1Proactive Policing

Pro-Active Policing


 Re-Investigation As A Result Of New Information
 A Consequence of Other Police Actions.




Force policy guides call takers, public counter staff and patrol officers on the information that they
need to gather and subsequent action to take. When receiving reports, staff should ensure that

they record, retain and reveal all material and pass it to the investigating officer. Investigators
should be familiar with the investigative strategies relating to victims and witnesses, as this
enables them to exploit early opportunities to gather material by questioning the person reporting

the crime.

Proactive investigations can start from an intelligence package identifying groups or individuals

who are assessed as being involved in ongoing criminal activity. They are often generated as a
result of the tasking and coordination (T&C) process, and allocated for further investigation.

Intelligence packages may include:


 Crime Pattern Analysis
 Network Analysis

 Operational Intelligence Assessment
 Problem Profiles
 Market Profiles

 Subject Analysis
 Tactical Assessment
 Criminal Business Analysis

 Tactical Profiles.





Reactive investigation


Reactive investigation is used when investigators receive information of criminal activity and there

is an urgent need to intervene. In such cases, too great a delay in response can result in serious
consequences for victims. Reactive investigation is weaker than proactive investigation for several
reasons:


 Victims may initially provide information but later refuse to cooperate

51

Pro-Active Policing


 Informants may provide information which requires immediate response

 Enabling those at higher levels of the criminal organization to evade arrest


Reactive measures may mean that evidence is lacking or not able to be collected there are three
responses which must be applied when the situation of a victim creates the need for a reactive
response:



 Immediate intervention
 To rescue victims

 To prevent the procurement of other victims
 To secure evidence
 Use of information

 To conduct proactive enquiries

 To disrupt trafficking practices
 To develop arrest strategies


Proactive cases:


Proactive cases do not present to law enforcement at all; instead, they result from operations that
are pre-planned, over time, through the use of more advanced investigative methods and criminal

intelligence. All cases should involve close coordination with victim service providers in
anticipation of encountering potential victims. Some examples include—



 Online ads: Law enforcement reviews online ads that potentially involve minor victims and
arranges a meeting. A key operational component includes surveillance to identify the
pimp/trafficker transporting the potential victim. Law enforcement officers detain and

question the potential victim, hoping to gain evidence of trafficking. (This same method
can lead to identifying trafficking victims who are over age 18, as well.)

 Brothel operations: Undercover officers locate brothels and gain evidence in order to
obtain a search warrant. Prior to serving the warrant, victim service provider partners are
informed so they can arrange housing for any victims of trafficking. When serving the

warrant, all individuals found in the brothel are screened for being potential victims of
human trafficking, and brothel operators are charged under human trafficking statutes if
appropriate.




52

Pro-Active Policing


 Labor trafficking identification and investigations: Unlike sex trafficking, labor trafficking

investigations are less clear cut. It is an emerging and dynamic area that takes creativity to
address. One strategy to consider is partnering with key stakeholders, such as labor or
code compliance inspectors, who may have more access and the ability to identify cases if

given proper training.
 Every task force needs to work both labor and sex trafficking cases effectively. Task forces

that are more advanced are able to conduct a larger number of proactive investigations.
Using proactive techniques in reactive cases often leads to the intelligence those later
forms the basis of longer term ―spin-off‖ investigations. Proactive case leads also often

arise from red-flag trainings, street outreach, task force relationships, and partnerships. It
all works in concert—bringing public awareness of human trafficking and doing direct
outreach to stakeholders, such as utility workers, hotel employees, emergency room staff,

school personnel, and others, can help build cases for law enforcement.


A human trafficking investigation entails three phases: pre-operational, operational, and post-
operational.


 The pre-operational phase involves the foundational portions of the investigation that pose

little to no risk of discovery by the targets.
 The operational phase begins once the investigators actually engage the targets with
covert actions or tools, and continues through the arrest and takedown of the human

trafficking operation itself.
 The post-operational phase includes all post-arrest aspects of the case.


Even though the three phases are sequential in nature, no case develops exactly as planned and

different aspects or targets within a single proactive case can fall within multiple phases at the
same time. Therefore, using the ―three-phase‖ proactive terminology allows investigators and
prosecutors to explain the status of pending cases to their chains of command and provide more

accurate estimates of costs and timing, which helps to justify the allocation of resources during
the investigation.


