The Smiley Face Killers and the Anatomy of a Modern Myth

In the early 2000s, a controversial theory emerged suggesting that a series of young men found drowned in waterways across the United States were victims of a coordinated network of serial killers. Dubbed the “Smiley Face Killers” theory, the idea rested in part on the reported presence of smiley face graffiti near some of the recovery sites. Promoted by a small group of retired law enforcement officials, the theory gained traction through books, documentaries, and media coverage. Yet despite its persistence in public discourse, the theory has been widely rejected by federal and local law enforcement agencies. Examined through a criminal justice lens, the Smiley Face Killers narrative offers a compelling case study in the formation and endurance of modern myths.

At the center of the theory are claims advanced by retired detectives Kevin Gannon and Anthony Duarte, along with criminal justice professor Gilbertson. They argued that dozens of drowning deaths shared common characteristics: victims were typically college-aged males, last seen after consuming alcohol, and later found in bodies of water. In some instances, investigators or proponents of the theory noted the presence of graffiti—occasionally including smiley faces—near where bodies were recovered. These elements were interpreted as evidence of a coordinated effort by organized offenders operating across jurisdictions (Gannon, Duarte, & Gilbertson, 2010).

However, these claims have been met with substantial skepticism from the broader law enforcement community. The Federal Bureau of Investigation conducted a review of the alleged pattern and found no evidence supporting the existence of an organized group responsible for the deaths. According to the FBI, the cases lacked the forensic, geographic, and behavioral consistencies typically associated with serial homicide. Instead, many of the incidents were consistent with accidental drownings involving alcohol consumption and environmental hazards (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2008).

The divergence between the theory and official findings highlights a critical issue in criminal justice: the distinction between pattern recognition and evidentiary proof. Humans are inherently predisposed to identify patterns, even when those patterns arise from coincidence rather than causation. In the Smiley Face Killers narrative, the clustering of similar victim profiles and circumstances created a framework that invited interpretation. Yet similarity alone does not establish linkage. Without corroborating forensic evidence—such as common offenders, shared methods, or credible witness accounts—the pattern remains speculative.

The role of the smiley face symbol itself is particularly significant in understanding the theory’s appeal. Symbols carry psychological weight, especially when they juxtapose innocence with harm. The smiley face, widely associated with positivity and simplicity, becomes unsettling when linked to death. This contrast enhances memorability and emotional impact, reinforcing the narrative in the public imagination. Importantly, graffiti featuring smiley faces is common in urban environments, and investigators have noted that many of the markings cited in the theory were not unique, temporally connected, or definitively related to the incidents in question (Snopes, 2019).

Authority also plays a key role in myth formation. The Smiley Face Killers theory gained credibility in part because it was advanced by individuals with law enforcement backgrounds. Even in retirement, professional affiliation can lend weight to claims, particularly when presented to a public audience unfamiliar with investigative standards. When combined with media exposure, these claims can evolve from hypotheses into widely accepted narratives, despite lacking institutional support.

Media amplification further contributes to the endurance of such myths. True crime programming, books, and online platforms often prioritize compelling narratives over methodological rigor. Repetition of the theory across multiple outlets increases familiarity, and familiarity can be mistaken for validity. As a result, the Smiley Face Killers concept has persisted in public discourse long after being dismissed by primary investigative agencies.

From an investigative standpoint, the theory also underscores the challenges of interpreting equivocal deaths. Drownings, particularly those involving alcohol, often present limited physical evidence. Environmental factors such as current, temperature, and terrain can obscure timelines and complicate determinations. In such contexts, the absence of clear explanations can create space for alternative narratives to emerge. These narratives, while not supported by evidence, fulfill a psychological need for coherence and intentionality.

The Smiley Face Killers theory ultimately illustrates how myths can develop within the intersection of uncertainty, symbolism, and authority. It demonstrates that in the absence of definitive answers, patterns can be constructed, meanings assigned, and conclusions drawn that extend beyond the available evidence. For criminal justice professionals, this serves as a reminder of the importance of adhering to evidentiary standards, resisting premature conclusions, and maintaining clear distinctions between hypothesis and proof.

At a broader level, the persistence of the Smiley Face Killers narrative reflects a fundamental aspect of human cognition: the desire to impose order on ambiguity. While this impulse can drive investigative inquiry, it can also lead to overinterpretation when not grounded in empirical validation. The challenge for both investigators and the public is to recognize the difference between a compelling story and a substantiated conclusion.

References

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2008). FBI sees no evidence of “Smiley Face Murder Theory.” Retrieved from FBI press statements and field reports.

Gannon, K., Duarte, A., & Gilbertson, L. (2010). Case studies in drowning forensics. CRC Press.

Snopes. (2019). Are the “Smiley Face Killers” real? Snopes Media Group.

Mental Illness Behind Bars: Why Prisons Have Become America’s Asylums

A half-century ago, most Americans with serious mental illness received treatment—even if imperfect and too often coercive—in state psychiatric hospitals. Today, by contrast, the country’s largest concentrations of people with serious mental illness are not in hospitals but in jails and prisons. Sheriffs in Los Angeles, Chicago, and New York have long described their lockups as the “largest mental health facilities” in their regions—an indictment of a system that routinely routes people with clinical needs into correctional custody. The result is a sprawling, decentralized, and under-resourced “asylum” network inside carceral institutions that were designed for security and incapacitation, not health care.

This essay explains how we got here, what we know about the scale of mental illness behind bars, how correctional environments complicate care, and what evidence-based reforms point to a different future. The focus is the United States, with reference to broader trends that illuminate the distinctively American pathway from deinstitutionalization to criminalization. Throughout, the argument is simple: the more we rely on correctional institutions to manage untreated mental illness, the worse the clinical outcomes, the higher the human and fiscal costs, and the further we drift from the constitutional and ethical mandates that should govern both health care and punishment.

From Hospitals to Jails: A Brief History

Beginning in the 1950s and accelerating through the 1960s and 1970s, the United States closed tens of thousands of state psychiatric beds under the banner of “deinstitutionalization.” In principle, shuttered hospitals were to be replaced by a robust community mental-health system. In practice, the promised community infrastructure arrived unevenly, leaving many people with serious mental illness without timely access to treatment and housing. By the 1990s and 2000s, researchers and county officials were documenting what they called the “new asylums”: a carceral safety net in which jails and prisons held far more people with serious mental illness than the country’s remaining state hospitals (Torrey, Kennard, Eslinger, Lamb, & Pavle, 2010; Torrey et al., 2014). The shift was not accidental. As public inpatient capacity declined and community services lagged, police—who are legally obligated to respond to crises—became de facto front-line mental-health responders. Courts and correctional systems absorbed the downstream consequences.

The “new asylum” moniker is not mere rhetoric. One national survey by the Treatment Advocacy Center concluded that, by the 2010s, jails and prisons held several times as many individuals with serious mental illness as state psychiatric hospitals, and that many of those individuals would previously have received inpatient treatment rather than incarceration (Torrey et al., 2010; Torrey et al., 2014). The criminalization pathway is now so entrenched that even well-intentioned local initiatives often amount to triage rather than structural change.

What the Data Show: Prevalence and Need

Although measurement varies across studies, the weight of evidence indicates that the prevalence of mental health symptoms and diagnoses in correctional settings far exceeds that of the general population. The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) found that 14% of state and federal prisoners and 26% of jail inmates met the threshold for serious psychological distress in the prior 30 days; 37% of prisoners and 44% of jail inmates reported having been told by a mental-health professional at some point that they had a mental disorder (Bronson & Berzofsky, 2017). That compares to about 5% meeting the same distress threshold in the general population sample used for comparison (Bronson & Berzofsky, 2017). Estimates from psychiatric advocacy and clinical literature commonly place the share of people with serious mental illness (SMI)—conditions such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, or major depression with severe impairment—at roughly 15% in prisons and 20% in jails (Treatment Advocacy Center, 2016).

