The police work effectively to reduce and prevent crime - Critically examine this statement in the light of the available evidence.

Sukhpreet Kaur Page Word Count:

The police work effectively to reduce and prevent crime. Critically examine this statement in the light of the available evidence.

The police is the area of the Criminal Justice System which is under the most scrutiny, almost always because they are perceived as ineffective. My aim is to establish whether or not the police deserve this tarnished reputation by investigating their effectiveness of reducing and preventing crime. I shall be looking into many different aspects of the police, starting with a brief history of the police and how their roles and responsibilities have changed since the beginning of the 19th century. I shall then go on to look at some statistics from the 2001 British Crime Survey in order to attempt to determine the effectiveness of the police in terms of crime reduction. Other investigative matters include police accountability, which takes me neatly to the question of police conduct and complaints- in order to gain an insight into the other side of policing where the so-called ‘good guys’ are in fact the ‘bad guys.’ I shall also be looking into the resources available to the police, and thus whether or not they are good enough and how they may be improved.

The police, once upon a time, had the image of perfection- in the early 1800s the local ‘bobby’ was someone who was glad to help out wherever possible, someone who was there for his community, was largely unarmed and used force only as a last resort. Order was maintained by negotiation and ‘pushing and shoving’ methods. This style of policing is known as consensual or communal policing, the objective of which is due process. However, the police’s values changed from due process to crime control, known as military policing. Their goals are now crime fighting rather than social peace keeping, and they are now crime fighting specialists instead of being citizens in uniform. They use weapons more readily than before, use force as a first resort and attempt to reduce crime through social exclusion, as opposed to social inclusion like before the turn of the century (Brewer 1991; Kleinig 1996; Jones and Newburn 1996; Kraska 2001). Sir Robert Peel, the then Home Secretary who later created the Metropolitan Police, made this change around 1829.

In 1842 the Special Branch was established as a result of death threats to Queen Victoria. By 1856 there were 239 police forces in England. From 1829-1856 the development of the Police was very quick due to this rapid growth.

In the early 20th century there were some landmark developments of the police: the system of classifying fingerprints was introduced in 1901; the Metropolitan Police caught the first criminal using telegraphy in 1910; in 1919 women officers were introduced but were kept in different departments to men- and were paid less than their male counterparts- until 1973. Two motor vans were acquired in 1920, which signalled the birth of the ‘flying squad’.

In the 1950s the image of the police was ‘servants of the public’ which was not true to life; in reality they were very tough, adept at breaking rules and were often unfriendly and unwelcoming. There was a lot of opposition against the police from all the classes- the working class saw them as oppressors and the middle classes felt their liberties were being limited- making the police very unpopular. In the 1960s technological advances meant that police officers were able to have police radios, breaking their link with the community even further.

Measuring police effectiveness is, and has always been, a problem because there are many ways to do this, each method having its advantages and its disadvantages. One method of measuring effectiveness is to go by clear-up rates. However, the most important factor when solving a case is the information supplied to the police by the victim (Greenwood 1980; Steer 1980; Maguire and Norris 1998). This means that with regards to crimes such as burglary, where the victim has limited knowledge of details, the case is more unlikely to be solved than in a case of inter-personal violence, for instance.

Another method would be to use ‘official’ crime statistics which are compiled various departments of the criminal justice system, including the police, the courts and prisons. However, their reliability has to be questioned because the process of recording offences requires numerous decisions which can cause some crimes to be included or omitted (Cook 1997). This exclusion of crimes means that trends cannot be assessed properly and that the statistics that we see are socially constructed (Morrison 1995) rather than a reflection of what is happening, with regards to crime, in our society.

Another factor in the unreliability of crime statistics is the underreporting of crimes. Fig. 1 proves crimes reported through the 2001 British Crime Survey (henceforth BCS) surveys have generally not been reported to the police.

Fig. 1

Thus I am using the BCS as the basis of my analysis. The BCS has attracted some criticism; it was thought, especially in the 1980s, that people distorted the facts of the crime. However, it has also achieved widespread respect among academics, as well as policy-makers (Maguire). ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

Fig. 1

The BCS sends out surveys to be completed by members of the public; if they have been crime victims they will receive a further document which will ask them to describe the crimes in detail. Fig 2 shows that, generally, crime is on the decrease. Does this suggest that police officers are now doing a better job than in 1991/1992, where the most significant increase of crime occurred? Fig 1 shows that the percentage of reported crimes has remained fairly steady from 1995-1999; the increase in 2000 has not resulted in a rise in crime- cynics may have credited the fall in crime to more underreporting but this appears not to be the case.

