Impact of Terrorism on the Policing System

0Running head: POLICING AND TERRORISM
POLICING AND TERRORISM
Name of the student:
Name of the university:
Author’s note:

POLICING AND TERRORISM1
The nature of policing has been affected profoundly after the attack of terrorists to
various essential parts of the United States on September 11, 2001 (Schwarzer, Bowler & Cone,
2014). The police forces have been combating with the terrorism even before such attack; the
subsequent acts of terrorism of other countries have shown that the conservative strategies of the
police were not so adequate to stop them. It has been demonstrated that the department of police
would have to work hard and closer to the National Securities Agencies (NSA) (Lowe, 2016).
There are many types of police resources, which have to be directed for the surveillance to the
suspected terrorist. After that attack, the US government has changed the environment of the
policing. The police officers have demonstrated considerable flexibility in facing some critical
incidents. This paper aims to confer the impact of terrorism on the policing system in the US
with the support of two scholarly articles.
In the case, the U.S vs. Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani 2010, the accused, Ghailani, has been
charged with murder as well as the conspiracy of terrorist activities by the Federal Court of the
US in New York. He has been further charged for the involvement in the bombing of such
Embassies of the US in Kenya. He has been detained at the CIA and interrogated by the police
offices. During that interrogation, he has made several statements, which have amounted to
confessions regarding the bombing and his role of it. The court of law has acquitted Ghailani on
other charges, but he has been sentenced for murder and conspiracy for using the weapon to
destroy the public at large.
The United States in its Fifth Amendment of Constitution has provided a constitutional
right against the self-incrimination of the accused, and they can refuse to testify if the answers of
the interrogations are hypothetically self-incriminating. At the time of interrogation of a suspect
or an accused, they can remain silent instead of answering all questions. In the case law Miranda