Prospective crime mapping in operational context Final report

Other potential tactical optionsAt the time of completing this phase of the research, the published literature on theeffectiveness of various burglary reduction options/tactics was reviewed. To stimulatealternative ways of thinking, also discussed were tentative suggestions for further tacticswhich may complement the ‘near repeat’ burglary victimisation pattern. Due to thecommunicability of risk in time as well as space, meaning that risks surround burgled homesfor a fairly limited time period, many of the suggested measures take existing technologiesand add a time dimension to them. Note that the redeployable CCTV option outlined in thematrix above, an example of this type of approach, is not without its problems. Theseapproaches would therefore only work in a setting where measures could be relocated swiftly.The proposed measures use the following research findings:• that risks are concentrated within 400m and one month;• that some areas have particularly high levels of near repeats; and• that near repeats often share MO characteristics (see Bowers and Johnson,2005b)Use of ANPR/surveillance ‘rings’One possible detection-focused scheme could ‘net’ high risk areas. This could involve amobile ring of covert cameras and/or Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) devicessurrounding the area. Here a burgled house in the middle of areas where burglary clusters inspace and time would be identified and cameras placed around it at a 400m radius. Thisprovides a way of monitoring all entrances and exits to the area for a limited period of time.This is now set up to act a little like a sting operation as the likelihood is that there will befurther activity in the area. If a further burglary does happen it should be possible to narrowdown when it occurred, to a reasonable time band at least, by asking the victim and looking atthe police record. It would then be possible to look at people and vehicles exiting/entering thearea for a feasible time band during which they could have entered the area and conductedthe burglary. With ANPR it would be possible to work with the Driver & Vehicle LicensingAgency (DVLA) to rule out cars that were registered within the area, which would leave asubset of cars to investigate.Moveable publicityThis would involve the use of offender-orientated publicity. To increase the perceived risks ofcommitting burglary in an area when risk is highest (for perhaps two weeks after an initialburglary), signs could be erected around the boundary of the area with a message indicatingthat people are entering a high-priority burglary clampdown area. The use of surplus policevehicles parked in strategic places (as is sometimes done to deter filling station drive-offs)would be one available form of publicity.Repeat Victimisation neighbours schemeSimilar to a cocoon-watch approach, this would involve always target-hardening houses acertain number of doors away from a repeatedly burgled home, as well as enhancing thesecurity of the property itself. It may be that a general publicity campaign describing the nearrepeatsphenomenon would sensitise otherwise complacent neighbours to take crimereduction measures.Targeted, MO-specific crime prevention adviceThe same vulnerability is often exploited in near-repeat incidents. This means that it ispossible to produce intelligence on the likely MOs of future incidents of burglary. This couldbe used as a basis for prioritising different elements of risk assessments. Crime preventionadvice and assistance would be tailored to MO type and provided to as many nearneighbours of a burgled house as possible. It would (of course) also direct patrolling officersto the part of a home through which entry is most likely to be gained.36