1. Crime Prevention Part I LIABILITIES ©TCLEOSE Course #2101 Crime Prevention Part I Curriculum is the intellectual property of CSCS-ICJS (2009) Institute for Criminal Justice Studies

2. LEARNING OBJECTIVES Learning Objective: The student will obtain a basic understanding of vicarious liability and how it applies to him/her as a crime prevention practitioner Learning Objective: The student will be able to define liability. Learning Objective: The student will be able to describe his/her responsibility for his/her actions and recommendations Learning Objective: The student will be able to define professional responsibility. Learning Objective: The student will be able to explain that there are no guarantees that a specific crime is preventable.

3. LEARNING OBJECTIVES Learning Objective: The student will be able to identify her/his responsibilities and liability, if he/she makes a security recommendation that: is a conflict with life safety codes, violates city ordinances, state or federal law; results in property loss, personal injury or death and/or is determined to be inadequate. Learning Objective: The student will be able to identify a key element of crime prevention which is ‘reducing the opportunity” for crime to occur.

4. FOREWARD Crime prevention is the anticipation, recognition, and appraisal of a crime risk and the initiation of action to remove or reduce it. Reducing opportunity is a key element in successful crime prevention. Reducing criminal opportunity is the basis for your advice and recommendations; however, there are no guarantees!.

5. FOREWARD we cannot guarantee that a specific crime is preventable We are in the business of deterring crime, but we cannot guarantee that a specific crime is preventable. No home or business can be made crime proof.

6. LIABILITY Something for which one is legally obligated or responsible LIABILITY is defined as: Something for which one is legally obligated or responsible. VICARIOUS LIABILITY VICARIOUS LIABILITY is defined as: Performed or endured by one person substituting for another: acting in place of or for someone else; delegating; substituted something for which one is legally obligated or responsible. LIBILITIES

7. Individual officer responsibility for your actions and recommendations : Crime Prevention As law enforcement professionals we must know the laws and codes that are related to our work, more especially in Crime Prevention, such as life safety codes, city ordinances, state and federal laws. LIBILITIES – Cont’d : LIBILITIES – Cont’d :

8. Professional Responsibility Professional Responsibility : The Crime Prevention practitioner must consider the reality of proving the adequacy of a recommendation in a court of law. No home or business can be made absolutely crime proof. (No guarantees) Select your words with caution, care and concern. Make realistic recommendations. LIBILITIES – Cont’d : LIBILITIES – Cont’d :

9. Professional Training: Realistic: Inclination towards literal truth and pragmatism. Artistic representation felt to be visually accurate. Foresee ability: To see or know beforehand; anticipate or envision.

10. Foresee ability of Harm Foresee ability of Harm (Negligence) “Anticipation of consequences is a necessary element in determining not only whether a particular act or omission is actionably negligent, but also whether the injury complained of is proximately caused by that act or omission.” The ability to have foreseen and prevented the harm is determinative of responsibility! LIBILITIES – Cont’d : LIBILITIES – Cont’d :

11. Foresee ability of Injury Negligence Foresee ability of Injury (Negligence) “Foresee ability is what distinguishes cause from proximate cause. It has been repeatedly stated that foresee ability or anticipation of injury is necessary element of proximate cause. One is responsible for only those consequences of his/her conduct he/she have foreseen or anticipated. LIBILITIES – Cont’d : LIBILITIES – Cont’d :

12. Natural and Probable Consequences Negligence Natural and Probable Consequences (Negligence): The foresee ability requirements of proximate cause are met if a person of ordinary prudence exercising ordinary care should have reasonably anticipated and foreseen that the accident (Or similar one), would occur as a natural and probable consequence of his/her act. LIBILITIES – Cont’d : LIBILITIES – Cont’d :

13. Ordinary Negligence distinguished as: Ordinary Negligence distinguished as: failure to exercise the degree of care that a person with ordinary prudence would exercise under the same or similar circumstances. Gross Negligence distinguished as: Gross Negligence distinguished as: the entire want of care that would raise the belief that the act or omission complained of was the result of conscious indifference to the rights or welfare of the person(s) affected by it. LIBILITIES – Cont’d : LIBILITIES – Cont’d :

14. You are responsibleliable You are responsible and liable if you make a security recommendation that: 1.Is conflict with life safety code. 2.Violates federal, state, county or city laws and/or city ordinances. 3.Results in property loss, personal injury or death. 4.Determined to be inadequate LIBILITIES – Cont’d : LIBILITIES – Cont’d :

15. A study of civil cases highlights court rulings on negligence, gross negligence, and foreseeability. Many of these case are settled out of court. 1974Connie Francis 1974 – Connie Francis (Movie & TV Star) won a lawsuit after she was sexually assaulted in a Long Island motel room. Jury believed the hotel to be negligent in not providing adequate security. (Sliding glass door easily opened from outside). LIBILITY CASE STUDIES

16. 1987 1987 – Apartment Security and Parking Lot Security Lighting- Tarrant County, Texas, Case No. 17-100421-86, ROBERTS V. CLARK FINANCIAL CORPORTION. A female victim was attacked and beaten while walking from the parking lot to her apartment. She claimed inadequate lighting in the parking lot. A security guard at the complex had previously suggested adding more lights to the part of the parking lot where the woman was assaulted. The building is in a high-crime area. She settled for $75, 000 (Security Law Newsletter 1987, Vol. 7, No.12, 137). LIBILITY CASE STUDIES

