1. Chapter 8: Having an impact on crime

2. Important notes These slides are not a replacement for the text Please use these slides as a starting point for your own PowerPoint presentation based on your reading of the book, and your needs. They are not designed to be a definitive record of the book chapter Please do not cite from these slides. Please cite any text from the book as some text may have changed. The book is the definitive record. Printing the slides The background for the slides is taken from the book cover. To print without the background, Right click on the slide background Click format background > Hide background graphics Click Apply to All Print as Slides with the color/grayscale set to Pure Black and White Dont forget to switch the background graphics back on! This is a hidden slide

3. Revising the crime funnel Original funnel10% increase prosecutions 25% increase in detections Actual offenses1000 Reported to police410 Recorded by police287 Detected offenses75 93 Charged or summoned374147 Proceeded against at court212326 Found guilty151719 Custodial sentence3.74.14.7

4. The limitations of arrest strategies Even though many police officers profess to wanting to catch the criminal elite, they are constrained by an organizational system that rewards them for the volume of arrests rather than the quality of their captures As a result of observations of over 300 crack dealers, and interviews with over 120, Johnson and Natarajan estimate that experienced and higher-level dealers can minimize the risk of arrest to one for every thousand drug transactions or more (See Johnson and Natarajan 1995: 54) Conviction rates in the UK from suspicious transaction reports during the early 1990s were as low as one for every thousand suspicious reports (See Levi, 2002)

5. The benefits of crime prevention Original funnel10% Decrease in actual crime Actual offenses1000900 Reported to police410369 Recorded by police287258 Detected offenses7567 Charged or summoned3734 Proceeded against at court2119 Found guilty1514 Custodial sentence3.73.4

6. Why dont politicians embrace prevention? Steve Lab (2004) points out why there is a general lack of enthusiasm for prevention from policymakers. Politicians prefer programs with: immediate results focus on outcomes that can be counted a sensationalist streak an eye to the immediate problems of the day

7. Defining reduction, disruption or prevention Crime reduction Brings net benefits after considering the impact of displacement and diffusion of benefits, fear of crime and the impact from other programs that may have contributed to any specific crime reduction activity (Chainey and Ratcliffe 2005: 19) Disruption Disruption occurs when the business is hampered for a period of time, normally as a result of law enforcement action, but is not permanently disabled (EUROPOL 2006: 17) Crime prevention Involves any activity by an individual or group, public or private, which attempts to eliminate crime either before it occurs or before any additional activity results (Lab 1988)

8. Levels of crime prevention Primary prevention Identifies conditions of the physical and social environment that create, precipitate or provide opportunities for criminal behavior (Brantingham and Faust 1976) Secondary prevention Aims to reduce risks associated with those people vulnerable to involvement in crime, and to ameliorate the chance of high-risk offenders developing more serious criminal activities. Tertiary prevention Deals with actual offenders and involves intervening with the lives of these offenders in a manner that prevents them from committing other crimes and includes arrest and prosecution, reform and rehabilitation, and institutional education programs (Chainey and Ratcliffe 2005: 17)

9. Levels of crime prevention: ILP relevance Primary prevention Used to tackle the systemic weaknesses that offenders exploit so that more strategic problem-solving can take hold Secondary prevention Provides opportunities to identify priorities for resource allocation and targeting Tertiary prevention Prevention benefits from the arrest and prosecution of high-risk, prolific and persistent offenders

10. The changing leadership role Most police commanders have been groomed for leadership positions by subjecting them to training and experiences that are not related to crime reduction We have people in leadership and management positions who were never expected to do the job Im asking them to do (New Zealand Police District Commander quoted in Ratcliffe 2005: 449)

11. The limitations of lawyers In many US jurisdictions, the chief law enforcement officer has a legal background (district attorney or county prosecutor) This often prevents them from understanding the benefits of crime disruption or prevention Although the gradual acceptance of prevention as the primary purpose of intelligence may precipitate improvement, law enforcement has a long history of strategies that respond to a current problem but rarely prevent or control an emerging or anticipated threat (Higgins 2004: 72)

12. Does police targeting prevent crime? Unfocused increases in police numbers appears to be relatively ineffective 10 per cent increase in police numbers would, on average, result in a 3 per cent reduction in the major crime types for a city Evidence from a study of 49 states and 56 cities conducted by Marvell and Moody, 1996 Hiring more police officers did not play an independent or consistent role in reducing violent crime in the United States (Eck and Maguire 2000: 217)

13. Police impact on crime Limited or no value Unfocused increases in police numbers Targeted patrols at drug corners Arrests of some juveniles for minor offences Drug market arrests Community policing with no clear crime-risk factor focus Positive impact Targeted patrols in (non-drug) crime hotspots Civil code violations and nuisance legislation applied to drug houses Proactive arrests of serious repeat offenders Combine enforcement with prevention strategies

14. Concentrating on the 6 per cent The 6% that commit 60% of all crime New South Wales Police Compstat-like process encouraged local police commanders to focus on Crime hot spots and hot times Spend more time searching people for illegal weapons Target recidivist offenders OCR process shown to reduce crime and a burglary was prevented for every two arrests, a vehicle theft was prevented for every five arrests, and a robbery was prevented for every 30 arrests (See Chilvers and Weatherburn 2001a: 11)

15. University of Maryland review Successful strategies Incapacitating offenders who continue to commit crimes at high rates Family therapy by clinical staff for delinquent and pre- delinquent youth Short-term vocational training programmers for older male ex-offenders no longer involved in the criminal justice system Prison-based therapeutic community treatment of drug- involved offenders

16. University of Maryland review Promising tactics (but that have to be evaluated further) Gang violence prevention focused on reducing gang cohesion Battered womens shelters for women who take other steps to change their lives Housing dispersion programs Enterprise Zones Intensive, residential training programs for at-risk youth

17. University of Maryland review Unsuccessful tactics Gang community mobilization against crime, in high-crime, inner-city poverty areas Gun buy-back programs operated without geographic limitations on gun sources Summer job or subsidized work programs for at-risk youth Short-term, non-residential training programs for at-risk youth Emphasized specific deterrence such as shock probation and Scared Straight

18. Whether the motivation is religious fundamentalism, anti- government sentiment, or the disaffected loner, radicalized groups or individuals are increasingly perpetrating terrorism. A substantial attack upon U.S. soil is increasingly likely. The answer rests with prevention. … The only way to prevent radicalization is to end the conditions that foster it. When efforts at prevention are unsuccessful or impractical, a fully trained and seamlessly integrated public safety force is required to recognize preincident indicators and develop interdiction, disruption, or arrest strategies. (Bratton 2007: 6-7)