1. 4 th International Evidence Based Policing Conference Prisoner Debriefing An Evidence Based Approach

2. Intelligence Debriefing of Prisoners Not conducted to obtain: – Evidence of prisoner offending – Evidence against co-defendants – Research data Are conducted to: – Obtain intelligence – for action – Respond to intelligence gap/requirement – Scan population - approach prisoners – Some talk – some walk

3. Not Conventional Informants No legislation for this activity Shorter relationship – Initial debrief + follow up Different motivation – Improved conditions, social factors – Limited finance Environment – Compromise, mismanagement = serious consequences

4. Why Research this Subject? Human intelligence vital Anecdotal success – but no evidence Public sector austerity measures Potential opportunities 140 prisons – 85k prisoners Captive audience Criminality orchestrated in prison

5. Purpose of the Research Establish from an evidence base: Effectiveness – How successful is the tactic – How valuable is the intelligence – Is it a good use of resources Efficiency – Could it be more efficient – Improve the level of cooperation

6. Research Data 218 Interview Documents CHARACTERISTICSFREQUENCYPERCENT MALES18685 FEMALE3215 BRITISH NATIONAL14466 FOREIGN NATIONAL7334 ETHNIC APPEARANCE WHITE 8238 NON WHITE13562 RELIGION - CHRISTIAN6028 OTHER BELIEF5425 NOT RELIGIOUS178

7. Offence for which Imprisoned OFFENCEFREQUENCYPERCENT SERIOUS VIOLENCE 7333 DISHONESTY4822 FIREARMS3617 DRUGS2813 IMMIGRATION157 SERIOUS SEXUAL73 OTHER115

8. Frequency Analysis - Cooperation FREQUENCYPERCENT VALIDNO9242.0 YES12457.0 TOTAL21699.0 MISSINGSYSTEM21.0 TOTAL218100.0 Cooperation 57% An effective use of limited resources? Comparative analysis – literature Prison environment - motivation

9. Intelligence – Volume and Value CRIMECRIMINALCONTEXTUALACTION MURDER1101 FIREARMS3849 BURGLARY1252 DRUGS2616 ROBBERY1555 PRISON2476 OTHER2455 TOTAL12302734

10. Improving Efficiency Is it possible to improve cooperation? Correlation analysis – Dependent variable ‘cooperation’ – Independent variables INTERVIEWERS GENDERPRISON CATEGORY PRISONERS GENDERLENGTH OF SENTENCE AGEIMPRISONED > 4 YEARS ETHNICITYCONVICTION OFFENCE RELIGIONOFFENCE - DRUGS NATIONALITYCRIME STRATEGY MOTIVATIONPREVIOUS OFFENCES

11. Summary of Findings: Age and Cooperation Direct correlation between age and cooperation (r=0.164, n=216, p=0.016) Negative relationship between ageing and delinquency Convicted criminals: – Older and more established – Play the system – Manipulate surroundings – Revenge on those responsible

12. Summary of Findings: Gender and Cooperation Greater cooperation with male only interviewers (p=0.046) Male 61%, female 45% Unsuccessful debriefs – culture and faith issues Female interviewing female – small sample 7/9 successful 55% male prisoners cooperated 69% female prisoners cooperated

13. Summary of Findings Offence and Cooperation Conviction offence and cooperation (p=0.019) In prison for a drugs offence (p=0.015) : 79% cooperated – Previous drugs conviction – no impact Convicted of serious sexual offence 6/7 Previous convictions and cooperation – no relationship

14. Summary of Findings Sentence and Cooperation Relationship between prison sentence and cooperation (p=0.032) – Short sentence (up to 4 years) 59% – Over 4 years 68% – Indeterminate 73% (small sample) – Life 50% – ‘Other’ (immigration) 36%

15. Conclusions Evidence to show that confidential debriefing works Evidence to show valuable intelligence is collected across actionable and strategic areas Criteria identified that will improve level of cooperation But further research required

16. 4 th International Evidence Based Policing Conference Prisoner Debriefing An Evidence Based Approach