Anger as crimes are left unsolved by Wiltshire Police (From Swindon Advertiser)
Get involved! Send photos, video, news & views. Text SWINDON NEWS to 80360 or email us
Anger as crimes are left unsolved by Wiltshire Police
7:30pm Sunday 4th November 2012 in News By David Wiles
Gerry Gprzybyszewski says the police should always look into all cases of reported crime
CONCERNED residents say Wiltshire Police risk losing public confidence after it was revealed that nearly one quarter of all crime reported to the force is not investigated beyond a desktop study or a phone call.
Information revealed under the Freedom of Information Act show that for 2011/12, out of the 36,245 offences of all types reported to emergency call handlers, 8,181 were listed as “not investigated” after an initial assessment.
The data shows that 42 per cent of cases of theft and handling of stolen goods were placed into this category, along with 34 per cent of criminal damage incidents and 21 per cent of burglaries.
However, the force investigated nearly all reports of sexual offences and violence.
In a statement accompanying the figures, Wiltshire Police said: “Every crime report that is received involves some form of investigation.
“This can be an initial desktop/telephone investigation and, failing any tangible lines of inquiry, this may be closed as undetected.
“If there are suitable lines to follow then this will be screened to another investigative department.”
But residents said the decision not to investigate risked reducing public confidence in police and deterred victims and witnesses from taking the time and effort to report future incidents.
Gerry Przybyszewski, 73, of Poulton Street, Gorse Hill, who is involved with Gorse Hill Neighbourhood Watch, said: “They should investigate, come out and ask for witnesses.
“If there’s no proof there’s nothing they can do but if people bring forward witnesses and a statement, how can they drop the case?
“Respond to the public, because if you don’t respond to the public, the public lose faith in you.”
Maurice Small, 70, who is also involved in the Neighbourhood Watch, said people had lost confidence in the police because fewer officers kept residents informed about progress with complaints or issues.
He said call handlers should go back to victims if their complaints are not being investigated and explain the reasons.
He said: “If they ring 999 and nothing gets done they aren’t going to bother any more.”
Robert Buckland, the South Swindon MP, who is also a lawyer, said some reports were spurious or gave no leads, but the new police commissioner should try to find new ways of dealing with complaints to see whether more could be done to improve responses.
Comments(24)
c skelton
says...
7:28am Mon 5 Nov 12
.co.uk
PaulD
says...
7:47am Mon 5 Nov 12
which is exactly what happened to my when I reported a theft yesterday
peatmoor pirate
says...
7:57am Mon 5 Nov 12
peatmoor pirate
says...
7:57am Mon 5 Nov 12
LordAshOfTheBrake
says...
8:04am Mon 5 Nov 12
Quote "Information revealed under the Freedom of Information Act show that for 2011/12, out of the 36,245 offences of all types reported to emergency call handlers, 8,181!
The above statement suggests the numbers may be much worse; since it only covers offenses reported to emergency call handlers. Offences reported by other means are probably going to an even lower priority (speculation).
nobody
says...
8:52am Mon 5 Nov 12
LordAshOfTheBrake
says...
10:19am Mon 5 Nov 12
Personally I'd pay more tax, if more criminals were more appropriately punished; especially where crimes are committed directly against the person or property.
Some of the sentencing that goes on is unbelievable; where people can be sent to prison for minor offences; yet repeated violence against the person can result in a few hours of community service.
The Real Librarian
says...
10:41am Mon 5 Nov 12
Whether people like it or not, decriminalising drug use and legalising and regulating the supply would reduce the level of crime.
Synergie
says...
11:00am Mon 5 Nov 12
.
Carefully read the nine principles of policing. These principles still form the basis of policing....and I said read CAREFULLY.
1.The basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and disorder.
2.The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon the public approval of police actions.
3.Police must secure the willing co-operation of the public in voluntary observation of the law to be able to secure and maintain the respect of the public.
4.The degree of co-operation of the public that can be secured diminishes proportionately to the necessity of the use of physical force.
5.Police seek and preserve public favour not by catering to public opinion, but by constantly demonstrating absolute impartial service to the law.
6.Police use physical force to the extent necessary to secure observance of the law or to restore order only when the exercise of persuasion, advice, and warning is found to be insufficient.
7.Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent upon every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.
8.Police should always direct their action strictly towards their functions, and never appear to usurp the powers of the judiciary.
9.The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with it.
.
Take note of principles #1, 5 and 7
.
Take particular note of principle #9, and you will understand why the Chief Constables spend so much time massaging the crime figures.
LordAshOfTheBrake
says...
12:03pm Mon 5 Nov 12
The same argument could be applies to all aspects of law.
Lets abolish all speed limits so the police don't need to spent any time policing it. Iknow a couple of people who'd love to be able to drive their cars at 150mph on the motorways etc.
Lets make theft legal, so the police don't have to spend any time policing it. Heck the courts are punishing those found guilty, so lets free up he resources.
The list goes on.
Hell lets just abolish the laws of the land and have anarchy!
The Real Librarian
says...
12:07pm Mon 5 Nov 12
LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:Stop being silly.
@The Real Librarian The same argument could be applies to all aspects of law. Lets abolish all speed limits so the police don't need to spent any time policing it. Iknow a couple of people who'd love to be able to drive their cars at 150mph on the motorways etc. Lets make theft legal, so the police don't have to spend any time policing it. Heck the courts are punishing those found guilty, so lets free up he resources. The list goes on. Hell lets just abolish the laws of the land and have anarchy!
