Intelligence-Led Policing Case Study

Bueermann, J. (n.d.). Being Smart on Crime With Evidence-based Policing. Retrieved April 22, 2017, from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/237723.pdf

The Australian Criminal Justice system has an intricate and diverse structure that makes it one of the most unique systems in the world. The Commonwealth of Australia was approved by the British Parliament in 1900 and came into existence on January 1, 1901. The federal constitution combined British and American practices, with a parliamentary government, but with two houses - the popularly elected House of Representatives and Senate representing the former colonies. This began the start of a new era of policing. (Findlay, Odgers, Yeo). The Commonwealth of Australia is a federalist government composed of a national government and six State governments. There are nine different criminal justice systems in Australia - six states, two territories, and one federal. The eight States and Territories have powers to enact their own criminal law, while the Commonwealth has powers to enact laws. Criminal law is administered principally through the federal, State and Territory police. (Chappell, Wilson, Heaton). In this essay an in depth analysis of the Australian criminal justice system will be given, along with a comparison to the United States criminal justice system throughout the essay. As well as an evaluation of the effectiveness of the system and finally a brief summary of how the Australian criminal justice system structure could be improved to better suit the evolving society. Australia has a complex and very intuitive system of policing that

Intelligence-led Policing (IPL) in its simplest definition is a policing model for crime prevention and reduction focussed on crime ‘hot spots’, recidivism amongst offenders and repeat victimization. However, IPL is ever-changing and is not a clear-cut model and therefore requires a broader definition. IPL models therefore act more as a framework for effective police work Although similar models existed previously, IPL gained momentum in the UK, US, Canada and Australia during and after the 1990s. Since crime is in a constant state of flux, so too is IPL, this in part is due to changes in resources and technology and IPL is not without its strengths and weaknesses as evidenced through examination of its increasingly widespread use throughout law enforcement.

Homeland Security is characterized by crime control being the primary police function. It is best achieved through a collective effort by all law enforcement agencies. One of the strategies being used is Intelligence Led Policing. This strategy is not new, it can be traced back to the British is the 1990’s (Bailey, 2011). Intelligence Led Policing is an approach to crime that deals with all crimes and threats including terrorism. This approach is unique because it is threat driven instead of incident driven. It also is a long term approach and focuses on causes and conditions that add to crime through a collection of data.

The opportunity to contribute to society are many and varied and include positions within defence or local community protection. This provides the opportunity to work in a field which promotes and supports the community and the Nation’s interests. In regard to working within ASIO, the focus is on analysing and reporting prospective threats, resulting in the production of protective security measures, to ensure the safety of Australia’s communities, people and assets. In the words of Pietsch and McAlister “Australia has been relatively immune from acts of terrorism” (Juliet Pietsch & Ian McAllister, 2012). “I want Australians to be aware that a terrorist incident on our soil remains likely but also that Australians should be reassured our security agencies are working diligently and expertly to prevent that happening” (Malcolm Turnball, 2015). Terrorism is an increasingly greater threat in the 21st century, and it is clear from these statements that ASIO has an important role to play in ensuring the security of Australian

Analysis- officers working the well-defined problem seek Intel on the crimes from public and private sources. Not using the Intel that you would find in the system but the officer actually seeking out a more community

Law enforcement response to counter-terrorism fundamentally changed as a result of the unprecedented events of September 11th 2001 in New York and Washington (Kaldas, 2002, p61-62). This essay will examine how law enforcement has evolved in response to the changing nature of terrorism, with an emphasis on how this has impacted Australia. An analysis of arrests and subsequent

Line officers are now trained to search for answers needed for intelligence like who possess a threat within the community, who’s doing what with whom, what’s the modus operandi, and what is needed to apprehend culprits and prevent incidents(Intelligence-Led, n.d.). Furthermore, ethical decision-making from community policing to intelligence-led policing has expanded from not only gaining the community’s trust but to ensure all actions and information gathered are directly linked to serving a purpose of intelligence under the constitution(Intelligence-Led, n.d.). No more are there independent units working in the dark collecting intelligence like in the past but all agencies across the nation share and collaborate with another to prevent traditional and national security concerns(Intelligence-Led, n.d.).

What are the fundamentals of Intelligence-led policing you might ask? I will give you a short over view of what most call Intelligence-led policing. We will learn how this model has come about and also what are some of the positive results that have come about from Intelligence-led policing.

Australian policing has been around for decades in maintaining a safe, fair and justice Australia for the Australian society. These policing are subjected to the prevention of crime.

“Things will never be the same.” (Miller, Stone & Mitchell, 2002, p. 3) Law enforcement has undergone dramatic changes as a result of the devastating events in the United States on 11 September 2001 (9/11). This essay will examine how law enforcement, specifically within Australia, has shifted its policies and strategies to fight the post-9/11 terrorist threat. An analysis of police actions towards terrorist related incidents since 9/11, displays how law enforcement agencies have demonstrated their

In preparation for my debate on the topics of intelligence-led policing and Compstat policing, I have discovered the many advantages and disadvantages of using intelligence-led policing and Compstat policing. According to Carter & Carter (2009), intelligence-led policing is the collection of and analysis of data relating to crime, used by law enforcement in “developing tactical responses to threats and/or strategic planning related to emerging changing threats” (p. 317). When applied correctly, intelligence-led policing is a tool used for information sharing in identifying threats and developing responses to prevent those threats from reaching fruition (Carter, 2011). One of the advantages of using intelligence-led policing is its incorporation of data analysts. The role of the data analyst in the context of intelligence-led policing allows them to take specially trained analysts to take raw data from information found in reports and translate it into useful information for the officers, allowing the police to deploy resources more effectively and efficiently (Griffiths, 2016). Another advantage is its application through preventative and predictive policing (proactive policing), in which law enforcement take data and identify crucial variables such as terrorism or the emergence of criminal organizations, in hopes of stopping the problem at its roots (Carter, 2011). Terrorism is especially important and emphasized after the 9/11 terrorist attack on the World Trade Centers in

Intelligence-led policing can be traced back to the United Kingdom (UK). In the late 1980s and early 1990s, the UK saw an increase in crime, domestic terrorist threats, and was also being pushed towards being more fiscal conservative. One of the first applications of ILP occurred in 1995 by Chief Constable Sir David Phillips of the Kent Police. He was seeking to institute a more strategic approach to problem-solving by promoting greater intelligence gathering allocating resources toward proactive criminal intelligence analysis. These efforts focused more towards burglary and vehicle theft, and looked to move beyond reactive responses to specific incidents. The actions performed

In the State of New York, fusion center is a perfect example of information technology optimizing their performance in reducing crime within their police departments. The New York/New Jersey High Intensity Drug Trafficking Center serves as an information hub for law enforcement. According to (Johnson, 2008), the mass of intelligence data in the central location has proved to be a key factor in identifying individuals and organizations that are facilitating or carrying out terrorist activity in New York City.

In most cases these INTs community compete among each other to provide needed intelligence information to policy makers to justify their budgetary allocations (Lowenthal, 2014). However, intelligence collection can be divided into five main categories referred to as “intelligence collection disciplines” or the “INTs”. These include Human Intelligence (HUMINT), Signals Intelligence