1. Compare and contrast the "due process" model and the "crime fighting model." which is preferable? 

Which model aligns with which ethical approach?

An armed robber, Mr. Cooper, breaks into Mr. Olson's house one night.  Mr. Olson grabs his gun from under his pillow and shoots the robber in the leg.  The robber quickly runs away, wounded but still mobile.  Mr. Olson reports the incident to the police.   A few hours later, Mr. Cooper visits the local emergency room due to severe pain and bleeding in his leg.  The physicians, following state law, report that a gunshot victim has sought medical treatment.  The police immediately suspect that Mr. Cooper is the man who broke into Mr. Olson's home.  The police stop by the emergency room and ask the doctors to remove the bullet from Mr. Cooper's leg.  If the bullet from Mr. Cooper's leg matches the bullets shot by Mr. Olson's gun, they'll have strong circumstantial evidence against Mr. Cooper.  However, the doctors tell the police that Mr. Cooper only wants some stitches and pain medicine.  The doctors say that due to the location of the bullet, Mr. Cooper can live out his life with the bullet remaining in his leg.  Thus, Mr. Cooper refuses to have the bullet removed.  The police then obtain a valid search warrant authorizing a search of Mr. Cooper's body for the bullet.  The doctors refuse to comply, citing the ethical obligation to "do no harm to a patient."  The police reply that the only ethical thing to do is to retrieve the evidence, so as to prevent Mr. Cooper—who is a repeat home invader—from going free (there's no other strong evidence against Mr. Cooper because Mr. Olson could not see clearly due to the darkness, and Mr. Cooper, a true professional, did not leave fingerprints or other traces).  What's the most ethical thing to do?  Why? Apply two ethical approaches to support your answer.

3.  Suppose that there are lots of illegal drug deals going on at the Chapel Hills Mall in Colorado Springs, CO.  Several kids have bought drugs at or near the mall and have died from drug overdoses.  To catch the drug dealers, the police secretly affix small listening devices under several tables in the food court area of the shopping mall.  The devices transmit sounds to a central audio recorder that amplifies and records human voices.  After selling some drugs in the nearest restroom, Mr. Olson sits down to eat lunch one of the tables in the food court.  When he's sure no one else is nearby, he calls his spouse and says, "Yes—it's done.  I sold all our meth to some teenagers and made $1,000.  I am celebrating with an awesome milkshake in the food court."  The police hear his comments on the audio recorder and arrest Mr. Olson.  At trial, Mr. Olson argues that there was an illegal search, so his statements should be suppressed.  Question #1:  Is he correct?  Why?  Back at the station house, the Police Chief wonders if the police officers acted ethically in gathering evidence against Mr. Olson.  Question #2:  What are your thoughts regarding the ethics of the investigative techniques at issue here