A Partnership Between the State College Police Departmentand the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board

Source Investigation ProjectSIP

UnDerAge Drinking iS An ADULt ProBLem

the Source investigation Project handbook was a team effort. there were many contributors. those who conducted the investigations, researched, proposed text, created charts and graphs, took photographs, formatted and edited.

the principal project team leadership & manual authors consisted of:

• Chief tom king

• Lt. Dana Leonard • off. tony Lopinsky

• theresa mcelwain

• Jan Hess

the principal project team members consisted of:

• off. kris Albright

• off. nick Argiro

• Det. John Aston • off. kelly Aston

• off. Craig Bernier

• off greg Brauser

• off. erich kessinger

• off. greg koehle

• off. mike mamolen

• off. Drew Sim

• off. kevin Winkelblech

AcknowldegementS

This project was supported by cooperative agreement with the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board. The opinions contained herein are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position of the the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board or the State College Police Department.

Copyright © 2005 by the State College Police Department and the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board. All rights reserved.

1

2

tAble of contentSchapter 1: Introduction 3 Background 4 Approach 5 Purpose of the Handbook 5 goal of the Source investigation Project 5

chapter 2: Research 6 Pre-Project Situation 6 Data resources 6 methodlogy 7 Philosophy 8

chapter 3: development 9 Foundation 9 Problem Analysis 10

chapter 4: Public Relations/Awareness campaign 13 media Strategy 13 Administration and Field operation 16 targeted group 17 Community Presentations 20

chapter 5: enforcement/Investigations 22 Administrations/Supervision of the enforcement Component 22 Field operations - enforcement 26 types of SiP investigations 27 Highlands neighborhood Watch Program 32 Downtown Safety enhancement Program 34

chapter 6: Prosecution Issues 37 Liaison 37 Court Cases 37 Court Watch 38

chapter 7: Alcohol Awarenss Programs - RAmP 40 responsible Alcohol management Program (rAmP) 40 international Property maintenance Code (iPmC) 41

chapter 8: conclusion 44

References 46

during one weekend in State college, Pennsylvania:

• officers find a 20 year old female passed out on the sidewalk with a blood alcohol content (BAC) of .31%. She is treated at the local hospital emergency room for alcohol overdose. it is her fourth public drunk arrest since coming to the university.

• A 19 year old runs a red light and is found to be driving under the influence (DUi) with a BAC of .236%.

• A 20 year old male overdoses on alcohol and is rushed to the hospital emergency room.

• A 21 year old male overdoses in the first two hours of his 21st birthday after a “bar tour” and is rushed to the emergency room. • A 16 year old attends an “underage night” at a local nightclub and is found intoxicated inside the club. • An 18 year old is found “passed out” under the wheels of a tractor. the list goes on. Serious problems with alcohol-related behaviors have impacted our community for a long time. State College is located in Centre County and is bisected by the main campus of the Pennsylvania State University (PSU). the campus sustains an annual enrollment of approximately 42,000 students, nearly all of whom are between 18 and 24 years old, an age group frequently associated with high-risk drinking. According to the latest census statistics, 67% of State College’s population is between 15 and 24 years of age.

Because of the youthfulness of our population, the State College Police Department (SCPD) spends an inordinate amount of time responding to and investigating alcohol-fueled crimes. SCPD investigates 7,000 to 8,000 crimes annually. each year we determine at least 50% of our crimes to be alcohol-fueled. the percentage of crimes occurring after 8 Pm leaps to 65% alcohol-fueled.

IntRoductIonchAPteR 1

the Problem:

Young people ages 16 to 25 are killed, are injured, ruin their lives, commit crimes or ravage neighborhoods because of their high-risk, dangerous alcohol consumption.

3

4

Panel Recommendations: what colleges and universities can do now:

• Be critical consumers of alcohol prevention strategies. Use programs with demonstrated effectiveness, such as those recommended in this report.

• take a strategic, outcome-driven approach to planning that reflects the campus situation and recognizes the need for the alignment of alcohol programs and policies with other aspects of institutional policy. evaluate policies and programs and share the results with other colleges and universities.

• recognize that college student drinking prevention programs require a long-term (10 to 15 year) commitment. Set realistic objectives for change that is based on institutional assessment and national experience.

• establish a system for collecting data regularly on alcohol consumption and related problems.

• report information objectively on campus and in the community, and update progress regularly.

• Adopt and integrate complementary approaches, rather than focusing only on one, as for example, when combined, social norms and policy enforcement efforts can enhance each other.

• involve students in developing and implementing activities to reduce high-risk drinking.

• involve a broad base of campus and community groups in prevention efforts, and reward students and others for supporting these programs.

• Use social marketing approaches to create and market programs to students.

• encourage presidents, administrators, and other campus leaders to communicate the message that reducing harmful alcohol use is an institutional priority.

• Have alcohol prevention interventions in place before freshmen arrive in the fall and sponsor related activities frequently during the first weeks of the academic year.

• train those who conduct prospective student tours and interviews to explain the institution’s alcohol policies and desired norms.

• Help move the field forward. Be willing to participate in alcohol-related research programs, for example, or to become a State or national policy advocate on college drinking issues.

Backgroundthrough the years, funding for adequate police investigative time to impact the source of highrisk, dangerous drinking was unavailable. However, with financial and staff support from the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board (PLCB), SCPD implemented a 24-month pilot enforcement initiative termed the Source investigative Project (SiP),targeting illegal service of alcohol to underage persons.

rather than haphazardly developing a system based on conventional wisdom as determined solelyby police, SCPD together with our partners at PLCB decided to implement a research-based approach. to this end, SiP is primarily based on premises contained in the report, How To Reduce High-Risk College Drinking: Use Proven Strategies, Fill Research Gaps (U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, April 2002) by the task force of the national Advisory Council on Alcohol Abuse and the Alcoholism national institutes of Health. the report served in part as a guideline for SiP implementation. the key recommendation that became the foundation for SiP is simply: Increased enforcement of minimum drinking age laws creates deterrence.

5

approach SCPD adopted a two-step approach to alcohol laws enforcement:

1. educate students and other community residents about alcohol laws. emphasize that violations will be more strictly enforced.

2. Become highly assertive in enforcing all alcohol laws, such as drunk driving, underage drinking, furnishing alcohol to minors and public drunkenness.

enforcement focuses attention and investigative time on hosts, suppliers, or purchasers of alcohol for the underage drinker. through various enforcement methods, SiP attempts to reduce underage drinking by attacking the source of alcohol consumption.

purpoSE of thE handBookthe SiP handbook is intended as a reference for local police when considering SiP or after choosing SiP as an enforcement option. the handbook contains a comprehensive overview of SiP. Because SiP was conceived as a pilot project, we document experimental strategies that worked and strategies that we tried and subsequently abandoned for one reason or another.

not intended as a basic training manual for officers in “how to enforce underage drinking laws,” the SiP handbook targets officers and departments possessing some experience with alcohol enforcement issues and an interest in how we implemented SiP. Whereas SiP was developed in our university community, and we believe SiP is best suited for a town and gown setting, many features could be adapted to communities without a student population but with a drinking problem.

goaL of thE SourcE InVEStIgatIon proJEctthe SiP goal is to reduce underage drinking by focusing on the over-21 source.

to accomplish our goal, we defined objectives to:

• reduce instances of dangerous drinking by persons 16 to 25 years of age.

• increase the fear of being caught for hosting an underage drinking party or engaging in dangerous drinking behavior.

• reduce instances of over-serving at liquor-licensed establishments.

• improve the environment and preserve the character of two key historic neighborhoods in State College.

• reduce disorderly-related, alcohol-fueled crimes in selected areas of our community.

SIP targets alcohol SouRce

? ??

????

??

6

?

?

?

?? ? ?

??

???

??

ReSeARchchAPteR 2

the Pertinent Questions:

• Who was drinking?

• What were they drinking?

• Where were they drinking?

• How much were they drinking?

• When were they drinking?

• Why were they drinking?

• Who was the source?

prE-proJEct SItuatIonWe identified the problem: Excessive alcohol consumption is ruining the lives of young people and adversely affecting our neighborhoods. in the past, although aware of the problem, over time we had grown accustomed to living with it. When PLCB presented us with the opportunity to address the problem, we gathered evidence and quantified the issues.

Our objective, among others, was to reduce certain alcohol-fueled crimes by reducing instances of dangerous and underage drinking, however, not by attacking the alcohol consumer directly. We targeted the consumer’s source: the usually over-21 people hosting the party, supplying, or purchasing the beverages for the underage or dangerous drinker. We collected and corroborated data by questioning consumers.

data rESourcES the information we gathered served as baseline data for SiP. Data and analysis supplemented our quest as to who, what, when, where, how, and in some cases, why the problem occurs. We analyzed data from:

• SCPD crime records • mount nittany medical Center emergency room statistics • responses to informal questions when asking underage drinkers where they drank • observations of late night drinkers’ habits • PLCB sales along with records of wine and distilled spirits

7

MEthodoLogY• Shoulder taps: An underage drinker loiters outside a bottle shop. He asks an adult stranger to buy alcohol for him. the adult complies. the underage drinker has obtained alcohol. Whereas this method generates a greater number of cases than underage purchases during certain times of year, shoulder taps still do not account for most of our problem.

