EN265 – Immigrant Experience in Literature Queensborough Community College * Professor Trikartikaningsih Byas

EN265 – Immigrant Experience in Literature
Queensborough Community College * Professor Trikartikaningsih Byas
1
Paper 1 – Argumentative Essay
• Issues in Firoozeh Dumas’ Funny in Farsi & Deepa Iyer’s We Too Sing America
Description
As part of the Reading Group activities, you have already read, summarized, and analyzed parts of
the two books Funny in Farsi and We Too Sing America which you reported to the Group. This
essay requires you to make an argument about an issue raised in the books and support your
argument using information from the books. Pick any ONE of the many ISSUES raised in the book.
For example, you can look at how social, economy, political, cultural factors played a role in the
actions/decisions of the characters in the books. You must support your argument using the
information from the two books (primary sources) and one secondary sources (Scholarly or news
articles). You will have to synthesize all the supporting details from the sources either by quoting,
paraphrasing, or summarizing relevant and important details from all the sources.
Related Readings:
• Dumas’ Funny in Farsi AND Iyer’s We Too Sing America.
Requirements:
• Information: You have to include the following in your paper:
o Primary Source –information from the textbooks (Dumas and/or Iyer).
o Secondary Source– find one scholarly or news article that support your argument.
• Have a good title that represent your argument
• Paper Format:
o Length: 1250 – 1500 Words (5-6 pages)
o Line space: 1.5 (essay), heading (1.0) with ø before and øafter
o Font: Times New Roman 12-pt. (Arial 10, Georgia 11)
• Grade: 125 points (8.3% of Final Grade )
• Due date:
o Draft 1 : _______ Background of issue, thesis (argument), source (± 3pages)
o Draft 2 : _______ Revised draft to include information from two primaryand
one secondary sources and Work Cited List (± 5 pages)
o Final Draft : ______ Revised draft with information from all secondary sources
incorporated and Work Cited list (6-7 pages)
Submission Checklist:
Components Included Remarks
o Final Version (clean printout including a
Works Cited Page in MLA Format)
o Draft 1 + Peer Review Sheet1
o Draft 2 + Peer Review Sheet2
o Annotated Secondary Sources
Please DO NOT reprint draft1, draft2 or sources. I do not accept CLEAN unmarked drafts/ sources.
EN265 – Immigrant Experience in Literature
Queensborough Community College * Professor Trikartikaningsih Byas
2
Writing Process
Topic: Any issue raised in Dumas’ Funny in Farsi AND Iyer’s We Too Sing America
Questions to consider to help you formulate your argument:
• What political, social, educational, cultural factors affect the life (lives) of the maincharacter(s)?
• Which of the above factors was more influential? Why? How did people’s experience differ?
• How did the character(s) come to America? Was it easy? How different/similar is the character’s
to other characters? How did the experience affect them?
• Who plays an important role in the character’s life in the new country?
Steps to complete:
• The issue: Write about the way that the social/educational/political/economy factor you have
chosen is depicted in the book (Summary of issue).
o Write a brief paragraph summarizing many episodes in the book that closely link to the issue(s) you
choose, then focus on two or three that are the most important.
o Explain the premise that the selected episodes present about the issue
• The Argument (Position): Reread and then free write about your reactions to these episodes as a
whole. As you write, try to move from your initial and general reactions toward a more focused
statement about the issue. Draft your preliminary central argument. (Draft 1a)
• The Support:
o Find one secondary sources which can include the news and scholarly articles.
Use QCC Library website: Lexis-Nexis to find news article, and J-STOR or Academic Search
Complete (EBSCO) for scholarly articles
o Prepare an outline that organizes each of the points you will use to support your argument.
Your argument does not need be the same as the author’s—Dumas or Iyer). This outline
should include the evidence (quotations) you will use from the secondary sources. (Draft 1b)
o Combine Draft 1a and Draft 1b and add relevant details to the new draft (Draft 2).
• The Complete Essay.
o Create a Works Cited list using the MLA style
o Revise your Draft 2 after Peer Review activity, and add the Works Cited list at the end of
your essay.
Peer Review:
• On the day indicated on the Schedule, have a printout of your draft (for in-class peer-review) or
upload your draft to our class’s Wikis (for asynchronous online peer-review).
• Read and offer comments to your friend’s draft as scheduled.
Reminders:
• Give your paper a strong TITLE and be sure to include the WORD COUNT
• Save your paper draft in the following format Paper# LastName Title Draft#
For example: 2Byas Adjustment2 2Davis DeportationF
EN265 – Immigrant Experience in Literature
Queensborough Community College * Professor Trikartikaningsih Byas
3
Paper 1 – Argumentative Essay
Author: Title:
Excellent Good Developing Weak
Overall Impression & Readibility 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6
The writer presents a significant and interesting
position that is convincing and thought provoking.
Paragraphs are skillfully organized and add to the
development of ideas. Support is sound with rare or
no weak areas. Skillful phrasing, adept management
of voice and tone, and apt word choice create an
inviting paper. Sentence-level
errors are rare to non-existent.
Main Idea / Thesis 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2
• Topic is interesting, significant, and intellectually
challenging with multiple facets addressed.
• Argument is well articulated and thoroughly
developed.
Development: Argument & Evidence 50 46 42 38 34 30 26 22 18 14 10 6
• Argumentative structure is clearly evident.
• Objections are taken seriously and addressed
fair-mindedly with great skill.
• Claims are supported by reliable, valid evidence
from critical and credible sources and effectively
synthesized in a very convincing manner.
• Have at least two credible secondary sources
Organization 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2
• The introduction captures reader attention and
establishes the context for the paper.
• All the main ideas are clear and logically structured.
All paragraphs are coherent with clear topic
sentences, and are developed so the meaning is
clear and easy to follow.
• Transitions provide a strong sense of coherence.
• The conclusion summarizes and explores
implications and significance.
Convention 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2
There are very few or no mechanical errors in the
paper. Documentation of sources is accurate.
Attachments 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2
All required supplementary materials (annotated
sources, previous drafts) are included

Prescribing Medication and Providing Psychotherapy

Subheading needed.
Millions of children and adolescents in the United States are diagnosed with a wide variety of DSM-5 diagnoses. As a result, psychotherapy and psychotropic medications are widely used in the treatment of mental illness among this patient population. PMHNPs are among the psychiatric providers who are available to meet the psychiatric mental health needs of children and adolescents and their families. In your initial post, address the following questions.
1. When is it appropriate to prescribe psychotropic medications for child and adolescent clients? When should caution be taken when prescribing for these patients?
2. What can be done to increase the use of psychotherapy for children, adolescents, and their families?
3. What are some of the unique needs of the child/adolescent patient population when it comes to both prescribing psychotropic medication and providing psychotherapy?
Utilize these articles and please use as references:
American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry. (2012, February). A guide for community child serving agencies on psychotropic medication for children and adolescents (PDF).http://www.aacap.org/app_themes/aacap/docs/press/guide_for_community_child_serving_agencies_on_psychotropic_medications_for_children_and_adolescents_2012.pdf
Anderson, L. E., Chen, M. L., Perrin, J. M., & Van Cleave, J. (2015) Outpatient visits and medication prescribing for US children with mental health conditions. Pediatrics, 136(5), e1178–e1185.https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/136/5/e1178
Hieber, R. (2013). Toolbox: Psychotropic medications approved in children and adolescents. Mental Health Clinician, 2(11), 344–346.http://mhc.cpnp.org/doi/full/10.9740/mhc.n145473?code=cpnp-site
Merikangas, K. R., He, J., & Rapoport, J. (2013). Medication use in US youth with mental disorders. JAMA Pediatrics, 167(2),141148.https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/1465762

Funding of Proposition 215

ubmit a 2- to 4-page paper utilizing the selected policy from Week 1(The Compassion Act of 1996), analyzing the impact of financing and budgetary issues.
In addition to this week’s Resources, perform an informal literature search on the funding of your policy. Include at least two articles that discuss cost-effectiveness and cost controls pertaining to either your policy or nursing practices in general. Use these resources to respond to the following prompts:
Describe how the policy is funded and annual costs of continuing the policy for the last year.
Analyze any financial and budgetary efforts developed or being proposed to contain costs.
Relate current cost-containment strategies, including regulations, managed care efforts, or other financial and budgetary initiatives.
Describe how the financing of your policy impacts health outcomes and the role of the nurse in the workplace.
Support your responses with evidence.
In addition to the course resources, you must use at least two articles that discuss cost effectiveness and cost conrols.

Option #1: Case Study – Medicare Fraud and Abuse Risk Management Plan

Option #1: Case Study – Medicare Fraud and
Abuse Risk Management Plan
In this assignment, we examine the legal and ethical implications
of fraud and abuse. Use the CSU-Global Library and the Internet
to identify a real-world case of Medicare fraud and/or abuse. Write
a 4-5 page Risk Management Plan for your healthcare facility
using the readings, research, and your knowledge of health law
and ethics to analyze this case.
Your report should address the following substantive
requirements:
• Description of what occurred, who was affected, and why.
• Assess the case from the following perspectives:
◦ Ethical—Identify the ethical principles involved in this
situation from the perspective of all those involved.
◦ Legal—What are the legal implications and what laws,
or statutes were involved?
• Develop appropriate policies and procedures to prevent this
from occurring in the future.
• Provide specific prevention mechanisms to deal with the
case at hand.
Your report should meet the following structural requirements:
• Be 4-5 pages in length, not including the cover or reference
pages.
• Be formatted according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing
and APA Requirements (Links to an external site.)
.
• Provide support for your statements with in-text citations
from a minimum of four (4) scholarly articles. Two (2) of
these sources may be from the class readings, textbook, or
lectures, but two (2) must be external. The CSU-Global
Library is a good place to find these references.
• Utilize the following headings to organize the content in your
work:
◦ Assessment,
◦ Recommendations, and
◦ Conclusion.
You are strongly encouraged to submit all assignments to the
Turnitin Originality Check prior to submitting them to your
instructor for grading. If you are unsure how to submit an
assignment to the Originality Check tool, review the Turnitin
Originality Check Student Guide (PDF)
(Links to an external site.)
.

Layered security, or defense in depth, is basically a structure that uses multiple layers to make up for the faults of the previous layer.