Call takers:



Initial telephone contact between victims and witnesses with the police service should be
regarded as the start of the investigative process. The call is an opportunity to obtain accurate

53

Pro-Active Policing


and relevant information, collect evidence, ascertain if a crime has occurred and give reassurance
and guidance to the caller, e.g., about the preservation of forensic evidence. This process can be

enhanced by the use of scripts, drop-down menus and other prompts which may assist call
handlers to deal with initial reports of a crime (see also material).

 Crime screening

 Further information

 Quality assurance


The call handler, at the point of initial report, determines the response to a crime. They must

decide whether it warrants the deployment of a response unit, referral to a crime recording
bureau, or if it should be recorded as an incident requiring no further action (NFA).



Initial investigation:


Most crimes reported to the police are not major incidents and usually the officer who first attends
is the only resource that is required. This officer may be the investigator throughout the enquiry.

The quality of the investigation, whether carried out in person or over the telephone, is a
significant factor in gathering material that leads to the detection of a crime. There may be limited
opportunities to locate and gather material and it is vital that those who conduct the initial

investigation ensure that material is not lost. Once a crime has been allocated to an investigator, it
is important that they gather material from whoever took the initial report. Investigations should be

conducted thoroughly, and investigators should not assume that a crime cannot be solved or that
someone else will carry out an investigation at a later stage.
Officers initially deployed to an incident are likely to have a number of competing demands placed

on them. These demands include:


 Dealing With A Violent Situation
 Providing First Aid And Calling For Medical Assistance

 Reassuring Victims And Witnesses
 Preventing Public Disorder


Fast-track actions:




54

Pro-Active Policing


These are defined as:
Any investigative actions which, if pursued immediately, are likely to establish important facts,

preserve evidence or lead to the early resolution of the investigation.
Fast-track actions can be applied to reactive or proactive investigations, irrespective of when the
crime was committed.

The first chance to obtain material may be the last. Identifying these actions during the initial
investigation stage produces the most effective outcome. A delay in protecting, preserving or

gathering material may result in evidence being contaminated or lost.
In larger enquiries silos should establish strategies to ensure that new information is brought to
their attention quickly, so that fast-track actions can be taken when they are needed.

Once these immediate priorities are dealt with, officers should plan how best to conduct the
investigation and should consider a number of key factors. Having done so, it is then appropriate

to consider concluding the initial investigation.

Initial investigation factors:

The following factors should be considered at the initial investigation:


 Scene Management (Identify And Preserve)

 Material (Identify Other Potential Evidence Sources)
 Who Is The Investigating Officer?
 Risk Management

 What Is the Limit of the Initial Attending Officer‘s Role?
 Communication
 Record Keeping

 Handover And Briefing
 Community Impact

 Initial Fast Track Actions
 Investigative Interviewing (Witness, Victim And Offender)
 Initial Search (Access Routes, Exit Routes, Places Where Offenders Are Likely To Have

Been).



Officers should call for assistance from supervisors where it appears that a major crime has been

committed, such as homicide or rape. While officers wait for assistance their priorities should be
to:

55

Pro-Active Policing





 Preserve Life

 Preserve Scenes
 Secure Evidence
 Identify Victims

 Identify Suspects.



Hot Spots Policing

Practice Goals:


Used by a majority of U.S. police departments, hot spots policing strategies focus on small

geographic areas or places, usually in urban settings, where crime is concentrated (Braga et al.
2012). Although there is not a common definition for ―hot spots,‖ they are generally thought of as
―small places in which the occurrence of crime is so frequent that it is highly predictable, at least

over a one year period.‖ (Sherman 1995, pg. 36). Through hot spots policing strategies, law
enforcement agencies can focus limited resources in areas where crime is most likely to occur.

The appeal of focusing limited resources on a small number of high-activity crime areas is based
on the belief that if crime can be prevented at these hot spots, then total crime across the city
might also be reduced.


