About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


16 Criminology & Crim. Just. 3 (2016)

handle is hein.journals/crmcj16 and id is 1 raw text is: Article Criminology & Criminal justice 2016, Vol. 16(1) 3-20 Police use of discretion @ The Author(s) 2015 Reprints and permissions: nresponse uom estic sagepub.co.ul/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1748895815590202 violence crj.sagepub.com OSAGE Andy Myhill College of Policing, UK Kelly Johnson Durham University, UK Abstract This article addresses the issue of police officers' use of discretion when responding to domestic violence. With reference to Ericson and Haggerty's theory of risk-oriented policing, we collected data direct from information management systems in an English police force and conducted field observations with attending officers to explore the degree to which officers used discretion to interpret the national definition of domestic violence. We also considered how officers applied national standards for recording incidents and crimes. We found that considerable discretion was required to interpret the official definition of domestic violence, and that decision making in relation to recording or otherwise incidents and crimes of domestic violence was variable. Specifically, we found examples of domestic-related incidents not recorded as such, and examples of crimes either not or incorrectly recorded. The implications of these findings for policy and practice are discussed. Keywords Coercive control, discretion, domestic violence, police Introduction The issue of officer discretion has been a recurring theme in academic research on the police since the first ethnographic studies of police work in the 1960s. Goldstein's classic Corresponding author: Andy Myhill, College of Policing, 10th Floor, Riverside House, 2a Southwark Bridge Road, London, SE I 9HA, UK. Email: andy.myhill@college.pnn.police.uk