These carceral numbers are not occurring in a vacuum. In the broader community, SAMHSA’s uniform reporting system estimates that millions of adults live with SMI in any given year, with significant unmet need for treatment (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration [SAMHSA], 2025). When community systems fail to engage those most at risk—often individuals with co-occurring substance use disorders, homelessness, and trauma histories—police and jails become the default point of contact.

Mortality and morbidity data underscore the consequences. BJS reports that suicide remains a leading cause of death in jails and a persistent concern in prisons (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2021). Federal oversight bodies have repeatedly documented lapses in screening, monitoring, and follow-up—failures with direct implications for people with mental illness (U.S. Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General [DOJ OIG], 2025; U.S. Government Accountability Office [GAO], 2024).

Why Correctional Settings Struggle to Deliver Care

Mission mismatch. Prisons and jails prioritize safety, custody, and order. Clinical care—especially for chronic, relapsing disorders—requires continuity, privacy, therapeutic alliance, and post-release linkage, all of which are hard to sustain in carceral environments. The American Psychiatric Association (APA) has long emphasized that correctional facilities nonetheless carry a constitutional obligation to provide necessary mental-health services—a duty that stems from case law prohibiting “deliberate indifference” to serious medical needs (APA, 2024). Meeting that obligation, however, is resource-intensive.

Churn and fragmentation. Jails experience massive turnover—millions of bookings annually—which complicates intake screening, medication reconciliation, and continuity of care. Many individuals arrive off their regimens, in withdrawal, or in acute crisis. Short stays mean clinicians have days—not months—to stabilize patients and arrange community follow-up. When those handoffs fail, people cycle back through custody.

Staffing and training constraints. Chronic vacancies among custody and clinical staff undermine both safety and care. Oversight reviews have linked staffing shortages to missed rounds, delayed assessments, and gaps in suicide prevention protocols (DOJ OIG, 2025). The GAO has separately found that the Bureau of Prisons has not fully implemented dozens of recommendations related to restrictive housing and associated mental-health risks (GAO, 2024).

Segregation and restrictive housing. Prolonged isolation can exacerbate psychiatric symptoms. National correctional health bodies advise excluding seriously mentally ill people from extended segregation or, where segregation is unavoidable, modifying conditions and providing structured therapeutic time out of cell (Metzner, Tardiff, & Fellner, 2015). Yet practice often lags policy.

Legal and ethical complexity. Treating people who refuse medication raises due-process and clinical questions that many systems navigate inconsistently. Surveys show wide variation in state policies governing involuntary treatment and access to hospital-level care for the sickest incarcerated patients (Torrey et al., 2014). Without clear, humane pathways to higher levels of care, jails and prisons become holding areas for untreated illness.

Constitutional Floor, Systemic Ceiling

When correctional conditions deteriorate, litigation is often the forcing function. In Brown v. Plata (2011), the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a population-reduction order for California’s prisons after finding that overcrowding produced constitutionally inadequate medical and mental-health care. The record described a system where preventable suffering and death flowed from structural dysfunction: insufficient space and staff, treatment delays, and a security posture that obstructed clinical access (Brown v. Plata, 2011). While Plata addressed state prisons, its logic echoes in local lockups and federal facilities facing similar barriers. Court orders can impose a constitutional floor; they cannot, by themselves, build the community systems that keep people out of custody or the clinical capacity inside facilities to meet complex needs.

Why Jails and Prisons Became the Default

Three dynamics explain the “asylum” shift:

1. Deinstitutionalization without parity. The rapid reduction of state hospital beds far outpaced the build-out of community services, leaving a shortfall in crisis stabilization, assertive community treatment, housing, and outpatient supports (Torrey et al., 2010).

2. Co-occurring disorders and homelessness. Many individuals with SMI also struggle with substance use and unstable housing—factors that raise the likelihood of police contact for low-level offenses or quality-of-life ordinances. Without diversion pathways, those encounters end in jail.

3. Legal and clinical thresholds. Civil commitment statutes and clinical practice trends place a premium on dangerousness and imminent risk; many people with SMI do not meet those thresholds until crises become acute. Police then become the gatekeepers.

Costs—Human and Fiscal

Housing and attempting to treat mental illness in jails and prisons is expensive. People with significant psychiatric needs require more staff time, medication, observation, and clinical services. They are also more likely to be victimized, to accrue disciplinary infractions, and to spend time in restrictive housing—all of which drive costs with little therapeutic payoff. Studies of large urban jails have documented per-diem costs that double or triple for people with serious mental illness compared to the general jail population because of added security and clinical supervision (see synthesis in Treatment Advocacy Center, 2016). Beyond custody, the “revolving door” of repeat bookings, emergency department use, and homelessness exacts a heavy toll on local budgets and, most importantly, on human life.

What Works: Evidence-Based Off-Ramps

If the pipeline into carceral “asylums” is the problem, diversion and treatment at the right time and place are the solution. Four strategies have the strongest evidence base:

1) Behavioral-health crisis response and 988 linkage. Mobile crisis teams, crisis receiving and stabilization facilities, and co-responder models reduce arrests during mental-health emergencies by providing an immediate clinical alternative to jail. When these services are integrated with the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline and law-enforcement dispatch, officers can hand off safely and quickly, avoiding unnecessary bookings. The logic is straightforward: build something better than jail for people in crisis.

2) Pre- and post-arrest diversion. Mental-health courts, prosecutor-led deflection, and sheriff-based diversion units can route eligible individuals into treatment plans with accountability and support. Miami-Dade County’s Criminal Mental Health Project is a frequently cited example: by coupling officer training with court-supervised treatment and housing navigation, the county sharply cut jail days among participants (see program syntheses in TAC and professional association reports; Torrey et al., 2014; Treatment Advocacy Center, 2017).

3) Clinical capacity inside custody. Jails and prisons still need robust intake screening, prompt psychiatric evaluation, access to evidence-based medications, suicide prevention protocols, and timely referral to hospital-level care when indicated. National professional guidance—by APA and correctional health organizations—sets clear expectations for staffing, confidentiality, treatment planning, and continuity of care (APA, 2024; Metzner et al., 2015). Compliance, however, depends on staffing, leadership, and oversight—areas where federal watchdogs continue to identify gaps (GAO, 2024; DOJ OIG, 2025).

4) Reentry that begins at booking. Without warm handoffs—appointments on the calendar, active benefits, medications in hand, and transportation—people with SMI fall off a cliff at the jail door. Effective programs collaborate with community providers, ensure Medicaid activation upon release, and prioritize housing supports—especially medical respite and supported housing—for those with high needs.

The Role of Leadership and Oversight

Cultural and structural change require leadership. Police chiefs, sheriffs, judges, and corrections executives increasingly acknowledge that they cannot “arrest their way” out of untreated mental illness. Yet acknowledgment must translate into budgets, contracts, and accountability. GAO’s 2024 review of the Bureau of Prisons’ restrictive housing practices illustrates how slow implementation and incomplete follow-through on recommendations can perpetuate risk for vulnerable populations (GAO, 2024). DOJ’s Office of the Inspector General has likewise documented lapses that, while sometimes focused on general medical care, signal systemic deficits in screening, follow-up, and staffing that inevitably spill over into mental-health outcomes (DOJ OIG, 2025). These findings should be read not only as critiques but as a roadmap for investment and reform.

Reframing the Question

Calling jails and prisons “America’s asylums” is descriptively powerful but normatively dangerous if it suggests that carceral care can ever be an adequate substitute for a functioning community mental-health system. The constitutional minimum for care in custody—secured through litigation when necessary—should not become the policy maximum. A humane, fiscally rational system directs people to the least restrictive, most effective setting consistent with public safety and clinical need. For many, that means community-based care, not a cell.

