Police attitudes to and use ofCCTV
Home Office Online Report 09/05
Tom LevesleyAmanda Martin
The views expressed in this report are those of the authors, not necessarily those of the Home Office (nor do theyreflect Government policy).
Police attitudes to and use of CCTV
Tom Levesley Amanda Martin Online Report 09/05
ii
Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank Graeme Gerrard and the ACPO Video/CCTV Working Group for their input at the outset and throughout this research. In particular Mr Gerrard’s help with making contact with senior officers within the forces gave the research the necessary credibility and allowed researchers access to respondents. Thanks are due also to Gwendolyn Brandon and Moritz Flockenhaus for guidance and practical help. The research would not have been possible without the expert co-ordination of our contacts within each of the forces we visited. Thanks for supplying rooms, respondents and coffee over the days we visited. Finally, thanks to the police officers across the country who gave their time and provided us with open and honest answers to our questions.
iii
Contents Acknowledgements ii Executive summary iv 1. Introduction 1 Aims and objectives 1 Methodology 1 The respondents 2 2. Police use of CCTV 4 Types of crime 4 Serious crime and investigations 5 Seizure of evidence 5 Policing major events 8
Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) 8 Police response 8 Officer awareness of cameras and impact on perceived safety 10
3. Police views on the impact of CCTV 11 Workload 12 Implications for the courts and criminal justice system 16 4. The human element 17 Police input, partnership and information sharing 20 Volunteer operators 21 Staffing levels 21 Methods of communication 21 5. Conclusions and further research 24 Reference 26
List of tables 1.1 Nature of interviews 2 1.2 Respondents by rank and interview type 3 3.1 Response to the statement “CCTV is a time–consuming tool” 14
List of figures 2.1 Nature of the most recent prevalent CCTV–related incident 4 2.2 During an average month, how often do you seize CCTV footage? 6 3.1 Does CCTV increase or decrease officers’ workload? 13 4.1 Factors that impact on CCTV 17 4.2 Method of communication between police and CCTV control room 22
iv
Executive summary This report describes the findings of exploratory research conducted in early 2003 about police views on and the police use of CCTV. It draws on the views of more than 250 officers in 33 police forces and explored: • how the police use CCTV; • officers’ views on its effectiveness and how it could be improved; • the seizure of images and presentation of evidence; and • the interaction between patrol officers and CCTV operators.
This work complements a study on public attitudes towards CCTV (Spriggs et al., 2004). Respondents indicated that the police use CCTV as a regular part of their everyday policing. In town centres, where cameras are extensively used, police report regular use of images to deal with public order offences, theft and assault. Respondents generally viewed CCTV highly and it is said to be the starting point for enquiries. Images are regularly seized by officers, a weekly occurrence for many, for identifying offenders, witnesses, proving or disproving alibis and versions of events, and providing evidence for trials. CCTV was also used as a tool for deploying officers more effectively, to monitor incidents and suspicious behaviour allowing early interventions to reduce the severity of incidents, and to provide guidance for officers on the scene. Officers had mixed views regarding whether or not CCTV provided a deterrent to potential offenders, particularly where alcohol was involved. At its best, CCTV was said to be a cost-effective tool, which could help speed up investigations and encourage offenders to plead guilty, saving police and court time. Respondents acknowledged that CCTV brought to police attention a number of incidents that might otherwise have gone unnoticed, and created extra work in retrieving and searching through footage, thus increasing the demands on police workload. However, almost unanimously, police felt that the benefits of CCTV were worth any additional time. Good communication between police and CCTV operators appeared to be at the heart of effective police use of CCTV. Many examples were given where there was a high level of trust and understanding between both parties. The level of skill of the operators was felt to be crucial and the recruitment of well-trained and experienced operators was thought to be a key part of a successful CCTV scheme. Very few drawbacks of CCTV were identified in the interviews beyond the issue of time demands on officers and perhaps an increase in the public’s expectations. However, many officers did point out areas where improvements to processes, systems or equipment could increase its effective use. These were often local management, staffing or technical issues. Sometimes they reached further, for example into the use of CCTV in the criminal justice system. Many issues raised by officers highlighted areas where further detailed research would be beneficial to help develop more effective use of CCTV by police.
1
1. Introduction This report contains the results of a study of police perceptions of the usefulness of CCTV. This complements a study of public perceptions of CCTV undertaken as part of the Crime Reduction Programme CCTV initiative (Spriggs et al., 2004). The police perspective and officers’ perceptions of the impact of CCTV have not been explored in great detail through other research. Until recently the majority of research into CCTV has focused on the deterrent effect, crime prevention and perhaps to a lesser extent crime detection properties of CCTV. The post-incident and proactive use of CCTV are also issues that have received little attention to date. The views of police officers regarding their use of CCTV and their views about the impact of the systems have not been examined in any detail. The Home Office therefore initiated some exploratory research in January 2003, carried out with the support of ACPO, to establish what the issues were regarding CCTV, which impacted on police in their everyday work. It should be stressed that the results are based on views expressed by the officers interviewed and are not designed to give a definitive picture of the effectiveness of the police use of CCTV. Further research would be required to understand how the police actually use CCTV systems on the ground. Eliciting the views of more than 250 officers in 33 police forces, researchers explored officers’ views on: • how the police use CCTV; • CCTV effectiveness and how it could be improved; • seizure of images and the presentation of evidence; and • the interaction between patrol officers and CCTV operators. This report describes the findings from the research and highlights areas for future work.
Aims and objectives The aim of the project was: • to establish in what context and for what purposes CCTV was used by police; • to glean officers’ views on its effectiveness; and • to highlight good practice and areas where guidance might be required in order to
optimise the benefits of CCTV.
Methodology A mixture of qualitative and quantitative methods was used to address the research aims. A mixture of self-completion questionnaires and structured interviews were used. These focused on: • the role of the respondent and the role that CCTV played in that job; • where and how CCTV was most effectively used by the force; • where and how it was least effectively used in the force; • whether CCTV affects deployment of staff; • how CCTV control room staff communicate with police officers; • staffing of the control room; • issues about collecting evidence from CCTV; and • the impact of CCTV in terms of:
- advantages and disadvantages of CCTV; - how the use of CCTV systems can be improved; and - the use of CCTV in deterrence, crime reduction, crime investigation and deployment of police resources.
