here or abroad. Some criminal practices
may also be considered normal, such as Asian merchants accepting extortion
as a customary way of doing business. 

The local police department may have few resources to break down such
barriers. It may have no Asian officers, or its Asian officers may not speak the
language or dialect of the perpetrators. These officers may lack general
investigative experience, or they may choose other specializations. Also, the
department may be concerned about creating, or appearing to create, special
units along racial lines. At the same time, undercover investigations of organized
Asian crime groups are virtually impossible unless investigators become
conversant with the nuances of various Asian languages, dialects, and cultures. 

Asian crime organizations are engaged in a broad spectrum of crime, including
heroin trafficking, extortion, gambling, prostitution, money laundering,
home-invasion robbery, assault, and homicide, and the lines between Federal
and local areas of responsibility are not always clear. For example, extortion
and prostitution clearly affect local communities, yet they may have Federal
implications. The proceeds may help finance international drug trafficking or
help emerging gangs involved in these crimes to evolve into more complex and
far-reaching organizations. Similarly, at the local level, the lines are often blurred
among organized crime, gangs and gang crimes that do not fit the definition of
organized criminal enterprises, and street-level crime. These definitional
problems affect the way in which departments allocate their personnel and
resources to combat Asian crime.

One recent study found that there were probably as many different local police
responses to Asian organized crime as there were cities with Asian crime
problems.[21] The following police responses were identified in this study:

o Develop traditional investigative units dedicated to Asian crime.

o Develop specialized Asian organized-crime databases and intelligence files.

o Assign Asian crime specialists to various types of investigative units, such as
organized crime, intelligence, and gang units.

o Immediately connect Asian victims through the police switchboard to a
24-hour translation service provided by a local language institute.

o Use one officer with language or cultural knowledge to staff an official or
unofficial desk for Asian racketeering.

o Create community relations-type patrol squads comprised of officers with
language or cultural knowledge.

o Create specialized backup squads that respond to calls for assistance from
patrol officers.

o Set up Asian crime desks in precincts that are populated by Asian residents.
 
o Coordinate the work of Asian crime investigators with vertical prosecution
units in the DA's office. 

o Participate in various types of multiagency Asian crime task forces for
intelligence sharing and joint investigations.

o Regularly assign local police specialists to specific Federal agency operations.

o Serve as a host agency for Federal agency investigators to work on a specific
case, organization, or group of suspects.


The diverse nature of Asian organized crime groups, the varying levels of
experience local departments have with these groups, the variations in local
resources, and a lack of evaluations in this area preclude developing a generic
model for combating Asian organized crime at the local level. However, some
recommendations can be made:

o Base the department's response on a thorough assessment of available
intelligence and information and on cooperation with Asian residents. The
organizational models used for traditional organized-crime investigations may
not apply.

o Ensure the availability of translators to aid in taking reports from and
interviewing Asian victims, witnesses, and perpetrators. Interpreters should be
fluent, as well as sensitive to cultural factors and nuances of the language.

o Actively recruit and train Asian officers and investigators. Some obstacles
associated with this recommendation were noted earlier; however, the benefits
in terms of both investigations and community outreach are important. Because
some agencies report a reluctance among qualified Asian-American men and
women to go into police work, personal contacts and other active recruitment
efforts may be needed at colleges and within Asian communities.

o Conduct a targeted community education and outreach effort, which is
essential if local police are to make progress in getting Asian victims and
witnesses to be more forthcoming. A number of techniques should be
considered, including the following:

-- Develop foreign language videotapes that give a general orientation to the
American criminal justice system, various police functions, when and how to
contact the police and what to expect, and community concerns with gangs
and organized crime.

-- Establish foreign-language crime and information reporting hotlines that
ensure caller anonymity.

-- Consider ways in which various community policing approaches may be
adapted to meet the unique needs of Asian communities. For example, establish
Asian crime desks at local precincts, or establish storefront offices or
foot-patrol beats using officers selected for their ability to communicate with
members of the Asian community.

In addition to language and cultural barriers, gang MO's often limit the range of
suppression tactics available to enforcement agencies. Some examples are
described in the following subsections.

----------------------------

Interpreters should be fluent, as well as sensitive to cultural factors and nuances
of the language.

----------------------------

Control of Geographic Areas. Some violent gangs take advantage of the
geography, street configurations, and traffic patterns of certain neighborhoods
or of the physical layout or isolation of certain housing complexes, hampering
law enforcement's ability to conduct surveillance or use traditional buy/bust
tactics. For example, one Tucson neighborhood's grid of exterior streets and
curved interior streets rendered the area ideal for retail drug trade. Crack
houses were situated so that surveillance was impossible, and a mid-level drug
dealer there dealt only with acquaintances. This combination precluded the
police department's use of most of its traditional enforcement and investigative
methods.

The department, in cooperation with the neighborhood, declared the area a
high-profile enforcement drug-trafficking area subject to special enforcement
efforts, including around-the-clock police presence and signs indicating that
surveillance was occurring and license plates were being recorded. This
strategy deflated the drug operations economically. When the dealer moved to
other locations, the police followed, ensuring a high discomfort level through
similar tactics. In addition, the agency pursued possible code violations in
buildings where the trafficking occurred and prodded landlords to evict tenants
known to be involved in criminal activities.

The Tucson Police Department reported that residents began to organize in the
community and eventually felt safe walking and congregating freely in the
neighborhood. However, the police also acknowledge that the neigh-borhood's
ultimate fate resides in the ability of its residents to remain organized and
promote an intolerant attitude toward criminal gangs and drugs.

When traditional enforcement tactics seem blocked, individual officers have
devised innovative tactics. For example, the following techniques were used:

o To avoid recognition by a gang member selling drugs, an undercover officer
cruising a neighborhood on his unmarked motorcycle made a buy with his
helmet visor down.


o To videotape street-corner drug buys at night, an undercover officer drove a
heavy-duty utility truck with infrared cameras installed in the outside air vents. A
baby's restraining seat strapped to the passenger-side seat prevented sellers
from getting out of camera range by entering the vehicle.

----------------------------

Some violent gangs take advantage of the geography, street configurations, and
traffic patterns of certain neighborhoods . . . .

----------------------------

Gangs in public housing developments also pose significant problems and often
require special approaches to investigate and suppress their activities. Drug
abuse in public housing areas has been a critical problem for years, and gangs
have virtually taken over some public housing developments.[22]

In Chicago, the Chicago Housing Authority (CHA) implemented a program,
Operation Clean Sweep (OCS), in cooperation with the Chicago Police
Department, that systematically gained temporary control of numerous public
buildings. OCS involved ousting trespassers, inspecting all units, securing
lobbies, installing security guards, and giving residents photo identification
cards. It also included identifying resident needs, repairing and maintaining units,
and involving residents in establishing security.

OCS was a multiphase program. Phase I involved securing the facility and
restoring common areas. Its 12 steps included selecting sites, meeting with
involved parties, securing the development's perimeter, opening an onsite
operations center, inspecting units, making building repairs, instituting visitor
policies, identifying immediate social service needs, and notifying the press and
local officials. 

Phase II involved improving property management. Administrative
improvements were designed to remove tenants who broke the law or CHA
regulations. To ensure that new residents would act responsibly, CHA
improved its income review procedures, resident screening, leasing
requirements, tenant recertification, and rent collection.

Phase III involved social services assessments and resident participation in
improvement initiatives. In the months immediately following a sweep, resident
service teams made door-to-door assessments of resident needs, identifying
and helping school dropouts, unemployed persons, and persons with substance
abuse problems. 

The benefits of the OCS approach are under study by the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD).

Insulation of Adult Leaders. Gang leaders often are difficult to arrest on a major
charge. Hardcore gang members are known for their use of juvenile employees
to insulate themselves from law enforcement. Leading gang members use
juveniles to conduct street-level drug trafficking and other frontline work, carry
their weapons, and act as bodyguards. Hardcore gang leaders are often
extremely intimidating to associates and witnesses and may hire others to
commit violent acts. 

Unless such a gang leader, through error or negligence, provides the basis for a
serious charge, an agency's options may be limited. One approach is to arrest
the person for commission of a misdemeanor offense, such as disorderly
conduct, reckless driving, or trespassing. The objective would be to document
enough of a criminal history to eventually merit a prison sentence.

----------------------------

Gangs in public housing developments also pose significant problems and often
require special approaches . . . .

----------------------------

Suppressing the Black Park Gang

Although the gang itself used no particular name, neighborhood residents
dubbed it the Black Park Gang because it shot out lights surrounding a park to
inhibit detection by police. Essentially, the gang had commandeered the park as
a base of operations.

This New York City gang was comprised of Puerto Ricans who grew up in a
public housing development near the park. Active membership numbered
between 50 and 75. Law enforcement targeted the gang because it was
particularly vengeful, vicious, and murderous and because it distributed multiple
kilos of heroin and crack throughout the city. The gang's activities also occurred
in one other State and in Puerto Rico. Investigators believed that Black Park
members committed at least 15 murders and that the gang had targeted 14
other persons for the same fate. Among the numerous murders committed by
one 19-year-old Black Park member was that of a woman in Puerto Rico, shot
40 times with a semiautomatic weapon.


With drug-trafficking proceeds, gang leaders bought legitimate businesses
through which they could launder additional drug profits, including a stationery
store, beauty parlors, grocery stores, and a liquor store.

Taking the lead, the Homicide Investigation Unit (HIU) of the New York
County (Manhattan) District Attorney's Office pursued an investigation in
cooperation with many other agencies, including the New York City Police
Department; housing authority police; police in another State and in Puerto
Rico; and Federal agencies, including the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and
Firearms (ATF), the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), and the Federal
Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Among the tactics that the HIU used within the
context of its multijurisdictional approach were the following:

o Intensive study and initial surveillance. The gang's hierarchy, structure,
drug-selling locations, and range of illegal activities were identified using
methods that included photo and video surveillance as well as the use of
confidential informants (CI's).

o Infiltration of the gang by undercover officers. Although the focus of
undercover officers was on top-level gang members, information was gathered
on all members and on their business locations, goods or property owned, and
means of communication. Often lower level gang members became informants
or witnesses. In addition to buying drugs and weapons at the highest possible
level within the gang, undercover officers tried to acquire information that
justified court permission for the unit to use various electronic surveillance
devices. 

o Cultivation and use of CI's. By debriefing gang members after arrests or while
in prison, the unit identified and cultivated those willing to become CI's. They
proved invaluable for introducing undercover officers to other gang members;
for gathering supplementary information about past, present, and planned gang
crimes (particularly about homicides); and for testifying against key gang
members. 

o Electronic surveillance. The unit found electronic surveillance essential to
making successful cases against gang members, especially when the goal was to
prosecute them as participants of a criminal enterprise under applicable State or
Federal statutes. 

o Cooperation with parole and probation. The unit initiated action to revoke
probation or parole of gang members found violating release conditions.

o Asset forfeiture. The unit targeted for seizure and forfeiture gang members'
possessions--such as cars, boats, real estate, and businesses--purchased with
drug proceeds or used to facilitate the distribution of narcotics.

Through such tactics, the HIU dismantled the Black Park Gang. However, the
park was still subject to takeover by other gangs. As a preventive measure,
the lights surrounding the park were repaired and activities for youth at the park
initiated, such as recreation programs supervised by the Police Athletic League.
The neighborhood soon renamed Black Park as White Light Park, which has
since remained gang free.

----------------------------

Temporarily removing the individual from the streets could disrupt the flow of
business and permit the use of other tactics or at least send a message that the
agency will diligently pursue criminal gangs. In some instances, such arrests
might warrant a search of the subject that could yield drugs, weapons, or stolen
property, leading to more serious charges. To be effective, such a tactic
depends on cooperation by prosecutors whose priorities are inclined to focus
on more substantive cases.

----------------------------

Frequently, gang MO's are rooted in an awareness of investigative techniques.

----------------------------

An adult gang leader such as the one described above also may be a candidate
for a State conspiracy investigation. For example, some gangs use a structured
communications system involving pagers and pay and cellular phones. (In such
cases, court permission for wiretaps may be required.) However, if cost, legal,
or resource constraints prevent this course of action by a local agency, involving
a Federal agency in the investigation is another possibility (for example, the
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF), when Federal firearms
violations are involved). These approaches are discussed later in the chapter
and illustrated in case examples. 

Knowledge of Police Operations and Policies. Frequently, gang MO's are
rooted in an awareness of investigative techniques. This awareness does not
necessarily negate the effectiveness of the techniques and may suggest a review
to determine whether implementation changes are warranted. For example, in
New York City, one Jamaican posse included members who were former
Jamaican police officers, some having been trained in the United States. Their
knowledge of tactics used by the New York Police Department was
substantial. Undercover officers operating out of a DA's office were permitted
to use tactics significantly different from those of other law enforcement
personnel in the city. The DA's gang unit could:

o Provide front money for drug buys. 

o Conduct inside buys.

o Carry weapons during buys. Because of high robbery potential, absence of
weapons would alert sellers to the possibility that buyers were undercover
officers. 

o Purchase drugs and weapons as part of the same transaction.

o Make buys on weekends and at night, not just during typical shift daylight
hours.

o Make buys during special events (for example, on Super Bowl Sunday).

Familiarity with individual gang MO's will allow law enforcement personnel to
select methods that will provide the highest degree of effectiveness as well as
officer safety. 

Hidden Wealth. Some criminal gang leaders and hardcore members have
accumulated wealth through their illegal enterprises, and an examination of their
investments may be worthwhile. In addition to purchasing items such as luxury
cars and jewelry, they may have purchased real estate or businesses through
which they launder illegal profits. Agencies may consider seizing such
possessions by applying State or Federal asset forfeiture laws, and some gang
leaders may be appropriate targets for financial investigations.

Status as Illegal Residents. With gangs whose members are primarily illegal
aliens, law enforcement should consider delaying arrests until the entire gang
may be apprehended in one operation and consequently deported. A more
incremental approach gives members time to flee to their native lands. When
illegal aliens are gang members, obtaining confidential informants (CI's) by
threatening deportation is often an effective tactic. Some agencies have worked
successfully with the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) on gang
cases involving illegal residents. 

Aggressive Attempts To Organize Local Gangs. The presence of gang
members who are new arrivals from other jurisdictions may require that
agencies revise their tactics. For example, to let new arrivals know that their
anonymity is lost, some agencies switch from covert to overt surveillance,
including videotaping, which can be sufficient inducement for recent arrivals to
leave the jurisdiction. The success of this tactic depends on high-quality gang
intelligence networks. 

The gang characteristics discussed above create numerous problems in
developing a generic gang suppression strategy. However, law enforcement
personnel, using a combination of traditional enforcement methods and
innovative tactics, should be able to overcome many barriers.

An Overview of Suppression Tactics

Because street gangs have become increasingly involved in drug-related crimes,
the tactics outlined in the following sections have a strong drug enforcement
orientation. It is assumed that agencies have a thorough working knowledge of
how to implement drug enforcement tactics. Descriptions here are brief and
primarily provide a context for such tactics in gang suppression. Further
information may be found in other BJA drug enforcement monographs.[23]

----------------------------

Two tactics employed by agencies in the gang suppression effort are the use
of CI's and undercover officers.

----------------------------

Use of Confidential Informants and Undercover Officers

Two tactics employed by agencies in the gang suppression effort are the use of
CI's and undercover officers.

Confidential Informants. The cornerstone of gang suppression efforts is
cultivation and use of CI's, the tactic that agencies usually employ despite its
high cost in terms of maintenance, time, protection, preparation for court
testimony, and possible eventual relocation. 

Working under the direction of investigators, CI's supply four major services:

o Purchasing drugs, weapons, and other items from, or selling them to, gang
members who thereby expose themselves to arrest and prosecution.

o Introducing undercover officers to gang members to infiltrate, purchase or sell
drugs, and collect essential information.

o Providing data such as the location of crack houses and other business
locations, assets held by gang members, the identity of gang leaders and violent
members, past crimes and who committed them, planned crimes, MO's,
addresses, and telephone numbers.

o Serving as witnesses at trials. 

CI-supplied information about imminent clashes between gangs, including those
at schools, or planned killings is of particular value to proactive suppression
efforts. Gang investigators may be able to defuse gang fights or prevent murders
by acting on tips from reliable informants. They may not only prevent the
incident in question, but also prevent more violent gang warfare. 

Generally, the most valuable CI is a member of the targeted gang; however,
members of rival gangs, friends of gang members, or persons who are not
affiliated with gangs but who compete against them in the drug market can serve
as CI's and provide highly useful information. In some cases, agencies import
professional CI's, often through the cooperation of Federal agencies, such as
ATF. 

A common range of motives applies to persons who decide to become
gang-related CI's: money, revenge, fear, elimination of competition,
prosecutorial or judicial leniency, and repentance. Some gang members,
perhaps pressured by friends, commit themselves to the gang before fully
understanding the scope of its violence and criminal activity. These individuals
often develop reservations and seek a way to terminate their involvement. They
may regard becoming CI's as an acceptable way to exit gang life, especially
when faced with the possibility of arrest or lengthy incarceration. 

