Police Patrol
Peak, Chp. 5
Patrol function







Deter crime through police
presence
Maintain order
Enable prompt response to calls for service
Arrest violators
Traffic safety
Foster sense of safety in the community
Furnish emergency social services
Calls for service –
influencers


Demographic variables
– Urban / rural
– Population and population density
– Crime and violence
– Wealth and employment
– Other (median age, education levels, etc.)
– May vary by area, precinct and beat
Calendar variables
– Shift
– Day of week
– Holidays and vacation time
– Weather
Police response –
Influencers



External variables
– Crime and violence
– Community pressures and politics
Agency variables
– Resources and funding
– Chief and command preferences
– Response and allocation policies
Precinct and beat variables
–
–
Supervisor preferences
– Current workload
Officer variables
– Individual preferences
– Knowledge, skills and abilities (KSA)
–

Crime type and frequency
Manpower and equipment resources
Patrol study: 1973 Kansas City
Preventive Patrol Experiment







Does routine patrol deter crime?
City divided into 15 beats
Created five groups, each with three demographically similar beats
For one beat, patrol was left as before; for the second, patrol was increased;
For the third, patrol was removed
Compared results within and across groups
Conclusions
– Crime did not change regardless of amount of patrol
– Citizen fear of crime and attitudes about police did not change
– Police ability to respond to calls did not change
Issues
– General v. specific deterrence
– Experiment kept secret from citizens and crooks
– Officers did not respect boundaries when answering calls
– Differences between actual patrol levels was slight
Studies of patrol
techniques


Team policing
– Permanent assignment to
geographical areas
– Officers worked as generalists
– Close ties with community
– Results:
 Expensive - patrol officers tied up on investigations
 Officer follow-up ineffective in complex or serious crimes
Directed patrol
– Crime data used to determine how officers should patrol
– Results:
 Ineffective
 Lack of officer support
Studies of
patrol techniques


Split force – Wilmington, DE
– One-quarter of patrol force redirected to stakeouts
– Results
 Productivity” increase (what does that really mean?)
 Crime reduction
– Effects on patrol response [No free lunch]
 Prioritization of patrol calls means fewer responses
 Quality of service issues
 Decline in free patrol time and self-initiated contacts
Foot patrol studies
– Liked by citizens, apparently does not affect crime levels
– Effects on patrol response [No free lunch]
1977 Kansas City patrol study –
findings



Response time:
– Faster police response does not help
– Reducing delay in crime reporting does help
One versus two-officer cars
– One-officer patrol cars just as safe
On-view arrests during routine patrol
– Officers seldom “stumble across” felonies in progress
Discussion – might these findings be biased because
certain factors were not taken into account? 
1977 Kansas City patrol study –
issues

Faster police response does not help
– Was response time significantly changed?

One-officer patrol cars just as safe
– Do multiple cars and backup officers respond on hot calls?
– Are solo officers just as proactive as officer pairs?

Officers seldom “stumble across” felonies in progress
– Narrow view of effects of patrol
– Officers frequently “stumble” across wanted persons, armed
gang members and persons responsible for other crimes

Stumbling: Murder of husband and
mother of Federal judge






On Feb. 28, 2005 the husband and mother of
Federal judge were found shot to death in the
Lefkow’s Chicago home
Suspicion was immediately placed on right-wing
militants against whom Lefkow had ruled on a civil
lawsuit. A huge investigation got under way.
Three days later a West Allis, Wisconsin patrol officer pulled over Bart
Ross for suspicious activities.
Ross, an unemployed electrician and cancer victim, shot himself as
the officer walked up. The officer almost got hit.
Inside the car was a note in which Ross confessed to the shootings.
He was angry at the judge for dismissing his suit against his doctors.
Ross’s DNA was matched against DNA left on a cigarette butt left
behind in the Lefkow residence.
Stumbling: Oklahoma
City bombing




On the morning of April 19, 1995,
Timothy McVeigh parked a rented
truck full of explosives in front of the
Federal Building, got in a car and
escaped.
At 9:02am a massive explosion occurred, killing 168 persons.
Two hours later McVeigh was stopped by a Oklahoma
Highway Patrol officer because his vehicle lacked a license
plate. The officer noticed a bulge in McVeigh’s jacket and
arrested him for carrying a loaded .45.
Suspicions about McVey and his resemblance to sketches of
the person who rented the truck led police to call the Feds.
Patrol deployment:
Compstat






Computerized pin-map
Shift resources contemporaneously
with changes in crime trends
– Short-term fluctuations can deceive
– Unrealistic to implement without extensive resources
– Zero-sum game: something has to give
Claimed effects highly questionable
– Reductions all across the City of New York much more likely an
effect of external social and economic factors
Best suited for quality-of-life issues rather than serious crime
Great pressures on managers to conform
Excessively vertical: can easily overlook information from below
Discretion


Officers often can choose to intervene:
– Whether (yes/no)
– How (warn  cite  arrest)
– To what extent (resolve situation or investigate more thoroughly)
Officer decisions are affected by many variables:
– Laws limiting discretion (e.g., spousal abuse)
– Seriousness of an offense; harm committed
– Presence of a victim
– Availability of information and witnesses
– Personal (attitudes, knowledge, skills, abilities)
– Workload and resources
– Community and political pressures
– Department policy and procedures (formal)
– Accepted practices (informal)
– Supervision
– Citizen or suspect attitudes
Youth’s demeanor
Severity of dispo?
Youth’s demeanor
Severity of
Disposition
Cooperative
Uncooperative
Total
Arrest or citation
6
19
25
Release without
charges
39
2
41
Total
45
21
66
“The observations made in this study serve to underscore the fact that the official
delinquent... is a delinquent because someone in authority has defined him as one, often
on the basis of the public face he has presented to officials rather than on the kind of
offense he has committed.”
(table adopted from Piliavin and Briar, “Police Encounters With Juveniles,” American Journal of Sociology, 70/2)
Youth’s demeanor
Eval of Threat
Severity of dispo?
Youth’s demeanor
Severity of
Disposition
Cooperative
Uncooperative
Total
Arrest or citation
6
19
25
Release without
charges
39
2
41
Total
45
21
66
Alternative Explanation