The Criminal Justice Process.

Due to the rising of crime rates in this country over the last decade a more proactive approach to policing has began to unfold. The belief is that the majority of crimes are committed by a small amount of individuals thus encouraging police to be more proactive and keep tabs on known offenders. Proactive policing also involves tackling particular offences that are identified as problematic in certain areas i.e. Operation Bumblebee against burglary and car crime in the London metropolitan police area. (Criminal Justice 2nd edition, Sanders. A and Young. R, page 738) This operation ensured a major crackdown on burglary and car crime in the area showing the benefits of proactive policing, however in this case the problem of mass arrests did occur which can happen using proactive methods leading to innocent people being drawn in.

One of the major problems that faces the police is the drug dealing culture, drug dealers are realising how easy it is gain substantial profit with little chance of getting caught. Reactive policing has very little affect on stamping out on drugs being sold, if lucky police may be able to charge people for possession of drugs. It is not often that dealers and organised drug syndicates are charged with supply using a reactive policing approach, they are usually charged when using a proactive approach.

Over the last decade proactive policing is tackling the massive drug dealing culture in the country. The aim is to hit the supply and stop the drugs being smuggled in to the country hitting the main dealers, to ensure this police use proactive methods to gather intelligence from public organisations and other sources. The public help the police to be proactive by giving information on drug dealers allowing police to build a case. Working alongside customs and excise and specialist organisations the fight against drugs smuggling is working due to proactive methods by the police.

A prime example of where proactive policing has become apparent is within the Merseyside police force. The introduction of proactive policing started back in 1991 due to high crime rates in Merseyside. The reconstruction of the police force from a reactive force to a proactive force has had major benefits. Implementing proactive policing had an impact on culture as well as policing methods. The Merseyside police force introduced numerous organisational changes introducing: Crime Management Units, A Force Intelligence System, The Force Intelligence Bureau and The MCU. The changes allowed the proactive model to become successful in Merseyside. This model was a huge success although there where problems. Officers needed training in order to understand proactive policing, however not many training methods were known or available. (Home Office Police Research Paper 105, March 1999)

The above models of proactive policing are becoming more evident throughout the whole country as they are being proven to be very effective in lowering crime rates and managing resources. Reactive policing appears to be drifting out solely and filtering in with the new proactive method of policing.

Proactive methods do however have their fair share of legal problems, e.g. police have to be careful when watching suspects due to privacy rights, there has to be sufficient evidence for police to tap phones and bug rooms without the police breaking the law themselves. The human rights laws have to be followed when using proactive methods of policing to ensure no complications arise after arrests are made.

The police have to ensure that when using informants the information they gain is reliable otherwise problems could occur if wrongful accusations or arrests are made. Informants are sometimes paid by police officers for important information and they may get away with less serious crimes for helping police catch serious criminals. Some could see this as an illegal policing practice so police have to be extremely careful when dealing with informants. As the proactive approach relies heavily on informants, surveillance and undercover work by officers the issue of accountability of evidence can be a problem. Whilst police are using proactive methods there is also a risk of police corruption, to stop this occurring codes of practice for covert policing techniques have been introduced.

Whilst researching both reactive and proactive methods of policing it is evident that proactive policing is most effective method in terms of crime prevention. Proactive policing reduces crime dramatically, increases efficiency in the deployment of police resources, it gives the public high levels of satisfaction with the police and it can also provide high levels of morale and job satisfaction for officers. Proactive policing is now filtering in to the mainstream police force.

Reactive policing doesn't reduce crime it just responds to it. Resources aren't used effectively using this method there are fewer detected cases and low victim and public satisfaction rates. If the police used reactive policing and attempted to react to every call made resources would be wasted. Only a certain number of reported crimes can be reacted to using this method this meaning certain crimes are overlooked.

The two policing methods discussed both have there down sides but when working together they are highly effective in response to and prevention of crimes. Reactive policing is an important part of police work and is still used throughout the country in conjunction with the highly effective proactive policing. It has been outlined that there are problems with the proactive approach, however these are easily substituted for the impact this method has on crime prevention.

Bibliography

Criminal Justice 2nd edition, A. Sanders and R. Young 2002

www.homeoffice.gov.uk

Barton, A and Evans, R. Proactive Policing on Merseyside Home Office Police Research Paper 105, March 1999

Lecture and seminar notes

Search engines used:

www.google.co.uk

www.ask.co.uk

CJP Essay

R.SHIELDS 021985270