Street crime trends and actions

Report: 8
Date: 11 October 2001
By: Commissioner

Summary

This report gives an overview of MPS street crime trends, and a review of actions taking place in the short, medium and long term.

A. Recommendation

Members are asked to note the report.

B. Supporting information

Definition

1. Street crime statistics embrace the offences of robbery of personal property and snatch theft. They cover a wide spectrum in terms of the degree of violence used to commit them. This ranges from extreme violence, including the use of weapons, to what is no more than a ‘mild’ snatch to facilitate the crime. Borough experiences would indicate that reporting practices have changed beyond recognition. Many incidents now recorded as a street crime would have been perceived by some as ‘acceptable’ behaviour until a few years ago. Whilst MPS counting practices adhere to Home Office guidelines, it is clear that deletion of snatch by theft offences from the street crime returns would reduce overall totals. However, these crimes would then be reflected in other crime categories and the street crime trend remains similar.

Trends

2. A brief description of the short, medium and long-term trends are given at Appendix 1. Unquestionably, offences categorised as street crime have experienced a significant increase in recent years. Street crimes have risen from 2320 in April ’98 to 5247 in July 2001. This is a 133% increase. During the same period judicial disposals have gone from 200 to 452. This reflects a comparable 126% increase in judicial disposals (JDs).

3. Victimisation ages for street crime also indicate a shift. Between April 2000 and July 2001 there has been an increase of victims in the 22-30 age group. Despite this shift, the peak age of victims still fall within the 14-17 year age group.

4. Borough victimisation age groups have been compared for Lambeth and Southwark. In Lambeth, the majority of victims of street crime consistently fall within the 26-40 age group.

5. For Southwark, the majority of victims fall within the 14-17 age group, in accordance with the overall MPS victimisation trend. Southwark also experiences less, but consistent, victimisation in the 31-40 age group.

6. Between April 1998 and July 2001 the highest number of accused have fallen within the 14-17 year age group. This accused group has shown a consistent increase in their involvement in street crime. Accusations against this age group have nearly trebled between April 1998 - July 2001, from 130 to over 350.

7. Accusations of street crime against younger and older age groups remain fairly constant over the same period. However, the second most prolific age group, between 18-21 years, have shown a significant increase in offending rates between June and July of this year.

8. The majority of suspects for street crime consistently fall within the 14-21 age group. A similar pattern emerges when the ‘first suspect’ only is considered. Between April 2000 and July 2001, there has been a small shift of suspects from the lower (10-21) to the higher (26-40) age groups.

9. What can be interpreted from these victim, accused and suspect profiles?

1. Street crime peak victim, suspect and accused ages are 14-17.
2. Victimisation rates may be shifting from lower to higher age groups.
3. Southwark borough victimisation fits the MPS profile on age.
4. Lambeth borough victimisation mainly falls within the 26-40 age group.
5. Judicial disposal rates have remained fairly constant across the MPS.

Are victims reporting crimes but continually unwilling to pursue prosecutions?

10. This is a difficult phenomenon to measure. Between April 2000 and July 2001, there were 392 cases where the guilt of the accused was clear but where the victim refused, was unable or not permitted to give evidence. This figure amounts to a monthly average of 23. Over more than a calendar year the figures are fairly constant, with significant variations only in December 2000 and April 2001. The figures compared to total offences and even to the JD rate, are fairly inconsequential.

11. However, it may be that victims have withdrawn their support at an earlier stage, and this cannot be measured using existing statistics.

Mobile phones issue

12. It has been accepted for some years that mobile phones make up a significant proportion of the property stolen in street crime offences. Prior to revised accounting guidelines introduced in December 2000, mobile phones and associated property (faxes, laptops) accounted for approximately 45% of the property stolen. Since April 2001, mobile phones have consistently accounted for more than 35% of the property stolen in street crime offences across the MPS.

13. However, localised reports from certain high ‘street crime’ boroughs, have indicated mobile phone theft in more than 50% of incidents of street crime.

14. Nationally, in 1998 there were 9 million mobile phone connections. Today the figure stands at 60 million handsets, with 43.4 million network connections. The youth sector, between the ages of 15-24 accounts for 84% of the potential market.

Suggestions by Borough Commanders to combat street crime

15. The following is a summary of the issues raised following consultation between Deputy Assistant Commissioner Territorial Policing (TP) and Borough Commanders.