17. 1987 KAVANAUGH V. FOGLEMAN MANAGEMENT CORPORATION 1987 – Residential Security and Failure to Warn- Harris County, Texas, Case No. 87-36214, KAVANAUGH V. FOGLEMAN MANAGEMENT CORPORATION. Victim’s apartment was burglarized and she was raped. She claimed the management failed to warn tenants about 32 previous claims, including 13 burglaries committed to the premises. The company failed to increase security after given notice of the prior claims. The victim settled for $350, 000 plus monthly lump sum payments for 20 years. LIBILITY CASE STUDIES

18. 1985 1985 – Residential Security, Failure to Warm and Key Control- Harris County, Texas, Case No. 85- 34441, DAVIS V. MANIVEST CORPORATION. A burglar who dropped his passkey on the way out of her apartment rapped victim. She claimed the apartment management was negligent in issuing passkeys and notifying tenants of the “pass-key” burglaries on the premises. Another female tenant was rapped 12 days earlier, but management decided not to warn other tenants for fear of bad publicity. Settled for $835,000.. LIBILITY CASE STUDIES KEY CONTROL

19. 1987 1987 – Apartment Security and Parking Lot Security Lighting- Tarrant County, Texas, Case No. 17-100421-86, ROBERTS V. CLARK FINANCIAL CORPORTION. A female victim was attacked and beaten while walking from the parking lot to her apartment. She claimed inadequate lighting in the parking lot. A security guard at the complex had previously suggested adding more lights to the part of the parking lot where the woman was assaulted. The building is in a high-crime area. She settled for $75, 000 (Security Law Newsletter 1987, Vol. 7, No.12, 137). LIBILITY CASE STUDIES

20. 1998 1998 – Hospital Security Lighting –Grand Prairie, Texas, GUTKOWSKIV. GRAND PRAIRIE HOSPITAL. The victim pulled into the hospital parking lot at night where she was robbed and shot in the head. She claimed the hospital had inadequate security lighting to deter criminal activity. The case settled out of court... LIBILITY CASE STUDIES SECURITY LIGHTING

21. Why Why are there no guarantees that any specific crime is preventable? Key What is a “ Key ” element of crime prevention? Reducing the opportunity for a crime to occur! LIBILITIES – Cont’d : LIBILITIES – Cont’d :

22. YOUR QUESTIONS ANY QUESTIONS? ©TCLEOSE Course #2101 Crime Prevention Part I Curriculum is the intellectual property of CSCS-ICJS (2009)

23. DEFINE & PROCESS ©TCLEOSE Course #2101 Crime Prevention Part I Curriculum is the intellectual property of CSCS-ICJS (2009) Explain your basic understanding of vicarious liability and how it applies to you as a crime prevention practitioner Define liability. Describe your responsibility for your actions and recommendations Define professional responsibility. Explain why there are no guarantees that a specific crime is preventable. Identify her/his responsibilities and liability, if he/she makes a security recommendation that: is a conflict with life safety codes, violates city ordinances, state or federal law; results in property loss, personal injury or death and/or is determined to be inadequate.

24. Black’s Law Dictionary. (Sixth Edition) 1990 Published by West Publishing Company, 50 West Kellogg Blvd., St. Paul, MN 55164-0526 Home Office Crime Prevention Training Centre. Stafford, England, miscellaneous material. 1 Security The Magazine for Security Decision-Makers. 1986. “Cutting Your Liability Risk” by Michael Thompson. (ISSM 0037-0703). Published by The Cahners Publishing Company, 275 Washington Street, Newton, Massachusetts 02158-1630, William M. Platt, President. 54 Security Law Newsletter. Published by Crime Control Research Corporation, 1063 Thomas Jefferson Street, N. W., Washington, DC 20007, Lawrence W. Sherman, President. 1987, Vol. 7, No. 5, 58,1987,Vol. 7, No. 3, 33, 1988,Vol. 8, No. 6,66,1989, Vol. 9, No. 1, 145- 146, 1987, Vol. 7, No. 12,137, 1989,Vol. 9, No. 7, 83, 1988, Vol. 8, 6, 66-67, 1988, Vol. 8, No.4, 44-45, 1988, Vol. 8, No. 5, 54-55, 1988, Vol.8, No.4, 43-44, 1986, Vol.6, No.12, 173, 1986,Vol.6, No.8, 120-121. Texas Jurisprudence. 3rd Ed. Published by Bancroft-Whitney Company. 357-35; 359-398;400-401; 464-465. SOURCES ©TCLEOSE Course #2101 Crime Prevention Part I Curriculum is the intellectual property of CSCS-ICJS (2009)

25. Contact Information INSTITUTE for CRIMINAL JUSTICE STUDIES 350 N. Guadalupe, Suite 140, PMB 164 San Marcos, Texas 78666. 877-304-2727 www.cscs.txstate.edu ©TCLEOSE Course #2101 Crime Prevention Part I Curriculum is the intellectual property of CSCS-ICJS (2009)

26. TAKE A 10-MINUTE BREAK