• false Identification (Id): We examined false iD cases reported to us. Annually we receive reports of only 200-300 instances where underage drinkers attempt to enter our liquor establishments. During the project we found only two documented cases where the underage drinker gained entry with a false iD, was observed, and proceeded to come into contact with police for an alcohol- fueled contact, generating a source case. We found very little evidence to support the contention that many underage drinkers were purchasing their alcohol from liquor licensees with false or borrowed identification. of 27 downtown State College liquor establishments, 19 have an incentive system in place whereby management rewards door staff for each false iD the staff detects. the reward ranges from $10 to $20 per false iD detected. this effort, coupled with our willingness to respond to each false iD call and cite the offender, has created an effective deterrent to the rampant use of false iDs in State College to purchase alcohol by underage drinkers. • Alcohol-fueled crimes: in addition to examining traditional alcohol offenses such as DUi, underage drinking and public drunkenness, we defined alcohol-fueled crimes to expand our research to include other alcohol-fueled crimes according to our definition. We applied our definition of alcohol-fueled crimes to suspects, defendants and patients in medical emergencies, usually alcohol overdoses, regardless of consumption levels, possessing or furnishing, etc. our most common alcohol-fueled crimes are: disorderly conduct, assualts, public urination, public drunkenness, DUi and sexual assaults.

• Issues Related to Alcohol, defendants’ Ages, and their Sources: Focusing on details, we maintained statistical data related for analysis:

definition of Alcohol-fueled crimes:

Any crime or police response in which alcohol was involved in any way by person(s) involved in the case.

• Problem properties

• repeat offender fraternities

• Liquor establishments over-serving patrons

• Source of DUi’s last drink

• time of day

• Day of week

• Locations, mapped using geographic information Systems (giS)

phILoSophYCentre County, particularly State College and PSU, hosts 1.5 to 2 million visitors each year (Central Pennsylvania Convention and Visitors Bureau, April 2005), some of whom contribute to a party atmosphere. to expend time and effort in citing a few dozen underage drinkers each weekend is ineffective in creating a prevailing sense of “i’m going to get caught.”

traditionally, the vast majority of alcohol enforcement has been directed at the consumers, especially underage drinkers, and very little to the hosts/suppliers.

on a busy Friday or Saturday night, we estimate that thousands of underage drinkers are at large. to expend effort in citing a few dozen offenders would be logistically impossible and relatively ineffective in effectuating deterrence among the hosts/suppliers of alcohol to underage drinkers. on any given Friday or Saturday night we encounter several dozen large, overflowing underage drinking parties. Attacking one or two parties per night, targeting hosts and suppliers, creates a more deterrent impact.

We examined statistics generated by SCPD indicating trends. DUi arrests in the region had increased dramatically.

of PSU students seeking emergency room treatment for alcohol-fueled injuries or related ailments, we found the average age dropped. Conversely, the number of patients and their respective BAC levels increased, over a four-year period. (PSU Public information office, 2004).

SiP did not conduct surveys because it did not seem cost effective to do so. We used other surveys only in a general sense. our focus was on the evidence, of which we collected plenty, and on the alcohol source.

8

9

foundatIonthe presence of a Community oriented Policing (CoP) philosophy between the local police department and community increases the chances of successful implementation of the project. SCPD has been actively pursuing the CoP philosophy for 12 years. SiP began with CoP as its foundation in early 2004. A vibrant and ongoing relationship with the community as a whole and with important groups within the community, lays the groundwork for an effective beginning. For SiP to succeed, we required assistance and cooperation from the following groups:

• magisterial District Judge

• County District Attorney’s office

• PSU Judicial Affairs

• PSU intercollegiate athletics, Student-Athlete Advisory Board

• PSU undergraduate student government

• PSU fraternity and sorority life

• PSU off-campus student union

• neighborhood groups such as the Highlands neighborhood Association and Holmes-Foster

neighborhood Association

• Community Help Center

• PSU Daily Collegian newspaper

• Centre Daily Times newspaper

• PSU student radio and a myriad of student journalists

time spent upfront in building and nurturing good working relationships enabled SCPD to implement the two strategies used in SiP.

develoPmentchAPteR 3

SIP Strategies:

• Public relations/awareness• enforcement

10

proBLEM anaLYSISin 1998 public dialogue began in earnest. in July of that year, State College and PSU experienced the first of three alcohol-fueled riots. riot mobs consisted of thousands of young people gathering in Beaver Canyon, a two block area of our downtown containing high-rise student apartment buildings along both sides of the street, creating a canyon effect. Young people typically congregate in Beaver Canyon after bars close and parties end. the riots were fueled by alcohol and caused dozens of injuries along with tens of thousands of dollars in damages.

the State College and PSU communities were deeply affected by these riots. in the days and weeks that followed, we considered many factors to counter future disturbances. one factor that could not escape notice was the extent to which excessive alcohol consumption had fueled our riots. too many young people had too much to drink. excessive drinking, coupled with other factors, created conditions threatening the safety and security of the community.

in 1999 SCPD began to flag all alcohol-fueled crimes. When an officer takes a crime report, he/she checks a block on the police report as to whether alcohol was a factor in the incident. our definition concerning where “alcohol was a factor” does not imply that alcohol was the cause of the behavior, but simply that alcohol was present in the suspect, defendant, or victim. this is based on:

• officer’s observations

• Statements from witnesses • Preliminary breath test (pbt) or blood test

note that this is not all-inclusive of alcohol-fueled crimes. Flagging a case as alcohol-fueled only pertains to crimes where the officer had direct contact with the victim. Some minor crime reports are taken by phone and often police do not have contact with the perpetrator because the case goes unsolved. to illustrate this point:

Several parked cars are vandalized while parked overnight on the street. this is not coded as alcohol-fueled, but our experience tells us that in almost all cases, the perpetrators of this type of behavior are intoxicated bar or party patrons.

Store owners complain that when they opened the shop Saturday morning they found pools of vomit and urine on their storefront. odds are that intoxicated people left the deposits, but without some evidence this is not coded as alcohol-fueled.

flag all alcohol-fueled crime data.

Alcohol Fueled Riots at PSU

11

early in the project, SiP realized we had statistical evidence to support what the officer on the street had known for years: dangerous, high-risk drinking was having a significant impact on the types of crimes and behavior in our community.

to further analyze our drinking problem, SiP began collecting information on where the last drink was consumed before police involvement. Adhering to our philosophy to focus our efforts very narrowly on the problem, we created a system to collect, sort, and analyze last drink data.Last drink data is generated when the officer in the field investigates beyond the alcohol-fueled incident at hand to determine where and when the intoxicated subjects obtained and/or consumed their last drinks, regardless of their age.

By looking at alcohol source data, SiP wanted to identify:

• repeat offender party houses

• Problem fraternities or bars that were over-serving their patrons

While not evidence per se, this information may point us in the right direction. to determine if gathering source data department-wide was worthwhile, we experimented. SiP analyzed all of our 452 DUi arrest cases from 2003, because we had been gathering last drink source data for these cases already as a normal part of the investigation.

note: in 2003 SCPD had the third highest number of arrests for DUi in the state; Philadelphia and Pittsburgh were first and second, respectively. this is an astounding arrest statistic, given the difference in relative size among the jurisdictions of the SCPD and the state’s two largest cities. After studying our DUi cases, we found a distinct correlation between our DUi arrests and their sources - where the offenders were drinking immediately preceding their arrests.

of those DUi arrestees, 45% reported they had been drinking at one or more of only six downtown State College bars. our focus area, downtown State College, contains 27 bars or liquor licensees. therefore, we expanded data collection to include last drink data or source data, from not only DUi, but from all our alcohol-fueled crimes.

12

SouRce memo11/30/04

to: All

From: Lt. Leonard

re: Alcohol Source Cases

the Source investigation Project is creating a system whereby alcohol Source cases can be investigated more often and in greater depth. one of our Departmental goals is to hold accountable the persons or organizations that furnish alcohol to minors and others. All patrol officers and detectives can play an important part in this project by seeking out and reporting alcohol source information.

i am asking that you attempt to identify the Source or Last Drink(s) information from suspects, defendants, victims, or patients during investigations into alcohol-fueled crimes and incidents. You are encouraged to question in detail those persons in an attempt to obtain important time-sensitive information about their Alcohol Source that can be extremely important if a Furnishing or over-serving case is subsequently investigated or prosecuted.

Source or Last Drink(s) information can be the person; place, business or organization that supplied the last drink(s) to the suspect; defendant; victim or patient in the time period immediately preceding the incident under investigation.

Some examples of Alcohol-fueled incidents:

• Underage drinking • Drunk driving • Alcohol overdoses • Sexual & other assaults • Public drunkenness • Serious injuries or death the reporting officer should include any statements concerning the Source information as part of the case report and should flag the appropriate “Alcohol Source” block in the person field of the mobile report. in addition; any alcohol source case that requires immediate or later follow-up investigation should be marked active and routed to the SiP coordinator for assignment. insert sample CrimeS report-source.

13

MEdIa StratEgYthe media segment of our project was highly successful. our goal was to use radio, television, newspapers, and any other journalistic conduit to ensure the public understood the project. A positive media message is important to the success of SiP. Although we do not have any formal training on media relations and do not have a trained Public information officer, we do have considerable experience in media relationships.

SiP publicized the neighborhoods which were our enforcement target areas. We publicized that SiP would be operating primarily on thursday, Friday, and Saturday nights between the hours of 9:00 Pm and 3:00 Am and generally shared our investigative techniques. At the conclusion of each initiative, we followed up with a progress report to the media.

