A Summary Of The Five I's Method

Assignment 2: Effects of crime and how the public services support victims and witnesses of crime

The two primary data sources discuss in this abstract will be the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) and the National Incident Based Reporting System (NIBRS). These data sources are reporting mechanism that tracks criminal activities in the United States and foreign countries. To articulate why crime exists and the extent of a crime, criminologists use records that are collected, compiled, and analyzed by government agencies such as the federal government’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (Siegel, Larry J., 2006, p 31). The official data is used to focus on the social forces that affect crime in regards to the relationship between crime and poverty, criminologist uses the data which provides

Crime measurement and statistics for police departments are very important when it comes to money allotment, staffing needs or termination and it is also used to determine the effectiveness of new laws and programs. There are three tools used to measure major crime in the United States: Uniform Crime Reports, National Crime Victimization Survey and the National Incident Based Reporting System- which is currently being tested to replace the Uniform Crime Reports. Although there different tools used to measure crime, crime rates can be deceiving. Each different tool reports a different type of rate, crime rates, arrest

A system called “CompStat” was used to track crime reports and other data in an effort to track areas with high crime rates and gang hot spots. Karoliszyn reports that “after patrolling these hot spots for a year, murders had dropped by 60 percent. By 2003, murders were the lowest they had been since 1964” (338). With these statistics, Karoliszyn proves the effectiveness of the system when actually used in the workforce. There is a flaw in his claim. The author only proved the system’s effectiveness in one city, and in one year. As with a great majority of statistics, these numbers could vary either towards or against the system’s value if done in different cities and in different amounts of time. With more data spread across the spectrum, a bigger picture could be seen regarding the reliability of a precognitive policing system.

Measuring crime is based on three main measurements; criminal justice system data, crime experience surveys and other sources called administrative data (Hayes & Makkai, 2015). Firstly, crime first needs to be categorised into types of crime that is classified under the Australian and New Zealand Standard Offence Classification (Hayes & Makkai, 2015). Only the main and select few offences are reported by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) in collecting annual reported crimes (Hayes & Makkai, 2015). Through ABS, it collects crime data in different ways such as crime reports, victimisations surveys, administrative data (higher courts, magistrates and policing agendas etc.,) and self-reports (Hayes & Makkai, 2015). Crime reports measure crimes such as homicide, robbery, rape, assault and more but is collected through police jurisdictions (Reid, 2012). The strength of crime reports provides additional information such as arrests, charges, officers assaults and characteristics of homicide victims (Reid, 2012). This helps to measure crime more effectively through gaining descriptions and knowledge of identifying crime and criminal behaviour more accurately (Reid, 2012). Administrative data is often helpful in collating data of sentences and jail sentences but fails to collect the ‘dark figure’ of crime (Hayes & Makkai, 2015). National Crime Victimisation Surveys (NCVS)

Accurate and timely intelligence and statistical crime information based on geographical settings and or areas.

In 1994, the New York City Police Department adopted a law enforcement crime fighting strategy known as COMPSTAT (COMPuter STATistics). COMPSTAT uses Geographic Information Systems (GIS) to map the locations of where crimes occur, identify “ hotspots”, and map problem areas. COMPSTAT has amassed a wealth of historical crime data. Mathematicians have designed and developed algorithms that run against the historical data to predict future crimes for police departments. This is known as predictive policing. Predictive policing has led to a drop in burglaries, automobile thefts, and other crimes in some cities.

Although crime has been around for ages, we only started collecting crime data around the 1930’s. Crime statistics show a lot about a country, state, county, etc. Crime can be linked to the environment, behavior of others, and personal experiences, it all depends on how the person deals with the hand they are dealt. Crime data is collected from three sources, which are uniform crime reports (UCR), national incident based reporting system (NIBRS), and national crime victimization survey (NCVS).

