1120 Connecticut Avenue, Suite 930

Washington, DC 20036

Telephone: 202.466.7820

Fax: 202.466.7826

www.policeforum.org
PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM:

The Strategies for Local Law Enforcement Series

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

Heather J. Davies and Gerard R. Murphy

with

Kareem Irfan 

Former Chief Jerry A. Oliver

Linda M. Schmidt

Deputy Superintendent Barbara B. McDonald 

Chief Gil Kerlikowske

Assistant Commissioner James D. Sewell
This project, conducted by the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF), was supported by Cooperative

Agreement #2002-HS-WX-K001 by the U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing

Services. Points of views or opinions contained 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 or the members of PERF.

The opinions expressed are generally those based on the consensus of executive session attendees. However, not

every view or statement presented in this report can necessarily be attributed to each individual participant.

Websites and sources listed provide useful information at the time of this writing, but the authors do not endorse

any information of the sponsor organization or other information on the websites.

© Police Executive Research Forum,

U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services

Police Executive Research Forum

Washington, DC 20036

United States of America

March 2004

ISBN 1-878734-80-6 

Library of Congress Number 2004091990

Photos courtesy of (from top to bottom):

The Arlington County (VA) Police Department (1-3)

Federal Emergency Management Association (4)

The Chicago Police Department (5)

Cover design by David Edelson, PERF

Interior layout by David Edelson, based on a design by Elliot Thomas Grant, etg Design
CONTENTS

Acknowledgments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v

Foreword. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .vii

Chapters

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

Community Concerns. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

Combating Misperceptions and Misunderstanding: A Community Leader’s Perspective . . . . . . .7

Racial Profiling Takes on a Different Meaning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 

Federal Resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Community Outreach Program. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21

Local Law Enforcement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Chicago’s Multi-Cultural Forum. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

One Community’s Response. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35

Locals Aid Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in Florida’s Counterterrorism Effort. . . .41 

Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51

Appendices

Participants and Observers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55 

Federal Resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .59

Forum and Council. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61 

Hate Crime Resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .63

National Associations/Resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67

COPS Office-Related Titles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .69

PERF-Related Titles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .71

About the Authors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .73

About the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS)

U.S. Department of Justice. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .77

About the Police Executive Research Forum. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .79

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

iii
PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

iv
WE WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE MANY INDIVIDUALS WHO CONTRIBUTED TO

this paper. Any value this paper has to the field is due largely to their

commitment to improving how law enforcement serves and works

with their diverse communities.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This paper is the result of a compelling executive

session—the second in a series of five—all made

possible by the U.S. Department of Justice Office

of Community Oriented Policing Services’ (COPS)

support and guidance. We are grateful to Director

Carl Peed for so clearly recognizing the need for

this project, and for his vision and support

throughout the effort. Project Monitor Amy

Schapiro has demonstrated her usual patience and

support as we have worked to convene the series of

executive sessions and the resulting white papers

on how local law enforcement can maintain its

commitment to community policing in a securityconscious world. 

We must also thank those who participated in the executive session. (See Appendix A.)

They took part in thoughtful and sincere discussions about how local law enforcement can engage

community residents and work with federal agencies to provide effective police services under the

threat of additional terrorist attacks. A special

thanks is due to former Chicago Police

Superintendent Terry G. Hillard and Deputy

Superintendent Barbara B. McDonald and their

dedicated staffs for hosting the executive session.

We thank the members of Chicago’s MultiCultural Forum—which receives support to convene forums from another COPS-funded project,

the Value Based Initiative—who graciously allowed

us to observe one of their police/community meetings. Their dedication to building a stronger relationship between the community and law enforcement is truly remarkable. Just as impressive was

their willingness to engage in a candid discussion

of sensitive issues regarding community concerns

and law enforcement efforts, demonstrating their

commitment to understanding one another’s perspective, and developing effective solutions to

problems. 

We want to thank those who contributed

to this paper by writing sidebar pieces: Kareem

Irfan, Chairman of the Council of Islamic

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

v
Organizations of Greater Chicago; Former Chief

Jerry A. Oliver, Detroit Police Department; Linda

M. Schmidt, FBI Community Outreach Specialist;

Deputy Superintendent Barbara B. McDonald,

Chicago Police Department; Chief Gil

Kerlikowske, Seattle Police Department; and

Assistant Commissioner James D. Sewell, Florida

Department of Law Enforcement.

Several members of the PERF staff spent

countless hours planning the executive session,

fact-checking the content of the paper, reviewing

drafts, and correcting mistakes. Executive Director

Chuck Wexler was instrumental in supporting and

facilitating the executive session. Research

Assistant Judy Lim managed the logistics of the

two-day event. We thank Research Assistant Alex

Hayes for assisting with logistics at the session

and researching documentation, as well as casting

a critical eye in providing feedback and editing. A

special thanks goes to Legislative Assistant Steve

Loyka who spent many hours verifying legislative

issues and facts in the report. We also thank Stacy

Osnick Milligan for her thoughtful review of the

report. David Edelson did an outstanding job completing the layout of this document on a demanding schedule. As always, we are very grateful to

Martha Plotkin for her patience, professional

assistance and unflagging efforts in editing and

producing this document. 

We also thank Michael Lieberman at the

Anti-Defamation League for reviewing early drafts

of the document related to hate crime enforcement

and resources for law enforcement.

To those of you in the community and in

law enforcement—at every level of government—

who work to make our communities places where

respect and dignity for all who live there are truly

valued, and who keep us safe from crimes of hate

and terror, we hope this paper provides you with

resources and information to assist you in your

efforts. 

PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

vi
FOREWORD

L

OCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES ARE STILL FEELING THE

effects of September 11, 2001. In the years that have passed since those

tragic events, law enforcement professionals have been working to redefine their roles as they continue traditional crime-fighting efforts while also taking on tremendous new counterterrorism responsibilities. Local police agencies

are not only training with new equipment and response tactics, they are engaging in intelligence gathering, multi-agency response planning and other domestic

security work. They are receiving increasing authority under national legislation

to support federal law enforcement efforts to identify and interview individuals

with information that could be critical to preventing another terrorist act. Yet,

these domestic investigations have far-reaching implications for local law

enforcement and the communities they serve. 

America’s multicultural neighborhoods, particularly Arab and Muslim communities, were initially affected by backlash violence and hate crimes

following the terrorist attacks. Yet in some cases,

their willingness to reach out to local law enforcement to prevent or report these crimes was hampered by their fear that police would use the opportunity to help deport, interrogate or otherwise act

against them. Such skepticism of law enforcement’s goals and misunderstandings about local

law enforcement’s role can impede effective service

delivery to their communities and hinder the

information sharing so necessary to keep all of our

cities safe. The answer to these problems may well

lie in the tenets of community policing—ensuring

the safety of all by partnering with community

leaders to better understand the needs and concerns of those affected by local law enforcement’s

new role in counterterrorism and then working

collaboratively to solve them.

The successes achieved through community policing, and the requisite structures for

building lasting relationships between the police

and the various communities within their jurisdiction, face new risks that have the potential to bring

down the very foundations they have created. In

some areas, we see Arab and Muslim communities—and others perceived to have the same religious or ethnic backgrounds associated with the

terrorists—developing tense relationships with law

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

vii
enforcement officers who are sworn to protect

them. Many members of these communities have

difficulty distinguishing between local and federal

law enforcement authority, and are unclear how far

either will go to protect the country from another

terrorist attack. At the same time, they know police

should be protecting these vulnerable neighborhoods from crime and disorder. Many issues and

obstacles are unresolved at this writing, and the

answers lie in the hands of those most affected by

them: local law enforcement organizations and the

diverse ethnic communities they want to effectively serve and protect.

The Police Executive Research Forum

(PERF), with support from the U.S. Department of

Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing

Services (COPS), has been addressing these issues

by engaging law enforcement agency executives and

multicultural community leaders in discussion and

debate over the topics most crucial to postSeptember 11th America. PERF has been convening a series of forums for law enforcement chief

executives, other policing professionals and government policy makers to explore, debate and

exchange information on providing communitypolicing services in a security-conscious world.

This white paper is the result of the second executive session in a series of five, which brought

together ethnically diverse community leaders and

advocates, police chiefs, sheriffs, and federal law

enforcement officials. The report offers practical

suggestions for meeting the needs of our diverse

communities and protecting against future terrorist

threats. Conducted as a forum open to the many

voices, opinions and views offered by the participants, the session provided insight on such issues

as interviewing and interrogation, bias crimes,

racial profiling and immigration enforcement.

Participants discussed problems, debated solutions,

agreed, and agreed to disagree, but perhaps most

importantly, they identified the concerns most significant to their respective agency or neighborhood. 

The COPS Office and PERF are pleased to

facilitate these forums and other work that will

provide the profession with strategies to apply community-policing principles to our efforts to address

the threat of terrorism and to protect our diverse

communities. 

Carl R. Peed Chuck Wexler

Director, COPS Executive Director, PERF

PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

viii
MEN, WOMEN AND CHILDREN, REGARDLESS OF THEIR RACE, ETHNICITY, RELIgion or immigration status, shared in the tragedy of September 11th.

The terrorist attacks were not just an assault on nationality and citizenry, but also on heritage, cultural pride and even faith. Within hours of the

Twin Towers’ collapse and the attack on the Pentagon, U.S. residents and visitors, particularly Arabs, Muslims and Sikhs, were harassed or attacked because

they shared—or were perceived to share—the terrorists’ national background or

religion.

C HAPTER O N E

INTRODUCTION

President George W. Bush, the U.S. Justice

Department, and local, state and federal law

enforcement quickly denounced such acts and

warned that individuals who committed violent

acts against or intimidated any individual because

of his or her skin color, religious affiliation, or ethnicity would be prosecuted. 

Law enforcement’s challenge since then

has been to maintain an appropriate balance

between the security interests of our country and

the constitutional rights of every American. From

the start, they were entrusted with treating all

individuals with fairness and dignity while following up on suspect descriptions and leads that took

them primarily to ethnically and/or religiously

diverse communities.1 For local law enforcement

this included not only searching for additional terrorists and answers, but also preventing hate

crimes, protecting civil and constitutional rights,

and building or strengthening relationships with

these communities. 

The significance of community policing in

diverse neighborhoods after the terrorist attacks on

the United States cannot be overstated. After the

attacks, there was an opportunity and need to

enhance and redefine ongoing community-policing

efforts with these communities. Community

policing’s focus on partnerships, trust and problem

solving has been essential to police agencies’

efforts to better serve and learn from dynamic and

diverse groups of individuals. These partnerships

are vital to preventing community members’ vicVOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

1

1 For the purposes of this paper, the term “diverse communities” will be used to include ethnically, religiously and/or culturally diverse groups of individuals.
timization, thwarting future attacks and maintaining critical relationships that, in some cases, took

years to build.

Historically, law enforcement’s relationships with minority communities have been

strained—even contentious at times. More recently, public opposition of certain organizations to

federal legislation meant to facilitate law enforcement’s information sharing and intelligence gathering has served to create concern, whether warranted or not in all cases, for diverse communities,

civil rights advocates and others. They are concerned that such laws may fuel government

infringement of individuals’ privacy and due

process rights, and increase unwarranted scrutiny

by law enforcement. The U.S. Justice Department

states that many of the federal law enforcement

actions that have been criticized have been misunderstood or were actually sanctioned by federal law

in effect well before the enactment of the Uniting

and Strengthening America by Providing

Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and

Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT Act), but were

wrongly attributed to the legislation enacted at the

time of this writing.2

Many jurisdictions across the country

have spent decades addressing the underlying

issues related to police-minority community tensions. And, as local law enforcement is increasingly asked to aid state and federal law enforcement

in gathering information and otherwise assisting

in antiterrorism work, those efforts to build

bridges with diverse communities have never been

more critical. Effective community policing

demands law enforcement’s awareness of community concerns, sensitivity to cultural norms and

practices, and an open dialogue about policing tactics that will help law enforcement eliminate fear

and enhance protection in multicultural neighborhoods. It means clarifying local law enforcement’s

role in the national effort to prevent the next terrorist attack and in ongoing investigations that

have a disparate impact on minority community

members.

The challenge before law enforcement and

immigrant communities is significant. Homeland

security, civil rights and hate crime prevention

often require a careful balance of law enforcement

tactics and strategies. It is only through partnerships with the community that this balance can be

achieved.

The Project: Community

Policing in a SecurityConscious World

The Police Executive Research Forum (PERF),3

with support from the U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Community Oriented Policing Services

(COPS), has been convening a series of executive

sessions for law enforcement chief executives,

other policing professionals, and government policy makers to explore, debate and exchange inforPROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

2

2 A copy of the USA PATRIOT Act (Public Law 107-56) can be found at www.policeforum.org in the “Terrorism” documents

folder for the USA PATRIOT Act. Also, see U.S. Department of Justice, The USA PATRIOT Act: Myths and Realities

(September 2003) at www.lifeandliberty.gov. For more on the PATRIOT Act and the relevant debate, see Chapter 2.

For this website and all follow-up footnotes to websites or sources, please note that they provide useful information at the time of this writing, but the authors do not endorse any information of the sponsor organization or other information on the website.

3 PERF is a nonprofit membership organization of progressive policing professionals dedicated to advancing law enforcement

services to all communities through experimentation and national leadership. Its members serve more than half the nation’s

population and the organization provides training, technical assistance, research, publications and other services to them

and the profession. More information about PERF can be found at www.policeforum.org.
4 The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) was reorganized, in part, to separate its enforcement and services divisions. The enforcement arm was placed within ICE. 

5 The multicultural series includes the following tapes: a Diversity Public Service Announcement, Sikhism, Islam, Judaism,

Airport Security, Diversity and Respect, and a Racial Profiling Public Service Announcement.

mation. These sessions provide law enforcement

practitioners with opportunities to share and

develop effective strategies for addressing terrorism while continuing to advance community

policing. The discussions are captured in subsequent white papers that are widely disseminated to

law enforcement and decision makers at all levels

of government. (Additional white papers are

planned for such topics as bioterrorism, intelligence and homeland security initiatives.)

The first executive session held on

November 7–8, 2002 resulted in a white paper on

Local-Federal Partnerships. It is the first in the

series on Protecting Your Community from

Terrorism: Strategies for Local Law Enforcement.

(This report is available as a free download at

www.policeforum.org.)

The Executive Session on

Working With Diverse

Communities

On June 5–6, 2003 in Chicago, PERF convened the

second executive session of a group of local law

enforcement executives, federal law enforcement

professionals, diverse community leaders and

criminal justice practitioners. (See Appendix A for

a list of the participants and observers.) The session focused on how law enforcement should

engage diverse communities, especially those with

significant Arab, Muslim and Sikh populations. To

facilitate a comprehensive discussion of the issues,

PERF asked chief law enforcement executives from

across the country to bring a team of key individuals—specifically a leader representing the views of

diverse community members, and their FBI or

Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement

(ICE) Special Agent in Charge (SAC).4 Moderated

by PERF’s Executive Director, the day-and-a-half

session resulted in participants thoroughly discussing the issues and identifying strategies for

delivering policing services in diverse communities

as the work to prevent terrorist attacks continues. 

In addition to a candid debate and discussion, the participants had a chance to observe a

successful community engagement effort in

action. The Chicago Police Department has been

involved in another COPS-funded project, the

Value-Based Initiative, to strengthen its bond with

the community. Each month, at different venues

around the city, local police personnel, federal law

enforcement and community members meet for a

community forum. This Chicago Multi-Cultural

Forum provides law enforcement and community

leaders a regular occasion to raise issues and discuss common solutions. (See page 31 for a more

in-depth discussion of the Forum.) The executive

session participants also viewed two tapes from

the Chicago Police Department’s multicultural

series on understanding Judaism and Islam.5 The

Chicago Multi-Cultural Forum and the tapes facilitated executive session participants’ discussions

on how to emulate the effective methods they

observed for engaging multicultural communities

as well as other approaches that could work in

their jurisdictions.

The Resulting White Paper

This white paper, the second in the series, summarizes the PERF executive session participants’

comments, and is intended to advance law

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

3
enforcement’s delivery of police services in diverse

communities. It is divided into three main sections: community concerns, federal law enforcement issues, and local law enforcement matters.

The paper is written primarily for local law enforcement agencies to identify the opportunities and

challenges for effectively delivering police services

and gaining support in diverse communities.

The first section—community concerns—

details the fears that diverse community residents

have about federal laws, law enforcement practices,

and the insidious effects of hate-motivated violence

and property destruction. The section also includes

residents’ perceptions about what law enforcement

is doing right. The second section—federal law

enforcement issues—focuses on federal programs

and resources that affect the ability of local law

enforcement to work with diverse communities.

The third section—local law enforcement matters—discusses the challenges facing local police

practitioners. This section builds upon the first two

sections and identifies a number of strategies and

tactics that agencies can tailor to the unique concerns of a particular jurisdiction. It also reiterates

the need for local and federal law enforcement to

strengthen their partnerships and make them more

effective. Some of the promising approaches discussed in this section are taken directly from agencies that have had success with them. Others are

based on the session participants’ exchange of ideas

and suggestions.

The paper includes several sidebars written

by executive session participants that provide more

detailed accounts of selected programs or points of

view. The paper concludes with recommendations

for local law enforcement agencies committed to

serving all individuals with respect, fairness and

understanding as they navigate their new role in

policing in a counterterrorism context. 

PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

4
Introduction

THROUGHOUT THE EXECUTIVE SESSION, SOME COMMUNITY MEMBERS VOICED

their concerns about law enforcement practices, such as perceived

racial/ethnic profiling and accounts of individual officers’ insensitivities.

At the same time, community members also recognized the difficult task that law

enforcement has in attempting to prevent future terrorist acts while working in

diverse communities. They also discussed the fear of backlash violence against

anyone thought to be of an ethnic or religious background shared by known or

suspected terrorists that pervades their communities. Some of their apprehension

at the session focused on the debate at the time of this writing about the impact

of federal laws on the delivery of police services in diverse communities. 

C HAPTER T W O

COMMUNITY CONCERNS

Community Apprehension

Federal Law

Enacted on October 26, 2001, a little more than a

month after the September 11th terrorist attacks,

the USA PATRIOT Act6 was passed by both the

Senate (98–1) and the House of Representatives

(357–66). At this writing, political officials, law

enforcement executives and community members

are still discussing its effects on civil liberties and

its ultimate usefulness. The executive session

group recognized that this Act and other federal

laws are not yet fully understood. Concerns about

local and federal law enforcement roles and

responsibilities has affected, in part, the extent to

which residents of diverse communities trust law

enforcement efforts and engender positive relationships between local police agencies and the

neighborhoods they serve. Specifically, participants

were apprehensive about the involvement of local

law enforcement in matters of immigration

enforcement and in federal surveillance efforts.