It is submitted that this reduction of crime could have occurred as a result of extensive crime prevention advertisements. If people were looking after themselves better then there would be a drop in crime.

Fig. 2

However, fig. 2 could imply that police has been more effective since 1995, when the drop in crime began. This is largely inconclusive due to the restricted data available.

The next issue is the one of police accountability. It is fine to say that the police are there to help you but how far are they prepared to go to do so? Who do they answer to when things go wrong? Most people agree that accountability is important because it is vital to prevent police misconduct- bad practice, corruption, miscarriages of justice and racism. The ‘tripartite structure’ encompassing the Home Office, the Chief Constable and the Police authority have been responsible for police accountability since 1964. This structure has been widely criticized; ‘Scarman Committees’ were established in order to include the community but they were seen as ineffective by both the police and the public.

The Crime and Disorder Act 1998 requires the police to consult with the community. However, consultation is not the same as accountability meaning that the issue of accountability still needs to be addressed if it to become more effective. Today, the police is more financially accountable than ever and policing policy is determined at national level when it be more effective if it were determined at local level. This would lead to police constables keeping a better eye on smaller groups of police officers instead of trying to manage the entire police force.

The low standard of police accountability leads to major problems concerning police conduct. Police officers see themselves as the most closely watched of all the public institutions (Wilson, Ashton and Sharp 2001). However, upon speaking to someone who has a grievance against the police that view will not be reaffirmed. Those people believe that the police are a law unto themselves.

Who are we supposed to believe? I have already suggested that the police are effectively unaccountable. I am now going to investigate the matter of police malpractice, which is a result of inefficient police accountability.

According to the Home Office report titled “Police Corruption in England and Wales: An assessment of current evidence” (2003), the following list is only an example of the corrupt acts performed by police officers:

• leaking information to those outside the force (an activity dominating the intelligence picture);

• using their power to obtain money or sexual favours from members of the public (e.g. from prostitutes);

• conspiring with criminals in the committing of crimes;

• carrying out thefts during raids; and

• using their position within the organisation to undermine proceedings against criminals. (at p. ii)

Sometimes acts of corruption are of ‘noble-cause’. This is when a police officer is convinced that someone is guilty of an offence and he will bend the rules to get that person convicted. Two of the most common methods are the exclusion of evidence and obtaining confessions under duress, although the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) has introduced procedures to eliminate those confessions. It is important to remember that a police officer’s ‘gut instinct’ is not always the right one. How can one judge whether an individual is guilty or not on a whim? It is also vital to think about the people who have been wrongfully imprisoned as a result of these ‘gut instincts’.

With regards to the origins of corruption,

“not only was corruption identified across all of the forces involved in the study, but it also showed some similar patterns and was apparently linked to some similar underlying factors. This suggests that corruption arises in a systematic and predictable way from the nature and context of policing.”(Wilson et al 2001)

These factors are: the individual circumstances of a person, the opportunities for corruption and the cultures and values surrounding a person.

Individual circumstances can include the ethics of a person and whether he or she has received many complaints before. Is their performance high?- if so maybe they are receiving some ‘help,’ or maybe they are helping themselves to information which they should not be seeing. Perhaps they are lacking in their personal lives- for example relationship problems, or the fight against an addiction- and need fulfilment from work in order to increase their confidence.

The opportunity for corruption is plentiful. Access to files- the police runs a fairly open intelligence system- is extremely easy; someone could quite easily use them for their private gain. There are many other opportunities, for instance when there is police officer-criminal interaction; the gym in a prison may be used by criminals as well as police officers; it has been suggested that socialising in social environments, for example in pubs and clubs, could bring police staff into contact with criminals. Other opportunities include relationships with informants, where the police officer would cover for the informant if he crossed the line, poor supervision or even targeting by organised crime.

The cultures and values surrounding a person- the so-called ‘cop culture’- surprisingly include drug-taking, and the willingness to talk about it. Other inclusions are being aware of poor supervision and knowing that someone will cover up for you. The latter is a major obstacle in the fight against corruption because ‘whistle-blowers’ are few and far apart. A very small number of police officers have been prepared to stand up publicly against their corrupted colleagues because of the unwritten rule which states that you are supposed to stand by your colleagues. If you break this rule you will be made to suffer. “One of the commonest ways of doing this is being sent to Coventry.” (Former Detective Superintendent, interview by Wilson et al 2001:).