Conclusion

The United States did not set out to make jails and prisons its primary mental-health institutions. It happened because we closed hospitals faster than we built clinics, relied on police to manage crises that medicine and housing should have addressed, and tolerated gaps in correctional health that would be unacceptable anywhere else. The data are clear: mental illness behind bars is common, care is difficult to deliver at quality and scale, and preventable harms—up to and including suicide—persist. The constitutional floor defined by cases like Brown v. Plata should motivate, not satisfy, our ambitions.

Changing course means funding crisis response and treatment upstream; creating lawful, clinical off-ramps in lieu of arrest; professionalizing and auditing correctional mental-health care where custody is unavoidable; and making reentry a clinical transition, not an administrative afterthought. We know what works. The question is whether we will invest in it—so that the phrase “America’s asylums” once again refers to hospitals and community clinics worthy of the name, not to the jails and prisons that have shouldered their absence.

---

References

American Psychiatric Association. (2024). Position statement on psychiatric services in jails and prisons. Author.

Bronson, J., & Berzofsky, M. (2017). Indicators of mental health problems reported by prisoners and jail inmates, 2011–12 (NCJ 250612). Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice.

Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2021). Suicide in local jails and state and federal prisons, 2000–2019: Statistical tables (NCJ 300954). U.S. Department of Justice.

Brown v. Plata, 563 U.S. 493 (2011).

Metzner, J. L., Tardiff, K., & Fellner, J. (2015). Mental health considerations for segregated inmates. National Commission on Correctional Health Care.

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2025). 2022 serious mental illness/serious emotional disturbance estimates. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Torrey, E. F., Kennard, A. D., Eslinger, D., Lamb, H. R., & Pavle, J. (2010). More mentally ill persons are in jails and prisons than hospitals: A survey of the states. Treatment Advocacy Center & National Sheriffs’ Association.

Torrey, E. F., Zdanowicz, M. T., Kennard, A. D., Lamb, H. R., Eslinger, D., Biasotti, M., & Fuller, D. A. (2014). The treatment of persons with mental illness in prisons and jails: A state survey. Treatment Advocacy Center.

U.S. Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General. (2025). Inspection of the Federal Bureau of Prisons’ Federal Medical Center Devens (Report 25-009). Author.

U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2024). Additional actions needed to improve restrictive housing and related mental health care in the federal prison system (GAO-24-105737). Author.

Prison Terms Handed Down to Four Oath Keepers Involved in Capitol Breach

Four members of the Oath Keepers, a far-right extremist group, have been sentenced this week on charges of seditious conspiracy and other offenses related to the breach of the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. The sentencing marks a significant step in holding accountable those involved in the violent attack that disrupted a joint session of the U.S. Congress and threatened the democratic process of certifying the electoral votes.

The defendants, Roberto Minuta, Edward Vallejo, David Moerschel, and Joseph Hackett, were found guilty of seditious conspiracy, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of an official proceeding, and conspiracy to prevent Members of Congress from performing their duties. Hackett was additionally convicted of destruction of evidence. Following a seven-week trial, the sentencing took place on June 1 and June 2, 2023, with each defendant receiving a prison term and supervised release.

Roberto Minuta, 39, from Prosper, Texas, was sentenced to 54 months in prison, followed by 36 months of supervised release. Edward Vallejo, 64, from Phoenix, Arizona, received a sentence of 36 months in prison, followed by 36 months of supervised release, with the first 12 months to be served on home confinement. David Moerschel, 45, from Punta Gorda, Florida, and Joseph Hackett, 53, from Sarasota, Florida, were both sentenced to 36 months and 42 months in prison, respectively, followed by 36 months of supervised release.

The evidence presented during the trial revealed a months-long conspiracy by the defendants and their co-conspirators to forcefully oppose the transfer of presidential power. They planned to assemble an armed "quick reaction force" near Washington, D.C., and coordinated their actions through encrypted communications. The defendants intended to bring weapons and paramilitary gear to the Capitol on January 6, 2021, when the certification of the electoral college vote was taking place. They traveled to the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area with firearms, tactical equipment, and other supplies necessary for their operation.

The Oath Keepers conspired in various ways, including organizing teams prepared to use force and transport firearms, recruiting members and affiliates, conducting paramilitary combat training, and bringing paramilitary gear to the Capitol grounds. On January 6, they breached the Capitol building, aiming to disrupt the certification process and using force against law enforcement officers. The defendants continued plotting even after the attack, with the goal of opposing the lawful transfer of presidential power.

The case is being prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia, along with the Justice Department's National Security and Criminal Divisions. Assistance in the investigation and prosecution has been provided by multiple U.S. Attorneys' Offices across the country. The FBI's Washington Field Office led the investigation, supported by the Metropolitan Police Department and the FBI's New York, Dallas, Tampa, and Phoenix Field Offices. The U.S. Capitol Police and the U.S. Secret Service have also played crucial roles in the investigation.

Since the events of January 6, 2021, law enforcement agencies have made significant progress in holding accountable those responsible for the Capitol breach. Over 1,000 individuals have been arrested in almost all states, with more than 320 individuals facing charges of assaulting or obstructing law enforcement officers. The investigation remains ongoing, as authorities continue their efforts to identify and apprehend individuals involved in the attack on the U.S. Capitol.

The sentencing of the Oath Keepers members serves as a reminder that those who engage in seditious acts and undermine the democratic process will face justice. It represents a step towards restoring faith in the rule of law and upholding the principles of democracy in the United States.

Associate Attorney General Tom Perrelli Speaks at the Department of Education’s Bullying Summit

Washington, D.C. ~ Thursday, August 12, 2010

Good morning and thank you. I am very happy to be joining you today on behalf of the Department of Justice. It is great to see Secretary Duncan and the Department of Education taking leadership on this important issue through this Anti-Bullying Summit. The Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools is doing great work, and I’m pleased to be with all of you here today.

I am pleased to be here for two reasons. First and foremost, I am a parent. I have two sons, and, like all parents, I want them to have every opportunity in life. I know that education will be their key, as it was for me. To that end, I want my sons to be safe in school, and without fear of harassment by fellow students. Our nation’s children deserve a learning environment that allows them to reach their full potential, and no child should be scared to go to school because of bullying. What all of you in this room are doing matters to me personally.

What you are doing also matters to me professionally. It isn’t often that, as Associate Attorney General, I get to walk into a room full of educators and education advocates. I think that in many communities, and for many Americans, what the Department does and what so many of you do are thought of as opposite ends of the spectrum. The theory goes that students have had to make choices and they can either make good choices, and succeed in school, or they can make bad choices, and end up in the criminal justice system. The theory would follow that you take care of the good kids and get them to college, and we take care of the bad kids and get them off the streets.

One of the reasons I am here today is because you and I know that that’s not how the world works. People who actually work in law enforcement, and people who actually work in our nation’s schools, know that our jobs are closely interwoven. When their neighborhoods and homes don’t feel safe, our children have a tough time focusing in school. And when our children are not engaged at school – if they are bullying others or being bullied – we know that can lead them onto a path to the criminal justice system, for bullies and victims alike.

Attorney General Janet Reno really drove this point home to me when I worked for her back in the 1990s. I remember once, when she was on a long plane flight, she took out a pen and paper and outlined everything that was required to reduce crime and keep communities safe. A number of the things on that list focused on what we think of as traditional law enforcement issues: Do we have enough officers on the streets? Are those officers using the right techniques? Are we being smart in how we prosecute crime?