There have been numerous opinions as well as criticism on how crime should be measured in the United States. FBI, and U.S. Census are a few of the government agencies who utilize crime reporting methods such as Uniform Crime Reports (UCR), National Incident-Based reporting system (NIBRS), and National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). Each method is created in order to give us an estimation of crime rate, so the process to reducing it could begin. Looking at the history of each report, then review their similarities and their differences, to finally analyzing varies criticisms, will help in the understanding if these crime reporting methods are effective.

According the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Report and the contrasting Department of Justice’s National Crime Victimization Survey, both reports show a steady reduction in violent crimes over the past two decades. Both reports are released annually and are comprised of statistical data of reported crime or victimization surveys of sample populations from across the country (Karmen, 2016). Though the information contained in both reports as statistically accurate as possible, a figurative spin can be placed on the information and data can be skewed to misrepresent the true picture of crime, so according to (Karmen, 2016), all statistical data but be viewed with some scientific scrutiny. Even though the data from both annual

Firstly, recorded crime statistics are collated through the collection of data by law enforcement agencies, such as the police in England and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in America. It focuses on the crime that is reported by the public and then what is chosen to be recorded by the police. During the mid-late 19th century, these statistics formed the basis of information about crime, however, although they still provide raw data for publications such as the Offenders Index, they are now viewed critically. This is because, according to Mayhew and Hough (1988), the recorded crime statistics are “adequate as a measure of police workload, but because of unreported and unrecorded crime – deficient as an index of crime”.

In preparation for my debate on the topics of intelligence-led policing and Compstat policing, I have discovered the many advantages and disadvantages of using intelligence-led policing and Compstat policing. According to Carter & Carter (2009), intelligence-led policing is the collection of and analysis of data relating to crime, used by law enforcement in “developing tactical responses to threats and/or strategic planning related to emerging changing threats” (p. 317). When applied correctly, intelligence-led policing is a tool used for information sharing in identifying threats and developing responses to prevent those threats from reaching fruition (Carter, 2011). One of the advantages of using intelligence-led policing is its incorporation of data analysts. The role of the data analyst in the context of intelligence-led policing allows them to take specially trained analysts to take raw data from information found in reports and translate it into useful information for the officers, allowing the police to deploy resources more effectively and efficiently (Griffiths, 2016). Another advantage is its application through preventative and predictive policing (proactive policing), in which law enforcement take data and identify crucial variables such as terrorism or the emergence of criminal organizations, in hopes of stopping the problem at its roots (Carter, 2011). Terrorism is especially important and emphasized after the 9/11 terrorist attack on the World Trade Centers in

At the core of the process is an examination and review of an organization’s status as revealed

The use of technology in the policing domain has been rapidly adopted over the past few years. However, it should be noted that the process of adopting and effectively using technology in law enforcement, begun more than 50 years ago. For instance, it become apparent in the 1950’s that computer would enable easier storage and retrieval of large amounts of data. More recently, advancement in technology has incorporated more sophisticated ways of transmitting and analyzing information, therefore aiding the law enforcement process (Button, Sharples & Harper, 2007). The police have found various aspect of technology useful; predominantly, computer crime mapping has been widely adopted and consequently received a lot of attention

Many children become familiar with the Juvenile Justice System without knowledge of why they continue to commit crimes. Many of them suffered years of being abuses, which caused socialization changes that pushed them to withdraw or act out. This research is important because it shows the long terms effects child abuse has on children that become juvenile delinquents. Statistics show increasing numbers of children who are the victims of child abuse and neglect, although they decrease in delinquency may reflect a greater nation focus on the issue and the use of more effective programs to attack the problem. This research is important to me because the Criminal Justice System doesn’t address the causes of deviant behavior in juvenile delinquents to its full potential. They rather just focus on policing and tough sanctions. Hopefully with this paper and many others child abuse can be prevented along with the long-term effects of child abuse and better programs can be invented to treat child abuse victims. The Office of Justice Programs came up with a “Safe Kids Safe Streets” Program, which acknowledge the correlation between child abuse and juvenile delinquency and is aimed at breaking the cycle of early childhood victimization and later delinquency (Safe