Undercover Officers. Frequently, the use of undercover officers is extremely
difficult because of the nature and/or demographics of the targeted gang (for
example, other cultures). Under the appropriate circumstances, however,
undercover officers may achieve the following results through gang infiltration or
by other means: 

o Drug buys made as part of either buy/bust operations or long-range
investigations. 

o Reverse stings.

o Provision of information that supports requests for court-ordered electronic
surveillance and establishes probable cause for issuance of search or arrest
warrants.

o Taping or transmission of incriminating conversations with gang members.
 
o Identification of potential CI's.

o Identification of suppliers of drugs and weapons to gang members.

o Acquisition of information similar to that listed earlier for CI's, such as
identification of gang members, gang assets, and locations of crack and stash
houses.

----------------------------

. . . the use of undercover officers is extremely difficult because of the nature
and/or demographics of the targeted gang . . . .

----------------------------

Surveillance/Arrest, Buy/Bust, and Reverse Sting Operations

Three approaches to curbing drug trafficking by gangs are surveillance/arrest,
buy/bust, and reverse sting operations.

Surveillance/Arrest. One traditional approach to curbing open-air drug
trafficking by gangs is surveillance, followed by the surveillance officer arresting
parties to the transaction. Surveillance occurs from unmarked vehicles,
buildings, or any other location providing a clear view of the market area.
Alternatively, the surveillance officer may observe transactions from a more
distant point and identify the buyer and seller by radio to a jump-out squad,
which then moves in and makes the arrests. The second approach reveals
neither the surveillance officer nor the surveillance location.

Buy/Bust. Buy/bust operations have proved effective against gang members. In
the most basic form of this tactic, undercover officers make drug buys and
either immediately arrest the sellers or signal jump-out squads. In some
scenarios, the arresting officers are hidden in the back of vans driven by the
undercover buyers. To better protect undercover identities, a variant of this
tactic allows the undercover officers to make the buys and remove themselves
from the scene; then backup units, which either observed the transaction or
were in radio contact with undercover officers, move in for the arrests. 

Yet another variation avoids alerting targeted gang members until they all have
made sales to either undercover officers or CI's, after which arrests are made
en masse. Each transaction is recorded on audiotape or videotape (preferably
the latter), from which officers familiar with the neighborhood often can identify
the sellers. As described in Prosecuting Gangs for Drug Trafficking, the San
Diego prosecutor's office reports using this tactic to induce many guilty pleas
and has found the videotapes to be strong evidence in cases at trial. The tapes
also may be effective in persuading gang members to become CI's. 

----------------------------

Three approaches to curbing drug trafficking by gangs are surveillance/arrest,
buy/bust, and reverse sting operations.

----------------------------

Prosecuting Gangs for Drug Trafficking

The San Diego District Attorney's (SDDA's) Office formed a gang unit in 1981.
The main function of the unit's three attorneys at that time was to prosecute
gang-related homicides. In 1989, a BJA grant enabled the office to hire two
additional attorneys to coordinate the investigation and prosecution of violent
members of drug-trafficking gangs. One investigation targeted Crips (Operation
Blue Rag), one targeted Bloods (Operation Red Rag), and another was
directed at Hispanic gang members (Operation Bandanna).

Police investigators worked side-by-side with the prosecutors to plan and
execute these operations, all of which involved using "flipped" gang members to
make drug buys. The buys were recorded by video cameras hidden in
informants' cars. Investigations lasted from 6 weeks to 3 months. Most
defendants pled guilty to drug-trafficking charges and received sentences
averaging 5 years in State court.

Several elements were critical to the success of these operations:

o A motivated and reliable informant who was easily accepted by targeted
hardcore gang members. 

o A vertical prosecution team that worked together with investigators from the
operation's beginning.

o A principal prosecutor who was freed from responsibility for other cases.

o Videotaped corroboration of drug transactions.

o Coordination with judges to inform them of the number of forthcoming
indictments and to discuss security issues. (In San Diego, two judges were
assigned to try all gang cases.)

o Coordination with the jailer before a sweep to allow preparation for the
increased number of detainees.

Two Federal Bureau of Investigation agents (FBI) were later assigned to the
SDDA gang unit to review the processes used by these operations. The FBI
successfully emulated the strategy in Oceanside, California, resulting in 58
arrests (and 56 guilty pleas) within 1 month. The FBI then brought one of its
informants to Seattle, Washington, for another operation that resulted in the
arrest of 110 gang members.

----------------------------

Reverse Stings. In reverse sting operations, which target drug buyers,
undercover officers effect the arrests of gang members or their customers on
charges of either purchasing drugs or, in States with the appropriate legislation,
soliciting for the purpose of buying drugs. In soliciting cases, actual drugs are
not needed because the offense is triggered when buyers, at the request of
undercover officers, show their money. At that point, the undercover officers, in
sight of surveillance teams parked nearby, direct the buyers to locations where
drugs supposedly are available or otherwise convince them to drive away,
perhaps by expressing concern about police in the area. The undercover officer
videotapes the solicitation. After a customer drives away from the solicitation
scene, officers in a marked police vehicle intercept the customer, whose driver's
license provides identification, and explain that the stops are routine because the
area is dangerous and known for drug activity. If appropriate, officers issue
traffic tickets. In any event, the stop serves to corroborate the solicitation, and
the encounter with the uniformed officer is also videotaped. Arrests are made at
a later time. 

When undercover officers actually sell drugs during reverse stings, buyers are
videotaped and, upon completion of the transaction, arrested by a backup unit,
which may also seize the buyer's vehicle under State forfeiture laws. Included
among the many details that must be considered prior to such operations are
protection of the drugs, avoidance of entrapment, officer safety, arrest and
booking procedures, and, if a large number of arrests are expected,
coordination with courts and corrections. 

Elements critical to successful investigation and prosecution of drug-trafficking
gang members are described in Prosecuting Gangs for Drug Trafficking.

----------------------------

Additional investigative approaches to gang enforcement involve the interdiction
of gang drug supplies . . . street barriers, police sweeps, and execution of
warrants.

----------------------------

Interdiction, Barriers, Sweeps, and Warrant Execution 

Additional investigative approaches to gang enforcement involve the interdiction
of gang drug supplies and the use of roadblocks, street barriers, police sweeps,
and execution of warrants. 

Interdiction. Interdicting gang drug supplies through traffic stops must be
supported by observation of illegal activity or at least by reasonable suspicion.
Searches of vehicles and occupants must be based on probable cause unless
they occur as incidental to arrest, in conformance with the plain view exception,
with the consent of the driver or owner, or in accordance with agency
regulations governing impoundment searches. Probable cause may arise during
the interaction between officers and the driver and passengers, such as the
detection of odors associated with marijuana or substances used to mask the
smell of drugs; pry marks on the vehicle; or narcotics paraphernalia in plain
view. 

Some police agencies have established roadblocks because of traffic
congestion due to street narcotics activity by gangs. These roadblocks involve
checks of driver's licenses and vehicle registrations and may result in arrests not
only for traffic-related violations, but also for drug-related offenses. If drugs are
found, roadblocks may be regarded as a form of interdiction. Agencies often
use roadblocks in conjunction with other tactics to target gang activity in a
neighborhood, such as uniformed saturation patrol, undercover buys, reverse
stings, and asset seizure. 

At transportation terminals, interdiction teams can intercept gang-related drugs
and currency. Those teams may patrol terminals on a regular basis and use drug
courier profiles or respond to tips from CI's or from sources among the
terminal's security personnel.

Barriers. Some agencies have erected street barriers, combined with increased
police presence, in neighborhoods seriously afflicted with drug trafficking,
driveby shootings, and other illegal activity by gangs. In Bridgeport,
Connecticut's, Project Phoenix, for example, the barriers create a maze of
dead-end streets in a neighborhood. This greatly reduces the ease with which
drug purchasers can turn off the adjacent interstate, make their buys, and
quickly return to the highway. If conditions improve enough to warrant
dismantling the barriers, residents and the police must make a strong
commitment to improve overall conditions and retain control of the
neighborhood. Before other agencies proceed with this tactic, they must first
consider how barriers also may inhibit the access of emergency vehicles (for
example, fire and ambulance).

Sweeps. Police sweeps are intended to provide at least temporary relief to
neighborhoods suffering from particularly intense gang violence or drug
activity. A sweep can target criminal activity on the streets, in buildings (as in
apartment complexes), or both.

To help ensure that criminal activity does not reassert its dominance after a
high-profile sweep, one agency maintains an intense patrol presence in
the area for the following 6 weeks. During that period, other city agencies begin
to rehabilitate the neighborhood. For example, streets and alleys are cleaned
and made passable, unoccupied buildings are boarded up, unsalvageable
structures are demolished, and fire and housing codes are enforced.
Subsequently, patrol officers identify the area's law enforcement needs on a
continuing basis, and other city agencies also remain involved. An example is
OCS in Chicago (described earlier), which is only one component of the city's
comprehensive plan to regain control of highrise apartment buildings. Followup,
including security measures, building repairs, and resident services, begins
immediately after the sweep. 

Execution of Warrants. Because of the habitual criminality exhibited by
hardcore gang members, a critical first step in gang enforcement is to determine
whether outstanding arrest or bench warrants have been issued for them; if so,
such warrants should be executed.

Developing probable cause to support search warrants can prove highly fruitful.
For example, the Riverside, California, Police Department investigated gangs
and related violent crimes, including drug dealing, for 2 months to prepare a
174-page search warrant affidavit. The affidavit supported 100 warrants that
targeted gang-member residences in Riverside and the surrounding area.
Following a detailed operations plan covering chain of command,
communications, operational procedures and timing, and responsibilities of all
involved, more than 300 officers from 35 agencies executed the warrants in 1
day. The operation resulted in 55 arrests on various charges, including murder.
Officers seized 98 firearms (some fully automatic), explosive devices (including
handgrenades), knives, and other weapons.

Search warrants in support of crack house raids may yield dividends, although
in many cases, large amounts of drugs are not on the premises. Gangs
frequently use their own version of a just-in-time inventory system by supplying
crack houses with small quantities of the drug on an hourly basis. Stash houses
are often more promising warrant-authorized raid targets, as are clandestine
laboratories, although extreme caution is mandatory during their dismantling
because of the dangerous chemicals that may be present. 

----------------------------

Stash houses are often promising warrant-authorized raid targets, as are
clandestine laboratories . . . .

----------------------------

Other Investigative Approaches

Other investigative approaches to gang enforcement include surveillance,
followup investigations in departments with gang units, and task forces. 

Surveillance. As previously noted, surveillance is appropriate in many
investigative contexts. Techniques applicable to gangs include use of listening
devices, wiretaps, body wires, car-tagging devices for electronic tracking,
audio and video equipment, and simple observation. 

Wiretaps and listening devices are usually restricted to surveillance of major
players and to investigations leading to prosecutions of gang members as
participants in conspiracies, such as in Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt
Organizations- (RICO-) type cases. Some agencies monitor audiotapes and
have them reviewed by paralegals, detectives, investigators, and prosecutors
for all pertinent gang intelligence, which is then entered into the gang database.

Agencies use surveillance techniques to identify stash houses, safe houses,
crack houses, and street sales locations. In a typical procedure, agency gang
specialists conduct surveillances of crack houses and street sales locations,
videotape the criminal activity, and if probable cause exists, make arrests or
obtain search warrants. 

As a case example, investigators working for the San Diego DA's Office taped
state-of-the-art audio equipment to a CI's body to corroborate drug purchases
transacted from the CI's vehicle, inside apartments, or in front of crack houses.
After each transaction, the agency recorded the CI's debriefing on the same
audiotape used during the purchase. The debriefing included the suspect's
name, description, quantity of drugs purchased, and any other pertinent
information. During the 4-month investigation, the CI made 65 drug purchases
from gang members, and the tape enabled the CI to prepare effective court
testimony. 

In another San Diego operation, a CI made purchases from a vehicle in which a
video camera and microphones were installed. The agency found videotaping
more effective than audiotaping for corroborating drug purchases because it
eliminated the possibility of a defense based on false identification, a tactic often
used by defendants and their attorneys.

----------------------------

Agencies use surveillance techniques to identify stash houses, safe houses,
crack houses, and street sales locations.

----------------------------

Followup Investigations. Police agencies differ in the extent to which they use
gang unit members to conduct followup investigations. Policies from two
different agencies related to this issue are highlighted below.

One agency states, "The [gang unit] will also concentrate on followup
investigations. Through their expertise about gangs, the members of the unit
have become adept at putting together cases with very meager evidence and,
often, intimidated witnesses." However, gang unit members, often required to
be available around the clock, generally are careful not to become overly
involved in followup investigations. They also need enough time to fulfill the
unit's proactive responsibilities in areas such as intelligence and prompt
responses to threatened gang incidents. 

In contrast, the Gang Task Force (GTF) in another agency conducts followup
investigations in conjunction with other investigative units on all criminal acts
committed by targeted gang members. To identify crimes committed by gang
members, all police reports are reviewed daily by GTF's criminal intelligence
officer, who compiles a list of all crimes in which a targeted gang member is
likely to be involved. The unit supervisor coordinates the followup investigations
on those crimes. GTF conducts most of the investigations, but specialized
investigations, such as homicides, sexual assaults, and arson, are handled by
other units. In those cases, a GTF officer is assigned to assist the investigating
unit.

Task Forces. Whether composed of agencies within one jurisdiction or across
jurisdictions (such as local-county or local-Federal), task forces offer a
framework that often can magnify the effectiveness of investigations.
Advantages associated with this investigative approach include:

o Availability of more resources than otherwise could be brought to bear,
including personnel, skills, and specialized equipment. 

o A pool of undercover officers (and perhaps CI's) whose identities are not
known by local gangs. 

o Avoidance of duplicate investigations.

o Ability to select from a wider range of laws on which to base investigations
and prosecutions (best charge in best court) or to seek court permission to use
investigative techniques such as electronic surveillance.

o Coordination in gathering and sharing gang-related information. 

o Containment of the interjurisdictional mobility of some gangs.

A formal task force agreement can help participants avoid misunderstandings
pertaining to interagency issues such as command and control, responsibilities,
objectives, asset sharing, overtime, liability, insurance, access to confidential
information, weapons policies, rotation of personnel out of the task force, cross
designation, tactics, and funding.

----------------------------

. . . task forces offer a framework that often can magnify the effectiveness of
investigations.

----------------------------

Other Approaches. Investigations leading to the arrests of gang members for
violations of State or local firearms laws may qualify for referral, via ATF, to
U.S. attorneys for prosecution under one of the Federal Triggerlock statutes,
which often carry stiffer penalties than those authorized by State firearms
legislation. For example, a gang member convicted for the use or possession of
a firearm during a crime of violence or drug trafficking receives a mandatory
consecutive sentence of 5 years in Federal prison, even in the absence of prior
convictions. Gang members violating another Triggerlock law, the Armed
Career Criminal Statute, face 15 years to life in Federal prison (see Chapter 7
for details).

Gang investigators may choose to pattern their investigations on the Federal
Continuing Criminal Enterprise Statute or its State counterparts or on Federal
or State RICO statutes (see Chapter 7). Gang members convicted under the
RICO conspiracy approach, for instance, face not only incarceration, but also
possible erosion of their economic base through asset forfeiture and injunctive
relief. 

Apart from RICO legislation, laws in all States authorize asset forfeiture in
connection with drug trafficking, drug manufacture, and, in some States, other
crimes. Gang units often refer such cases to their agencies' financial investigation
units, which may pursue forfeiture on either a criminal or civil basis.

In many States, gang investigations benefit from legislation based on the "mad
dog pack" theory. Under certain circumstances, such legislation holds individual
gang members responsible for actions of the gang as a whole, even if they were
not present when the crime was committed. Perhaps the most widely known
legislation of this type is California's Street Terrorism Enforcement and
Prevention (STEP) Act. Under this law, a single homicide and an attempted
murder led to the prosecution of 32 gang members. The outcomes of this case
included a 22-year State prison sentence for a gang member who was riding in
the car from which shots were fired; a 3-year sentence for a gang member who,
though not in the car at the time of the shooting, was present at a meeting where
the shooting was planned; and a 2-year sentence for the head of the gang, who
was neither at the planning meeting nor in the car. Whether agencies are able to
take full advantage of investigations patterned on legislation such as the STEP
Act depends, in general, on how thoroughly agencies identify the gangs in their
respective jurisdictions and how well they document the identity of each gang
member (see Chapter 7 for details on the STEP Act).

Another frequently used investigative approach is to revoke the bail, probation,
or parole of gang members whenever possible (see Chapter 6).

----------------------------

. . . laws in all States authorize asset forfeiture in connection with drug
trafficking, drug manufacture, and . . . other crimes.

----------------------------


Suppression Through Patrol

Another form of gang enforcement is suppression through patrol, which includes
directed patrol and community-oriented policing. 