“Law enforcement investigates

activity and behavior—not religion or culture.” 

—FBI SAC

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

5

6 For more on the debate regarding what the PATRIOT Act does permit, how it has been used and how it relates to other

federal laws that enable federal law enforcement to search, detain and otherwise investigate suspected terrorist activity, see

the U.S. Department of Justice website at www.lifeandliberty.gov. Their resources provide a section-by-section analysis about

the Act, its commentary and the Justice Department’s response to criticisms. 
7 The Material Witness Law, 18 USC, Part 2, Chapter 207, Section 3144, was enacted in 1984. U.S. Justice Department

officials have stated, however, that while the Material Witness Law has been used more frequently since September 11, 2001,

it is being applied at this time in the same consistent manner with which it has always been. The law authorizes, through

court order, the arrest and detention of an individual whose testimony is deemed material to a criminal

proceeding, and when it is shown that it may become impracticable to secure the presence of the person by subpoena. More

details on the Material Witness Law can be found at the following link www.lifeandliberty.gov/subs/congress/hjcpatriotwcover051303final.pdf. This link is to a letter from the Attorney General’s Office on May 13, 2003 in response to a House

Judiciary Committee inquiry into the USA PATRIOT Act. The Material Witness Law discussion begins on page 50 of the

response. 

Community members expressed their

concern that the government’s attempts to protect

our country from another terrorist attack might

put local law enforcement in the position of conducting interviews and interrogations within communities in which illegal aliens, immigrants and

minorities are disproportionately represented.

Fearing they could become the focus of investigations, which they believe may lead to detention or

deportation, many of these individuals would then

be unwilling to communicate with authorities.

Executive session participants acknowledged the

challenges local law enforcement faces as they

define their role and authority under the law while

maintaining positive working relations with

diverse communities. The key to addressing those

challenges, they agreed, will be effective and open

communication between police and the individuals they serve.

The Material Witness Law

Some minority community leaders also suggested

that the Material Witness Law7 has been increasingly used by the U.S. Justice Department to augment other federal tools. Several members of the

community fear the indiscriminate use of this law

and, more generally, do not understand its application. Many community members sometimes do

not distinguish between federal and local law

enforcement actions in interrogation and detention and, as a consequence, turn to local law

enforcement to explain the law. Unfortunately,

they learned that local law enforcement officials

may not be privy to federal actions, and may be

unable to explain why the law was applied to a particular individual. 

Other Related Factors

Executive session participants from the community agreed that if law enforcement lacks awareness

of and is insensitive to ethnic, cultural and religious differences, their interactions could become

more difficult and time consuming. They must

communicate how they will be working with federal law enforcement and with community members. Community leaders reinforced the importance of agencies having the ethnic, racial and gender diversity to reflect the make-up of the commu-

“In a country of laws, people

make the difference.”

—FBI SAC

“After September 11th, law

enforcement bombarded the

ethnically diverse communities

looking for terrorists, but often

found only a law-abiding community.” 

—Community Leader

PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

6
VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

7

COMBATING MISPERCEPTIONS AND MISUNDERSTANDING:

A COMMUNITY LEADER’S PERSPECTIVE 

by Chairman Kareem Irfan,

Council of Islamic Organizations of Greater Chicago

Since the tragic September 11th attacks, America has traversed extremely trying times. The war against

terrorism has spawned unprecedented law enforcement initiatives aimed at achieving homeland security. Actions aimed at ferreting out potentially subversive actions and perpetrators undertaking or somehow supporting acts of terrorism have been ratcheted up in both scope and intensity to significant levels.

The resultant impact on minority communities like Muslim and Arab Americans has been dramatic. Combined with media frenzy, sensationalistic reporting and stereotyping, these efforts have led to

actual and certainly perceived targeting and profiling of such minorities. The end result has been a drastic deterioration of the sensitive relationship between our law enforcement agencies and the communities they serve—most distressingly, this decline occurs precisely when we need improved communications and interactions as our society confronts an era of global and local conflicts and increasingly violent approaches by disenchanted citizens.

It is time to step back and recognize the true nature of this all-important relationship that is so

critical to societal stability. Law enforcement agencies and the citizens they represent are in this game

together as partners with distinct, yet cooperative roles. Law enforcement agencies must remember that

they exist exclusively to serve the communities they are sworn to literally “serve and protect.” This

understanding, while elementary, needs solid reinforcement, in order to avoid an approach whereby a law

enforcement agency assumes its role of providing security as an authoritative one with little or no consideration for the communities’ needs or sensitivities. It sometimes presumes that it knows best what

the security needs are and dictates how best to achieve this independent of the communities’ perspective.

Communities, by way of their representative leadership, must realize that they have responsibility for the law enforcement agencies that have, in the final analysis, been commissioned and authorized

by them to serve and protect them. Communities need to remember that the law enforcement agencies

are doing their best to achieve a secure environment and that certain compromises must be made in

terms of personal rights and liberties to achieve desired success. Communities must recognize the

urgency of staying involved with their law enforcement agencies to avoid a sense of isolation.

Considering the above-noted roles, it is abundantly clear that true security may only be

approached by a collaborative partnership that dispels the us-versus-them mentality on both sides of the

law enforcement agency-community divide. The lessons of the September 11th aftermath have reinforced

and confirmed the need for such a partnership.

At the national level, we have failed to recognize and/or implement meaningful partnerships

between federal law enforcement agencies and American communities. Coupled with ineffective communication, our law enforcement approaches have generated unprecedented suspicion and paranoia
across the spectrum of America’s minority communities. On the other hand, community leaders

themselves have largely been ineffective in understanding or engaging law enforcement agencies.

Enterprising leadership has been lacking especially in forceful representation of the communities’ concerns while simultaneously maintaining cordial and meaningful relationships with key law enforcement agency officials.

Committed efforts will be required from both sides in the days ahead to establish the desired

partnerships and communications based on the positive and successful experiences of the Chicago-area

Muslim-American community in the post-September 11th context. Some important suggestions come

to mind:

Visionary, relationship-building leaders are needed on both sides;

Law enforcement agencies need to take the lead in reaching out to key community leaders—the approach should be one of open and honest communications;

Law enforcement agency leaders should avoid focusing on contacts solely for information

extraction; instead, the relationship should be driven by information sharing relevant to

the community;

Community leaders should, to the greatest extent possible, be broadly representative of

the diverse groups forming the minority community at issue—the presence of an

umbrella organization like the Council of Islamic Organizations in Chicago, for instance,

has been instrumental in ensuring effective communications and responsive initiatives;

Periodic formal as well as informal meetings among representative leaders of law enforcement agencies and the community are essential; and,

Community leaders must be committed to, and actively implement, practical mechanisms for identifying current concerns, communicating the same to law enforcement

agencies, and relaying any related feedback to the involved community.

The foregoing provides a skeletal framework for a more effective, collaborative relationship

between law enforcement agencies and the communities they serve. By appropriately fleshing out the

details, it is hoped that a trusting and relatively candid relationship will evolve. Differences and disagreements will arise, but should not lead to a disruption of essential communications. Instead, both

law enforcement agencies and communities should be driven by the over-riding goal of a team-based

partnership approach. Both sides will hopefully focus on their common objective of achieving lasting

peace and security. I conclude with an appeal for leaders on both sides to rise to the occasion and be

passionately committed to realizing this partnership paradigm—the stability of our society

depends on us.

PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

8












nities they serve. Law enforcement must establish

credibility and be able to clearly inform community members of law enforcement’s duties, role and

commitment as they deliver services as well as

protect all individuals from terrorists. Community

leaders also posited that the inability by some residents to speak or comprehend the English language is a barrier to the proposed effective interaction with law enforcement officials—and more

must be done to address these communications

challenges.

Violence and Fear

Among the concerns discussed, session participants raised the issue of protecting vulnerable

individuals from backlash violence and hate

crimes, as well as reducing fear within diverse

communities.8 Community leaders passionately

spoke about residents becoming victims twice:

first as American citizens, and then as victims of

hate crimes. Session participants discussed how

hate crimes can weaken a people’s resolve and

even alienate them from the larger community if

the crimes are not condemned, investigated and

prosecuted. Some session representatives suggested that the terrorist attacks of September 11th and

the U.S. government’s antiterrorism campaign

have fueled the public perception that Arab,

Muslim and Sikh communities in particular are

filled with potential terrorists. These misperceptions have prompted some Americans to commit

hate crimes—acts of violence and destruction

against individuals, their religious gathering

places, as well as their homes and businesses. 

Executive session participants discussed

those individuals most vulnerable to hate crimes

after the attacks on the World Trade Center and

the Pentagon—again, primarily Arabs, Muslims

and Sikhs. Some of these men and women are easily identifiable because, based on religious practices, Muslim women often wear the hijab, many

Muslim and Sikh men wear thick beards and most

Sikh men wear turbans. Participants also discussed the misperception that many Arabs,

Muslims and Sikhs have clustered themselves into

certain jobs—including driving taxis and running

small businesses, gas stations, convenience stores

and motels. This form of stereotyping may direct

backlash violence against people engaged in these

occupations. Along with targeting certain groups,

bias-motivated attacks are also often directed at

properties such as mosques and other places of

worship. Prayer houses on campuses, for example,

are vulnerable to hate crimes even though they are

“Our community lost the most

from September 11th. We lost

the right to be average

Americans.”

—Community Leader

“We believe ignorance is fear

and that causes violence.”

—Community Leader

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

9

8 Hate crimes are those crimes that “manifest evidence of prejudice based on race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or

ethnicity, including where appropriate the crimes of murder; non-negligent manslaughter; forcible rape; aggravated assault;

simple assault; intimidation; arson; and destruction, damage or vandalism of property” (Hate Crime Statistics Act (HCSA),

28 U.S.C. 534). 
often not well known to the greater student population or the community at large. 

Concerns for Student Safety

Each year, America’s universities and colleges

attract diverse groups of students from all over the

world. While many international students are not

U.S. citizens, participants agreed they still deserve

the same protections. Many international students

have become fearful of both law enforcement and

their classmates, for many of the same reasons

cited above, and are apprehensive about the

Student and Exchange Visitor Information System

(SEVIS), which is discussed later in this document.

Many international students come from countries

where they have little experience dealing with law

enforcement and are fearful of those interactions.

These fears may require special efforts by campus

police and even school resource officers in junior

and senior high schools.

Fear of Racial Profiling

Law enforcement has been working to address the

incidences and perceptions of police using race

inappropriately to make decisions. Racial profiling

is the improper reliance by law enforcement on

race, religion, ethnicity or national origin in deciding whom to target and investigate. Executive session participants believe that just as African

Americans, Hispanics and other minorities have

complained about being targeted by police officers

investigating street crime and immigration violations, respectively, Arabs, Muslims, Sikhs and others who appear to be from Middle Eastern countries

have been targeted in an antiterrorism campaign.

Participants stated that these latter groups have

been stopped, searched, detained and deported,

based in whole or in part, on their race, ethnicity,

national origin or religion. These experiences have

given rise to the expression “flying while Arab.” 

Executive session participants discussed

the strains that past racial profiling and the current

terrorism profiling have put on community-policing efforts, and their inappropriateness.

Community speakers stressed that profiling is not

useful as a law enforcement tactic for fighting terrorism, street crimes or immigration violations.

Further, expansive law enforcement attention on

Arabs, Muslims, Sikhs and others who share or are

perceived as sharing some outward characteristics

that fit a certain terrorist ‘profile,’ but who pose no

threat to national security actually detracts from

the antiterrorism efforts. These efforts divert limited law enforcement resources away from investigations of individuals, including Arabs, Muslims and

Sikhs, who are linked to terrorist activities by specific and credible evidence. Profiling ignores the

possibility that someone who does not fit the profile may be engaged in terrorism, or may be an

accomplice. Racial profiling is not a substitute for

behavior-based and activity-based enforcement.

Community member participants noted

that the events of September 11th and the legislative activity at this writing regarding terrorism

appear to have put a hold on significant congressional efforts to address racial profiling.

Nonetheless, session participants stated that federal and state resources can help end racial and eth-

“The purpose of terrorism is to

divide a community based on

race, ethnicity, religion and

national affiliation.” 

—FBI SAC

PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

10
nic profiling. They propose that nationwide standards be developed by law enforcement agencies,

and such standards should include explicit guidance on preventing and addressing racial profiling.9

A public education campaign is also necessary to

explain misperceptions, the myths related to racial

profiling, and the effects of its practice.10 

Implications for Policing All

Minority Communities

While the primary focus of the executive session

was on law enforcement’s working with primarily

Arab, Muslim and Sikh communities, participants

discussed the effects of the terrorist attacks on

African Americans, Hispanics, Asian Americans

and other minority groups. Many voiced their concern that law enforcement agencies are now focusing on improving relations with Arab Americans

and Muslims at the expense of these other minorities. A few executive session participants questioned why law enforcement is prioritizing Arab,

Muslim and Sikh relations, when African

Americans’ relationships, for example, have been

strained for years without receiving such an immediate and positive response. Executive session participants expressed that many minorities feel they

are perpetually victimized and that crime and violence that plagues their neighborhoods can be as

destabilizing to a community as terrorism.

Executive session participants discussed

how minority communities are putting pressure

on law enforcement to remember the positive

efforts to build relationships in their communities

before September 11th. A local law enforcement

executive stated that prior to that time, their officers spent more time in Hispanic and AfricanAmerican communities than they do today. The

group’s consensus, however, was that law enforcement agencies must work at understanding and

maintaining relationships in all communities;

otherwise, inattention to partnerships

between multicultural communities and law

enforcement that have taken years to achieve may

suffer long-term damage. Indeed, the positive

developments between African-American communities and law enforcement in some cities, for

example, could serve as models for strengthening

such partnerships in other jurisdictions. 

Conclusion

Community members at the executive session

expressed their concerns about law enforcement

practices, including perceived profiling and insensitivity issues. The executive session included a

debate of the impact of federal laws on the delivery

of police services in diverse communities. The discussion also addressed fears in multicultural communities of backlash violence if a domestic terrorist incident involves suspected terrorists with the

same apparent ethnic or religious background.

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

11

9 The U.S. Attorney General issued federal guidelines in June 2003 to all federal agencies on how and when race can be

appropriately used as a factor in conducting traditional law enforcement duties and in cases of national security. The U.S.

Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division publication, Guidance Regarding the Use of Race by Federal Law Enforcement

Agencies can be accessed at www.usdoj.gov/crt/split/documents/guidance_on_race.htm.

10 A recent PERF report, Racially Biased Policing: A Principled Response, provides recommendations for an effective law

enforcement response to racially biased policing and the perceptions thereof. The COPS Office-supported report provides

recommendations for addressing police policy, recruitment/hiring, training/education, community outreach,

supervision/accountability, and data collection. The publication is available as a free download at www.policeforum.org.
RACIAL PROFILING TAKES ON A DIFFERENT MEANING

by Jerry A. Oliver, Former Chief, Detroit Police Department

Upon the second anniversary of the September 11th tragedy, I recalled my last visit to the World Trade

Center. It was just prior to the attacks and I was attending a law enforcement conference on racial profiling. At that time, the dialogue on racial profiling was almost exclusively centered on its impact upon

the African-American community. 

In the aftermath of the attacks, the landscape of policing has changed as dramatically as the

skyline of New York City. Local police chiefs must now chart a new course to successfully fulfill and

balance the demands of our pre- and post-September 11th policing demands. In many instances, the

terrorist attacks eliminated the slow pendulum effect that law enforcement issues usually experience,

where we see our demands and priorities make gradual shifts over time. Rather, September 11th has

had more of a sledgehammer effect on local policing issues. 

Before the terrorist hijackings, a law enforcement dialogue on racial profiling could conceivably

be narrowly focused upon the African-American community, and to some extent, the HispanicAmerican community. After the attacks, rarely is the issue of racial profiling raised unless we are dealing with its impact upon the Arab and Muslim communities. Yet, we must strike a balance between

the competing demands that our local communities face. How do we do that? 

First, consider that Detroit’s metropolitan area is home to the largest Arab and Muslim population in the country.11 Further, Detroit’s overall population is approximately 80 percent African

American, 5 percent Hispanic and has a growing Asian population.12 Even though September 11th has

shifted our attention to balancing the civil rights of the Arab and Muslim communities, our challenges

with meeting the needs of other diverse communities remains. We must be vigilant in our strategic

planning not to marginalize any segments of our community, nor to lose any ground that we gained

through the community policing efforts that came before the terrorist attacks. 

Before September 11, law enforcement had responded to the call for more “customer-friendly”

policing. We had achieved great successes with our communities by making departments less militaristic, less secretive and less intimidating to the citizens we serve. Now, local police departments are

“fit-testing” all our officers to don gas masks as first-responders to chemical and biological attacks.

With this counterterrorism horizon as our backdrop, how much latitude will we have to continue in

our efforts to improve citizens’ access and partnerships with their police?

What did our citizens expect of their local police before September 11th? Our mandate then

11 U.S. Bureau of the Census (2000) For more information, see www.aaiusa.org/demographics/population_highlights.pdf.

12 Detroit Population and Demographics (US Census 2000). For more information see www.detroit.areaconnect.com/statistics.htm.

PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

12
was that if a citizen called 911 for a burglary, they wanted a fast response. When drug dealers plagued

their neighborhoods, we were to take the bad guys off the corners. Additionally, we know that our citizens demanded that in all of our efforts, we also balanced and protected the civil rights of those in the

communities. 

What do our citizens expect of their local police after September 11th? Our mandate is still a

fast response to traditional crime such as burglary and drug dealing. Now however, we have the additional responsibility of what were traditionally national security duties. Acts of terrorism seek to intimidate the masses by causing large-scale disaster and human loss. Therefore, every large local event has

local and national security implications. A Detroit Lions football game or an Aerosmith concert now

present an opportunity for terrorism. Local police are now called upon to detect, prevent and, in the

event of an attack, be first responders to these terrorist attacks. Our challenge is finding the resources

and developing the strategies to balance these often competing mandates of our pre- and postSeptember 11 communities. 

It remains to be seen how our new mandates will affect our traditional responsibilities. Our

successes in community policing could serve as a model for achieving a synthesis between the two.

One thing is certain, however: None of us will find the solutions in a vacuum. Along the way, local law

enforcement must share its challenges, failures and successes to bring the best of what we have accomplished to the tasks we face ahead.

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

13
PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

14
Introduction

F

EDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES PLAY A CRITICAL ROLE AND OFFER SIGNIFicant resources that influence how local law enforcement delivers police

services in diverse communities. Since September 11th, federal programs

have been reorganized and renamed, and new programs have been implemented.