• Shift resources from other crimes to address street crimes.
• Address mobile phone theft.
• Address petrol station drive-outs, which divert valuable personnel resources from street crime.
• Address archaic and prescriptive crime reporting policies by some local authorities and insurance companies to re-direct personnel to street crime.
• Align borough shift rota to street crime patterns.
• Appropriate court sanctions for those convicted of street crime.
• Co-ordinated pan London schools approach against bullying, from which street crime flows.
• Questionable benefits of directing borough personnel to Operation Crackdown which has not subsequently impacted on street crime.
• Return to budgeted workforce target (BWTs)
• Introduction of unmarked police response vehicle (Q) cars to address priority crimes.
• Street crime is opportunist, lacks intelligence and is best addressed by High Visibility Patrols (HVPs).
• Provision of technical equipment i.e. video sentries, covert video, and vehicles to target street crime.
• More rapid identification processes.
• Lobbying for legislative change of remanding youths to local authorities care to include, ‘commission of further offences’.
• Quicker Forensic Science Service (FSS) turnaround times.
• Borough influence over Intelligence Directorate SO11 computerised witness album database.
• Routine availability to covertly film those who refuse ID parades.
• Displacement and then return of criminal activity following borough implementation of ‘Strongbox’.
• Borough Youth Offending Teams inadequately resourced to take on Diversion issues.
• Difficulty in obtaining CRIS with knowledge of street crime offenders.
• Legislative change for authority levels for taking photos for ID without consent. Formal inferences from refusal to stand on ID parade, service of form 620 in presence of appropriate adult and not just parent/guardian.
• Lobbying for harsher court sentences for street crime offenders.

What is Territorial Police Headquarters (TPHQ) Crime Support OCU doing to combat street crime?

TP contingency fund

16. This ensures the appropriate allocation of funds to boroughs, to address MPS priority crimes. Applications considered on a proactive assessment tasking proforma and are only authorised subject to the application meeting a strict set of criteria. This attracted Home Office funding up to the end of the last financial year. It is not possible to do a year on year comparison analysis of this funding and results of initiatives as records only began in July of 2000.

17. The numbers of pro-active assessment taskings targeted against street crime have been compared for the period April-June 2000 against April-June 2001. During 2000 the boroughs implemented in excess of 150 initiatives. For the same period in 2001 they implemented nearly 300 initiatives. The increase in initiatives was achieved, despite the absence of £3.9m of Home Office funding, which was directed towards this activity in 2000. Experience has indicated that whilst high visibility patrols ensure displacement of crime and public re-assurance they are ineffective in the long term unless supported by plain clothes activity. TP HQ is supporting borough activity by the purchase and distribution of video sentry systems.

Mobile phones - crime prevention

18. Some of the crime prevention initiatives in operation include:

• Poster campaign to raise awareness in all secondary schools of the vulnerability to theft (robbery) of mobile phones.
• This was agreed at the TP Crime forum of 4.9.2001.
• All Borough Commanders/Supt Ops. have been contacted and support this initiative.

19. Officers to attend secondary schools and supervise the voluntary UV pen marking of mobile phones. Virtual tamper-proof sticker to be attached to phones to assist officers identifying school age owners. Pupils to retain a registration card in the event of contacting police.

1. Agreed at the TP crime forum of 4.9.2001.
2. Evaluation at Enfield, Southwark, Camden and Greenwich.
3. Utilise specials/volunteers/sixth form students.
4. LEA`s contacted for support.
5. £86,000 discount by conducting MPS wide.

20. Operational officers to be issued with pen sized UV lights to assist in the detection of offences and in the recovery of stolen property.

21. IMEI recording on criminal report and investigation system (CRIS). Only 5% of robbery CRIS reports (where a mobile phone was stolen) record the IMEI number (PIB. 2001).

• The IMEI number is the only way of recovering a stolen phone that has not been property marked.
• There is a field in CRIS for this number.
• If included in the CRIS a search will locate the report and thus the victim.

22. Details of fraudulent reporting

• More Nokia 8210 handsets have been ‘stolen’ than have been sold in the UK (Head of Security - BT Cellnet).
• The mobile phone networks are researching the levels of rejected insurance claims to identify fraudulent reports to police.
• If appropriate, information can be obtained from the networks to generate operational activity targeting offenders accordingly.