But what stood out to me most was how many of the elements on that list were things that most people never think of as law enforcement issues. She started with pre-natal care, and her list included Head Start and available childcare for working families. Wherever one thinks we should start, we all know that it takes a lot more than police, prosecutors and prisons to make a community safe. You need people who watch out for each other and who have a stake in their community. You need an economic base that keeps people engaged and relatively free from need. And you need safe schools.

Our current Attorney General has a similarly broad view about how to make communities safe. When Attorney General Eric Holder served as Deputy Attorney General during the 1990s, he was struck by the research that showed that for every child who ends up in the criminal justice system, there were 40, 50, 100 opportunities for intervention early in life that were missed. He led the Department to take an in-depth look at the problem of children exposed to violence and uncovered some deeply troubling facts. That research revealed, for instance, that exposure to violence – whether the child was an observer or a direct victim – was associated with long-term physical, psychological, and emotional harm. The studies showed that children exposed to violence are more likely to go on to abuse drugs and alcohol. They’re at greater risk of depression, anxiety, and other post-traumatic disorders. They fail in school more often than other kids. They’re more likely to develop chronic diseases and to have trouble forming emotional attachments. And they’re more likely to commit acts of violence themselves.

The work that he started has continued to this day, and we have doubled down on it upon his return as Attorney General. Last fall, through our National Survey on Children Exposed to Violence, which is the first comprehensive look at children as victims and witnesses of crime, abuse, and violence from infancy to age 17 and which is an outgrowth of then-Deputy Attorney General Holder’s initiative from more than a decade ago, the Department of Justice found that most children are exposed to violence in their daily lives. Indeed, the study found that the majority of our kids – more than 60 percent – have been exposed to crime, abuse, and violence. And the Department has renewed its efforts in this area, beginning a new pilot program to address the problem of children exposed to violence.

And all that helps explain why I am here and why the work that you do is so extraordinarily important. We know that bullying has lasting, serious effects for both victims and perpetrators, and that bullying can be a sign of other serious anti-social and violent behavior. The Health Resources and Services Administration reports that kids who bully are more likely to get into frequent fights, vandalize and steal property, be truant or drop out of school, and carry a weapon. And these impacts are long-lasting, as the research tells us there is a strong association between victimizing peers during school years and engaging in illegal behavior as adults. Indeed, just two weeks ago when I was visiting the Menominee Indian Reservation of Wisconsin, tribal leaders emphasized the direct link between bullying among youth and occurrences of domestic violence in later years.

So if we realize that bullying is not just a school’s problem, how do we respond to it? When I was a kid, students were bullied for being overweight or for being labeled a nerd, not for being gay or because of sexual promiscuity. And the sitcom response from the 1960s and 70s was for parents to give kids boxing gloves because, we were taught, that if you have the courage to fight back, the bully backs down.

But bullying is not that simple and the notion that "kids will be kids" isn’t an answer to problem. When we talk about bullying, we are talking about a destabilizing force that not only disrupts the school environment; it disrupts young lives in serious, far-reaching ways, with dangerous academic, health, and safety consequences. From this summit and the work you all are doing, we know that bullying starts early; that bullying is widespread; that it escalates when unchecked, and that it takes many forms and is evolving. And as the tragic suicides of Megan Meier and Phoebe Prince make apparent, we know that bullying can also be fatal.

With the increasing use of social networking sites and text messaging, the face of bullying is changing. Previously, an incident may have involved girls bickering with each other over boys on the playground. Today, insults – and retaliation for insults -- are not only made face-to-face, they are also posted on a classmate’s Facebook profile for all to see. As the internet becomes today’s playground, the previous distinction between what took place inside and outside of school is disappearing. Unsurprisingly, teachers are now spending time mediating conflicts between students that began online or through text messages.

What’s more, the apparent anonymity offered by technology can lead to more vicious insults. It is apparent that children (and frankly adults) are willing to push the envelope in cyberspace and say malicious things that they might not otherwise say in person. Never before has particularly cruel harassment from school persisted as long as it does now online, where for example, a Facebook group, populated with hundreds of members, is dedicated solely to making fun of a fellow classmate because of his hair color. The Journal of Adolescent Health reported that the number of adolescent victims of online harassment increased by 50 percent between 2000 and 2005. And as students become more technologically sophisticated at younger ages, they learn early on that the Internet can be a powerful, and hurtful, tool. retain an expert in the area of harassment based on sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation to review the District’s policies, and an expert to conduct annual training for staff and students on discrimination and harassment based on sex. The agreement also required the school district to implement a comprehensive plan for disseminating its harassment policies, and to maintain records of investigations and responses to allegations of harassment for five years. All of us -- the federal government, local police officers, community leaders, teachers, coaches, principals, and – above all – parents have a responsibility to act. With a multi-tiered approach, involving school officials, community agencies, and the Department of Justice, our team efforts can pay huge dividends – for our nation’s children, for the safety of our communities, and for the future of our country.

Bullying is changing in other ways as well, as harassment has also become increasingly sexually explicit. In Los Angeles’ San Fernando Valley, middle school, high school, and college students posted comments on a web site that were full of sexual innuendo attacking fellow students. The online message boards had been accessed more than 67,000 times in a two-week period. This type of far-reaching harassment haunts and torments kids who are keenly aware that not just a few classmates can view these posts, but the whole world can view the disparaging comments. And with the widespread use of text messaging, an increase in "sexting" has also become a complication for combating bullying, where, with just the click of a cell phone button, an angry boyfriend can retaliate by forwarding compromising photos of a middle school girlfriend to his adolescent classmates.

And for gay and lesbian students, who are now coming out at earlier ages, bullying at school is also on the rise. According to a study released by the California Safe Schools Coalition, more than 200,000 California students are targets of harassment every year, based on actual or perceived sexual orientation. The study tells us that these 200,000 students are three times more likely to miss school because they feel unsafe, and are more than twice as likely to be depressed, to consider suicide, or to make a plan for suicide.

Laying out the problem and its long-term consequences certainly makes it feel daunting, and the fact that bullying will continue to evolve makes it feel even more daunting. But we have to start where the research tells us to start – like so many other things, bullying and its consequences are preventable and require early intervention to break the chain of events that will lead a bully or a victim to other behaviors later on that may intersect with the criminal justice system. On this, we all have a role to play. The question is – how do we do it?

A first step is the recognition that we are all in this together and that means that teachers, principals, parents, and yes, law enforcement must model caring behavior for our children and promote communication. It means teaching our kids how to care for themselves, how to care for each other, and how to care for their communities, through group community service requirements or student-to-student mentorship programs. When Secretary Duncan and the Attorney General did a forum with high school students on healthy relationships in December, you saw the power of peers helping peers to deal with some of the most difficult aspects of learning and growing up. While adults need to model the right behaviors and provide supervisions, the power of peers should not be underestimated.

And that leads to a second step, which is fostering a sense of responsibility among our young people. We know that students observe bullying all the time, but rarely report it or often don’t take action to stop it. This bystander problem is not unique to today’s subject matter. Early this year, Justice Department officials did a coordinated swing through colleges and universities to highlight the problem of sexual assault and abuse on college campuses, with a particular focus on enlisting bystanders as forces to stop the abuse. We must promote responsibility and integrity in our schools – and specifically, the duty to others, and the duty to report. By activating bystanders in this way, and then following up with consistent responses to when incidents are reported, schools can convey the message that bullying is monitored closely, by both teachers and fellow students, and it will not be tolerated.

I know that most of what I have said doesn’t sound like what most people think the Justice Department does. But our philosophy is not just that you have to be tough on crime, but you have to be smart on crime. That requires looking at the science and supporting programs that are evidence-based and have a track record or a likelihood of success. And that means recognizing the seeds of problems that will occur later on and investing in initiatives that will actually prevent crime and ensure that our children grow up health, whether its peer counseling, mentoring, after-school programs, character education, and many of the other activities to which you devote your time. Only through initiatives that address these issues in the developmental stages, can we prevent them from intensifying into serious criminal justice problems that create widespread harm for all of our communities in the long-run.