2
Throughout the report the results of the structured interviews and questionnaires are referred to as ‘questionnaire’ findings since they were coded and analysed together. Unstructured interviews were also conducted with officers in management and strategic roles. This would allow researchers to explore similar topics to those covered in the structured questionnaires but with more scope to focus on areas of officers’ particular interest or expertise, and to omit or cover in less detail the areas which were not applicable to a respondent’s particular role. In addition, Assistant Chief Constables from ten forces were interviewed by telephone to ensure that no significant issues had been missed, and to enrich the findings.
The respondents The research involved a total 253 officers from 23 forces, as shown in Table 1.1.1 Table 1.1. Nature of interviews
Number of officers Number of forces Questionnaire: face–face 45 10* Questionnaire: self– completion
136 13
In-depth interviews 72 9* Telephone interviews (ACCs only)
10 10
Total 263 33* * The in-depth interviews were carried out in the same forces as the face–face questionnaire completion. A random sample, stratified using the ACPO force families, was used to select the forces to participate in the interviews. This ensured that the forces selected represented characteristics found across the country as far as possible. However, it is recognised that within forces, individual BCUs vary significantly and these differences were not necessarily captured by this approach. Within each force, officers of different ranks were interviewed, as shown in Table 1.2, to gain an understanding of views from an operational and strategic point of view. For ease of administration, officers were recruited by a co-ordinator within each of the forces. The sample was therefore not drawn systematically at this level and it is recognised that, due to the potential for self-selection and the likelihood of a non-random selection, there is potential that some bias may have been introduced. However, the nature of this research was exploratory and therefore it was not essential that a purely random sample was selected. Interview data were coded and analysed quantifiably using SPSS.
1 The force families group according to characteristics such as size of areas and nature of policing requirements.
3
Table 1.2. Respondents by rank and interview type
Questionnaire* In-depth interview
Telephone interview
Total
Police Constable 37 3 40 Detective Constable 19 10 29 Sergeant 36 3 39 Detective Sergeant 15 10 25 Inspector 25 10 35 Detective Inspector 13 11 24 Chief Inspector 7 7 14 Detective Chief Inspector 9 2 11 Superintendent 3 4 7 Chief Superintendent 5 7 12 Chief Constable 1 1 Assistant Chief Constable
10
10
Civilian 2 1 3 Not recorded 9 4 13 Total 181 72 10 263 *Includes self-completion and structured questionnaires
4
2. Police use of CCTV This chapter provides an overview of: • how the police described their use of CCTV; • the nature of incidents for which CCTV is used; • the type of response made by police to those incidents; and • how successful they feel CCTV is in meeting the objectives of the police service. More specifically it describes: • the process of seizing CCTV footage for use as evidence; • how CCTV is used to inform deployment of officers; and • the level of information provided by operators to ensure an appropriate level of resource
is deployed. The majority of schemes that were discussed were town–centre, local authority–run schemes, although many officers described incidents involving private schemes. The stated aim of most of these town centre schemes was general crime reduction or public reassurance.
Types of crime In order to establish the nature of incidents for which the police use CCTV, respondents to the structured questionnaire were asked to describe two incidents; the most recent and the most significant incidents in which CCTV was involved. Well over half (57 per cent) of the officers described incidents which had occurred earlier that week and frequently that day, demonstrating just how much a part of the police toolkit CCTV has become.
Figure 2.1. Nature of the most prevalent recent CCTV–related incident
Based on response to an open question to which 170 officers replied.
Figure 2.1 shows that public order (17 per cent of responses), assault (16 per cent) and theft (15 per cent) were mentioned most frequently by officers when asked about the nature of the most recent CCTV–related incident. These incidents were generally monitored, or the calls were generated, from local authority/CDRP2 control rooms (77 per cent of the 147 respondents who gave an answer), rather than police control rooms (10 per cent) or private schemes (11 per cent). The nature of these incidents also reflects what the CCTV systems
2 Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships
0
10
20
30
40
No.
of O
ffenc
es
Robbery
Drug relatedoffenceSuspiciousbehaviourTheft
Assault
Public order
5
were designed to address, predominantly town and city–centre systems focusing on shops during the daytime and pubs and clubs at night. Many officers in the unstructured interviews stated that the systems were effective in addressing disorder on Friday and Saturday nights when bars were closing, especially when linked to schemes such as Pubwatch. Whilst the town–centre and routine crimes were the most frequently mentioned, officers also highlighted the importance of CCTV as an intelligence–gathering tool. It was used for locating missing persons, special operations, traffic monitoring and tracking suspects’ progress through the town. One superintendent also described the use of CCTV in ‘safe corridors’, an initiative set up in a high–crime area along a walking route frequently used by students. Contact points or ‘refuges’ were installed at which members of the public could make contact with, and if required be observed by, CCTV operators in the control room.
Serious crime and investigations References were often made to serious crime when officers were asked about the most significant CCTV–related incident. Although public order (10 per cent) and physical assault (15 per cent) were again frequently cited, homicides (12 per cent), robberies (7 per cent), sexual assaults and firearms incidents (5 per cent) were also described by officers. The unstructured interviews highlighted numerous examples of murder, rape, covert operations, child protection cases and terrorism investigations where CCTV was said to be an invaluable tool, even if the incidents were not actually captured on camera. As one patrol officer stated, it is often forgotten that people pass in front of the cameras on their way to commit crimes. Footage had also been captured which showed that alleged serious incidents did not take place at all.
Seizure of evidence
“The first thing you do now if there's an incident, a murder or a rape, you seize all the CCTV that you can get.” (Detective Constable)
A recurring theme was the extensive use that officers made of CCTV footage in investigative work. For some officers the use of CCTV was viewed as being as important as the changes brought about by DNA technology, in terms of the ability to capture offenders and provide conclusive evidence. For most officers, the seizure of footage was a weekly or daily occurrence. Figure 2.2 shows that 45 per cent of officers said that they, or their staff, seized footage more than ten times per month. Only four respondents said that they would not seize footage in this time. Furthermore, 60 per cent had seized footage in the week and 76 per cent in the month, preceding the interview.
6
Figure 2.2. During an average month, how often do you seize CCTV footage?