have to reply to four of my classmates posts. 100 words each.
Post 1. By Amber
Layered security, or defense in depth, is basically a structure that uses multiple layers to make up for the faults of the previous layer. The idea behind this being that each layer has the ability to slow an intrusion making it easier to detect them and boot them. Each layer serves a specific purpose and thus would have limited capabilities on preventing different pathways of attacks. The idea is to focus on all possibilities of a data breach to try and prevent them, or to minimize the damage done in the event of a breach. Hackers will always find a way in if they really want to and having steps in place that make it more difficult for them to access data they want which in turns lessens the damage done. The more hurdles the attacker would have to jump over, the easier they are to find within the system. Of course knowing how they breached can help with strengthening the defense of the security to help block from that type of attack. From what I understand there are ways in which the layered security can be adaptable to the needs of the company using it.
When I searched data breaches from this year I came across one that caught my attention. A Capital One data breach identified on August 2nd of this year where roughly 100 million credit applications were stolen. A former amazon employee was arrested in connection with this breach. The connection between the amazon employee and Capital One is that Capital One was using a cloud within the Amazon Web services. Now even with different levels of protection a simple error lead to a major problem. The Web Application Firewall that Capital One was using was misconfigured and had way to many permission allowed to it. This misconfiguration allowed the firewall on Amazon’s web services to be tricked. The former amazon worker also had the inner workings of how Amazon’s web services and access services worked and was able to exploit the misconfiguration majorly. Amazon’s AWS boasts multiple security features that somehow where completely bypassed. For instance, their access advisor is meant to detect and locate pieces of their software that has to many permissions. This did not catch the misconfiguration of the Capital One AWS web application firewall. Other key security measures noted in the article were also bypassed. So it only takes one person with enough knowledge of the subject to exploit a flaw and cause major damage.
Post 2. By Willard
While layered security and defense-in-depth are quiet similar, their similarities end just as quickly as they begin. Layered security is about combining multiple security controls to protect data and resources. Some call it the “Swiss cheese defense” while others simply look at it like an onion. Since you are focusing on multiple layers of security overlapping each other, the chance of complete breach is rare. Yeah one or two layers of security or defense might be compromised or bypassed but there are still more to deal causing some to believe the ordeal too much of a hassle. Lapses and weaknesses do not easily materialize since other defenses exist. Defense in depth originated in the military as a strategy to resist rapid penetration. Here there were multiple layers of defense spread out and the idea is that the attack to lose momentum over time. With defense in depth it is understood that not just one security measure can protect a system. It takes multiple measures and aspects to reduce risk such as technical, physical and administrative controls.
American Medical Collection Agency(AMCA) had a data breach spanning over eight months from August of 2018 to March of 2019. Over 20 million American’s personal and financial information had been hacked and potential been put up for sale. AMCA is a third party healthcare billing vendor used by companies such as LabCorp ,Quest Diagnostics, BioReference Laboratories and Sunrise Laboratories to name a few. AMCA claims only 200,000 individuals had data stolen while reports and data have proven otherwise. Neither the collection agency or the companies it works for have notified all those whose information has been stolen while lawsuits around the US come out of the woodwork. Attorney generals from Illinois and Connecticut have opened investigations into this matter while senators from New Jersey and Virginia have sent letters to AMCA and individual companies using AMCA demanding answers on how this happened and how it went on for so long going unnoticed.
https://www.zdnet.com/article/amca-data-breach-has-now-gone-over-the-20-million-mark/
Post 3. By Ryan
The topic I chose to discuss from this week’s reading is obscured information. I know very little about this topic because I have not done much work with forensics, but I have heard about it from other cybersecurity classes. The subject I know the most about would be encryption, as most of my other classes talk about it at some point in the curriculum. I enjoy learning more about encryption and testing my abilities at figuring out algorithms on my own. In previous classes, we would do activities where we tried to unscramble an encrypted sentence, such as ones that used the Caesar Cipher, and I found that I enjoyed doing so. As for steganography, I do not know much about this subject at all. The only experience I have for that would be talking about it very little in class and in clubs. One club that I was a part of had a guest come in to talk about what their job entails; he works for the county police in the forensics department, so one of the things he talked about was steganography. Before talking to him, I had virtually no understanding about the subject, but he explained what the general idea was and showed real examples that he has encountered before. One example was a message that was hidden in individual pixels of a picture, used by a criminal to send secret information to someone else. I found that I am very interested in learning about steganography. The other things that the textbook mentions, like compression and proprietary format, I know even less about. I have not really heard of them other than from reading in the textbook. Overall, I am very interested in learning about obscuring information and how cybercriminals use this to their advantage. It is surprising that companies also use this technique for protecting sensitive information, but it does make sense. I look forward to understanding this topic better!
Post 4. By Amaya
The topic I will be discussing is The Children’s Online Privacy Act of 1998 (COPPA) which protects children 13 years of age or younger from the collection and use of their personal information by websites. Websites have to obtain parental consent before they can collect or use any personal information. I personally did not know this Act was established but i’m glad it was for the safety of young online users. While researching this act a little further, i discovered that schools can give consent to COPPA, but the information they collect must be used to benefit the school and it cannot be used to commercial purposes. Any personal information such as the child’s name, email address, phone number, social security, etc,. are just a few things that are protected under COPPA. I also discovered that screen names are not protected under COPPA unless an email is being used in replacement. I think this act is very important, especially now more than ever with the amount of sex trafficking and online predators, that children are protected while using the internet. They might not always be aware of how much information they give out. Along with that, parents should always keep an eye on the things their children are using the internet for or the websites they visit. Just in doing that can protect the children even more. I think COPPA should be updated slightly just because technology has advanced so much since it was established. It’s easier than ever for people to retrieve information quickly and easily. I am interested to see if the policies will be updated.
https://www.commonsense.org/education/articles/what-is-coppa

Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA)

Module 02: Critical Thinking

Module 02: Critical Thinking
Lewin’s Change Model (100 points)
One of the seminal studies and theories related to change management is Kurt Lewin’s Change Management Model. Components of his work are identified in many other theories, so understanding this theory offers insight into the change management process.
In this assignment, provide a brief overview of Lewin’s Change Management Model, including his rationale for creating this theory and the intended role this model addresses in change management.
Then discuss the three stages of change implementation and explain the importance of each stage. Be sure to use the terminology for each stage of Lewin’s model as outlined in the text.
Finally, Lewin’s theory was created in the 1940s. How would you modify/alter his theory to ensure that it remains relevant and applicable within KSA? Discuss any changes to be made to his theory to reflect today’s business environment, both globally and within KSA.
Your well-written paper should meet the following requirements:
Be three-to-five pages in length, which does not include the title page and reference pages, which are never a part of the content minimum requirements.
Use Saudi Electronic University academic writing standards and APA style guidelines.
Support your submission with course material concepts, principles, and theories from the textbook and at least three scholarly, peer-reviewed journal articles.
It is strongly encouraged that you submit all assignments into the Turnitin Originality Check prior to submitting it to your instructor for grading. If you are unsure how to submit an assignment into the Originality Check tool, review the Turnitin Originality Check – Student Guide for step-by-step instructions.
Review the grading rubric to see how you will be graded for this assignment

Explain (in at least 500 words for full credit) the FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF CAPITALISM.

Explain (in at least 500 words for full credit) the FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF CAPITALISM. Remember to spell-check, grammar check, no references needed, use your TEXTBOOK, not the internet.
You should have four paragraphs, at least, as well as an opening statement and a closing statement. Compose your submission as a WORD (or save as Word Doc, or rtf) document so that you can spell check it. Use good sentence structures and remember that spelling and grammar count! Be sure to proof your work.

Application Project Team Charter Outline

Application Project Team Charter Outline
Before completing this charter, read Roger Kaufman’s article and my file regarding means and ends.
The purpose of developing a team charter is to jump-start your work together as a learning team, help you avoid or quickly avoid common problems, and facilitate continual improvement of your team’s performance. By addressing the following issues at the beginning of the course, you will be able to enhance your team performance, member satisfaction, and course results.
Another purpose of the team charter is to give me notice of how you plan to work together and a “measuring stick” whereby to measure to what extent you have achieved your goals. Your team goals should be stated as measurable ends, not as means whereby you intend to achieve those ends. Develop your team charter through mutual sharing and consensus. Include the following components in your written team charter.
I. Mission statement
a. Team purpose (This is your mission statement)
i. Why do you exist as a team?
ii. What do you want to accomplish and why?
iii. What metrics will you use to determine whether you have accomplished your mission (if I can’t measure it, you haven’t accomplished it).
b. Team goals (These are means to your mission)
i. What team goals do you have to accomplish to attain your mission?
ii. How will you measure team progress toward accomplishing those goals?
iii. Describe individual and mutual accountability for goal achievement.
c. Member goals (These help align individuals to the overall team goals)
i. Clarify in measurable terms what each member expects to achieve by being a part of this team.
ii. What do you have in common?
iii. How do individual goals differ? (Clarify grade expectations, learning goals, and social expectations, etc.)
II. Boundaries
a. What policies, procedures and values do you subscribe to that cannot be violated?
b. What are the limitations on the teams’ performance (e.g., time and resources)?
III. Operating guidelines: Team structure and processes
a. How will you perform the work that has to be done on the various assignments?
b. How will you communicate with each other?
c. How will you facilitate member growth and development?
IV. Performance norms and consequences (Performance Agreement)
a. How will you measure overall team and member performance?
b. How will you reward overall team and member performance?
c. How will you deal with dysfunctional behaviors, e.g., dominating, withdrawing, wasting time, free riding, etc.?
d. How will you evaluate member contribution to the team process?
e. What expectations do you have for team meetings, will you have team meetings?
f. What consequences for missing or being late to a meeting and valid excuses for missing or being late?
g. What is expected quality of assigned work?
V. Charter endorsement
a. All team members sign the team charter agreement.
PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR WRITTEN CHARTER AS AN ATTACHEMENT TO THE ASSIGNMENT IN THIS FOLDER. IN ADDITION, SUBMIT THE COMPLETED TEMPLATE ATTACHED TO THE ASSIGNMENT SUMMARIZING YOUR TEAM’S GOAL’S.

VOLUME 20, ISSUE 2, PAGES 25–45 (2019) Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society