SiP publicized the project for two months before any increased enforcement began and continued aggressive publicity for an additional four months before the concentrated enforcement operations began in the fall of 2004.

the Chief of Police, SiP Sergeant, and Community relations officer were the primary messengers to the media and community/student groups. no other personnel were regularly used to “carry the SiP message.” it is important to target the message in any large scale campaign, therefore limiting the authorized spokespersons on behalf of the project was necessary for success.

SCPD enjoys an excellent relationship with local and area media. our established relationship aided a great deal to inject a positive spin on SiP. During the campaign we stayed away from terms like “raid,” “roundup,” “busting parties,” and “crackdown.” We did not want to be perceived as “Beer nazis.” After all, for generations, the public has considered college drinking and these types of behavior to be a rite of passage and part of the college experience.

PublIc RelAtIonS/AwAReneSS cAmPAIgnchAPteR 4

SIP media Strategy:

• highlight size and scope of the dangerous drinking problem.

• explain who, what, where, how and why to the public.

our strategy was to focus our message on dangerous drinking, resulting crime, and associated negative consequences for perpetrators, victims and the entire PSu/State college community.

Since most of our source investigations are initiated after young people commit underlying offenses which draws attention to them such as public drunkenness, urinating in public, or open container, SiP attempted to tie its efforts to alcohol-fueled crimes rather than a standalone anti-drinking message.

We found that the PSU student newspaper, the Daily Collegian, followed the SiP project very closely for most of the two years. During a one month period, April 2004, the PSU Daily Collegian printed 21 articles, features, or letters to the editor about SiP and the alcohol problem in State College.

the following describes an example of a media blitz: St. Patrick’s Day 2005: 1. SiP partnered with the Centre County Alcohol task Force and the Pennsylvania State Police (PSP) Underage Drinking enforcement initiative to roster more than 24 extra officers on duty.

2. SiP announced through various television and newspaper interviews and press releases that extra officers would be deployed in liquor stores and beer distributors, partnering SiP with Cops in Shops and DUi enforcement.

3. SiP warned the public as to where we would be and why.

4. SiP released statistics on alcohol-fueled crimes from the previous year on St. Patrick’s Day and mapped our data to giS for 2004 and 2005. in the maps, light to dark colors reflect few to many crimes. SiP spent most of the day before St. Patrick’s Day participating in tV interviews and responding to newspaper requests for information about SiP.

5. the day following enforcement, the coordinator updated the media with a complete report of our alcohol-fueled crimes to include the number of police calls, arrests for DUi, public drunkenness, underage drinking, and other alcohol offenses.

Your media plan (Srinivas, n.d.) should contain: 1. A media specialist or point person

2. media outlets most useful to promote your campaign. Use the outlet(s) which can best serve your effort.

3. good rapport among members of the local television and newspaper reporters and radio personalities with your media specialist.

4. Your target audience: local news media. regional or statewide coverage is less important because SiP is primarily a local news focus affecting a localized community.

5. Several media opportunities, not only confined to radio, television, and newspapers, but beyond:

• newspaper editorial coverage our SCPD Chief met with the community newspaper’s editorial board to promote SiP and other community topics. Letters to the editor or guest opinion columns present excellent promotional opportunities.

• television public service announcements

• radio talk shows

• radio or television public affairs programs

• news releases, press conferences, hard news stories

• newspaper feature articles

• Patrol ride-alongs for television news reporters caution: television news cameras record sound inside a person’s home, identifying suspects and others before they are charged. SCPD establishes ground rules with news crews before they “ride-along” with SiP officers.

• Special interest tabloids in your community State College has two, and one did an op–ed piece on SiP.

• Professional publications

If you are inexperienced in media relations, we recommend formal training.

14

15

we recommend a PR blitz to commence one month prior to

enforcement to ensure the public understands the problem and how

your department intends to address it.

Be prepared for quirks of the media who work on a different timetable than we do:

1. they have daily deadlines.

2. if a reporter calls with a request for facts and figures, be prepared to spend appropriate time researching and providing the information. You should not send reporters to research the information themselves.

3. A prompt response to all media requests is critical in getting your message out, especially when your message is time-sensitive.

4. eventually a reporter will contact you in order to complete a feature or more in-depth story on your subject.

5. reporters like photos, facts, figures, charts, and most of all, the human interest side of the story. 6. Prompt responses that are completely truthful are a must. if you don’t know, don’t guess! tell the reporter you don’t know.

7. remember that YoU do not control the media. You work with them; however, they control how the story is written, edited, when it is published, and where it is placed.

8. remember, if the media elects to write a story and you don’t assist them, they will obtain the information from another source and run the story without your input.

9. Authorized personnel should be prepared to go on camera and on radio. Follow the rules and look credible. incompetence on one interview can do more harm than good for the entire project.

10. rarely does the story come out exactly the way you first presented it to the reporter or editor.

11. never say “no comment.” Always comment!

12. never speak to a reporter off the record. there is no such thing!

13. try not to speculate or answer hypothetical questions.

adMInIStratIon and fIELd opEratIonSPrior to the Alcohol Source investigation Project (SiP), SCPD charged 685 individuals with liquor law violations during a 12-month period for 2003. When combining our statistic with PSU Police Service’s yearly total, that number increased to 974.

Although PSU Police Services did not participate directly in SiP, the combined number of alcohol violations proved to be an alarming statistic. the high number reflected the attitude of young adults (under 21) who were charged with drinking underage and adversely affected the State College community as a whole.

Considering the number charged is just the “tip of the iceberg” of those at risk in the 16 to 25 age group who would ignore the law, penalties, and the dangers of drinking, SCPD determined that a public relations and awareness campaign would serve in the best interest of the community in two aspects:

• Awareness of alcohol-fueled crimes • Publicity for the SiP initiative Attacking both issues at once proved to be the most efficient method and provided the at-risk age group with pertinent information on various issues involving alcohol such as:

• Dangerous drinking

• intoxication rates

• Alcohol overdoses

• Sexual assaults/prevention

• Assaults

• Disorderly conduct

SiP provided and linked the above-mentioned statistic with others relating to alcohol consumption, such as:

• Public intoxication

• Driving under the influence of alcohol

• Assault • Sexual assault • rape

information on SiP was also provided to target audiences with details on how and why the project was undertaken to:

• Deter underage drinking

• Act as a crime prevention tool to deter other alcohol-fueled crimes

16

17

O

DA

S

GR

LMP B

N

U

I

C

Y

F

K

targEtEd group: fratErnItIES at pEnn StatE unIVErSItY

the first and largest segment of the targeted group is the fraternities at PSU. most fraternity houses are located within State College.

the Community resource officer (Cro), who is also the Fraternity Liaison for SCPD, contacted the inter-Fraternity Council (iFC). the Cro offered to speak with any and all fraternity chapters concerning fraternity/police relations, including alcohol issues and related crime on their respective properties. iFC is the student governing body of greek Life at PSU. greek Life at PSU is one of the largest and most vibrant organizations in the United States and therefore a main SiP focus.

numerous large parties are held weekly during the course of a semester at many of the fraternity houses and include live bands, disc jockeys, and large quantities of alcoholic beverages. these parties draw 400-500 college-aged guests. it is common, especially on busy weekends such as PSU football weekends, to see numerous fraternities hosting parties beginning at 10:00 Pm and lasting until after 3:00 A.m.

problems posedFraternities pose a unique problem as a source of alcohol as follows: • Fraternity brothers are usually assigned to the front door and control access by a guest list and require party-goers to sign an attendance log. • Fraternity doormen are required by iFC to check identification of guests and issue a “wrist band” or “hand stamp” only if the guest is 21 years of age or older for the purpose of obtaining alcohol, generally free, from the bar. • in some cases, guests signing in indicate they are not undercover police officers. • Bartenders are to provide alcohol only to guests who have passed the door check. • Problems arise when doormen, who may sometimes be intoxicated, allow underage friends into the party and issue them wrist bands or hand stamps to obtain alcohol. • Bartenders may be under the influence and distribute alcohol indiscriminately and in large quantities, rather than one or two drinks at a time per guest.

• guests ordering alcohol at the bar frequently order drinks for other underage guests as well. therefore, in reality, there is little or no control on alcohol consumption at the party.

• Fraternity officers, generally the President, Vice President, or risk manager are supposed to be sober, responsible for the party, and meet the police in the event of a disturbance. He finds he is already responsible for an out-of-control event. He may be under the influence of alcohol as well.

new approachin an effort to curb the alcohol problem and to provide educational and SiP information to the fraternities, the SCPD Cro teamed up with representatives from the Judicial Affairs office at PSU and the State College Borough ordinance enforcement office.

the Cro first provided statistical information concerning police contact with a particular fraternity and, based on frequency and nature of contact, tailor-made a presentation to address specific problem areas the particular fraternity was experiencing. in most cases, the common issues were:

• Drugs

• Assaults

• Sexual assaults

• Liquor law violations, including furnishing alcohol

• Disorderly conduct (noise violations) the Cro then broke down each specific problem for the group and provided several options the fraternity members could use to address the situation.

Concerning alcohol, option solutions included:

• Better door control, including “responsible, sober” doormen to control access.

• Sign in should include verifying a valid driver’s license as proof of age and then issuing wrist bands and hand stamps based on proof of age to those 21 or older.

• An “iD guide Checking Booklet” was presented to the fraternity president or risk manager to assist them in determining what is and what is not a valid driver’s license or state issued identification card.