Base181 officers who were asked this closed question. The process of seizure was similar across the country. Officers were mindful of the need for continuity of evidence, strict audit trails and for the seizure and securing of footage (for example through sealing the tapes) to occur as soon after the incident as possible. Of those who said they had seized tapes (159 officers), 53 per cent were seized from local authority control rooms and 28 per cent from private schemes. Generally there was said to be good co-operation between the police and private operators although this was not taken for granted by respondents. While both parties have an interest in developing and maintaining good relations, small businesses in particular found it difficult to supply police with what they wanted every time they called, not through unwillingness to assist but through a lack of time or money. Good relations were encouraged, for example through tape exchange schemes, whereby police offer new tapes in return for those that they seize, and this type of initiative appeared to be beneficial. Usually officers found what they were looking for: either ‘easily’ (53 per cent) or ‘with some problems’ (24 per cent) and 99 per cent of respondents who had been helped by control room staff said that the staff were helpful or very helpful (only one said they were not very helpful). It was clear from the unstructured interviews that police felt that operators and other control room staff had a crucial role to play both in capturing evidence of a high quality and in enabling investigating officers to retrieve and compile evidence. Chapter 4 discusses in more detail the relationships between officers and CCTV control room staff. However, a number of issues arose in the process of seizing footage; specifically relating to: • the physical storage of tapes, DVDs etc. • the variable nature and quality of systems and procedures operated by individual CCTV
schemes; • preparing and presenting evidence for court; and • the time needed to compile evidence gathered by CCTV, i.e. to obtain, review, enhance
and document images. Storage The sheer volume of seized evidence created problems of finding the physical space to store evidence securely. For some forces this was an extension of the difficulties of storing evidence generally. The requirements on forces to retain images for a certain length of time, to document and catalogue accurately and store everything securely were clearly causing practical problems for the police and incurred a cost.
2%
43%
22%
23%
10%
Never1-10 times11-20 times20+ timesNo response
7
Quality There were two, linked aspects of quality raised by officers; the quality of images and the quality of the evidence provided.
The siting of cameras, the technical capabilities and condition of the cameras and other equipment, as well as the ability of the operators all had a great influence on whether or not the images captured would provide sufficient quality to recognise or identify individuals at an incident. Even when good images were captured, the over–use of video tapes, particularly in small private CCTV systems, often led to such deterioration in quality that the images were unusable.
However, even high quality pictures would be inadmissible as court evidence if correct procedures were not followed. Procedures include ensuring that: • an audit trail is maintained; • that data and time stamps on images are accurate; and • that tapes are rotated, at least on seven-day cycles, rather than recorded over
immediately.
One police constable demonstrated the importance of following correct procedures when describing a high quality system, saying:
“We once seized a video from a shop that had a one year old system. The tapes had been changed daily but there was no footage as they hadn't pressed record!”
Careful procedures could also have their downside – for example, where evidence was needed quickly to interview an offender or corroborate a witness statement. Tapes are typically rotated at set times during the day. If an incident had just occurred and the tape was still recording, officers could be frustrated by having to wait a number of hours before they could take it away.
Evidence for court The variety of media available, and the diversity of technologies even within a single medium, impacted both on the ability of officers to seize evidence and of the courts to use it. For example, some digital systems stored images directly onto the hard drive of a computer. If police are required to seize the original recording as a master copy, officers would have to seize the hard drive3 which they were generally unwilling to do due to the size, cost, and inconvenience caused to the system provider. Alternatively they would have to download images onto a suitable format, such as floppy or compact disc, which relied on the compatibility of police and CCTV control room technologies. Occasionally hardware would need to be sought, from Germany in one case making the process very cumbersome. Any shortcuts potentially provided a loophole in the law for a defence case who might claim that the CCTV evidence was inadmissible.
Time Numerous officers complained about the time taken to physically obtain and review tapes. This is discussed in more detail under ‘workload’ in Chapters 3.
Role of digital technology Many officers felt that the introduction of digital technology would overcome many of the problems described above. They saw as inevitable the replacement of bulky videotapes, which deteriorated in quality over time, with compact disc and DVD. Transfer of digital images by secure email could also save officers’ time in retrieving tapes from distant locations. Some of these comments should be read with caution, however. Although beyond the remit of this
3 It should be noted that PSDB guidance states that bit-for-bit identical copies are possible and carry the same evidential weight as the primary or original version. This is not possible with analogue recordings since the images degrade at each copy. (Digital Imaging Procedure, March 2002)
8
report it is worth observing that the Home Office Police Scientific Development Branch (PSDB) still feel that video tape is the most dense medium for storing images, in particular for real–time footage. There are also unresolved issues around the integrity of digital images and with the possibility that they could be tampered with.
Policing major events Football matches and other major events, such as demonstrations, were mentioned in around a quarter of the unstructured interviews. Police said that CCTV was used proactively to monitor crowds, retrospectively to investigate incidents of crowd trouble, as a deterrent to troublemakers, and to provide reassurance about public safety. Almost all of those who mentioned major events said that CCTV had had a positive impact on public order and hooliganism. One superintendent went so far as to say it had prevented trouble at their local football ground. Others gave examples of specific incidents where CCTV was used to good effect, in a few cases leading to large-scale arrests.
Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) Although ANPR was not a major feature of the structured responses, it was mentioned in around one–third of the unstructured interviews. The respondents were very positive about its use, not just to address traffic and vehicle crime but in general policing and investigative work too. Mobile systems and systems linked to the local authority CCTV schemes were both mentioned and officers seemed to welcome these developments. The advantages of ANPR are documented elsewhere and its use is expanding through Operations Spectrum and Laser4.
Police response The most common police response to CCTV–related incidents was the deployment of officers to the scene. This was the case in 105 (58 per cent) of the most recent and 72 (40 per cent) of the most significant incidents described. This indicates the active part that CCTV plays in policing, whether officers were called to the scene following an incident being observed in the CCTV control room, or the incident was tracked after the police had alerted the CCTV operators.
The way in which the cameras were said to be utilised showed the flexibility and adaptability of CCTV and the way in which systems were used proactively. Officers in the unstructured interviews said the strength of CCTV lay in providing a measured, effective and, where appropriate, immediate response. Intelligent use of the cameras allowed police officers to anticipate problems and perhaps intervene to reduce the seriousness of the incident or prevent it from happening altogether.