I am here to thank you for your efforts and for the work that you do every day. You have an ally in the U.S. Department of Justice, because the needs of the most precious and most vulnerable among us – our children – are a top priority for us. We are lucky to have, in Eric Holder, an Attorney General who has always understood the connection between the education environment and public safety. And much of what we are doing in today’s Justice Department is based on our recognition that we need broad partnerships to make our communities safe. That means building and renewing coalitions among local communities. It means re-building the partnerships with state and local authorities who are the first responders to most crime in this country and who are best positioned to make our communities safer. And it means re-engaging with our partners in health care, education, and other areas not traditionally thought of as part of law enforcement.

At the Department of Justice, we have made an historic commitment to this work. I’m proud that, today, the Department is directing resources for the express purpose of reducing bullying in schools and to raising awareness around its ramifications, and, of course, to countering its negative impact. In particular, our Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention – or OJJDP – provides many resources that respond to the problems of bullying and cyber bullying, including online programs for kids, parents, educators, law enforcement, and community leaders.

I would like to highlight a couple of specific projects of ours that have shown positive results. For example, OJJDP's Model Programs Guide (MPG) is a user-friendly, online portal to scientifically tested and proven programs that address a range of issues across the juvenile justice spectrum. The MPG profiles nearly 200 prevention and intervention programs and helps communities identify those that best suit their needs.

Web Wise Kids is another initiative focused on empowering today's youth to make wise choices online. Through Internet Safety tips and state-of–the-art Internet Safety computer games, which are modeled after real-life scenarios, Web Wise Kids seeks to promote a safer, friendlier internet experience.

I am also proud to announce today two new anti-bullying initiatives spearheaded by the Department of Justice. First, OJJDP is developing a five-bulletin series on the topic of peer victimization in schools based on three studies funded by OJJDP and conducted by the National Center for School Engagement. The authors designed the studies to explore the connections between bullying and peer victimization, school engagement, and the outcomes for school attendance and educational achievement. These bulletins will be used nationwide by practitioners and policymakers to understand the problem of bullying, in order to devise effective ways of addressing it.

These practical recommendations, written in an accessible style for non-researchers, are based on the research, evaluation, and knowledge of real life situations in schools, classrooms, and neighborhoods. Scheduled to be released in late 2010 and early 2011, the bulletins will also provide resources to help individuals who work directly with youth, or who make decisions about how schools and communities respond to bullying, to find additional assistance in order to address peer victimization.

Second, OJJDP will develop a webinar using information and presentations from this Federal Partners in Bullying Prevention Summit so that we can deliver the message of the summit to wider audiences throughout the field. Scheduled to air approximately a month from now, the webinar will be available on OJJDP’s website and will serve as a free training tool for practitioners throughout the country.

And as many of you know, the Department of Justice is also combating bullying in the courtroom. This past January, the Department of Justice joined a lawsuit, which resulted in a settlement, on behalf of a student who was subjected to severe and pervasive harassment based on sex. Because this student failed to conform to gender stereotypes in behavior and appearance, he was bullied by fellow classmates. The harassment escalated from derogatory name-calling to physical threats and violence. We asserted that the school district knew of the harassment, yet was deliberately indifferent in its failure to take action.

The resulting settlement agreement required the school district to, among other things:

To be clear, we don’t want to make excessive demands of our school administrators and educators, because I know that we already expect so much of them. We realize that educators are stretched thin and that these are difficult times. But, together, we have a duty to keep our children safe in school.

I want to thank those of you who have seen the importance of this issue, and who have been working to improve the lives of our young people. I look forward to our continued partnerships to build school environments where our children can thrive.

Crime Mapping

On January 28, 2010, Conversations with American Heroes at the Watering Hole will feature a discussion with Michael R. King on Crime Mapping.

Program Date: January 28, 2010
Program Time: 1700 Hours Pacific
Topic: Crime Mapping
Listen Live: www.americanheroesradio.com/crime_mapping.html

About the Guest
Michael R. King is a National Law Enforcement Account Manager for ESRI, the Environmental Systems Research Institute, a worldwide leader of GIS software. He was a Product Planning Manager for Motorola, Inc. from 2004-2006. In 2004, Michael R. King retired from full-time Law Enforcement and has over 28 years of service. He began his law enforcement career in 1979. After 8 years of experience with the Ogden Utah Police Department, Michael R. King became the Chief of Staff for Weber County Attorney, Reed M. Richards. He served in that capacity and as lead investigator for 8 years.

In 1993, Michael R. King became an investigator with the Utah Attorney General’s Office where he investigated sexual offenses, cult activity and white-collar crimes. He was promoted to the rank of Lieutenant and eventually promoted to Chief of Staff under Attorney General Jan Graham. During this time, King was trained as a criminal profiler through the FBI. He served as the co-chair of the FBI’s Violent Criminal Apprehension Program National Board. Michael R. King has consulted on hundreds of complex criminal cases around the world.

Michael R. King has a Master of Criminal Justice Degree and a Bachelor of Arts Degree in Criminal Justice. He is an adjunct faculty member for the school of Criminal Justice at Salt Lake Community College and Weber State University. He is a member of the Harvard Medical School Program in Psychiatry and the Law (2003-present) and is a Visiting Scholar for the School of Nursing at Boston College (2005-present).

Mike has authored, in part or whole, a number of books, including: Analyzing Criminal Behavior; Cold Case Methodology; and, Predators: Who They are and How to Stop Them.

About the Watering Hole
The Watering Hole is Police slang for a location cops go off-duty to blow off steam and talk about work and life. American Heroes Radio brings you to the watering hole, where it is Sometimes funny; sometimes serious; but, always interesting.

About the Host
Lieutenant Raymond E. Foster was a sworn member of the Los Angeles Police Department for 24 years. He retired in 2003 at the rank of Lieutenant. He holds a bachelor’s from the Union Institute and University in Criminal Justice Management and a Master’s Degree in Public Financial Management from California State University, Fullerton; and, has completed his doctoral course work. Raymond E. Foster has been a part-time lecturer at California State University, Fullerton and Fresno; and is currently a Criminal Justice Department chair, faculty advisor and lecturer with the Union Institute and University. He has experience teaching upper division courses in Law Enforcement, public policy, Public Safety Technology and leadership. Raymond is an experienced author who has published numerous articles in a wide range of venues including magazines such as Government Technology, Mobile Government, Airborne Law Enforcement Magazine, and Police One. He has appeared on the History Channel and radio programs in the United States and Europe as subject matter expert in technological applications in Law Enforcement.

Listen, call, join us at the Watering Hole:
Program Contact Information
Lieutenant Raymond E. Foster, LAPD (ret.), MPA
editor@police-writers.com
909.599.7530

Forensic Science in Homicide Investigations

On December 17, 2009, Conversations with American Heroes at the Watering Hole will feature a discussion with Vernon J. Geberth, NYPD (ret.) on Forensic Science in Homicide Investigations.

Program Date: December 17, 2009
Program Time: 1700 hours, Pacific
Topic: Forensic Science in Homicide Investigations
Listen Live: www.americanheroesradio.com/forensic_science_homicide_investigations.html

About the Guest
Vernon Geberth is a retired lieutenant-commander of the New York Police Department. As the commanding officer of the Bronx Homicide Task Force, his investigators handled more than four hundred murder investigations every year. Vernon Geberth is recipient of over sixty awards for bravery and exceptional work during twenty-three years of service. He has personally investigated, supervised, assessed, researched and consulted on over eight thousand homicides.