These reforms affect partnerships with state and local law enforcement, though

their full impact may not be realized until years from now. The executive session

participants discussed the need to work more closely with federal partners.

Community members also noted that they often do not distinguish federal from

local law enforcement actions, which may have consequences for ongoing local

community policing efforts. 

C HAPTER T HREE

FEDERAL RESOURCES

Bureau of Immigration and

Customs Enforcement 

With the establishment of the Department of

Homeland Security, the investigative and intelligence resources of the U.S. Customs Services,

Federal Protective Services, Immigration and

Naturalization Services, and—as of November

2003—the Federal Air Marshall Services were consolidated into the U.S. Bureau of Immigration and

Customs Enforcement (ICE). ICE is the investigative arm of the Directorate of Border and

Transportation Security at this time, which is

tasked with securing our nation’s borders and safeguarding its transportation infrastructure. ICE

focuses on enforcing immigration and customs

laws within the United States, the protection of

specified federal buildings, and conducting air and

marine enforcement. The bureau is composed of

the following operational divisions: Office of

Investigations, Office of Detention and Removal,

“To stand united we must do so

regardless of religion, culture,

and immigrant status.”

—Community Member

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

15

“Individuals have rights in this

country, regardless of their

immigrant status.”

—Community Member
Office of Air and Marine Operations, Office of

Federal Protective Service, Office of Intelligence,

and the Federal Air Marshall Service.13 Executive

session participants discussed how essential it is

for local law enforcement to understand the roles

and responsibilities of ICE, and to coordinate with

their local ICE office to raise community concerns

of which they may be aware.14

Registration Programs

Immigration can be a contentious issue in U.S.

public policy debates. Since September 11th, some

commentators have blamed lax immigration policies for the terrorist attacks. Fear of additional terrorist acts has intensified public opposition to illegal immigration—believing stricter enforcement

would better protect homeland security by controlling U.S. borders. Congress has enacted legislation

that authorizes the U.S. Justice Department to

implement entry-exit programs designed to screen

and track those entering the country. Executive

session participants discussed the registration programs used by the federal government, especially

ICE, and local law enforcement’s role in assisting

federal agencies in enforcing violations of those

programs. 

Special Registration Program Under

the National Security Entry-Exit

Registration System (NSEERS)/

United States Visitor and Immigrant

Status Indicator Technology Program

(USVISIT)

The Special Registration Program under the

National Security Entry-Exit Registration System

(NSEERS) initiative was meant to track the estimated 35 million foreign visitors who have come

to the United States each year.15 The U.S. Justice

Department-designed system, administered by

Naturalization and Immigration Services, was

modeled in part after those already in place in

many European countries (e.g., France, Great

Britain and Germany). The Special Registration

System was developed as a three-part comprehensive entry-exit monitoring system to increase border security. NSEERS required temporary visitors

who were natives or citizens of countries designated by the U.S. Attorney General, who warranted

monitoring for national security or law enforcement reasons, to submit fingerprints, photographs

and other information upon entry into the United

States. The program was intended to be an initial

“Law enforcement agencies

who refuse to work with ICE are

ignoring a valuable tool in the

fight against crime.” 

—ICE Representative

“Registration programs are

used to keep terrorists off balance and protect our country.”

—Chief Law Enforcement

Executive

PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

16

13 More information on ICE can be found at www.bice.immigration.gov. 

14 The contact information for all the ICE offices’ Special Agents-In-Charge or the Resident Agents-In-Charge can be found

at the time of this writing at www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/toolbox/contacts/saic_raic/.

15 At this writing, this figure was found at the DHS website at www.dhs.gov.
step towards a full entry-exit system. In 2002, the

direction of NSEERS as well as the Office of

Naturalization and Immigration Services was

transferred from the U.S. Justice Department to

the Office of U.S. Immigration and Citizenship

Services under the Department of Homeland

Security (DHS). In December 2003, DHS

announced that it had suspended the formal

requirement for individuals previously registered

in the NSEERS to re-register after 30-days and one

year of continuous presence in the United States. 

On January 5, 2004, the first phase of a

new DHS entry-exit program was implemented,

integrating and building upon existing NSEERS

functions. The U.S. Visitor and Immigrant Status

Indicator Technology project (USVISIT)16 is

designed to meet the national security needs that

NSEERS addressed and to improve upon the previous system, incorporating “biometric identifiers”

in its registration process.17 The program is a result

of the pooled resources and efforts of the

Transportation Security Administration,

Immigration Customs Enforcement (ICE),

Customs and Border Patrol and State Department.

The goal of the program is to capture more complete arrival and departure data for those who

require a visa to enter the United States, thus

enhancing the security of citizens and visitors

while expediting legitimate commerce and travel.

The law requires that an automated entry-exit system be implemented at air and seaports by

December 31, 2003; the 50 most highly trafficked

land ports of entry by December 31, 2004; and all

ports of entry by December 31, 2005. At this writing, only the airport and seaport entry portion of

the USVISIT program has been implemented.

USVISIT uses scanning equipment to collect “biometric identifiers,” such as a digital photograph of

the visitor and fingerprints, in an inkless process.

Together with standard biographical information

gathered from a visitor concerning country of origin and reasons for travel, the new program will

verify the visitor’s identity and compliance with

visa and immigration policies at points of entry.

This approach is meant to reduce the need for

tracking and for enforcement of immigration violations within our borders. The automated system

also allows border security officials to check the

names of visitors and immigrants against terrorist

and criminal watch lists.

Exit controls can enable DHS to monitor

who leaves the country on time and to facilitate

the removal of those who overstay their visas.

According to U.S. Justice Department materials,

failure to comply with the Special Registration

Programs is a misdemeanor violation. If ICE determines that “aliens” who are subject to Special

Registration have not complied with these federal

obligations, warrants will be issued on the Wanted

Aliens, and their name and information will be

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

17

16 For more information on the USVISIT program, visit the DHS website at www.dhs.gov.

17 “Certain aliens whose presence in the United States warrants monitoring for national security or law enforcement reasons

remain subject to the NSEERS special registration procedures. The special entry and exit registration procedures under

NSEERS will meet the requirements of this USVISIT rule for entry and exit inspection for persons who are also subject to

NSEERS. The information that NSEERS aliens provide on arrival and departure is kept in a special NSEERS system that

will be integrated with all of the other foreign national arrival and departure data that are required to be kept in the entryexit system component of USVISIT” (8 U.S.C. 1187, 1365a and note, 1379, 1731–31; Federal Register 69, no.2, 5 January

2004).
entered into the National Crime Information

Center (NCIC) because it constitutes a violation of

Title 8.18

State and local law enforcement have

experience with handling individuals who have

committed a crime and are also in violation of

immigration laws. The U.S. Justice Department

has indicated that any contact local law enforcement might have with “Wanted Aliens” during the

routine course of their duties should follow current

protocol and procedures for dealing with ICE

“hits” in the NCIC system. Policy requires that

local ICE offices respond to all NCIC “hits” in an

efficient and effective manner. When ICE cannot

make a timely response and take custody of the

detainee, local law enforcement officials are

encouraged to obtain all relevant information.

Local law enforcement must then determine

whether the offense warrants a fine, detention or

other disposition and report their findings to ICE.19 

Local law enforcement participants

described how they have taken a measured role in

enforcing violations to immigration law. They

believe that the majority of local law enforcement

agencies have enforced Title 18 criminal violations

by illegal immigrants—that is, they have taken

enforcement action when a criminal act has been

committed. For the most part, they have not, however, acted on violations of Title 8, which include

such offenses as willful failure to register or failure

to notify immigration authorities of a change of

address. Local law enforcement—recognizing the

potential for its impact on minority relations—has

largely refrained from enforcing anything but criminal law violations.20 

At this time, it is suggested that local law

enforcement work with their local ICE office to

discuss policies and procedures that will support

their community policing goals. Local agencies are

also encouraged to check with their local government and state attorneys to ensure there is a clear

understanding of the local law enforcement role

and legal authority. 

Student and Exchange Visitor

Information System (SEVIS)

SEVIS requires educational institutions to maintain information about foreign students studying

at their institutions. The system is based on an

automated process to collect, maintain and manage information about international foreign students and exchange visitors during their stay in

the United States. SEVIS is a centralized Internetbased system that is meant to maintain accurate

and current information on non-immigrant students (F and M visas), exchange visitors (J visa),

and their dependents (F-2, M-2, and J-2). SEVIS

enables the schools to transmit this information

PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

18

18 8 USC, Chapter 12, Subchapter II, Part VII, Section 1306; Federal Register 67, no. 155, (12 August 2002) (8 CFR Parts

214 and 264).

19 U.S. Department of Justice, Immigration and Naturalization Service communiqué to local law enforcement. Immigration

Security and Law Enforcement. October 2002 (distributed by PERF at IACP meeting in Minneapolis, MN).

20 Some congressional efforts to more directly involve local law enforcement are reflected in such proposals as the Clear Law

Enforcement for Criminal Alien Removal (CLEAR) Act of 2003. More information could be found at this writing on the

Library of Congress legislative search engine (http://thomas.loc.gov/) by typing in the bill number HR2671 for the 108th

Congress.
electronically to ICE and the State Department

throughout a student or exchange visitor’s stay in

the United States. 

SEVIS attempts to capture international

student or exchange visitor activity, such as port of

entry, date of entry, failure to enroll, disciplinary

action by the school or early graduation, change of

address, change in program of study and other

details. Schools are required to report any change

in status for full-time foreign students, at which

time the student may be subject to deportation.

SEVIS will provide system alerts, event notification, and basic reports to the end-user schools,

programs, and Immigration-related field offices.

The filing deadline was August 1, 2003 for foreign

students and educational institutions to comply

with the SEVIS System.21 

Executive session participants discussed

their perceived role in assisting ICE in the implementation and compliance with the SEVIS registration program. Some community participants

were still unclear about their role in helping students comply with the registration program. Local

law enforcement also was concerned about what

role, if any, they would have in encounters involving off-campus students who failed to comply with

the SEVIS system. 

Federal Assistance

There are many federal programs and resources

that executive session participants recommended

for local law enforcement agencies to use in working with diverse communities. The programs listed below are among those designed to serve both

law enforcement and the community. Contact

information for the federal resources can be found

in Appendix B.

U.S. Department of Justice,

Community Relations Service 

The 1964 Civil Rights Act established the

Community Relations Service (CRS), an agency

within the U.S. Department of Justice. CRS is the

only federal component that is a specialized conciliation service available to work with state and

local officials to help prevent and resolve racial and

ethnic conflict, violence and civil disorder. There

are currently 56 CRS employees throughout the

United States located in ten regional offices

(Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Dallas, Denver, Kansas

City (MO), Los Angeles, New York, Philadelphia

and Seattle) and four field offices (Detroit,

Houston, Miami and San Francisco) who are

trained as professional mediators. These mediators are experienced in settling community conflicts and violence related to race, color or national origin. CRS is a free, neutral and confidential

service available 24 hours a day.

Immediately following the September

11th attacks, CRS began arranging meetings

across the country between law enforcement, city

officials, and Arab, Muslim and Sikh communities

to enhance mutual understanding and encourage

cooperation. By January 2004, CRS had conducted

more than 250 such forums across the country in

such states as California, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa,

Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Michigan

and Texas. In addition, CRS organized police trainings on interfacing, communicating, and collaboVOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

19

21 The description of SEVIS was based, in part, on information found on the website

www.ice.gov/graphics/enforce/imm/imm_sevis.htm.
rating with Arab, Muslim and Sikh Americans.

These programs were designed to assist law

enforcement officials in their outreach efforts to

targeted communities and to help gain community support for their hate crime and bias incident

investigations. The training addressed cultural

behaviors and sensitivities, information on Islam,

stereotypes, and expectations encountered when

interacting and communicating with Arab,

Muslim and Sikh Americans. In addition, CRS

developed several helpful resources for law enforcement, including the publications Twenty-Four Plus

One Things Local Law Enforcement Agencies Can

Do to Prevent or Respond to Hate Incidents

Against Arab-Americans, Muslims and Sikhs and

the video, The First Three to Five Seconds: Arab

and Muslim Cultural Awareness Training for Law

Enforcement.

22

In addition, the Community Relations

Service of the Department of Justice, has conducted several “Train-the-Trainer” programs, in which

Arab, Muslim and Sikh American volunteers are

trained to help local law enforcement and other

government officials acquire a fundamental understanding of Arab, Muslim and Sikh cultures. The

trainings have been held in high-hate crime areas

or in primarily Arab, Muslim and Sikh American

communities. Recent trainings have been held in

San Francisco, CA; Middlesex, NJ; Miami, FL;

Denver, CO; Philadelphia, PA; and Washington,

DC.

U.S. Department of Justice, Civil

Rights Division

The U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights

Division,23 in partnership with the FBI, is the

“institution within the federal government responsible for enforcing federal statutes prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, sex, handicap,

religion and national origin.” One component of

the U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Rights

Division is the National Origin Working Group,24

which investigates alleged civil violations of federal rights laws specifically against individuals who

are perceived to be Arab, Muslim or Sikh—recognizing the backlash from the events of September

11th. If there is a criminal violation of civil rights

laws, then the FBI has jurisdiction for the investigation. The National Origin Working Group

receives reports of violations based on national origin, citizenship status and religion, including

those related to housing, education, employment,

access to government services and law enforcement. The results of criminal investigations conducted by the FBI are used by the Civil Rights

Division to initiate federal hate crime prosecutions. The group works with other Justice

Department components and other government

agencies to ensure accurate referral, effective outreach and service provision to victims of civil

rights violations.

PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

20

22 The publication and video can be found online at www.usdoj.gov/crs/24things.htm and www.usdoj.gov/crs/training_video/3to5_lan/Intro.htm, respectively.

23 More information about the U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division can be found at www.usdoj.gov/crt/. 

24 More information about the U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, National Origin Working Group can be

found at www.usdoj.gov/crt/nordwg.html.
COMMUNITY OUTREACH PROGRAM

by Linda M. Schmidt, FBI Outreach Specialist, Cleveland

The FBI has a Community Outreach Program (COP) in all of its 56 divisions across the country. Each

program has the same basic requirements, but elements vary based on the particular needs of their

communities. The COP is the conduit between the community and the FBI division, balancing the

requirements of the program with the needs of its community partners. Both the FBI and the communities served benefit from COP because it provides an opportunity for open dialogue in a safe environment. 

One of Cleveland’s most important projects is the Northern Ohio Hate Crimes Working

Group (NOHCWG), specifically the Community Outreach/Education Committee. This committee is

made up of members from many of Cleveland’s ethnic communities. They bring the richness of their

cultures to the table as we work side by side in developing hate crime prevention and education conferences, brochures and training events, as well as small discussion groups. The Cleveland Division

Special Agent in Charge, Assistant Special Agents in Charge, Chief Division Counsel, Supervisory

Special Agents, Agents, Community Outreach Specialist and professional employees provide requested presentations at group meetings. In this way, the community gets answers to many of their questions and gains an understanding of the FBI and its jurisdiction. Through this dialogue, participants

learn and accept reasons why there are cases about which the FBI cannot publicly comment; and, the

FBI has an opportunity to hear the community’s perspective on our crime-fighting efforts. Oftentimes

we receive their support for our efforts. 

After September 11, 2001, the NOHCWG and the Community Outreach/Education

Committee expanded to include new members from Arab and Asian communities. They added a new

perspective to our hate crime prevention efforts and this committee. In June 2002, this group hosted

the first annual three-day hate crimes conference. It was the result of spending many long hours working with each other developing an agenda, deciding on speakers and sending out invitations. As a result

of the conference’s success, members of the planning committee were invited to participate in an FBI

on-line chat on the first anniversary of the September 11th attack. We had individuals with such

diverse religious and ethnic perspectives as Asian, Arab, Jewish, Caucasian and African American

answering questions from across the country on what the NOHCWG did to combat hate crime immediately following the terrorist attack and what the group was continuing to do. A bond of friendship

has developed between the Cleveland Division FBI and members of this working group. We continue

to learn from one another, sharing cultural beliefs, holidays, language, food, humor, cultural taboos and

social norms. Most importantly, we work together to share what we have learned from others. Our second annual three-day hate crimes conference was held in June 2003, and planning has already begun

on next year’s conference. 

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

21
Another important program is the Citizens’ FBI Academy. Many of the FBI divisions host at

least one academy a year. The academy can run seven to nine sessions, providing participants opportunities to discuss historic closed cases from their hometowns, new crime trends, ethics, shoot-don’t

shoot scenarios, criminal jurisdiction, drugs, gangs, fugitives and much more. Through the FBI

Community Outreach Program the FBI and the community can work together for a safer tomorrow. 

PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

22
FBI Civil Rights Program

The FBI’s Civil Rights Program is the primary federal agency responsible for investigating allegations

regarding criminal violations of civil rights, including federal hate crime legislation. The FBI’s Civil

Rights Program consists of subprograms divided

into two units: the Color of Law Unit, which

includes police misconduct investigations; and the

Hate Crimes Unit, which is responsible for overseeing and managing all criminal investigations

involving animus based on race, sex, religion, ethnicity, national origin, criminal violations of the

Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, and

involuntary servitude and slavery.25

FBI Hate Crimes Working Group 

In 1998, the U.S. Attorney General directed the

U.S. Attorney’s Offices (USAOs) and the FBI to

cosponsor a Hate Crimes Working Group (HCWG)

that would operate through field offices throughout

the country. These groups represent a collaborative

effort among city, state and federal officials, and

individuals from diverse communities, universities

and businesses. These working groups develop

strategies to address local hate crime problems that

draw on community and law enforcement

resources. 

For example, in March 1998, the USAO for

the Northern District of Ohio and the FBI’s

Cleveland Division developed a proactive hate

crimes working group.26 They have created education/awareness programs, provided public speakers,

and produced posters and a brochure that detail

local hate crime resources. The mission of the program has been to provide outreach to the community through the FBI’s established communitybased, school-based and partnership programs. The

program also works with the communities and

schools directly in developing services that meet

their needs. A FBI Community Outreach Program

(COP) Specialist assists this program by identifying

resources and engaging individuals from every sector of the community to build partnerships. The

Cleveland Division COP of the FBI has also helped

to reduce crime, drugs, hate/bias, gangs, peer sexual harassment, school and community violence. 

Federal Initiatives on the Local

Level

Executive session participants discussed federal initiatives available in their state that impact law

enforcement’s relationship with diverse communities. Participants recommended that local chiefs

and sheriffs contact their U.S. Attorney’s Office

and FBI field office to inquire about local programs

or initiatives in place to improve relationships with

diverse communities. 