“The force uses CCTV effectively for the intelligence side of public order. We can patrol the town centre in three minutes flat in order to get an idea of what public order problems we may have on Friday and Saturday nights.” (Chief Inspector)
Arrests were made in 40 per cent of the CCTV–related incidents that respondents had most recently been involved in (based on the 146 incidents for which an outcome was stated). Of these around a third resulted in offenders being charged. For the most significant incidents, arrests were made in 61 per cent of the 155 cases for which an outcome was stated, reflecting perhaps that some officers interpreted the term ‘most significant’ to relate to the most successful use of CCTV. Care is needed in interpreting these figures as they relate to 4 For example, see the Home Office/ACPO report “Engaging criminality: denying criminals use of the roads” by PA Consulting, http://www.paconsulting.com/industries/government_public_sector_consulting/insights/ANPR_report.htm
9
reported incidents where the police provided a response. They do not relate to where the police are not called or do not respond. The preceding figures do point to the positive impact of CCTV. However, other positive outcomes were achieved in 30 per cent of the most recent and eight per cent of the most significant incidents, where incidents were reported to have been resolved, events ran smoothly or no further response was necessary. In many of these cases it was inferred that no crimes were committed and potentially that crimes were prevented by CCTV-aided police intervention. Forty–one per cent of respondents also said that they had been involved in at least one incident within the last month that had helped to prevent a crime.
Deployment The majority (78 per cent) of participants5 rated CCTV as a useful tool to deploy police officers and other police resources. Analysis of the qualitative data also showed many officers reporting that CCTV had a significant impact on deployment within their force, by alerting the police to incidents before they are reported by a member of public, or through clarifying the account of an incident and thus often preventing unnecessary deployment.
“Officers on the beat will communicate with the CCTV control room, thus resulting in more intelligent, evidence–based deployment. CCTV helps direct police to incidents.” (rank unknown)
In 58 of the 72 face–to–face interviews the issue of deployment of police officers was highlighted. Virtually all of these officers depicted the positive role that CCTV can have on deployment. Only four officers felt CCTV had little or no impact on deployment. In addition to being able to determine the number of officers to send to a live incident through information provided, CCTV was thought to have a more strategic influence. Some respondents stated explicitly that CCTV should not replace patrol officers but that it could enhance the effectiveness of their deployment. This might be through allowing less intensive patrols where areas were covered by cameras or checking the severity of an incident before making a decision on whether or not to follow up a call from the public. This was considered to be important since some incidents turned out to be less, or more, severe than might have been assumed from a description over the phone. A situation could change in the time it took for officers to reach a scene and cameras were able to capture this. Incidents could be watched as they developed to ensure that officers arrived at the scene with information about what to expect, helping them to gather evidence where necessary. One chief inspector commented that CCTV helped them make more cost-effective decisions about deployment since officers could be sent into situations that appeared to be about to escalate. Two officers stated that the cameras provided a visible presence in the streets to deter potential troublemakers allowing patrol officers to be deployed elsewhere. Conversely, another officer spoke of the cameras as a discrete form of monitoring which highlights two issues. Firstly that too many uniformed officers on the street might be a cause of concern to law–abiding members of the public or indeed provoke confrontation, and secondly that CCTV was used for covert operations as well as more general intelligence gathering on known offenders. Both of these interpretations were supported by other comments made in the interviews. Despite the general consensus about the valuable contribution of CCTV in informing deployment, a small number of officers (7 per cent), when asked about the disadvantages of CCTV raised the issue of deployment to non-priority incidents. This was a factor bound up in the impacts of police/ operator relationships. Good communication between officers and operators, or a police presence in the CCTV control room, were felt to be valuable to ensure intelligent, evidence–based deployment. It also meant operators were likely to have a greater
5 Combined responses to structured and unstructured questionnaire.
10
understanding of police workload and filter the demands accordingly. Issues of communication, quality of the operators and the value of police and operator co-operation are discussed in more detail in Chapter 4.
Officer awareness of cameras and impact on perceived safety Most respondents in the structured interviews (83 per cent) said that they were aware of the cameras to some extent when on patrol. Of these, 60 (41 per cent) felt that this influenced the way they conducted their patrol significantly or to some extent whilst many more felt the cameras had hardly any (19 per cent) or no effect at all (43 per cent) on their methods of patrol. Some officers said that CCTV footage was used as part of training. Those who were influenced by the cameras referred to deployment of officers. This included providing support for colleagues and hence increasing officer safety. Others said they were careful not to obscure the view of the camera with their bodies or turned off car headlights to avoid interfering with the quality of the picture. One officer said that they tried to ensure that their interactions with the public were on camera for their own safety. There was, however, a minority of officers (12 of 60 who answered this follow-up question) who said that they tried to make sure they were recorded on CCTV when interacting with members of the public. Some of the respondents in the face–to–face interviews revealed that they or some of their colleagues were more careful to follow procedures when they knew they could be seen on camera. Whilst rare, the implication was that there was a small number of officers who were more likely to behave correctly when they were being watched. On the other hand, those discussing the issue recognised that CCTV was a useful tool in raising standards, and welcomed the increased professionalism that an awareness of being monitored brought about. Conversely, two officers mentioned incidents where footage had disproved allegations of inappropriate or malicious behaviour by officers, which were very commonly made, particularly by those in custody. Officers were also asked whether they felt any more secure when patrolling an area covered by CCTV and more than one third (37 per cent) said that they did. One inspector said that officers sometimes asked for the cameras to be put on them in violent incidents, possibly to avoid accusations of bad practice or to ensure that any attacks on them were captured to provide evidence at a later date. Half of the respondents, however, felt that being on camera made no difference to their feelings of safety, reinforcing a sense that the police get on with their job regardless of whether or not CCTV is there. Nevertheless, officers valued the presence of the cameras and their contribution to police work.