VOLUME 20, ISSUE 2, PAGES 25–45 (2019)
Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society
E-ISSN 2332-886X
Available online at
https://scholasticahq.com/criminology-criminal-justice-law-society/
Corresponding author: Lee Ann Slocum, University of Missouri, St. Louis, 324 Lucas Hall, St. Louis, MO 63121-4400, USA.
Email: slocuml@umsl.edu
Changes in Enforcement of Low-Level and Felony Offenses PostFerguson:
An Analysis of Arrests in St. Louis, Missouri
Lee Ann Slocum, Claire Greene, Beth M. Huebner, & Richard Rosenfeld
University of Missouri–Saint Louis
A B S T R A C T A N D A R T I C L E I N F O R M A T I O N
As a result of several highly publicized incidents of police killing unarmed Black suspects, many contend that American
police are in the midst of a crisis. Police have faced high levels of public scrutiny that some argue has stifled police
activities and led to spikes in violent crime. This phenomenon—coined in the aftermath of the police killing of Michael
Brown in Ferguson, Missouri—has become widely known as the Ferguson Effect. This study uses seven years of data and
time series analysis to assess whether the events in Ferguson were associated with a reduction in arrests for felonies and
low-level offenses in the nearby City of St. Louis, Missouri. We find that there was an initial reduction in low-level arrests
of Whites and Blacks in the wake of Ferguson. Enforcement of misdemeanors and ordinance violations then increased and
returned to expected levels, but only for Blacks. Post-Ferguson, felony arrests initially dropped for Blacks, but not Whites,
and then climbed for both groups. This work adds to the burgeoning literature on police responses in the wake of a highprofile shooting.
Article History:
Received April 15, 2019
Received in revised form June 18, 2019
Accepted June 30, 2019
Keywords:
arrest trends, misdemeanors, Ferguson Effect, de-policing, interrupted time series
© 2019 Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society and The Western Society of Criminology
Hosting by Scholastica. All rights reserved.
26 SLOCUM, GREENE, HUEBNER, & ROSENFELD
Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 2
The killing of Michael Brown in August of 2014
sparked civil unrest in the St. Louis region and across
the nation. This event, along with several high-profile
use of force incidents and unprecedented ‘social media
scrutiny’ of police, served as a catalyst for political
mobilization against police violence and accelerated
the growth of the Black Lives Matter Movement
(Shjarback, Pyrooz, Wolfe, & Decker, 2017). Some
scholars, policymakers, and police commanders raised
concerns that increased public scrutiny of police
behaviors would stifle proactive policing activities,
embolden offenders, and leave communities
unguarded (Hayes, 2015; MacDonald, 2016). FBI
Director James Comey voiced similar concerns,
stating in 2015 that high-profile police events had led
to a “chill wind blowing though American law
enforcement over the last year” (as cited in Schmidt &
Apuzzo, 2015, paragraph 3). This phenomenon—the
increased scrutiny of police followed by de-policing
and rising crime rates—has been called the “Ferguson
Effect” in the popular media.
Despite wide-ranging claims such as these, much
remains to be learned about possible de-policing postFerguson, and, more generally, how high profile and
controversial events such as police shootings and
allegations of excessive use of force influence the
manner in which police officers do their work. Aside
from a few notable exceptions (Shjarback et al., 2017),
there has been limited research that examines how the
actions of police in the St. Louis region changed in the
wake of Ferguson. This is a surprising gap in the
literature given that police in this community faced
intense and sustained scrutiny following the shooting
of Michael Brown (Institute for Intergovernmental
Research, 2015).
Using time series analysis, this study explores
whether the events in Ferguson were associated with
decreases in custodial arrests in St. Louis City,
Missouri, from 2011 to 2017. Arrests for low-level
offenses (misdemeanors and ordinance violations),
which tend to be more discretionary in nature, were
assessed separately from felonies. This study adds to
the literature in several ways. First, the research
conducted to-date on de-policing in the St. Louis
region exclusively examined traffic stops in Missouri
counties (Shjarback et al., 2017). Constraining the
focus to one type of police activity does not allow for
a nuanced exploration into whether the impact of highprofile events is limited to discretionary types of
enforcement, such as arrests for low-level offenses, or
if it extends to arrests for felonies. This distinction is
important because these actions reflect differing
resident demands. For example, the events in Ferguson
shed light on the fact that minorities in the St. Louis
region were being arrested at high rates for relatively
minor offenses (U. S. Department of Justice, 2015; see
also Ferguson Commission, 2015). Therefore,
reductions in arrests for minor offenses may align with
resident demands for policing practices aimed at
enhancing safety rather than generating revenue from
fines. On the other hand, there likely is less public
support for reducing arrests for serious felony
offenses.
Second, we examine whether the shooting of
Michael Brown had a different impact on arrests of
Whites versus Blacks. A growing body of research
suggests that law enforcement and citizen behavior in
response to high-profile policing events may be
racialized (Desmond, Kirk, & Papachristos, 2016;
Shjarback et al., 2017). Thus, we assess whether the
“chilling effect” of increased scrutiny of law
enforcement was more strongly manifested in the
policing of Black residents in St. Louis.
Finally, the study incorporates arrest data that
covers 2011 through 2017, which allows for the
examination of enforcement activity several years
before and after the Ferguson incident. Arrests for
low-level offenses have been declining since the early
2000s in most major cities, including St. Louis. (e.g.,
Rosenfeld & Wallman, 2019; Slocum, Huebner,
Rosenfeld, & Greene, 2018). We draw on seven years
of data to separate short-term variation in enforcement
from meaningful sustained change and to assess
claims that the events in Ferguson have had “a lasting
impact on police and citizens” (Deuchar, Fallik, &
Crichlow, 2018, p. 2). We also control for two sentinel
events that may have influenced police activity in the
region, including the St. Louis County grand jury
decision not to indict the police officer who killed
Michael Brown, as well as the acquittal of St. Louis
City police officer Jason Stockley in 2017, who was
accused of shooting a Black man and then planting
evidence. Overall, the results highlight the importance
of considering the long-term, distinctive effects of
high-profile events on arrests for different types of
offenses.
Background
On August 9, 2014, Michael Brown was shot and
killed by Ferguson, Missouri Police Officer Darren
Wilson. News of the shooting quickly spread on social
media, leading to impromptu protests against police
violence and eventually to more organized and
sustained demonstrations that were broadcast across
the St. Louis region and the world (Byers, 2014). The
after-action assessment report suggested that “social
media was the key global driver” of the protests in
Ferguson, which lasted for over 17 days (Institute for
Intergovernmental Research, 2015, p. xviii). While the
Ferguson police department had a tenuous relationship
CHANGES IN ENFORCEMENT OF LOW-LEVEL AND FELONY OFFENSES POST-FERGUSON 27
Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 2
with the community prior to the death of Michael
Brown, the events furthered the divide between Black
residents and the predominantly White police response
(Institute for Intergovernmental Research, 2015).
In the year following the shooting, violent crime
in the City of St. Louis began to climb after several
years of decline, leading St. Louis Police Chief Sam
Dotson to claim in late 2014 that the increases could
be attributed to the “Ferguson Effect.” He and other
local police chiefs argued that officers had been
stretched thin and were worn out from handling the
protests, leading to declines in enforcement (see
Byers, 2014). Others, including the director of the FBI
James Comey, suggested that officers had become
increasingly hesitant to engage with the public
following Ferguson because of heightened criticism
and out of fear of becoming “the catalyst for the next
round of civil unrest” (Dotson, as cited in Hayes, 2015,
paragraph 9).
Theoretical Perspectives
Although the Ferguson Effect is a relatively new
phenomenon, the notion that police enforcement,
particularly discretionary activity, is sensitive to
external pressure is not. External control and
accountability entities, such as the Department of
Justice, have strongly shaped the contemporary
proactive policing landscape, in part out of concern for
police agencies’ inability to effectively control
officers’ behavior (i.e., misconduct) and elevated
levels of public distrust of law enforcement. Zerotolerance and other more aggressive ordermaintenance police approaches, such as stop-questionand-frisk, have come under immense public, scholarly,
and legal scrutiny. Politicians have also increasingly
called for changes to make the police more
accountable and transparent. In 2014, President
Obama convened a special task force to make
recommendations for the reform of law enforcement
in America with the explicit goal of improving police
legitimacy (President’s Task Force on 21st Century
Policing, 2015).
While a complete review of the work
documenting the factors that influence police officers’
arrest decisions is beyond the scope of this paper (e.g.,
Chappell, MacDonald, & Manz, 2006; Klinger, 1994;
Kochel, Wilson, & Mastrofski, 2011; Novak, Frank,
Smith, & Engel, 2002; Smith & Visher, 1981), we
argue that officers’ decisions to disengage from the
public in the face of heightened public scrutiny can be
viewed as encompassing two general sets of
concerns—instrumental and normative. The
instrumental perspective, or social exchange theory,
views police as rational actors who weigh the costs and
benefits of exercising their discretion to make arrests
(Blau, 1964/2017; Emerson, 1976). On the positive
side of this ledger, benefits that accrue may be
collective and related to the belief that arrests help the
community by reducing crime. There might also be
personal benefits, some of which are tangible,
including promotions, and others that are intrinsic or
psychological, such as the positive feelings that come
from serving the community or seeing justice done.
Interactions with the public, however, also come with
potential costs that officers must consider: Lawsuits,
public scrutiny, official reprimand, termination of
employment, personal injury, and even death are all
potential outcomes when officers engage with the
public. For example, Novak, Smith, and Frank (2003)
found that officers who were aware that their behavior
could pose a liability were significantly less likely to
initiate encounters with suspects. To reduce the
likelihood of becoming entangled in potentially
litigious situations, officers often “self-selected”
themselves away from riskier environments and
encounters (Novak et al., 2003).
Large scale social changes post-Ferguson, such as
the increased scrutiny of the police and rise of the
Black Lives Matter Movement, as well as actual and
perceived changes in the level of organizational and
political support officers receive, have likely affected
enforcement behavior by shifting both the perceived
costs and benefits associated with making arrests
(Deuchar et al., 2018; Nix & Wolfe, 2017). Moreover,
it is reasonable to expect that arrests for minor offenses
should be more sensitive to these changes. Not only
are these types of enforcement actions more
discretionary than felony arrests, they likely bring
fewer rewards and entail similar risks.
In addition to these instrumental concerns,
normative considerations may also play a role. Recent
attention has been focused on the potential for high
profile incidents of police shootings and use of force
to damage the public’s view of law enforcement and,
in particular, the extent to which police are viewed as
legitimate (Culhane, Boman, & Schweitzer, 2016;
Matt, 2014). There is also emerging research on how
sentinel, negative events and the ensuing public dialog
shape officers’ perceptions of their own legitimacy
and their belief that they have the right to use force to
enforce the law. In their extension of the legitimacy
perspective, Bottoms and Tankebe (2012) highlight
the dialogic and relational nature of legitimacy and
argue that it is negotiated through discourse between
the police and public. Just as the public bases their
perceptions of legitimacy on what the police say and
do, the police center their own views of their
legitimacy on the signals they receive and interpret
from the public. Therefore, officers may interpret the
public outcry following the shooting of Michael
Brown as a challenge to their legitimacy and, in turn,
may begin to question their own moral authority (Nix
28 SLOCUM, GREENE, HUEBNER, & ROSENFELD
Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 2
& Wolfe, 2017). As a response to this perceived
legitimacy “deficit,” officers are expected to adjust
their behavior in an effort to revise their claim to
legitimacy. Some of the discourse surrounding
Ferguson has focused on the over enforcement of
minor offenses, so a potential response from the police
to these legitimacy challenges may be to refrain from
active enforcement of low-level crimes. In
comparison, making felony arrests, which are more
likely to be in response to citizen-initiated calls for
service and to involve crimes that pose a serious threat
to public safety or property, may help to bolster
officers’ beliefs in their own legitimacy. Thus, both
the instrumental and normative perspectives suggest
that any effect of Ferguson on enforcement activity
will be more pronounced for less serious arrests.
Given the highly charged role that race played in
the controversy over the shooting of Michael Brown,
as well as the more general racialized narratives
regarding policing in the United States, officers’
decisions pertaining to when and against whom to
enforce the law are unlikely to be color blind. They
may perceive that enforcement actions taken against
Blacks as compared to Whites come with the potential
for greater costs and greater harms to their legitimacy
(Deuchar et al., 2018). We might expect, therefore,
that the decline in enforcement post-Ferguson was, at
least initially, greater for Blacks than for Whites.
Empirical Research on De-Policing
There is some research that has explored changes
in arrests following high profile police shootings. For
example, Shi (2009) examined whether the shooting of
an unarmed Black youth in Cincinnati and the ensuing
civil unrest influenced arrests. Results indicated that
misdemeanor and felony arrests declined after the
shooting, but only misdemeanor arrests declined after
the riots. The author suggested that the lack of a
significant decline in felony arrests may be due to a
countervailing force – increases in serious crime that
occurred during this time.
Related work considers the effect of federal
investigations and oversight on enforcement activity.
Stone, Foglesong, and Cole (2009), in their analysis of
the outcomes of the 2000 consent decree in Los
Angeles, found limited evidence of de-policing. In the
two years following the consent decree, arrests
declined and crime increased slightly. After 2002,
enforcement activity increased, particularly for minor
crimes. Chanin and Sheats (2018) examined arrests in
ten jurisdictions under investigation by the
Department of Justice and obtained similar results:
Following investigations, there was a short-term
decline in arrests that was not sustained over time.
These findings aligned with the notion that officers
tend to engage in avoidance behaviors or lay low
during times of strife (Kappeler, Sluder, & Alpert,
1998; Muir, 1977; Paoline, 2004).
Policing in the Post-Ferguson Era
In spite of the widespread media attention to the
Ferguson Effect, there have only been a few studies