23. What happens to stolen mobile phones?

• A study of 100 stolen phones showed that 18 were used on the same or another network after the theft. Three networks have yet to run the search to give a complete picture.
• SIS are being commissioned to investigate the real possibility of phones being stolen for export to the Middle and Far East, where mobile phone markets are emerging.

24. Home Office input.

• Legislative changes are being considered to control the duplication of IMEI numbers (currently legal and free).
• Independent consultancy commissioned to research what the networks are capable of achieving to reduce crime.

Petrol station crime

25. Whilst not within the definition of street crime, it is recognised that this is a major personnel and resource abstraction, diverting effort from street crime. In conjunction with BOSS (British Oil Suppliers Syndicate) and the supermarket suppliers, TPHQ are working to design out crime and engage in target hardening activity.

Operation Seneca

26. Borough research indicated that 75% of their street crime was taking place within 150 yards of just five identified bus routes. The situation appears to be replicated throughout the MPS. Seneca has seen intelligence led, co-ordinated partnership activity aimed at disrupting crime, identifying criminals and transferring the fear of crime. Forty operations have been conducted under the Operation Seneca banner this year, with significant degrees of success.

Operation Strongbox

27. Strongbox focuses limited MPS resources in a targeted, intelligence-led manner on identified boroughs. It has achieved, and continues to achieve, significant success against street crime. i.e. 24% reduction in crime in Lambeth, 19% reduction in crime in Hackney.

Operation Crackdown

28. An MPS wide initiative targeting the drug markets, now in its third phase. Whilst predominantly an anti-drugs initiative, there may be some links with street crime activity in certain locations. Crackdown continues to achieve significant success against drug markets and provides significant levels of public reassurance.

Identification procedures

29. Robbery investigations demand speed in identification procedures. The investigation strand of the OCU has reduced waiting times for ID parades and introduced centralised booking. It is now working on reducing waiting times even further and responding to legislative change which will impact on video ID procedures and digital imaging. It is responsible for co-ordinating the various identification processes and projects pan-London.

MPS National Intelligence Model (MPS NIM)

30. The MPS NIM is rolling out to five pilot sites during September 2001. This model will subsequently be embraced MPS wide. Amongst many other elements it will introduce strategic analysis of priority crimes at borough level. This will facilitate a forward look at street crime, reviews of strategic intelligence, comparison of performance against targets and identification of solutions. This will directly impact on street crime. It introduces improved training and use of crime analysts at borough level and minimum standards surrounding all intelligence issues. What the NIM currently lacks is a central co-ordination of this borough analysis that would serve to give a fuller picture throughout the MPS.

Media campaigns

31. Building on the Safer Streets Media Campaign at the end of 2000, July 2001 saw the launch of an anti-knives media strategy. These efforts will be complimented and supported by the introduction of knife exclusion zones on certain boroughs. Running alongside will be the introduction of a ‘Crimestoppers for Kids’ initiative, towards the end of this year. These efforts are expected to impact on street crime. Standardised procedures in relation to the use of witness appeal boards, to promote greater effectiveness and reduce the fear of crime are also being progressed by the OCU.

Forensic developments

32. The following developments within the Directorate of Forensic Services are expected to impact on street crime.

• Increased local sites for the immediate fuming of exhibits.
• Enhanced training for personnel to increase awareness of forensic opportunity.
• Crime linking by analysts at borough level.
• Increase in the number of level 1 scene examiners.
• Introduction of Scientific Support Intelligence cells for North and South London.

Research

33. Research currently underway includes:

• Arranged visit to Greater Manchester Police to establish if there is best practice there regarding street crime that is transferable to the MPS.
• Input and liaison with Commander Alan Shave regarding work on persistent young offenders/Youth Diversion.
• Links with Dr. Marian Fitzgerald and her academic research regarding young people’s involvement in street crime.
• Researching the potential for legislative change and impact on court sentencing.

Quarterly robbery returns

34. These returns for the comparative period April-June 2000 and April - June 2001 show that whilst personal robbery has increased by 21.37%, business robbery has declined by 14.5%. It is possible that ‘professional’ robbers are switching from the harder commercial targets to the softer personal targets. A correlation could be proved or disproved by statistical analysis, however any underlying cause is not known.

35. Indicative figures from PIB, between April-July 1998 and April-July 2001, show a significant increase in the number of street crime offences where the victim and suspect are under 17 and the value of property stolen is less than £10. The figure has gone from 454 to 910, a 100% increase, in line with the overall trend.

