Click any image to see it larger - esc to return
Politicians of all persuasions, Chief and
senior police officers and more recently, Police Crime Commissioners have all thrown
their hats and helmets in the air to celebrate a steady fall in crime. The Home
Office said it was all down to its crime prevention work. The police said it
was their new intelligence-led approach. The academics said it was rising consumption,
falling inequality, more alarms, fewer adolescent males or a fall in
unemployment.
But what if it never happened? What if all
that research (and all of the political point-scoring which it inspired) is one
big misleading lie? What if the truth is that crime didn’t fall at all – that
it was fiddled statistics presenting the deceitful illusion that crime had
fallen?
This week The Public Administration Select
Committee (PASC) begins an inquiry into crime statistics. The Committee will be
examining whether appropriate checks are in place to ensure crimes are recorded
properly and therefore whether policy makers in government, as well as the
public, can have confidence in crime statistics.
At 9.30am, Tuesday 19 November 2013, evidence
will be heard from the following witnesses:-
·
James Patrick, Metropolitan Police
·
Peter Barron, former Detective Chief Superintendent, Metropolitan Police
·
Dr Rodger Patrick, former Chief Inspector, West Midlands Police
·
Paul Ford, Police Federation
·
Ann Barnes, Police and Crime Commissioner for Kent
·
Nick Alston, Police and Crime Commissioner for Essex
·
Paddy Tipping, Police and Crime Commisioner for Nottinghamshire
·
Alan Pughsley, Deputy Chief Constable, Kent Police
Particular issues to be explored may include:
·
the extent to which the recorded crime data serves as a reliable
indicator of national and local crime trends;
·
the extent to which adequate procedures are in place to promote a culture
of data integrity within the police; and
·
the importance of accurate crime data to Police and Crime Commissioners
for the purposes of local performance monitoring and accountability.
THE THIN BLUE LINE BLOWS
THE WHISTLE
Click any image to see it larger - esc to return
Regular readers of these pages will know that we have
espoused the view that crime statistics, both police recorded crime and
detections perniciously and deceitfully fiddled to the extent that they have
long since lost all probity and data integrity. They cannot be trusted for the
vital strategic policing decisions and have undoubtedly played a major
contributory factor in the malaise that currently faces policing in the UK.
Our written submission to the PASC was received and
acknowledged, however the powers that be have chosen not to publish the
contribution or invite our verbal witness evidence. Having digested the
accepted written evidence which presents excellent quality and a diversity of
views, we can only surmise that our views were considered a little TOO up-front
and conclusive for the committee.
The excellent views of the other contributors can be seen by
clicking this link. In particular, we recommend the submission of Dr Rodger
Patrick, former
Chief Inspector, West Midlands Police, who has conducted some of the most
honest and detailed investigative work into the subject.
Once submitted, our
submission became the property of the Committee and no public use can be made
of it unless we have first obtained permission from the Clerk of the Committee.
The embargo relates to the submitted piece, so there is no issue with content
that is not lifted from our submission.
CONSEQUENCES OF COOKING THE BOOKS OF
CRIME
If manipulating recorded crime is the cause what are its
effects?
“So they cook the books a bit … what possible harm could it
do?”
The actual harm it has done and continues to do is CATASTROPHIC.
·
Imagine you are the Chief Executive of UK Police
plc, a fictitious business with 44 UK branches. It would be totally reasonable
to expect a variance in performance among the branches. There will be star
players, average players and those who need to pull their performance socks up.
·
20 or so years ago, this was the case with the
police service. Some forces were genuinely effective at reducing crime,
primarily by persistently locking up the volume crime offenders. At the other
end of the scale were forces whose performance needed to improve. This was
closer to the reality of life and the statistics that recorded it.
·
Successive Governments looked at targeting as a
means of improving performance across the public sector, including the police
service. However it was new labour with their centrally planned economy who were
responsible for introducing Performance Management and Targets. Linking
performance to significant financial and career incentives gave birth to a dysfunctional
“Gaming” culture that Peter Neyroud, then Chief Constable of Thames Valley
referred to as “administrative corruption” when he gave evidence to the PASC in
2003.
·
The corruptive seed was planted. Over the years
that followed, Chief and senior officer bonuses soared as the under recording
of crimes escalated and the numbers plummeted to levels that have become a work
of absolute fiction. If this were a fairy tale, Hans Christian Anderson would
have been proud to have created it.
·
We have published a wealth of detailed evidence
explaining how it was and is done to this day. The compelling conclusion is
there for all to see in the decline of recorded crime since 2003. Even more
damning, is the extent of the problem. In 2003, only 17 of the 44 forces achieved
a reduction in crime. This number rose year by year along with financially incentivised
performance management until we reach the total unbelievable situation in 2013,
where 44 out of now 45 recording sources show a reduction in crime.
Click any image to see it larger - esc to return
So, what are
the consequences of this fallacious deception?
·
At the very least, the Con/Dem Coalition must
have suspected that recorded crime had been fiddled mercilessly in the years
prior to their coming to power. Despite this, they chose to use the “Alleged”
fall in crime as a key motivator for including policing in the comprehensive
spending review that led to the massive cuts in police resources and frontline
officer numbers.
·
Protect life and property, prevent and detect
crime. That is the police function, to protect us from the recidivist criminal
fraternity. This is what most police officers want and join the job to do.
Slashing head counts based on fiddled crime statistics ignores this issue
completely and endangers the lives and threatens the safety of us all.
·
Working under intense pressure to deliver figures
which their senior officers demand, Police officers cuff with diligence and
imagination. Setting up “alternative recording systems” which on the surface appear
quite innocent, mis-recording more serious matters as minor damage, vehicle
interference and domestic violence.
·
A member of the public contacts police to report
someone has tried to break into his home. Jemmy marks around his back door are
evidence of an attempt burglary which according to the Home Office counting
rules, is a crime which needs to be recorded. Corruptive influence results in
the circumstances being classified as mere minor damage costing less than £20
to repair, not a crime at all for the purpose of official statistics. The MOP faithfully
believes that the forces of law and order are now on his side. Duped! The
police cuff him and forget him.
·
A motorist finds someone has tried to break into
his car and his report is fudged out of the records as a case of “vehicle
interference” – a lesser offence that is overlooked when looking at vehicle
theft related matters. Those victims who tell police that they have suffered
theft of a mobile phone, handbag, wallets or giro cheque might be surprised to
learn that no crime is recorded unless there is clear evidence to corroborate
the theft, the incident is recorded as lost property.
·
The author is the creator of a product provides
replacement vehicles to many hundreds of victims of car theft. Daily experience
has shown that crime numbers are rarely provided. Incident numbers are issued
that are supposed to convert to crime numbers when the offence of Theft is
complete – i.e. not recovered. Subsequent enquiries reveal that the vast
majority do NOT covert to crime numbers and therefore reflect a greater than
actual reduction on vehicle theft.
·
Politicians believe what is in their interests
to believe and disregard anything that may be prejudicial to their ongoing
tenure. Declining crime wins votes, regardless of the lack of probity in the
numbers. They have no desire to prize open the can of worms and reveal that the
numbers have been fiddled ruthlessly for years. Worse still, they fear the
revelation that the financial cost of Chief Officer bonuses paid on this basis
makes the MP expenses scandal appear paltry by comparison.
·
The Chief Officers who have either constructed
the corrupt and fraudulent recording systems, or at the very least condoned or adopted
a conveniently blinkered attitude to their use, display a lack of concern for the
public whose votes and taxes put them in office. They are only interested in
spinning the numbers out to represent what they want the public, the
politicians and their police crime commissioner to believe.
·
The honour and distinction of achieving a high
rank in what was a total respected police service has been replaced with corruption,
voracious greed and a convenient blindness to the immorality and corrupt nature
of their actions.
·
The corrupt system is protected by a lack of any
real support system for officers daring to whistle-blow on the subject. This perpetuates
the problem. In fact, Officers that have done so have been castigated, with
careers blocked or even ended as a result.
·
Recent courageous public disclosures, by Chief
Superintendent Irene Curtis (Chair of the Superintendents Association) and
Steve Williams of the Police Federation confirm the substantial evidence we
have collated from rank and file officers that recorded crime is suppressed to
convey an impression of reducing crime.
·
Chief Officers must be held to account for their
actions in this perverse and grossly corrupt activity. It is THEY who have
benefitted from this dishonesty and manipulation. It is THEY who received
exorbitant bonus payments to reflect crime reductions and detection increases.
It is THEY who advanced their careers and political ambitions on the back of
this disgraceful deception. It is the public who are being conned, the rank and
file who have lost faith in their superiors.
·
This scandal will raise further concerns over
the quality of leadership and integrity of many of the past and present Chief
Officers. We should expect that a considerable degree of document shredding and
concealment and we hope Mr Winsor and his HMIC team, when they go to inspect
the forces in 2014 are prepared for the extent to which some will go to protect
their positions. Mr Winsor will have to display a ruthless determination to
uncover the truth if the public and rank and file officers are to be convinced
of his independence and intentions to root out any improper practices.
·
The police will never regain our trust until
they get decent leadership and smash the so-called ‘canteen culture’ that
pervades the service. The decent officers, the majority, deserve much better
than they have got, and so does the British public.
Res ipsa loquitor - Let the facts speak
for themselves
"Power does not corrupt men; fools, however, if they
get into a position of power, corrupt power." - George Bernard Shaw
"All
that's necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good
men to do nothing."
Edmund Burke (British Statesman and
Philosopher 1729-1797
Posts