that assess if and how these events were internalized
by officers and agencies and their potential impact on
police behavior. The Ferguson Effect rests on the
assumption that police officers are less likely to
engage in proactive policing (Wolfe & Nix, 2016;
Valencia, 2015), and studies on changes in crime postFerguson provide indirect evidence regarding this
phenomenon. Research generally has failed to link the
events in Ferguson to significant increases in crime.
For example, Pyrooz, Decker, Wolfe, and Shjarback
(2016) found no change in violent or property crime in
81 large U.S. cities in the 12 months before and after
Ferguson. Substantial fluctuation in crime trends postFerguson and the short follow-up period, however,
made estimation of true change difficult. The authors
contended that if there was de-policing, it occurred
largely in cities with historically high levels of
violence and primarily in Black communities.
Similarly, Rosenfeld and Wallman (2019) examined
arrest rates and homicides in 53 large cities from 2010
through 2015 and found no association between
reductions in arrests and higher homicide rates. In fact,
higher arrest rates of Black persons were associated
with increases in homicide. Research focusing
specifically on St. Louis also offers mixed evidence:
The timing of increases in property crime, but not
other types of offenses, was consistent with a Ferguson
Effect (Rosenfeld, 2015).
Studies of officers’ perceptions of the policing
climate after high profile shootings have been more
supportive of a Ferguson Effect. Much of this research
aligns with the hypothesis that de-policing postFerguson is the result of both shifts in the costs and
benefits of engaging with the community, as well as
officers’ perceptions of their own legitimacy. For
example, using cross-sectional survey data collected
from a sample of officers in one Southeastern
jurisdiction, Nix and Wolfe (2017) found that officers
perceived policing as more dangerous and less
enjoyable post-Ferguson and believed that the public’s
perceptions of the police had worsened (see also
Deuchar et al., 2018; Pew Research Center, 2017;
Torres, Reling, & Hawdon, 2018). In addition, about
one third of the sample reported that they were less
likely to be proactive, were more apprehensive about
using force and had lower levels of self-legitimacy
(see also Oliver, 2015). Using data from commandlevel officers in the same region, Nix, Wolfe, and
Campbell (2018) also found that most of commanders
in the sample believed there was a “war on cops.” In
CHANGES IN ENFORCEMENT OF LOW-LEVEL AND FELONY OFFENSES POST-FERGUSON 29
Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 2
contrast to line officers, however, they did not feel that
public scrutiny led to de-policing. It is unclear if these
attitudinal shifts translated into changes in policing
behaviors, as research has found that attitudinal factors
have only a moderate influence on officers’ proactive
behavior (Worden, 1989). Furthermore, because pretest data were not available, there is no way to discern
from these studies if police attitudes or behaviors
changed markedly as a result of high-profile police
shootings.
Some research has directly assessed the effect of
Ferguson on police activity. Researchers conducting
an ethnographic study in a Southeastern police agency
observed that officers were reluctant to engage in
proactive policing even when they observed illegal
activity (Deuchar et al., 2018). This research was
conducted post-Ferguson, so it is not known if this
represented a change in enforcement; however,
interviews corroborated that many officers perceived
a shift in their relationship with the public and a
decline in the vigor with which they enforce the law.
Other research has examined this issue using
longitudinal enforcement data. In a study of Baltimore,
Morgan and Pally (2016) found that arrests decreased
substantially post-Ferguson and fell even further
following the death of Freddie Gray, a young Black
man who was lethally injured while being transported
by the police. Furthermore, the reductions were most
pronounced for less serious offenses. In one of the few
examinations of de-policing that focused explicitly on
Missouri, results indicated that departments made
fewer traffic stops and arrests in 2015 (post-Ferguson)
compared to 2014 (pre-Ferguson) (Shjarback et al.,
2017).
Evidence also is consistent with the idea that
highly publicized police shootings in the postFerguson era created a racialized de-policing effect.
Although opinions of the police held by both Blacks
and Whites generally decline in the wake of highprofile cases of brutality against unarmed Black men
(Lasley, 1994; Weitzer, 2002), a study by the Pew
Research Center (2017) found that officers believed
that recent incidents greatly aggravated tensions
between the police and Black residents. Furthermore,
Shjarback and colleagues (2017) contended that
officers are more likely to avoid discretionary
activities in minority communities because of the
racially centered nature of recent police shootings,
particularly in light of the already strained
relationships between the police and persons of color
(see also Weitzer, 2014). There is preliminary
evidence that supports this idea. Shjarback and
colleagues (2017) found that declines in traffic stops
and arrests were amplified in predominately Black
jurisdictions. Similarly, Shi’s (2009) study of the 2001
Cincinnati riot also found greater reductions in arrests
in communities with greater concentrations of Black
residents.
Current Study
At the core of the Ferguson Effect is the notion
that police have pulled back from pro-active policing
in response to increased public scrutiny. Yet this
assertion has received very little empirical scrutiny,
with much of the research providing indirect tests of
this argument. This study provides a direct
examination of the de-policing hypothesis by
examining monthly changes in arrests for low-level
offenses (i.e., misdemeanors and ordinance violations)
and felonies pre- and post-Ferguson in St. Louis,
Missouri from 2011 to 2017 using interrupted timeseries analysis.
In particular, we address three interrelated
research questions. First, was there a decline in arrests
for low-level offenses and felonies following
Ferguson, and was any observed reduction sustained
over time? Following prior research (e.g., Chanin &
Sheats, 2018; Stone et al., 2009), we hypothesize that
arrests immediately declined following the shooting of
Michael Brown and then increased over time as the
saliency of this event faded from public and police
consciousness.
Second, are similar reductions observed for lowlevel and felony arrests Post-Ferguson? We expect that
declines will be greater for arrests involving
misdemeanors and ordinance violations relative to
felonies. Officers have more discretion when
enforcing low-level offenses as compared to felonies,
and we hypothesize that the events in Ferguson were
less likely to have an effect on the cost-benefit
calculations associated with making arrests for serious
crimes. Moreover, police may view arrests for minor
offenses as contributing to their “legitimacy deficit”
(Bottoms & Tankebe, 2012, p. 133), whereas felony
arrests constitute “legitimate” police work (Brown,
1981).
Third, were declines in arrests more pronounced
for Blacks than Whites following Ferguson? Race
plays a central role in the post-Ferguson narrative, and,
therefore, we hypothesize that reductions in arrests
were more heavily concentrated among Blacks.
St. Louis provides an important context for this
research because of its proximity to Ferguson. The
City of St. Louis, which has a population of just over
300,000 persons, is an independent county adjacent to
St. Louis County, which encompasses dozens of
municipalities, including the city of Ferguson. The St.
Louis Metropolitan Police Department was a central
partner to St. Louis County Police Department during
the civil unrest following the shooting of Michael
Brown. Moreover, as a result of the shooting, police
30 SLOCUM, GREENE, HUEBNER, & ROSENFELD
Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 2
practices in the entire metropolitan region came under
substantial scrutiny (Ferguson Commission, 2015; U.
S. Department of Justice, 2015), placing additional
pressure and stress on all local law enforcement
agencies (Institute for Intergovernmental Research,
2015).
Blacks make up 50% of the St. Louis population
and Whites 44% (U.S. Census, 2017). Similar to many
U.S. cities, dimensions of race and economic
inequality are intertwined with spatial segregation.
The greatest concentration of Black residents and the
highest rates of poverty tend to be concentrated on the
north side of the city, which also has the highest rates
of violent crime. Geographically, the north side is also
closer to Ferguson than are other areas of the city.
Method
Data
The dependent variable is the number of custodial
arrests made by the St. Louis Metropolitan Police
Department (SLMPD) within the City of St. Louis in
each of the 84 months from 2011 through 2017.
SLMPD provided the data to generate monthly arrest
counts, which were broken into two types based on the
most serious charge. Lower-level arrests consist of
enforcement actions in which the most serious charge
was either a misdemeanor offense or an ordinance
violation.1 Misdemeanors and ordinance violations
were combined because they are associated with
relatively minor crimes. 2 Arrests in which the most
serious charge was a felony are captured by our second
dependent variable. 3 Each individual’s race was
recorded by the SLMPD at the time of arrest. In order
to assess whether police disengagement was more
pronounced for Blacks than Whites, we further
disaggregated arrests by the race of the individual
arrested. Because most residents of St. Louis identify
as either Black or White, we focused on these two
groups.
To understand the long- and short-term effects of
the events in Ferguson on arrests, we constructed a
series of measures designed to capture changes in
arrest trends. It is hypothesized that the events in
Ferguson led to an immediate reduction in the number
of arrests made by the SLMPD. The primary
independent variable used to test this is a dichotomous
measure (post-Ferguson) scored 0 in the months prior
to August 2014 and 1 in the month that Michael Brown
was shot (August 2014) and all subsequent months.
We assessed whether there was a change in the slope
of the arrest trend after the shooting by including an
independent variable that measures the number of
months that passed since Ferguson, scoring all months
before this event as 0. To account for long-term trends
in enforcement, we included an independent variable
that captures the number of months since the start of
the observation period (January 2011). Non-linearity
in the underlying arrest trends and the trends postFerguson were explored using quadratic terms.
We included several control variables that capture
factors likely to influence enforcement activity.
Similar to crime, enforcement levels show seasonal
fluctuations, peaking in the warmer summer months.
Monthly fixed effects were included in the models to
adjust for seasonality. Because the population of St.
Louis has declined over time, we controlled for the
number of residents using data from the U.S. Census.
We also controlled for two high profile events that
followed the Ferguson shooting. In November 2014,
the grand jury determined there was not enough
probable cause to indict Darren Wilson, the officer
who shot Michael Brown, and a number of highly
visible, and sometimes violent, protests were held
throughout the region in late November and early
December (Moore, 2014). To account for these events,
we included a dichotomous control for the months
surrounding the grand jury decision (1 = November or
December 2014, 0 = all other months). We also
controlled for the acquittal on September 15, 2017 of
SLMPD police officer Jason Stockley, who was
charged with the first-degree murder of Anthony
Lamar Smith. Stockley shot and killed Smith after a
police pursuit and attempted apprehension, which was
triggered by a suspected drug deal. Although the
shooting occurred on December 20, 2011, Stockley
was not charged until May 2016, when activists
asserted that the killing had been covered up by the
police (Currier & Patrick, 2017). Following the
acquittal, protests immediately erupted throughout the
region and continued for over a month, resulting in
hundreds of arrests (Berg, 2017; Petrin, 2017). Unlike
the protests following the shooting of Michael Brown
and the Wilson grand jury decision, which were
centered in St. Louis County, the Stockley protests
primarily occurred in St. Louis City. A dichotomous
indicator was introduced to account for the civil unrest
associated with Stockley’s acquittal (1 = September or
October 2017, 0 all other months).
Research suggests that changes in enforcement
can be driven by fluctuations in resident demand for
police services (Rosenfeld, Fornango, & Rengifo,
2007), and there is some evidence to indicate that high
profile incidents of police violence dampen the
public’s willingness to call the police, particularly in
predominantly Black neighborhoods (Desmond et al.,
2016). For these reasons, we included a measure of the
number of calls to 911 in each month. These data came
from the SLMPD computer-assisted dispatch (CAD)
system. Because our interest was in controlling for
events that might trigger arrests, accident-related calls,
CHANGES IN ENFORCEMENT OF LOW-LEVEL AND FELONY OFFENSES POST-FERGUSON 31
Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 2
calls for illness, and other public service calls were
excluded, as were duplicate calls for the same event.
We also controlled for changing crime rates using the
number of Part 1 crimes recorded by the police in each
month.4
Analytic Plan
The analysis proceeded in several phases. We
began by computing descriptive statistics for felony
and low-level arrests for the periods pre- and postFerguson, respectively (see Table 1 and Figures 1 and
2). Independent sample t-tests (two-tailed) were used
to assess whether the mean monthly number of arrests
differed significantly between these two periods.
Simple before- and after- comparisons do not take
into account underlying trends in enforcement activity.
This is a noteworthy limitation because prior research
has found that in St. Louis and elsewhere, police
enforcement had been declining relatively steadily
since at least 2002 (Rosenfeld & Wallman, 2019;
Slocum et al., 2018). Any observed decline simply
might be a result of these long-term trends. To assess
whether the events in Ferguson had an effect on felony
and low-level arrests above and beyond the long-term
underlying enforcement trends, we used maximum
likelihood time series analysis (Bernal, Cummins, &
Gasparrini, 2017; Corsaro, 2018). This type of design
is appropriate for testing whether there was a change
in the number of arrests and the slope of the arrest
trend following the events in Ferguson, controlling for
fluctuations in public demand for police services and
crime. Because all outcomes were counts, a negative
binomial model was used. 5 Robust standard errors
were estimated using the Huber-White sandwich
estimator to adjust for non-normality in the residuals.
Models for all arrests of each type (i.e., low-level and
felony) were estimated first, followed by race-specific
arrest models. Hausman tests were conducted using
the Stata 15 (Statacorp, 2017) suest and test commands
to determine if Ferguson had a significantly different
effect on arrests of Whites versus Blacks. Finally, to
facilitate interpretation of the results, we generated
graphs depicting the estimated number of monthly
arrests of Blacks and Whites pre- and post-Ferguson
using Stata’s margins command. These figures also
include the counterfactual, which estimated the
number of arrests expected to occur in each month if
the events in Ferguson had not taken place.
Results
Bivariate analyses were first used to describe
changes in the mean numbers of low-level and felony
arrests per month before and after Ferguson. As
presented in Table 1, the mean number of monthly
arrests for all comparisons was significantly lower
after Ferguson. Prior to August 2014, the mean
number of low-level arrests per month was 484.72 (SD