11
3. Police views on the impact of CCTV This chapter explores the police views on the effectiveness of CCTV, its impact on officers’ workload and the implications for police and the courts in bringing offenders to trial. Although not asked explicitly whether or not CCTV worked, respondents’ views were sought on a variety of issues to gauge the extent to which they felt that CCTV was or was not ‘a good thing’. A large number of respondents were positive about CCTV and the benefits it brought to policing; 160 (88 per cent) said that CCTV had a positive impact on their job and the same number felt that more money should be spent on CCTV. Only two respondents felt it had a negative impact and three agreed with the statement “CCTV is a waste of money”. The specific benefits and the reasons police were positive are described in some detail throughout this report, showing how CCTV is seen as a vital part of the policing ‘toolkit’. Its preventative power, allowing officers to pre-empt trouble, its use as an extra set of eyes or for intelligence gathering and, to a lesser extent, the deterrent effect were all seen as benefits. Disadvantages were more difficult to identify. In total officers provided 348 responses when asked about the advantages of CCTV compared with 238 for disadvantages. Some (8 per cent) even said there were no disadvantages while a further 11 per cent gave no response at all. Few of the responses were negative about CCTV per se, but expressed a desire to be able to use it better, for example wanting better operators, more extensive camera coverage or more funding. The highest single responses related to frustration either in terms of the time– consuming nature of reviewing and gathering evidence (37 respondents or 20 per cent), poor quality images (35 respondents or 19 per cent) or the increase in incidents being brought to the attention of police (13 or 7 per cent). Those who did mention genuine disadvantages made references to displacement of crime (11 or 6 per cent), the potential for deployment of officers to non-priority incidents (12 or 7 per cent) and the high expectations that the public may have about how much CCTV, and therefore the police, can do (13 or 7 per cent).
The deterrent effect As with many crime-prevention interventions, one of the most common debates surrounding CCTV is whether or not its presence actively deters potential offenders from entering or committing crime in the area covered by the cameras or thought to be so. Does CCTV increase the chances of arrest and prosecution of offenders who commit offences on camera and of locating those wanted in connection with other offences? Perhaps CCTV can have a deterrent effect initially but does any reductive impact on crime fade over time as the cameras cease to be a novelty? There are questions about the fear of being caught, and whether any concern about CCTV cameras has an impact on offenders’ criminal activities. Additionally, CCTV cameras, like other crime prevention interventions, might only displace crime to areas which are not covered by cameras. There was a mixed view from officers as to whether CCTV had a deterrent effect. Only 24 officers (13 per cent)6 mentioned the deterrent effect as an advantage of CCTV, compared with 116 (64 per cent) who mentioned its evidential use generally, and 54 (30 per cent) the ability to identify offenders, witnesses or victims. It should be noted, however, that responses to this open question were otherwise fairly low on individual issues and the deterrent effect was the third most frequent response. The responses to a different, closed question showed a more positive view since 205 officers (81 per cent) thought that CCTV was a useful or very useful tool in helping to deter crime. 6 Percentages based on 181 officers who were asked this open question in the questionnaire.
12
This compared favourably with similar questions about CCTV as a tool to reduce crime (84 per cent) and to deploy officers (78 per cent), although again it was felt to be most useful in investigations (95 per cent). Officers who were supportive of CCTV in terms of deterring crime often described an indirect effect, more in terms of creating a safer environment in which crime was thought to be less likely to occur, rather than offenders seeing a camera and deciding not to commit a crime. The high visibility of most town–centre cameras, prominent signage and local publicity were an important part of this perceived impact. Hand–held cameras could also provide a highly visible deterrent to troublemakers and reassurance to the general public, for example at football matches. A small number of respondents did say that CCTV had a deterrent effect on public order although more felt that the presence of the cameras had little effect, if they were noticed at all, particularly when alcohol was involved. Officers also recognised that offenders learned to adapt to the cameras by altering their behaviour. They could establish where the cameras were located and avoid those areas, thus effectively displacing crime. Others simply wore baseball caps to obscure their faces or took other measures to avoid being identified. On balance, however, the survey pointed to a view from the police that CCTV does act as a deterrent. This may be linked to particular types of offender, to particular areas, or to particular crime types. This perceived deterrent effect also appeared to be linked to CCTV’s ability to reduce fear of crime and improve community safety generally in an area. Some officers provided examples of how they felt this deterrent effect occurred, suggesting that it might move on drug users or beggars from an area, enhancing community development or moving on potential victims from a dangerous area. Others felt that the investigative power of CCTV could act as a deterrent in the longer term, that is as offenders saw themselves on camera and were convicted.
Workload
It became clear at an early stage in the research that police officers were not always able to make the best use of the resources available to them. This was frustrating for officers who were largely supportive of CCTV and aware of its capabilities. When asked about the disadvantages of CCTV, the time–consuming nature of the work was the largest response, cited by 37 officers (20 per cent). Officers also said that if indisputable evidence was located and seized it saved vast quantities of time; in many cases the evidence–gathering process was reported to be the most time–consuming element of CCTV.
There was a tension therefore, although not a contradiction, in what the police were reporting. Does CCTV increase officers’ workload or, overall, does it help save police time? Figure 3.1 depicts the percentage responses to four closed questions asked about the influence of CCTV on police time. It reflects the tension over the police workload since 43 per cent of participants agreed that CCTV was a time–consuming tool whilst 44 per cent disagreed. However, in the interviews it was clear that, even those officers who agreed that CCTV was time consuming were reticent to appear to be negative about it. The responses to the other questions in Figure 3.1 underline the reasons for this reticence; 92 per cent felt that the benefits that CCTV provided were worth spending the additional time to achieve and only six per cent thought that time spent on CCTV was better spent on other activities. Additionally, 61 per cent of respondents felt that CCTV actually saved police time overall whilst 17 per cent disagreed with the statement and 19 per cent did not agree or disagree.
13
Figure 3.1. Does CCTV increase or decrease officers’ workload?
Base: 252 respondents to closed questions.