• Dissemination of information addressing how to handle intoxicated persons attempting to enter the party, as well as handling guests intoxicated on premises.

• Bartenders should be “responsible and sober” when distributing alcohol and to assign several fraternity brothers on a rotating basis to monitor alcohol consumption at each party.

• recommendations were made to address alcohol overdose situations to facilitate emergency response by police and ambulance personnel and included care procedures for the victim to prevent death and, in the case of female guests, sexual assault.

SiP information was provided to the audience at each fraternity meeting. the basic operating procedures of the program were discussed and included the various methods used to investigate and develop probable cause to obtain search warrants for entry into parties where minors are believed to be drinking and are being furnished alcohol by the host.

this segment of the presentation usually generated many questions due to increased enforcement of the liquor laws and the higher risk potential for arrest. the focus of this segment was to formally notify fraternity members of the SiP project, reason for its implementation, and the laws concerning underage drinking and furnishing alcohol to minors.

O

DA

S

GR

LMP B

N

U

I

C

Y

F

K

18

partnership with penn State Judicial affairs (PSJA)

representatives from each fraternity were visited with information on the PSU off-Campusmisconduct Policy.

in partnership with the SCPD, PSJA received copies of all criminal arrests on a monthly basis for review by their office and determines whether disciplinary action is appropriate for violation of student conduct standards on a case-by-case basis.

Disciplinary action on violation of policy may range from an email to a formal hearing at the PSJA office, and sanctions may range from a warning through suspension for one or several semesters, or expulsion.

the State college ordinance Enforcement officer in addition, the State College ordinance enforcement officer provided information on Borough ordinances frequently violated during the aftermath of a large fraternity party. Specifically, violations included trash, beer cans, cups, paper, urine in doorways or stairwells of nearby properties, vomit on the sidewalks, and other debris strewn throughout the fraternity property including a trail of trash on the public sidewalks and streets from intoxicated guests leaving the party. the officer also included other common ordinance violations in the presentation, and remedies to address problems.

most presentations lasted approximately one hour, however requests for presentations increased throughout the greek Life community, especially because of the SiP initiative.

rumors spread quickly that raid teams were being used to “bust” parties and “undercover officers” were attempting to access parties to view underage drinking in progress and identify those furnishing alcohol. Although undercover officers were not used in the SiP initiative, the tactic was not completely ignored. Undercover officers were a last resort method to be used only if other methods of obtaining information and developing probable cause failed.

raid teams, as the greek Life community labeled them, were nothing more than adequate manpower levels to secure a party location and allow a sufficient number of personnel to prepare and serve search warrants, write numerous citations for underage drinking, as well as to conduct the investigation and arrest those responsible for furnishing the alcohol to minors.

the rumors spread by fraternity members assisted SiP by acting as a deterrent to further alcohol law violations by those who believed the risks outweighed the rewards of furnishing alcohol or drinking underage. SIP did not attempt to correct the misconception.

19

coMMunItY prESEntatIonSthe SiP coordinator further enhanced the community relations aspect of the initiative by preparing a series of PowerPoint presentations on the goals and objectives of the program.

the presentations include alcohol-related crime statistics, photographs of associated criminal activity in progress, as well as the aftermath of incidents relating to criminal mischief, public intoxication, scattered rubbish, and urine stream spots on the walls of businesses within the downtown business district. the information was presented to any community group interested in the alcohol problem and was scheduled on several different occasions.

SIp Information added to WebsiteSiP information, primarily goals and objectives, was posted on the SCPD website. in addition, SiP posted an initial news release announcing the SiP initiative including target group information for ages 16-25 who participate in dangerous drinking behavior. Specific target location information was provided and included fraternities, rental properties and lawn parties.

After each SiP initiative, a news release was prepared for all local media outlets. Arrest information concerning furnishing alcohol charges and minors law citations issued at a particular address was published in The Centre Daily Times, a local newspaper, and The Daily Collegian, whose readers are primarily PSU students.

our Public relations (Pr) campaign goal was simple: to aggressively take our message to our audience of student groups; community groups and to the public as a whole via the media.

Source investigation business cards provided to the target group (ages 16-25) on high alcohol activity nights between the hours of 8:00 Pm and midnight. the Community relations officer distributed over 5,000 cards while on foot patrol and specifically at high pedestrian traffic intersections in downtown State College. We found business card distribution to be one of the most effective means of circulating the SiP message and provided direct and positive public contact.

20

21

By far the most effective and powerful method to convey the SIP message is though the local media. However, we concluded the project can not devote all of personnel’s time to the media. Concurrent with the media campaign are an effort and willingness to meet with smaller groups or to hold town hall meetings. SIP spokespersons would also submit to one-on-one interviews by student journalists as part of their class projects. Examples of community and special interest groups where we made presentations:

• PSu Student Athletes Advisory Board• Community Help Center• Fraternity Safety Training• PSu fraternity & sorority life• PSu intercollegiate athletics -Head Coaches • PSu Off-campus Student union• District Judge town hall meetings• One-on-one student journalist interviews• PSu student radio public affairs talk show• C-NET public access television• PA Senate law & justice hearing• PSu classes• Magisterial District Judges• Downtown Tavern Association• Fraternity advisors• Pennsylvania Coalition Against Rape• Pennsylvanians Against underage Drinking• underage Drinking Enforcement Training Center

Part of our message is : other investigations do not suffer. no time is taken away from other criminal investigations. A sexual assault, burglary, car theft or any other police response is not affected. i’m often asked, “don’t you guys have anything better to do than pick on underage drinkers?” my answer is yes we do and we’re doing it, but we are doing this work as well.

adMInIStratIon/SupErVISIon of thE EnforcEMEnt coMponEntthis project should have the complete support of the Chief of Police and administrative staff. managerial support is key to success.

Avoid taking on this project just to add another program to your library or to simply increase the number of arrests/citations. instead, the project should be adopted in response to a very real and dangerous drinking problem that has been identified by you and your community.

Enforcement ScheduleSince SIP was geared to coincide with the Penn State academic calendar, we were able to schedule staff well in advance. SiP focused enforcement efforts on weekends: 1. Weekends defined as thursday, Friday and Saturday nights. 2. only those “weekends” where PSU is in session were included. 3. out of 52 weekends per year, SiP focused efforts on 14 during the fall semester and 14 during the spring semester. 4. the total number was further reduced because of thanksgiving, Winter and Spring semester breaks to a total of 24 target weekends.

in the beginning, SiP officers were scheduled to work 8:00 Pm to 3:00 Am. We quickly noticed a pattern. most alcohol-fueled crimes in our community occur between 11:00 Pm and 4:00 Am. Very few SiP investigations were generated before midnight.

Because of activity, we adjusted our start time to10:00 Pm. the new start time made the detail more desirable for volunteers and allowed our SiP investigators to take care of other associated matters from a previous case before our anticipated alcohol-fueled activity increased sometime after 11:00 Pm. the number of SiP investigators scheduled on a weekend night varied generally from a minimum of two to a maximum of eight, depending on the anticipated workload and officer availability. A two-investigator team would be under the supervision of the on duty patrol sergeant. if six or eight SiP investigators were scheduled, a police supervisor on overtime would be assigned to supervise the SiP teams.

enfoRcement/InveStIgAtIonchAPteR 5

Fall Semester SIP Schedule

22

SIp Investigators

The officers who volunteered to work on these cases were titled SIP investigators. each SiP investigator must be Able to:

1. Develop a lead in a source case

2. investigate the lead through various means

3. Corroborate the lead or tip

4. gather & seize evidence

5. Successfully prosecute the criminal case

Some Skills needed:

1. Ability to effectively interview witnesses, suspects and defendants

2. Ability to solicit cooperation from underage drinking defendants

3. Ability to take valid written statements from cooperating underage drinkers

4. Ability to write detailed police reports, criminal complaints and search warrants

5. Ability to professionally and successfully present their cases in the Court of Common Pleas

Any SCPD officer, regardless of interest or ability, was eligible to volunteer for SiP enforcement details. the theory was that in the beginning, officers might volunteer to work solely for overtime pay but as the project progressed, those officers who were truly interested would continue on and become our core of experienced investigators. the theory proved correct. twenty officers have worked on SiP. of these, 11 have taken a genuine interest in the project and have become our core investigators on whom we depend to work SiP cases and enforcement details on a regular basis.

23

Enforcement target areasSiP is targeted enforcement. in an effort to work smarter, not harder, we focused our enforcement details in 3 areas of State College: the Highlands and Holmes/Foster neighborhoods and the Downtown improvement District.

State College is divided into nine neighborhoods each having an organized neighborhood association. State College surrounds the central portion of the PSU campus. three out of four students live off campus and most live in State College Borough. A large percentage of the off-campus students live in two historic neighborhoods: Highlands and Holmes-Foster. the neighborhoods demographically contain a mixture of students, other young people, and older, permanent residents. there is mixture of rental and owner occupied houses, converted houses, and high-rise apartment buildings.

As stated before, SiP publicized the target enforcement areas. Although we didn’t ignore the other seven neighborhoods of the Borough, only one SiP case was generated from outside our target areas.

downtown State college downtown and highlands downtown, highlands, and holmes-foster neighborhoods.

crime data Related to Alcohol for current month

number of Cases per neighborhood

24

25

geographic Information Systems (gIS)SiP used a powerful information tool, giS, to map alcohol-fueled data. SCPD used giS to effectively manage the alcohol-fueled crime and last drink data which we gathered.