Vernon Geberth has master's degrees in both psychology and professional studies, is a graduate of the FBI's National Academy. Over the past twenty-five years, he has taught over 50,000 police officers his comprehensive course in Practical Homicide Investigation.

Geberth’s book, Practical Homicide Investigation has been referred to as the "Bible of Homicide." His subsequent works, “The Practical Homicide Investigation Checklist and Field Guide” and “Sex-Related Homicide and Death Investigation: Practical and Clinical Perspectives,” demonstrate his professional ability and subject matter expert command over homicide investigations. In addition to his own works Geberth has been an editor in over forty other textbooks. He has devoted his life to the study of murder and was the first law enforcement professional to devise standard guidelines and protocols for proficient death inquiries. Currently he is president of P.H.I. Investigative Consultants, Inc., a New York-based corporation that provides state-of-the-art instruction and consultation regarding homicide investigations to police officers.

About the Watering Hole
The Watering Hole is Police slang for a location cops go off-duty to blow off steam and talk about work and life. American Heroes Radio brings you to the watering hole, where it is Sometimes funny; sometimes serious; but, always interesting.

About the Host
Lieutenant Raymond E. Foster was a sworn member of the Los Angeles Police Department for 24 years. He retired in 2003 at the rank of Lieutenant. He holds a bachelor’s from the Union Institute and University in Criminal Justice Management and a Master’s Degree in Public Financial Management from California State University, Fullerton; and, has completed his doctoral course work. Raymond E. Foster has been a part-time lecturer at California State University, Fullerton and Fresno; and is currently a Criminal Justice Department chair, faculty advisor and lecturer with the Union Institute and University. He has experience teaching upper division courses in Law Enforcement, public policy, Public Safety Technology and leadership. Raymond is an experienced author who has published numerous articles in a wide range of venues including magazines such as Government Technology, Mobile Government, Airborne Law Enforcement Magazine, and Police One. He has appeared on the History Channel and radio programs in the United States and Europe as subject matter expert in technological applications in Law Enforcement.

Listen, call, join us at the Watering Hole:
www.americanheroesradio.com/forensic_science_homicide_investigations.html

Program Contact Information
Lieutenant Raymond E. Foster, LAPD (ret.), MPA
editor@police-writers.com
909.599.7530

Adirondack Book House Talks Leadership

August 7, 2009 (San Dimas, CA) American Heroes Press announced that the co-author of Leadership: Texas Hold ‘em Style, Lieutenant Raymond E. Foster, LAPD (ret.) will be a guest on the internet-based radio program Adirondack Book House.

Date: September 4, 2009
Time: 7:00 PM Pacific
Listen Live:
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/TheAdirondackBookhouse

ABOUT THE PROGRAM
The Adirondack Book House reviews books and provides authors an outlet to dicuss their work. The Adirondack Book House is hosted by Peter Klein, the author of numerous travel and hiking books on the Adirondack area of New York State as well as the author of the fiction series The Valkyrie Vampire.

ABOUT RAYMOND E. FOSTER
Raymond E. Foster was a sworn member of the Los Angeles Police Department for 24 years. He retired in 2003 at the rank of Lieutenant. He holds a bachelor’s from the Union Institute and University in Criminal Justice Management and a Master’s Degree in Public Financial Management from California State University, Fullerton. He has completed his doctoral studies in business research. Raymond is a graduate of the West Point Leadership program and has attended law enforcement, technology and leadership programs such as the National Institute for Justice, Technology Institute, Washington, DC.

Raymond has been a part-time lecturer at California State University, Fullerton and is currently a faculty advisor and chair of the Criminal Justice Program at the Union Institute and University. He has experience teaching upper division courses in law enforcement, public policy, technology and leadership. Raymond is an experienced author who has published numerous articles in a wide range of venues including magazines such as Government Technology, Mobile Government, Airborne Law Enforcement Magazine, and Police One. He has appeared on the History Channel and radio programs in the United States and Europe as subject matter expert in technological applications in law enforcement.

His first book, Police Technology is used in over 100 colleges and universities nationwide. He latest book, Leadership: Texas Hold ‘em Style has been adopted by several universities for course work in leadership; by several civil service organizations and required reading for promotion; and, has been well received in the wider market.

ABOUT THE BOOK
Using poker as analogy for leadership, Captain Andrew Harvey, CPD (ret.), Ed.D. and Lieutenant Raymond E. Foster, LAPD (ret.), MPA found the right mix of practical experience and academic credentials to write a definitive book for leaders. Working together, Harvey and Foster have written Leadership: Texas Hold em Style. Most often leaders find they are given a set of resources people, equipment, funds, experience and a mission. As Foster noted, "You're dealt a certain hand. How you play that hand as a leader determines your success."

More than a book: A fun and entertaining journey through leadership that includes an interactive website to supplement knowledge gained from the book.
Proven and Tested: Not an academic approach to leadership, but rather a road-tested guide that has been developed through 50-years of author experience.
High Impact: Through the use of perspective, reflection, and knowledge, provides information that turns leadership potential into leadership practice.
Ease of Application: Theory is reinforced with real-life experience, which results in accessible and practical tools leaders can put to use immediately.
High Road Approach: Personal character and ethical beliefs are woven into each leadership approach, so leaders do the right thing for the right reasons.
Uses Game of Poker: Rather than a dry approach that is all fact and no flavor, the game of poker is used as a lens through which to view leadership concepts.

CONTACT INFORMATION
Lieutenant Raymond E. Foster, LAPD (ret)
909.599.7530
raymond@hitechcj.com
www.police-writers.com

Entrepreneurial Leadership

July 23, 2009 (San Dimas, CA) American Heroes Press announced that the co-author of Leadership: Texas Hold ‘em Style, Lieutenant Raymond E. Foster, LAPD (ret.) will be a guest on the Internet-based radio program Ladee 16 discussing entrepreneurial leadership on September 12, 2009 at 4PM Eastern.

Date: September 12, 2009
Time: 4PM Eastern
Listen Live: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/Ladee16

ABOUT THE PROGRAM
Ladee 16, an internet marketer by profession, hosts a show that showcases entrepreneurs and artists. According to Ladee 16, “It is the goal of this show to promote as many people as possible to help them on their individual paths to their individual goals.”

ABOUT RAYMOND E. FOSTER
Raymond E. Foster was a sworn member of the Los Angeles Police Department for 24 years. He retired in 2003 at the rank of Lieutenant. He holds a bachelor’s from the Union Institute and University in Criminal Justice Management and a Master’s Degree in Public Financial Management from California State University, Fullerton. He has completed his doctoral studies in business research. Raymond is a graduate of the West Point Leadership program and has attended law enforcement, technology and leadership programs such as the National Institute for Justice, Technology Institute, Washington, DC.

Raymond has been a part-time lecturer at California State University, Fullerton and is currently a faculty advisor and chair of the Criminal Justice Program at the Union Institute and University. He has experience teaching upper division courses in law enforcement, public policy, technology and leadership. Raymond is an experienced author who has published numerous articles in a wide range of venues including magazines such as Government Technology, Mobile Government, Airborne Law Enforcement Magazine, and Police One. He has appeared on the History Channel and radio programs in the United States and Europe as subject matter expert in technological applications in law enforcement.

His first book, Police Technology is used in over 100 colleges and universities nationwide. He latest book, Leadership: Texas Hold ‘em Style has been adopted by several universities for course work in leadership; by several civil service organizations and required reading for promotion; and, has been well received in the wider market.

ABOUT THE BOOK
Using poker as analogy for leadership, Captain Andrew Harvey, CPD (ret.), Ed.D. and Lieutenant Raymond E. Foster, LAPD (ret.), MPA found the right mix of practical experience and academic credentials to write a definitive book for leaders. Working together, Harvey and Foster have written Leadership: Texas Hold em Style. Most often leaders find they are given a set of resources people, equipment, funds, experience and a mission. As Foster noted, "You're dealt a certain hand. How you play that hand as a leader determines your success."

More than a book: A fun and entertaining journey through leadership that includes an interactive website to supplement knowledge gained from the book.
Proven and Tested: Not an academic approach to leadership, but rather a road-tested guide that has been developed through 50-years of author experience.
High Impact: Through the use of perspective, reflection, and knowledge, provides information that turns leadership potential into leadership practice.
Ease of Application: Theory is reinforced with real-life experience, which results in accessible and practical tools leaders can put to use immediately.
High Road Approach: Personal character and ethical beliefs are woven into each leadership approach, so leaders do the right thing for the right reasons.
Uses Game of Poker: Rather than a dry approach that is all fact and no flavor, the game of poker is used as a lens through which to view leadership concepts.

CONTACT INFORMATION
Lieutenant Raymond E. Foster, LAPD (ret)
909.599.7530
raymond@hitechcj.com
www.police-writers.com

Leadership Mojo

July 23, 2009 (San Dimas, CA) American Heroes Press announced that the co-author of Leadership: Texas Hold ‘em Style, Lieutenant Raymond E. Foster, LAPD (ret.) will be a guest on the internet-based radio program Professional Mojo for two episodes: August 11, 2009 at 8AM Pacific and August 20, 2009 at 8AM Pacific.

Dates: August 8, 2009 and August 20, 2009
Time: 8AM Pacific
Listen Live:
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/professionalmojo/2009/08/11/Professional-Mojo-Interviews-Raymond-Foster-about-Leadership

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/professionalmojo/2009/08/20/Professional-Mojo-Continues-the-Discussion-on-Leadership-1

ABOUT THE PROGRAM
Professional Mojo delivers thoughtfully priced webinars, onsite learning, private label teleseminars, and web design services for nonprofits, churches, and organizations. Lee Brogden Culberson, the host of Professional Mojo, said, “Our mission is simple: offer professionally moderated webinars with relevant, timely topics at a reasonable price. Join the Mojo Mavens and get ready!”

ABOUT RAYMOND E. FOSTER
Raymond E. Foster was a sworn member of the Los Angeles Police Department for 24 years. He retired in 2003 at the rank of Lieutenant. He holds a bachelor’s from the Union Institute and University in Criminal Justice Management and a Master’s Degree in Public Financial Management from California State University, Fullerton. He has completed his doctoral studies in business research. Raymond is a graduate of the West Point Leadership program and has attended law enforcement, technology and leadership programs such as the National Institute for Justice, Technology Institute, Washington, DC.

Raymond has been a part-time lecturer at California State University, Fullerton and is currently a faculty advisor and chair of the Criminal Justice Program at the Union Institute and University. He has experience teaching upper division courses in law enforcement, public policy, technology and leadership. Raymond is an experienced author who has published numerous articles in a wide range of venues including magazines such as Government Technology, Mobile Government, Airborne Law Enforcement Magazine, and Police One. He has appeared on the History Channel and radio programs in the United States and Europe as subject matter expert in technological applications in law enforcement.

His first book, Police Technology is used in over 100 colleges and universities nationwide. He latest book, Leadership: Texas Hold ‘em Style has been adopted by several universities for course work in leadership; by several civil service organizations and required reading for promotion; and, has been well received in the wider market.

ABOUT THE BOOK
Using poker as analogy for leadership, Captain Andrew Harvey, CPD (ret.), Ed.D. and Lieutenant Raymond E. Foster, LAPD (ret.), MPA found the right mix of practical experience and academic credentials to write a definitive book for leaders. Working together, Harvey and Foster have written Leadership: Texas Hold em Style. Most often leaders find they are given a set of resources people, equipment, funds, experience and a mission. As Foster noted, "You're dealt a certain hand. How you play that hand as a leader determines your success."

More than a book: A fun and entertaining journey through leadership that includes an interactive website to supplement knowledge gained from the book.
Proven and Tested: Not an academic approach to leadership, but rather a road-tested guide that has been developed through 50-years of author experience.
High Impact: Through the use of perspective, reflection, and knowledge, provides information that turns leadership potential into leadership practice.
Ease of Application: Theory is reinforced with real-life experience, which results in accessible and practical tools leaders can put to use immediately.
High Road Approach: Personal character and ethical beliefs are woven into each leadership approach, so leaders do the right thing for the right reasons.
Uses Game of Poker: Rather than a dry approach that is all fact and no flavor, the game of poker is used as a lens through which to view leadership concepts.

CONTACT INFORMATION
Lieutenant Raymond E. Foster, LAPD (ret)
909.599.7530
raymond@hitechcj.com
www.police-writers.com

Poker and Leadership

July 20, 2009 (San Dimas, CA) American Heroes Press announced that the co-author of Leadership: Texas Hold ‘em Style, Lieutenant Raymond E. Foster, LAPD (ret.) will be a guest on the internet-based radio program Boris Poker Radio.

Date: July 24, 2009
Time: 7:30 PM Pacific
Listen Live:
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/Boris-Poker-Radio/2009/07/25/Boris-Poker-Radio-6

ABOUT THE PROGRAM
Boris Poker Radio covers the poker world from the casual and low limit perspective. Reoccurring segments with our message board's very own on-line multi-table tournament pro help those new to the game in making the right decisions as they learn the game.

ABOUT RAYMOND E. FOSTER
Raymond E. Foster was a sworn member of the Los Angeles Police Department for 24 years. He retired in 2003 at the rank of Lieutenant. He holds a bachelor’s from the Union Institute and University in Criminal Justice Management and a Master’s Degree in Public Financial Management from California State University, Fullerton. He has completed his doctoral studies in business research. Raymond is a graduate of the West Point Leadership program and has attended law enforcement, technology and leadership programs such as the National Institute for Justice, Technology Institute, Washington, DC.

Raymond has been a part-time lecturer at California State University, Fullerton and is currently a faculty advisor and chair of the Criminal Justice Program at the Union Institute and University. He has experience teaching upper division courses in law enforcement, public policy, technology and leadership. Raymond is an experienced author who has published numerous articles in a wide range of venues including magazines such as Government Technology, Mobile Government, Airborne Law Enforcement Magazine, and Police One. He has appeared on the History Channel and radio programs in the United States and Europe as subject matter expert in technological applications in law enforcement.

His first book, Police Technology is used in over 100 colleges and universities nationwide. He latest book, Leadership: Texas Hold ‘em Style has been adopted by several universities for course work in leadership; by several civil service organizations and required reading for promotion; and, has been well received in the wider market.

ABOUT THE BOOK
Using poker as analogy for leadership, Captain Andrew Harvey, CPD (ret.), Ed.D. and Lieutenant Raymond E. Foster, LAPD (ret.), MPA found the right mix of practical experience and academic credentials to write a definitive book for leaders. Working together, Harvey and Foster have written Leadership: Texas Hold em Style. Most often leaders find they are given a set of resources people, equipment, funds, experience and a mission. As Foster noted, "You're dealt a certain hand. How you play that hand as a leader determines your success."

More than a book: A fun and entertaining journey through leadership that includes an interactive website to supplement knowledge gained from the book.
Proven and Tested: Not an academic approach to leadership, but rather a road-tested guide that has been developed through 50-years of author experience.
High Impact: Through the use of perspective, reflection, and knowledge, provides information that turns leadership potential into leadership practice.
Ease of Application: Theory is reinforced with real-life experience, which results in accessible and practical tools leaders can put to use immediately.
High Road Approach: Personal character and ethical beliefs are woven into each leadership approach, so leaders do the right thing for the right reasons.
Uses Game of Poker: Rather than a dry approach that is all fact and no flavor, the game of poker is used as a lens through which to view leadership concepts.