The real likelihood of victimisation

36. Street crime continues to rise at a concerning rate in the capital. It is currently at an all time high. There are borough on borough variations in the likelihood of becoming a victim. As discussed, not all street crime takes the form of extreme violence to facilitate theft. Taken MPS wide, the likelihood of becoming a victim of street crime is 1 in 1400 or a 0.07% likelihood of victimisation (using July 2001 street crime figures and GLA population data of 7,375,068). Whilst there is clearly no room for complacency, this still makes London one of the safest major cities in the world.

37. By way of comparison the likelihood of victimisation from the MPS equivalent of street crime in Greater Manchester is 1 in 1770. In the West Midlands Police area the likelihood decreases to 1 in 2,900.

38. However, extreme caution is urged in the use of these comparative figures. This is because of the differences in crime classification procedures from force to force and the accuracy of the population data from which these probabilities have been calculated.

The Lambeth perspective

39. Lambeth borough continues to be one of the most significant contributors to the street crime figures. Whilst obviously starting from a point at which it has a higher number of street crimes than many other boroughs, it is appropriate to note that its year on year increase is no worse than many boroughs. 38% for Lambeth, compared to 59% for Greenwich, 112% for Merton, 65% for Hillingdon.

40. The PYTD% change for Lambeth is just above the MPS average.

Conclusion

41. Street crime is a significant concern for the MPS. It tears at the fabric of society and wide, sometimes overly emotive, reporting increases the fear of crime. As many victims and offenders are young it may be the first crime a person has either committed or been the victim of. The experience is likely to shape their social attitudes for a long period of time, possibly for the rest of their lives. There are massive efforts at borough, TPHQ and other levels within the MPS, to combat street crime. Despite these efforts, the MPS is failing to achieve a zero growth in street crime.

C. Financial implications

There are no financial implications. However, should any of the initiatives exceed existing budgets reports would be prepared for consideration by the Committee.

D. Background papers

None.

E. Contact details

Report author: Chris Noye, MPS TPHQ Crime Support OCU, 020 7321 7308

For information contact:

MPA general: 020 7202 0202
Media enquiries: 020 7202 0217/18

Appendix 1

1. Recent trends relating to street crime in London include:

• 133% increase from April 1998 to July 2001 from 2320 to 5247 offences.
• Judicial disposals (JD’s) during same period show a comparable 126% increase.
• The peak victim age range is still 14-17.
• Recent increase in victims in 22-30 age group.
• Lambeth victimisation falls mainly in 26-40 age group.
• Peak accused age range falls within 14-17 years. (no. of accusations trebled in 3 years.)
• Removing snatch theft from category would not influence overall trend.
• More than 35% of street crimes involve mobile phone theft.

2. Some of the short term actions to combat street crime have included:

• Consultative process with Deputy Assistant Commissioner (TP) and borough commanders.
• ‘Best practice’ visit to Greater Manchester Police.
• MPS Intelligence and targeting model out to 5 pilot sites during September 2001
• Strategic analysis into street crime trends.
• Anti-knives media strategy July 2001.
• Introduction of knife exclusion zones on certain boroughs later this year.
• Liaison with Commander Shave re work on persistent offenders and youth diversion.
• Allocation of TP funding to address street crime initiatives on boroughs.
• Introduction of video sentries to assist borough street crime efforts.

3. Some of the medium term actions to combat street crime have included:

• Rollout of MPS model pan-London.
• Continued implementation of Operation Seneca targeting identified bus routes.
• Continued implementation of Operation Crackdown (anti drugs) on identified borough.
• Continued implementation of Operation Strongbox.
• ‘Crimestoppers for kids’ initiative towards end of 2001.
• Continued research and implementation of findings from ‘safer streets” working group.
• Links with academic research into young people’s involvement in street crime.
• Standardised procedures in relation to the use of witness appeal boards.
• Increased forensic opportunity and forensic turnaround times.
• Development of Operational Solutions Database.
• Recruit and place borough crime analysts.

4. Long term initiatives against crime street include:

• Researching potential for legislative change and impact on court sentencing.
• Quicker identification procedures, digital imaging and response to legislative change.
• With BOSS and supermarket suppliers, target hardening & designing out forecourt crime.
• Introduction of safe corridors Initiative.
• Mobile phone initiatives with service providers/Home Office/education programme.
• Pan London rollout of all strands of MPS Policing model.

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback