Relatively low rates of homicide solvability results in law-abiding citizens being forced to co-exist with known murderers, which is detrimental to a community’s psyche. This condition happens disproportionately in neighborhoods where crime is high, cohesiveness among its members is weak, and the citizen/police relationship is little or non-existent. This research sought to understand this phenomenon by asking,” How can murder solvability rates improve in marginalized communities?” and employing four theoretical lenses. Using the city of New Orleans as a case study and holding Social Disorganization Theory constant, Spiral of Silence, Habitus, and Dramaturgy were utilized in an attempt to understand individuals who witness violent crime but do not come forward. From these theories, nine assumptions were formed, connecting the literature to this specific area of inquiry. Using a mixed methods approach both qualitative and quantitative data was collected within New Orleans from a variety of instruments: a survey (both web-based and in-person), a questionnaire and two deliberative forums. Utilizing the questionnaire and in conjunction with the Kettering Foundation and the National Issues Forum Institute (NIFI), this research was also able to quantitatively compare New Orleans data with data collected nationally by NIFI. While the data collected support all nine assumptions, five of the nine account for 82% of the data. Of these five, none originated from the Spiral of Silence theory, two originated from the Habitus theory, and three originated from the Dramaturgy theory.

La loi du 19 juin 1851 qui étatise la police de Lyon marque une rupture majeure dans l’histoire du maintien de l’ordre en France. Depuis la Révolution française, les maires ont en effet été chargés de la police dans toutes les communes françaises, Paris exceptée. À partir de 1851, Lyon fait donc figure d’exception. Parce qu’elle s’est signalée par ses colères récurrentes depuis la fin du XVIIIe siècle, qu’elle est considérée comme la capitale du sud-est de la France et que sa population apparaît unanimement comme rétive à toute forme de domination, elle passe pour une cité rebelle. Dans le contexte d’un « Printemps des peuples » marqué par les soulèvements réguliers des partisans de la République démocratique et sociale, en juin 1848 puis en juin 1849, Lyon devient aux yeux des autorités, le quartier général de tous ceux qui veulent renverser l’ordre social en France voire en Europe. Or, durant cette période, la police lyonnaise donne chaque jour les preuves d’une défaillance complète face à la criminalité et à la délinquance, malgré une réorganisation générale tentée à l’automne 1848. En réaction, le pouvoir parisien place progressivement Lyon « hors du droit commun ». La ville et ses faubourgs sont d’abord privés de leurs gardes nationales en juillet 1848, lesquelles ne seront jamais réorganisées, à la différence des autres municipalités, car elles sont perçues, entre Rhône et Saône, comme peu sûres, faibles face à l’émeute et promptes à se retourner contre l’armée et la police. Le 15 juin 1849, une nouvelle insurrection éclate à Lyon. Réprimée par l’armée, elle enclenche la réforme générale de l’organisation administrative et policière de la ville et des faubourgs. Dans l’immédiat, Lyon et les cinq départements de la 6e division militaire sont placés et maintenus en état de siège. Tentée une première fois à l’automne 1849, la réforme aboutit avec la loi du 19 juin 1851. Désormais, Lyon jouit d’une police étatisée, aux mains d’un préfet du Rhône devenu préfet de police, agissant dans une nouvelle entité administrative, l’agglomération lyonnaise, qui regroupe une douzaine de communes et faubourgs. Le décret du 24 mars 1852 fait aboutir cette réforme, en supprimant le maire et en attribuant ses fonctions au préfet, en annexant les communes suburbaines et en divisant la ville en cinq arrondissements. Sur le plan policier, les services sont réorganisés jusqu’en 1854, sur la base des modèles parisien, londonien et genevois. La police d’État lyonnaise traverse le Second Empire et devient le modèle à partir duquel les polices des préfectures de plus de 40 000 habitants sont étatisées en 1855. Cette pérennité de la police d’État ne doit pourtant pas dissimuler une contestation permanente de son existence au cours des années 1860, au Corps législatif puis au Conseil général du Rhône. Les élus républicains demandent en effet la restitution à Lyon d’une municipalité élue, prélude au retour de la ville dans le « droit commun » sur le plan policier. Progressivement, la surveillance politique de l’agglomération s’avère difficile à assurer et les effectifs policiers apparaissent insuffisants. C’est néanmoins la défaite de Sedan qui aura raison de la police d’État. La République proclamée, la municipalité lyonnaise tout juste recomposée reprend immédiatement la direction du maintien de l’ordre le 4 septembre 1870 / The law of 19th June 1851 which establishes state control over the police of Lyon marks a major break in the history of urban policing in France. Since the French Revolution, mayors were in charged of the police in all the French municipalities, Paris excepted. From 1851, Lyon thus became an exception. Because it differenced itself by its recurring revolts since the end of the XVIIIth century, because it is considered as the capital of the southeast-part of France and because its population appeared unanimously as refusing any kind of domination, it was considered as a rebel city. During the "people’s spring" marked by the regular uprisings of the partisans of the democratic and social Republic, in June, 1848 then in June, 1849, Lyon became for the authorities, the headquarters of all those who wanted to turn upside down social order in France and even in Europe. Yet, during this period, the police of Lyon gave daily proofs of a total failure to fight criminality, in spite of a general reorganization tempted in autumn 1848.In reaction, the Parisian power gradually put Lyon "outside the common law". The city and its suburbs were firstly deprived of their national guards in July 1848, unlike the other municipalities, because its guards were perceived, between the Rhône and the Saône, as weak in front of riots and quick to turn around against the army and the police. On June 15th 1849, a new uprising burst in Lyon. Repressed by the army, it engaged the general reform of the administrative and police organization of the city and the suburbs. Lyon and the five departments of the 6th military division had immediately been are placed and maintained under state of siege. Firstly tried in autumn 1849, the reform succeeded with the law of 19th June 1851. From then on, Lyon had a state-controlled police, in the hands of the prefect of the Rhône who became a prefect of police, acting in a new administrative entity, the Lyon agglomeration, which included a dozen municipalities and suburbs. The decree of March 24th, 1852 made this reform succeed, by suppressing the mayor and by attributing its functions to the prefect, by annexing the suburban municipalities and by dividing the city into five districts. On the police plan, services were reorganized until 1854, on the basis of the models of Paris, London and Geneva.The State police of Lyon crossed the Second Empire and became the model from which the polices of the prefectures of more than 40 000 inhabitants passed under state control in 1855. Nevertheless, the State police is contested during the 1860s, in the Legislative Corps and the General Council of the Rhône. The republican asked for the restoration of an elected municipality in Lyon, seen as the first step of the return of the city in the police "common law". Gradually, political surveillance of the urban space became increasingly difficult, and the police staff seemed insufficient. Nevertheless, it was the defeat of Sedan that would mark the end of the State police. Once the Republic had been proclaimed, the municipality of Lyon just recomposed took back immediately the direction of the police on September 4th, 1870.