For example, the U.S. Attorney in the

Eastern District of Michigan and the Michigan

Director of the American-Arab AntiDiscrimination Committee have formed a group

called Building Respect in Diverse Groups to

Enhance Sensitivity (BRIDGES). The purpose of

BRIDGES is to continue the dialogue on issues of

mutual concern between federal law enforcement

and diverse communities, and for federal law

enforcement to convey information to the community. BRIDGES is an outgrowth of the monthly

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

23

25 For more information, see www.fbi.gov/hq/cid/civilrights.civilrts.htm.

26 More information on the Northern Ohio Hate Crimes Working Group can be found at http://cleveland.fbi.gov/cop.htm.
PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

24

meetings held since September 11 between the

U.S. Attorney and local Middle Eastern community leaders. Approximately six federal law enforcement heads and twelve community group representatives make up the membership of BRIDGES. 

Executive session participants provided

another example: the ongoing dialogue between

the Arab American Institute and the FBI

Washington Field Office, which resulted in the FBI

establishing a local Arab American Advisory

Committee. The committee works to improve

relations between Arab Americans and the FBI and

is part of a national effort to address community

concerns. The committee serves as an important

link between the Arab American community and

the FBI’s Washington Field Office. Regional advisory committees have also been formed.

Committee members are responsible for bringing

community concerns to the FBI’s attention and

collaborating to find solutions. At these

committee meetings, the FBI disseminates crucial

information regarding new policies and

available resources, helping to build a formal

relationship that fosters timely cooperation and

communication. 

Contact information for the BRIDGES

and the Arab American Advisory Committee can

be found in Appendix B.

Conclusion

Federal assistance is currently available that local

law enforcement can draw on when delivering

police services in diverse communities. Local law

enforcement agencies must be aware that individuals in the community often do not differentiate

between local and federal law enforcement efforts,

which may have consequences for community

policing efforts. Executive session participants recommended that local law enforcement work closely with federal agencies to ensure their operations

do not undermine local police relations with

multicultural communities; to understand new

laws and define their respective roles; to learn

about federal program reorganizations and available sources of assistance. Federal law enforcement

agencies play a critical role and offer significant

resources that can influence how local law

enforcement delivers police services in diverse

communities. 
Introduction

L

OCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT HAS ASSUMED A DIFFICULT ROLE IN OUR NATION’S

fight against terrorism—a role that involves sometimes-conflicting goals

and a careful balance of interests and needs. The challenges for local law

enforcement are perhaps most clearly revealed when they try to serve diverse

communities while collecting information on and investigating potential terrorist threats. 

C HAPTER F OUR

LOCAL LA W ENFORCEMENT

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

25

Some policy makers have suggested that local law

enforcement must change its strategies and policies to master its new role in domestic security.

Yet, many police professionals have contended

that community policing employs all the tools and

resources needed to prevent and respond to terrorism. It provides local law enforcement with the

strategies to build the relationships with diverse

communities needed to better understand their

priorities and encourage crime-reporting; gather

information for investigative purposes; coordinate

with federal law enforcement initiatives; and protect these communities from fear, hate crimes and

other victimization. The following discussion

focuses on how local law enforcement can effectively deliver police services in diverse communities, including the tools, tactics and resources to

help agencies respond to community concerns

while building strong partnerships with state and

federal law enforcement to address terrorism.

Religious and Cultural

Awareness 

Community session participants stressed, and law

enforcement officials agreed, that cultural and religious awareness is important for police officers

who regularly interact with diverse residents, such

as Muslims, Arabs, Sikhs or others perceived as

sharing a common religious or ethnic background

with terrorists.27 An informed community policing

officer must have a basic knowledge of and respect

27 For more information about Arab American experiences see the document published by the Arab American Institute

(2002), Healing the Nation: The Arab American Experience After September 11. At the time of this writing, the publication could be found at www.aaiusa.org/PDF/healing_the_nation.pdf.
for the religious beliefs and the cultural practices of

the people they serve. When law enforcement

demonstrates an awareness of cultural and religious sensitivities and traditions, they can engender a bond of trust with those communities.

Diverse communities (especially those most

affected by the September 11 backlash) may well

be willing to work with investigators who they

believe will respect their privacy, their traditions

and act responsibly to keep terrorists out of their

communities. 

To further law enforcement’s understanding, executive session participants briefly

explained some religious distinctions and detailed

why no single religion should be identified with

terrorism. And while the discussion made clear

the offensiveness and fruitlessness of trying to

associate terrorists with an entire religious group,

it also elucidated the need for greater awareness

about how police efforts will be perceived by those

whose religious or cultural belief systems differ

from the majority of Americans.

Executive session participants recommended that law enforcement officers be aware of,

and in some cases participate in, community rallies, religious services or gatherings, and unity celebrations to gain a better understanding of other

religions and cultures. These events give the community constructive ways to express concerns and

provide an opportunity for officers to gain a better

appreciation for the culture. Participants urged

officers to go to community gatherings to reach

out to individuals who might not initiate contact

with law enforcement. They might even visit

stores that draw diverse groups and participate in

after-school activities attended by ethnically

diverse youth groups. Officers could also work

with religious leaders by providing them with

information on law enforcement roles and responsibilities to incorporate into sermons that educate

community members about potential partnerships

and opportunities to support one another’s efforts. 

Participants discussed how law enforcement should be respectful, sensitive, and appreciate the historical, cultural and life experiences of

diverse communities. Police knowledge of individuals’ cultures and customs can offer additional

investigative opportunities and improve relations.

And while it is impossible to have extensive

knowledge of every ethnic or religious group in a

jurisdiction, executive session participants

believed that law enforcement agencies should

attempt to understand the basic, important cultural sensitivities of diverse groups represented in

their communities. 

The following examples were obtained

from viewing the Chicago Police Department’s

“Law enforcement has to be

sensitive to the cultural, social

and religious values of diverse

communities.”

—Community Leader

PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

26

“Not every officer can know

every nuance of every culture in

the community, but obtaining a

better understanding of cultural

differences ... will help an officer

deliver police services in these

communities.”

—Chief Law Enforcement

Executive
videotapes and from executive session participants.28 While generalizations will not always

apply, they are a starting point for law enforcement

professionals as they learn about different religions

and cultures:

Entering and Protecting Mosques 

Members of law enforcement should respect

mosques and other prayer houses. Officers should

usually enter a mosque without their shoes.

Participants recommended that officers find an

adequate place to put their shoes or follow the

mosque host’s instructions. In mosques, women

are often asked to cover their heads and to dress

modestly, whereas men should wear long pants

and shirts. Officers should know that women and

men are separated for prayer in a mosque. 

Sacred Days

Officers should avoid contacting Arabs and

Muslims on religious holidays or during prayers—

and should be sensitive about not scheduling

interviews during their sacred days. Devout

Muslims may pray five times each day and attend

weekly communal prayer at noon on Fridays. Even

seemingly small gestures, such as police being

aware of parking problems around communal

praying locations, will demonstrate law enforcement’s sensitivities to the communities’ concerns.

Women 

Participants stressed that law enforcement needs

to be sensitive to how they approach, interact,

interview and search women. Arab women as well

as women from south-Asian countries like India,

Pakistan and Malaysia may wear garments that

cover their heads and sometimes even their faces

as a religious practice, not simply a cultural one.

These coverings are rooted in Islamic requirements of modesty for both men and women, and

specifically the teachings about hijab, a term that

covers both the practice of, and the garment used

for, covering women’s hair. Muslim women do not

universally wear such coverings, and often the

practice varies by region and other factors.

Participants commented that male law enforcement officers should have little, if any, eye contact

with Arab girls and women when conducting

interviews or conversing in general. Law enforcement should encourage female officers to interview women. When possible, male family members should be included in conversations. 

Entering the Home

Participants again cautioned that law enforcement

officers should not enter an Arab or Muslim house

uninvited for a routine interview if a man is not

present. Officers should avoid slouching in chairs

or baring the soles of their shoes to their hosts, as

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

27

28 The Chicago Police Department produced five videos and two public service announcements. The project was supported

by a Cooperative Agreement No. 2000-DD-VX-K002 awarded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance. The first video is on airport security. Because of the TSA agreement, it is critical for local law enforcement to understand all religions and cultures

in handling airport security. The Chicago Police Department produced separate videos on four different religions (Sikhism,

Islamism, Judaism and Buddhism) to educate and inform both local law enforcement and community members about these

religions. The videos assist police and community members to be more cognizant of cultural and religious differences. The

Chicago Police Department also produced two Public Service Announcements (PSAs): 1) A pledge against biased-based policing, and 2) A pledge against hate crime.

For more information on cultural and religious issues that law enforcement can use as a resource, see 100

Questions and Answers about Arab Americans: A Journalist’s Guide that can be found at

www.freep.com/jobspage/arabs/index.htm.
this is a sign of disrespect. Participants noted that

many Arabs and Muslims have been raised to

make their homes comfortable for visitors—so officers conducting interviews may be offered tea or

coffee and even generous amounts of food as a

means of showing hospitality to guests in their

home.

Conducting Interviews

Officers should conduct interviews in private,

allowing the individual interviewed to explain a

perceived contradiction or omission without

embarrassment. Participants suggested that investigators raise questions or request clarifications,

but should allow the interviewee to retain his or

her dignity. Participants expressed their belief that

most individuals would respond to well-mannered

and professional investigators. During interviews,

law enforcement officers should try to learn more

about the culture that can further enhance communication and prepare them for other interviews

or encounters with ethnically diverse community

members. They may even ask the individuals they

have interviewed for suggestions on how they

might improve the way they approach others, and

what made them feel more at ease. 

Greetings

Officers should attempt to use the appropriate

greetings when meeting and interacting with people from different cultures. Many ethnically

diverse residents grew up in America, and do not

require a special greeting. Participants stated, however, that law enforcement should be cautious and

watch for cues for the appropriate greeting (e.g.,

returning a nod of acknowledgment). They also

noted that the nonverbal cues used in most successful interviews, such as smiling at those being

interviewed, could help relieve tensions. They

note, however, that shaking hands may be inappropriate if the officer does not know the man or

woman. 

While these examples do not provide an

exhaustive review of the sensitivities that law

enforcement should show to improve partnerships

with community members, they demonstrate the

range of issues that officers might need to

consider and their significance to diverse community members. 

The Role of the Executive 

Diverse community leaders and law enforcement

executives must commit to the same goals: to rid

communities of terrorists and hate crimes, and to

address more traditional crime and disorder problems together. Combating terrorism and protecting

all individuals’ civil liberties demands open dialogue and collaboration between community and

law enforcement leaders at every level of government. Leadership is essential to starting a meaningful discussion as well as building trust between

the community and law enforcement.

Participants pointed out that these relationships must be formed during nonstressful or

noncrisis periods, allowing both community members and law enforcement representatives ample

time to work together before a terrorist incident,

hate crime or other tragedy occurs. Session partic-

“Law enforcement leaders do

not know how valuable community leaders are to their policing

efforts.”

—Community Leader 

PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

28
ipants who had strong communication structures

in place before September 11th reported they were

better prepared to deal with issues surrounding

backlash violence, and were able to better protect

and secure their neighborhoods. Strong relationships between law enforcement and the community can help law enforcement address heightened

tension and racial conflict, civil disturbances, and

even riots. 

Chief executives from the session encouraged their fellow law enforcement leaders to open

lines of communication with their diverse community members if they have not done so already.

This can be accomplished through individual

meetings between community leaders and law

enforcement executives, or through the formation

of collaborative working groups representing

diverse community leaders; civil rights organizations; and members of local, state and federal law

enforcement. Executive session participants discussed how some leaders’ personalities can be a

determining factor in the extent to which they are

able to build and sustain relationships, but that

every executive can succeed in this area. There

must, however, be a strong institutional commitment and structure; otherwise, law enforcement

personnel turnover, changes in community leadership, and crises can erode these relationships. 

Leaders must be perceived as acting

responsibly, by the public as well as within their

agency, or they will lose credibility and trust. For

example, law enforcement executives and political

officials must partner with ethnically and/or religiously diverse community leaders to condemn

acts of terrorism and backlash violence, and to

reassure the affected communities that every effort

will be made to protect them. Law enforcement

leaders must then ensure that their agencies are

upholding all laws, especially civil and human

rights laws that protect individuals—regardless of

immigration status—from victimization and mistreatment. Community leaders standing with

police executives should send a signal through the

ranks that such partnerships and cooperative

efforts are valued by the law enforcement agency

and that they should be reflected in officers’ daily

interactions and outreach with the community.

Forums or Councils—The Road

to Cooperation

Multicultural forums and councils are used in several communities to open a dialogue between law

enforcement officials and community members. A

forum or council can provide a special opportunity

for discussing current problems, concerns and

frustrations, as well as identifying which law

enforcement strategies for delivering police services have proven to be effective. Community members can voice their anxiety about issues such as

how police conduct interviews and interrogations,

hate crimes, terrorist acts, and even fears of law

enforcement engaging in racial profiling or demonstrating cultural insensitivity. In turn, law enforcement can stress the importance of community

support and partnerships; provide information on

new federal laws that authorize local law enforce-

“Building relationships within

the community would be more

effective for combating terrorism than any other single law

enforcement effort.” 

—Chief Law Enforcement

Executive

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

29
29 See, e.g., Developing a Partnership to Improve Race Relations: Kansas City Together (A Final Project Report for the Kansas

City, Missouri Police Department), June 2003. Police Executive Research Forum: Washington, DC (available at

www.kcpd.org). The KCPD also made use of The Busy Citizen’s Discussion Guide: Facing the Challenge of Racism and Race

Relations, 3d edition, published by Study Circles Resource Center, a project of the Topsfield Foundation. Information about

this guide and others can be obtained at the time of this writing by calling 860.928.2616 or at www.kcpd.org/images/informant/KCTogether.pdf.

30 The Community Policing Consortium conducts community engagement sessions in 9-hour forums (usually convened

over one-and-a-half days) to build consensus and collaboration between both community and law enforcement stakeholders. Local law enforcement chief executives who have made a commitment to community policing and engagement can

employ the Consortium’s action plan, which is used to conclude their sessions by setting out a problem-solving process.

More information can be found at www.communitypolicing.org/training.html. Also, a free service that can assist in creating a forum in response to a community conflict is the U.S. Department of Justice’s Community Relations Service (CRS).

CRS has nearly forty years of experience in mediation and conciliation services, with extensive experience establishing local

law enforcement and minority community forums to communicate disputes and resolve tensions. More information can

be found at www.usdoj.gov/crs.

31 For an additional example that reflects a police agency’s efforts to assess and support the resolution of race-related issues

within the police department, as well as to use officers with diverse backgrounds as resources, see the Kansas City Together

report cited in footnote 29.

ment involvement in intelligence gathering or

other counterterrorism efforts; an explanation and

clarification of police roles and responsibilities;

and their policies and procedures for delivering

police services. Executives must anticipate and

come prepared with constructive plans to address

tough questions from all members of the forum

and to encourage joint problem solving. 

Executive session participants discussed

how successful forums have important commonalities:

Local and federal law enforcement

executives, with support from community leaders, initiate and lead the

forums. 

The forums are inclusive—representatives of diverse groups attend and

participate fully.

The forums focus on improving

understanding of community concerns and law enforcement actions.

The forums encourage a candid discussion of how to resolve problems

and concerns.

Forums use a problem-solving model

to jointly identify problems, analyze

them, develop a comprehensive

shared response plan, assign implementation tasks and then evaluate the

overall effort.29

Executive session participants recommended that each local law enforcement agency

create a forum or council.30 Below are two illustrations from Chicago, Illinois and Lowell,

Massachusetts that demonstrate how these

forums can enhance communications and build

trust between law enforcement and diverse

communities. (See Appendix C for contact information for the forum and council at the time of

this writing.)31

PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

30

 



 

 

 
CHICAGO’S MULTI-CULTURAL FORUM

by Deputy Superintendent Barbara B. McDonald,

Chicago Police Department

As former Chicago Police Superintendent Terry G. Hillard embarked on his third year as the city’s top

cop, he reflected on the progress made during his tenure. The Chicago Alternative Policing Strategy

(CAPS) was recognized as one of the most successful in the country, crime continued a near decadelong decline, and most police department members were demonstrating compassion and courage in

their day-to-day functions. Although the department was on the right track, like the head of any good

customer-oriented business, Hillard believed it was his job to ensure not just good service, but the best

service possible. He also knew that to do this, he would need the full support and trust of his customers—the community. While relations with the community were generally good, tensions still existed between police and the members of some of Chicago’s minority communities. 

For a better understanding of the problem, Hillard decided to consult with PERF, and with their

assistance, initiated a day-long forum on race relations in 2001. This first meeting was the start of

many such forums held throughout the city. Several themes emerged from these discussions: Key was

the message that the department needed to balance effective crime control strategies with an equal

appreciation for how citizens are treated. More precisely, the reduction of crime cannot be accomplished at the expense of community partners’ trust. 

The department’s actions didn’t stop with just meeting and talking; it set out to address each

of the concerns raised at the forums. As a first move, Hillard signed into department policy a specific

directive on bias-based policing. Shortly thereafter, the Superintendent and his entire command staff

publicly signed a pledge to all members of the department and to the citizens of Chicago to uphold the

principles of bias-free policing. Additionally, the department produced two Public Service

Announcements (PSAs) declaring zero-tolerance for racial profiling and hate crimes, as well as a series

of police training videos to provide officers with tactics to ensure maximum effectiveness while emphasizing courtesy and a professional demeanor.

Then came September 11th, a day that America will never forget. While the events of that day

united many, unfortunately it also brought out the worst in some. Prior to that time, Chicago was

enjoying a steady decline in reported hate crimes. After the terrorist acts, however, attacks against

Arabs, Muslims, Sikhs and other people of Southeast Asian descent increased. This served as a call to

action for the Chicago Police Department. 

Extending the concept of the forums to communities with special concerns as a result of

September 11th, PERF’s executive director was again called upon to facilitate a dialogue between police

and these concerned communities. A COPS-funded project (the Value-Based Initiative) supports a

group, now known as the Multi-Cultural Forum, comprised of long-time American citizens of MiddleVOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

31
Eastern and Southeast Asian descent as well as recent immigrants, professionals and business people

from these communities, representatives from numerous religious affiliations, and community advocates. Department members, from beat officers to the Superintendent’s command staff also participated. The focus has been twofold: 1) What can the department do to better serve these communities?

and 2) What should officers know about the customs and practices of our diverse communities to provide effective, responsive and respectful service? 

This forum inspired another series of police officer training videos in which community members are the faces and voices of the communities’ concerns. Officers are given an intimate glimpse into

their lives as they explain their cultures, religions and customs, emphasizing those areas in which

police need to show special sensitivity. To date, police agency materials on the religion and associated

customs of Islam, Judaism and Sikhism have been explored and educational resources on Buddhism

and Hinduism are the subject of ongoing efforts. In addition, a video was also produced specifically

focusing on the issue of airport security and its impact on people of different cultures and religions.