Visual representations of mapped incidents of underage drinking, DUi, or any other crime data can be quickly absorbed by law enforcement personnel. A picture or graph is worth more than vast reports, lists, and spreadsheet data.

By integrating criminal records management data with giS using location, SiP crime mapping depicts activity by:

1. incident type

2. Date, day of week, time

3. Alcohol fueled

4. Alcohol source

5. Location

in combination with liquor establishments, nuisance property, and fraternity spatial designations, SiP uses giS to analyze patterns, determine trends, and plan enforcement of problem locations. SiP created giS time-of-day maps for assaults overlaying crime data onto maps of liquor establishments. in our giS map convention, light to dark colors indicate few to many crimes, respectively.

SCPD has only begun to understand what is possible with giS and our crime data. However, in examining over 3,000 alcohol-fueled crimes per year, SiP needed a way to easily understand and examine crime correlations. giS is a decision-making tool which improves organizational integration. So far, SiP has found that giS is useful for both internal and external purposes.

An external use example: Create a map of alcohol-fueled assaults which can powerfully convey the correlation between assaults by time of day, day of week, day of year, locations, and sources. SiP used these illustrations in our public presentations to help make our point and highlight the correlation between dangerous drinking and associated crime such as assaults, etc.

An internal use example: giS can be used to very precisely map and identify those specific addresses and areas where repeat alcohol sources are numerous so SCPD can target our patrol officers and SiP investigators to be at the right place at the right time.

examples of gIS maps:

1. Source map - fraternity or bar

2. Public urination cases

3. Street assaults

4. Sexual assaults

5. Public drunks

6. Problem properties

7. Student/rental densities by neighborhood

8. Disorderly parties

definition:

Spatial analysis techniques afforded by gIS provide valuable tools for effective strategic planning, decision-making, historical analysis, public relations presentations and predicting future events.

§ 6310.1. Selling Or Furnishing Liquor Or Malt Or Brewed Beverages To Minors.

(a) Offense Defined--Except as provided in subsection (b), a person commits a misdemeanor of the third degree if he intentionally and knowingly sells or intentionally and knowingly furnishes, or purchases with the intent to sell or furnish, any liquor or malt or brewed beverages to a person who is less than 21 years of age.

(b) Exceptions.--The provisions of this section shall not apply to any religious service or ceremony which may be conducted in a private home or a place of worship where the amount of wine served does not exceed the amount reasonably, customarily and traditionally required as an integral part of the service or ceremony.

(c) Minimum Penalty.--In addition to any other penalty imposed pursuant to this title or other statute, a person who is convicted of violating subsection (a) shall be sentenced to pay a fine of not less than $1,000 for the first violation and a fine of $2,500 for each subsequent violation. There shall be no authority in any court to impose on an offender any lesser sentence than the minimum sentence mandated by this subsection. No court shall have the authority to suspend any sentence as defined in this section. Nothing in this section shall prevent the sentencing court from imposing a sentence greater than the minimum sentence mandated in this subsection. In no case shall the sentence exceed the maximum sentence prescribed by law.

fIELd opEratIonS — EnforcEMEnt

applicable criminal Law: crimes code, Liquor code, Social host ordinancesSCPD SiP investigations derived their authority from two statutes:

• the Pennsylvania Crimes Code the Pennsylvania Crimes Code 18 Pa. C.S.A. ss 6310.1 : Selling or Furnishing Liquor or malt or Brewed Beverages to minors

• the Pennsylvania Liquor Code the Penna. Liquor Code: 47 P.S. ss 4-493 (1) Unlawful Acts relative to Liquor, malt and Brewed Beverages and Licensees; Furnishing Liquor or malt or Brewed Beverages to Certain Persons.

ordinancesnote: Social host ordinances are a growing movement in many states. Local governments may enact Social Host ordinances that regulate the behavior of the party host if he/she permits or allows underage drinking on the premises; usually a house or apartment.

most recently 43 of Connecticut’s 169 municipalities have passed a Social host or “house party” ordinance (Connecticut Coalition to Stop Underage Drinking, April 2005).

26

tYpES of SIp InVEStIgatIonSSCPD SiP investigators used a basic investigative technique to develop probable cause in order to detect underage drinkers in order to solicit their cooperation in furtherance of a furnishing alcohol charge against the source.

SiP generally did not use the “mere encounter approach” of a youthful-looking person on the street to seek out the underage drinker when there was no other noticeable criminal behavior present.

Investigative detentionthe method used to detect suspected underage drinkers was the investigative detention. these detentions usually resulted in a citation for an “on view” violation that was the cause for the investigative detention. Detection of underage drinking was a secondary offense stemming from an “on view” violation of the Crimes Code or a local ordinance. the age of the offender is not a factor in the decision to stop and detain. the criminal behavior is a factor in the decision to stop and detain.

An example of a typical detention:

1. regardless of offender age (over/under 21) they are cited for the underlying criminal behavior which usually was:

a. Carrying an open container of alcohol

b. Urinating in public

c. Public drunkenness

d. other disorderly conduct

2. A source investigation begins after the stop for illegal behavior.

a. After the subjects are detained they are identified.

b. A resolution of the offense for which they were detained is completed.

3. During the course of the stop, the investigating officer determines the age of the suspect. 4. the subject may be given a preliminary breath test (PBt).

5. the suspect may be questioned about the source.

6. the subject will be asked to cooperate in our investigation by making a written statement and testifying if necessary at the preliminary hearing. most PSU at State College underage drinkers are 18-20 years of age. SCPD does not regularly encounter persons under the age of 18.

note: this procedure is not recommended for juveniles under the age of 18. departmental policy regulates the questioning of juveniles without parental permission in such a circumstance.

27

Scheduled Street Interdiction Leads

• Prescheduled events, where two-person teams patrol the target neighborhoods between10:00 Pm and 3:00 Am on selected thursday, Friday, and Saturday nights.

• enforcement teams patrol in cars and on foot, in uniform, and in plain clothes, searching for and responding to alcohol-fueled crimes. the most common violations encountered are:

1. Public urination

2. Public drunkenness

3. Assault

4. open containers

5. Disorderly parties

• once a violation is encountered, the offender is detained for further investigation.

• the investigator notes the age and local address of the offender and may issue a citation for the initial offense. if the offender is under 21, officers may begin a source investigation to identify the furnisher. if the offender is over 21 and the source is a licensed establishment, a referral may be made to the Bureau of Liquor Control enforcement for possible service to visibly intoxicated persons.

• At the conclusion of the detention, the offender is questioned in greater detail about the source of his/her drinking. A PBt is usually administered. they can refuse the PBt test (most don’t). each night shift officer is issued a PBt.

• if cooperation is gained, a written statement is taken immediately. no promises are made to the suspect to gain their cooperation.

• if successful, SiP has a lead to work in an attempt to make a furnishing case on the source.

Problems that may be encountered include: 1. Sometimes the underage drinker is too intoxicated and cannot communicate. 2. Sometimes the underage drinker is from out of town and doesn’t know addresses or other pertinent details and may be lost. 3. Sometimes they refuse to cooperate fully, which is alright.

28

29

citizen complaint Leads

Another type of SiP lead may develop in response to citizen complaints; usually an assault, disorderly party, or alcohol overdose.

the most frequently encountered lead is a large party where the guests spill over onto the street, alley, or sidewalk. the subsequent investigation often follows these steps:

1. SiP sets up on the perimeter of the party, on public property, and waits for a guest to: a. Urinate in public b. Become disorderly c. exit the property carrying an open container (alcoholic beverage)

2. Suspect is stopped, cited for his/her behavior, and questioned to determine age and source.

3. Corroboration. the SiP investigator may attempt to gain cooperation from additional underage drinkers in this same investigation in order to corroborate and possibly add counts to the criminal complaint. or he may elect to obtain a search warrant for the premises. the investigator may decide to interview the host(s) in an attempt to secure an admission.

follow the LeadSiP investigations based on “follow the lead” are conducted by officers and detectives concurrent with the underlying event under investigation such as sexual assaults, assaults, alcohol overdoses, serious injuries and deaths from falls and DUi crashes.

SiP recognized a strong correlation between dangerous drinking and certain crimes and events and decided that as long as a source investigation did not interfere with the primary investigation, we would continue on with a source investigation and charge the furnisher of the alcohol. SiP is aware that alcohol is present in 90% of our Sexual Assault investigations and that most or our Sexual Assault victims are women 18-20. Alcohol is a factor in most of our street assaults as well. keeping this in mind, SiP continues to investigate these cases beyond the primary offense to expose the underlying or secondary offense of furnishing alcohol to minors.

When an investigation reveals a lead that suggests an underage drinker was furnished, a detective is assigned to pursue the SiP investigation portion of the case.

Underage drinking and the source are not overlooked just because the primary investigation was of a more serious nature.

when entering a large underage drinking party with a search warrant or otherwise, use caution and follow

procedures from controlled Party dispersal training.

Soliciting the cooperation of underage drinkers (ud)this strategy is designed for the age group from 18 to 20 years of age only. it is not recommended for those younger than 18, due to departmental policy regarding the questioning of juveniles.

the process of soliciting cooperation from underage drinking defendants in furtherance of a source investigation is based on the model that SCPD has used in drug investigations for several years.

in order to “make a source case,” SiP must solicit the cooperation and testimony from underage drinkers to identify and prosecute the host, supplier, or purchaser of the alcohol.

working up the ladder: in drug investigations this process is called “working up the ladder.”

