Presentation on theme: "Technological Innovations in Crime Prevention and Policing James M. Byrne, Professor Griffith University EIDOS Congress: 9 th National Public Policy Conference."— Presentation transcript:
Technological Innovations in Crime Prevention and Policing James M. Byrne, Professor Griffith University EIDOS Congress: 9 th National Public Policy Conference Presentation, Hilton Surfers Paradise, Qld: Nov.12, 2013
(1) High Quality Corrections and Sentencing Research Agenda- the Centre will develop research projects focusing on evaluating the impact of current corrections and sentencing strategies( adult/juvenile) in Queensland, throughout Australia, and internationally. (2) Knowledge Exchange Seminars and Systematic, Evidence -based Policy Reviews -To translate research into practice, the Centre will develop a series of executive session seminars and workshops highlighting corrections and sentencing issues in each global region. (3) Global Evidence-based Corrections and Sentencing Network Development : The Centre— through the Centre’s state of the art website-- will become a global clearinghouse for high quality, evidence-based corrections research, and a primary source of information on global corrections performance, and innovative corrections and sentencing policies and practices. WEBPAGE:
Presentation Overview New Technology of Crime New Technology of Crime Prevention New Technology of Policing Impact of New Technology: Research Review Three Issues To Consider
The New Technology of Crime: New Offenders, New Crimes The Impact of Technology on Criminality – New Offenders 3 Distinct Opportunity Structures—first identified by Richard Sparks in 1980—can be applied to internet-facilitated crimes: –Crime at work –Crime as work –Crime after work
The New Technology of Crime AT Work : Some Examples Embezzlement Money Laundering/Financial Frauds Credit Card Fraud by Employees Corporate Espionage (via bots, monitoring, pretexting) Theft/Sale of Private, Confidential, Personal Data The Spreading of Viruses & Malicious Codes (to gain competitive advantage)
The New Technology of Crime AS Work: Some Examples Internet Fraud Schemes: Nigerian letter, online auctions, drug/health frauds, lottery frauds, revictimization frauds Telemarketing Fraud Schemes: Investments, promotions, sales Identity Theft Credit Card/Check Fraud Phishing (for Profit) Internet Sex Crimes Sale of Private, Confidential, Personal Data Internet Piracy Silk Road: hidden identity online shopping Theft of Computers, Computer Software, Internet Access
The New Technology of Crime AFTER Work Internet Sex Crimes (Sex tourism, child pornography, child predators/solicitation) Internet Hate Crimes Internet Stalking Cyber-Terrorism Spreading Viruses and Malicious Codes Hacking/Illegal Access to Data Sexting
The New Technology of Crime Prevention Hard Technology CCTV Street Lighting Citizen Protection Devices (e.g. mace, tasers) Metal Detectors Ignition Interlock Systems (drunk drivers) Soft Technology Threat Assessment Instruments Bullying ID Protocol Sex Offender Registration Risk Assessment prior to involuntary civil commitment Profiling Software to identify suspicious persons
The New Technology of Policing Hard Technology Improved police protection (vests, cars) Improved/new weapons Less than lethal force Computers in squad cars Hands free patrol car control (Project 54) Offender and citizen ID’s via biometrics/fingerprints Gunshot location devices Soft Technology Crime mapping (hot spots) Crime analysis (e.g. COMPSTAT) Criminal history data systems enhancement Info sharing within CJS and private sector CCTV police applications
Hard Technology Innovations in Policing Improvement in weaponry of police Less-than-lethal force technology used in mob/potential riot situations Computers in squad cars to improve criminal identification and /or for gang identification; computer-based strategies to identify criminal behavior on the internet (e.g. sex offenders, cyber crime, terrorism) Improvements in offender/citizen identification (e.g. biometrics, fingerprints, etc.) Improvements in police protection devices (e.g. bullet proof vests, new construction of police departments)
Other Hard Technology Police Innovations Gunshot location Systems can identify gun firing and automatically dispatch both police and emergency vehicles to the location. Police-operated CCTV Systems can be used to monitor targeted locations.
Additional Safety Items Barrier Strips (stop pursuits) Bullet Proof Vests (officer Safety) Linked to Decline in Officer and Civilian Deaths VIDEO VIDEO
Does Hard Technology Work in Policing? Issues to consider: (1)Research on the reliability of the technology? (2)Training on the use of technology? (3) Research on the impact of the technology on key outcome measures? (4) Cost effectiveness of technology acquisition?
Research Evidence: Police Use of Taser Technology Amnesty International said it had tracked more than 300 cases since 2001 in which people died after being shocked by a Taser. And although studies have not shown what role the devices might have played in those deaths, “extreme caution” is in order, said Larry R. Cox, the executive director of Amnesty. Amnesty International lethal.org/docs/66/LessLethalPerformanceBasedAnalysis.p df lethal.org/docs/66/LessLethalPerformanceBasedAnalysis.p df l?pagewanted=1&_r=2&ref=nyregion
Police Use of Force Research indicates that police use of force is statistically rare in the United States, occurring in approximately 1% of police–citizen encounters (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1999). There are approximately 43 million police–citizen encounters in a given year, Now for some math: What is 1% of 43 million? 421,000 use-of-force incidents occur annually, which translates into approximately 1,100 incidents in a typical day.