Response by rank Some analysis was carried out to explore whether there was any consistency in response across different ranks. It is feasible that ground level officers might perceive an increased–workload, for example in calls to incidents or trawling through footage, compared with more senior officers, who would be unlikely to carry out specific tasks related to CCTV and may be more aware of the overall benefits in terms of the force or BCU. In fact there were few notable differences according to rank between the response to the workload questions. However, in looking at the question of whether CCTV was a time–consuming tool, some rank differences did become evident. Table 3.1 separates out the responses to ‘CCTV is a time–consuming tool’ by two different rank groupings. It shows little difference between the proportion of ground–level and other ranks of officers who agreed that CCTV was a time–consuming tool. However, there is a slightly larger proportion, 13 per cent compared with eight per cent, who strongly disagree with the statement. Ground–level officers, however, were less likely than more senior officers to agree that CCTV saved officer’s time overall (59 per cent compared with 71 per cent). This fits with the hypothesis described above. A higher proportion of detectives (53 per cent) rate CCTV as a time–consuming tool, compared with all other groups (38 per cent). Additionally, only 56 per cent of detectives compared with 68 per cent of all other officers agreed that CCTV saved police time overall. These differences may be explained by the fact that detectives deal with CCTV predominantly in relation to evidence gathering, which as stated earlier constitutes the time most time–consuming element of CCTV. It appears then that detectives are more aware of the impact on workloads than other officers; however, detectives were still positive about the impact of CCTV on their job.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
The benefit s of CCTV areworth the additional time
Overall, CCTV savesofficers' time
CCTV is a timeconsuming tool
CCTV takes up a lot ofpolice time that could bebetter spent elsewhere
strongly agree agree neither disagree s trongly disagree No response
14
Table 3.1. Response to the statement “CCTV is a time consuming tool” (% response)
Strongly agree
agree neither disagree Strongly disagree
Base (no of respondents b)
All ground levela 5 39 11 31 13 132 Other ranks 7 36 10 39 8 100 All detectives 10 43 11 25 10 87 Non–detectives 3 35 10 40 11 145 All respondentsc 7 36 11 34 10 252 a) Ground level is defined as constables and sergeants, including detectives b) 20 respondents are missing in each of the rank breakdowns c) All respondents row excludes 3 per cent non-responses, hence percentages do not sum to 100
CCTV as a time–saving tool Many officers spoke about the time–saving power of CCTV. The reported high number of arrests in CCTV–related incidents (see Chapter 2) points to an efficiency; if police are able to make arrests quickly this saves time in investigating an incident, interviewing witnesses then identifying, locating and capturing offenders. It was acknowledged, however, that it is difficult to quantify the effectiveness since some offenders would have been arrested regardless of CCTV. The ability for CCTV footage to convince offenders to plead guilty did appear to save police and court time. Half of the respondents (49 per cent) said that CCTV had helped them to secure a guilty plea within the last month. Interviews also prompted a high number of comments on this matter.
“If the evidence is good, nine out of ten admit to the offence.” (patrol sergeant)
Not only could it convince offenders to own up to a crime, the use of CCTV could help locate individuals or, through ANPR, vehicles at the scene. Such images could help confirm or deny an alibi or a witness statement and thus to progress enquiries more quickly. CCTV also allowed officers to spend less time in court. CCTV evidence of a high enough quality could provide a jury with a far better illustration of an incident than a description by a police officer. One detective constable said they knew of 120 cases which had been to court where the availability of CCTV evidence meant that officers did not have to attend. Unfortunately, evidence quality was not always sufficient to secure a conviction and this was a frustration for police.
CCTV as a time–consuming tool Extra calls for service
“Public order incidents would go unreported if it weren't for CCTV. The more you look, the more you see.” (superintendent)
It is arguable that the presence of CCTV cameras increases public reporting of incidents; 12 officers (7 per cent) felt CCTV generated extra calls for service in an open question about the disadvantages of CCTV. However, 76 per cent of respondents to the structured questionnaires rated the volume of calls generated by CCTV as manageable. Only five officers (3 per cent) felt that it was unmanageable. The indications from officers then are that any increase in police activity that is generated by CCTV is within reasonable limits
15
Disclosure The officers spoken to were conscious of the need to assemble a watertight case when preparing CCTV evidence. This raised the issue of the disclosure laws7, the effect of which was to significantly increase the amount of footage that needed to be seized, stored and, most importantly, trawled through. This added an inordinate amount of time. Disclosure was raised unprompted in around a quarter of the interviews and 17 officers (9 per cent) specifically mentioned disclosure when asked about the disadvantages of CCTV in the structured interviews, the fourth most popular response. Trials had collapsed under the disclosure laws and officers felt under pressure to be absolutely sure they had footage which covered the appropriate time and place. Some officers blamed defence lawyers for increasing the amount of footage that it was necessary to seize to prove that their client was, or was not, in a particular place. This often required many hours of footage either side of an incident to be seized. Frequently, when officers were trying to disprove an alibi, the footage seized showed nothing, for example an empty street where a defendant had said they had been, but nevertheless someone has to watch it to disprove their claim. There was some uncertainty as to whether or not this needed to be a police officer or if civilian staff should be able to carry out such duties and some definitive guidance on this issue would be welcome.
“The disclosure side of things is very time consuming. If we're using the cameras, say on a drug–dealing operation, then we've got many, many tapes of activity or non-activity. All those tapes have to be made available to the defence, disclosed and copied. If you've got six defendants each represented by different lawyers, each of those tapes would have to be copied six times.” (Detective Inspector)
Even the copying of tapes, so that all sides had access to the evidence, was a burden on officers’ time and also on the force/BCU budget. The need to enhance or produce still images added further complications and in one case, cited by a detective superintendent, the enhancement of the images by the defence had actually corrupted the images. The responsibility for this work appeared to lie with police officers although some forces did use civilians for some of the work. It is important to question how much of the evidence copying procedure should actually be a police responsibility and how much, and for what specific duties, civilian time could be utilised.
Managing the workload Drawing on special constable or civilian support was suggested by a number of officers in order to alleviate the demands on the police. The presence of city wardens or special constables could act to reinforce the initial deterrent effect of CCTV schemes, whilst also contributing to achievement of the schemes original objectives (for instance to reduce public order offences or nuisance behaviour in the town centre). A number of respondents stated how a scheme’s success was heavily dependent on an effective partnership approach and CCTV is as much a community safety tool as a policing tool, therefore it seems beneficial to draw on community resources. Some forces also used civilians to help in trawling through tapes to look for evidence; however, it was not clear to the officers interviewed whether this was a job that ought to be carried out by police or civilian staff. Using civilians in this way could help use police resources more effectively. Officers interviewed were also unsure about the legislative position in relation to using civilian staff.
7 Under disclosure laws, officers are required to make available to defence lawyers any evidence relating to the case that they seize or have reviewed.
