Dear Editor,
Recently I heard one of the deputy commissioners of police (DCP) on one of the morning radio programmes discussing the high incidence of crime plaguing the country.
The DCP told the interviewer that the statistics for rape and shooting, for example, were down 22 per cent and five per cent, respectively, when compared to 2014. The DCP, however, went on to bemoan the fact that murder was the major challenge for the Jamaica Constabulary Force (JCF).
What I found interesting was that neither the interviewer nor the DCP sought to explain or have explained the reason for the possible decline in the rape or shooting figures. I doubt very much that either the DCP or the JCF would be able to proffer an adequate explanation.
It, therefore, led me to ask, what level of control does the police have over these rates? Why or how is it that the JCF has become the agency responsible for crime statistics and to have its performance assessed against these statistics?
If the murder rate/figures decline, the police may be congratulated, but if the rate/figures go up, the police would have failed in some regard. But what control do the police have over these figures?
It would appear that if a husband kills his wife, the performance of the police would be immediately impacted. The police may even be expected to anticipate acts of murder and the police are held responsible for someone committing such acts.
The police, no doubt, have some responsibility for crime and crime data. But how did the police come to own murder and other statistics and their performance measured against them? Have the police/JCF, therefore, been setting up themselves?
I think that the key performance target for the police/JCF would be the extent to which their investigative expertise has been applied to the compilation of water-tight cases for successful prosecution, and not the mere reeling out of crime data.
Percy Johnson
Lowe River District
Trelawny
Recently I heard one of the deputy commissioners of police (DCP) on one of the morning radio programmes discussing the high incidence of crime plaguing the country.
The DCP told the interviewer that the statistics for rape and shooting, for example, were down 22 per cent and five per cent, respectively, when compared to 2014. The DCP, however, went on to bemoan the fact that murder was the major challenge for the Jamaica Constabulary Force (JCF).
What I found interesting was that neither the interviewer nor the DCP sought to explain or have explained the reason for the possible decline in the rape or shooting figures. I doubt very much that either the DCP or the JCF would be able to proffer an adequate explanation.
It, therefore, led me to ask, what level of control does the police have over these rates? Why or how is it that the JCF has become the agency responsible for crime statistics and to have its performance assessed against these statistics?
If the murder rate/figures decline, the police may be congratulated, but if the rate/figures go up, the police would have failed in some regard. But what control do the police have over these figures?
It would appear that if a husband kills his wife, the performance of the police would be immediately impacted. The police may even be expected to anticipate acts of murder and the police are held responsible for someone committing such acts.
The police, no doubt, have some responsibility for crime and crime data. But how did the police come to own murder and other statistics and their performance measured against them? Have the police/JCF, therefore, been setting up themselves?
I think that the key performance target for the police/JCF would be the extent to which their investigative expertise has been applied to the compilation of water-tight cases for successful prosecution, and not the mere reeling out of crime data.
Percy Johnson
Lowe River District
Trelawny