Directed Patrol. Under a directed-patrol approach, agencies provide the
relevant information about a gang-related problem as well as directives for
action to uniformed officers . Among other possible tasks within the problem
neighborhood, officers overtly enforce drug and other criminal laws, as
well as local ordinances. Visible police presence hinders gang street activities
and encourages citizens to participate in safe outdoor neighborhood activities.

Directed patrol can solidify an effective relationship between the patrol force
and gang officers by increasing two-way communication and by assigning more
resources to the gang problem. For example, some patrol officers could be
directed to work for a few hours each day on specified gang-related tasks,
such as answering gang-related calls for service, gathering gang-related
information, executing warrants on gang members, or carrying out gang
prevention activities. 
 
Directed patrol is an integral part of a multiagency task force approach
established in 1991 in the operations division of the Ft. Wayne, Indiana, Police
Department. Its Community Anti-Narcotics (CAN) concept advocates a more
thorough approach in which a team of officers, under the direction of the
community policing supervisor, goes through five basic steps in each CAN
operation. 

Step 1, targeting, involves selecting a target area after analyzing crime data (for
example, call-for-service, felony arrest, drug line, crime stoppers, and gang
data) and conducting video surveillance. Several other police departments assist
with Step 2, surveillance. Step 3, intensive undercover enforcement, lasts 2 to 4
weeks. One 2-week CAN sweep in 1992 resulted in approximately 50 arrests.
Step 4 is saturation patrol. Step 5 is evaluation. In 1992, this involved
door-to-door canvassing by CAN officers (reserve officers assisted in 1991),
who also distributed crime prevention information and made referrals to city
resources.

----------------------------

The community policing philosophy emphasizes identification and resolution of
problems and conditions that cause crime . . . .

----------------------------

Community-Oriented Policing. A proactive, decentralized, neighborhood-based
approach, community-oriented policing stresses close interaction and
cooperation between citizens and uniformed patrol officers, who are frequently
based at neighborhood substations. The community policing philosophy
emphasizes identification and resolution of problems and conditions that cause
crime, rather than focusing exclusively on individual incidents. 

Ideally, neighborhood residents and police jointly define the problems, select
the targets, and share in developing appropriate strategies. Solutions to
underlying problems or conditions that contribute to neighborhood crime
include removing abandoned cars, improving street lighting, converting pay
phones to function on a call-out basis only, securing advance permission from
business owners for police to enter private property (for example, parking lots
and exterior stairs), and arresting and investigating gang members or other
loitering individuals.

Many view community-oriented policing as an attractive option for addressing
the fears and misapprehensions that often are prevalent among minority
communities. As one gang unit commander explained, the agency must sell its
anti-gang program to minorities so that they will not consider it a form of
repression against their respective communities. 

For example, the Oakland, California, Police Department recognizes the value
of a community-oriented approach by consistently reaching out to Latino and
Asian organizations to explain that, in contrast to some other nations, police in
the United States are part of the solution, not the problem. Among its other
outreach activities, the department distributes videos featuring minority narrators
who explain how police and other criminal justice agencies operate. These
efforts appear to be useful in promoting a greater willingness among minorities
to volunteer gang-related information.

The Aurora, Colorado, Gang Task Force, considered a model in its
broad-based community approach to gang suppression, is highlighted in
Community-Oriented Gang Control.

----------------------------

Community-Oriented Gang Control

The Aurora, Colorado, Police Department (APD) established the Aurora Gang
Task Force (AGTF) to implement gang prevention recommendations derived
from the department's study of the community's gang problem. AGTF is a
structured, ongoing group composed of 75 members who represent city
government, the police department, health care, businesses, schools, religious
organizations, military installations, and nonprofit groups.

APD and AGTF have a symbiotic relationship, with APD providing firsthand
information to AGTF members, and AGTF mobilizing the remainder of the
Aurora community to do its part in supporting gang control and prevention
efforts. To assist the gang investigation unit, members of the task force obtained
donated video cameras, mobile telephones, and surveillance and night vision
goggles from local Rotary clubs and military installations. A local trade school
volunteered to transform police cars into unmarked surveillance vehicles, and
Humana Hospital-Aurora provided meeting space, support staff, and funds to
support APD- and AGTF-related services. 

AGTF, in conjunction with APD, also produced a videotape, Aurora Colors,
which, along with a companion publication, was distributed nationally and
internationally. The materials chronicle the rise of gangs and the city's efforts to
combat them. They were funded and produced by Humana Hospital-Aurora,
whose Director served as Chairman of AGTF.

AGTF is considered a model in its broad-based community approach to
controlling gangs. In 1992, the program received an outstanding achievement
award through the 1992 City Livability Award program at the U.S. Conference
of Mayors' Annual Meeting. That year Aurora was also selected as the
site for a $250,000 study from NIJ. The study is expected to be used in
developing a national model on how to deal with gangs in America.

For copies of the video or publication or for information about Aurora's gang
control efforts, contact AGTF, c/o Presbyterian St. Luke's Medical Center,
1719 East 19th Avenue, Denver, CO 80218, 303-839-6100 or
303-830-7171. 

----------------------------

Suppression Through Enforcement of Codes and Abatement Ordinances 

Compliance with health, building, and zoning codes, as well as nuisance
abatement ordinances, may be enforced to close crack houses, clandestine
laboratories, and other gang locations; to evict gang members from apartments
used for drug-related purposes; and to otherwise control gang activity. For
example, one agency produced evidence resulting in the eviction of 324 tenants
for drug-related reasons over a 30-month period and, in some instances, used
eviction threats as leverage to cultivate CI's.

In one jurisdiction, law enforcement and another city agency cooperate to
survey buildings in high-crime areas and determine whether codes are being
violated. The legal owners of buildings with code violations are given 1 month
to comply. If violations are not remedied within the allotted period, the property
is fenced off and boarded up. If, after a series of additional notifications, the
owner does not respond, the property is subject to demolition, or the city can
rehabilitate the property for resale or conversion to public housing to avoid
leaving buildings in a boarded-up condition.

Another option for controlling gang activity is enforcement of gang-free or
drug-free zones at parks and schools. Chapter 7 provides more information on
legal issues surrounding use of these tactics.

----------------------------

Chapter 6: Interagency Cooperation and Collaboration

Given the violence and other characteristics associated with gangs, heightened
cooperation between law enforcement and other criminal justice
agencies--prosecutors, probation and parole, jails and courts, crime
laboratories, and Federal agencies--is critical to the success of gang
suppression efforts.

Police-Prosecutor Cooperation 

Components of police-prosecutor cooperation include vertical prosecution,
early involvement and advice, and managing and protecting witnesses.

Vertical Prosecution 

Under vertical prosecution, the prosecuting attorney, trained in and usually
devoted full time to gang matters, is responsible for each phase of the case,
from filing through trial and sentencing. The New York County (Manhattan)
District Attorney's Office uses different prosecution teams for different gang
types. For example, one team focuses on Dominican, Jamaican, and other
gangs composed primarily of illegal aliens from the Caribbean and Central
America, while another team focuses on Asian gangs.

A State task force on gangs and drugs in California concluded:

[Vertical prosecution] has proven to be the most productive tool in attaining
longer sentences for serious gang and drug offenders. This method of
prosecution provides for more continuity throughout the court process. With
specialized caseloads, attorneys can learn unique aspects of gang and drug
cases. Prosecutors become more aware of the criminal history of individual
gang members and have the opportunity to structure a case for more effective
prosecution.[24]

Specialization also allows for a reduced caseload. A closer examination of this
specialized approach is offered in Case Study: Vertical Prosecution in Tucson. 

Under vertical prosecution, attorneys become trained in or otherwise attuned to
the culture, structure, and guns-and-drug economy of the street gang. Some
prosecutors become skilled in understanding and speaking street jargon and use
this knowledge, for example, to extract the maximum amount of information
from audiotapes of gang-member conversations. Others may feign ignorance of
street language when interviewing gang members, which often results in subjects
revealing more than intended.

Prosecuting attorneys in vertical units emphasize gang affiliation of defendants as
an aggravating factor in support of no-bail motions and petitions for maximum
sentences. If bail is made with illegal funds, attorneys may, under applicable
laws, initiate steps to revoke it. Vertical prosecution often results in greater
willingness by attorneys to accept cases involving relatively mundane charges,
such as disorderly conduct or vandalism, to deter gang activity and to build
gang-member criminal histories. Such prosecutors also determine the relative
advantages of bringing charges through an information, grand jury, or
preliminary hearing. 

----------------------------

Under vertical prosecution, the prosecuting attorney . . . is responsible for each
phase of the case . . . .

----------------------------

Early Involvement and Advice 

According to law enforcement agencies experienced in dealing with gangs, the
earlier the prosecutor becomes involved in gang cases the better. In the ideal
situation, the prosecutor assists in all phases of investigation and in identifying
appropriate targets for prosecution.

Prosecutors can advise on particularly effective laws, their elements of proof,
and procedural pitfalls so that law enforcement can tailor investigations
accordingly. Prosecutors can also advise on the following topics, among others:

o Preparation and execution of search warrants.

o Avoidance of entrapment during buy/bust and reverse sting operations.

o Use of electronic surveillance.

o Selection of charges most likely to result in no bail or high bail.

o Asset seizure and forfeiture.

In addition, prosecutors may be present at the scene of raids and other
operations to provide on-the-spot advice as legal questions arise.

----------------------------

Prosecutors can advise on particularly effective laws, their elements of proof,
and procedural pitfalls . . . .

----------------------------

Managing and Protecting Witnesses 

In gang cases, the likelihood of witness intimidation is always a factor and
should be among the first issues addressed by law enforcement and
prosecutors. One option is relocation of a threatened witness to a relative's
house, public housing apartment, hotel room, or out-of-town site. If the case
resulted from work by a task force including Federal agencies, either of these
parties may be able to absorb the cost of relocation and related security. Or a
State victim-witness assistance fund may help to offset relocation costs.

Even when Federal agencies are not involved in investigations, local requests to
place witnesses in the Federal witness protection program may be made to
U.S. attorneys, who may forward the requests to the U.S. Marshals Service.
However, gang members often have difficulty adhering to the program's
guidelines, which require minimal contact with friends and family. 

In some jurisdictions, law enforcement may request prosecutors to obtain a
court-ordered ex parte protective order prohibiting release of witnesses' names
until just prior to testimony. 

To help witnesses feel more secure, prosecutors should make every effort to
deny bail to gang defendants. According to a prosecutor in the Riverside,
California, District Attorney's Office: 

The gang prosecutor should treat the detention or bail hearing as a major
appearance, which may spell out whether the case is ultimately won or lost. If
a gang member who has committed a violent crime is out of custody pending
resolution of the charges, witnesses will disappear . . . . Prior to the hearing, the
prosecutor should review the defendant's probation file, records with the police
gang unit, and general criminal history, including reading the police reports for
every detail, such as a prior occasion when the defendant was noted to have an
extremely anti-authority attitude. 

Harassment can be devastating to witnesses. Responses to threats and taunts
must be swift and dramatic if they are to be effective in maintaining open lines of
communication with victims and witnesses. For example, the practice by gang
members of loitering in front of a witness's home could be halted by placing
additional patrols in the area. Probation or parole conditions prohibiting
association with other gang members could serve as the basis for arrest and
revocation in these instances.

In any case, the absolute minimum requirement is getting to witnesses early to
establish a strong rapport and assure them that their interests and safety are of
prime concern to police and prosecutors. Giving them the name of the
investigating officer as well as 24-hour telephone access helps establish this
confidence.

Some witnesses will be reluctant or hostile for reasons other than safety
concerns (for example, relatives, friends, and gang associates of the defendant).
Incarceration of material witnesses deemed likely to fail to appear at trial may
be possible, at least until court-ordered bond is posted or immunity from
prosecution may convince others to cooperate.

Reluctant witnesses may decide to recant or change their initial statements to
police and prosecutors. To help counteract this, one gang prosecutor advocates
that police and prosecuting attorneys familiarize themselves with and assess the
applicability of the law on prior inconsistent statements. He notes that in
California v. Green (1970),[25] the Supreme Court held that a prior
inconsistent statement could be offered not only to impeach a witness at trial,
but also for the truth of the matter asserted therein. 

Another prosecutor often brings witnesses in gang cases to the preliminary
hearing--in contrast to an information or grand jury hearing--in an
attempt to neutralize possible future problems by reluctant witnesses. This
action brings witnesses before the judge and defense counsel and records their
stories early in the case, eliminating the possibility of problems caused by their
failure to appear or presenting different testimony. 

Other agencies advocate qualifying law enforcement officers as expert
witnesses in gang prosecutions, based on their experience and training. For
example, they are often required to lay a foundation for the admission of gang
affiliation evidence in cases prosecuted under gang statutes.

----------------------------

To help witnesses feel more secure, prosecutors should make every effort
to deny bail to gang defendants.

----------------------------

Case Study: Vertical Prosecution in Tucson

At one time, the Pima County, Arizona, Attorney's Office did not distinguish
between gang members and other defendants. Prosecution generally involved a
different prosecutor for each stage of the case. In addition, practical case
management considerations often prevented acceptance of gang-member
cases. For example, an Arizona statute allows criminal prosecution for damages
of $250 or more, but to control caseloads, attorneys would not bring cases
involving graffiti damages of less than $500. Graffiti is often the first indication of
a gang problem, but many incidents did not meet the $500 criterion. The
Tucson police wanted to pursue these and other misdemeanor cases more
aggressively, both to deter gang activity and to compile criminal histories on
hardcore gang members. 

To address these problems, the county attorney's office designated a trial
attorney to review gang cases for charging decisions. The trial attorney also
handled a general felony caseload. As the number of gangs and gang-related
crimes increased, the attorney could not keep up with intelligence updates and
maintain service levels while devoting time to other types of cases. 

What became apparent was that violent street gangs, which often engaged in
drug trafficking, required a more specialized approach. For example, police
stressed that street gang cases often involve witnesses or victims who do not
possess great jury appeal. Furthermore, these witnesses and victims may be
reluctant or even unwilling to cooperate with law enforcement due to
intimidation and fear or out of loyalty to the gang. General prosecutors often
lacked the special expertise required to solidify an investigation containing
problem witnesses or victims and bring it to trial. Opportunities to target
high-profile gang members were lost, and prosecutors not specifically charged
with making an impact on the street-gang problem had little time for proactive
involvement at the investigative stage. As a result, criminal cases involving street
gangs tended to receive inadequate attention.

Thus, the county attorney's office assigned a full-time prosecutor exclusively to
street gang cases and investigations. This prosecutor handles all gang-related
cases except those involving homicide and adult or child sexual assault
(although these cases are assisted as necessary). The gang prosecutor also
trains officers in up-to-date legal developments affecting investigations, advises
during the search warrant process, uses special grand juries and grants of
immunity, moves cases through preliminary hearings to evaluate and preserve
witness testimony, and offers recommendations on how to interview defendants
(for example, videotapes of interviews show the clothing style and colors of
gang members--in contrast to how they dress for court--and may record hand
signs). 

The gang prosecutor also ensures coordination with the probation and juvenile
justice systems. Thus, prosecution of juvenile street gang members is
coordinated to achieve maximum exposure to the penalties for their adult
counterparts. The gang prosecutor also notifies probation of all gang-member
convictions and pleas so that preparation of presentence reports is assigned to
investigating officers familiar with gangs and assists probation in expediting
probation revocation proceedings involving street gang members. 

----------------------------

Coordination With Probation and Parole

The following probation and parole recommendations of a California task force
on gangs and drugs warrant serious consideration:

o Development of standardized gang-control probation and parole conditions
that preclude continuing gang and drug involvement and provide enhanced
probationer/parolee tracking.

o Requirement that parole and probation conditions, as well as the name of the
probation or parole officer and a 24-hour contact phone number for that
agency, be listed on an identification card to be carried at all times and
presented to any police officer upon request. 


o Establishment of a centralized statewide registry, accessible to criminal justice
agencies, to maintain information on all probationers and parolees, including the
specific probation and parole terms and conditions applicable to each
individual.

o Assurance that gang and drug offender probation violators will be returned to
the judge who sentenced them.

Among the probation and parole conditions recommended by the task force
are prohibitions on associating with other gang members, using car phones and
pagers, and displaying gang colors, paraphernalia, hand signs, and slogans.
Gang probationers and parolees would be required to submit to drug testing on
demand, obey curfew terms, participate in drug prevention and education
programs, and submit to personal and vehicle searches and seizures. In addition
to the foregoing conditions, a probation department should include among its
special conditions for gang members the following prohibitions:

o Recruitment or coercion of others to become involved in gang activity.

o Association with juveniles or frequenting of school grounds without prior
approval. 

o Appearance in court or at the courthouse unless serving as a party in the
proceeding or reporting to a probation officer.

o Association with any person who is in possession of firearms, weapons, or
replicas. 

o Occupancy of a stolen vehicle or one that the probationer would likely have
known was stolen.

o Driving a vehicle without a valid driver's license, registration, and proof of
insurance. 

