Advertisement

Investigative Activities, Resources and Burglary Detection

  • Richard Timothy CoupeEmail author
Chapter
  • 128 Downloads

Abstract

This chapter considers the importance of matching police officer resources to incident solvability for cost-effective residential burglary detection. It uses data from police incident logs and self-completed surveys of first officers and detectives. The data set is distinctive because it contains details of officer time spent on each investigative activity and incident, site and occupant information for each individual burglary case. Findings indicate that the resources allocated to investigating solvable incidents help explain which incidents are detected. Solvability characteristics determine whether burglaries may be solved, but resource inputs enable detection potential due to solvability to be realized. Resources appear to be used less effectively in further investigations than by first officers. Better solvability predictors are needed for the incidents at which the resourcing of further investigations results in evidence that helps solve them. These could inform a more cost-effective allocation of resources between first officers and detectives and identify which actions and activities are best undertaken for cases with different characteristics at different investigative stages. The findings are at odds with earlier research insofar as detection rates for high-solvability cases may be improved with even larger resource inputs while some low-solvability offences can be solved and should not, therefore, always be screened out by ‘triage’.

Keywords

Burglary Solvability Resources Investigations Detection Predictors 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The author acknowledges the use in this chapter of 1586 words from Coupe (2016).

References

  1. Antrobus, E., & Pilotto, A. (2016). Improving forensic responses to residential burglaries: Results of a randomized controlled field trial. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 12(3), 319–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brandl, S. G., & Frank, J. (1994). The relationship between evidence, detective effort, and the disposition of burglary and robbery investigations. American Journal of Police, 13(3), 149–168.Google Scholar
  3. Carden, R. (2012, July, 9–11). Car key burglaries: An exploratory analysis. Paper presented at the 5th International Evidence-Based Policing Conference, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  4. Coupe, R. T., & Blake, L. (2005). The effects of patrol workloads and response strength on burglary emergencies. Journal of Criminal Justice, 33(3), 239–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Coupe, T., & Griffiths, M. (1996). Solving residential burglary (Police Research Group Crime Detection and Prevention Services, Paper 77). London: Home Office.Google Scholar
  6. Eck, J. E. (1983). Solving crimes: The investigation of burglary and robbery. Washington, DC: Police Executive Research Forum.Google Scholar
  7. Robinson, A., & Tilley, N. (2009). Factors influencing police performance in the investigation of volume crimes in England and Wales. Police Practice and Research: An International Journal, 10(3), 209–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Tilley, N., Robinson, A., & Burrows, J. (2007). The investigation of high volume crime. In T. Newburn, T. Williamson, & A. Wright (Eds.), Handbook of criminal investigation (pp. 226–254). London: Willan Publishing.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of CriminologyUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations