Opinion | An Early Warning That Policing May Be in Decline
www.nytimes.com
New data reveals that crime-solving rates are at record lows.

While headlines tend to focus on falling clearance rates in large liberal cities, the decline occurred nationwide in both red and blue cities, counties and states. The violent crime clearance rate, for example, fell considerably between 2019 to 2022 in big cities, which tend to be led by Democrats, as well as in small cities and suburban and rural counties, which tend to be led by Republicans.

  • Rottcodd@kbin.social
    403·
    1 year ago

    It’s not necessarily the case though that fewer crimes are being actually “solved,” in the most precise sense of the term.

    It could be that the current heightened interest in police oversight and focus on investigation of (and huge lawsuit payouts as a consequence of) wrongdoing by the police has made it less likely that people will be railroaded/framed for crimes they didn’t actually commit, so the rate at which crimes are marked as solved has declined, even as the rate at which they actually are solved hasn’t.

    • silence7@slrpnk.netOP
      121·
      1 year ago

      That’s definitely a big chunk of the drop in case clearance rates since the 1960s. It’s not as clear that there have been actual changes to police honesty recently though.

      • Rottcodd@kbin.social
        141·
        1 year ago

        It struck me after I posted that that modern technology and investigative techniques would also contribute to such a decline.

        It’s undoubtedly more difficult to falsely convict someone (whether deliberately or not) in the era of GPS, cell phone records, video surveillance and DNA tests.

        • silence7@slrpnk.netOP
          141·
          1 year ago

          There’s a famous example of how improvements in understanding of burn patterns resulted in concluding that a bunch of people were falsely convicted for arson:

          Due to the extensive publicity the case received, and because the murder charge carried a potential death sentence, the prosecution hired Lentini and John DeHaan, who had coauthored a fire investigation textbook, to evaluate other theories of how the fire may have started. One possible explanation was that one of the children, playing with matches, had ignited a sofa.

          Fortunately, two doors down from the Lewis’ residence was an almost identical house. Lentini and DeHaan received funds and permission to furnish that house with the same type of furniture and carpeting as in Lewis’. Then they wired the structure with sensors, lit the sofa on fire and recorded the results. Within minutes the house was an inferno, due to a flashover. A flashover occurs when a burning object generates hot combustible gasses that ignite and engulf an entire area in flames.

          To the general amazement of everyone involved, Lentini and DeHaan discovered the same burn marks on the floor of the test house that prosecutors thought indicated arson. But rather than having resulted from a liquid accelerant, the marks were caused by flashover. Prosecutors quickly dropped the charges. “That case opened my eyes,” Lentini said. “There were all these rules of thumb you can find in the literature at the National Fire Academy that are just wrong.”

          • davel [he/him]@lemmy.mlEnglish
            4·
            1 year ago

            Don’t credulously accept the testimonies of expert witnesses. Examples of “the science” proving years later to have been pseudoscience abound.

    • Veraxus@kbin.social
      31·
      1 year ago

      Ding ding ding ding ding! This is exactly the case.

      The police are merely getting away with less corruption and misconduct. The metric “solving crimes” has ALWAYS been a red herring.

      • Rottcodd@kbin.social
        42·
        1 year ago

        Eh?

        I said that it’s “not necessarily the case that” one thing and “it could be that” something else.

        Logic and plausibilty are all that’s necessary.

          • Rottcodd@kbin.social
            72·
            1 year ago

            What the fuck are you on about?

            It’s not necessarily the case though that fewer crimes are being actually “solved,” in the most precise sense of the term.

            It could be that the current heightened interest in police oversight and focus on investigation of (and huge lawsuit payouts as a consequence of) wrongdoing by the police has made it less likely that people will be railroaded/framed for crimes they didn’t actually commit, so the rate at which crimes are marked as solved has declined, even as the rate at which they actually are solved hasn’t.

            That’s everything I said, right there. What part of it are you not understanding?

            evidence is necessary. otherwise, it’s just speculation

            Of course it’s fucking speculation! What the fuck else did you think it was?!

            i didn’t expect equivocation

            It would be equivocation if there was a disjunct between the intended meaning of what I said at one point and the intended meaning of the same thing at some other point.

            But I’ve been entirely consistent in what I’ve said. The disjunct is between what YOU thought I meant and what I actually said, and that’s your fucking problem - not mine.