With close coordination and information sharing between law enforcement and
probation and parole, police can attempt to present testimony against granting
probation or parole to gang members. If probation or parole is nevertheless
granted, officers can then strive to detect violations of conditions, especially by
hardcore gang members. For example, they can ride with law enforcement on
directed patrol, receive police backup in potentially dangerous situations, and
use their search and seizure powers to provide police with timely access to the
homes of gang members when appropriate (see Police-Probation Coordination
To Control Gang Probationers for further examples).


----------------------------

. . . police can attempt to present testimony against granting probation or parole
to gang members.

----------------------------

Police-Probation Coordination To Control Gang Probationers

In 1990, the Tucson, Arizona, Pima County Court sentenced 50 percent of
gang members found guilty through plea or trial to prison terms and the
remainder to probation. Of those receiving probation, approximately 70
percent were placed on lowest level supervision. It became apparent to the
probation department that most gang members were not being held fully
accountable for their prior actions.

Initial efforts to rectify this situation established a liaison with the police
department's gang task force to obtain information on the activities of gang
members pending sentencing and on those already on probation. Armed with
that information, presentence investigating officers successfully increased the
number of gang members receiving prison sentences, and probation officers
became more aware of and better able to control the activities of gang-member
probationers. 

Typically, probation officers are generalists who deal with low-risk, high-need
probationers. In contrast, gang members are generally high-risk offenders for
whom officers require special training and expertise. Thus, to increase the
effectiveness of supervision, reduce risk, and enhance surveillance and
suppression of illicit activity, the probation department assigned six officers to
specialize in dealing with gang members. Focusing on suppressing gang activity
and generating information and intelligence, the officers were firearms qualified,
underwent unarmed self-defense training, and began working closely with the
police department as part of the gang task force.

To increase gang-member accountability, gang task force and probation
officers worked together in several ways. They jointly conducted home
inspections, particularly when a defendant was suspected of possessing
weapons or engaging in drug trafficking. The probation department also
implemented minimum standards of conduct for all persons under supervision
(whether under routine supervision or assigned to enhanced programs, such as
intensive probation supervision) and imposed special conditions for gang
members. 


----------------------------

Coordination With Corrections and the Courts

Another example of interagency cooperation is between corrections and the
courts, which includes alerting officials to gang arrests and court security issues.

Alerting Officials to Gang Arrests

When special operations such as stings are likely to result in an unusual number
of arrests, law enforcement should alert jail personnel to the ensuing extra
workload. Jailhouse preparation for the influx should be done in a way that
does not alert currently detained gang members, who may tip off associates by
phone or through visitors. 

Police also should inform jail personnel of the gang affiliations of arrestees so
that members of rival gangs may be segregated, if possible. Courts should be
forewarned of an impending surge in caseloads that will result from vigorous
gang enforcement activity. 

Court Security 

Gang members may attempt to intimidate witnesses and victims in the
courthouse (for example, by threats, menacing looks, and gestures). However,
certain measures can provide protection in the corridors and in the courtroom
itself. 

Ideally, physical layout and timing can be manipulated to separate routings in
the courthouses for the general public, judges, juries, court staff, witnesses, and
defendants. Gang-member defendants and witnesses should occupy separate
rooms while awaiting proceedings. Also, a close relationship should be
developed with local victim/witness programs, both to discuss with staff the
potential dangers involved in gang cases and to arrange to meet witnesses'
special needs.

A common security precaution is the use of metal detectors and video cameras
at either the courthouse or courtroom entrance. Security suggestions from
various jurisdictions include the following:

o Because gangs often pack the courtroom to intimidate witnesses, investigative
officers could attend court and point out potential gang members to the judge
and the witnesses. 


o Known gang members can be removed to the outside corridor of the court
for justifiable safety purposes. They should be identified, frisked, and
questioned about their presence in the courtroom. The investigator can bring a
Polaroid camera and have them pose for the department's gang book. 
Although younger gang members may become nervous and leave, hardcore
members believe it is their duty to back up fellow members and may remain in
the courtroom.

o Investigative officers should check the status of all identified gang members in
their data system to discover whether they are on parole or probation or have a
trial pending. This information may be used as the basis for a bail increase
motion, because nonassociation with gang members may be a condition of the
probation or parole. 

o Making the judge aware of potential problems can prepare the way for quick
action. For example, if any intimidating signs are flashed to witnesses, the gang
member responsible may then be barred from the court and possibly arrested.

----------------------------

A common security precaution is the use of metal detectors and video 
cameras . . . . 

----------------------------

Consistent with recommendations of the California task force on gangs and
drugs, the San Diego court system assigns gang cases to certain judges, who
realize the unique aspects of adjudication involving these cases. The task force
advocated that large communities establish specialized courts to hear only cases
involving gangs and drugs and recommended that judges receive specialized
training. The task force's rationale is summarized below:

Gang and drug cases involve complex facets of the law that address narcotics
trafficking, juvenile offenders, and violent crimes. However, the judiciary is not
provided the specialized training necessary to address those problems . . . .
Judges may not yet be aware that gang offenders have become increasingly
sophisticated in manipulating the criminal justice system . . . . They often use
juveniles in drug operations to avoid adult penalties, and by requesting diversion
to drug treatment programs, they often avoid incarceration.

Gang- and drug-related cases contain many nuances. Judges must consider the
complexity of the narcotics laws, the potential for victim and witness
intimidation, the attributes of gang behavior that influence the criminal act, and
the manipulations of attorneys who may endeavor to delay unnecessarily the
court proceedings. Weighing all of these factors within a general court caseload
can be difficult. Specialized courts adjudicating gang and drug cases will
provide judges with the opportunity to learn more about the attributes of these
cases, leading to more effective adjudication.[26]

Cooperation With the Crime Laboratory

By alerting the crime laboratory to significant operations targeting gang drug
trafficking, agencies may improve the expediency of analysis of seized
substances and not delay development of the prosecution's case.

Given the agreement of the court and prosecutor, field-testing drugs may be a
feasible alternative for preliminary or bind-over hearings, which require
probable cause rather than proof beyond reasonable doubt. 

If advised in advance by the agency that a drug-seizure operation targets
members of the same gang or may otherwise result in related court cases, the
crime laboratory may be able to use the same technician for all submitted
substances, thus simplifying later court testimony. Additional techniques are
described in Crime Laboratory Tips for Handling Gang-Related Drug
Evidence. 

----------------------------

Crime Laboratory Tips for Handling Gang-Related Drug Evidence 

Certain basic procedures may avoid serious problems. For example:

o Officers should not just label their respective seized drug submissions to the
laboratory as Item 1 and Item 2, for example, but also include the seizing
officer's initials after each such designation to enable the laboratory to identify
quickly among a multitude of items which one is needed when someone
requests an item from the operation. 

o When officers submit evidence to the laboratory, they should not combine
drugs and other items on the same property sheet (such as crack cocaine and
a knife). Doing this could create excessive paperwork in connection with
preserving the chain of custody. 

o Each laboratory-stored submission should be placed within a transparent
glassine container, which is then placed in an outer glassine packet along with
the envelope used to send the drug sample to the laboratory. This permits the
evidence to be seen but not disturbed. The outer glassine packet has a coded
seal so that tampering can be easily detected. The laboratory weighs the inner
drug packet before and after analysis and before disposal to ensure that part of
the contents have not been removed. 

o Officers should submit bullets or bullet fragments within metal containers
similar to those used for film. Using envelopes exposes contents to inadvertent
damage.

----------------------------

Cooperation With Federal Agencies

Close contact between local agencies and appropriate Federal agencies may
yield many of the advantages cited in the previous discussion of task forces (see
Chapter 5). Local agencies may often benefit from Federal assistance when
dealing with gangs involved in the interstate movement of people, drugs,
weapons, and money. Federal agencies may benefit from the gang information
accumulated by local agencies and from the experiences of the local police in
combating street gangs. 

Local agencies frequently collaborate with Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and
Firearm (ATF) regional offices, which can provide information about gun
dealers and supply valuable intelligence. ATF is backed by powerful Federal
weapons statutes, such as those underlying Project Triggerlock. In addition,
ATF can trace weapon origin, perform ballistics analysis, and raise fingerprints
on weapons through laser printing. In some cases, ATF has also provided buy
money (for weapons), overtime funds, and specialized equipment to local
agencies. In another instance, an agency reciprocated assistance to ATF by
providing work space for its agents. 

Resources of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Drug
Enforcement Administration (DEA), especially in areas of drugs and violent
crime, can be allocated to specific local gang problems. For example, the U.S.
Marshals Service operates the Federal witness protection program, heads a
program to locate and apprehend dangerous and violent fugitives (Operation
Gunsmoke), and is a source of information on asset seizure and forfeiture. For
gang members who are illegal aliens, the Immigration and Naturalization Service
(INS) can be a useful ally to local agencies seeking deportation or
imprisonment of deported gang members who violate U.S. law.

Some local agencies collaborate with the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) and local housing authorities to force cleanup of
certain gang-affected properties. In addition, the local housing authority may be
eligible for HUD drug elimination funds to hire officers, develop citizen patrols,
or support other measures to improve security and combat drug-related crime.

Although not a Federal agency, the National Guard also warrants mention. It
has assisted local agencies by providing personnel to help develop gang
intelligence databases and by conducting air surveillance over public lands
where gang-related drug trafficking activity is suspected.

As mentioned in Chapter 4, ATF and other agencies maintain gang databases
that may be accessed by local gang investigators. For more information, contact
the local or regional field offices of these agencies.

----------------------------

. . . ATF and other agencies maintain gang databases that may be accessed by
local gang investigators.

----------------------------

Chapter 7: Legal Issues

Law enforcement's response to the epidemic of street gang crime, with new
strategies and tactics complementing more traditional approaches, has proven
effective in many jurisdictions; however, it often poses new legal issues to be
resolved. Failure to resolve these legal issues may threaten the future success of
new strategies. This chapter discusses the most common legal issues that may
result from law enforcement efforts to control street gang crime.

This chapter first examines the criminal code provisions applicable to street
gang crime, including a brief review of applicable traditional (common law)
criminal provisions and recent innovative additions to the criminal code that
target street gangs and related criminal enterprises. Then it discusses the
primary legal issues associated with traditional law enforcement. These include
the major police activities from a temporary stop through recordkeeping and
information sharing. The chapter also analyzes legal issues relating to the use of
civil law statutes, including nuisance abatement and building code requirements
and discusses innovative prosecutorial tactics. 

----------------------------

Traditional law enforcement tactics aimed against street gangs are directed at
resolving criminal acts . . . .

----------------------------

Criminal Code Law Enforcement

Street gang law enforcement employs two types of criminal code. These include
common-law-based provisions establishing criminal liability and new criminal
laws directed at street gangs. 

Traditional Criminal Code Provisions

Traditional law enforcement tactics aimed against street gangs are directed at
resolving criminal acts and may include criminal offenses involving both direct
and vicarious criminal liability. 

Direct criminal liability includes drug trafficking, homicide, assault with a
weapon, robbery, home invasion, arson, extortion, and auto theft. Vicarious
criminal liability refers to the basis for invoking the criminal law and includes
penal or criminal code provisions that define criminal acts such as conspiracy to
commit crime and aiding and abetting overt criminal acts.

Innovative Law Enforcement Provisions

Two types of innovative criminal law provisions complement common law
provisions: (1) laws directed at gangs and gang members and (2) laws
providing for enhanced punishment for crimes that are often gang related, but
not limited in application to gang members only.

Racketeering Enterprise Laws. State laws targeting criminal enterprises are
directed at organizations of a continuing nature that engage repeatedly in acts of
crime. The Federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO)
Act (18 U.S.C. 1961 et seq.) is the prototype for State laws that are directed
at organized crime and other racketeering ventures. RICO provides for
enhanced sentences for 24 separate Federal and 8 State crime types. RICO
also provides for a separate crime of engaging in a pattern of racketeering
activities, defined as committing two or more racketeering crimes within a
10-year period. Most street gang crimes are among those listed as RICO
violations. 

----------------------------

Most street gang crimes are among those listed as RICO violations.


----------------------------

Street Gang Laws. The California Street Terrorism Enforcement and
Prevention (STEP) Act (California Penal Code 186.20 et seq.) is the most
extensive statutory scheme to criminalize gang acts as separate, substantive
gang crimes that are distinct from traditional criminal law provisions. The key
feature of this act is its criminalization of knowing membership in a criminal
street gang. It defines a criminal street gang as an "ongoing and self-identified
association of three or more members who individually or collectively engage in
specified criminal acts (for example, assault and robbery) on an ongoing basis."
Thus, the act requires proof of both membership in a gang and knowing
approval of the gang's criminal acts. 

Other State laws suggest how both elements are proven. For example, Florida
law (Florida Statutes 874.01 et seq.) defines gang membership based on
self-identification, parental identification, or circumstantial proof, such as
residing in a gang area, dressing as a gang member, or associating with other
known gang members. An Indiana law (Indiana Code 35-45-9-1 et seq.)
requires the commitment of a felony. Virtually all State gang laws include "a
continuing pattern of criminal behavior" in their definition of gang. However,
California simply requires proof of two or more specific criminal acts, attempts,
or solicitations. 

The California STEP law and similar statutes create a new crime. Other State
gang laws provide enhanced penalties for gang members convicted of more
traditional violations. Florida law, for example, simply increases the crime level
to one that is more serious (for example, from felony 3 to felony 2). Georgia
law (Georgia Code 16-15-3 et seq.) adds 1 to 3 years onto prison sentences
for criminal law violations. Another variation in creating substantive gang laws is
Oklahoma's law (Oklahoma Statutes Title 21 Section 856) that criminalizes
recruitment of minors into a gang as contributing to the delinquency of a minor.
 
Enhanced Punishment. Innovative criminal laws authorize enhanced punishment
for dangerous offenders, habitual criminals, individuals using a firearm or other
weapon in the commission of a crime, and commission of a crime in a protected
area, such as a school zone. Although these laws may apply to all types of
offenders, they are especially useful against gang members. The California law
contains enhancement provisions, including ones for committing a crime in the
vicinity of a school or for carrying a firearm during the commission of a crime.

Aiding and Abetting. Criminal laws providing punishment for aiding and abetting
may be interpreted as applicable to gang leaders of organizations whose
members engage in continuing criminal enterprises such as a crack network.
Hence, a gang leader convicted of aiding and abetting may be punished under
the continuing criminal enterprise laws as a principal in the criminal enterprise
itself.[27] Gang membership also may be a basis for proving, in part, aiding and
abetting serious violent crime when gang members participated (for example,
rode in a car to the scene of an assault) in the preliminary stages of the crime
without actually participating in the crime itself.[28]

----------------------------

Law enforcement actions encompass police gang suppression operations,
criminal investigations, interdiction, and gang information systems.

----------------------------

Law Enforcement Actions

Law enforcement actions encompass police gang suppression operations,
criminal investigations, interdiction, and gang information systems.

Police Gang Suppression Operations

Police gang suppression actions include street stops and arrests, which, in the
context of gangs, present unique legal issues.

The Terry Stop. The U.S. Supreme Court recognized in Terry v. Ohio the
reasonableness of permitting police officers to stop individuals for investigative
questioning, provided specified conditions are met.[29] Thus, a police officer
may stop and ask an individual for identification if the officer has a reasonable
suspicion for believing that the person may be engaged in criminal acts.[30] This
reasonable suspicion must be based on both the officer's expertise and some
objective element, which, in the gang context, may be in part gang insignia or
association with known gang members who have a history of criminal
involvement. Courts also have upheld Terry stops based on police observation
of furtive movements or other unusual behavior.[31] In some circumstances,
the basis for a stop may be quantified. For example, courts have become
increasingly accepting of police use of courier profiles that list common
characteristics of drug couriers who are seen at public transportation centers
(for example, airports and bus terminals).[32]

Incidental to a legitimate Terry stop, a police officer may conduct a limited
search of the detained person for reasons of safety.[33] The Terry search must
be for weapons and based on fears for personal safety.[34] One factor
affecting the reasonableness of the search is the nature of the suspected crime
for which the Terry stop is made. The Terry stop crime must be of the sort
where a suspect's carrying of a weapon is not unusual (for example, drug
trafficking). Obviously, seriousness of crime is correlated with danger, but not
exclusively; a Terry search can be legitimate even if the stop is for a minor
offense.[35] If the person detained for street questioning is under court-ordered
probation, the officer's search may not necessarily be limited by a personal
safety motive.[36]

California courts have held that where an adult offender's probation order
includes an obligation to submit to warrantless searches, such a provision is
valid because it is based on waiver (defendants may refuse probation and its
attendant conditions) and destroys any expectation of privacy that otherwise
may exist. Juveniles may not waive probation as an adult offender may;
however, juvenile courts have wide discretion to tailor probation conditions to
the individual based on prior actions. Notwithstanding the officer's initial lack of
knowledge of probationary status, warrantless searches of juvenile probationers
under court order may be valid where the order is valid.[37]

Terry stops also are made to run warrant checks. Although such a stop by itself
may be unquestioned, the warrant check may exceed permissible bounds if it
lasts too long. Moreover, a reasonable basis must exist for making the warrant
check. If the person stopped is suspected of only a minor crime, a warrant
check is not appropriate.[38] 

Arrest. The general rule is that warrantless arrests be based on probable cause
that a crime has been committed and that the individual arrested committed the
crime.[39] In misdemeanor cases, most States require that the arresting officer
witness the offense for which an arrest is made. One exception is arrest of a
juvenile for a misdemeanor offense. Certain States, including California,
authorize warrantless arrests of juveniles for misdemeanor offenses based on
probable cause.[40] 

A common law enforcement strategy in gang crime suppression is to arrest gang
members for minor crimes that might otherwise be left unnoticed. For example,
in one jurisdiction, police enforce disorderly conduct laws based on behavior
such as use of gang signs and hand signals. Such strict interpretation of the laws
may violate several Federal constitutional guarantees, including first amendment
freedoms of speech and association. Moreover, courts may well suppress
evidence gained from a Terry stop safety search if the crime charged does not
support a police officer's claim of fear for personal safety.[41]

Another arrest tactic is saturation patrol or sweeps, whereby officers saturate
an area to arrest large numbers of offenders--typically those engaged in buying
or selling controlled substances. Offenders who commit crimes in sight of the
police are arrested; others may be asked to identify themselves, and a record of
each contact is kept, including physical descriptions of suspects. As noted, a
Terry stop permits asking individuals to identify themselves and may be the
basis for warrant checks and safety searches for weapons. In the gang context,
police sweeps also may be directed at offenders who possess dangerous
weapons. In addition, sweep targets may commit lesser crimes in response to
the sweep, such as obstruction of justice or disorderly persons violations. 