CONTACT INFORMATION
Lieutenant Raymond E. Foster, LAPD (ret)
909.599.7530
raymond@hitechcj.com
www.police-writers.com

Leadership and the Odd Mind

July 20, 2009 (San Dimas, CA) American Heroes Press announced that the co-author of Leadership: Texas Hold ‘em Style, Lieutenant Raymond E. Foster, LAPD (ret.) will be a guest on the internet-based radio program The Odd Mind with host Lesa Trapp on September 3, 2009.

Date: September 3, 2009
Time: 9PM Central
Listen Live:
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/TheOddMind

ABOUT THE PROGRAM
The Odd Mind Show is the voice of the independent author/artist. The host, Lesa Trapp, is also the publisher of The Odd Mind magazine. In an interview of Trapp by Yvonne Mason, Trapp said of the Odd Mind magazine, “"I want a magazine which not only highlights unknown authors and artists, I also want one which can be purchased and taken into a store to use as a guide to by books." Lesa Trapp went onto explain, “These authors have to rely one their own promoting and their own resources to get their work out there to the readers. Many have spent years trying to not only get published but about as many years getting known.” Summed up, the radio program and the magazine put the extraordinary talents of relatively unknown authors and artists into the minds of new audiences.

ABOUT RAYMOND E. FOSTER
Raymond E. Foster was a sworn member of the Los Angeles Police Department for 24 years. He retired in 2003 at the rank of Lieutenant. He holds a bachelor’s from the Union Institute and University in Criminal Justice Management and a Master’s Degree in Public Financial Management from California State University, Fullerton. He has completed his doctoral studies in business research. Raymond is a graduate of the West Point Leadership program and has attended law enforcement, technology and leadership programs such as the National Institute for Justice, Technology Institute, Washington, DC.

Raymond has been a part-time lecturer at California State University, Fullerton and is currently a faculty advisor and chair of the Criminal Justice Program at the Union Institute and University. He has experience teaching upper division courses in law enforcement, public policy, technology and leadership. Raymond is an experienced author who has published numerous articles in a wide range of venues including magazines such as Government Technology, Mobile Government, Airborne Law Enforcement Magazine, and Police One. He has appeared on the History Channel and radio programs in the United States and Europe as subject matter expert in technological applications in law enforcement.

His first book, Police Technology is used in over 100 colleges and universities nationwide. He latest book, Leadership: Texas Hold ‘em Style has been adopted by several universities for course work in leadership; by several civil service organizations and required reading for promotion; and, has been well received in the wider market.

ABOUT THE BOOK
Using poker as analogy for leadership, Captain Andrew Harvey, CPD (ret.), Ed.D. and Lieutenant Raymond E. Foster, LAPD (ret.), MPA found the right mix of practical experience and academic credentials to write a definitive book for leaders. Working together, Harvey and Foster have written Leadership: Texas Hold em Style. Most often leaders find they are given a set of resources people, equipment, funds, experience and a mission. As Foster noted, "You're dealt a certain hand. How you play that hand as a leader determines your success."

More than a book: A fun and entertaining journey through leadership that includes an interactive website to supplement knowledge gained from the book.
Proven and Tested: Not an academic approach to leadership, but rather a road-tested guide that has been developed through 50-years of author experience.
High Impact: Through the use of perspective, reflection, and knowledge, provides information that turns leadership potential into leadership practice.
Ease of Application: Theory is reinforced with real-life experience, which results in accessible and practical tools leaders can put to use immediately.
High Road Approach: Personal character and ethical beliefs are woven into each leadership approach, so leaders do the right thing for the right reasons.
Uses Game of Poker: Rather than a dry approach that is all fact and no flavor, the game of poker is used as a lens through which to view leadership concepts.

CONTACT INFORMATION
Lieutenant Raymond E. Foster, LAPD (ret)
909.599.7530
raymond@hitechcj.com
www.police-writers.com

Unstoppable Leadership

July 14, 2009 (San Dimas, CA) American Heroes Press announced that the co-author of Leadership: Texas Hold ‘em Style, Lieutenant Raymond E. Foster, LAPD (ret.) will be a guest on Mission Unstoppable hosted by Frankie Picasso on
August 25, 2009 at 5PM PACIFIC.

Date: August 25, 2009
Time: 5PM Pacific
Listen Live: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/missionunstoppable

ABOUT THE PROGRAM
Mission Unstoppable a mindset. It is an innate knowing that you can do whatever it is that you want to Do, and be whoever it is you want to Be! Mission Unstoppable is your new mantra. It is a way of life. It is a choice that you make on the inside that results in fruitful results on the outside. Mission Unstoppable is your call for action! Some folks find it on their own; others acquire it as they go along. Anyone can learn it. According to the host, Frankie Picasso, “That’s why I am here. I am Guerrilla Coach Frankie Picasso, aka The Unstoppable Coach. Join me and my Unstoppable Guests Tuesdays at 8 pm Est. and be inspired to live life large, live life by design, live life on a Mission, Mission Unstoppable!”

ABOUT RAYMOND E. FOSTER
Raymond E. Foster was a sworn member of the Los Angeles Police Department for 24 years. He retired in 2003 at the rank of Lieutenant. He holds a bachelor’s from the Union Institute and University in Criminal Justice Management and a Master’s Degree in Public Financial Management from California State University, Fullerton. He has completed his doctoral studies in business research. Raymond is a graduate of the West Point Leadership program and has attended law enforcement, technology and leadership programs such as the National Institute for Justice, Technology Institute, Washington, DC.

Raymond has been a part-time lecturer at California State University, Fullerton and is currently a faculty advisor and chair of the Criminal Justice Program at the Union Institute and University. He has experience teaching upper division courses in law enforcement, public policy, technology and leadership. Raymond is an experienced author who has published numerous articles in a wide range of venues including magazines such as Government Technology, Mobile Government, Airborne Law Enforcement Magazine, and Police One. He has appeared on the History Channel and radio programs in the United States and Europe as subject matter expert in technological applications in law enforcement.

His first book, Police Technology is used in over 100 colleges and universities nationwide. He latest book, Leadership: Texas Hold ‘em Style has been adopted by several universities for course work in leadership; by several civil service organizations and required reading for promotion; and, has been well received in the wider market.

ABOUT THE BOOK
Using poker as analogy for leadership, Captain Andrew Harvey, CPD (ret.), Ed.D. and Lieutenant Raymond E. Foster, LAPD (ret.), MPA found the right mix of practical experience and academic credentials to write a definitive book for leaders. Working together, Harvey and Foster have written Leadership: Texas Hold em Style. Most often leaders find they are given a set of resources people, equipment, funds, experience and a mission. As Foster noted, "You're dealt a certain hand. How you play that hand as a leader determines your success."

More than a book: A fun and entertaining journey through leadership that includes an interactive website to supplement knowledge gained from the book.
Proven and Tested: Not an academic approach to leadership, but rather a road-tested guide that has been developed through 50-years of author experience.
High Impact: Through the use of perspective, reflection, and knowledge, provides information that turns leadership potential into leadership practice.
Ease of Application: Theory is reinforced with real-life experience, which results in accessible and practical tools leaders can put to use immediately.
High Road Approach: Personal character and ethical beliefs are woven into each leadership approach, so leaders do the right thing for the right reasons.
Uses Game of Poker: Rather than a dry approach that is all fact and no flavor, the game of poker is used as a lens through which to view leadership concepts.

CONTACT INFORMATION
Lieutenant Raymond E. Foster, LAPD (ret)
909.599.7530
raymond@hitechcj.com
www.police-writers.com