In reply to Jim Fraser:
> (In reply to Phil Payne)
>
> The two central truths of modern justice in all UK jurisdictions.
>
> 1. NUMBERS
> Numbers that can be used to supposedly prove to politicians that police and prosecutor are earning their salaries are more important than public safety and the security of your property. That is why mischief is now called anti-social behaviour and criminalised. That is why drivers breaking the speed limit is a higher priority than crimes of dishonesty even though police figures collated by the DfT do not support the position on speeding.
>
I won't deny that numbers are the bane of policing - but largely due to a desperate pursuit to quantify and try to improve performance. If only it was as simple as to suggest that antisocial behaviour was just "mischief" - tell that to Fiona Pilkington.
As for putting a higher priority on drivers speeding than victims of theft, robbery and burglary - that is nonsense. A glance at the wholescale slashing of traffic departments and their focus now on intelligence-led and ANPR type operations would tell you that.
> 2. CITIES AND COMPUTERS
> You cannot properly police either of these so nobody even bothers anymore. Good coppers flee to the shires so they do proper police work. Number crunchers, pension counters, nutters and fraudsters concentrate in the large conurbations where they can get lost in the noise and never found out. Most credit card fraudsters are allowed to just get on with it because neither the banks not the police are up to the task.
I agree fraud is a really hard area for police. That is not due to the calibre of the officers investigating, it is due to the constraints and difficulties of having to gather evidence suitable for production at court to prove the commission of the offence and the guilt of the offender. When that can involve transient computer records, numerous production orders from banks and tracing suspects who whilst in receipt of the proceeds of fraud might be several steps removed from those committing it.
Even a simple fraud can be a lengthy and protracted investigation which if it is resolved usually results in a derisory sentence and often none of the proceeds can be recovered for the victim, or the victim has already been refunded by the bank - who then become the victim and very often don't wish to assist.
As for not being able to police the cities - where are you getting these ideas from?