Potential whistle-blowers will also be discouraged by the story of PC Graham Cruttenden who, in 1980, took the very brave step of reporting some of his co-workers who had been stealing from a crime scene. His superiors commended him for his bravery but his colleagues beleaguered him for his so-called betrayal. He subsequently transferred from City of London to Hampshire Police (Guardian, 9 March 1999).

A Metropolitan Police policy document suggested a type of ‘witness relocation’ program for whistle-blowers, where they are moved to new locations, given new identities and new jobs. But would people be prepared for such an upheaval of their lives for the sake of professional integrity? (Daily Telegraph, 3 July 2000)

As indicated, the cop culture is one in which loyalty to colleagues is extremely important, to the point of people having to choose between their ‘friends or the force’. However, it has been suggested that when people do have friends outside the force, these friends are briefed on what to say to the police if they are brought into the police station on a charge. This adds further depth to police corruption as the public is being educated in how to go about their criminal activities with minimum chance of getting arrested. (Wilson et al 2001)

When police officers are suspected of police misconduct, complaints can be made to the Police Complaints Authority (PCA). The PCA is an independent body set up to manage, among other things, complaints against the police. However, there does not seem to be much of a success regarding police complaints; the PCA itself has proposed some changes to its present system (Sampson and DeSilva 2001).

One method of resolving complaints, found in the Police (Complaints) (Informal Resolutions) Regulations 1985 is informal resolution, which I believe could possibly lead to more corruption within the police. This is because one of the rights of the accused is that he can speak to one of his co-workers about the grievance. This colleague can then attempt to settle the complaint- which could lead to calling in favours, which may involve bending of the rules, which adds further to the matter of police corruption.

The final issue I intend to discuss is the one of efficiency- not in dealing with criminals per se- but with regards to the day-to-day life of a police officer and how his day could run more smoothly if certain measures were put into place.

There are many areas where the police is inefficient, usually regarding the amount of time they spend doing their activities. A report found that police officers are spending almost as much time in the police station (43.1%) as on the street (PA Consulting). Research says this time could be lowered as a result of more civilianisation- at the front desk, for instance, where it is not necessary to have uniformed police officers. Civilianisation could also be extended to other areas, such as:

• Analytical functions for criminal intelligence, suicide watch and preparing prosecution paperwork. Many police forces already have criminal justice units which take on the role of full file preparation where a not guilty plea is entered, but in a number of forces officers are still required to perform such basic tasks as transcribing interviews on a regular basis.

• Prisoner processing units would take the charging and prisoner processing functions away from the responsible officer, allowing them to return to operational duties more swiftly.(Source: PA Consulting)

Employing typists would also benefit some of the older police officers as they are sometimes not as fast at typing as the younger, more computer-literate generation.

The other solution for the improvement of police efficiency is the upgrading of the IT systems which are presently being used. They are ancient, extremely inefficient and causes police officers to spend more time doing paperwork than is necessary. A new integrated system, which would eliminate the need to input the same data and information several times by different police officers, is something the police could benefit from. Although this is, perhaps, a bit too big a step for the police to take; maybe the first step should be to buy some more computers as police officers spend a lot of their time waiting around for computers to become available (PA Consulting).

Another factor which adds to the inefficiency of the police is the much more basic problem of lack of mobile phones. Police officers are reluctant to use their radios for long periods of time, for example if they need to phone in details of a crime- which reduces wasted time as a result of not needing to drive to and from the station- in case of important incoming messages. Asking the victims permission to use their telephones seems inappropriate.

The use of laptops would also contribute to the reduction of time-wasting because details of the crime could be entered into the system at the scene of the crime, where the victim is, possibly, more comfortable than in the unfamiliar surroundings of the police station.

All of the aforementioned evidence suggests that there are many flaws in the police force. Admittedly, there is need for improvement of the method of measuring police efficiency itself. However, I have established that there are many problems within the police itself- until police corruption is eradicated, how is the public supposed to have faith in the police? This lack of confidence plays a major role in the underreporting of crime. And until people report more crimes the police cannot attempt to improve crime statistics. Even the more basic aspects of running a police station needs to be looked at- starting with ‘baby-steps’ such as investing in some mobile phones or laptops could do a lot for the improvement of the police.

