Intelligence Led Policing The ILP Policing Model

2

Intelligence-Led Policing

Learning Task: Week 1- What are the factors that have favored the emergence of Intelligence Led Policing (ILP)? Use the chronology of policing models given by Ratcliffe as a guide (i.e., contrast what is similar and different about ILP from the major policing models).

Intelligence-led policing is a decision-making strategy that analyzes criminal intelligence as an objective decision-making tool that facilitates crime prevention and reduction through effective and efficient policing strategies and external partnership projects drawn from an evidential base. Intelligence-led policing is mainly based on four distinct elements, and the first is that it targets the offenders, especially by targeting the active criminals through covert and overt means. The other element is managing the hotspots and crimes (Ratcliffe, 2008). The third element is investigating the liked series of incidents and crimes. The last one is applying preventive measures, which include working with local partnerships to reduce disorder and crime. Intelligence-led policing has been promoted by several factors. The first is the rise of criminal activities around the globe. Policing is vital since it helps identify crime reduction strategies based on solid evidential support (Ratcliffe, 2008). The intelligence-led policing applies criminal intelligence analysis as an objective decision-making tool that will be vital in facilitating crime reduction and prevention. The support it gets from the government is the other essential factor. It helps it develop more effective policing strategies and external partnership projects based on the evidential base.

Ratcliffe’s chronology of policing models includes interpreting, influencing, and impacting. For policing to be made, its influence on the nation and other places must be assessed. Their influence must be positive, and it must benefit most people. Moreover, it must also significantly impact the people and be positively interpreted for its benefits to be used correctly (Ratcliffe, 2008). The similar part of all these models is that they benefit most people and show that if their consequences are more optimistic, people are expected to have more positive results in crime reduction. The difference in these models is that crime-intelligence analysis is the central decision-making in intelligent-led policy and helps shape a criminal environment based on its influence.

Learning Task: Week 2 - Ratcliffe argues that 9/11 had a galvanizing effect on US policing, which rapidly embraced ILP after the terrorist attack. In the light of the “Demonising Intelligence” section of the text, what do you think the long-term outcome will be for the intelligence-led approach? How can misconduct of the past be prevented?

The 9/11 attacks led to the creation of the Homeland Security era, which was considered a kind of intelligence-led policing. The approach was created after the terrorist attack by the Department of Homeland Security, and it was caused by numerous calls for police agencies in the United States of America. Its sole aim was to build global partnerships and increase the way information was shared in the domestic arena. The IACP helped a Criminal Intelligence Sharing Summit in the Spring of 2002 from the Global Justice Information Sharing Initiative (Global) Intelligence Working Group (GIWG). It led to the National Criminal Intelligence Sharing Plan (Ratcliffe, 2008). If the plan existed before the tragic 9/11 events could have been prevented, but this never occurred. The theme plans that there is a need to overcome the substantial and long-standing barriers to hinder intelligence sharing. The response has led to the formation of fusion centers and a greater awareness of the importance of sharing information. The plan also recommends more training and infrastructure leading to the adoption and creation of standards, fostering trust among the law enforcement agencies, and even developing professional practice and making better use of the existing and new resources. The long-term outcome of the intelligence-led approach is that it helped the country keep up with its security and even ensured that a situation similar to 9/11 would not occur again (Ratcliffe, 2008). The past had many misconducts, which can be prevented in specific ways. The people can be more open to ideas that they have to be whistle-blowers in case they feel that someone is part of any criminal activity. By reporting this to the necessary authority on time, they can prevent a worse situation that could cause the injury and death of many people. The government can also work with other national and international organizations to help protect the people from harm and even arrest the lawbreakers who may want to cause commotion in society.

Learning Task: Week 3- Discuss the major issues of predicting who might be a prolific offender. Consider this from a law enforcement point of view and aim to cover both operational (what info you are likely to have) and ethical concerns. Do you consider these to be insurmountable?

There are several issues present in deciding who may be a prolific offender. The first is the biological risk factors. People may commit criminal acts mainly due to neuroendocrine functioning, neurobiology, and even autonomic arousal. The adverse childhood experiences could also make people commit crimes. For instance, people are raised differently; some are presented as pleasant, idyllic, or less fortunate, making them commit crimes for various reasons (Ratcliffe, 2008). Some children are raised in dire situations, an increased risk for criminal behavior during their adult and juvenile years. A hostile social environment also plays a massive role in deciding whether someone is a prolific law offender. Being in a high-crime neighborhood or living in a place where people participate in criminal activities helps them become rich since they live in a poverty-stricken community. Nonetheless, drugs and substance abuse can also lead to criminal behavior (Ratcliffe, 2008). People who take alcohol and other drugs may commit crimes when they are under the influence of drugs since it leads to psychological and physiological changes that may affect decision-making and self-control.

There are ethical concerns that are related to all the issues used to predict those who are prolific offenders. The first is that sometimes, some people may commit crimes and pretend they do not have the proper mental health, meaning the crime is justified. It has affected many people since they do not get the required justice (Ratcliffe, 2008). Besides, some of these criminals pass the tests even when they have no mental health problems, which has massively affected the justice system (Ratcliffe, 2008). Law enforcement must have information about an individual’s social, political, and economic background to understand why people commit crimes. It helps know if there are factors that make an individual commit crime and whether these issues related to a prolific offender affect the quest for justice.

Learning Task: Week 4- Ratcliffe claims that Intelligence-Led Policing (ILP) is an objective process; comment on whether you think this is justified. What theories of crime and criminality do you think might be operating within ILP?

Intelligence-Led Policing (ILP) could be described as an objective process for specific reasons. Here are two kinds of approaches that are similar and include ILP and predictive policing. Predictive policing mainly uses computers to analyze the big data concerning crimes within a geographical area to determine when or where the crime will occur soon (Ratcliffe, 2008). Contrarily, intelligence-led policing tries to identify the potential repeat offenders and victims and work in partnership with society to give them a chance to change their behaviors before they are arrested for severe crimes. The ILP gathers data on arrests, domestic incidents, trade stops, and gang activities, making the process more objective. The ILP is aiming since it involves a more collaborative law enforcement approach: combined information sharing, problem-solving policing, and police accountability, which is part of the intelligence operations (Ratcliffe, 2008). The approach has been designed to guide the policing activities toward the high-frequency offenders, crimes, and locations to affect resource allocation decisions. One of the most vital components of ILP is that it encourages and mainly depends on collaboration among certain agencies and the community, including the local police and other local enforcement agencies. ILP uses a more sophisticated technology and analysis. Technological advancements have made the agencies leverage data to focus on the law enforcement agency system, and the analysis centers around an individual and not a geographical area (Ratcliffe, 2008).