Routinely viewed over the department’s Intranet by all department members, the information provides

officers with the tools to build and strengthen police-community relationships through a better understanding of the people they serve. 

PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

32
Race Relations Council, Lowell

(Mass.) Police Department

In August 2000, the Lowell Police Department

received a grant from the Office of Community

Oriented Policing Services (COPS) titled “Police as

Problem Solvers/Peacemakers.” This grant helped

Superintendent Edward F. Davis, III and the

department form a Race Relations Council,32 a

committee composed of law enforcement representatives and members of Lowell’s diverse community, which meets monthly to discuss such

issues as intergenerational issues, gangs, racial

profiling and cultural differences. Joined by the

police department’s superintendent, police officers

and community members discuss improving relations with one another, furthering communication, and understanding the community’s many

cultures. 

The ideas generated from these council

meetings are used to provide a foundation for

future trainings at the Lowell Police Department’s

Training Institute, which currently trains more

than 1,100 officers annually from communities

throughout Massachusetts. As of 2003, the

department has also received two training and

technical assistance grants from the COPS Office

to train, educate and support 82 police and sheriffs

agencies from across the United States on improving police-community relations.

Recommendations made by the Race

Relations Council over the past year to improve

police-community partnerships include the following:

Improving an understanding of community perspectives, with presentations from various council members;

Detailing logistics for creating Race

Relations Council initiatives, including the planning process, potential

barriers, philosophy and resources;

Engaging in a discussion about the

partnerships needed for any race relations effort to succeed;

Conducting a case study of Lowell’s

Race Relations Council that explores

its activities and initiatives;

Developing a resource guide that

includes text references and websites

for topics such as cooperation and collaboration, group facilitation, policing

issues and community relations; and

Evaluating the Lowell Police

Department training program.

A critical component of this initiative is

the evaluation being conducted by Jack Greene

and Jack McDevitt of Northeastern University.

The evaluators have already identified the Race

Relations Council as a model for replication, and

their project products will include a draft curricu-

“The biggest defense against

terrorism is to show we are

united as a community, regardless of culture.”

—FBI SAC 

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

33

 

 

 

 

 

 

32 The description of the Race Relations Council is based, in part, on information found at www.lowellpolice.com/rrelations/RR_Home.htm.
lum and resource guide that can be used by police

agencies nationwide.

Preventing Hate Crimes in

Vulnerable Communities

Participants discussed numerous ways to identify

and protect vulnerable communities. Perhaps one

of the greatest tools a community can employ is a

public education campaign—particularly one in

which religious and ethnic leaders stand with law

enforcement leaders to educate all citizens in a

jurisdiction about the tremendous damage discrimination and hate crimes can have on a community. Dispelling myths and addressing misplaced fears about entire religious and ethnic

groups can be an essential first step in preventing

hate crimes.

In addition, local law enforcement must

work with the community to distinguish individuals, properties and groups at risk of potential hate

crimes—and collaboratively develop prevention

and response strategies. Potential targets for bias

crimes include schools, places of worship, work

sites and public places where targeted ethnic

minorities are known to frequent or assemble.

Identifying these and other high-risk areas enables

police agencies to assess environmental design factors and other security issues, and to respond

quickly to any outbreaks of violence or property

damage should prevention efforts fail. 

The chief law enforcement professionals

participating in the executive session also discussed having a contingency plan to deploy officers

to potential target areas in the event of a terrorist

incident. Session participants recommended saturation patrols in these areas in times of conflict or

if there is an expectation of a future terrorist

attack. A police presence in vulnerable areas would

reduce residents’ fears and potentially deter hate

crimes. Participants also recommended that officers be familiar with a deployment plan that would

expedite responses to a hate crime if these protective measures are unsuccessful. 

Law enforcement agencies should try to

assess the basis and severity of tensions felt by

ethnically diverse residents and workers before a

terrorist-related incident occurs. Telephone calls,

in-person meetings, forums with leaders from vulnerable communities, and other outreach efforts

are essential to discuss problems and concerns.

Community policing officers are an essential

resource in identifying susceptible groups or properties and are the best means for gaining feedback.

In addition to routine community policing tasks,

law enforcement agencies can locate staff substations in critical areas, hire liaison officers with special training, or create dedicated units to help identify potential problems, prevent incidents and

investigate hate crimes.

Hate crimes tend to garner widespread

media coverage that can exacerbate already emotionally charged situations, so the potential for law

enforcement-community relations to rapidly deteriorate remains high. The media provides a platform for bringing concerns and problems to

national attention—an opportunity that is hard to

pass up for both community advocates and police

agencies defending their practices—even when

steady progress is being made on the local level to

resolve them. To avoid having an event polarize

the views of those who have been working together on common solutions, a media plan and other

contingencies should be put in place before a critical incident. With emotions running high, executive session participants reiterated the importance

PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

34
ONE COMMUNITY’S RESPONSE

by Chief Gil Kerlikowske, Seattle Police Department

In Seattle, like most cities across this nation, the aftershocks of the September 11, 2001 terrorist

attacks required quick and innovative responses. Within just a few days of the strikes, we began to see

a backlash against those in the community that looked like the images of those responsible for the

events. The most serious incident occurred at one of our local mosques. An individual attempted to

set the mosque on fire from outside the building. When he was confronted, he raised a handgun and

shot at several people. After a short vehicle pursuit, the suspect was arrested. I held a press conference

at the scene to reassure the community that our places of worship and the people who attended services there would be protected. Immediately following the incident at the mosque, precincts identified

sites where the vulnerable communities gathered—be they religious, social or educational facilities.

Patrol officers were instructed to be on high alert and to check these locations throughout their shifts.

For several weeks following the attempted arson and shooting, patrol vehicles made routine area checks

and provided a visible presence when people were coming and going from the mosque.

At a meeting after the press conference, the Arab and Muslim community described untold

incidents of people being questioned, harassed, assaulted and intimidated because they were perceived

as “the enemy.” They relayed stories of people being afraid to leave their homes or send their children

to school. They asked for assistance in restoring a sense of safety to their community. The Seattle

Police Department began working with the group to identify issues of concern and develop strategies

to assist them. 

Fear of being singled out and either embarrassed or physically attacked were issues that were

keeping members of the Arab and Muslim communities from moving freely throughout the city.

Rumor, as well as exaggerated stories, contributed to this fear. There were also concerns that incidents

were going unreported. The Arab and Muslim communities had little contact with police prior to

September 11th. Seattle also posed some unique challenges because of its high number of immigrant

populations, including East African, South Asian and Iraqi.

Because many in the community were new to this country, the language barrier became one of

the first hurdles. The department established a hotline that was staffed by community members who

could communicate with individuals in their primary language. To assist them in this role, the department provided training to various groups on the laws and using 9-1-1, with an emphasis on how to

indicate the need for a translator, how to access resources, and how to receive follow-up services. The

department also did extensive outreach to the communities listed above.

I sent a clear and direct message to every employee of the department emphasizing the responsibility of law enforcement to ensure that the civil rights of everyone in the community would be proVOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

35
tected. I expected that the utmost care would be taken when responding to calls of bias crimes, and this

was communicated from the bottom to the top of the organization.

Since September 11th, the department has had several opportunities to facilitate meetings

between these immigrant communities and local and federal officials. We have worked closely with the

FBI, the U.S. Attorney General as well as others in local law enforcement to improve communication.

The department has also learned many important lessons about various cultures and customs that

could potentially influence police officers’ interactions with those community members. The increased

level of trust between the community and the department is the most lasting outcome of this effort.

The community has voiced their support for the department and their willingness to work with the

police to address issues as they emerge. They continue to participate in an ongoing dialogue regarding

the shared responsibility involved in ensuring that the civil rights of all people are respected and protected in the City of Seattle. 

PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

36
of all officers being trained to rapidly deploy to vulnerable areas to prevent the situation from escalating. In cities without preexisting relationships

with vulnerable communities, police found themselves reacting to backlash violence and deploying

officers to these at-risk communities only after

hate-crime incidents had occurred. 

Immediately after September 11th, many

other law enforcement agencies dispersed officers

to protect mosques during prayer services as well.

For example, the Seattle Police Department

assigned officers to protect mosques during religious ceremonies, and community members

assisted officers in understanding prayer services

and other religious activities so they could provide

better security. Held at the front steps of a mosque

in the week following September 11th, the Seattle

Police Department and the FBI Seattle Field Office

conducted a meeting and press conference to show

unity—efforts that included the governor, mayor,

police chief, and community leaders from the

Islamic, Jewish and Christian communities. 

Resources for Investigating

Hate Crimes

The backlash against Arabs and Muslims is part of

a larger, longstanding problem of how police prevent, identify, respond to, investigate and report

hate crimes in the United States. While the current focus is on violence against Muslims and

Arabs, the strengths and weaknesses of law

enforcement’s response to all hate crimes is under

renewed scrutiny. Executive session participants

discussed the importance of local law enforcement

agencies developing policies and protocols specific

to their localities. 

Executive session participants recommended that local law enforcement agencies

expand hate crime units or response teams. In

larger cities, an appointed investigator or a hate

crimes unit should be assigned the responsibility

of investigating any incident where there is evidence that the motive falls within the definition of

a hate crime.33 However, participants recognized

that many law enforcement agencies do not have

the in-house resources available or a documented

caseload sufficiently large enough to support a

solely dedicated unit, appointment of a special bias

crime investigator, or to comprehensively train all

officers on how to identify and investigate bias

crimes. In small agencies, at least one officer needs

to be trained to ensure that someone has the

expertise to properly identify and investigate these

crimes. These specialists should ultimately work

to improve the ability of other officers to recognize

the sometimes subtle indicators of hate crimes.

Through federal grants, many local law enforcement agencies are able to provide hate crimes prevention training and secure support in investigating and prosecuting hate crimes.34 

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

37

33 Since 1994, the federal government has defined a hate crime as “a crime in which the defendant selects a victim, or in the

case of a property crime, the property that is the object of the crime, because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion,

national origin, ethnicity, gender, disability, or sexual orientation of any person.” 28 U.S.C. § 994, as amended. 

34 Federal resources are available under grant programs from the Office of Justice Programs of the Department Justice prescribed by the Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 1999 to prevent, investigate and prosecute hate crimes. At the time of this

writing, the pending legislation Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act of 2003 would provide for further grants in addition to the ability to request technical, forensic, prosecutorial, or any other form of assistance in the criminal investigation

or prosecution of any crime that constitutes criminal violence, including but not limited to hate crimes. 
Executive session participants also discussed the importance of developing memoranda

of understanding (MOUs) with other agencies or

regional task forces as an effective way of sharing

information and combining resources to address

hate crimes. The MOUs should collectively integrate all local and federal agencies, district and city

attorneys, civil rights organizations, communitybased organizations, prosecutors, educational

institutions, and others that could offer resources

to address hate crimes and promote positive relationships between minority communities and law

enforcement. 

Existing guidelines, programs and policies

from local law enforcement agencies and organizations can be used as models for those agencies that

have not yet developed them (see Appendix D).

Law enforcement agencies should tailor these

approaches to meet the unique needs of their jurisdictions. Executive session participants also discussed practical guidelines to prevent and investigate hate crimes, including the following: 

Government officials, law enforcement chief executives and community

leaders should publicly state and periodically reiterate that bias-motivated

violence will not be tolerated and that

those who engage in it will be prosecuted. 

Government officials, including law

enforcement executives, must make

immediate statements and release

public service announcements condemning discrimination and backlash

violence after an event that may trigger hate crimes.

Local law enforcement must gather

information on areas of the city especially vulnerable to backlash violence

and property damage.

Local law enforcement must create a

response plan to deploy officers to bias

crime-vulnerable areas and show a

heightened presence in the aftermath

of a trigger-incident or such a crime. 

Every law enforcement agency should

have one or more officers trained to

identify and investigate bias-motivated crimes. 

Law enforcement agencies should educate the public on where, to whom,

and how to report hate crimes. 

Protecting Students and

Educational Institutions

The safety of the nation’s campuses and schools

depend on students being willing to report crimes

and suspicious activity, which requires a certain

“It is important to convey to

immigrant community leaders

that meeting with law enforcement officials is not always

about gathering intelligence

and information, but about

strengthening the community

as a whole.”

—Chief Law Enforcement

Executive

PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

38

 

 

 

 

 

 
level of trust and understanding of law enforcement’s role in policing in a terrorism context.

Participants suggested that campus police and

security departments must ensure that their policies and strategies go beyond routine crime

enforcement to address preventing and responding

to hate crimes and terrorist incidents. Participants

suggested campus police should continue building

partnerships with student organizations, religious

groups, teachers and campus organizations, as

well as strengthening their community policing

and problem-solving approaches to identify and

resolve concerns and problems.

Law enforcement can go to prayer houses

as a place to begin building relationships with students of all religions and ethnicities. After

September 11th, many campus police officers

immediately reached out to Arab and Muslim students who often are separated from the main campus and sometimes isolated from the rest of the

city. Campus police should coordinate with the

city’s community policing officers to ensure law

enforcement is deployed to these areas for their

students’ protection. Law enforcement, both on

and off campus, should support and build relationships with these students.

Participants also suggested campus police

should reach out to students, their parents and the

media to educate them on both the law enforcement role on campus and the resources available

to students. Participants from universities recommended creating committees representing international students, law enforcement and teachers as

well as crisis management teams comprised of

campus police, the Dean of Foreign Students, and

associations available to the school’s students 24

hours a day.

Participants stressed that campus law

enforcement should draw on university resources

to increase their understanding of immigrant

groups. Many campuses have students and faculty

who can provide information and courses on language, religion, culture and history—significant

assets for learning more about the students they

serve and protect. 

Session attendees recommended that

campus police agencies enter into mutual aid

agreements with local, state and federal law

enforcement agencies. These agreements facilitate

resource-sharing during a crisis and coordinate

appropriate operations. For example, participants

recommended protocols that encourage campus

police officers to accompany local, state and federal authorities who are interviewing students, faculty or staff. Campus police have closer ties to the

student community and can reduce students’ fear

and open lines of communication.

The Community as a Source of

Information 

Executive session participants discussed how residents can provide information to local, state and

federal law enforcement—with significant discourse about the importance of distinguishing

between information and intelligence. A number

of the community leaders expressed their uncertainties about what information to provide law

enforcement. Many participants believed that

community members have the perception that law

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

39

“We have too much to lose to

have terrorists come from within our community.”

—Community Leader
enforcement wants only sophisticated information

that might include, for example, names, dates and

details about specific terrorist threats. Law

enforcement leaders emphasized that they do not

expect residents to analyze or verify the accuracy of

information. Rather, police value residents’ information about people or events that seem out of

place or unusual. It is law enforcement’s job to sift

through that information looking for patterns or

clues, and synthesize it. Participants did note that

officers must understand that residents may be

reluctant to provide such information because they

fear retaliation, and this concern must be

addressed.

And contrary to some perceptions, community leaders at the session cautioned that terrorists do not necessarily live in or interact with

their ethnically diverse communities. As an example, community leaders explained how the

September 11 terrorists lived in predominantly

white neighborhoods and not in ethnic communities. Community leaders stressed that their flourishing immigrant communities have too much to

lose to allow a terrorist to live and work among

them. 

Local law enforcement leaders used this

opportunity to express some of their frustrations

about not always knowing what to look for, or

what to do with the information they receive and

collect from the community. This frustration represents the relatively new role of local law enforcement in intelligence gathering. As local law

enforcement agencies continue to refine their

intelligence functions, they must redouble their

efforts to improve local-federal methods for information sharing. They also need to provide additional and ongoing training to patrol officers and

investigators on the signs and indicators of possible terrorist activity.35

Some executive session participants stated

that between the first wave of interviews after

September 11th and the beginning of the war in

Iraq, law enforcement displayed a greater sensitivity towards immigrant concerns. For example, in

some cities just prior to the war, the FBI educated

residents about its pending initiative to interview

many ethnically diverse community members.

This helped alleviate the public’s fear about the

interviews and led some residents to volunteer to

be interviewed. Executive session participants

agreed that informing the community of law

enforcement actions, when possible, is essential to

developing trust and collecting useful information

from interviews. 

Coordination Between Local

and Federal Agencies

Executive session participants discussed their own

jurisdiction’s experience with communicating and

coordinating with their local or federal colleagues.

A local law enforcement chief executive related an

incident in which INS agents searched several

homes without informing the local police of the

operation. From these federal efforts, an individual

was deported who was helping local police identify

crime suspects and was influential in building better community relations with law enforcement.

PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

40

35 For more detailed information about federal-local partnerships and information sharing, see the following section of this

report and the first white paper, Protecting Your Community From Terrorism: Strategies for Local Law Enforcement, Volume

1: Local-Federal Partnerships available for free at www.policeforum.org. Please sign in as a PERF member or enter as a guest

and click on the highlighted topic “Terrorism Preparedness.”
LOCALS AID IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT (ICE)

IN FLORIDA’S COUNTERTERRORISM EFFORT

by Assistant Commissioner James D. Sewell,

Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE)

While information sharing and effective partnerships are not new concepts, the events of September

11, 2001 heightened the awareness and urgency of finding ways to improve communications throughout all levels of law enforcement and intelligence organizations. In July 2002, the enforcement arm of

the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), now part of the Bureau of Immigration and

Customs Enforcement (ICE), entered into a first-of-its-kind partnership (a federal memorandum of

understanding between ICE, the State of Florida, and FDLE) with state and local law enforcement to

help improve sharing of critical information and to provide a cadre of officers dedicated to identifying

and investigating potential terrorist threats in Florida. State and local law enforcement agencies selected 35 agents and investigators to participate in a one-year pilot program. After attending a comprehensive six-week ICE training curriculum focusing largely on the application of immigration law and

policies, these officers were authorized and prepared to carry out the responsibilities and mandates of

ICE. Assigned full time to one of Florida’s seven Regional Domestic Security Task Forces (RDSTFs),

these personnel are empowered to use their new federal authority only under the joint direction of the

regional ICE supervisor and the RDSTF, and in the context of their counterterrorism assignments.

They do not engage in general immigration enforcement actions.

Before launching this pilot program, law enforcement made a significant effort to explain the

project’s purpose and reassure members of Florida’s diverse ethnic population that its efforts would be

focused on domestic homeland security efforts and not on sweeps looking for just any immigration violators. An informational brochure was published in four languages (English, Spanish, Creole and

Arabic) and distributed throughout the state. Public information teams, with representatives from the

Office of the Governor as well as the FDLE and other state and local agencies, met with community

leaders in all seven of Florida’s domestic security regions to educate them about the pilot effort and

address any questions or concerns they might have. Although no complaints were received during the

12-month pilot period, a mechanism for community feedback was established through the RDSTFs to

ensure that any questions or complaints from the public could be promptly addressed.