Summary of Steps in gaining cooperation from underage drinkers (ud) • UD is identified and may be cited based on probable cause.

• Upon completion of the investigative detention, UD is questioned about the Source of their alcohol and/or overdrinking.

• if cooperative, a verbal statement is taken from UD.

• UD completes a written statement implicating their SoUrCe.

• the citation issued to the UD is “continued” at magisterial District Judge court until after the Source case preliminary hearing.

• the UD is subpoenaed to County Court to testify at Source preliminary hearing.

• Upon successful completion of the Source preliminary hearing the citation against the UD may be mitigated in return for their testimony.

• Check with your District Attorney for guidance.

30

31

the Interview With the cooperating defendantthe suspect (aged 18-20) is questioned about his/her source. miranda warnings are not always necessary as the statements are intended for use against the furnisher of the alcoholic beverages. miranda protects the defendant in custodial arrest situations against self-incrimination.

Suspect interviews can be conducted on the street, in a police vehicle or at the police station.

the SiP investigator explains to the suspect that cooperation in prosecuting the furnishing case is desired. Completing a written statement and agreeing to testify in the furnishing case will be brought to the attention of the prosecuting attorney.

the Suspect InterviewAfter taking the statements from one or more underage drinkers and obtaining further corroboration, SiP officers make contact with the suspected source. the purpose is to gather more evidence to support the lead provided by the underage drinker(s). the source suspect is:

• informed of the allegations made against him/her • Asked to make a statement

officers usually obtain some corroboration which can range from an “admission to hosting a party up to and including a full written confession to include the purchase of the alcohol.”

Search Warrants“the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” (Fourth Amendment, US Constitution).

Search warrants may be necessary to enter premises to search and seize evidence. SiP cases are criminal cases. refer to Commonwealth v. Demshock. it is an important case.

Another resource is PLCB Project Same P.A.g.e.

the mission of Project Same P.A.g.e. is to provide a training manual and video for law enforcement, which facilitates and promotes legally sound and thorough investigations, as well as successful prosecutions of underage drinking and related offenses in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. the program is meant to encourage police officers and court officials to work together in achieving more consistency in successfully prosecuting underage drinking violations. Successful prosecutions will help to educate the community and create a general deterrence to the use of alcohol by minors.

the training materials provide guidelines to be utilized during underage drinking investigations. Same P.A.g.e. is not meant to infringe upon the individual discretion or experience of law enforcement personnel, however, it is developed with the intent of encouraging communication between officers and court officials to establish acceptable expectations when prosecuting these cases. if expectations of the officer and the court are on the Same PAge, rulings will be more consistent and the community will recognize that underage drinking is being taken seriously by local law enforcement.

obtaining sales data from retail alcohol outlets varied. Some outlets would supply the sales information upon request; some wanted a subpoena or search warrant. SiP policy was to use whatever method the holder of the information required.

32

hIghLandS nEIghBorhood Watch prograMthe Highlands neighborhood Watch Program began in Spring of 2004. Although neighborhood watch programs have been in existence since 1972, the Highlands program has a new twist to an old concept. the Highlands neighborhood is comprised of residential, apartments, and fraternity housing. most students residing off-campus, who do not live in the downtown apartment complexes but walk to classes at Penn State, reside in the Highlands.

the Highlands neighborhood Watch Program was designed to assist police by using PSU students from the Crime, Law and Justice Program in the College of Liberal Arts. Student interns assigned to the Police Department patrol the Highlands neighborhood on foot during peak activity hours: 9:45 Pm to 3:00 Am tuesday through Saturday nights.

procedures for Internsthe interns walk in pairs for safety and carry cellular phones to contact the 9-1-1 Center to report suspicious and criminal activity. interns also carry small mini-mag flashlights and are certified in the use of o.C. pepper spray for self-defense.

the interns have no power to arrest or detain an individual suspected of being involved in a criminal incident. they may follow an individual until patrols arrive on scene and take control of the situation.

interns complete a written statement for each incident they witness and on which they report. the incidents are then attached to the official police report to aid in the investigation.

the Highlands neighborhood Watch interns are used to identify persons involved in criminal activity at the scene of an incident and can be summoned to testify in court if necessary.

time spent in court is removed from patrol time and interns are excused from foot patrol assignment on slower nights, generally tuesday, in order to comply with PSU credit hour requirements.

training for Internsinterns involved in the program receive an initial eight (8) hours of classroom instruction on topics which include:

• methods of foot patrol

• elements of criminal offenses

• Vehicle code violations

• reporting suspicious and criminal activity

• report writing

• Court room procedures

• testifying in court

• Code of conduct

interns are also afforded the opportunity to ride-along with the patrol officers several times during the course of their internship.

interns are administratively supervised and trained by the Cro but are directly supervised by the night shift patrol supervisors who, along with the 9-1-1 dispatchers, provide direct input on the intern evaluations. intern evaluations are forwarded to PSU for a final course grade.

the program addresses common crime problems within the Highlands neighborhood which include:

• Alcohol violations

• Disorderly conduct

• Public drunkenness

• Vandalism

• Assaults

• theft

• other conditions on the neighborhood streets rendering them unsafe areas for citizens and detracting from the tranquility of the neighborhood.

interns receive six credits upon successful completion of the Highlands neighborhood Watch Program but may expand the course to nine credits by completing additional assignments directly related to SiP which include:

• Court watch

• Photographing alcohol-related incidents and the aftermath of such incidents

• Photographs are routed to investigating police officer along with the intern’s written statements and included in the police report.

33

doWntoWn SafEtY EnhancEMEnt prograMthe Downtown Safety enhancement Program began shortly after the Highlands neighborhood Watch Program (Spring 2004) and was implemented to address the safety concerns of the State College Downtown Business Association.

the Association viewed alcohol-related crime and other criminal activity as a growing problem in the downtown area and elected to reimburse PSU for providing uniformed foot patrol coverage by student auxiliary personnel assigned to Penn PSU Police Services.

on Campus, the student auxiliary was primarily responsible for:

• traffic control at major events such as home football games, basketball games and concerts where large crowds were expected

• general security duties for building lock down after hours • issuing parking tickets in the campus parking lots

Downtown, however, their duties are defined in the same manner as the Highlands neighborhood Watch internship Program:

• observe And report Suspicious And Criminal Activity

• Working within the SCPD’s jurisdiction, student auxiliaries are directly supervised by the SCPD’s night shift supervisors and work high activity times tuesday through Saturday 9:45 Pm to 3:00 Am.

Unlike the Highlands neighborhood Watch interns who wear civilian clothes and green windbreaker jackets with a gold neighborhood watch eye logo, the student auxiliaries are uniformed and wear light blue shirts with PSU student auxiliary patches on the shoulders and dark blue slacks.

the auxiliaries carry portable radios to contact the 9-1-1 Center to report activity rather than cellular phones. they are not equipped with o.C. pepper spray.

All written statements and administrative paperwork is channeled through the SCPD Cro, who links the statements through the records Section to the official police report.

Student auxiliary personnel are available by summons to appear in court to testify to any incident they report.

the only major difference between the Highlands neighborhood Watch Program and the Downtown Safety enhancement Program is that:

• the Highlands interns work for college credits to apply toward a Criminal Justice Degree and a letter of recommendation to include in a resume for a perspective (police agency) employer.

• the student auxiliary personnel work for a wage agreed upon by the Downtown Business Association and PSU Police Services.

• Both programs have proved beneficial in addressing alcohol-related crimes as well as other criminal activity in the assigned locations.

• While the Downtown Safety enhancement program has a higher potential for increased activity due to the licensed liquor establishments and high-rise apartment parties, the Highlands program has generated sufficient activity, especially within the fraternity area to warrant being continued beyond the SiP initiative.

34

35

photography projectthe Highlands neighborhood Watch interns were also given extra credit assignment by the SiP coordinator to photograph alcohol-related incidents or the resulting aftermath of such incidents.

SiP provided a digital camera to the interns who were responsible for taking the camera out on foot patrol during each shift. interns were instructed in the use of the camera and advised to photograph persons exhibiting signs of intoxication, in addition to any associated criminal activity the intoxicated persons may commit within the Highlands neighborhood.

interns were advised to photograph from a public place:

• Large parties in progress

• Scenes of vandalism

• refuse on lawns after large parties

• Urination spots on the walls and in the doorways of businesses

• Vomit puddles on sidewalks and streets

• items that were thrown off balconies onto vehicles or into the street

SiP stressed that the photographs were to be taken only if photography could be accomplished without jeopardizing the safety of the intern. All photographs taken were recorded by the intern on a form which the Highlands neighborhood Watch interns designed. the photographs and photo log were then submitted to the SiP Coordinator for use at his discretion during presentations.

the photographs powerfully demonstrate the scope and seriousness concerning the dangerous drinking behaviors exhibited by the SiP target group. in some instances, the photographs may be used for prosecution purposes if the intern captured criminal activity in progress. Photographs of this nature are then routed to the investigating officer along with the intern’s written statement and included in the official police report.

Urine Stained Wall in State College

Liquor control EnforcementSiP does not ignore dangerous drinking by those over 21. in cases where the drinker is over 21, the source is a licensed liquor establishment, and we have evidence to support the allegation, SiP notifies Pennsylvania State Police Liquor Control enforcement and the liquor license holder of the suspected violation.

the PA Liquor code regulates the serving of visibly intoxicated persons (ViPs) at a licensed establishment. enforcement responsibility rests with PSP Bureau of Liquor Control enforcement (LCe).