16
Implications for the courts and criminal justice system
“Where you actually see the assaults from start to finish, you don't really need any more evidence, put that before the court and they're convicted. It's a wonderful way of building up a picture of what's happened.” (Detective Inspector)
There was little doubt amongst respondents that good quality images could conclusively prove a charge against an offender. The benefits of this impacted not only on the police themselves but extended throughout the criminal justice system. As discussed above, police could make large time savings in their investigative work and an early guilty plea as a result of CCTV could reduce the time spent interviewing witnesses, victims and the offenders. Furthermore, the improved quality and the indisputable nature of much CCTV evidence could save court time, by reducing the number of trials collapsing due to weak evidence and/or the amount of time necessary for the prosecution to prove their case. CCTV evidence was also a very powerful way of indicating the severity of an incident. This could demonstrate to a jury that, say, an assault was more brutal than the defence had suggested. This kind of evidence could therefore influence sentencing. Ironically, the prevalence of CCTV and its successful use in criminal cases was, according to one officer, beginning to undermine those cases where such evidence was not present. This officer felt that the absence of CCTV evidence could be detrimental.
“In fact if no CCTV footage is presented at court suspicions are aroused because the court assumes that there is extensive CCTV coverage. This is a severe disadvantage, this expectation that footage exists weakens the case if the footage is not available or obtainable. A police officer’s word is now becoming less and less taken as the truth." (Detective Inspector)
Although this was the view of only one officer, to some extent it is supported by the 8 per cent of respondents who cited the unrealistic expectations of the public as one of the disadvantages of CCTV.
“It creates inflated expectations among members of the public who expect to be able to use it to solve all crimes…there is a need to manage expectations.” (rank unknown)
Many officers expressed amazement and dismay at the difficulty that courts had with showing images. Most courts were set up to accept only video tapes, so time and money was spent transferring images onto such tapes. One officer also commented that courts generally only had television sets rather than proper monitors on which to view CCTV evidence, and that this had an adverse effect on the quality of evidence provided. It appeared that the police and the criminal justice system would benefit from some joint working or exchange of information regarding what was realistic in improving the way CCTV evidence could be presented in court.
17
4. The human element
“There is no point in having the CCTV unless you are going to have some sort of pro-active monitoring.” (Chief Inspector)
The effectiveness of CCTV is dependent on a number of factors, including the equipment used and the placement of the cameras. Frequently, such technical issues dominate discussion around CCTV and indeed were one of the major frustrations expressed by officers in this research. However, arguably more important is the way in which the technology is put into operation; the way that police and operators work and how well they work together to get the most out of the technology. This Chapter explores the role and importance of the ‘human element of CCTV’, specifically the operators, and the interaction between officers, operators and the CCTV equipment at their disposal. This will help to highlight what can be done to improve police use of CCTV through training and better management of the systems available. Chapter 3 examined how CCTV impacted on the work of the police. Reversing this, respondents were also asked to say what impacted on the CCTV systems used by their force. Figure 4.1 shows that equipment and operators dominated the responses to this question, this chapter focuses on the operators, relationships and communication.8 Figure 4.1. Factors that impact on CCTV
Based on 107 participants giving at least one response (total of 167 responses). Top five responses are shown.
8 The use of equipment and technology was not the focus of this research (nor was the funding of CCTV systems) and there were no specific questions about developments in technology in the interviews. Despite this, ANPR and facial recognition technology, the importance of good lighting, introduction of digital systems, mobile cameras, maintenance issues, difficulties with enhancement, real–time and time–lapse recording were all cited as important factors in the quality of pictures and the quality of evidence. The work of the Home Office Police Scientific Development Branch (PSDB) is relevant here.
05
1015202530
Freq
uenc
y
Equipment
Operators
Money
Relationships/communicationLighting
18
The CCTV operator “When I was a divisional commander I looked at research and found a gap in terms of good practice and the role of the CCTV operator in criminal investigations. I think we have a tremendous tool here that is not being maximised to its full potential.” (Assistant Chief Constable)
Officers considered the operator to be a factor that heavily impacted on their use of CCTV, and many discussed the quality of monitoring and operator training. The importance of good operators was highlighted with 13 per cent of those of participating in structured interviews referring to operators when discussing the disadvantages of CCTV. This might have been in relation to inconsistent operator training or lack of operators, both of which came out in the unstructured interviews as key issues. In addition, in response to a question about what agencies such as the local authority and Home Office should be considering, a common issue highlighted was CCTV staffing. This issue also came up in the unstructured interviews:
“…CCTV is only as good as its operator’s intelligence, its positioning, its protocols and if we get those right we'll start maximising its availability and use.” (Superintendent)
Paid civilians staffed the majority of control rooms while police staffed some and volunteers staffed others. The study did not identify a standard staffing arrangement for CCTV control rooms, nor attempt to evaluate whether one arrangement was more effective than another. However, the interviews and questionnaires generated large amounts of information about staffing and the influence police felt the different arrangements had.
Skills required of an operator The operator occupies as pivotal position within a CCTV scheme and respondents felt that a good operator could seriously influence the effectiveness of CCTV. Within the different schemes there was evidence of a range of ability amongst the operators and some difference of opinion regarding whether or not the operators were doing a good job. However, some consensus did emerge from the unstructured interviews regarding the respondent’s views about the qualities an operator needed to have in order to do their job. The ability to operate the equipment in the control room was obviously a high priority. Many situations develop quickly and operators would need to be confident and comfortable with the CCTV controls in order to respond. Tracking offenders through an area could be difficult but a knowledge of where cameras were located, geographical knowledge of an area, and the ability to switch quickly between cameras increased the chances of successfully tracking a target. Additionally it was very important that operators knew when and how to switch to manual control of cameras or to initiate real–time recording. A lack of technical knowledge here could mean vital seconds being lost. Local knowledge, of offenders and crime hotspots, allowed operators to proactively monitor an area. The ability to recognise known offenders or police targets meant that operators could look out for individuals during the day and inform police of their whereabouts. Looking for indications of where trouble might start could ensure that officers were deployed or, if incidents did develop, operators would be ready to capture vital evidence. A small number of officers complained that poor operators did not capture evidence adequately, mainly through a lack of understanding of what was required. This manifested itself in images that captured a general scene rather than honing in on individuals for identification and evidential purposes. An understanding of police work could instil in operators the value of both close-up and distance shots and when each is best employed. Some skills were more ephemeral and were explained by officers in terms of general police know-how, that is the skills that police officers used in their everyday work that they felt were gained by experience. This might include knowing that someone intent on committing a street
19
robbery was likely to engage a lookout. A good operator might identify such a person from their behaviour and keep watch in the vicinity or work out who they were communicating with and thus identify an offender. Operators might also know what amounted to suspicious behaviour and monitor or notify accordingly. Other policing skills mentioned included the ability to provide a commentary on events whilst a knowledge of legal requirements was said to be essential, in particular the requirements of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act and Data Protection Act regulations to ensure that evidence was collected in accordance with the law. Much also depended upon how police and operators communicated and the relationship they developed. For instance if the operator had a good rapport with the local patrol officers, police were more likely to share information. This better equipped the operator to be selective in their reporting and to make sound judgements about whether or not police involvement was required. Similarly, the trust and confidence that the officers had in the operators and their ability influenced how far police would be prepared to act on advice they received from the CCTV control room.
