The nature of the crime and the possibility of solutions

Regarding the nature of the crime, the various media have helped to blur reality and fiction. As a result, notions about the causes of criminal behavior have been distorted. In reality, people commit crimes simply because they choose to. The commission of a criminal act is not the result of conduct that occurs suddenly. Criminals deliberately choose their course of action long before the subsequent act occurs. However, due to mass confusion, contemporary society deals with criminal behavior by explaining such facts. A criminal act is seen as something abnormal and outside the scheme of “normal good human behaviour”. Excuses abound and the theory of criminal behavior is often confused and mispronounced. As such, criminal behavior theory tends to revolve around therapeutic intervention, rehabilitation strategies, and sociopolitical politics. Instead of evaluating the bad decisions that people are free to make, the external environment is examined to “justify” the aberrant behavior. And, although the environment can play a role to some degree, anyone can come up with any number of excuses. Such notions present scenarios in which it is all too easy to mitigate criminal behavior on the basis of psychological dysfunction or oppressive social conflict. Police work is compounded by mixed messages, flawed interventions, misguided politicians and media distortions.

Ultimately, criminal behavior assessment strategies must include good tactics. Criminals, like the rest of us, know exactly what they’re doing. Their motives, means and methods are determined by them. Criminals basically control every aspect of their criminal behavior actions. They select their targets based on opportunity and the skill sets they possess. Crimes are committed by people seeking personal gain for one reason or another. Solving the crimes that criminals commit requires a Holmesian eye for detail and valid and insightful interpretation. Good police officers solve problems effectively and efficiently. They gather the facts and rule nothing out until the evidence proves otherwise. Figuring out the “why” of a criminal incident and then following the clues to the “who did it” conclusion requires patience and perseverance. There are no magic formulas or psychics to consult. It is just a matter of applying experience, education, and skills to the deductive process of careful investigation. Crime fighting is a continuum of careful observation and ingenious application of professional skills. Profiling, for example, is just one imperfect tool among many tools. The analysis of criminal behavior and subsequent criminal apprehension is an interdisciplinary continuum. The process is based on many aspects, from autopsy to zoology. Assessment strategies need to be proactively involved in assessing possible links between people, places and things. Assessing criminal behavior is an open-minded part of the investigative process. The ability to think, in relation to all possibilities, is a basic requirement. This applies in contrast to drawing pre-trial conclusions. It is important to suspend the inclination to make snap judgments. Naturally, there is a tendency to play with the odds and consider statistical measures of one kind or another. However, to hunt down criminals, proactive strategies are essential. An evolution in thought must occur. The simplistic reasons for criminal behavior and the commission of crimes must be radically altered.

Case links, interviews and interrogations, science and technology must work together. Essentially, the fundamental characteristics of an investigation revolve around three basic concepts: information, interrogation and instrumentation. These basic principles are supported by other aspects that reinforce the process by which solutions are probable.

Criminal methods of operation become unique to the individual, although there may be general similarities. Each delinquent can aspire to one level of society or another depending on his behavioral tendencies. His ways can be stifled or enhanced based on education, training, fantasy, lifestyle, desire, ability, and opportunity. He or she usually evaluates the event based on a win or lose approach. This part corresponds to the profit minus the risks involved in committing the claim. People tend to use what they know. They express their basic capabilities in their actions. We often apply our individual skill set depending on what we have learned. Criminals will follow the path of least risk and resistance. The motive, the means and the method continue to be basic to solve facts of criminal conduct. As such, abilities and skills vary from person to person. Criminals choose to commit crimes because someone else has something they want. Current sociological explanations of criminal behavior are too general. Notions about motivation and intention are blurred by simplistic single-causation theories and easy explanations.

Contemporary society has been misled about the nature of criminal behavior. And it’s not just society that is misled and confused, but the various criminal justice systems as well. According to some, criminals are never responsible for their behavior. Excuses, easy to make up, are readily available to rationalize criminal behavior. We forget the reasons, the why of what criminals do. Criminals, like the rest of us, play games with people. They know how to take advantage of vulnerabilities. Criminals look for opportunistic situations to exploit. The path of least resistance is essential. At first, they learned to manipulate others and cheat the system. Our complex criminal justice system has become a sleight of glass and smoke, myth and metaphor. Also, some of the academic types, operating under the guise of the academy, often point fingers at parents, neighborhoods, poverty, mental defects, and whatever else they can make up. Others will blame the police, prosecutors and judges. Through “sleight of hand” tactics, using fallacies of inference, truth becomes fiction, television drama becomes reality. We are often inundated with the reasons why there is crime. This usually happens when the government reports the latest statistics. Academics, clinging to ivory towers, may suggest changing demographics, inadequate police budgets, complacency in “fighting crime” and generally blaming the government. We can even be told that violent crime trends are a “statistical spike.” With such distractions, it’s easy to forget who is really responsible for the crime: the criminals themselves. They make decisions, knowingly and freely. Part of the investigative effort is to understand the thinking of criminals. For the police, solving crimes is a challenge. Nothing is ever a simple task or an easy explanation.

To determine criminal behavior and solve crimes, strategies must be safe, fast and methodical. There must also be a certainty of punishment. That is what criminals can understand, that it is the risk rather than the gain. The nature of crime, in terms of the criminal, is beyond the simplistic notion of internal conflicts. It is a matter of selfishly wanting what someone else has. As long as we can make excuses for the behavior, no one has to be held responsible for anything. From a case-solving perspective, the concept of free will and moral culpability should not be replaced by notions of psychological or sociological determinism. These views allow the criminal to escape responsibility. They cloud the motive, means and method by which crimes are committed. Instead, such notions focus on the mythical protection of society through the reformation of the criminal. As a result, sometimes before the criminal is caught, he or she has become the victim. There is a change of roles. The actual victim is forgotten in the blur of a media blitz. The assessment of criminal behaviour, based on a crime profile, should focus on the facts of the case. The apprehension, deterrence, and prevention of crime is a responsibility that belongs to law enforcement. Understanding the nature of crime refers to issues related to how individuals respond to the environment. Preventive conditions must face criminals at all times. The consequences of criminal behavior must be addressed by trained personnel, as well as technological and forensic strategies. Materials and resources must be expended to ensure competent approaches to case resolution. Early interdiction in criminal behavior would be an ideal situation.

Law enforcement must provide leadership in crime analysis, criminal behavior assessment, technological advances, forensics, and crime resolution strategies. Highly qualified, competent, and well-trained personnel are essential to the police agency. They must be recruited, trained and educated accordingly. Government budget processes must support effective and efficient police services. Urban planning and growth management must include the police as a public policy. Community planning should be subject to the supervision of law enforcement. Activities carried out by the police that are not related to law enforcement should be reduced or eliminated. A careful and in-depth analysis of job tasks must be carried out in all agencies. Part of the intention would be to maximize the number of officers dealing with operational and tactical issues, as opposed to administrative tasks. Solutions to crime can be found through an analysis of the opportunities and environmental conditions that allow crime to occur. These are community oriented items. Criminal behavior is self-learning behavior, and controlling crime means reducing opportunities for crime. Legal sanctions must be enforced to be effective if crime control measures are to be successful. The criminal should be dealt with directly for his criminal behavior and not rewarded for such behavior. There must be consequences. And, not indirectly treated as the symptom of some inner conflict. Crime control measures must be safe and fast. Apologies should not be used to escape accountability or responsibility. This applies regardless of socioeconomic status, political influence, judicial connections, corporate position, or the price of legal advice. Crime, delinquent behavior and social disorder will not be brought under control unless serious interdiction strategies are used to modify current approaches.