In February 2003, a review of the pilot concluded that while there are areas for improvement—

primarily in data accessibility—the pilot to date had been an overall success. The 35 agents/investigators provided every region an avenue for rapidly contributing to and accessing vital ICE information.

Additionally, they provided every region an ICE presence dedicated to counterterrorism enforcement.

The limited staffing resources available to ICE could not have produced this kind of result without the

force-multiplier of trained state and local officers. Personnel assigned to this pilot project assisted with

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

41
interviewing and investigating federal ICE targets, locating suspects linked to terrorist organizations,

and identifying individuals thought to be a security risk at Florida’s airports and seaports. Their collective efforts resulted in 93 arrests and more than 2,500 investigative follow-ups. Several long-term

criminal investigations remain ongoing. 

ICE, FDLE and local law enforcement plan to continue this program—training additional state

and local personnel as needed. The essential public outreach component will continue and scheduled

periodic reviews will remain in place for the duration of the program to ensure its integrity and its benefit to the overall counterterrorism mission.

PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

42
Residents often do not distinguish between local,

state and federal policing efforts, and in this

instance, they blamed local law enforcement for

the loss of their leader. The local agency spent time

defending federal actions, but also explained that

they were not privy to advance information about

the effort.

Participants agreed that information must

flow in both directions between local and federal

agencies to effectively deliver police services in ethnically diverse communities. To prevent future terrorist attempts, local and federal law enforcement

agencies must exchange information and intelligence, as well as their plans for conducting investigations in immigrant communities. Then, they

must work collaboratively to build upon one

another’s strengths. Session participants cited the

need for more integrated problem-solving efforts

that take into account minimizing overlapping

roles and responsibilities, as well as making the

most of existing expertise and relationships. 

Participants felt that federal law enforcement is unfamiliar with the knowledge base that

local law enforcement has developed over the last

decade in employing community-policing strategies. They recommended that federal agencies

contact local law enforcement before conducting

interviews or searches whenever possible—allowing local agencies to identify any efforts that would

undermine their ongoing work with the community and to provide information that may be critical

to an investigation. The benefits of this kind of

notice and coordination are reflected in some

recent cases in which ICE has delayed immigration enforcement until the FBI completed needed

interviews. In another example, a participant stated that the FBI regularly informs local law enforcement of their terrorism-fighting efforts in his jurisdiction. The community leaders also reported positive interactions with federal agencies when local

law enforcement officers are involved in the federal operation—as they have greater contact and

trust with community members and can effectively preempt rumors and misconceptions about an

effort. 

Secure Identification Cards as a

Resource for Law Enforcement

Executive session participants discussed the use of

identification cards issued by the Mexican

Consulate to its citizens traveling to the United

States. This identification card, Matricula

Consular, resembles a driver’s license and displays

a picture, name and the U.S. address where the

holder will temporarily reside. Mexican immigrants in the United States use the card, whether

or not they are in the country legally. While participants focused on the Mexican identification

card for discussion purposes, they recognized that

the issues often relate to other countries that issue

similar cards. 

Immigrants use the identification card to

establish bank accounts, access government services and even obtain driver’s licenses in some

states, especially when they are ineligible to

receive a U.S. identification card. Executive ses-

“Law enforcement and community members all learned after

September 11th that resolving a

misunderstanding and clearly

communicating their intentions

will better accomplish the mission of combating terrorism.”

—FBI SAC

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

43
sion participants discussed how these Mexican

Consular identification cards have eased access to

financial and local government services for immigrants, which limit their chances of being victims

of financial crimes. These identification cards help

low-income Mexican workers in the United States

reduce their vulnerability to robberies by allowing

them to open bank accounts instead of keeping

their savings in cash. 

Nevertheless, the American Association of

Motor Vehicle Administrators does not recommend

its participating states accept these cards for the

purposes of receiving a license. Yet, some states

accept the card instead of a driver’s license for certain purposes, such as those states that permit the

card to be used to get an Individual Taxpayer

Identification Number (ITIN) to serve as a substitute for a Social Security number. This enables card

holders to contribute to and benefit from the social

security system. Note, however, it is likely that

those individuals who receive an ITIN, but do not

then file taxes, are simply using it as official U.S.

government identification for banking, government

services and driver’s licenses in selected states.

Despite some agencies’ reluctance to

accept the foreign government cards, local law

enforcement participants discussed how the card

helps identify both legal and illegal immigrants

who are in need of services, as well as for their

investigations—and in the end some identification

is better than none. Some local law enforcement

representatives commented that they often do not

make arrests for minor infractions committed by

individuals who only have a foreign government

identification card because the card does not

provide reliable information to conduct background checks, fingerprints and criminal database

searches.

Executive session participants discussed

how agencies, especially those enforcing immigration laws, are concerned that accepting these types

of consular identification cards as a substitute for

U.S.-issued identification has serious implications

for American immigration policy and homeland

security. Session participants discussed how the

Mexican Consulate has been working to address

standardized issuance procedures, uniform security

features, and a secure database for verification purposes to improve protection for the cards. Though

a Mexican birth certificate is now required as the

source document, some executive session participants questioned if this is enforced, or if there is

crosschecking against computerized records in

Mexico to ensure the verified existence of only one

person, one identity and one card. 

Executive session participants discussed

the need for local law enforcement agencies to learn

more about the foreign government consular identification cards and the prevalence of their use in

the multicultural communities they serve.

Participants suggested that local law enforcement

agencies should develop a concrete policy either

accepting or rejecting the cards as identification

and disseminating that information to the respective communities. 

Agencies are encouraged to contact the

Mexican Consulate or agencies such as the Central

Texas Immigrant Worker Rights Center, as

resources for educating immigrants on their rights

in the United States and how to obtain identification cards, open bank accounts and trust law

enforcement when reporting crimes. 

PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

44
Media Role in Informing the

Community

The print and broadcast media can play a critical

role in shaping public attitudes and perceptions.

The media can educate and foster understanding,

or it can fan the prejudices of hate-mongers.

Which role it assumes, and how it covers events

can go a long way in supporting or undermining

law enforcement efforts to build relationships, prevent hate crimes and collect information about

possible terrorist activities. A number of law

enforcement agencies are finding that, with the

right strategy, the media can be a valuable partner

in fostering public understanding and alleviating

fear, suspicion and anger.

Executive session participants discussed

how law enforcement agencies can be proactive in

working with print and electronic reporters by

hosting press events and encouraging the media to

launch print, radio and television public service

announcements (PSAs). The media can inform

the community of the roles and responsibilities of

each local, state and federal agency, and the tactics

and strategies they use to conduct interviews and

investigations. Law enforcement can communicate through the media its commitment to a zerotolerance policy for hate crimes and its use of

behavior-based enforcement methods—law

enforcement decision making that is based on

individuals’ actions, not on their religion or culture. 

For example, before Operation Iraqi

Freedom began, the FBI in every city was directed

to conduct interviews with individuals who might

have been supportive of Saddam Hussein’s authority. The FBI in Detroit, for example, called a press

briefing to explain why and how they were conducting interviews, to request volunteer interviews

and to urge residents to report civil rights violations and hate crimes. The press event included

local police and community members.

Tools and Resources for

Improving Communication 

A variety of tools are currently available to help

guide both law enforcement agencies and ethnically and religiously diverse community members in

their efforts to better understand one another.36

Tools and resources mentioned by executive session participants include recruiting, hiring and

retaining multilingual officers; using translation

services; disseminating multilanguage brochures

and statement forms; using community liaisons;

improving training in religious and cultural differences; developing videotapes for training; working

with national associations; and convening forums

or councils, as discussed above.

Communicating with Diverse

Communities

Recruiting, Hiring and Retaining a

Diverse and Multilingual Police

Force

Since September 11th, law enforcement agencies

have been more aggressive in their recruiting and

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

45

36 At this writing, a team of researchers at Northeastern University is conducting a three-city study focusing on identifying

strategies to enhance understanding between law enforcement agencies and the Arab, Muslim and Sikh communities in the

United States. This initiative, Partnering for Prevention and Community Safety (PfP), will culminate in the development of

a “Promising Practices” guide in May 2004 that will be available for both community and law enforcement across the country. More information on this project is currently available by contacting Professor Deborah Ramirez at 617-373-

4629/d.ramirez@neu.edu or Project Manager Sasha O’Connell at 617-373-8845/s.oconnell@neu.edu.
hiring efforts to ensure greater ethnic, racial and

gender diversity, particularly in minority communities with whom they are increasingly working on

terrorism-related issues. Agencies are increasingly

hiring officers who can serve as liaisons to work

specifically with their ethnic or religious communities. 

While it is impossible for all officers to

speak the many languages used in their communities, ideally there should be bi- or multilingual

officers on any given shift to ensure community

access to police officers who speak their primary

languages. Due to limited resources and the need

to cover multiple shifts and districts, a significant

number of officers may need to be recruited and/or

trained. (Where the applicant pool does not

include officers with these skills and training

would be too costly or less effective, agencies can

consider such options outlined below such as

translation services and others.)

Law enforcement agencies should offer

language training to interested and qualified officers. Participants proposed that law enforcement

officers, at a minimum, should be given reference

material, such as wallet-sized cards listing important phrases in different languages, or cultural

facts about and resources for ethnic communities

in that jurisdiction.

Translation Services

Law enforcement agencies should have a policy

and procedure for accessing interpreters. On-scene

interpreters or 24-hour call-in services are

extremely beneficial. Law enforcement agencies

can contract with phone company translation

services, or establish less formal relationships with

civilian volunteer translators. 

Immediately following September 11th,

the FBI recruited Arabic speaking students and citizens as translators. The outpouring of support

from translators overwhelmed the FBI.37

Community leaders should work with police to

similarly identify opportunities for students and

residents to help as linguistics analysts or translators, especially during police investigations. Law

enforcement agencies should also consider designating multilingual, multicultural liaisons to communicate with limited English-proficient residents. Participants noted that universities are a

good resource for finding translators and potential

liaison personnel. 

Multilanguage Brochures and

Statement Forms

Brochures and victim or witness statement forms

distributed by law enforcement agencies should be

printed in the primary languages used in ethnically diverse communities. For example, pamphlets

explaining how victims should report bias-motivated crimes should be developed and translated

into the appropriate foreign languages and distributed widely. These will assist officers in communicating and conducting interviews with individuals from non-English speaking communities.

These forms should also ask the recipient to seek

an interpreter when they are communicating with

law enforcement about hate crimes or terrorism

information in their communities. 

Materials published and printed by law

enforcement agencies should be in languages such

as Arabic, Farsi and Punjabi and should be distributed to the Arab, Muslim, Sikh and other communities. These materials can be distributed to community organizations, individual homes and

PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

46

37 “Arabic Speakers Answer FBI Call for Translators,” Richard Willing, USA Today online, 18 September 2001.
places of worship. Local law enforcement agencies

might also draw on federal resources to publish

and distribute multilanguage brochures. On the

federal level, for example, the FBI’s Civil Rights

Division publishes brochures explaining laws that

are meant to protect civil rights in the languages of

those communities at most risk of backlash-violence after the terrorist attacks. 

Community Liaisons

Executive session participants discussed the

importance of community liaisons when attempting to improve communication between residents

and law enforcement. Some local agencies use

liaisons to assist in crime prevention programs

and other services to vulnerable groups. In addition to speaking the given language of the community, a liaison can act as a facilitator, bringing

the needs of the community to the department’s

attention. A liaison can also disseminate information to immigrant neighborhoods regarding police

interviews; the reasons behind them; and dispel

any misperceptions about the nature of investigations in predominately ethnic neighborhoods, particularly with those mistrustful of law enforcement. The liaison can also provide immediate

assistance to crime victims and their families.

This assistant may be able to listen to victims’

frustrations and concerns; communicate law

enforcements methods in investigating hate

crimes; identify and contact individuals and agencies that can be beneficial to the victim; and

arrange protection and security for the victim. 

Training in Religious and Cultural

Differences

In jurisdictions with significant diverse populations, police recruits should receive religious and

cultural awareness training, and should have the

opportunity to attend refresher courses throughout

their career. Recruit training may extend academy

training, or incur costs for instructors, space and

some materials. Participants agreed that every

effort should be made to collaborate with community groups to minimize costs. Using federal and

community resources, including free materials and

training, will help offset any burden to the agency.

Roll call, personnel meetings, brief presentations

and other opportunities should also be sought to

support cultural awareness efforts.

Larger local police departments are more

likely to have the resources to devote to training

and educational awareness programs. Smaller

jurisdictions can benefit from regional programs

and initiatives such as the one in King County,

Washington where the U.S. Attorney’s Office

sponsored training for representatives from all

police departments and the sheriff’s office in the

County. (The speakers included the special counsel for the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Office, the

Region-10 U.S. Attorney, a representative from the

U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of Civil Rights

and the Seattle police chief.) In addition, the

Community Relations Service of the U.S.

Department of Justice has organized countless

trainings across the country for local law enforcement agencies on Arab, Muslim and Sikh cultures

often conducted by local members of the Arab,

Muslim and Sikh American communities.

Language tapes can also be offered to augment officers’ learning process. Agencies should

consider recognizing officers through special

awards or bonuses for learning languages on their

own time and demonstrating cultural sensitivities.

This is an incentive for officers to retain proficienVOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

47
PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

48

cy and be given professional recognition for their

efforts. Community members, students and faculty at universities can help teach officers new languages and educate them about cultures and religions; their help should be considered by agencies

trying to set up collaborative programs.

Videotapes for Training

Videotapes can be used by law enforcement agencies for training and to improve communication

between law enforcement and the community.

The use of videotapes is important for law enforcement training purposes because it is an efficient

means for delivering a uniform message to a large

audience on important cultural issues. These

videos can be viewed during roll call or offered at

other times during and after shift work. They can

be aired on local cable television, and during town

hall meetings, forums and councils to demonstrate

to the community that the law enforcement

agency is committed to the neighborhoods they

serve. 

Production of these tapes should involve

officers and community leaders to make certain

the perspectives of both groups are effectively portrayed and information is accurate.38 Law enforcement can also develop their own tapes to explain

the law enforcement role, priorities and relevant

laws and policies, including the importance of

community partnerships and crime reporting.

These videotapes can be used for public service

announcements and in public forums to ensure

that all individuals in the community are aware of

law enforcement’s policies, procedures and the

means to access services.

National Associations as a Resource

Numerous national associations provide resources

for local law enforcement, community leaders and

residents. The following list is not presented as an

exhaustive list of national associations, but should

demonstrate that there are a wide range of associations with available resources. The contact information for these associations can be found in

Appendix E. 

Anti-Defamation League

Arab American Institute

Center for Immigration Studies

National Asian Pacific American

Legal Consortium

National Association for the

Advancement of Colored People

National Council of La Raza

National Immigration Forum

National Urban League

Sikh Coalition

Conclusion

Executive session participants reaffirmed that

community policing provides the tools and

resources needed to deliver police services to

diverse communities and to engage in the partner-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

38 A free copy of a sample video can be downloaded from the Community Relations Service website: The First Three

to Five Seconds: Arab and Muslim Cultural Awareness Training for Law Enforcement,

www.usdoj.gov/crs/training_video/3to5_lan/Intro.htm.
ships needed to prevent and respond to terrorism

and backlash violence. Community policing provides an effective way to build relationships with all

communities by understanding their concerns,

gathering information for investigative purposes,

reducing fear and preventing crimes. Local law

enforcement can effectively work with diverse communities by tailoring the tools, tactics and

resources used successfully in other jurisdictions to

address their communities’ unique concerns. Their

success will be contingent on developing lasting

trust and open communication with individuals in

their area, while strengthening effective partnerships with state and federal law enforcement.

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

49
PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

50
COMMUNITY POLICING IS UNIQUELY QUALIFIED TO PROVIDE LOCAL LAW

enforcement professionals with the principles and approaches that will

help them build stronger bonds with their diverse communities as they

continue to address crime, fear and the terrorist threat. Community policing’s

focus on partnerships, community engagement, trust and problem solving has

been essential to police agencies’ efforts to better serve and learn from individuals of widely varied cultural, ethnic and religious backgrounds. These partnerships are vital to preventing residents’ victimization, thwarting future terrorist

attacks and maintaining critical relationships that are the foundation for continued cooperation.

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

51

C HAPTER F IVE

RECOMMENDATIONS

The Executive Session on Working With Diverse

Communities provided an opportunity for law

enforcement and community leaders to discuss a

host of concerns and challenges, and to identify

specific recommendations for other jurisdictions

to consider as they work together for safer communities. Listed below are highlights of selected

recommendations contained throughout this

report. The list is not exhaustive. While there are

some recommendations that could be unique to

only some jurisdictions, these recommendations

represent the range and complexity of the common

issues considered in this paper:

Recommendation Highlights

Religious and Cultural Awareness

Law enforcement must learn more about the

cultural sensitivities, traditions and religions of

diverse communities to engender a bond of trust.

Law enforcement officers should be aware of,

and in some cases participate in, community rallies, religious services or gatherings, and unity celebrations to gain a better understanding of other

religions and cultures. 

Law enforcement must work at building and

understanding relationships, as well as reducing

fear and protecting all diverse communities.
Law enforcement must examine how they

interview and interact with individuals from

diverse communities, regardless of immigration

status. 

Law Enforcement Leadership

Law enforcement leaders must develop relationships and communication networks with

diverse communities prior to a crisis, and should

rely upon a variety of strategies for building trust.

Law enforcement leaders must ensure a

strong institutional commitment to protecting

diverse communities, including condemning acts

of terrorism and backlash violence, reassuring

communities that every effort will be made to protect them, and making certain that their agencies

are upholding all laws, especially those that protect

the dignity of all individuals.

Law enforcement leaders must ensure that

the local police role is clearly defined and communicated within the agency and to the community.

Forums or Councils

Multicultural forums and councils of law

enforcement officials and community members

can provide a special opportunity for discussing

current problems, concerns and frustrations, law

enforcement policies and strategies. The forums

should be built on the following principles: 

The forums are inclusive—representatives of diverse groups attend and fully

participate.

The forums include knowledgeable

and experienced facilitators, who

must establish ground rules for the

meeting.

The forums focus on improving

understanding of community concerns and law enforcement actions.

The forums encourage a candid discussion of how to resolve problems

and concerns.

The forums use a problem-solving

model to jointly identify problems,

analyze them, develop a comprehensive shared response plan, assign

implementation tasks and then evaluate the overall effort.