----------------------------

A common law enforcement strategy . . . is to arrest gang members for minor
crimes . . .

----------------------------

Criminal Investigations

The principal criminal investigation techniques used in gang-related criminal
cases include the use of confidential informants (CI's), undercover officers, drug
buys and sales (raising entrapment issues), forced entry, and surveillance. 

Confidential Informants. Information from CI's is commonly used to justify
warrantless arrests and applications for search warrants. The constitutional
reasonableness requirement for police actions necessitates that the informant's
information have indicia of reliability. If the informant is willing to be known and
swear to the accuracy of the information, no further corroboration is needed.
However, by definition, CI's wish to remain anonymous. Therefore,
corroboration in this context may come in several ways. One way is from prior
experience with the accuracy of the informant's information,[42] which
also means that the informant's information is based on personal knowledge;
otherwise the information is hearsay, requiring an assessment both of the
reliability of the original source of the information and of the extent to which the
informant may have misperceived what was said or made errors in repeating the
information. 

Corroboration also occurs when police can verify significant elements of the
informant's information (for example, description of suspect or actions).[43]
Finally, corroboration may be made based on two (or more) informants
providing similar information when the informants are independent of each other
and their information is based on personal knowledge.[44]

Defendant discovery of a CI's identity is required only in cases in which the
informant can testify to issues related to guilt or innocence.[45] If informant
information was used only to provide probable cause for a search warrant, the
Constitution does not require discovery of the informant's identity. However, if
the defense raises significant issues of entrapment, coercion, or planted
evidence, the informant may be required to testify about these defenses.[46]

----------------------------

Information from CI's is commonly used to justify warrantless arrests and
applications for search warrants.

----------------------------

Undercover Officers. The use of police officers as undercover agents can
circumvent the above-mentioned problems associated with using CI's. 
Because the officers' reported information is based on personal knowledge,
they can swear personally in affidavits as to the truth of their own statements.

The most common legal issue associated with the use of undercover
investigators is the defense argument of entrapment. Entrapment is a technical
defense to criminal charges, which contends that but for police actions to
encourage criminal acts, the alleged crime would not have occurred. The
entrapment defense has two elements: outrageous acts by police that encourage
criminal acts by the defendant and the propensity of the defendant to commit
criminal acts without police encouragement. Police actions that arguably
encourage criminal acts constitute entrapment only where it may be reasonably
said to be likely to cause a normally law-abiding person to commit a crime.[47]
Therefore, mere solicitations or offers by police do not constitute entrapment,
nor does providing an opportunity for criminal acts. More is required, such as
continued and prolonged offers for criminal partnerships, strong references to
friendship as a motivating factor, or even the absence of any reasonable
suspicion to justify making the police offer. 

Drug Buys and Sales. A common use of undercover investigators is the buying
or selling of controlled substances to an offender who is otherwise involved in
the drug trade. Of course, drug trafficking is often a gang-related crime. Two
drug enforcement tactics are most common: the buy/bust and the reverse sting,
in which the police sell drugs to drug traffickers or users. In the gang context,
law enforcement's primary objective is to maximize potentially applicable
penalties by increasing the number of charges and the amount of drugs involved.
In practice, this often results in a continuing series of drug trades that later
become the basis for court-issued arrest warrants. In addition, buy/bust
operations may be used against individual gang members, with probable cause
for a warrantless arrest emanating from the defendant's prior immediate
participation in a drug transaction.

In the reverse sting scenario, police sell drugs to users or lower level drug
traffickers. Some jurisdictions may argue that reverse sting operations violate
the law that makes possession of controlled substances illegal because the law
has no exception authorizing police possession of seized contraband--which is
the only source of drugs for reverse stings. In a related scenario, the California
Supreme Court has held it a criminal offense for police to supply a controlled
substance to a confidential informant.[48]

----------------------------

Two drug enforcement tactics are most common: the buy/bust and the reverse
sting . . . .

----------------------------

Forced Entry. Police officers executing a search warrant must ordinarily knock
and announce their purpose before entering.[49] Forced entry is permitted only
to gain admission to a building where resistance to police entry may be
expected, resulting in danger to the officers, or where delayed entry may result
in the destruction of evidence. Forced entry may be accomplished by physical
force such as the use of a battering ram or through a ruse in which an officer
poses as a delivery man, salesman, or similar person to gain entry, permitting
other officers to rush in. 

Some jurisdictions authorize police entry into a building without notice, using
so-called no-knock warrants.[50] Jurisdictions differ on the requirement to
show a particular need for a no-knock entry, rather than a general need based
on the type of crime involved.[51]

Surveillance. Police surveillance is another common investigative technique used
to produce evidence for applications for search or arrest warrants. Depending
on the crime involved, surveillance may be of a person or a location. Often,
visual surveillance is supplemented by the use of audiovisual equipment to
maintain a permanent record of what the surveillance uncovered.

The principal legal issues with surveillance typically involve privacy. One issue is
the breach of a reasonable expectation of privacy through placement of
audiovisual equipment in a nonpublic area. A search warrant is needed when
the area is appropriately designated not usually open to the public and the
offender is privileged to be there.[52] A second privacy issue is that of
surveillance harassment. This issue is more problematic from law enforcement's
perspective than the first privacy issue because subject awareness of
surveillance reduces the likelihood of obtaining investigative information. In the
absence of a strong law enforcement motive, courts are likely to balance the
importance of other police motives against the claimed invasion of privacy.[53]

Interdiction

The primary interdiction methods--roadblocks, traffic stops, and street
barriers--are all intended, in part, to disrupt drug-trafficking patterns.
Roadblocks and traffic stops also may be used to gain physical evidence of
criminal activity.

----------------------------

Interdiction methods . . . are intended to disrupt drug-trafficking patterns.

----------------------------

Roadblocks. Roadblocks are established checkpoints at which police direct
vehicles to stop. Randomly stopping cars at any point is overly dependent on
police discretion and is an intrusion into privacy, protected by the fourth
amendment.[54] However, court decisions conflict on when roadblocks are
permitted. At a minimum, the use of roadblocks must be reasonable--that is,
likely to result in the identification of high numbers of persons in possession of
controlled substances or other contraband.[55] This result, however, may be
difficult to show.[56] Less difficult to prove is that a roadblock serves a traffic
control function, such as limiting pedestrian drug buys that interfere with traffic
flow.[57] Roadblocks may also be used in some situations to provide drivers
with information that is intended to deter them from reaching sellers. California
Attorney General guidelines require road checkpoints to be publicized in
advance and for signs to be posted, warning of the checkpoint before drivers
reach it.[58]

Traffic Stops. Traffic stops of individual cars must be based on a showing of
either a traffic violation or probable cause to arrest an individual in the stopped
vehicle (for example, based on an arrest warrant). The Terry reasonable
suspicion test has been accepted by some courts to justify a traffic stop when
the officer has some basis for suspicion that something relating to a crime has
occurred or is occurring and that the car's occupants are connected with that
activity.[59] After a justified traffic stop, the officer may make safety searches
of the driver[60] and, in some instances, any other occupants of the
vehicle.[61] If the officer sees contraband in plain sight after the stop, no search
warrant is needed to seize such evidence.[62] In virtually all cases, a validly
arrested driver may be searched, along with the vehicle being driven.[63]

Street Barriers. Barriers prohibiting or preventing entry into a street are used to
inhibit drug trafficking by rerouting traffic patterns. The legal authority in some
jurisdictions may require a rulemaking-like procedure to be used when street
barriers are set up to create a permanent traffic pattern change. For temporary
uses, however, virtually no jurisdictions limit police power to place traffic
barriers.

----------------------------

Investigation and suppression efforts are supported by the systematic collection
of information about gangs and their members.

----------------------------

Gang Information Systems

Investigation and suppression efforts are supported by the systematic collection
of information about gangs and their members. In many jurisdictions, this
information includes field interrogation or contact cards, arrest reports, crime
reports, photographs of gang members, and court records. 

These items may be collected for internal use, such as planning gang
suppression programs. They also may be disseminated to other governmental
agencies, including those working with gangs, or to nongovernmental parties
(for example, the media). Challenges to agencies' internal use of gang
information records relate to the propriety of the data collection itself.
Contentions that police information collection is illegal have been upheld where
the collection was motivated by political considerations regarding potential
infringement of first amendment rights.[64] In those cases, unlike the gang
context, the crimes involved were few (if any) and rarely involved Part I crimes,
as defined in annual FBI Uniform Crime Reports.

Police may use photographs that they have taken of gang members for the
purpose of having witnesses identify offenders and for investigative
purposes.[65]

A more serious issue is the dissemination of police records about street gangs
and their members to other persons, in or out of government. Because gang
members often are juveniles, State laws typically restrict dissemination of their
juvenile records. However, these laws typically are directed at dissemination of
juvenile court records, not law enforcement records.[66] To the extent that law
enforcement records parallel juvenile court records (that is, they contain
records of court appearances), they also may be covered by the same statutory
limits. However, other elements of police juvenile records simply report on
police contacts, which are not covered by these laws.

In practice, record dissemination within the criminal justice community is
unlikely to be successfully attacked. Therefore, police, prosecutors, and
probation officers may share their gang records among themselves when the
records are created independently of the juvenile court.[67] The records should
not be released to agencies other than law enforcement agencies without
explicit legislative authority.
 
Innovative Uses of Criminal and Civil Law

Criminal and civil laws may be used as innovative tactics against crime
conditions. Several of these are outlined in the following section.

Nuisance Abatement

Nuisance abatement laws are concerned with the elimination of public and
continuing nuisances. Nuisance refers to property rather than personal conduct.
Hence, a legal action to eliminate a nuisance may be directed at the property
itself, as well as at the owners or users of the property.[68] A public nuisance
action may be brought by government officials to protect public order and
decency. In contrast, private nuisance actions may be brought only by the
injured party to cure that person's injury. 

Nuisance abatement measures range from court orders stopping a particular
use to seizure of a property for up to 1 year. Colorado's nuisance law even
permits forfeiture of property, such as a car used in a driveby shooting.[69] The
California and Louisiana STEP Acts classify buildings used by gangs for the
commission of a pattern of crimes as nuisances and permit the court to order
eviction or sealing of the buildings. These laws permit law enforcement to have
abandoned buildings razed and vacant lots cleared.

A common use of nuisance abatement laws is to force owners to act against
gang use of their buildings or face governmental takeover. For example, under
these laws landlords have been court-ordered to clean up graffiti, erect security
gates, install lighting, remove abandoned cars, and evict known drug dealers.
Such orders are commonly coordinated with community policing tactics to
reinforce the owners' ability to act against gangs.


The Los Angeles City Attorney has expanded on the nuisance abatement
concept to secure injunctions against street gangs based on the effect of their
presence on daily life. To prove the existence of a public nuisance, evidence to
support such injunctions is solicited from daily logs kept by residents that
describe incidences such as gunshot sounds or municipal sanitation or road
maintenance schedule changes due to the fear of gangs.

----------------------------

. . . a legal action to eliminate a nuisance may be directed at the property itself,
as well as at the owners or users of the property.

----------------------------

Gang Ordinances

Local government laws also may permit police to arrest gang members who
violate a police directive to disperse or leave an area. These new gang loitering
laws expand on the common vagrancy laws that date back to England's feudal
period. While vagrancy and loitering laws often have been successfully attacked
for their vagueness,[70] these laws also have been upheld when directed at a
specific problem, such as prostitution.[71] These latter cases support the
constitutionality of gang loitering laws, especially if they can be tied to criminal
actions such as drug trafficking.[72] However, an ordinance that is simply
directed at gang members may be subject to challenge on first amendment
grounds as infringing on the right of association protected by that amendment--
unless the gang has been formally declared a criminal organization pursuant to a
State gang law such as California's STEP Act. 

Building Code Requirements

Building code requirements refer to State and local laws that regulate building
construction and maintenance. Thus, buildings in a jurisdiction must comply with
fire codes, health and sanitation codes, and other code requirements. For
example, the lack of running water in an occupied building may violate code
requirements. Local housing codes may be used to show illegal occupancy of a
building, and zoning codes may be used for similar purposes. Building codes
also may be used to close a building that is structurally unsafe or that does not
have running water or working toilets. Under these codes, abandoned buildings
that pose safety hazards may even be razed.

Parental Liability

 
Parental liability is based on the responsibility of parents for the acts of their
children. Failure of parents to properly supervise their children may be
considered a form of parental negligence. Depending on the degree or
blameworthiness of parental negligence, civil or criminal liability may be
authorized by statute.

The three types of parental liability laws are as follows:

o Laws on contributing to the delinquency of a minor authorize juvenile courts
to exercise jurisdiction over the parents of a minor for the parents' actions or
inactions that arguably contribute to the minor's delinquency. The
contributing-to-delinquency laws are essentially a variant of vicarious criminal
liability laws. Hence, some degree of causation must be shown. These laws also
require that the minor's acts be within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court. If the
minor is tried in the adult criminal court, there can be no contributing to
delinquency. 

o Laws such as the California STEP Act expand on the contributing-to-
delinquency laws with a provision (California Penal Code 272) permitting
criminal prosecution against a parent whose child commits a crime and who has
knowingly failed to control or supervise the child. Prosecution is authorized only
after the parent has been offered counseling or a course in parenting (after a
prior crime has occurred). Similar legislation has been enacted in the States of
New York and Kentucky. 

o Laws may hold a parent civilly liable for injuries caused by a minor when the
minor's act was directed or ratified by the parent or the parent's negligent acts
were a proximate cause of the injury.[73] State statutes today permit parties
injured by the intentional acts of a minor to collect monetary compensation from
parents for property damage and, in half the States, personal injuries. All States
with parental liability laws place monetary limits on the amount that can be
recovered; in Texas, for example, this can be up to $15,000. Indiana law raises
the monetary limit if the injury is a result of gang-related activities.

Curfew Laws

Curfew laws prohibit minors from appearing in public streets or places,
including places of amusement or eating, unless supervised by an adult between
specific hours of the evening and morning (for example, from 11 p.m. to 6
a.m.). The primary justification for these laws is that juveniles who leave home
at night are more vulnerable to peer pressure and the committing of crime than
are adults.[74] However, this contention is not always accepted,[75] and
curfew laws are typically challenged on civil liberties grounds.

School Regulations

School regulations include administrative rules that govern the dress or behavior
of youth attending public schools by barring specific types of dress, activities, or
property (for example, pagers) from school grounds. 

School disciplinary rules may be used to enforce school ground neutrality,
prohibiting gang activities in or near the school or even disciplining students for
participating in gang actions outside of school. One common rule aimed at gang
members is the prohibition of gang attire and hairstyle. Because school safety
represents a strong State interest that outweighs a student's rights of free
expression or association, most courts have upheld this type of school rule if the
school can show that the prohibition is reasonably directed at limiting school
disruptions due to gang affiliation conflicts.[76] However, this type of rule may
be subject to challenge if written in language that is directed at race or
gender.[77]

There is also court precedent for schools' outlawing gang membership.[78] One
basis for such a bar is case law permitting schools to discipline students based
on their engaging in illegal acts (for example, drug possession) away from
school grounds.[79] The gang membership bar may, presumably, extend to
barring student use of gang symbols, hand signals, or other actions furthering
gang interests, such as recruitment of new members on school grounds. Schools
also may bar students from leaving school grounds during the school day.[80]

----------------------------

One common rule aimed at gang members is the prohibition of gang attire and
hairstyle.

----------------------------

Prosecution Issues

Prosecutors in gang-related prosecutions have developed several innovative
strategies directed at increasing the penalties imposed on gang members. Other
innovations are directed at preventing witness tampering.

Maximum Penalties

Three prosecutorial tactics directed at maximizing the available penalties in
gang-related prosecutions are cross-assigning State prosecutors, filing
enhancement charges, and using juvenile records in adult court.

Cross-Assignment. Federal law often provides more severe penalties for
committing drug-related crimes than those that are available in State court. In
other criminal cases, the Federal Armed Career Criminal Act (18 U.S.C.
924[e]) also may be applicable for increased sentences. A common tactic
in some jurisdictions is for the State prosecutor to ask the U.S. attorney to
accept jurisdiction and file charges in Federal court. When the U.S. attorney
accepts the case, the State prosecutors may be given temporary status as
assistant U.S. attorneys to prosecute in Federal court the same case that they
would have filed in State court. 

Enhancement Charges. In many States, the criminal code imposes enhanced
penalties on defendants convicted of a crime with specified aggravating
circumstances. For example, a defendant convicted of committing a robbery
may be given a sentence of up to 10 years imprisonment with probation
eligibility. An enhanced sentence for possession of a firearm during the robbery
may add an additional prison term and bar suspension of that term for a
probation sentence. The more common enhanced sentences include those for
possessing a firearm, committing a crime in a school or other protected zone,
and furthering gang ties or motives. 

When an enhanced penalty is sought, most States require the charging
instrument (for example, indictment or prosecutor information) to specify that
enhancement is being sought and to identify the allegations for which
enhancement is authorized.[81] Some State laws also require that each
separate count of an indictment or other charging instrument include the relevant
enhancements. In these States, if the defendant is not convicted on all counts,
the enhancement charges may be lost.

Of the three types of cases most commonly involving sentencing enhancements,
furthering gang ties or motives is the only one with unique proof elements.
Proving that a defendant acted as a gang member or to further gang interests
may require evidence specifically directed at proving this enhancement. For this
purpose, the prosecutor may offer the testimony of an expert witness. Among
the matters to which an expert can testify to show a gang-related motive are the
meaning of gang graffiti or signs, gang rituals, or even the psychology of gangs
and their members. 

Evidence of gang membership may be admitted by the court when membership
is relevant to proving motive and identity of a participant in a crime committed
by gang members.[82]


----------------------------

Common enhanced sentences include those for possessing a firearm,
committing a crime in a school or other protected zone, and furthering gang ties
or motives.

----------------------------

Juvenile Records. Most State sentencing laws provide for enhanced penalties
for those defendants previously convicted of a crime. Many of these States also
provide that, for sentencing purposes, a juvenile disposition for a felony is the
equal of an adult conviction.

Witness Intimidation

Prosecutor efforts to limit witness intimidation include applying witness
intimidation laws, using methods such as preliminary hearings that protect
testimony from changing as a result of witness intimidation, and establishing a
victim advocate position.

Witness Intimidation Laws. Witness intimidation in criminal matters is a crime
under both Federal[83] and State laws.[84] In cases of alleged witness
intimidation, some prosecutors argue that high bail should be ordered,
contending that efforts to obstruct justice are equivalent to an attempt to flee the
jurisdiction. 

----------------------------

Witness intimidation in criminal matters is a crime under both Federal and State
laws.

----------------------------

Protecting Testimony. Prosecutors who anticipate witness intimidation often
seek to obtain an early record of witness testimony, which is accomplished by
presenting the witness at a preliminary hearing where the testimony is subject to
cross-examination. Thus, witness unavailability at a later date will not prevent
introduction of the preliminary hearing testimony. Other jurisdictions sometimes
prefer to defer witness testimony by using the indictment process, thereby
eliminating early confrontations between witnesses and gang-member
defendants. 

Alternative measures to preserve witness testimony include audiotaping or
videotaping depositions. Also, a deposition procedure can provide for the
cross-examination needed under the confrontation provision of the Constitution.
Alternatively, a witness who changes testimony at trial may be challenged in
some jurisdictions with the recorded testimony as a prior inconsistent statement. 

Laws in other jurisdictions may provide for a witness protection program similar
to that used by the Federal Government[85] or for witnesses to be placed in
protective custody. 

Victim Advocate. Gang retaliation for testifying against a gang member is a
significant impediment to both crime reporting and successful prosecution.
Although prosecutor use of witness intimidation laws can protect witnesses, it
does not by itself attack the problem of community perceptions. Thus, a victim
advocate is a necessary corollary to the witness intimidation laws. Among the
advocate's duties are notifying witnesses of court hearings, transporting them to
court, and providing the linkage to ensure that victims' and witnesses' fears are
addressed. 

Chapter 8: Evaluation

Without a systematic evaluation, an agency may not be able to assess whether
its gang suppression strategy is successful. A careful evaluation will suggest
ways to improve or expand operations, point out strengths and weaknesses,
and help other departments adapt similar strategies to meet their communities'
needs. Also, the public, elected officials, and potential funding sources will want
to see evidence of success.

The evaluation design need not be overly complex to produce meaningful
results. This chapter presents concepts to consider in conducting evaluations.
Local colleges and universities also may be of assistance either by helping with
evaluation design or by providing student interns who can collect and analyze
data. 

The police department should prepare for the evaluation during the pro-ject's
early planning stages. An early analysis will describe the environment in which
the department is operating and may reveal areas in which new or revised data
collection procedures are needed. When the department establishes its gang
suppression objectives, planners also should determine the indicators for
measuring the achievement of those objectives.

----------------------------

The evaluation design need not be overly complex to produce meaningful
results.

----------------------------

In general, the evaluation seeks to answer several key questions:
 
o Was the strategy or program implemented as intended?

o What specific activities were implemented?

o Did these activities lead to the attainment of specific objectives?

o Were the program's overall goals achieved?

o To what extent were successes or failures a result of factors other than the
strategy? 

To answer these questions, a two-stage approach to evaluation is used. This
approach is described in the following sections.

Process Evaluation

A process evaluation documents and analyzes the early development and actual
implementation of the strategy or program, assessing whether strategies were
implemented as planned and whether expected output was actually produced.
Examples of output include:

o Number of gang-related crimes reported.

o Number and category (for example, leaders, hardcore members, and
associates) of gang members arrested. 

o Number and types of weapons seized from gang members and associates.
 
o Types and amounts of drugs seized from gang members and associates.

o Number of gang members and associates convicted, along with charges and
sentences. 

Other output measures are listed on a quarterly reporting form completed by
departments funded under BJA's Urban Street Gang Program. A copy of this
form is included in Exhibit 4. 


Detailed information about the program as it was actually implemented is
invaluable for determining what worked and what did not. A thorough process
evaluation should include the following elements:

o Description of the program environment and supplying data. 

o Description of the process used to design and implement the program. 

o Description of program operations, including any changes in the program.

o Identification and description of intervening events that may have affected
implementation and outcomes.

o Documentation such as meeting minutes, reports, memorandums, newsletters,
and forms.

Describing the Program Environment 

Before a program's effectiveness can be judged, it is important to understand its
operating environment. The program analysis stage (see Chapter 3) produces a
detailed description of the environment at the time of planning. Significant
changes in the environment should be documented during program
implementation to help determine whether similar results may be expected in
other communities or whether the results are site specific. That is, if the
environment is unique, then the results achieved in that setting may not be
replicable elsewhere. 

----------------------------

Significant changes in the environment should be documented during program
implementation . . . .

---------------------------- 

Describing the Process 

Good ideas do not always yield good results. Therefore, to understand the
tasks to be performed and the scope of effort, a clear description of the
implementation process is required. This step also will aid in replicating the
effort in other environments. Describing the implementation process would
involve elements such as: 

o Interaction among participants (for example, gang specialists or gang unit,
patrol, investigations, crime analysis, other local criminal justice agencies,
Federal enforcement agencies, and citizen groups).

o The extent of participation (for example, by various agencies, units, and
individuals). 

o Any training provided to officers or other participants.

o Interaction among participants and others in the community who were not
involved in planning and implementing the strategy.

Describing and Measuring Program Operations 

The process evaluation must describe the way the gang suppression strategy
worked, or failed to work, using quantitative and qualitative data. Questions to
consider in assessing the process evaluation include the following:

o What problems were encountered in implementing objectives? How were
they resolved? 

o Have all planned activities been implemented? If not, what remains to be
done? Were they accomplished on schedule?

o If objectives, plans, or timetables were revised, why was this necessary?

o What new objectives were added and why?

o What changes occurred in leadership or personnel? What effect did these
changes have?

o What costs were incurred? Did they exceed initial projections? 

o What was the level of resident support in targeted neighborhoods? How did
this affect the overall enforcement effort?

o What lessons have been learned that might be useful to other jurisdictions?

Identifying Intervening Events 

Local programs operate in continually changing environments. To identify the
effects of various intervening external factors on program outcomes, an
intervening variable analysis is employed. The intervening variables that may
affect a program are numerous, complex, and varied and may or may not be
able to be controlled or eliminated. These variables are discussed later in this
chapter in the Impact Evaluation section. To assess outcomes correctly, these
variables will need to be identified, interpreted, and described. 

----------------------------

The intervening variables that may affect a program are numerous, complex,
and varied . . . .

----------------------------

Collecting Process Data 

The process evaluation should begin during the program planning phase and
continue through program implementation. Two main categories of data should
be collected. The first data source includes official police, city/county, census,
and other data gathered during the initial program planning and analysis phase.
These data will help determine whether program outcomes may be expected in
similar jurisdictions.

The second data source includes interviews with and observations of
participants. Observations should begin with early program development and
continue throughout program implementation. Major planning activities as well
as enforcement activities are of interest. Observers will answer questions such
as the following:

o Does the process proceed smoothly, or are communications and relations
difficult and strained?

o Do participants work together to identify a range of potential strategies? 

o Do the status and hierarchy of involved personnel interfere with
communications? 

Interviews with key participants also should be conducted to complement
information attained from observation. These interviews should reveal the
reactions of patrol officers, investigators, and others to the program's
development, noting their observations about difficulties encountered and
associated explanations, as well as suggested solutions. An open-ended format
for observations is suggested so that observers are not limited in their focus.
However, the protocol for interviews should be more structured to ensure
consistency and validity. 


Impact Evaluation

An impact evaluation measures the program's effects and the extent to which its
goals were attained. Although evaluation designs may produce useful
information about a program's effectiveness, some may produce more useful
information than others. For example, designs that track effects over extended
time periods (time series designs) are generally superior to those that simply
compare periods before and after intervention (pre-post designs); comparison
group designs are superior to those that lack any basis for comparison; and
designs that use true control groups (experimental designs) have the greatest
potential for producing authoritative results. At a minimum, gang suppression
programs should use pre-post designs. Even better is the use of longer time
series analyses and comparison or control group designs. 

----------------------------

An impact evaluation measures the program's effects and the extent to which its
goals were attained.

----------------------------

Dependent Variables 

The major limiting factor on evaluations is the availability of baseline data on the
dependent variables of interest. Examples of dependent variables are
gang-related crime, citizens' fear of crime, and weapons offenses. Although
data on arrests, reported crime, and calls for service for prior time periods are
available in most jurisdictions, it may be impossible to determine from these
data which events are gang related. Some jurisdictions find it informative to
examine pre- and post-data surrounding events that frequently involve gang
members (for example, all weapons offenses, including shots fired; homicides;
drug trafficking; and driveby shootings). Less commonly found are data on
other variables, such as fear of crime, levels of disorder, or satisfaction with the
police.

If no prior data exist for an important dependent variable, the department must
gather the data prior to the start of a new program. This effort may involve
producing special computer runs on selected types of incidents or geographic
areas, conducting a special community survey, taking photographs that show
gang influence in targeted neighborhoods, or hand tabulating data from existing
records. 

Comparison or Control Groups 

Whenever possible, it is desirable to identify a comparison or control group.
This may be a group of persons or an area in the community that does not
receive the intervention but has characteristics similar to the group that does.
Another possible comparison group is a similar, nearby community. The same
pre- and post-intervention measurements should be made of the comparison
group as of the group receiving the intervention. 

Basic Evaluation Procedures 

Regardless of the evaluation design, certain fundamental procedures should be
followed, the most important of which are outlined in the eight steps that follow.

Carefully State the Hypothesized Effects. In the project planning phase, the
department should carefully state its expectations of a gang enforcement
strategy that is implemented correctly. There may be one anticipated effect or
many, examples of which are: 

o The strategy will reduce gang-related crime by 30 percent.

o The strategy will eliminate drug trafficking by the 86th Street Crew.

o The strategy will reduce fear of crime among residents in the southwest
quadrant. 

o The strategy will result in conviction of two hardcore gang leaders under
Federal Triggerlock statutes.

In some programs, the effects may be expected to occur in stages: for example,
the program will reduce street-level drug sales by gang members, which will
reduce fear of crime. In this case, one stated effect is anticipated to result in
another.

----------------------------

Regardless of the evaluation design, certain fundamental procedures should be
followed . . . .

----------------------------

Identify Possible Unintended Effects. Most programs have potential associated
risks that also should be identified early in the planning phase to allow the
department an opportunity to address them better. The evaluation can assess
whether the unintended effects occurred. Examples of unintended but
anticipated effects are:

o Officers will object to the organizational changes required for implementation.
 
o New gang leaders will quickly assume control after leaders targeted by the
strategy are incarcerated. 

o Neighborhood residents will react negatively to increased enforcement
efforts.

o Key personnel will be transferred or will retire.

Define Measurement Criteria. The indicators that will be measured (for
example, gang-related crime and community support) must be clearly defined to
obtain consistent, reliable measurements. What is meant by gang-related crime?
Should a gang motive be present before crimes are so classified? Are measures
of some crimes more important than others? How are satisfaction with the
police, fear of crime, or community support defined? Terms should be clarified
so the department and evaluators understand exactly what is to be measured
and how.

Determine Appropriate Time Periods. Data collection can be costly, and
information about results is important to people with investments in the
program. For practical reasons, evaluators often must compromise ideal time
periods. This step responds to issues such as how far back in time baseline data
should be collected and how long the program should operate to give it a fair
opportunity to show results.

Generally, the BJA Urban Street Gang Program demonstration sites obtained
data on key dependent variables (for example, drug arrests, driveby shootings,
and gang-related homicides) for a 5-year period before project
commencement. This method helped identify trends and aberrations. For
example, an unusual problem or a unique special operation could have resulted
in an unusually high arrest rate in a given year. 

The demonstration sites were expected to devote the first 3 months to the
needs assessment and planning processes, with program activities occurring for
the next 12 to 15 months. The impact evaluation should be based on data
accumulated for at least 12 months of program activities. The demonstration
sites were required to submit their evaluation reports in their 18th month. 

Although not a steadfast rule, most jurisdictions should be able to make some
assessments about program impact after 12 months of activities. However, the
appropriate period may vary considerably, depending on the nature of the
problem, the type and complexity of the response, and other factors.

----------------------------

. . . most jurisdictions should be able to make some assessments about program
impact after 12 months of activities.

----------------------------

Monitor Program Implementation. Systematic program monitoring is required
to aid the site in correcting and overcoming problems, to effect management
improvements that may reduce future implementation failures, and to interpret
program results correctly.

Collect Data Systematically. The data collected on program implementation,
hypothesized effects, and unintended effects must be as accurate as possible.
If more than one person collects data, each must follow the same rules and use
the same definitions. If data are collected over a long period, the same rules and
definitions must be used throughout. 

Analyze Data. Data analysis should produce a description of the program as it
was implemented. If the evaluation design is strong enough, analysis can go
beyond describing what happened and provide convincing explanations of why
it happened. The analysis should present the evidence that helps determine
whether the program had its hypothesized effects and whether it resulted in any
unintended effects.

In some situations, it may be useful to determine whether differences between
target and control groups are statistically significant. Various statistical
techniques may be used to determine whether observed differences are likely
due to the program design or whether they occurred by chance. 

For most jurisdictions, statistical significance will be less important than other
considerations, such as if the program effect was large enough to make a
substantial difference and if enough benefits were derived to justify program
costs. These judgments must be made by the department, city or county
administrators, and residents, and the evaluation results should assist in making
informed decisions. 

Replicate the Program. Replication of a program ensures that the documented
program effects were not a chance occurrence, the result of unobserved
intervening factors, or limited to one place or one time period. Once a program
component is found to have consistent effects in several applications, the
strategy may be used confidently with predictable results. This feature
underscores the importance of evaluations. 

----------------------------

Replication of a program ensures that the documented program effects were
not a chance occurrence . . . .

----------------------------

Endnotes

1. G. David Curry et al., National Assessment of Law Enforcement Anti-Gang
Information Resources, Draft 1992 Final Report, National Institute of Justice,
U.S. Department of Justice, 1992. 

2. Survey by the Institute for Law and Justice, Urban Street Gang Program,
Bureau of Justice Assistance, U.S. Department of Justice, 1992.

3. Results of the 1990 National Assessment Program Survey, National Institute
of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice.

4. Survey by the Institute for Law and Justice, Urban Street Gang Program.

5. W. Allan Williams, "The Case for Proactive Prosecution," Criminal Justice
Journal, Vol. 13, n.d., p. 389.

6. Marilyn P. Sommers, "Law Enforcement Intelligence: A New Look,"
International Journal of Intelligence and Counter Intelligence, Intel Publishing
Group, Inc., Vol. 1, No. 3, n.d., p. 26. 

7. Attacking Organized Crime, Organized Crime National Strategy, U.S.
Department of Justice, January 1991.

8. Standards for Law Enforcement Agencies, Commission on Accreditation for
Law Enforcement Agencies, July 1989, p. 51.

9. Claire Johnson, B. Webster, E. Connors, and D. Saenz, "Gang Enforcement
Problems and Strategies: National Survey Findings," Report on the 1992
Survey on Gang Prosecution by the National Institute of Justice, U.S.
Department of Justice. 

10. For more information, contact the Law Enforcement Communication
Network (LECN), P.O. Box 3098, Torrance, CA 90510-3098, telephone 
310-543-3195. LECN membership and participation in GREAT are restricted
to official criminal justice agencies.

11. Tucson Police Department planning document. 

12. Ira Reiner, Gangs, Crime and Violence in Los Angeles, 1992, Findings and
Proposals from the District Attorney's Office, May 1992, p. xi.

13. Attacking Organized Crime, p. 13.

14. Reiner, p. xvi.

15. Walter Arsenault, Assistant District Attorney, New York County
(Manhattan) District Attorney's Office, National Conference on Armed
Criminals and Gang Violence, June 1992.

16. Attacking Organized Crime, p. 16.

17. Remarks by Kenneth W. Sukhia, U.S. Attorney, Northern District of
Florida, National Conference on Armed Criminals and Gang Violence, June
1992. 

18. Attacking Organized Crime, p. 16.

19. Deborah Lamm Weisel and J. Eck, Police Response to Drugs and Gangs:
Case Studies of Police Decisionmaking, Police Executive Research Forum,
1992, p. 41.

20. James S. Reynolds, National Conference on Armed Criminals and Gang
Violence, June 1992. 

21. John Dombrink, University of California, Irvine, 1991. Court records of 50
closed cases in Los Angeles, San Francisco, and New York City; interviews
with 200 police officials and prosecutors in these cities and in Canada, Hong
Kong, Honolulu, and the State of Nevada; and interviews with a smaller
number of Asian community leaders.

22. For other examples of efforts in public housing, see Barbara Webster and
E. Connors, "The Police, Drugs, and Public Housing," NIJ Research in Brief,
June 1992. 

23. Hugh Nugent, F. Leahy, and E. Connors, Managing Confidential
Informants, Narcotics Control Technical Assistance Program, Bureau of Justice
Assistance, U.S. Department of Justice, 1991; Edward F. Connors and H.
Nugent, Street-Level Narcotics Enforcement, Narcotics Control Technical
Assistance Program, Bureau of Justice Assistance, U.S. Department of Justice,
1990; Michael Goldsmith, E. Connors, and H. Nugent, Entrapment Defense in
Narcotics Cases: Guidelines for Law Enforcement, Narcotics Control
Technical Assistance Program, Bureau of Justice Assistance, U.S. Department
of Justice, 1990; and Edward F. Connors, H. Nugent, and F. Leahy, Managing
Confidential Funds, Narcotics Control Technical Assistance Program, Bureau
of Justice Assistance, U.S. Department of Justice, 1989. 

24. California Council on Criminal Justice, State Task Force on Gangs and
Drugs, Final Report, Sacramento, January 1989.

25. California v. Green, 399 U.S. 149 (1970).

26. California Council on Criminal Justice, State Task Force on Gangs and
Drugs, Final Report, Sacramento, January 1989.

27. See comment to "Aider and Abettor Liability, the Continuing Criminal
Enterprise, and Street Gangs: A New Twist in an Old War on Drugs," Journal
of Criminal Law and Criminology, No. 81, 1990, p. 348.

28. See People v. Bradford, 104 Cal. Rptr. 852 (1972); Commonwealth v.
Meadows, 428 N.E.2d 321 (Mass. 1981).

29. Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968).

30. See also INS v. Delgado, 466 U.S. 210 (1984).

31. In California v. Hodari, 111 S. Ct. 1547 (1991), the Supreme Court
admitted into evidence drugs thrown by a suspect after he fled from the
appearance of police officers on the basis that the police chase was not a Terry
stop until the defendant was caught.

32. See Florida v. Royer, 460 U.S. 491 (1983); U.S. v. Sokolow, 490 U.S. 1
(1989). 

33. Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968).

34. Ybarra v. Illinois, 444 U.S. 85 (1979) (a break-in search to continue safety
search of others, after noting suspicious nonweapon, shows nonsafety intent for
subsequent research). 

35. Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752 (1969). 


36. Griffin v. Wisconsin, 483 U.S. 868 (1987) permitted a warrantless search
of a probationer's home on the basis of the State's need to maintain an effective
probation system. 

37. In re Binh, 6 Cal. Rptr. 2d 678 (1992).

38. See U.S. v. Luckett, 484 F.2d 89 (9th Cir. 1973) (jaywalking stop not
serious enough to support warrant check).

39. See, for example, Henry v. U.S., 361 U.S. 98, 102 (1959); Dunaway v.
New York, 442 U.S. 200 (1979) (detention for custodial investigation requires
probable cause, not reasonable suspicion of Terry).

40. In re Samuel, 277 Cal. Rptr. 14 (1990).

41. U.S. v. Guzman, 864 F.2d 858 (11th Cir. 1988). See also Gustafson v.
Florida, 414 U.S. 260 (1973); U.S. v. Luckett, 484 F.2d 89 (9th Cir. 1973).

42. Aguilar v. Spinelli, 378 U.S. 108 (1964).

43. Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (1983).

44. See People v. Ballassey, 30 Cal. 3d 614 (1973).

45. See People v. Bounda, 11 Cal. 3d 523 (1974).

46. See People v. Fried, 214 Cal. App. 3d 1309 (1990).

47. Jacobsen v. U.S., 112 S. Ct. 1535 (1992).

48. People v. Backus, 23 Cal. 3d 360 (1979).

49. Ker v. California, 374 U.S. 23 (1963).

50. See, for example, 21 U.S.C. 879 (1988).

51. See People v. Gastelo, 432 P.2d 706 (Cal. 1967); People v. Dumas, 512
P. 2d 1208 (Cal. 1973), for leading cases adopting the particularized showing
rule. See also U.S. v. Singer, 943 F.2d 758 (7th Cir. 1991) (officer danger
exception). 

52. See Nader v. General Motors Corp., 298 N.Y.S.2d 137 (1970).


53. In the absence of any legitimate police motive, open surveillance may result
in the commission of the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress
(Restatement, Second, Torts,  46) and prima facie tort (Restatement, Second,
Torts,  870).

54. Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648 (1979) (check on drivers' licenses).

55. In Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz, 496 U.S. 444 (1990), the
Supreme Court upheld a roadblock directed at identifying drivers who were
under the influence of alcohol.

56. See, for example, Galberth v. U.S., 590 A.2d 990 (D.C. 1991). But see
State v. Everson, 474 N.W.2d 695 (N. Dak. 1991).

57. U.S. v. McFayden, 865 F.2d 1306 (D.C. Cir. 1989).

58. Discussed in Note, "Walking the Constitutional Beat: Fourth Amendment
Implications of Police Use of Saturation Patrols and Roadblocks," Ohio State
Law Journal, Vol. 54, 1993, p. 497.

59. Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648, 663 (1979).

60. Michigan v. Long, 463 U.S. 1032 (1983). In Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434
U.S. 106 (1977), the Supreme Court approved the actions of a police officer
who directed the vehicle driver to leave the car after a Terry stop and patted
down the driver after observing a shoulder bulge.

61. Rucker v. United States, 455 A.2d 889 (D.C. 1983) (passenger search
upheld on basis of prior observation of drugs by another officer).

62. Texas v. Brown, 460 U.S. 730 (1983).

63. New York v. Belton, 453 U.S. 454 (1981).

64. See, for example, Riggs v. City of Albuquerque, 916 F.2d 582 (10th Cir.
1990). See generally Laird v. Tatum, 408 U.S. 1 (1972); Meese v. Keene,
481 U.S. 465 (1987).

65. People v. Contreras, 144 Cal. App. 3d 749 (1983).

66. Compare, for example, Cal. Wel. & Inst. Code 827 (general prohibition on
dissemination of juvenile court records) with Cal. Wel. & Inst. Code 204
(police dissemination of arrest records conditioned on case disposition being
attached). 

67. Some State laws explicitly provide authority for sharing of juvenile records
within the criminal justice community. See, for example, Fla. Stat. 39.039; Ill.
Comp. Stat. 405/1-7. Ariz. Stat. Ann. 8-208 provides for the release of
juvenile records to adult probation, police, and prosecutors of youths charged
in Superior Court. But where State law prohibits retention of specific juvenile
records such as fingerprints, their later use may result in reversal of a conviction.
See State v. Lucas, 299 S.E. 2d 21 (W. Va. 1982).

68. Muglen v. Kansas, 123 U.S. 623 (1887).

69. See People v. Milton, 732 P.2d 1199 (Col. 1987). 

70. Papachristou v. City of Jacksonville, 405 U.S. 156 (1972).

71. See People v. Smith, 378 N.E.2d 1032 (N.Y. 1978).

72. See City of Tacoma v. Luvene, 827 P.2d 1374 (Wash. 1992).

73. See, for example, Horton v. Reaves, 526 P.2d 304 (Cal. 1974).

74. See People ex rel. J.M., 768 P.2d 219 (Col. 1989).

75. See Walters v. Barry, 711 F. Supp. 1125 (D.D.C. 1989).

76. See, for example, Massie v. Henry, 455 F.2d 779 (4th Cir. 1974).

77. Miller v. Gillis, 315 F. Supp. 94 (N.D. Ill. 1969) (men's hair length 
regulation invalid where safety reasons for ban also apply to unregulated
women's hair length).

78. See Olesen v. Board of Educ., 676 F. Supp. 821 (N.D. Ill. 1987).

79. See Caldwell v. Cannady, 340 F. Supp. 835 (N.D. Tex. 1972). 


80. Fitzpatrick v. Board of Educ., 284 N.Y.S.2d 590 (Sup. Ct. 1967).

81. See, for example, Ohio Rev. Code Ann. 2929.71 (additional 3-year term
for firearm possession).

82. People v. Contreras, 144 Cal. App. 3d 749 (1983); State v. Ruof, 252
S.E.2d 720 (N.C. 1979). See also U.S. v. Rodriguez, 925 F.2d 1049 (7th Cir.
1991).

83. 18 U.S.C. 1512 (1988). 

84. See, for example, Cal. Penal Code 136 et seq.

85. 18 U.S.C. 3521 (1988).

----------------------------

Appendix A: Bibliography

Drugs and Gangs

Dombrink, J. "Organized Crime: Gangsters and Godfathers." In Controversial
Issues in Crime and Justice, eds. J.E. Scott and T. Hirschi, pp. 54-75. 1988.

This article concludes that the prohibition policies of the U.S. Government
regarding alcohol, drugs, and gambling have promoted crime and have been the
greatest contributor to the growth of criminal groups in American society.

Esbensen, F., and D. Huizinga. "Gangs, Drugs, and Delinquency in a Survey of
Urban Youth." Criminology 31(4) (November 1993) 565-589. 

This article discusses the findings of a study using data from the Denver Youth
Survey, a longitudinal study of families. The data were used to examine the
prevalence and demographic composition of gangs, the degree to which gang
members are involved in illegal activities, and the temporal relationship between
criminal offending and gang membership. Results showed that while gang
members had higher rates of involvement in crime before joining gangs than
nongang members, offending rates were substantially higher during the actual
year of gang membership. 

Huizinga, D., R. Loeber, and T.P. Thornberry. Urban Delinquency and
Substance Abuse: Initial Findings: Research Summary. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
1994.

This publication summarizes initial findings of a multiple-site study of urban
delinquency and substance abuse, sponsored by the research program on the
Causes and Correlates of Juvenile Delinquency of the Office of Juvenile Justice
and Delinquency Prevention. Longitudinal studies were conducted in Denver,
Colorado; Rochester, New York; and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Hyatt, W.D. "Investigation of Major Drug Distribution Cartels." In Critical
Issues in Criminal Investigation, Second Edition, ed. M.J. Palmiotto, pp.
113-139. 1988. 

This paper describes the organized crime groups most involved in narcotics
distribution, the most popular methods for combating them, and citizens' rights
issues raised by these methods. 

Klein, M.W., and C.L. Maxson. "`Crack,' Street Gangs and Violence."
Criminology 29(4) (November 1991) 623-650.

This study found that while drug sales and distribution may be activities of
individual gang members, there was little evidence that the sale of drugs was an
organized gang activity. 

McCarney, W.G. "Crack Cocaine, Guns, and Youth: An Extremely Lethal
Mixture." Lay Panel Magazine 20 (September 1988) 6-8.

The introduction of crack cocaine into the drug markets in the United States
results in youth involvement in drug dealing and violence at much earlier ages.

Skalitzy, W.G. "Aider and Abettor Liability, the Continuing Criminal Enterprise,
and Street Gangs: A New Twist in an Old War on Drugs." Journal of Criminal
Law and Criminology 81(2) (Summer 1990) 348-397.

This article describes the unprecedented growth in gang size, scope of activities,
and sophistication that occurred in the 1980's.

Thornberry, T.P., M.D. Krohn, et al. "The Role of Juvenile Gangs in Facilitating
Delinquent Behavior." Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 30(1)
(February 1993) 55-87.

This study examines alternative explanations for why gang members are more
likely to have higher rates of serious and violent crime than nongang members.
Data from the Rochester Youth Development Study are used to compare
several models. Findings indicate that gang members, compared with nongang
members, did not have higher rates of delinquent behavior or drug use before
joining gangs, but once they became members, crime rates increased
substantially. 

Gang Prevention and Intervention

Agopian, M.W. "Targeting Juvenile Gang Offenders for Community Service."
Community Alternatives: International Journal of Family Care 1(1) (Spring
1989) 99-108.

Juveniles who have committed property-related or substance abuse offenses
are often sentenced to community service as a condition of probation.

Bryant, D. Communitywide Responses for Dealing With Youth Gangs.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention. 1989.

A national conference sponsored by the Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention brought together policymakers from 19 cities to learn
about the extent of youth gang violence and the steps necessary to develop
community responses to it. 

Curry, G.D., and I.A. Spergel. "Gang Homicide, Delinquency, and
Community." Criminology 26(3) (August 1988) 381-405.

This analysis of Chicago community-level data substantiates two conceptual
differences: between gang crime and delinquency as community-level
phenomena and between theoretical associations of each of the former to
community social disorganization and poverty.

Fattah, D. "House of Umoja as a Case Study for Social Change." Annals of the
American Academy of Political and Social Science 494 (November 1987)
37-41.

The House of Umoja is a program model that has successfully reduced
individual and gang violence in Philadelphia by providing African-American
gang youth a set of altruistic, extended family values based on African culture.

Fox, J.R. "Mission Impossible? Social Work Practice With Black Urban Youth
Gangs." Social Work 30 (January/February 1985) 25-31.

A model of social work practice has proved effective in delivering professional
services to African-American urban youth gangs and their communities.

Huff, C.R. "Denial, Overreaction, and Misidentification: A Postscript on Public
Policy." In Gangs in America, ed. C.R. Huff, pp. 310-317. 1990.

Policymakers in cities initially confronted by a youth gang problem typically
follow the process of denial, followed by overreaction and misidentification of
gang members and the causes of gang problems, and therefore develop
ineffective approaches to address the issue.

Klein, M.W., and C.L. Maxson. "Street Gang Violence." In Violent Crime,
Violent Criminals, eds. A. Weiner and M.E. Wolfgang, pp. 198-234.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
1989. 

This analysis of gang research and its implications for policy and program
decisions emphasizes the change from street workers to police as the main
information source over the past 20 years, and it reports on the development of
intervention programs that have been based only vaguely on knowledge of
gang structure and functions.

Martens, F.T. "Organized Crime Control--The Limits of Government
Intervention." Journal of Criminal Justice 14(3) (1986) 239-247.

This article explores generally prevailing explanations of organized crime in the
United States, chiefly the parasitic and symbiotic models and offers a synthesis
of these two called the functionally exploitive model.

McKinney, K.C. Juvenile Gangs: Crime and Drug Trafficking. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention. 1988.

This bulletin reports on the conclusions and suggestions offered by 12 experts
to the Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
regarding the nature of and ways to prevent and address juvenile gang activities.

Miller, W.B. "Why the United States Has Failed To Solve Its Youth Gang
Problem." In Gangs in America, ed. C.R. Huff, pp. 263-287. 1990.

