Crime analysis refers to the systematic procedure of collection, collation, analysis, and propagation of information to offer judicious information relating to patterns and trends of crime (Meier et. al, 2001). In most cases, the analysis is of crimes that have eluded conventional preventive measures Vellani and Nahoun, 2001). It differs from analysis of crime in the sense that analysis of crime is used to solve crime, whereas crime analysis is used to prevent crime. Accordingly, crime analysis is more of a tactical device that enables law enforcement personnel to calculate or anticipate the occurrence of a crime.
The information obtained from the analysis assists the law enforcement personnel to plan and put in place appropriate measures and resources to effectively deal with crime. The information is also useful in the analysis of crime, and in many instances it assists in solving crimes. Accordingly, crime analysis supports various departments in a law enforcement body or agency (Gottlieb et. al, 1994).
Vellani and Nahoun opine that crime analysis is a detail oriented discipline (pg 8). Therefore, crime analysts utilize quantitative and qualitative data, both primary and secondary. Quantitative data is collected mainly through statistics whereas qualitative data is collected through various methods such as observation and conducting research on the field. The data collected for analysis varies depending on the purpose and type of the analysis.
Crime analysis being detail-oriented, it is imperative that the data collected is accurate and authentic. Accordingly, crime analysts invariably use primary data collection methods, unless it is not possible in which case secondary data collection methods may suffice. Primary data is collected through gathering information from arrest reports, offense reports, field interviews, and any other crime data held by the law enforcement agency. These reports contain raw information, which the analyst analyses to create data.
Secondary data on the other hand is collected from pre-existing data such as surveys, department reports, and official statistics. Additionally, secondary data may be collected through a re-appraisal of a previous crime analysis report or other similar research that had been conducted before. Secondary data may also be obtained from data that is not primarily related to the analysis but is somehow connected. For instance, an analyst conducting research on housebreaking and burglary may obtain secondary data from companies that install home security systems.
Crime analysis identifies the effectiveness of the broken windows policing in two aspects. One, crime analysis shows that a pro active approach to crime is far effective than a reactive one. It provides information to prevent crime from happening. This preventive aspect is what is emphasized by the broken windows policing. Secondly, crime analysis evidences the effectiveness of an analytical approach to crime. The broken windows policing also takes an analytical approach to dealing with crime, that is, minor disorders must be identified first to prevent serious crime. Accordingly, since the effectiveness of these aspects are highlighted by crime analysis, it follows then that since the broken windows policing also encompasses the same aspects, its effectiveness is thus demonstrated by crime analysis.
References
Gottlieb, S. L., Arenberg, S. I, and Singh, R. (1994). Crime Analysis: From First Report to Final
Arrest. London: Alpha Publishing. Print.
Harcourt, B. E. (2001). Illusion of Order: The False Promise of Broken Windows Policing.
Chicago: Harvard University Press. Print.
Meier, R.F., Kennedy, L. W. and Sacco, V. F. (eds) (2001). The Process & Structure of Crime:
Criminal events & Crime Analysis. NJ: Transaction Publishers. Print.
Vellani, K. H. and Nahoun, J. D. (2001). Applied Crime Analysis. MA: Butterworth –
Heinemann. Print.