The difference between speed limits and drugs policy is that setting and enforcing speed limits works effectively to reduce road deaths whereas the drugs policy is an expensive failure that has increased drug use, criminalises youth and kills people
LordAshOfTheBrake
says...
12:35pm Mon 5 Nov 12
You do know people die from drug use, right? Same with alcohol and nicotine etc etc.
Enforcing speed limits does very little to reduce road deaths. The bigger issue is actually a lack of driving discipline which includes speed; but many other factors too. People do die from accidents that happen within the speed limits too. I would suggest that speeding is another example of an expensive policy that is failing. I drive quite a lot every day and the number of people driving well in excess of the speed limit would confirm its a failed policy. Therefore using your own arguments, we should abolish speed limits.
house on the hill
says...
1:50pm Mon 5 Nov 12
Also to the Pirate, the problem is not how much money is spent it is how it is used in the public sector. We all know how much SBC waste on stupid projects, consultants, partners and general inefficiency, so imagine that on a national scale across things like policing, the NHS, transport and education and you can see why they have no resources in the right places where they are actually needed.
I am sure this all came as no surprise to many which speaks for itself.
timt1964
says...
1:51pm Mon 5 Nov 12
I 2 Could B
says...
2:16pm Mon 5 Nov 12
There was a great example of what needs to be done in the national papers last week. A young lad's parents' house had been burgled, the police weren't interested/didn't do anything and so he and his friends went out, asked around and managed to track down the burglar criminal within a couple of hours. Bit embarrassing for the police, really.
Davey Gravey
says...
2:22pm Mon 5 Nov 12
I 2 Could B
says...
2:47pm Mon 5 Nov 12
Davey Gravey wrote:Or, we could vote for governments that don't waste our money.
We wouldn't need to pay more taxes. Just tax properly and fairly. We all know the booming companies getting off score free along with the richest people in britain.
If Starbucks had paid the amount of tax they could, had they been stupid, have paid over the last 3 years it'd still have been £90million LESS than the amount our in debt government decided to give away to India over that same period.
India, of course, who have gone on record as saying they neither need nor want our money.
While our governments are so happy to squander everybody else's money, I'm happy for companies to ensure they only pay what they have to. There's no point encouraging poor economic decisions by any government by handing them more money to waste.
Davey Gravey
says...
2:58pm Mon 5 Nov 12
I 2 Could B wrote:Being critical of passed mistakes yet not being bothered about the here and now seems daft to me. We can't change the past but the future needs sorting out
Davey Gravey wrote:Or, we could vote for governments that don't waste our money.
We wouldn't need to pay more taxes. Just tax properly and fairly. We all know the booming companies getting off score free along with the richest people in britain.
If Starbucks had paid the amount of tax they could, had they been stupid, have paid over the last 3 years it'd still have been £90million LESS than the amount our in debt government decided to give away to India over that same period.
India, of course, who have gone on record as saying they neither need nor want our money.
While our governments are so happy to squander everybody else's money, I'm happy for companies to ensure they only pay what they have to. There's no point encouraging poor economic decisions by any government by handing them more money to waste.
I 2 Could B
says...
4:55pm Mon 5 Nov 12
Davey Gravey wrote:Yes, I agree, the future does need sorting out... but it isn't being sorted out, the current government is both borrowing and spending more than the last mob did!
I 2 Could B wrote:Being critical of passed mistakes yet not being bothered about the here and now seems daft to me. We can't change the past but the future needs sorting outDavey Gravey wrote: We wouldn't need to pay more taxes. Just tax properly and fairly. We all know the booming companies getting off score free along with the richest people in britain.Or, we could vote for governments that don't waste our money. If Starbucks had paid the amount of tax they could, had they been stupid, have paid over the last 3 years it'd still have been £90million LESS than the amount our in debt government decided to give away to India over that same period. India, of course, who have gone on record as saying they neither need nor want our money. While our governments are so happy to squander everybody else's money, I'm happy for companies to ensure they only pay what they have to. There's no point encouraging poor economic decisions by any government by handing them more money to waste.
itsamess3
says...
5:41pm Mon 5 Nov 12
Very few of these measures have worked as there are too many failing economies in the world.
So called third world countries are reaping the benefits because they can produce both cheap and superior products to flood our markets.
MP's can never answer a direct question--they give an answer they feel suits and is usually evasive and is not restricted to any party--they are much the same.
Councils should be autonomous--but here we have the same problem--the truth is rarely told.
Can we have some councillors that are for the people rather than the party--councillors not politicians please.
Police that want to solve crimes rather than ignore them.
I 2 Could B
says...
9:23pm Mon 5 Nov 12
So called third world countries are reaping the benefits because they can produce both cheap and superior products to flood our markets.
They all have one massive advantage over us... no unsustainable welfare state to try (and fail) to fund.
And, of course, they all have police forces that command authority and judges that live in the real world.
Empty Car Park
says...
10:04pm Mon 5 Nov 12
YaddaYadda
says...
10:04pm Tue 6 Nov 12
c skelton says...
7:23am Mon 5 Nov 12
In many parts of the country it is now the practice that for minor assaults and burglary, the police only issue a crime number so that the victim can claim on their insurance. I don't want this to happen in Wiltshire.
The governments (mainly Conservative) 20% cut to Police funding due next April will only make matters worse.
Colin Skelton
Independent Candidate for Police Commissioner.