Preventing and Investigating Hate

Crimes

Law enforcement officials, as well as government leaders, must speak out against hate crime

and reassure the community that their protection

is of the highest priority. 

Law enforcement agencies should identify

individuals, properties and areas susceptible to

hate crimes and assess environmental design factors and other security issues in an effort to prevent hate crimes. Agencies should consider saturation patrols in these areas in times of conflict or if

there is indication of a possible terrorist attack.

Agencies should respond quickly to any outbreaks of hate violence or property damage should

prevention efforts fail.

PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

52



 



 


Law enforcement agencies should ensure

they have the necessary expertise to investigate

hate crimes, including having adequately staffed

bias crime units or, in smaller agencies, at least one

officer trained to identify and investigate hate

crime incidents. They should be aware of other

resources that can supplement their own.

Local law enforcement agencies should develop policies and guidelines on hate crimes specific to

their localities, including plans to deploy officers to

potential target areas in the event of a terrorist

incident.

Law enforcement agencies should develop

memoranda of understanding that collectively integrate all local and federal agencies, district and city

attorneys, civil rights organizations, communitybased organizations, prosecutors, educational institutions, and others that could offer resources to

address hate crimes and promote positive relationships.

Protecting Students and Educational

Institutions

Campus police agencies should enter into

mutual aid agreements with local, state and federal

law enforcement agencies. These agreements facilitate resource sharing to prevent hate crimes and

coordinate operations during a crisis.

Law enforcement at all levels of government

should develop protocols that encourage campus

police officers to accompany local, state and federal

authorities who are interviewing students, faculty

or staff.

Campus and local law enforcement should

utilize available university resources for a better

understanding of religion, culture and language.

Community members, students and faculty at universities can provide useful assistance in translating, teaching officers new languages, and educating

them about culture and customs.

Coordination Between Local and

Federal Agencies

Local and federal law enforcement agencies

must continually work to improve the exchange of

information and intelligence, as well as their plans

for conducting investigations in immigrant communities.

Local law enforcement agencies should educate the community about its role in counterterrorism efforts, particularly as it relates to assisting federal agencies in operations, investigations and

enforcement. 

Media Role in Informing the

Community

Law enforcement agencies should proactively

work with print and electronic reporters by hosting

press events and finding opportunities to update

and familiarize the media on steps the department

is undertaking.

Agencies should develop media plans directed at preventing hate crimes and responding to a

critical incident.

Agencies should consider public education

campaigns—particularly ones in which religious

and ethnic leaders stand with law enforcement

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

53
leaders to educate all citizens in a jurisdiction

about the tremendous damage discrimination and

hate crimes can have on a community.

Tools and Resources for Improving

Communication 

Law enforcement must use all the tools currently available to improve the delivery of police

services in diverse communities. Tools and

resources mentioned by executive session participants include recruiting, hiring and retaining multilingual officers; using translation services; disseminating multilanguage brochures and statement forms; using community liaisons; improving

training in religious and cultural differences; developing videotapes for training; working with

national associations; and convening forums or

councils.

Conclusion

While the recommendations in this white paper

are somewhat broad and cover a breadth of issues

influencing both law enforcement and the communities they serve, it is hoped that the details in

the text will be of value to a department or community organization. Indeed, the text offers suggestions that can be tailored to the unique needs of

a jurisdiction. These approaches are meant as a

starting point for law enforcement and community leaders to develop a collaborative, proactive, and

problem-oriented response to combat future terrorist attacks, reduce fear within our communities

and advance community policing across America.

PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

54
Participant List

Nassar Beydoun

Executive Director

American Arab Chamber of Commerce

Dearborn, Michigan

Jim Burack

Chief

Milliken Police Department

Milliken, Colorado

Dale Burke

Assistant Chief

University of Wisconsin-Madison Police

Department

Madison, Wisconsin

Keith Colvin

Pastor

Director NAACP

Pueblo West, Colorado

Dan Corsentino

Sheriff

Pueblo County Sheriff’s Department

Pueblo, Colorado

Carmen Cortes-Harms

Chief of Protection

Mexican Consulate

Austin, Texas

Robert Coughlin

Deputy Director

Office of Intergovernmental Affairs 

and Public Liaison

U.S. Department of Justice

Washington, D.C.

David Dial

Chief

Naperville Police Department

Naperville, Illinois

John DiFava

Chief

MIT Police Department

Cambridge, Massachusetts 

Robert Driscoll

Former Deputy Assistant Attorney General

U.S. Department of Justice

Civil Rights Division

Washington, D.C.

Khaled J. Elkhatib

Attorney

Cohen and Hussein

Chicago, Illinois 

Hisham Farajallah

Executive Director

Idriss Mosque

Seattle, Washington 

Sharee Freeman

Director

Community Relations Service

U.S. Department of Justice

Washington, D.C.

Walter P. Hempel

Senior Special Agent

Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement

Washington, D.C.

Tim Hennessy

Deputy Chief of Administrative Operations

Cleveland Police Department

Cleveland, Ohio 

Terry G. Hillard

Former Superintendent

Chicago Police Department

Chicago, Illinois 

Willie T. Hulon

Special Agent in Charge

Federal Bureau of Investigation

Detroit, Michigan

A PPENDIX A

PARTICIPANTS AND OBSERVERS

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

55
Ronald Iden

Assistant Director

Federal Bureau of Investigation

Los Angeles, California

Kareem Irfan

Chairman

Council of Islamic Organizations of Greater

Chicago

Naperville, Illinois

Gil Kerlikowske

Chief

Seattle Police Department

Seattle, Washington

S. S. Shiva Singh Khalsa

Minister of Sikh Dharma

Gurdwara Sahib of Chicago

Chicago, Illinois

Tomas J. Kneir

Special Agent in Charge

Federal Bureau of Investigation

Chicago, Illinois

Rudy Landeros

Assistant Chief 

Austin Police Department

Austin, Texas

Cha Lee

Executive Director

South East Asian Community Counsel

Minneapolis, Minnesota

Charles E. Mandigo

Special Agent in Charge

Federal Bureau of Investigation

Seattle, Washington

Eloy Mares

Trustee, Town of Milliken

Milliken, Colorado 

Barbara B. McDonald

Deputy Superintendent

Chicago Police Department

Chicago, Illinois 

Thomas A. Nunemaker

Assistant Special Agent in Charge

Federal Bureau of Investigation

Kansas City, Missouri 

Jerry A. Oliver

Chief

Detroit Police Department

Detroit, Michigan 

Robert K. Olson

Chief

Minneapolis Police Department

Minneapolis, Minnesota 

Deborah Strebel Pierce

Special Agent in Charge

Federal Bureau of Investigation

Minneapolis, Minnesota

Julien Ross

Coordinator

Central Texas Immigrant Worker Rights Center

Austin, Texas

Richard K. Ruminski

ASAC, Counterrorism-Chicago

Federal Bureau of Investigation

Chicago, Illinois 

Linda M. Schmidt

Community Outreach Specialist

Federal Bureau of Investigation

Cleveland, Ohio 

James D. Sewell

Assistant Commissioner

Florida Department of Law Enforcement

Tallahassee, Florida 

Jesse Taylor

Regional Director

Community Relations Service

Chicago, Illinois 

William Taylor

Captain

Lowell Police Department

Lowell, Massachusetts

PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

56
Joseph Timmons

Director of Security

University of Tulsa

Tulsa, Oklahoma

Rita Valenciano

President

Coalition of Hispanic Organizations

Kansas City, Missouri

M. Kim Ward

Colonel

Baltimore County Police Department

Baltimore County, Maryland

P. Deborah Ye

Research/Sales Associate

Edgegroup, Inc.

Lowell, Massachusetts

Russell York

Chief

Fort Wayne Police Department

Fort Wayne, Indiana

Jan Zimmerman

Major

Kansas City Police Department

Kansas City, Missouri 

OBSERVER LIST

Matt Crowl

Deputy Chief of Staff to the Mayor

City of Chicago

Chicago, Illinois

Robert Davis

Senior Research Associate

VERA Institute of Justice

New York City, New York

Roger Gomez

Senior Assistant to Sheriff

Pueblo County Sheriff’s Department

Pueblo, Colorado 

Jack Greene

Dean

Northeastern University College of Criminal

Justice

Boston, Massachusetts

David Harris

Balk Professor of Law and Values

University of Toledo College of Law

Toledo, Ohio

Dennis Kenney

Professor

John Jay College, City University of New York

New York, New York

David Klinger

Associate Professor

University of Missouri St. Louis 

St. Louis, Missouri

Philip Lyons, Jr.

Executive Director

Texas Regional Community Policing Institute

Sam Houston State University

Criminal Justice Center

Huntsville, Texas

Lois Felson Mock

Senior Social Scientist

National Institute of Justice

U.S. Department of Justice

Washington, D.C.

Karen Rowan

General Counsel to the Superintendent

Chicago Police Department

Chicago, Illinois 

Amina Saeed

Community Relations

Council of Islamic Organizations of Greater

Chicago

Lombard, Illinois

Anthony Scalise

Sergeant

Civil Rights Section

Chicago Police Department

Chicago, Illinois

Wes Skogan

Northwestern University

Institute for Policy Research

Evanston, Illinois

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

57
39 Judy Lim has since become a Special Agent for the U.S. State Department Diplomatic Security Service.

40 Gerard Murphy has since become Director of the Homeland Security and Technology Division in the National Governors

Association Center for Best Practices.

PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

58

COPS Office

1100 Vermont Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20530

Phone: 800-421-6770

Fax: 202-616-2914

www.cops.usdoj.gov

Pam Cammarata

Acting Deputy Director

Sherry Carroll

Grant Monitoring Specialist

Maria Carolina Rozas

Assistant Director

Marcia Samuels

Lead Grant Monitoring Specialist

Amy Schapiro

Senior Social Science Analyst

Sheryl Thomas

Senior Policy Analyst

PERF Staff

1120 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 930

Washington, DC 20036

Phone: 202-466-7820

Fax: 202-466-7826

www.policeforum.org

Heather Davies

Research Associate

Alex Hayes

Research Assistant

Judy Lim

Research Assistant/Conference Coordinator39

Stacy Osnick Milligan

Research Associate

Gerard Murphy

Deputy Director of Research40

Melissa Reuland

Senior Research Associate

Chuck Wexler

Executive Director 
Building Respect in Diverse Groups to 

Enhance Sensitivity (BRIDGES)

U.S. Attorney’s Office for the 

Eastern District of Michigan

U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Collins

211 West Fort Street, Suite 2001

Detroit, MI 48226

Phone: 313-226-9100

Fax: 313-226-2311

www.usdoj.gov/usao/mie/

Civil Rights Division

U.S. Department of Justice

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Office of the Assistant Attorney General, Main

Washington, DC 20530

Phone: 202-514-4609

Fax: 202-514-0293

www.usdoj.gov/crt/crt-home.html.

Community Relations Service

U.S. Department of Justice

600 E Street, NW, Suite 6000

Washington, DC 20530

Phone: 202-305-2935

Fax: 202-305-3009

www.usdoj.gov/crs/

COPS Office

U.S. Department of Justice

1100 Vermont Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20530

Phone: 1-800-421-6770

Fax: 202-616-2914

www.cops.usdoj.gov

FBI Arab American Advisory Committee 

Michael J. Anderson, Supervisory Special Agent

FBI Northern Virginia Resident Agency

7799 Leesburg Pike, Suite 200 South

Falls Church, VA 22043

Phone: 703-762-3352

Fax: 703-506-8491

FBI Civil Rights Program

Jose Vargas (Hate Crime Division)

935 Pennsylvania Avenue NW

Washington, DC 20535

Phone: 202-324-4272

Fax: 202-324-3155

www.fbi.gov/hq/cid/civilrights/civilrts.htm

Northern Ohio Hate Crimes Working Group

Linda M. Schmidt

Community Outreach Specialist

Community Outreach Program

Cleveland Division, FBI

1501 Lakeside Avenue

Cleveland, Ohio 44114

Phone: 216-622-6615

Fax: 216-622-6717

http://cleveland.fbi.gov/cop.htm 

A PPENDIX B

FEDERAL RESOURCES

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

59
PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

60
Chicago’s Multi-Cultural Forum 

Barbara B. McDonald

Deputy Superintendent

Chicago Police Department

3510 S. Michigan Avenue, 3rd Floor 

Chicago, IL 60653

Phone: 312-745-5600

Email: barbara.mcdonald@chicagopolice.org

Race Relations Council 

Cindy Callahan

Program Coordinator

Lowell Police Department

50 Arcand Drive

Lowell, MA 01852

Phone: 978-937-3228

Email: ccallahan@ci.lowell.ma.us

A PPENDIX C

FORUM AND COUNCIL

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

61
PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

62
41 These references were identified by the Anti-Defamation League, as were the resources in the following section. These

listings may provide useful information at the time of this writing, but by including them the authors do not necessarily

endorse any information of the sponsor or publishing organization or other information on the websites.

A PPENDIX D

HATE CRIME RESOURCES

SELECTED WEBSITES ON HATE CRIME RESOURCES4 1

These websites include resources on hate crimes laws, anti-bias and prevention programs, and links to

other related sites: 

www.adl.org [Anti-Defamation League]

www.adl.org/learn [Anti-Defamation League Law Enforcement Agency Resource Network]

www.partnersagainsthate.org [Anti-Defamation League, Leadership Conference Education

Fund, Center for the Prevention of Hate Violence, Office of Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention, U.S. Department of Justice]

www.cphv.usm.maine.edu [The Center for the Prevention of Hate Violence]

www.hatecrime.net [Hate Crimes Research Network] 

www.hrc.org [The Human Rights Campaign]

www.hrw.org [Human Rights Watch] 

www.theiacp.org [The International Association of Chiefs of Police]

www.civilrights.org [Leadership Conference on Civil Rights/Leadership Conference on Civil

Rights Education Fund]

www.stopthehate.org/get_involved/law/tools/Model_Protocol.pdf [Massachusetts’s

Governor’s Task Force on Hate Crimes]

www.tolerance.org [Southern Poverty Law Center/Klanwatch]

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

63
SELECTED RESOURCES ON HATE VIOLENCE 

American Prosecutors Research Institute, National District Attorneys Association, 2000.

A Local Prosecutor’s Guide to Hate Crimes.

Anti-Defamation League, 2001. Arresting Hate: Training Video For Police Officers and

Discussion Manual. 

Bureau of Justice Assistance, U.S. Department of Justice, 1997. A Policymaker’s Guide to

Hate Crimes.

Bureau of Justice Assistance, U.S. Department of Justice, 2000. Addressing Hate Crimes: Six

Initiatives That Are Enhancing the Efforts of Criminal Justice Practitioners.

Bureau of Justice Assistance, U.S. Department of Justice, 2000. Responding to Hate Crimes:

A Roll Call Training Video for Police Officers [accompanied by 16-page Instructor’s Guide].

Department of Education and U.S. Department of Justice, 1997. Preventing Youth Hate

Crime: A Manual for Schools and Communities.

Devine, Richard A., Cook County State’s Attorney, Chicago. 1998. Hate Crime: A

Prosecutor’s Guide.

Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. Department of Justice, 1999. Hate Crimes.

Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2002/2003. Hate Crime Statistics: Annual Report.

International Association of Chiefs of Police, August 1, 1991. Hate Crimes: Model Policy,

accompanied by Concepts and Issues Paper. 

International Association of Chiefs of Police, 1991. Investigating Hate Crimes: Training Key

#409.

International Association of Chiefs of Police, 1999. Responding to Hate Crimes: A Police

Officer’s Guide to Investigation and Prevention. 

PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

64
Each of the following four curricula were developed in partnership by the International

Association of Directors of Law Enforcement Standards and Training, the National

Association of Attorneys General, the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Department

of the Treasury.

Hate Crime Training: Core Curriculum for Patrol Officers, Detectives, and Command

Officers; 

Hate Crime Training: Curriculum for Detectives and Investigators; 

Hate Crime Training: Curriculum for Patrol and Responding Officers; and 

Hate Crime Training: Curriculum for Command Officers.

Lawrence, Frederick M., Harvard University Press, 1999. Punishing Hate: Bias Crimes Under

American Law.

Leadership Conference Education Fund/Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, 1997. Cause

for Concern: Hate Crimes In America.

Levin, Jack and Jack McDevitt,1993. Hate Crimes: The Rising Tide of Bigotry and Bloodshed,

Plenum Press.

National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives (NOBLE), March 1986. Racial

and Religious Violence: A Law Enforcement Guidebook. 

National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives (NOBLE), September 1985.

Racial and Religious Violence: A Model Law Enforcement Response.

Office of Civil Rights, Department of Education and National Association of Attorneys

General, 1999. Protecting Students from Harassment and Hate Crime: A Guide for Schools. 

O’Malley, Jack, 1994. A Prosecutor’s Guide to Hate Crime, Cook County State’s Attorney.

U.S. Department of Justice/CRS, 2001. Twenty-Four Plus One Things Local Law

Enforcement Agencies Can Do to Prevent or Respond to Hate Incidents Against ArabAmericans, Muslims and Sikhs, www.usdoj.gov/crs/24things.htm.

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

65
PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

66

U.S. Department of Justice/FBI, 1996. Hate Crime Data Collection Guidelines, Summary

Reporting System, National Incident-Based Reporting System, Uniform Crime Reporting. 

U.S. Department of Justice/FBI, 1996. Training Guide for Hate Crime Data Collection,

Uniform Crime Reporting: Summary Reporting System, National Incident-Based Reporting

System.
42 The associations listed as a resource may provide useful information at the time of this writing, but by including them

the authors do not necessarily endorse the information of the sponsor organization or other information on the websites.

A PPENDIX E

NATIONAL ASSOCIATIONS/ RESOURCES

NATIONAL

ASSOCIATIONS/RESOURCES4 2

Anti-Defamation League

1100 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1020

Washington, DC 20036

Phone: 202-452-8310

Fax: 202-296-2371

Website: www.adl.org/adl.asp

Arab American Institute

1600 K Street, NW, Suite 601

Washington, DC 20006

Phone: 202-429-9210

Fax: 202-429-9214

Website: www.aaiusa.org

Center for Immigration Studies

1522 K Street, NW, Suite 820

Washington, DC 20005

Phone: 202-466-8185

Fax: 202-466-8076

Website: www.cis.org/aboutcis.html

National Asian Pacific American Legal

Consortium

1140 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1200

Washington, DC 20036

Phone: 202-296-2300

Fax: 202-296-2318

Website: www.napalc.org/contact/index.html

National Association for the Advancement of

Colored People (NAACP)

4805 Mt. Hope Drive 

Baltimore, Maryland 21215 

Phone: 877-NAACP-98

24-Hour Hotline: 410-521-4939

Fax. Not available.