The failure of the United States to solve its youth gang problems results from
major procedure and policy deficiencies. Gangs are more numerous, more
prevalent, and more violent than in earlier decades.


Spergel, I.A. "Youth Gangs: Continuity and Change." In Crime and Justice: A
Review of Research 12, eds. M. Tonry and N. Morris, pp. 171-275.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention. 1990. 

This essay describes what is known about youth gangs in the United States;
explains the gang phenomenon, mainly with social disorganization and poverty
perspectives; and discusses the effectiveness of organized responses to the
problem.

Spergel, I.A. Youth Gangs: Problem and Response. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
1989.

Four major policy emphases for dealing with youth gangs in the United States
have evolved: local community mobilization, youth outreach, social
opportunities, and gang suppression.
 
Spergel, I.A., D. Curry, et al. Gang Suppression and Intervention: Problem and
Response: Research Summary. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice,
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. October 1994.

This summary report integrates the findings of seven data collection and
research phases conducted in the initial assessment of the National Youth Gang
Suppression and Intervention Program. The purpose of this assessment was to
determine the scope of the youth gang problem, review the response, and
examine promising approaches for combating the gang problem.

Spergel, I.A., and G.D. Curry. "Strategies and Perceived Agency Effectiveness
in Dealing With the Youth Gang Problem." In Gangs in America, ed. C.R. Huff,
pp. 288-309. 1990. 

Data from a national survey formed the basis of an analysis of efforts to
suppress and intervene in youth gangs.

Takata, S.R. Racine Community Collaboration Project Final Report. 1988.

Wisconsin's Racine Community Collaboration Project, initiated in 1985,
explored the use of a coordinated approach to prevent youth gang delinquency
problems in Racine and attempted to develop a comprehensive plan for
improving youth-related programs and services.

Thompson, D.W., and L.A. Jason. "Street Gangs and Preventive
Interventions." Criminal Justice and Behavior: An International Journal 15(3)
(September 1988) 323-333.

This article presents an evaluation of an intervention aimed at youth who are at
risk for joining street gangs.

U.S. Department of Justice. "Role Models, Sports and Youth: NCSS (National
School Safety Center) Resource Paper." Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. 1989.

Research and model programs indicate that many youth can be steered away
from a lifestyle centered in gangs and drugs through interaction with positive
role models and involvement in sports or other constructive activities.

General

Hagedorn, J.M. "Back in the Field Again: Gang Research in the Nineties." In
Gangs in America, ed. C.R. Huff, pp. 240-259. 1990.

This analysis on modern gangs concludes that more field studies are needed due
to the limitations of other types of gang research and despite concerns about
field work. 

Howell, J.C. "Recent Gang Research: Program and Policy Implications." Crime
and Delinquency 40(4) (October 1994) 495-515.

This article reviews recent studies related to gang and juvenile violence, gang
migration and expansion, and gang involvement in drug trafficking. Program and
research implications are recommended.

Janowski, M.S. Islands in the Street: Gangs and American Urban Society.
1991. 

This firsthand examination of urban gangs provides new insights into the
underworld of violence, defiance, and criminal activity among street gangs.

Short, J.F. "New Wine in Old Bottles? Change and Continuity in American
Gangs." In Gangs in America, ed. C.R. Huff, pp. 223-239. 1990.

This analysis of recent research on gangs, communities, and crime emphasizes
that contemporary gangs are more sophisticated and more lethal than gangs of
the past. 


Police Response to Gangs

Austin, D., and J. Braaten. "Turning Lives Around." Police Chief 58(5) (May
1991) 36-38. 

The greater Portland Police Activities League (PAL), modeled on the Police
Athletic League, sponsors sports activities for youth who appear to be at high
risk of gang or alcohol and drug involvement. Working with other community
agencies, PAL seeks to reduce the incidence of juvenile crime, provide positive
alternative activities, and foster understanding between youth and police.

Badey, J.R. Dragons and Tigers. 1988.

This text for law enforcement officers provides an overview of Asian criminality
and provides procedures for bridging the cultural gap between Western justice
systems and criminals from Vietnam, Laos, China, Japan, Korea, Cambodia,
and other Asian countries.

Boyle, J., and A. Gonzales. "Using Proactive Programs To Impact Gangs and
Drugs." Law and Order 37(8) (August 1989) 62-64.

Through its enforcement and education programs, the Sacramento Police
Department reports having an impact on reducing gang and drug activity.

Conly, C.H. Street Gangs: Current Knowledge and Strategies. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice. August 1993.

This report summarizes research and professional criminal justice perspectives
on gangs; describes selected gang prevention, intervention, and suppression
strategies; and presents recommendations for dealing with street gangs at the
community level. 

Curry, G.D., R.A. Ball, and R.J. Fox. Gang Crime and Law Enforcement
Recordkeeping. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National
Institute of Justice. August 1994.

This report discusses the results of a 1992 survey of 79 large and 43 smaller
police departments regarding the extent and nature of gang problems in their
jurisdictions, gang definitions, gang member and gang crime recordkeeping
practices, and police strategies for combating gangs.

Englert, R. "Safety Action Team." FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin 59(10)
(October 1990) 2-5. 

A program started by the Housing Authority of Portland and the Multnomah
County, Oregon, Sheriff's Office in 1989 provided a law enforcement squad
called the Safety Action Team to reduce public housing residents' fear of crime
and help them reclaim their community from the gangs and drug dealers who
had rapidly increased crime and violence in their neighborhood.


Harper, S. "LA's Gang Busters: Lessons Learned." School Safety (Fall 1989)
12-15. 

Citizens and law enforcement officials in Los Angeles have had many years of
experience in confronting gang problems and have learned that a combination of
prevention and intervention strategies is the most effective approach.

Johnson, C., B. Webster, and E. Connors. Prosecuting Gangs: A National
Assessment. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of
Justice. February 1995. 

This report summarizes the results of a nationwide survey of local prosecutors'
approaches to gang prosecution. Prosecutors favored vertical prosecution of
gang members; some used new State code provisions to indict street gangs,
while the majority prosecuted street gangs using existing criminal codes. Victim
and witness cooperation and protection were identified as major issues in gang
cases.

Klein, M.W., C.L. Maxson, and M.A. Gordon. Police Response to Street
Gang Violence: Improving the Investigative Process, Executive Summary.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
1987.

This study analyzes approximately 800 homicide and 500 other violent incidents
occurring in two large Los Angeles police jurisdictions between 1978 and
1982. The analysis characterizes gang violence, distinguishes it from nongang
violence, and estimates the impact of police investigative procedures on the
official designation of gang and nongang incidents.

Los Angeles Interagency Gang Task Force Countywide Criminal Justice
Coordination Committee. County of Los Angeles Interagency Gang Task
Force. 1990.

The Los Angeles Interagency Gang Task Force was established in 1980 to
develop cooperative strategies and programs to reduce the level of gang
violence in Los Angeles County. In addition to preparing written reports on
various aspects of gang activity, the task force plays an advisory role to the
board of supervisors. It has also cosponsored a statewide conference on how
to communicate mobilization strategies, written a newsletter for individuals and
organizations involved in anti-gang efforts, developed a public agency and
community organization resource guide, collaborated in the development of a
law enforcement database, and implemented a pilot program to target
interagency resources to high-risk areas.

Maltz, M.D. Measuring the Effectiveness of Organized Crime Control Efforts.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
1990.

This monograph provides a framework for evaluating law enforcement
programs established to control organized crime.

National Drug Intelligence Center. NDIC Street Gang Symposium: Preliminary
Findings and Recommendations. Johnstown, PA. November 19, 1994.

This report summarizes the perceptions and recommendations of 16 gang
enforcement experts from throughout the United States regarding the Federal
role in gang suppression, weapons, drug trafficking, gang migration,
standardized definitions, and other issues.

Spergel, I., R. Chance, et al. Gang Suppression and Intervention: Community
Models: Research Summary. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice,
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. October 1994.

This publication explains the components of a comprehensive gang prevention
and intervention model that serves as the basis for a multisite demonstration
project, the Comprehensive Community-Wide Approach to Gang Prevention,
Intervention, and Suppression Program, sponsored by the Office of Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention. The model was based on a comprehensive
national survey of organized agency and community group responses to gangs
conducted by researchers at the University of Chicago.

Spergel, I.A., R.L. Chance, and G.D. Curry. National Youth Gang
Suppression and Intervention Program. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. June 1990.

This summary report integrates the findings of seven data collection and
research phases conducted in the initial assessment of the National Youth Gang
Suppression and Intervention Program. The purpose of this assessment was to
determine the scope of the youth gang problem, review the responses, and
examine promising approaches for combating the gang problem.

University of Illinois at Chicago, Office of International Criminal Justice.
Transnational Crime: Investigative Responses. 1989.

The proceedings of this symposium indicate that international and transnational
crime poses new threats for law enforcement and criminal justice systems
worldwide and that key international crime issues are drug trafficking, organized
crime, illegal arms dealing, and terrorism.

Wardlaw, G. "Organized Crime and Drug Enforcement." In Control of
Organized Crime, pp. 17-30. 1986. 

The assumptions underlying law-and-order strategies for controlling organized
crime are critically examined, and the effectiveness of law enforcement
measures targeting drug traffickers is questioned.
 
Profiles of Gangs in the United States

Abadinski, H. Organized Crime, Second Edition. 1985.

This book discusses the definition and structure of organized crime, its history
and activities, and efforts to combat it through laws and law enforcement.

Bing, L. "When You're a Crip (or a Blood)." In School Safety (Fall 1989)
4-11. 

Members of two Los Angeles youth gangs, the Crips and the Bloods, describe
the reasons they joined gangs and their daily activities in this transcript of a
discussion held at the Kenyon Juvenile Justice Center in Los Angeles,
moderated by journalist Leon Bing.

Block, C.R., and R. Block. Street Gang Crime in Chicago. Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice. December 1993.

This report summarizes the results of a study of street gang crime in Chicago.
 
Burnes, E., and T.J. Deakin. "New Investigative Approach to Youth Gangs."
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin 58(10) (October 1989) 20-24.

Youth gangs in Baltimore, Maryland, are unique in their structure, objectives,
and methods of operation, which, coupled with the increase in drug problems,
have made many standard investigative techniques ineffective.

Edelhertz, H., and T.D. Overcast. Study of Organized Crime Business-Type
Activities and Their Implications for Law Enforcement. Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice. 1990.

This report examines the descriptive research on the business activities of
organized criminal groups.

Fagan, J. "Social Organization of Drug Use and Drug Dealing Among Urban
Gangs." Criminology 27(4) (November 1989) 633-667.

Interviews with 151 youth gang members in Los Angeles, San Diego, and
Chicago in 1984 and 1985 formed the basis of this analysis of the relationships
among drug dealing, violence, and organizational and social aspects of gangs.

Lyman, M.D. Gangland: Drug Trafficking by Organized Criminals. 1989.

This book addresses the history, structure, and operations (particularly drug
trafficking) of various organized criminal groups in the United States and
suggests legal tools and investigative techniques for countering such groups. The
book includes chapters on Asian organized criminal groups, the Los
Angeles-based Crips, Jamaican posses, the economics of drug trafficking, Latin
American drug connections, and other topics.

Santamaria, C., S.A. Obregon, L. Figueroa, R. Sosa, and S. Stern. "Study of
Juvenile Gang in a High Risk Community: Results of the Initial Phase of the
Relationship." Salud Mental (12)3 (September 1989) 26-36.

Using participant observation, this study examines the activities, membership,
and structure of a juvenile gang in a high-risk neighborhood of Mexico City.

Skolnick, J.H., T. Correl, E. Navarro, and R. Rabb. "Social Structure of Street
Drug Dealing." American Journal of Police 1(9) (1990) 1-41.

The relationship between drug distribution and gangs in California and street
drug dealing are discussed.

U.S. Department of Justice, Office of the Attorney General. Drug Trafficking: A
Report to the President of the United States. 1989.

Because drug trafficking is considered the most serious crime problem in the
United States, 93 U.S. attorneys were requested to provide information on the
business structure of drug trafficking in their districts, the magnitude of the drug
problem, and the work of agents and prosecutors in pursuing drug traffickers.

U.S. General Accounting Office. Nontraditional Organized Crime: Law
Enforcement Officials' Perspectives on Five Criminal Groups. 1989.

This report summarizes the findings regarding the activities and structure of
Colombian, Jamaican, Chinese, and Vietnamese criminal groups and Los
Angeles street gangs.

Public Housing, Drugs, and Crime

Balthazar, M.L., R.J. Cook, and G. Roundtree. "Attitudinal Profile." Corrective
and Social Psychiatry and Journal of Behavior Technology Methods and
Therapy 35(1) (January 1989) 12-17. 

A study was conducted in a Southern urban public housing project to determine
the attitudes of young African-American males toward school, church, and
crime as well as to develop a sociodemographic profile of these juveniles.
 
Weisel, D.L. Tackling Drug Problems in Public Housing: A Guide for Police.
Police Executive Research Forum. 1990.

This guide instructs police in their operations of local public housing authorities
to enhance the relationship between police and public housing residents; this in
turn is intended to foster joint efforts to address public housing problems,
notably drug-related problems.

Schools and Gangs

Taylor, C.S. "Youth Gangs Organize Quest for Power, Money." School Safety
(Spring 1988) 26-27. 

This 1980-85 study examined the characteristics of African-American urban
juvenile gangs and their impact on schools and their communities.

U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention. Safer Schools, Better Schools. 1988.

This bulletin provides information on 5 Federal programs to curb drug use,
truancy, vandalism, and gang activity and to improve the academic environment
for America's 45.5 million public school students.


Youth Gangs

Amuleru-Marshall, O. "Substance Abuse Among America's Urban Poor."
Urban League Review 13(1-2) (1990) 93-98.

Substance abuse is prevalent among urban youth from various ethnic groups
outside the American mainstream. Confronted by life problems including
unemployment, gang membership, violence, adolescent pregnancy, crime, drug
use, and drug distribution, many of these youth are attracted by the money
associated with the trading of illicit drugs.

Moore, J. "Gangs, Drugs and Violence." In Drugs and Violence: Causes,
Correlates, and Consequences, eds. M. de La Rosa, E.Y. Lambert, and B.
Gropper, pp. 160-176. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services, National Institute on Drug Abuse. 1990.

This analysis of research on the relationships among youth gangs, drugs, and
violence concludes that common stereotypes are erroneous.

Short, J.F. Gang, Neighborhoods, and Youth Crime Criminal Justice Research
Bulletin 5(4) (1990) complete issue.

Most of what is known about juvenile gangs, their causes, and internal
dynamics is based on research conducted many years ago. Gang research in
the 1960's was done in the field, employing extensive and intensive observation
and other advanced research methods. In the mid-1970's, research shifted
toward reliance on police and other law enforcement contacts and data.

----------------------------

Appendix B: Sources for Further Information and Technical Assistance

For more information on Urban Street Gang Enforcement Operations, contact:

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms 
Violent Crime Prevention Branch
800 K Street NW.
Suite 842
Washington, DC 20001
202-682-4220

Bureau of Justice Assistance
810 Seventh Street NW.
Washington, DC 20531
202-514-5947

Bureau of Justice Assistance Clearinghouse
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
1-800-688-4252

Federal Bureau of Investigation
Violent Crime Section
10th and Pennsylvania Avenue NW.
Washington, DC 20535
202-324-8874

Institute for Law and Justice
1018 Duke Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
703-684-5300

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse
Gang Consortium
810 Seventh Street NW.
Washington, DC 20531
202-307-0751

Police Executive Research Forum
1120 Connecticut Avenue NW.
Suite 930
Washington, DC 20036
202-466-7820

Safe Streets Bureau
Attention: Sergeant McBride
Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department
3010 East Victoria Street
Rancho Dominguez, CA 90221
310-603-3105

----------------------------

Bureau of Justice Assistance Information


General Information

Callers may contact the U.S. Department of Justice Response Center for
general information or specific needs, such as assistance in submitting grants
applications and information on training. To contact the Response Center, call
1-800-421-6770 or write to 1100 Vermont Avenue NW., Washington, DC
20005.

Indepth Information

For more indepth information about BJA, its programs, and its funding
opportunities, requesters can call the BJA Clearinghouse. The BJA
Clearinghouse, a component of the National Criminal Justice Reference Service
(NCJRS), shares BJA program information with State and local agencies and
community groups across the country. Information specialists are available to
provide reference and referral services, publication distribution, participation
and support for conferences, and other networking and outreach activities. The
Clearinghouse can be reached by: 

o Mail
P.O. Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000

o Visit
2277 Research Boulevard
Rockville, MD 20850

o Telephone
1-800-688-4252
Monday through Friday
8:30 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. eastern time

o Fax
301-519-5212

o Fax on Demand
1-800-688-4252

o BJA Home Page
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA

o NCJRS World Wide Web
http://www.ncjrs.org

o E-mail
askncjrs@ncjrs.org

o JUSTINFO Newsletter
E-mail to listproc@ncjrs.org
Leave the subject line blank
In the body of the message, type: 
subscribe justinfo 
[your name]