Concurrent with any referral to LCe for a suspected over-serving case, we also notify the liquor license holder of our actions.

Lessons LearnedSiP has two components: (1) Public relations (Pr) and (2) enforcement. in the beginning, SCPD expected that the enforcement component would be the most important portion. However as the project progressed we clearly recognized that an effective PR campaign can be more powerful than enforcement. if the public believes you to be bigger and more omnipresent due to your “image” which is cultivated by effective media management and Pr, then the public views your enforcement efforts to be greater when your enforcement may be nothing more than adequate.

Pr and enforcement must go hand in hand. one cannot be accomplished without the other. Had SiP publicized our increased enforcement and never followed through, then our project’s credibility would have suffered as well as our department’s reputation.

the media is predictable and will not merely accept what you tell them. they will ask for statistics, facts, and figures to draw their own conclusion. remember; you can “spin” your information, but a good reporter will “verify” and report as such.

be flexible: At the beginning, the SiP enforcement segment was planned to involve the “interdiction” of underage drinkers and their sources only. As the project evolved, we added two important elements: (1) “follow the lead” and (2) the investigation of over-serving by licensed establishments.

career developmentAn unexpected fringe benefit which can pay long term dividends is career development. While career development was not a primary motive for undertaking the project, we found that SiP investigations provided valuable experience to our uniform patrol officers who otherwise may not initiate this type of investigation.

SiP investigators enhanced their professional skills by:

• Soliciting cooperation from defendants

• obtaining written statements that stand up in court

• Preparing criminal complaints, serving search warrants, etc.

• Preparing and presenting a complex court case

SCPD found that our SiP investigators were eager to gain these valuable investigative skills.

36

LIaISon

Without the cooperation and understanding of the Centre County District Attorney (DA), our efforts would have been much more difficult. During the course of this project, one of the most interesting and sometimes frustrating areas was “prosecution issues.” SiP will not offer legal advice.

Before the SiP project began, the Centre County DA assigned an Assistant District Attorney (ADA) to manage, coordinate, and prosecute our SiP cases.

the ADA attended our quarterly SiP investigators’ meetings. His advice and guidance was well-received and proved invaluable to the project.

Whenever a new or effective defense argument was made in an alcohol case, the ADA liaison would research the matter in order to counter it.

ideally SiP would have preferred to have the same ADA prosecute most of our cases in keeping with a hands-on, same-page type approach. However due to scheduling issues, he was unable to do so.

court caSESin addition to Commonwealth v. Demshock, 854 A.2d 553 (Pa. Superior 2004) (search warrants), SiP found that defense arguments focused on two primary issues: (1) the Furnishing Alcohol section of the PA Liquor Code does not apply to persons in a home and that the Liquor Code can only be applied to persons at a licensed liquor establishment and (2) the “knowingly” and “intentionally” culpability factors contained in the Furnishing Alcohol section of the Crimes Code.

Pa. Superior Court decided the first argument by ruling in Commonwealth v. randall, 603 A.2d 276 (Pa. Superior 1957) in determining that the Liquor Code pertains to individuals as well as licensees.

“knowingly” and “intentionally” as decided in Commonwealth. v Scolieri , 813 A.2d 672 (Pa. Superior 2002) requires the Commonwealth to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the person furnishing alcohol to a minor knew that he or she was under the age of 21.

A third case of note was decided by the Superior Court in 2005: Commonwealth v mistler, et al, 869 A. 2d 497 (Pa. Superior 2005). this case addresses reasonable suspicion to detain party guests at an underage drinking party at a fraternity. We are aware of this case and its potential impact, but have not yet faced the issue presented in the appeal.

PRoSecutIon ISSueS chAPteR 6

37

court Watchpurpose of court Watchin order to enhance our prosecution efforts and gather necessary data we instituted a court watch program. We recognized the importance of successfully prosecuting all alcohol-fueled cases for project credibility as well as not lose the interest of the investigating officers.

Court watch was instituted for early identification of any investigative, prosecution, or case presentation issues at the magisterial District Judge (mDJ) summary level so that appropriate adjustments could be made.

Student Interns PSU students, as part of their internship with SCPD, were assigned to SiP Court Watch. SiP Court Watch was narrowly focused on two magisterial district judge courtrooms, even though the SCPD does business with four of the six mDJs in Centre County. these two mDJs have primary jurisdiction in our two-neighborhood project area.

Magisterial district Judges mDJs hear only summary offenses in these courtrooms. misdemeanor cases are held at centralized court in the county courthouse. the Court Watch segment of SiP was not expanded to the centralized court proceedings at the preliminary hearing during the initial project. it may be expanded at some future time.

the Court Watch concept was designed to address concerns regarding dispositions of alcohol-related incidents and the criteria applied by the mDJ to find an individual:

• not guilty

• guilty

• Allow the defendant to enroll in a community service

• Juvenile justice program

A simple form was designed by the Highlands interns and contained a series of check blocks relating to a standard criminal summary hearing and included:

• A section for alcohol involvement

• Source of alcohol – last drink

• Whether the incident before the court was alcohol-fueled

the form provided space for:

• Summary of the offense from prosecution

• Summary of the offense by the defense

• Comments by the magisterial district judge hearing the case – reason for the verdict

information compiled from the Court Watch initiative would then determine whether a disposition resulted from factors beyond the prosecuting officer’s control such as the:

• Bias opinion of the court

• mere fact that the defendant was represented by counsel

in contrast, the information would also explain whether or not the officer was adequately prepared to prosecute the case or if he/she failed to appear for the hearing.

mDJs and all officers were notified prior to the implementation of Court Watch. Department representatives met with both affected mDJs. SiP wanted an opportunity to explain the project’s overall focus and direction and to also share with them our Court Watch segment and strategy.

interns received a tutorial. they were instructed to attend the hearings, sit passively, and listen carefully to the testimony and record as much of it as possible on the Court Watch form. they were cautioned to not ask questions of the mDJ or the prosecuting officer.

38

39

caseload on average SCPD has 20-25 summary non-traffic, alcohol-fueled hearings per month. the Cro assigned the interns to as many hearings per month as the interns’ schedules would permit. they averaged about a 50% attendance rate.

couRt wAtch-SIP

defendant – last name: _________________ first name: ____________________

other defendant(s): Yes[ ] no[ ] _____________________________________

date of offense: __________ time of offense: ______ day of week:_________

charge: _____________________________________________________________

other citation(s): Yes[ ] no[ ] _________________________________________

district Judge Presiding:_______________________________________________

on view: [ ] ____________________ witnessed event: [ ] _________________

defendant did Appear: Yes[ ] no[ ] complaint did Appear: Yes[ ] no[ ]

witness(s) did Appear: Yes[ ] no[ ]

highlands Intern Involvement: Yes[ ] no[ ] ______________________________

continued from Past or to be continued: Past [ ] future [ ]

defense Attorney: Yes[ ] no[ ] If Yes – name: ___________________________

Alcohol fueled: Yes[ ] no[ ]

Source of Alcohol – last drink: ______________________________

medical Intervention: check all that Apply

[ ] Ambulance

[ ] hospital

Summary of offense from Prosecution: ___________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

Summary of offense from defense: ______________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

comments from district Justice: ________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

verdict/Sentence/ disposition:[ ] guilty – Summary [ ] gP – guilty Plea[ ] ng – not guilty [ ] wd – withdrawn[ ] dIS – dismissed [ ] Plea bargain[ ] YoP – Youthful offenders Program

Alcohol AwAReneSS PRogRAmSchAPteR 7

rESponSIBLE aLcohoL ManagEMEnt prograM (raMp)Pennsylvania legislation enacted June 18, 2001 established a “voluntary” responsible Alcohol management Program (rAmP) certification which provides incentives for licensees who participate. there are five parts to the program:

1. owner/manager training An owner and/or manager must attend a free training session offered by the PLCB.

2. Alcohol Server/Seller training Fifty percent of the licensee’s alcohol service employees must complete a PLCB certified alcohol server/seller education program. this includes anyone who is in a position to serve alcoholic beverages and/or check iDs.

Upon completion of the program, employees are required to complete a course examination and must receive an 80% or better to pass.

3. new employee orientation new employee orientation must be provided on or before the first day of employment as a member of the licensee’s alcohol service staff. the PLCB provides the licensee with a checklist and appropriate learning methods. the licensee maintains these records.

4. Signage this section covers posting of signs, prominently displayed, regarding responsible alcohol service.

the signs must include acceptable forms of iD and the refusal of alcohol service to minors and visibly intoxicated persons (ViPs).

5. certification compliance Appointment and visit the final component consists of a compliance visit from the regional rAmP representative who completes the necessary documentation for the PLCB.

Benefits of raMpCompliance with the rAmP certification provides licensees with the benefits of:

• reduced fines for serving a minor or intoxicated person • knowledgeable, responsible and well trained service staff • management and recognition as a responsible licensee in the community

the ordinance enacted by State College Borough Councilmade it “mandatory” for licensees to comply with training requirements by charging them an additional $50 fee to cover the costs of the tiPs course and assessed fines

40

41

34

5

a12aaaa

IntErnatIonaL propErtY MaIntEnancE codEthe international Property maintenance Code was formally adopted as a State College Borough ordinance in 2003 as ordinance 1798. the Code prescribes effective standards and minimum requirements for buildings and premises so that persons in or visiting State College are provided with a safe and sanitary environment.