Target Areas:


The units of analysis in hot spots policing vary in size. Hot spot areas can include very small units
of analysis such as buildings or addresses, block faces, or street segments, or bigger units such
as clusters of addresses, block faces, or street segments. There is also several crime mapping

techniques that can be used to identify and test for crime hot spots using software packages such
as ArcGIS. Hot spots can also be displayed in diverse formats, including point mapping and

spatial ellipses. There is no set standard for identifying and defining crime hot spots; rather, a
combination of technology and police officer or crime analyst experience/knowledge contribute to
the mapping and targeting process (Eck, et al. 2005).




56

Pro-Active Policing


Practice Theory:


Recent interest in hot spots policing is due in part to changes and innovations in policing that have
occurred over the last three decades and the emergence of theoretical perspectives in
criminology suggesting the importance of ‗place‘ in understanding crime. The observation that the

distribution of crime varies within neighborhoods and is not spread evenly across areas has
existed for some time (Braga et al. 2012). However, with the emergence of powerful computer

hardware and software capable of carrying out sophisticated spatial analyses, crime analysts in
police departments are now able to identify and track spatial concentrations of crime. Moreover,
police reforms like Comp stat revealed the strong linkages between spatial analyses of crime

patterns and police operations meant to disrupt those patterns. Criminologists have also relied on
spatial analysis tools to point out that much of the crime in a community is committed in a small

number of criminogenic places.

Three related theoretical perspectives influenced the study of place-based crime: rational choice

theory (Cornish and Clarke 1987), routine activity theory (Cohen and Felson 1979), and
environmental criminology (Brantingham and Brantingham 1991). Rational choice theory assumes
that offenders are self-interested and weigh the costs and benefits of offending before making the

choice to offend. Routine activity theory suggests that crime is the convergence in time and space
of a motivated offender, a suitable target, and a lack of capable guardianship. Environmental
criminology is concerned with criminal events and the importance of the characteristics of the

places where crime happens (as cited in Braga, 2007). Hot spots policing emerged, in part, from
these criminological theories.


Practice Components:


Hot spots policing relies primarily on highly focused, traditional law enforcement strategies. A
visual representation of the relationship between the diversity of the hot spots policing approach

and its level of focus compared to other policing strategies, such as community-oriented and
problem-oriented policing, can be found in Weisburd and Eck (2004, pg. 45).


Hot spots policing can adopt a variety of strategies to control crime in problem areas, including
order maintenance and drug enforcement crackdowns, increased gun searches and seizures, and
zero-tolerance policing. These strategies can be categorized into two fundamentally different


57

Pro-Active Policing


types of approaches (Braga, et al. 2012). The first approach, problem oriented policing,
represents police-led efforts to change the underlying conditions at hot spots that lead to recurring

crime problems. It requires police to look past traditional strategies and include other possible
methods for addressing crime problems (Weisburd and Eck, 2004). The second approach relies
primarily on traditional policing activities, such as vehicle patrols, foot patrols, or crackdowns

concentrated at specific hot spots to prevent crime through general deterrence and increased risk
of apprehension.





Pro & Con: Tactics of Transit Officers; Police Decoys, Temptation and Crime


SINCE the days when burly, bewigged policemen masqueraded as women to catch molesters,
police departments around the country have used decoy officers to trap suspected muggers,
rapists and other criminals. The technique works, but it has sometimes been abused.


Officers have been accused of entrapping suspects by dangling money, flaunting jewelry, planting
evidence a practice sometimes called ''flaking,'' though the origin of the term is uncertain or

tricking a target into picking up a valuable item an officer has purposely dropped.

Last month, the New York City Transit Authority Police Department suspended the operations of

its elite 23member decoy squad amid accusations that its officers had made dubious arrests on
subway platforms and trains. Manhattan District Attorney Robert M. Morgenthau is investigating

the allegations.

The transit decoy unit, the most recent version of which was formed in 1985, had been making

about 600 arrests a year. It was considered one of the most prestigious assignments in the
3,800member transit force. Critics contend, however, that pressure to justify the unit's continued

existence may have motivated officers to make arrests involving what Mr. Morgenthau has called
''aggressive enticement.''