In conclusion, I believe that the police does not reduce and prevent crime effectively and that there are many areas of the police which need to be improved in order to for them to be able to do so.

Bibliography

Brewer, J.D. (1991) “Policing in Divided Societies: Theorising a Type of Policing” Policing and Society 1/3: 179-191 in Bowling, B. and Foster, J., Policing the Police, p. 984 in Maguire M., Morgan, R. and Reiner, R. (eds.) (2002) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 980-1022

Cook, D. (1997) Poverty, Crime and Punishment London: Child Poverty Action Group, p17 in Lawson, T. and Heaton, T. (eds.) (1999) Crime and Deviance London: Macmillan Press Ltd

Daily Telegraph (3 July 2000) in Wilson, D., Ashton, J. and Sharp, D. (2001), What Everyone in Britain Should Know About the Police, London: Blackstone Press Ltd.

Guardian (9 March 1999) in Wilson, D., Ashton, J. and Sharp, D. (2001), What Everyone in Britain Should Know About the Police, London: Blackstone Press Ltd.

Greenwood, P. (1980) ‘The Rand Study of Criminal Investigation’ pp35-43 in Clarke, R. and Hough, J. (eds.) The effectiveness of policing Aldershot: Gower, p. 1000 in Bowling, B. and Foster, J., Policing the Police in Maguire M., Morgan, R. and Reiner, R. (eds.) (2002) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 980-1022

Jones, T. and Newburn, T. (1996) Policing and disaffected communities: a review of the literature, a Report to the Standing Advisory Committee on Human Rights, p. 984 in Bowling, B. and Foster, J., Policing the Police in Maguire M., Morgan, R. and Reiner, R. (eds.) (2002) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 980-1022

Kershaw et al 2001, The 2001 British Crime Survey: First Results, England and Wales Statistical Bulletin 18/01 London: Home Office, available from: www.homeoffice.gov.uk [Accessed 21/04/2003]

Kleinig, J. (1996) The Ethics of Policing Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p. 984 in Bowling, B. and Foster, J., Policing the Police in Maguire M., Morgan, R. and Reiner, R. (eds.) (2002) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 980-1022

Kraska, P. (ed.) (2001) Militarising the American Criminal Justice System New York: New York University Press, p. 984 in Bowling, B. and Foster, J., Policing the Police in Maguire, M., Morgan, R. and Reiner, R. (eds.) (2002) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 980-1022

Maguire, M. “Crime Statistics”, pp322-370 in Maguire M., Morgan, R. and Reiner, R. (eds.) (2002) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology Oxford: Oxford University Press

Maguire M., Morgan, R. and Reiner, R. (eds.) (2002) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology Oxford: Oxford University Press

Maguire, M. and Norris, C. (1992) The Conduct and supervision of Criminal Investigations, Royal Commission on Criminal Procedure Report 5, London: HMSO, p. 1000 in Bowling, B. and Foster, J., Policing the Police in Maguire M., Morgan, R. and Reiner, R. (eds.) (2002) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 980-1022

Miller, J. 2003, Police Corruption in England and Wales: An assessment of current evidence, Home Office Online Report 11/03, London: Home Office, available from: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/rdsolr1103.pdf [Accessed 21/04/2003]

Morrison, W. (1995) Theoretical Criminology: from modernity to post-modernism London: Cavendish Publishing, p17 in Lawson, T. and Heaton, T. (eds.) (1999) Crime and Deviance London: Macmillan Press Ltd

PA Consulting Group (2001) Diary of a Police Officer, Police Research Series Paper 149, London: Home Office, available from: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/prgpdfs/prs149.pdf [Accessed 21/04/2003]

Sampson, F. and DeSilva, N. (2001) Police Conduct, Complaints and Efficiency London: Blackstone

Steer, D. (1980) Uncovering Crime Royal Commission on Criminal Procedure Research Study 7 London: HMSO, p. 1000 in Bowling, B. and Foster, J., Policing the Police in Maguire M., Morgan, R. and Reiner, R. (eds.) (2002) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 980-1022

Wilson, D., Ashton, J. and Sharp, D. (2001), What Everyone in Britain Should Know About the Police, London: Blackstone Press Ltd.