Less than Lethal Force Technology Political fallout from the lethal use of force has spurred the development of less than lethal alternatives over the past thirty years. Advances in technology have led to the development of force alternatives such as oleoresin capsicum (OC; i.e., pepper) spray, impact weapons, foams,ballistic rounds, nets and, most recently, conducted energy devices
The Controversy Issue 1: potential lethality Issue 2: disproportionate Use against minority residents Issue 3: inappropriate use against vulnerable populations, such as the mentally ill, the elderly, and young kids
Research Questions Research examining the effectiveness of the device in the field has focused on two questions: (1) Does the TASER have the intended physiological effect,thereby terminating suspect resistance; and more generally, (2) does use of the device reduce suspect and officer injuries? Unfortunately, limited empirical research is available to answer these questions.
Research Findings With regard to suspect resistance, field data analyzed by TASER International(2006) and internal evaluations by police agencies (Seattle Police Department, 2004) place the effectiveness rate of the TASER somewhere between 80% and 94%. White and Ready (2007) analyzed TASER deployment records from the New York City Police Department and found that suspects stopped resisting and were successfully incapacitated in 86% of incidents occurring during a 4-year period. In a follow-up study, White and Ready (2009) found that the effect of the device on suspect resistance was mitigated by several factors, including suspect weight, intoxication, and the distance between the suspect and the officer.
Implications for Policy and Practice First, we need more research on the link between taser use and death. Second, we need to consider carefully whether taser deployment is a cost effective strategy. Third, we need more data on the impact of deployment on injuries to both officers AND to civilians.
Unintended Consequences of Hard Technology Innovations New Guns designed to improve police performance end up in the hands of offenders. Less-than-lethal Force Weaponry designed to reduce police use of guns/deadly force result in more harm to suspects because it is used in lower level police-citizen encounters.
Unintended Consequences New Patrol Car Technology will change the nature and extent of police surveillance of the public—in cars and in the community. Citizen mistrust of the police may actually increase if technological interactions replace personal interaction between police and community residents
People versus Thing Technology: Tipping Points Evidence of effectiveness is mixed. Cost of new technological innovation may result in fewer police officers in the community. Private Sector Policing may replace public safety policing in many areas.
The New Technological Revolution in USA Policing Problem-Orientated Policing (POP),Community- Orientated Policing (COP), Hot Spots Policing, and Intelligence-Led Policing now encourage police to make greater use of the data they routinely collect, and to be more analytic with regards to the data they utilize for tactical and strategic decision making. POP and COP strategies encourage police to go beyond individual calls for service, and instead take on the problems underlying them.
Information Technology: Data Collection and Management Innovations in Policing Record Management Systems (RMS) Computer-Aided Dispatch (CAD) Systems Mobile Data Terminals (MDTs) Compstat, COP, POP, Hot Spots: Crime Mapping,Crime Analysis, and Intelligence-led Policing Early Intervention Systems: identify problem Cops
Focus:Hot Spots Policing Crime Analysis of Calls for service and patterns of crime Link Crime analysis to police deployment Focus on locations with the most serious problems Identify patterns of criminal activities over time and by location Issue: coercive vs. proactive police strategies( values-oriented policing)
Operation Ceasefire in Boston David Kennedy’s unique “pulling levers” strategy identified as model program by the DOJ. Carrots vs Sticks Assumption: Gang members are the primary cause of violence in Boston Intervention: Make gangs accountable by targeting gang leaders and members for aggressive prosecution when a violent crime occurs in their territory
Evidence of Impact of New Innovations on Police Performance National Research Council review of police performance (2004) revealed that there is no evidence of improved performance linked to recent police innovations. Peter Manning(2008) reached the same conclusion in his detailed case studies of police technology innovations in three police departments: Washington, Boston, and an unnamed medium sized American city, called Western. Campbell Collaborative Evidence-Based Review of COP programs( 2008) did identify a significant, but modest, impact on performance. Braga’s review of hot spots policing also revealed lower crime in target areas short term.
Assessing the Impact of Technology on Crime and Justice: Three Critical Issues to Consider 1. Will new technology applications in criminal justice result in the replacement of ‘people’ with ‘things’? 2. Will technological advancements in the area of offender control minimize the possibilities for individual & community change? Focus: Justice Reinvestment Strategies: More cops, more Tx, or more community change? 3. What are the long term consequences of privatization of key technology related CJ system functions?
The New Technology of Criminal Justice: Intended vs. Unintended Consequences Crime Prevention……… Police………………….. Courts………………….. Institutional Corrections Community Corrections Intended Unintended Less crime Less Freedom, Less crime More Distrust More efficiency More Disparity More Control Less Change