Todd S. Purdum, a reporter for The Times, discussed the matter with Thomas Reppetto, a former
Chicago police commander who is president of New York City's Citizens Crime Commission, and
Richard D. Emery, a lawyer and former staff counsel to the New York Civil Liberties Union, who is


58

Pro-Active Policing


representing eight people in a multi milliondollar lawsuit in which they claim to have been falsely
arrested by transit officers (not members of the decoy unit). Excerpts follow. RICHARD D.

EMERY 'Creating Crime' I think decoy squads, even well trained and well supervised, eventually
self destruct.


This is a result, in most cases, of the inevitable pressure to produce when there is this much
investment of personnel and resources in what usually turns out to be not an extremely productive

squad. You have four or five officers on a detail, spending one set of tours at least and probably
more, five days a week, conducting operations which result in sometimes several but other times
not so many arrests. And there is an inevitable, inexorable pressure to justify that expenditure.


Regrettably, the only way the police have traditionally attempted to justify that enormous

expenditure is through arrests. Consequently decoy squads are under pressure, at the end of a
week when there have been few arrests, to move toward entrapment, toward framing somebody,
toward 'flaking' somebody. They usually think they can get away with it and they usually can get

away with it, because it's four or five officers' words against one suspect, who's usually picked
because he or she
is vulnerable. But sooner or later that sort of scam catches up with the decoy squads, just as it did

in the mid1970' s when the 'dollar collars' scandal ended the last transit decoy squad. That's when
kids were lured by dollars hanging out of decoys' pockets.


There's concern at this point over evidence of alleged flakes of suspects, where valuables are
planted on arrestees by decoy officers, and robberies are staged between decoys to rope in an

innocent bystander who's the target and has the goods dumped on him by one of the decoys
posing as the mugger.


The tragedy of the decoy squad is that if improper arrests are made, it is extremely difficult to
defend against them. Any defendant caught up in a decoy scam stands almost no chance at all.

There's this large number of cops, and their testimony will be tailored, given their extensive
training and understanding of the entrapment laws, to obtain a conviction.


And the target will often be a person with a criminal record, even though he or she did not commit
this particular offense. There is also something just fundamentally offensive about cops creating
crime. Obviously, targeting people who are predisposed to criminal conduct is a desirable law


59

Pro-Active Policing


enforcement technique. It's efficient, and it protects the public. But creating temptations that are
often questions of instantaneous judgment for the target, where it's extremely ambiguous as to

what the target's intent really was at the time he or she was arrested, is a very, very troubling side
of police work, and really walks on the precipice of a violation of due process. THOMAS
REPPETTO 'Sound Practice' It's better that the crime victim be a trained officer with a backup

team than an innocent citizen walking the streets or the platforms of the subways. That's why the
decoys were put in there. They're put in where there have been a lot of reports of crime. I would

expect that on a referendum it would get 99 percent of the vote.

It's also very strong from a legal standpoint. You've got a police officer who's trained. You've got

an ironclad case, as opposed to a citizen who may not have seen the person, who may be afraid
to follow through and make a complaint. So, with the police officer, it's the same as with a drug

sale. If you sell to an undercover officer, you've got an ironclad legal case.

It's also a theory called proactive policing, as opposed to reactive policing. All progressive police

administrators today try to be proactive. Instead of waiting around for things to happen, they go
out where the numbers say there is a lot of crime. If the numbers say a lot of businesswomen are
getting mugged, you might put a female officer out there with a briefcase.


It is dangerous, even with a backup team. The perpetrator can get in some pretty good licks. But
you're doing something about preventing crime, rather than waiting and writing a report on it. My

basic quarrel with the extreme civil liberties point of view is that most everything they've been
criticizing is good, solid, sound police work. If it's done in the wrong way, the answer is not to say,

''Let's abolish it.''

The basic principle is that these things are not some weird idea that somebody thought up.

They're based on standard police practices. And if you posit the idea that there are crime
problems in the subways, and I think everyone would agree that there are, then the way you deal

with it is with standard police practices.

A police force is created to maintain order and protect people against crime, and it isn't always

going to come out neat and sweet. Most cases are not 100 percent clear cut either way. A lot of
them are judgment calls. Certainly there are ethical difficulties. The rule has always been that




60

Pro-Active Policing


you're not supposed to flash money. The standard on entrapment is you're not supposed to
persuade people to commit a crime who would not have committed crime otherwise.



***







































































61