Website: www.naacp.org

National Council of La Raza

1111 19th Street, NW, Suite 1000

Washington, DC 20036

Phone: 202-785-1670

Fax: 202-776-1792

Website: www.nclr.org 

National Immigration Forum

50 F Street, NW, Suite 300

Washington, DC 20001

Phone: 202-347-0040

Fax: 202-347-0058

Website: www.immigrationforum.org

National Urban League

120 Wall Street

New York, NY 10005

Phone: 212-558-5300

Fax: 212-344-5332

Website: www.nul.org

Sikh Coalition

P.O. Box 7132

New York, NY 10150-7132

Phone: Not available.

Fax: Not available.

Website: www.sikhcoalition.org

Email: info@sikhcoalition.org

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

67
PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

68
OFFICE OF COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICING SERVICES, U.S.

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (COPS)-RELATED TITLES

McMahon, Joyce, Joel Garner, Ronald Davis and Amanda Kraus. 2002. How to Correctly Collect and

Analyze Racial Profiling Data: Your Reputation Depends On It! Washington, D.C.: Office of Community

Oriented Policing Services.

This publication is the result of a COPS-funded project conducted by the CNA Corporation (CNAC) to

help law enforcement agencies collect and analyze data. The publication is particularly timely as more

and more states mandate that law enforcement agencies collect traffic stop data. As part of this project,

CNAC worked with the Baltimore (MD) Police Department, the Phoenix (AZ) Police Department, the

Chattanooga (TN) Police Department, and the St. Paul (MN) Police Department, all of which are highlighted in the document along with the Oakland (CA) Police Department. At the time of this writing, the

publication can be found at www.cops.usdoj.gov/mime/open.pdf?Item=770.

Rinehart, Tammy A., Anna T. Laszlo, and Gwen O. Briscoe. 2001. The COPS Collaboration Toolkit: How

to Build, Fix, and Sustain Productive Partnerships. Washington, D.C.: Office of Community Oriented

Policing Services.

This toolkit provides practical guidance to law enforcement agencies as they develop and sustain partnerships that support community policing. The toolkit will benefit law enforcement personnel, community-based organizations, educators, youth, government officials, and others seeking to combine efforts to

reduce crime and social disorder problems. At the time of this writing, the publication can be found at

www.cops.usdoj.gov/default.asp?Item=344.

Walker, Samuel, Carol Archbold, and Leigh Herbst. 2002. Mediating Citizen Complaints Against Police

Officers: A Guide For Police And Community Leaders. Washington, D.C.: Office of Community Oriented

Policing Services.

This guide addresses the implementation, expectations and evaluation of police-citizen mediation programs. It addresses how to overcome obstacles to mediation such as police and citizen resistance. Key

issues discussed include eligibility, cultural barriers and creating a level playing field. The guide presents

examples of successful mediation processes for communities thinking about developing a

mediation program. At the time of this writing, the publication can be found at

www.cops.usdoj.gov/mime/open.pdf?Item=452.

The COPS Office has many other publications related to the advancement of community policing, problem solving and other law enforcement-related topics. For more information, call 1-800-421-6770 or visit

www.cops.usdoj.gov.

COPS OFFICE- RELATED TITLES

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

69
PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

70
PERF-RELATED TITLES

POLICE EXECUTIVE RESEARCH FORUM (PERF)-RELATED TITLES

Correia, Mark. 2000. Citizen Involvement: How Community Factors Affect Progressive

Policing. Police Executive Research Forum.

DeGeneste, Henry and John Sullivan. 1997. Fresh Perspectives: Policing a Multicultural Community.

Police Executive Research Forum.

Eck, John E., and Nancy La Vigne. 1994. Using Research: A Primer for Law Enforcement Managers. Police

Executive Research Forum.

Fridell, Lorie. 2004. By the Numbers: A Guide for Analyzing Race Data from Vehicle Stops. Police

Executive Research Forum. (Available as a free download at www.policeforum.org by clicking on “Racially

Biased Policing.”)

Fridell, Lorie, Robert Lunney, Drew Diamond, and Bruce Kubu. 2001. Racially Biased Policing: A

Principled Response. Police Executive Research Forum.

Geller, William and Michael Scott. 1992. Deadly Force: What We Know: A Practitioner’s Desk Reference

on Police Involved Shootings. Police Executive Research Forum.

Geller, William and Hans Toch, eds. 1995. And Justice for All: Understanding and Controlling Police

Abuse of Force. Police Executive Research Forum

Oramas, Nelson. 1994. Drug Enforcement in Minority Communities: The Minneapolis Police

Department, 1985-1990. Police Executive Research Forum.

Reuland, Melissa, Chuck Wexler, and Terry Chowanec. June 2003. Developing a Partnership to Improve

Race Relations: Kansas City Together. Police Executive Research Forum. (Available as a free download at

www.kcpd.org)

Walker, Samuel. 1995. Citizen Review Resource Manual. Police Executive Research Forum.

Walker, Samuel. 2000. Police Interactions with Racial and Ethnic Minorities: Assessing the Evidence and

Allegations. Police Executive Research Forum.

PERF has many other publications on community problem solving, evaluating police agencies and practices, and other materials used for promotion exams, training and university classes. For a free catalog or

more information, call 1-888-202-4563. PERF’s online bookstore can be found at www.policeforum.org.

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

71
PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

72
Primary Authors

Heather J. Davies, Ph.D., Research Associate

Police Executive Research Forum

Dr. Davies has more than five years experience in criminal justice and child welfare research, evaluation,

training and technical assistance. She is currently managing a variety of PERF projects, including

Community Policing in a Security-Conscious World and Managing Multijurisdictional Cases: Lessons

Learned from the Sniper Investigation. 

Prior to joining PERF, Davies was a Senior Research Associate with the American Bar

Association’s Center on Children and the Law and the Criminal Justice Section. She was the principal

investigator on a project evaluating parental involvement practices of juvenile courts, and one on improving legal and judicial responses to parental kidnapping. She conducted an analysis of legal services provided by the District of Columbia’s Office of Corporation Counsel to the Child and Family Services

Agency. In addition, she served as project associate on such studies as the implementation of the

Michigan Lawyer-Guardian Ad Litem Statute, a national assessment of law enforcement and community partnerships for helping children exposed to domestic violence, and an evaluation of domestic violence

no-drop policies. Davies was the co-author of a National Center for Missing and Exploited Children

monograph, Child Pornography: The Criminal Justice Response. She holds a B.S. in Sociology from

Virginia Tech, and a M.S. and Ph.D. in Justice, Law and Society from American University. Her dissertation addressed Understanding Variations in Murder Clearance Rates: The Influence of the Political

Environment.

Gerard R. Murphy, Former Deputy Director of Research

Police Executive Research Forum

At this writing, Murphy was a senior research and policy analyst with the Police Executive Research

Forum (PERF). He is currently the Director of the Homeland Security and Technology Division in the

National Governors Association Center for Best Practices. He has directed a number of national projects,

including Managing Multijurisdictional Cases: Lessons Learned from the Sniper Investigation, An

Assessment of the Law Enforcement Response on September 11, and Community Policing in a SecurityConscious World as well as others focusing on port security, police performance measures, recruitment

and hiring practices.

Before joining PERF in September 2001, Murphy spent 12 years with the Baltimore County (MD)

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

73
PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

74

Police Department. He was the Director of Planning and Research, responsible for developing and implementing the department’s strategic plan, researching and developing department policies, managing federal and state grants, and serving as the agency’s accreditation manager. Prior to that position, he was the

Assistant to the Police Chief for eight years spanning the tenure of three chiefs for whom he provided policy advice and guidance. Murphy also conducted a variety of special projects to improve organizational

efficiency. He also served as Executive Director of the Baltimore County Police Foundation. His previous

experience also includes being an Assistant Professor of Public Affairs at Indiana University, Fort Wayne

and a previous stint at PERF as a research associate. Murphy holds a master’s degree in public policy and

has completed extensive work towards his doctorate in public policy. He is also a graduate of the Federal

Executive Institute.

Contributing Authors

Kareem Irfan, Chairman

Council of Islamic Organizations of Greater Chicago 

Mr. Irfan has been Chairman of the Council of Islamic Organizations of Greater Chicago since January

2001. Prior to that he has led many Council projects, co-chairing its Bosnian Refugee Relocation Project

and chairing its Media Relations Committee. He has collaborated with national Islamic organizations

including the Islamic Society of North America on social betterment, political awareness and civil rights

initiatives and managed program development, presentations and media relations for national conventions. He has served on the Boards of several Islamic Centers and educational institutions and remains

committed to pro bono work for professional, religious and nonprofit organizations.

Mr. Irfan is Assistant General Counsel for the North American Division of Square D Co.-

Schneider Electric, a Paris-based global manufacturer of electrical distribution, automation and control

products. He has been with Schneider Electric for 12 years and is currently responsible for legalities of

business initiatives in Information Technology and e-commerce for the company. He has served as

Secretary and Board Director of the Intellectual Property Law Association of Chicago and as Chairman of

its Inventor Services Committee. In the aftermath of Sept. 11, he has appeared on local and national radio

and television programs promoting inter-faith understanding, cooperation and bridge-building amongst

fellow Americans. He has a M.S. in computer engineering from the University of Illinois and a J.D. from

DePaul University.

Jerry A. Oliver, Sr., Former Chief 

Detroit Police Department

Oliver has been a law enforcement leader and advocate for policing reform. In his more than three decades

of service, he has served as the Assistant Chief of Police in his hometown of Phoenix, Arizona; the

Director of Drug Policy in Memphis, Tennessee; and Chief of Police in Pasadena, California, and in

Richmond, Virginia. From February 2002 until October 2003, he was the appointed Chief of Police for

the Detroit, Michigan, Police Department. Chief Oliver holds a master’s degree in public administration
(public finance) and a bachelor of science degree in criminal justice, both from Arizona State University.

He was a member of the FBI’s 21st National Executive Institute.

He is a graduate of the Senior Management Institute for Police; was selected as an Executive

Fellow with the Police Foundation; and is an active member of the Police Executive Research Forum.

Oliver was one of the originators of Richmond’s Project Exile, a nationally acclaimed and replicated program that targeted gun and drug violence. 

His recent awards include the IACP-Motorola Webber Seavy Award for Policing Excellence in

2001 and The U.S. Attorney General’s Award for Outstanding Contributions to Community Partnerships

for Public Safety in 2000. 

Linda M. Schmidt, Community Outreach Specialist

Federal Bureau of Investigation

Linda M. Schmidt has been with the Cleveland Division of the FBI for ten years. She is the Community

Outreach Specialist and a certified police instructor. Schmidt works with community organizations as

chair of the Community Outreach/Education Committee of the Northern Ohio Hate Crimes Working

Group (NOHCWG) and coordinator of the Citizens’ FBI Academy. Schmidt, along with members of the

NOHCWG, co-authored two hate crime brochures—one for students and one for parents and teachers.

She has also contributed to a FBI Web Page Two article and a FBI On-Line Chat on the effects of

September 11th on Cleveland’s multicultural communities and the NOHCWG (2002). She also authored

the video script Peer Sexual Harassment and co-authored with Mary A. Lentz, Esq., Peer Sexual

Harassment: A Reference Guide for Educators (1999). In addition, Schmidt has an extensive background

working with street gangs. She authored a chapter in The Gang Guidebook, published by the Office of

Criminal Justice Services, State of Ohio (1998); and an article in Baldwin’s Ohio School Law Journal entitled, A Brief History of Ohio Gang Trends: Changes in Legislation as a Result of Gangs and Successful

Prevention Methods (1999). Schmidt also wrote the script for A Stranger in Your Home (2001), a video

done with the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor’s Office and the Internet Crimes Against Children Task

Force.

Barbara B. McDonald, Deputy Superintendent

Chicago Police Department

Barbara B. McDonald is the Deputy Superintendent of the Bureau of Administrative Services for the

Chicago Police Department. She directs activities related to information and strategic services, financial

and personnel services, and oversees five divisions: Personnel, Finance, Information Services, Records

Services, and Research and Development. Prior to becoming Deputy Superintendent in June 2000, she

served as the Assistant Deputy Superintendent for Research and Planning. In that capacity she directed

the activities of the research and development division and also served as the co-manager of the departmentwide community-oriented policing model—the Chicago Alternative Policing Strategy (CAPS). She

joined the Chicago Police Department in 1993 as the Director of the Research and Development

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

75
PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

76

Division.

Before coming to the department, she served as Deputy Executive Director of the Illinois

Criminal Justice Information Authority, the state’s criminal justice planning agency. She has also been

the Director of the Illinois Juvenile Justice Commission and the Associate Director of the Illinois Law

Enforcement Commission. 

McDonald holds masters degrees in planning and administration and human resource development from the University of Vermont, as well as doctoral studies in education at Boston University. In

1990, she became the first woman president of the National Criminal Justice Association (NCJA), a DCbased interest group representing state and local governments on issues concerning public safety and

criminal justice. She is one of the principal architects of CAPS. In 1995, she received the Gary P. Hayes

Award in part for her work with CAPS. She also served for several years as policy staff to the Major Cities

Chiefs, an organization of law enforcement executives from 57 of the largest urban areas in the United

States and Canada. She also serves on the PERF Board of Directors.

Gil Kerlikowske, Chief of Police

Seattle Police Department

Chief Kerlikowske was appointed to his position on August 14, 2000. Previously, he was the Deputy

Director of the Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) at the U.S. Department of Justice. He

served as Police Commissioner in Buffalo, New York from 1994 to 1998. He began his law enforcement

career in St. Petersburg, Florida, in 1972. In 1985, he received a one-year fellowship from the U.S.

Department of Justice to evaluate police procedures throughout the country. Chief Kerlikowske holds a

B.A. and M.A. in criminal justice from the University of South Florida in Tampa. He is a graduate of the

National Executive Institute at the F.B.I. Academy in Quantico, Virginia, as well as the Senior

Management Institute for Policing (SMIP). He was the 1990 recipient of the Gary P. Hayes Award for

innovation in policing. He served as the President of PERF from 1996 to 1998. 

James D. Sewell, Assistant Commissioner

Florida Department of Law Enforcement

James D. Sewell was appointed Assistant Commissioner of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement

on May 23, 2003. During his tenure with FDLE, he has held a variety of administrative positions, including Deputy Commissioner, Regional Director of its Tampa Bay Regional Operations Center, Director of

the Division of Criminal Justice Information Systems, and Director of the Florida Criminal Justice

Executive Institute. He also served as Chief of Police for the City of Gulfport, Florida, for nearly five

years. He has held positions with the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles and the

Florida State University Department of Public Safety, where he began his law enforcement career in 1973.

Assistant Commissioner Sewell holds a B.S., M.S. and Ph.D. in Criminology from the Florida State

University and is a graduate of the FBI National Academy. 
ABOUT THE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICING

SERVICES, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

The Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS), U.S. Department of Justice, was created in

1994 and has the unique mission to directly serve the needs of state and local law enforcement. The

COPS Office is an innovative agency that has been the driving force in advancing the concept of community policing through the creation of locally driven problem-solving strategies and police-community

partnerships. COPS is responsible for one of the greatest infusions of resources into state, local and tribal law enforcement in our nation’s history.

Since 1994, COPS has invested $9.6 billion to add community policing officers to the nation’s

streets, enhance crime fighting technology, support crime prevention initiatives and advance community

policing nationwide. COPS funding has furthered the advancement of community policing through innovation conferences, the development of model practices, pilot community policing programs and applied

research and evaluation initiatives. COPS has also positioned itself to respond directly to emerging law

enforcement needs. Examples include working in partnership with departments to enhance police integrity, promoting safe schools and combating the methamphetamine drug problem, and recently, homeland

security efforts.

Through its fiscal year 2003 grant programs, COPS has assisted and encouraged local, state and

tribal law enforcement agencies to enhance their homeland security efforts. Traditional COPS programs

such as Universal Hiring (UHP) give priority consideration to those applicants that demonstrate a use of

funds related to terrorism preparedness or response through community policing. The COPS in Schools

(CIS) program has a mandatory training component that includes topics on terrorism prevention, emergency response and the critical role schools can play in community response. In addition, COPS has

developed interoperability and overtime programs that will assist in addressing the homeland security

demands that inevitably fall to law enforcement. 

The COPS Office has made substantial investments in law enforcement training. COPS created

a national network of Regional Community Policing Institutes (RCPIs) that has revolutionized law

enforcement training. Most recently, the RCPIs have been focusing their efforts on developing and delivering homeland security training. COPS also supports the advancement of community policing strategies

through the national training delivery system provided by the Community Policing Consortium.

Furthermore, COPS has made a major investment in research that makes possible the growing body of

substantive knowledge covering all aspects of community policing.

ABOUT THE COPS OFFICE

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

77
These substantial investments have produced a significant community policing infrastructure

across the country as evidenced by the fact that more than two-thirds of the nation’s law enforcement

agencies have sought COPS grants and were awarded funding. The COPS Office continues to respond

proactively by providing critical resources, training and technical assistance to help state, local and tribal

law enforcement implement innovative and effective community policing strategies.

PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

78
ABOUT THE POLICE EXECUTIVE RESEARCH FORUM

The Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) is a national professional association of chief executives of

large city, county and state law enforcement agencies. PERF’s objective is to improve the delivery of police

services and the effectiveness of crime control through several means:

the exercise of strong national leadership,

the public debate of police and criminal justice issues,

the development of research and policy, and

the provision of vital management and leadership services to police agencies.

PERF members are selected on the basis of their commitment to the organization’s objectives and

principles. PERF operates under the following tenets:

Research, experimentation and exchange of ideas through public discussion and debate are

paths for the development of a comprehensive body of knowledge about policing.

Substantial and purposeful academic study is a prerequisite for acquiring, understanding and

adding to that body of knowledge.

Maintenance of the highest standards of ethics and integrity is imperative in the improvement of policing.

The police must, within the limits of the law, be responsible and accountable to citizens as

the ultimate source of police authority.

The principles embodied in the Constitution are the foundation of policing.

Categories of membership also allow the organization to benefit from the diverse views of criminal justice researchers, law enforcement of all ranks and other professionals committed to advancing law

enforcement services to all communities.

Additional color copies of this report can be downloaded for free at www.policeforum.org. Please sign in

as a PERF member or enter as a guest and click on the highlighted topic “Terrorism Preparedness.”

ABOUT PERF

VOL. 2: WORKING WITH DIVERSE COMMUNITIES

79


















NOTES

Additional Copies of this report can be downloaded free of charge from 

www.policeforum.org.

Please sign in as a PERF member or enter as a guest and click on the

highlighted topic “Terrorism Preparedness.”

PROTECTING YOUR COMMUNITY FROM TERRORISM: THE STRATEGIES FOR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERIES

80