= 82.27). For the period after Ferguson, this mean
declined to 327.68 arrests per month (SD = 48.86).
Reductions in low-level arrests were observed for both
Blacks and Whites, but the percent change was greater
for Blacks (-37.6%) than Whites (-17.6%). For Blacks,
low-level arrests declined from 359.63 (SD = 66.83) to
224.34 (SD = 35.26). The comparable pre-and postFerguson means for Whites were 123.09 (SD = 20.88)
and 101.44 (SD = 21.72), respectively. Figure 1
presents the observed trends in arrests for low-level
offenses separately by race. This figure visually tells
the same story as the bivariate comparisons. Despite
monthly fluctuations in arrests, the highest peak in
arrests of Blacks post-Ferguson was lower than the
lowest peak pre-Ferguson. Reductions in low-level
arrests of Whites were smaller, and there was a tall
peak near the time of the Stockley protests.
Table 1. Comparison of Low-Level and Felony Arrests Before and After Ferguson
Pre-Ferguson Post-Ferguson
Mean SD Mean SD t-score
Low-level Arrests
All 484.72 82.27 327.68 48.86 -10.57***
White 123.09 20.88 101.44 21.72 -4.66***
Black 359.63 66.83 224.34 35.26 -11.52***
Felony Arrests
All 468.07 82.87 369.24 69.84 -5.9***
White 99.60 19.80 88.02 21.50 -2.57*
Black 366.98 67.18 279.80 51.51 -6.65***
Abbreviations: SD = Standard Deviation
Note: ***p ≤ .001, * p ≤ .05. Independent sample t-test comparing mean number of arrests
per month before and after Ferguson, df = 82
32 SLOCUM, GREENE, HUEBNER, & ROSENFELD
Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 2
Figure 1. Number of Arrests of Whites and Blacks for Misdemeanors and Ordinance Violations Before and
After Ferguson, January 2011 – December 2017 (N = 84 Months)
The mean number of monthly felony arrests was
also significantly lower following Ferguson. This was
true for arrests of Blacks and Whites, and again, the
decline was greater for Blacks (-23.8%) than Whites (-
11.6%). Before Ferguson, the mean was 468.07 (SD =
82.87) compared to 369.24 (SD = 69.84) after this
event. The mean number of felony arrests of Blacks
declined from 366.98 (SD = 67.18) per month to
279.80 (SD = 51.51), and White felony arrests dropped
from 99.60 (SD = 19.80) to 88.02 (SD= 21.50). The
trends for felony arrests of Blacks and Whites are
displayed in Figure 2. Similar to low-level arrests,
there were notable declines in the number of felony
arrests per month for Blacks. Declines in White felony
arrests are more difficult to discern visually.
These findings suggest that the SLMPD made
fewer arrests post-Ferguson; however, this reduction
might simply reflect underlying downward trends in
enforcement. To assess whether there was an abrupt
shift in the number of felony or low-level arrests or
whether the slopes of these trends changed after the
shooting of Michael Brown, we used interrupted time
series analyses. The results of these analyses can be
found in Table 2 for misdemeanor arrests and
ordinance violations and Table 3 for felonies. Results
for all arrests are displayed first, followed by racespecific results.
As displayed in Table 2, the negative and
significant coefficient for months since January 2011
indicates that arrests for low-level offenses were
generally declining over the study period. However,
there was an added, significant drop post-Ferguson,
which is reflected in the negative significant
coefficient. The incident rate ratio (IRR) indicates that
after Ferguson, low-level arrests decreased by a factor
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
Number of Arrests
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
10
20
30
40
Months Since Michael Brown Shooting
White Arrests Black Arrests
Solid black line indicates month of Michael Brown shooting.
Short-dash gold line indicates month of Darren Wilson grand jury decisions.
Long-dash gray line indicates month of Jason Stockley verdict.
CHANGES IN ENFORCEMENT OF LOW-LEVEL AND FELONY OFFENSES POST-FERGUSON 33
Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 2
of .782. After this initial drop, arrests for these types
of offenses increased in a linear fashion.
Other periods of civil unrest also had an effect on
low-level arrests. There was a drop in the number of
arrests for misdemeanors and ordinance violations in
the months surrounding the Wilson grand jury
decision, while low-level arrests were significantly
higher after the Stockley acquittal. The number of 911
calls, the number of Part 1 crimes recorded in the
month, and changes in city population were unrelated
to low-level arrests.
The results are presented graphically in Figure 3,
which displays the estimated number of arrests before
and after Ferguson based on this model. The dotted
line represents the counterfactual and provides an
estimate of how many arrests for misdemeanors and
municipal violations would be expected if the events
in Ferguson had not occurred. Consistent with the
results in Table 2, low-level arrests dropped
immediately after the shooting of Michael Brown,
then increased, before gradually declining. Low-level
arrests never reached the number that would be
expected based on the counterfactual, and they ended
the study period at their lowest expected levels.
Figure 2. Number of Arrests of Whites and Blacks for Felonies Before and After Ferguson, January 2011 – December
2017 (N = 84 Months)
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
Number of Arrests
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
10
20
30
40
Months Since Michael Brown Shooting
White Arrests Black Arrests
Solid Vertical line indicates month of Michael Brown shooting.
Short-dash vertical line indicates month of Darren Wilson grand jury decisions.
Long-dash vertical line indicates month of Jason Stockley verdict.
34 SLOCUM, GREENE, HUEBNER, & ROSENFELD
Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 2
Table 2. Negative Binomial Regression with Month Fixed Effects Estimating the Effect of Ferguson on Arrests for
Misdemeanors and Ordinance Violations Disaggregated by Race (N = 84)
All White Black
Coef. Robust SE IRR Coef. Robust SE IRR Coef. Robust SE IRR
Months since January
2011 (X 10) -0.066*** 0.015 0.993 -0.029 0.023 0.997 -0.082*** 0.017 0.992
Post-Ferguson -0.246*** 0.054 0.782 -0.304*** 0.092 0.738 -0.219*** 0.056 0.803
Months since
Ferguson (X 10) 0.160** 0.060 1.016 0.202* 0.095 1.020 0.138* 0.061 1.014
Months since
Ferguson, squared (X
10)
-0.003 0.002 1.000 -0.007* 0.003 0.999 -0.001 0.001 1.000
Wilson Grand Jury
decision -0.125* 0.049 0.882 -0.155* 0.068 0.857 -0.115 0.060 0.891
Stockley verdict 0.200*** 0.051 1.222 0.510*** 0.135 1.666 0.026 0.071 1.027
Number of 911 calls
(X 10,000) 0.230 0.166 1.000 0.396 0.210 1.000 0.164 0.196 1.000
Part 1 Crimes (X
1,000) -0.017 0.071 1.000 0.014 0.105 1.000 -0.042 0.081 1.000
Population (X 10,000) 0.040 0.166 1.000 -0.331 0.263 1.000 0.185 0.173 1.000
Constant 4.680 5.281 14.763 8.459 -0.081 5.521
Pseudo R2 0.20 0.14 0.21
Abbreviations: Coef. = Coefficient; SE = Standard Error; IRR = Incident Rate Ratio
Note: ***p ≤ .001, **p ≤ .01, * p ≤ .05. To ease interpretation, coefficients and robust standard errors for were multiplied by a constant
when indicated. IRRs were not transformed.
CHANGES IN ENFORCEMENT OF LOW-LEVEL AND FELONY OFFENSES POST-FERGUSON 35
Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 2
Figure 3. Estimated Number of Arrests for Misdemeanors and Ordinance Violations Before and After the Shooting of
Michael Brown
The race specific results tell a somewhat different
story. For Blacks, the underlying trend in low-level
arrests was negative and statistically significant, while
arrests of Whites did not decline significantly over the
period. The underlying trends differed significantly by
race (χ2
(1) = 7.73, p ≤ .01). Following Ferguson, lowlevel arrests of both Blacks and Whites dropped with
arrests of Whites declining by a factor of .738 and of
Blacks by .803. Arrests then increased for both groups,
but the increase for White arrests diminished over
time, as indicated by the significant quadratic term for
the number of months post- Ferguson. In comparison,
the linear term, but not the quadratic term, was
significant for Blacks, signaling that the increase in
low-level arrests of Blacks post-Ferguson remained
relatively constant. Despite these differences, the
extent to which Ferguson had an effect on the number
of arrests and arrest trends did not differ significantly
by race (level: χ2
(1) = .75, p > .05; linear trend: χ2
(1)
= .31, p > .05). Finally, for Whites, low-level arrests
decreased after the Wilson grand jury decision but
increased after the Stockley verdict. These decisions
had no effect on the arrests of Blacks.
Figure 4 provides more insight into the extent and
nature of the post-Ferguson trends in arrests for minor
offenses. Low-level arrests of Blacks climbed postFerguson, and less than two years after the shooting of
Michael Brown, they exceeded the levels predicted by
the counterfactual. Arrests of Whites for minor
offenses, in comparison, increased initially postFerguson, then dropped again. They never reached the
level that would have been expected if the events in
Ferguson had not occurred.
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
Number of Arrests
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
10
20
30
40
Months Since Michael Brown Shooting
Counterfactual Estimated
Solid black line indicates month of Michael Brown shooting.
Short-dash gold line indicates month of Darren Wilson grand jury decisions.
Long-dash gray line indicates month of Jason Stockley verdict.
36 SLOCUM, GREENE, HUEBNER, & ROSENFELD
Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 2
Figure 4. Estimated Number of Arrests of Blacks and Whites for Misdemeanors and Ordinance Violations Before and
After the Shooting of Michael Brown
The results for felony arrests are presented in
Table 3. Similar to the models for low-level arrests,
there was a general downward trend in felony arrests
for the study period, and the number of arrests
decreased by a factor of .787 post-Ferguson.
Following the initial drop, felony arrests trended
upward, but at a diminishing rate. Felony arrests
declined during the period surrounding the Wilson
grand jury decision and the Stockley verdict.
Mirroring misdemeanor and municipal arrest results,
population changes, 911 calls, and Part 1 crimes were
not related to felony arrests.
The estimated counts and counterfactual
displayed in Figure 5 indicate that felony arrests
dropped immediately post-Ferguson, then increased,
surpassing within a year the number that would have
been expected if the events in Ferguson had not
occurred. They then declined again, ending the study
period at higher than expected levels.
These findings hold for felony arrests of Blacks
and Whites as well with one key exception: White
felony arrests did not decline significantly after the
shooting of Michael Brown, a finding that runs counter
to the Ferguson Effect. The magnitude of the postFerguson reduction in felony arrests did not vary
significantly by race (χ2
(1) = .49, p > .05), but after this
event, arrests increased at a faster rate for Whites
compared to Blacks (χ2
(1) = 5.22, p ≤ .05).
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
Number of Arrests
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
10
20
30
40
Months Since Michael Brown Shooting
Counterfactual, White Estimated, White
Counterfactual, Black Estimated, Black
Solid black line indicates month of Michael Brown shooting.
Short-dash gold line indicates month of Darren Wilson grand jury decisions.
Long-dash gray line indicates month of Jason Stockley verdict.
CHANGES IN ENFORCEMENT OF LOW-LEVEL AND FELONY OFFENSES POST-FERGUSON 37
Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 2
Table 3. Negative Binomial Regression with Month Fixed Effects Estimating the Effect of Ferguson on Felony Arrests
Disaggregated by Race (N = 84)
All White Black
Coef. Robust SE IRR Coef. Robust SE IRR Coef. Robust SE IRR
Months since January
2011 (X 10) -0.083*** 0.022 0.992 -0.102*** 0.034 0.99 -0.078*** 0.022 0.992
Post-Ferguson -0.239*** 0.066 0.787 -0.177 0.096 0.838 -0.252*** 0.074 0.777
Months since Ferguson
(X 10) 0.315*** 0.079 1.032 0.511*** 0.103 1.052 0.252** 0.088 1.026
Months since Ferguson,
squared (X 10) -0.005*** 0.001 0.999 -0.007*** 0.002 0.999 -0.005** 0.002 1.000
Wilson Grand Jury
decision -0.382*** 0.047 0.682 -0.481*** 0.127 0.618 -0.367*** 0.068 0.693
Stockley verdict -0.352*** 0.048 0.704 -0.446*** 0.078 0.640 -0.324*** 0.049 0.724
Number of 911 calls (X
10,000) 0.240 0.256 1.000 -0.072 0.302 0.999 0.338 0.284 1.000
Part 1 Crimes (X 1,000) 0.002 0.100 1.000 0.029 0.164 1.000 -0.013 0.099 1.000
Population (X 10,000) -0.082 0.197 1.000 0.250 0.296 1.000 -0.180 0.219 1.000
Constant 8.558 6.241 -3.123 9.493 11.324 6.939
Pseudo R2 0.159 0.142 0.157
Abbreviations: Coef. = Coefficient; SE = Standard Error; IRR = Incident Rate Ratio
Note: ***p ≤ .001, **p ≤ .01, * p ≤ .05. To ease interpretation, coefficients and robust standard errors for were multiplied by a
constant when indicated. IRRs were not transformed.
38 SLOCUM, GREENE, HUEBNER, & ROSENFELD
Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 2
Figure 5. Estimated Number of Felony Arrests Before and After the Shooting of Michael Brown
Figure 6, which displays the estimated number of
felony arrests along with the counterfactual, makes
clearer the changes in felony arrests of Blacks and
Whites that occurred post-Ferguson. For Blacks, the
initial post-Ferguson decline was notable. This drop
was followed by rising arrests, and approximately a
year after Ferguson, there were more felony arrests
than expected based on the underlying trend. Felony
arrests of Blacks then began to fall and by December
2017 dropped just below expected levels. Felony
arrests of Whites followed a different trend. There was
little evidence of a decline post-Ferguson, and arrests
rose and remained higher than expected.
In supplemental analyses, we created a measure
of felony arrests that excluded arrests in which the
most serious charge was a drug offense. Drug offenses
can be more discretionary in nature, and the laws
classifying marijuana offenses changed during the
study period. In addition, they are the most prevalent
felony charge in St. Louis City (see Slocum et al.,
2018). In these analyses, the magnitude of the postFerguson drop is attenuated somewhat, but still
statistically significant for arrests of Blacks, but not
Whites. After the shooting, non-drug felony arrests of
Whites increased linearly, and there was no such
significant increase for Blacks.
Discussion
This study sheds light on the impact of increased
police scrutiny on enforcement activity by examining
changes in arrests in St. Louis City following the
killing of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri. Our
dual focus on arrests for lower-level offenses and
felonies provides for a nuanced exploration of how
arrest decision-making is shaped by larger social shifts
following controversial use of force incidents. Given
the racialized nature of the protests following
Ferguson, we also disaggregated arrests by race to
assess whether any observed reduction in enforcement
activity post-Ferguson was more heavily concentrated
among Blacks.
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
Number of Arrests
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
10
20
30
40
Months Since Michael Brown Shooting
Counterfactual Estimated
Solid black line indicates month of Michael Brown shooting.
Short-dash gold line indicates month of Darren Wilson grand jury decisions.
Long-dash gray line indicates month of Jason Stockley verdict.
CHANGES IN ENFORCEMENT OF LOW-LEVEL AND FELONY OFFENSES POST-FERGUSON 39
Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 2
Figure 6. Estimated Number of Felony Arrests of Blacks and Whites Before and After the Shooting of Michael Brown
Several key findings emerged. First, as
hypothesized, results from bivariate analyses
comparing the number of arrests in periods before and
after the shooting of Michael Brown indicate there
were fewer enforcement actions after Ferguson. After
adjusting for underlying declining arrest trends and
controlling for changing demand for police services,
we observed a reduction in enforcement for both lowlevel offenses and felonies in the month Michael
Brown was killed. The findings lend credence to the
idea of a Ferguson Effect and align with prior research
that documented a decrease in traffic stops in Missouri
after Ferguson (Shjarback et al., 2017).
We also found that the reductions in enforcement
were only sustained for low-level arrests. Arrests for
misdemeanors and ordinance violations exhibited
relatively small increases post-Ferguson before falling
again, and they never reached the levels that would
have been expected absent these events. In
comparison, felony arrests climbed more steadily after
Ferguson and returned to expected levels within a
year. These findings support our hypothesis that
declines were greater for low-level offenses compared
to felonies. They also comport with other research of
this type that suggests government interventions and
sentinel events, similar to those in Ferguson, are most
likely to have an effect on lower-level enforcement
activity for which discretion is more available (Chanin
& Sheats, 2018; Morgan & Pally, 2016).
Second, when enforcement actions were
disaggregated by the race of the individual arrested, a
more complicated picture emerged. For Blacks, the
findings are generally consistent with the hypothesis
that controversial incidents of police violence are
associated with immediate reductions in enforcement
that are not sustained over time. After the initial drop
following the shooting of Michael Brown, arrests of
Blacks for minor offenses and felonies increased,
40 SLOCUM, GREENE, HUEBNER, & ROSENFELD
Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 2
returning to expected levels within approximately 16
to 20 months.
Similar to Blacks, there was a significant and
abrupt post-Ferguson reduction in arrests of Whites for
ordinance violations and misdemeanors. Although we
hypothesized that this drop would be more pronounced
for Blacks, the magnitude did not vary by race. After
this decline in enforcement, low-level arrests of
Whites initially mirrored those of Blacks and began to
increase, but they soon diverged, trending downward
to end the study period at lower levels than expected.
Thus, to the extent de-policing of low-level offenses
occurred, it was only sustained for Whites.
Post-Ferguson felony arrest trends for Whites also
differed from those observed for Blacks in important
ways. First, felony arrests of Whites did not decline
significantly in the month after the shooting of
Michael Brown. Second, although felony arrest trends
for both groups followed an inverse curve in the
months after the shooting, arrests of Whites increased
at a faster rate. It is possible that these differences are
driven by increases in heroin use for Whites, a factor
that has been linked with recent rises in crime
(Rosenfeld, Gaston, Spivak, & Irazola, 2017). From
2002 to 2013, heroin use increased by 114% for nonHispanic Whites, but only nominally for Blacks
(Jones, Logan, Gladden, & Bohm, 2015). Because
deployment patterns and police practices vary across
areas (Klinger, 1997; Smith, 1986), future research
could provide additional insight on these observed
race differences by examining how the race of
individuals arrested interacts with policing context,
including crime rates and neighborhood racial
composition.
Although this research provides a picture of how
SLMPD enforcement activity changed in the wake of
Ferguson, much remains to be learned about the
underlying mechanisms driving these trends.
Traditional interpretations posit that de-policing is due
to public criticism of officers and their fear of being
involved in the next controversial incident (Shjarback
et al., 2017; Wolfe & Nix, 2016). Due to instrumental
concerns, police may have made fewer low-level
arrests post-Ferguson because the minimal benefits of
these arrests no longer outweighed the costs that come
with enhanced public scrutiny and perceived decreases
in public, organizational, and political support.
Alternately, in line with a normative perspective, law
enforcement may have focused instead on serious
crime, subsequently making fewer minor,
discretionary arrests in an attempt to bolster their
legitimacy (Bottoms & Tankebe, 2012).
An alternate explanation is that periods of civil
unrest draw police away from self-initiated or
discretionary activities and force them instead to focus
on crisis management and acute community needs.
Protests in St. Louis continued for months following
the shooting of Michael Brown, and scholars have
documented the physical and emotional toll of these
events. Officers worked long shifts, and police
agencies did not have resources to fully support their
needs (Institute for Intergovernmental Research,
2015). These effects were compounded by declines in
the number of officers employed by SLMPD during
this time (Slocum et al., 2018). It is therefore possible
that officers did not purposefully refrain from
engaging with the public, but rather they lacked the
time or resources to attend to the broad needs of
multiple communities under strife. It is vital that future
research attempt to decouple the intentional decision
of officers to pull back from the community from the
need for police agencies to redirect resources to
critical community needs.6
The results also highlight the importance of
controlling for ‘after shocks’ or other sentinel events
that follow a high-profile police incident. This study
accounted for two important court actions that
followed the events in Ferguson, the Darren Wilson
grand jury decision and the Jason Stockley verdict,
both of which taxed SLMPD resources albeit in
different ways. The Wilson decision pulled city
officers out to the county, which was the site of most
of the protests. Therefore, it is not surprising that
arrests of all types declined sharply as SLMPD
resources were diverted outside the city. The protests
following the Stockley verdict were centered in the
city and efforts were made by protesters to shut down
a major interstate, requiring extensive police
intervention. In the period surrounding this event, lowlevel arrests increased, many of which were related to
the protests, and there was a concomitant decrease in
felony arrests. Because arrests for more serious
offenses tend to be less discretionary and therefore less
likely to be subject to de-policing, these findings
provide support for the idea that declines in
enforcement proximal to periods of civil unrest may
be due, in some part, to diminished police resources.
Several important limitations should be noted.
First, this study focuses on one jurisdiction, whereas
over 50 agencies in the St. Louis region provided law
enforcement assistance in the wake of Ferguson
(Institute for Intergovernmental Research, 2015).
Therefore, the findings do not represent the totality of
changes in policing occurring across the metropolitan
area. Moreover, the extent to which enforcement
actions in jurisdictions beyond the St. Louis region
were—or were not—affected by the events in
Ferguson remains unclear. In addition, our study omits
data on traffic stops, which have been the focus of
prior work of this type (Shjarback et al., 2017).
Furthermore, there were substantial legal changes
post-Ferguson not accounted for. In July of 2015, the
CHANGES IN ENFORCEMENT OF LOW-LEVEL AND FELONY OFFENSES POST-FERGUSON 41
Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 2
State of Missouri passed Senate Bill 5 (SB5), which
substantially limited discretion in municipal courts.
SB5 reduced the annual general operating revenue that
can be collected from traffic fines from 30% to 20%,
capped total fines for minor traffic violations ($300),
and prohibited confinement for traffic violations and
for failure to pay fines (RSMO 479.353). Low-level
arrests can be triggered by warrants for failing to
appear in court or to pay fines, and thus additional
research is needed to assess the extent to which
legislative changes may have contributed to declining
arrests.
A final limitation is that we do not estimate the
link between changes in enforcement and crime. As
such, we cannot speak to the impact of Ferguson on
violence in the region or add to the more general
discussion of the extent to which de-policing and the
legitimacy crisis may contribute to rising crime rates.
However, studies that have addressed these issues,
both locally and nationally, have failed to support the
notion that Ferguson led to an increase in homicides or
crime more generally (Rosenfeld & Wallman 2019;
Sharback et al., 2017). The goal of the current work is
instead to provide a rigorous, nuanced examination of
long-term shifts in police actions post-Ferguson, with
sub-analysis by type of enforcement action and race of
the individual arrested. This study lays the foundation
for future work addressing the broader issue of
whether declines in specific types of enforcement
actions in St. Louis coincide with increases in crime.
The findings also are important in their own right
because they speak to how controversial police
shootings shift the extent and nature of enforcement,
which has implications not only for crime, but
community perceptions of police effectiveness and
legitimacy as well as how police view themselves.
Conclusion
The results raise a number of important policy
issues. First, they highlight the importance of regional
collaborations that can be mobilized to facilitate safe
and lawful public demonstrations, without disrupting
regular operational activities of law enforcement
agencies. Although regional officials maintain that
such a team was quickly mobilized during the
Ferguson protests, much remains to be learned about
how to effectively and constitutionally manage largescale demonstrations of this type, particularly when
they continue for many days (Gillham & Marx, 2018;
Institute for Intergovernmental Research, 2015).
Moreover, multi-agency responses often do not
include additional staffing or plans to attend to the
routine, daily tasks of law enforcement. Continually
enhancing these types of collaborations is particularly
important given results of a recent nationally
representative survey that found that police officers
believe their departments do not have enough officers
to adequately police the communities they serve (Pew
Research Center, 2017).
Second, the findings suggest a need for greater
community engagement and governance among
policing agencies to develop common goals for
community safety. For example, the Forward through
Ferguson Report (Ferguson Commission, 2015)
argued for the development of civilian review boards
at the municipal and county levels that would review
data from criminal justice agencies and advise
stakeholders on how to improve policy and practice.
These boards would also provide the public with an
active voice in identifying agency goals.
The events in Ferguson also sparked important
discussions about the racialized nature of policing in
the St. Louis region, particularly the
disproportionately high arrest rates in predominately
Black communities for bench warrants and other
relatively minor offenses (Department of Justice,
2015). Contact with criminal justice system, even for
low-level offenses, can “kick-start” a cascade of
negative consequences for the accused (Lofstrom,
Martin, Goss, Hayes, & Raphael, 2018, p. 5), and it
can widen the net of criminal justice control,
especially for people of color and those living in
poverty (Gau & Brunson, 2010; Jacobs, 2015; KohlerHausmann, 2018; Natapoff, 2018; U.S. Department of
Justice, 2015; Young & Petersilia, 2016). Being
arrested also can tarnish individuals’ perceptions of
law enforcement and reduce their willingness to
cooperate with the police (Leovy, 2015; Natapoff,
2009; Tyler & Huo, 2002). At the same time, police
are perceived by many as key partners in the
production of neighborhood safety (Carr, Napolitano,
& Keating, 2007), and residents in some cities have
raised concerns that, in the wake of protests over
police use of force, the police have withdrawn from
their neighborhoods, leading to rising rates of crime.
Negotiating these competing demands requires
transparency and a willingness to engage in an open
dialog with the community.
Finally, work of this type highlights the growing
sense that the public’s reaction to police tactics matters
independent of effectiveness (e.g., Lum & Nagin,
2017). Research suggests that the raw number of
arrests may not be the best benchmark for police
efficacy. Instead, Owens (2019) suggests that police
should work toward focusing on ‘socially efficient’
arrests—those behaviors for which the potential gains
to society outweigh the potential harms to police
legitimacy. In the post-Ferguson era of increased
police scrutiny, it is likely that law enforcement will
have to consider the potential impact of enforcement
42 SLOCUM, GREENE, HUEBNER, & ROSENFELD
Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 2
strategies on community confidence and support as
well as public safety.
References
Berg, K. (2017). It’s been a month of St. Louis
protests, and slowly change is happening.
Belleville News-Democrat. Retrieved from
https://www.bnd.com/news/local/article1789906
41.html
Bernal, J. L., Cummins, S., & Gasparrini, A. (2017).
Interrupted time series regression for the
evaluation of public health interventions: A
tutorial. International Journal of
Epidemiology, 46(1), 348–355.
https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyw098
Blau, P. (1964/2017). Exchange and power in social
life. New York, NY: Routledge.
Bottoms, A., & Tankebe, J. (2012). Beyond procedural
justice: A dialogic approach to legitimacy in
criminal justice. Journal of Criminal Law &
Criminology, 102(1), 119–170.
Brown, M. K. (1981). Working the street: Police
discretion and the dilemmas of reform. New
York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
Byers, C. (2014). Crime up after Ferguson and more
police needed, top St. Louis area chiefs say.
Retrieved from
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-andcourts/crime-up-after-ferguson-and-more-policeneeded-top-st/article_04d9f99f-9a9a-51be-a231-
1707a57b50d6.html
Carr, P. J., Napolitano, L., & Keating, J. (2007). We
never call the cops and here is why: A qualitative
examination of legal cynicism in three
Philadelphia neighborhoods. Criminology, 45(2),
445–480. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-
9125.2007.00084.x
Chanin, J., & Sheats, B. (2018). Depolicing as dissent
shirking: Examining the effects of pattern or
practice misconduct reform on police behavior.
Criminal Justice Review, 43(2), 105–126.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0734016817704696
Chappell, A. T., MacDonald, J. M., & Manz, P. W.
(2006). The organizational determinants of police
arrest decisions. Crime & Delinquency, 52(2),
287–306.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128705278329
Corsaro, N. (2018). Interrupted time series analysis
using STATA. Lecture Presented at the Justice
Research Statistics Association (JRSA)
Conference, Denver, Colorado.
Culhane, S. E., Boman, J. H., & Schweitzer, K. (2016).
Public perceptions of the justifiability of police
shootings: The role of body cameras in a pre/post
Ferguson experiment. Police Quarterly, 19(3),
251–274.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1098611116651403
Currier, J., & Patrick, R. (2017). Stockley not guilty
verdict not a surprise based on history, or for legal
experts. St. Louis Post Dispatch. Retrieved from
https://www. stltoday. com/news/local/crimeand-courts/stockley-not-guilty-verdict-not-asurprise-based-on-history/article_65eaeafa-7267-
5e6e-93d7-409ad6f94915. html
Desmond, M., Papachristos, A. V., & Kirk, D. S.
(2016). Police violence and citizen crime
reporting in the black community. American
Sociological Review, 81(5), 857–876.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122416663494
Deuchar, R., Fallik, S. W., & Crichlow, V. J. (2018).
Despondent officer narratives and the ‘postFerguson’ effect: exploring law enforcement
perspectives and strategies in a southern
American state. Policing and Society, 1–16.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10439463.2018.1480020
Emerson, R. M. (1976). Social exchange theory.
Annual Review of Sociology, 2, 335–362.
doi:10.1146/annurev.so.02.080176.002003
Ferguson Commission. (2015). Forward through
Ferguson: A path toward racial equity. Retrieved
from https://3680or2khmk3bzkp33juiea1-
wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wpcontent/uploads/2015/09/101415_FergusonCom
missionReport.pdf
Gau J. M., & Brunson, R. K. (2010). Procedural justice
and order maintenance policing: A study of innercity young men’s perceptions of police
legitimacy. Justice Quarterly, 27, 255–279.
https://doi.org/10.1080/07418820902763889
Gillham, P. F., & Marx. G. T. (2018). Changes in the
policing of civil disorders since the Kerner
Report: The police response to Ferguson, August
2014, and some implications for the twenty-first
century. RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation
Journal of the Social Sciences, 4, 122–43. doi:
10.7758/RSF.2018.4.6.06
Hayes, C. (2015). St. Louis police chief blames
“Ferguson Effect” for drop in self-initiated
policing. Retrieved from
https://fox2now.com/2015/02/25/st-louis-policechief-blames-ferguson-effect-for-drop-in-selfinitiated-policing/
CHANGES IN ENFORCEMENT OF LOW-LEVEL AND FELONY OFFENSES POST-FERGUSON 43
Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 2
Institute for Intergovernmental Research. (2015).
After-action assessment of the police response to
the August 2014 demonstrations in Ferguson,
Missouri. Retrieved from Community Oriented
Policing Services website: https://ric-zaiinc.com/Publications/cops-p317-pub.pdf
Jacobs, J. B. (2015). The eternal criminal record.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Jones, C. M., Logan, J., Gladden, R. M., & Bohm, M.
K. ( 2015). Vital signs: Demographic and
substance use trends among heroin users – United
States, 2002–2013. Morbidity and Mortality
Weekly Report, 64, 719–725.
Kappeler, V. E., Sluder, R. D., & Alpert, G. P. (1998).
Forces of deviance: The dark side of policing (2nd
ed.). Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.
Klinger, D. A. (1994). Demeanor or crime? Why
“hostile” citizens are more likely to be
arrested. Criminology, 32(3), 475–493.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-
9125.1994.tb01162.x
Klinger, D. A. (1997). Negotiating order in patrol
work: An ecological theory of police response to
deviance. Criminology, 35(2), 277-306.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-
9125.1997.tb00877.x
Kochel, T. R., Wilson, D. B., & Mastrofski, S. D.
(2011). Effect of suspect race on officers’ arrest
decisions. Criminology, 49(2), 473–512.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-
9125.2011.00230.x
Kohler-Hausmann, I. (2018). Misdemeanorland:
Criminal courts and social control in an age of
broken windows policing. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton Press.
Lasley, J. (1994). The impact of the Rodney King
incident on citizen attitudes toward police.
Policing and Society, 3(4), 245.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10439463.1994.9964673
Leovy, J. (2015). Ghettoside: A true story of murder
in America. New York, NY: Penguin.
Lofstrom, M., Martin, B., Goss, J., Hayes, J., &
Raphael, S. (2018). New insights into California
arrests trends, disparities, and county differences.
Retrieved from Public Policy Institute of
California website: https://www.ppic.org/wpcontent/uploads/new-insights-into-californiaarrests-trends-disparities-and-countydifferences.pdf
Lum, C., & Nagin, D. S. (2017). Reinventing
American policing. Crime and Justice, 46(1),
339–393.
MacDonald, H. (2016). The war on cops. New York,
NY: Encounter Books.
Matt, D. (2014). The Ferguson effect: A cop’s-eye
view. The New York Post. Retrieved from
https://nypost.com/2014/10/14/the-fergusoneffect-a-cops-eye-view/
Moore, D. (2014). Violence erupts after grand jury
declines to indict Darren Wilson. St. Louis PostDispatch. Retrieved from
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-andcourts/print-story-violence-erupts-after-grandjury-declines-to-indict/article_239f41f4-adcf565c-9259-77a7fb2d67c3.html
Morgan, S. L., & Pally, J. A. (2016). Ferguson, Gray,
and Davis: An analysis of recorded crime
incidents and arrests in Baltimore City, March
2010 through December 2015. Retrieved from
Johns Hopkins University website:
https://socweb.soc.jhu.edu/faculty/morgan/paper
s/MorganPally2016.pdf
Muir, W. K., Jr. (1977). Police: Streetcorner
politicians. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago
Press.
Natapoff, A. (2009). Snitching: Criminal informants
and the erosion of American justice. New York:
NYU Press.
Natapoff, A. (2018). Punishment without crime: How
our massive misdemeanor system traps the
innocent and makes America more unequal. New
York, NY: Basic Books.
Nix, J., & Wolfe, S. E. (2017). The impact of negative
publicity on police self-legitimacy, Justice
Quarterly, 34(1), 84–108.
https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2015.1102954
Nix, J., Wolfe, S. E., & Campbell, B. A. (2018).
Command-level police officers’ perceptions of
the “War on Cops” and de-policing. Justice
Quarterly, 35(1), 33–54.
https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2017.1338743
Novak, K. J., Frank, J., Smith, B. W., & Engel, R. S.
(2002). Revisiting the decision to arrest:
Comparing beat and community officers. Crime
& Delinquency, 48(1), 70–98.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128702048001003
Novak, K. J., Smith, B. W., & Frank, J. (2003).
Strange bedfellows: Civil liability and aggressive
policing. Policing: An International Journal of
44 SLOCUM, GREENE, HUEBNER, & ROSENFELD
Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 2
Police Strategies & Management, 26(2), 352–
368.
https://doi.org/10.1108/13639510310475813
Oliver, W. M. (2015). De-policing: Rhetoric or
reality? Criminal Justice Policy Review, 28(5),
437–461.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0887403415586790
Owens, E. (2019). Economic approach to “depolicing.” Criminology and Public Policy, 18(1),
77–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12413
Paoline, E. A., III (2004). Shedding light on police
culture: an examination of officers’ occupational
attitudes. Police Quarterly, 7(2), 205–236.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1098611103257074
Petrin, K. M. (2017). Protest-related arrests over the
weekend, by the numbers. St. Louis Magazine.
Retrieved from https://www.stlmag.com/news/alook-at-the-numbers-in-jason-stockley-protestarrests/
Pew Research Center. (2017). Behind the badge: Amid
protests and calls for reform, how police view
their jobs, key issues and recent fatal encounters
between blacks and police. Retrieved from
https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2017/01/11/beh
ind-the-badge/.
President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing.
(2015). Final Report of the President’s Task
Force on 21st Century Policing. Retrieved from
Community Oriented Policing Services website:
https://cops.usdoj.gov/pdf/taskforce/taskforce_fi
nalreport.pdf
Pyrooz, D. C., Decker, S. H., Wolfe, S. E., &
Shjarback, J. A. (2016). Was there a Ferguson
Effect on crime rates in large U.S. cities? Journal
of Criminal Justice, 46, 1–8.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2016.01.001
Rosenfeld, R. (2015). Ferguson and police use of
deadly force. Missouri Law Review, 80, 1077.
Rosenfeld, R. (2016). Documenting and explaining the
2015 Homicide Rise: Research directions.
Retrieved from National Criminal Justice
Reference Service website:
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/249895.pdf
Rosenfeld, R., Gaston, S., Spivak, H., & Irazola, S.
(2017). Assessing and responding to the recent
homicide rise in the United States. Retrieved from
National Criminal Justice Reference Service
website:
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/251067.pdf
Rosenfeld, R., & Wallman, J. (2019). Did de-policing
cause the increase in homicide rates? Criminology
and Public Policy, 18(1), 51–75.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12414
Rosenfeld, R., Fornango, R., & Rengifo, A. F. (2007).
The impact of order‐maintenance policing on
New York City homicide and robbery rates: 1988‐
2001. Criminology, 45, 355–384.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-
9125.2007.00081.x
Shi, L. (2009). The limit of oversight in policing:
Evidence from the 2001 Cincinnati riot. Journal
of Public Economics, 93(1–2), 99–113.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2008.07.007
Schmidt, M. S., & Apuzzo, M. (2015). F.B.I. chief
links scrutiny of police with rise in violent crime.
The New York Times. Retrieved from
http://www.nytimes.
com/2015/10/24/us/politics/fbi-chief-linksscrutiny-of-police-with-rise-in-violentcrime.html
Shjarback, J. A., Pyrooz, D. C., Wolfe, S. E., &
Decker, S. H. (2017). De-policing and crime in
the wake of Ferguson: Racialized changes in the
quantity and quality of policing among Missouri
police departments. Journal of Criminal
Justice, 50, 42–52.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2017.04.003
Slocum, L. A., Huebner, B. M., Rosenfeld, R. B., &
Greene, C. (2018). Tracking enforcement rates in
the City of St. Louis, 2002 – 2017. Retrieved from
Research Network on Misdemeanor Justice
website: http://misdemeanorjustice.org/wpcontent/uploads/2018/10/Tracking-EnforcementRates-in-St.-Louis_2002_2017.pdf
Smith, D. A., & Visher, C. A. (1981). Street-level
justice: Situational determinants of police arrest
decisions. Social Problems, 29(2), 167–177.
https://doi.org/10.2307/800422
Smith, D. A. (1986). The neighborhood context of
police behavior. Crime and Justice, 8, 313-341.
https://doi.org/10.1086/449126
StataCorp. (2017). Stata Statistical Software: Release
15. College Station, TX: StataCorp .
Stone, C., Foglesong, T., & Cole, C. M. (2009).
Policing Los Angeles under a consent decree: The
dynamics of change at the LAPD. Retrieved from
Harvard Kennedy School Program in Criminal
Justice Policy and Management website:
http://www.hks.harvard.edu/criminaljustice/publi
cations/Harvard_LAPD_Report.pdf
CHANGES IN ENFORCEMENT OF LOW-LEVEL AND FELONY OFFENSES POST-FERGUSON 45
Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 2
Torres, J., Reling, T., & Hawdon, J. (2018). Role
conflict and the psychological impacts of the
Post-Ferguson period on law enforcement
motivation, cynicism, and apprehensiveness.
Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology,
33(4), 358–374. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-
018-9284-y
Tyler, T. R., & Huo, Y. (2002). Trust in the law:
Encouraging public cooperation with the police
and courts. New York, NY: Russell Sage
Foundation.
United States Census Bureau. (2017). Community
facts. Retrieved from
https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/
community_facts.xhtml?src=bkmk
United States Department of Justice. (2015).
Investigation of the Ferguson Police Department.
Retrieved from
https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/opa/pr
essreleases/attachments/2015/03/04/ferguson_police
_department_report.pdf
Valencia, N. (2015). Pistol-whipped detective says he
didn’t shoot attacker because of headlines.
Retrieved from
https://www.cnn.com/2015/08/13/us/alabamabirmingham-police-detective-pistolwhipped/index.html
Weitzer, R. (2002). Incidents of police misconduct and
public opinion. Journal of Criminal Justice,
30(5), 397–408. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0047-
2352(02)00150-2
Weitzer, R. (2014). Police race relations. In M. Reisig
& R. Kane (Eds.), The Oxford handbook on police
and policing (pp. 339–361). London, England:
Oxford.
Wolfe, S. E., & Nix, J. (2016). The alleged “Ferguson
Effect” and police willingness to engage in
community partnership. Law and Human
Behavior, 40(1), 1–10.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000164
Worden, R. E. (1989). Situational and attitudinal
explanations of police behavior: A theoretical
reappraisal and empirical assessment. Law and
Society Review, 23(4), 667–711.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3053852
Young, K., & Petersilia, J. (2016). Keeping track:
Surveillance, control, and the expansion of the
carceral state. Harvard Law Review, 129, 1318–
1360.
About the Authors
Lee Ann Slocum conducts research related to policecommunity relations, developmental
criminology, and how people’s environment
shapes their behavior. Her recent work explores
the effects of being stopped or arrested by the
police on youth’s involvement in delinquency and
orientation toward the law and how prior
experiences with law enforcement influence
victims’ willingness to report crime.
Claire Greene entered the UMSL Criminology and
Criminal Justice Ph.D. program in 2017. Her
research draws upon qualitative and quantitative
methods to examine the development, adoption,
deployment, and impact of emergent technologies
in the criminal justice system. Her current work
utilizes ethnographic field methods to examine
the ways in which police technologies shape the
subjectivities and decision-making of police
actors.
Beth M. Huebner received her Ph.D. from Michigan
State University in Criminal Justice in 2003. Her
current research interests include prisoner reentry,
criminal justice decision making, and quantitative
research methods. Her current research explores
the effect of incarceration on employment and
marriage and how incarceration affects family
relationships.
Richard Rosenfeld research interests include the
social sources of violent crime, crime statistics,
and crime control policy. His current research
focuses on explaining U.S. crime trends. Dr.
Rosenfeld served as President of the American
Society of Criminology in 2010. Areas of
specialization include: Social sources of violent
crime, crime control policy, and crime trends.
Acknowledgments
Funding for this research was provided by Arnold
Ventures. This project was made possible through the
support of Meredith Patten and Preeti Chauhan at the
Data Collaborative for Justice at John Jay College. We
would like to thank St. Louis Metropolitan Police
Department for sharing their data, and we are
especially grateful for the assistance provided by
Sherri Schaefer and other employees in Information
Technology as well as members of the command staff
who provided input on the project.
46 SLOCUM, GREENE, HUEBNER, & ROSENFELD
Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 2
Endnotes
1
Arrests that were made solely because of a bench or fugitive warrant (i.e., warrants that have been issued by
municipalities outside the City of St. Louis) were excluded from the analyses. There were a number of municipal
court changes post-Ferguson that likely impacted the prevalence of these types of warrants. Trends in these types of
arrests may confound changes in police behavior with changes in court behavior.
2 Misdemeanors are punishable by a fine and/or county jail time for up to one year and include both person and
property offenses. Municipal governments issue ordinance violations for violations of local rules. Some acts are
governed by laws at the state and local level. For example, an individual caught in possession of marijuana could be
charged with either a misdemeanor or ordinance violation. 3 A number of arrests were recorded as occurring at police headquarters, district headquarters, and the city jail.
These arrests were excluded when computing counts because they are less likely to be initiated by the police and
thus, are less likely to be a function of de-policing. Also excluded were arrests made outside the city, many of which
involved arrests of individuals who were being detained by police in neighboring municipalities for bench warrants
in the City of St. Louis.
4 The Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program divides offenses that have been reported to the police into two
groups, Part I and Part II crimes. Part 1 offenses include serious violent and property crimes (homicides, rapes,
robberies aggravated assaults, burglaries, larcenies, motor vehicle thefts, and arsons). 5 Results from likelihood ratio tests comparing the negative binomial to the Poisson model indicated that the
negative binomial is the preferred model due to over-dispersion. 6 In supplemental analyses, we attempted to separate these issues by including a measure that captures the number of
patrol officers employed by SLMPD at the beginning of each month. The number of officers employed by SLMPD
declined steadily during this time, and as a result, this measure was highly correlated with the linear trend (r = .93).
More nuanced measures are needed to tease out the processes described here.
Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further reproduction
prohibited without permission.

THE TEAM CHARTER

THE TEAM CHARTER
Q: What’s a “Team Charter”? Are we going fishing?
A: That might be more fun, but, no. A charter is just a document, developed by the team, which sets down in writing both what the team is to accomplish and what the limits are for the team.
Q: Why do we need one?
A: Officially, it helps the team by making sure all team members are working toward the same goals. Also, it helps people outside the team (i.e. – your boss or other teams) to understand what your team is doing.
Q: You said “officially”; is there any other reason?
A: It cuts down on whining. When done properly, the charter lays out the expectations for the group. Later one, nobody can say, “I didn’t know …” or “No one told me …”. From a practical point of view, at the end of the semester, if a group member has not participated, you, as a group, will give the non-participant a poor evaluation, which will affect his or her grade. The charter keeps that person from complaining that they didn’t know what was expected.
Q: So, we should do this right away?
A: Yes. Creating the charter is good exercise for the “Forming” step in team development. As the team works together to set the items of the charter, unacceptable behaviors can be identified and written into (forbidden) in the charter while the process itself teaches the members how to work together.
Q: What items go into a team charter?
A: This is just an overview of what the charter should include. A detailed template has been posted in Blackboard for you to follow. In general, there are five parts to a team charter: a Mission Statement, Team Vision, Team Identity, Boundaries, and Operating Guidelines. It is also common to include Performance Norms (expected behaviors).
Q: What does the Mission Statement cover?
A: The team’s purpose and goals, and individual goals. It is important to keep this practical.
Q: What do you mean by “practical” goals?
A: Well, everybody wants world peace, but that isn’t really a goal for your team. Use the acronym SMART (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, and Timely) as your guide. You can do a search online if you want details on those steps.
Q: What is a goal for our team, for each of us to pass the course?
A: That could be your goal, or you might be more ambitious and admit your goal is to earn a “A” for the course. That is why the team must discuss this, because personal goals can differ. You also need to consider how you will attain your goals.
Q: That would be simple, wouldn’t it? Just do well on all the class work.
A: When your statements are vague, results tend to get lost. Yes, you have to do well on the class work, but, let’s face it, to earn an A you have to do A-level work starting from the very first gradable item. You can’t push off doing your best work until the end of the semester, so as part of your goal-setting your team must commit to working together and figure out how to work together so little goals (getting an A on the first quiz), build to bigger goals (getting an A on the first test), which will deliver the final goal (getting an A in the class).
Q: OK, then, what is a Team Vision?
A: It is related to the mission, but is very specific. Look ahead to the end of the semester and give a clear and concise statement of the ideal result for the team and each team member if the team is successful.
Q: That seems pretty simple. What is a Team Identity?
A: Some of it is fanciful as in picking a team name or logo, but some of it is practical, developing a roster of the team members, including not only contact information, but strengths, weaknesses, and personality assessment results.
Q: Why do we need more than the contact information?
A: Early in the process of the team working together, it is helpful to have a written guideline when you are looking for someone to help you with a task. Later, on, when you know each team member better, that is less relevant.
Q: What are Boundaries?
A: What they sound like – what is permissible and what is not acceptable, both in a project-related sense and a social sense. You should also include limitations, such as when the team can work together and how much any one team member can do on their own.
Q: How is that different from Operating Guidelines?
A: They are related. The guidelines are more specific, such as does leadership rotate and if so when, do you need 100% agreement or does majority rule, things like that.
Q: Which leaves us with Performance Norms – what are those?
A: Very specific statements about expectations and consequences for team members as the team works together.
Q: Can we alter the charter as the semester progresses?
A: Of course, but it requires another team meeting and vote. To help you avoid that, more details are provided in the Team Charter template posted in Blackboard. Also, ask questions if you need to.