State college Borough ordinance 1798 chapter 10All rental housing and property within the Borough is issued a rental housing permit which must be renewed annually at a cost set forth in the ordinance. Failure to renew a housing permit renders the permit null and void and the property is unable to be rented to a perspective tenant(s).

rental permit Suspension effective January 1, 2005 Chapter 10 became effective and is entitled “Permit Suspension.” this chapter of the ordinance allows permits to be suspended for rental properties based on a point system. the purpose is to identify problems arising from repeated violations of laws and ordinances. A brief outline is as follows:

1. All rental properties including fraternities must have a “person-in-charge”

a. the “person-in-charge” must live within 25 air miles and other than the property owner must be at least 25 years of age

b. the Code official must be notified of any changes to the “person-in-charge” and ownership c. “Person-in-charge” is responsible for notifying the property owner of violations, complying with applicable occupancy limits, notifying tenants of local ordinances and the appropriate Borough agency to contact if there are unresolved problems

3. Violations at the property are tracked for a 12 month period

a. each violation that occurs is assigned a point value from one (1) to three (3)

b. When five (5) or more points accumulate, a notice of violation is sent to the property owner

4. A correction plan is requested in the notice

5. the property owner has the option to request an informal hearing with the Borough manager

6. When ten (10) or more points accumulate, a permit suspension notice is sent and the permit suspension process is initiated

7. Appeal of suspension notice process

a. Submit in writing within15 days of notice, a mitigation process

b. meeting with the Borough manager

c. Hearing with the rental Housing Hearing Board

8. Defense – the eviction of culpable tenants

a. Violations resulting from property owner, manager or tenant requests for assistance will not count against the property b. First suspension: six (6) months

c. Second and subsequent suspensions: one (1) year

d. Permit suspension commences on the first day following the expiration of the current lease, provided the lease is not longer than one (1) year

e. if the lease is longer or there is no lease, then permit suspension begins on the first day following the annual renewal date

f. if more points accumulate against a property during a suspension, the suspension may be extended for up to an additional year

9. Points

a. maximum number of points that can accumulate against a property in a 24 hour period is three (3). b. Violations Assigned one (1) Point: refuse, grass/weeds recycling Failure to remove snow and ice from walks Property maintenance code violations State dog law ordinance violations

c. Violations Assigned two (2) Points: Disorderly conduct including noise Alcohol other than furnishing to a minor possession of illegal drugs Simple assault Harassment Fire prevention code occupancy limits under zoning open lewdness indecent exposure Student home under zoning

d. Violations Assigned three (3) Points: Furnishing alcohol to a minor Aggravated assault Statutory sexual assault involuntary deviate sexual intercourse Sexual assault rape Aggravated indecent assault Possession with intent to deliver controlled substances or look-a-like substances 10. Commonly termed the Problem Property ordinance, Chapter 10 was designed to serve two purposes: a. Landlords assume more responsibility in screening prospective tenants b. the organization takes action against a tenant by initiating eviction proceedings or other sanctions when the landlord is notified in writing that his/her property has accumulated five (5) points

42

the ordinance further identifies properties to Borough administration which have a repeated history of response by police, ordinance, code and zoning enforcement officers and which are a nuisance in the neighborhood as based on the point system mentioned above.

the ordinance specifically addresses those properties which are an ongoing problem because of the actions of those who reside there.

While a few points may be assessed to a property for a loud party on the premises, the property does not become classified as a problem property. However, if the same property is home to five (5) disorderly parties within one year then based on the Borough manager’s decision, the rental permit may be suspended.

if eviction or suspension proceedings are initiated, neighborhood peace and tranquility is restored because those problem tenants are sure to be removed at the end of the lease, or at the time which permit renewal is due.

Courts will not uphold eviction proceedings mid-lease because tenants must be afforded time to find other living arrangements.

43

44

SiP is an extension of SCPD’s policy adhering to the basic premise of protecting life and property through law enforcement and crime prevention. Police agencies cannot, by themselves, effectively reduce crime. therefore, partnerships with community organizations, businesses, and neighborhoods are essential. identifying crime problems and trends is a responsibility shared by all members of the community as is the effort put forth in deterring these problems.

Like any crime prevention initiative, education is one key to SiP. our community identified underage drinking and furnishing alcohol as a major problem. it is imperative to teach our young adults that drinking underage is not only illegal, but “dangerous drinking” can have life-long adverse or fatal consequences. Likewise, educating those individuals old enough to drink, to drink responsibly and not furnish alcohol to minors is equally important, because they are the root source of the alcohol problem. those who would furnish alcohol to minors must understand that their criminal action not only has severe consequences in fines and criminal arrest records, but the potential for civil liability exists as well. they must understand that they assume the responsibility and safety for human life, other than their own, when furnishing alcohol to persons under the age of 21.

SiP found the media to be a powerful tool, not only in advertising the enforcement initiative but in disseminating the education message out to the public. Public assistance is fundamental to launching a successful campaign. reaching audience segments by presentation methods may be time-consuming and not always cost effective. Public service announcements and news releases provide a greater impact and reach a larger audience in less time and with fewer dollars spent. Both the media and the police serve the public. therefore it is in the best interest of both entities to address the current, important alcohol issue adversely affecting the entire community. With enforcement as another component of SiP, the community becomes aware of the scope of the problem because of news release updates and arrest information published in the newspaper.

the public perceives that the police are doing their job to address a dangerous problem. Potential future violators of the alcohol laws also become aware of the increasing risk of being apprehended because of reading feature stories, opinion editorials, and arrest blotters. Consequently, a deterrent affect is created.

Word of mouth spreads the SiP message. Word of mouth also spreads rumors which may blow the project out of proportion, making the initiative bigger than it really is. SiP discovered this perception to be a positive boost for the project. SiP allowed the rumors to spread and did not attempt to correct any misconception, adding to the deterrent effect.

in other recent public safety initiatives, goals were set to achieve safety through compliance by education and enforcement. the Buckle-Up PA Click-it or ticket program, part of a nationwide campaign, hoped to attain a 90 percent compliance usage of seatbelts by 2005 with Pennsylvania’s goal set at 80 percent. When the initial campaign began, statistics reflected a 5 percent spike in seatbelt usage because of advertised enforcement efforts combined with education information targeted at licensed drivers. initiatives included roadside message boards encouraging people to “buckle up.” Public service announcements reflected serious injury and fatality statistics resulting from not using a seat belt and fine amounts for violation of the seatbelt laws. radio and television spots about new seat belt laws with stiffer penalties for noncompliance were included in the education blitz. All efforts were carefully orchestrated to increase public awareness and change current attitudes about passenger safety.

St. Patrick’s Day 2005, 7:00 a.m., State College

concluSIonchAPteR 8

the SiP campaign is likewise an attempt to educate the public about the consequences of dangerous drinking through education via the media and partnered by a complementing zero tolerance enforcement effort. our young adults need to understand the adverse effects alcohol can have on them when they drink irresponsibly and illegally. the message must be reinforced by parents as well. Parental involvement is crucial to producing a turn around in alcohol abuse and related crimes by young adults and may heighten responsible decision making when parental supervision is not available. one or two communities alone, however, will not be effective. A statewide campaign is required to get the message across. Uniform education efforts throughout Pennsylvania with a uniform zero tolerance enforcement approach will be necessary to achieve results. As the entire Pennsylvania community becomes aware of the seriousness of the alcohol problem relating to underage drinking and furnishing alcohol, stiffer penalties can be lobbied for and laws amended by legislators to reflect Pennsylvania’s tough stance against alcohol abuse by young adults. Look what mADD accomplished statewide and nationwide in their efforts to prevent drunk driving offenses and stiffen penalties for DUi by their education and lobbying efforts.

the SCPD envisions SiP to be a solid foundation prototype for other police agencies to build upon. We completed the preliminary research based on our alcohol statistics and trends and provided proven investigative methods, effective in any community. Agencies may customize an education and enforcement program by adjusting our model to fit the alcohol crime trends in their respective communities. Concerning our currently high alcohol abuse rate, we plan to attain 80 percent compliance of alcohol laws in our community by 2009. Pennsylvania may likewise attain a similar goal through united efforts.

45

46

rEfErEncES

1. Central Pennsylvania Convention and Visitors Bureau. (personal communication. 2005, April 19)

2. Connecticut Coalition to Stop Underage Drinking. (2005, April) Changing Policy: Ordinance against Underage Drinking. retrieved may 6, 2005 from http://www.preventionworksct.org/ctcoal_ chgpol/ordinances/Localordinance.pdf

3. PSU Public information office. (printed communication. 2004).

4. Srinivas, Hari. (n.d.). g.D.r.C. Special Feature: Dealing with the media. Media Toolbox. retrieved 2004 from http://www.gdrc.org/ngo/media/

5. U. S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2002, April). How To Reduce High-Risk College Drinking: Use Proven Strategies, Fill Research Gaps. retrieved June 7, 2005 from niAAA reports: College Drinking, Changing the Culture website http://www.collegedrinkingprevention.gov/ \ reports/Panel02/keyresearch_00.aspx

SOURCE INVESTIGATION PROJECTEnabeling law enforcement personnel to address

violations for furnishing alcohol to minors.

A Partnership Between the State College Police Departmentand the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board

UnDerAge Drinking iS An ADULt ProBLem