“You can tell when you are working with experienced, knowledgeable operators because information is free-flowing. Operators [need to have] local knowledge and knowledge of the technology, they don't necessarily need knowledge of police issues, as long as they can communicate with officers.” (Srgeant)
Operator training The extent of operator training given varied from none at all, to in-house or police administered training, up to professional training. The majority of operators seemed to receive in-house training, or simply learnt from police officers who spent time in the control room. Although professional training may be considered preferable, police administered training was portrayed as effective, and professional trainers proved very costly. There was a clear discrepancy between paid operator and voluntary operator training; the volunteers were thought to receive less, if any, training in comparison to the paid operators. Operators were believed to be the key to maximising the use of CCTV and many respondents felt that it would be worth developing a national qualification for CCTV operators.9 Thre was however some concern about the cost that this would involve. It is important to bear in mind when interpreting these findings, that information was gathered through interviews with police officers. It did not include interviews with CCTV operators; therefore the information is secondary, subjective and many respondents would not have been aware of the training that was available to, or completed by, operators. The Home Office National Evaluation, being conducted by Leicester University, has been including observational control room studies and will gather first–hand information about the level of training operators have received. The Home Office Police Scientific Development Branch has also published guides on recruitment and training of CCTV operators. These are available through the
Police input, partnership and information sharing Some respondents felt that policing skills were necessary to do the job of monitoring the cameras. For some, this extended to a view that, in an ideal world, control rooms should be staffed by police officers since the ability to anticipate trouble as well as to communicate with 9 A joint working party between the CCTV User Group and PCMA is currently developing core competencies for CCTV operators. The Security Industry Training Organisation is developing Occupational Standards for operators in parallel to this work to ensure a consistent approach.
20
other officers on the ground were skills that civilians would not necessarily have. Most, however, acknowledged that well-trained civilians could do a good job as operators and they recognised that it was not practical to fill CCTV control rooms with police. Having policing skills in the control room, not necessarily police officers, appeared to be the key.
“If it's run by police officers or by civilians it works just the same.” (Detective Constable)
Because of the nature of the skills required and the importance of the relationship between CCTV operators and the police, many respondents felt that a degree of police input, perhaps in terms of monitoring and of training operators, could be beneficial. Some officers said that police were involved in training operators, or worked side by side with them in the early days of setting up the control room. Furthermore, many of the schemes referred to by respondents had evolved from more basic schemes, some of which were located within police stations and/or staffed by police officers. One detective sergeant described the set up of their scheme, where police officers went into the control room and worked for several weeks with the civilian operators. Officers continued to work with the operators and advised them if police thought there was something that could be improved. Some operators went out on patrol as part of their training to help develop their policing skills and their understanding of the police requirements. Conversely, one detective inspector said that training police officers on CCTV systems could help to demystify CCTV for police and show its capabilities to ensure that officers’ expectations of CCTV were realistic. Others said that operators were involved in police briefings or were appraised of police intelligence, enabling the proactive monitoring discussed above to take place. Shared control rooms for police operations and CCTV control room provided exchange of practice as well as enabling swift response to incidents.
“I liked the instant communication that a shared police/CCTV control room facilitated. It's very important to match up intelligence with the proactive monitoring of a well- trained operator, police or non-police. In [name of force area] we have very good dedicated operators who know the area and the offenders. Operators can guide police to individuals as incidents happen.” (Chief Superintendent)
The importance of good relationships, exemplified by shared briefings, was mentioned many times, not only to promote information sharing but also to encourage trust and mutual understanding. As a result of such information–sharing practices the quality and relevance of the information CCTV operators could relay back to police was also said to improve, since operators with an understanding of the officers’ workloads could filter demands accordingly.
“We have such a good working relationship with the CCTV operators. I know them all well, I know their names. The whole point of the CCTV operator is they have to be professional, to know what they are talking about, to know who is on your rota & how everyone works.” (Detective Inspector)
Feedback from police to operators was said to play an important role in the development of operator skills. Involving operators in a post–incident discussion or feeding back on the outcome of a prosecution could have many benefits. In successful operations, operators might be encouraged by seeing the value of their input, encouraging further good practice. Officers felt that this was particularly important since some of the operators’ work could be monotonous and badly paid. Similarly if operators were not capturing appropriate images, constructive criticism could ensure that they understood the shortcomings and could take remedial action in the future.
21
Volunteer operators Volunteer-run schemes were generally seen in a different light to the other employee–run schemes. Police viewed them more as a means of offering public reassurance, particularly in small towns, but the lack of quality assurance meant that officers were generally unfavourable towards them. The advantage of having paid civilian staff, rather than volunteers, was reported to be that they would be employed to monitor at key times, usually considered to be Friday and Saturday nights. Often schemes staffed by volunteers would be left unmonitored at these key times. Additionally, those volunteers that were mentioned by officers were most often viewed as poorly trained and thus the quality was inconsistent.
“[(Name of town] CCTV scheme is staffed by volunteers. These volunteers have limited training and little understanding of policing, e.g. there was a smash and grab and there was a ten–minute shot of a broken window.” (Chief Superintendent)
Staffing levels One fifth of those who participated in unstructured interviews, felt that CCTV should be monitored on a twenty-four–hour basis or at the least over what are considered to be ‘key times’. This was not possible in all schemes.
“…needs to be a 24hr system. Operator shifts end at 3am and we rely on tapes [until 7am] recorded on a time lapse, some of the big incidents happen at these times and the evidence is poor.” (Chief Inspector)
A number of officers felt that more operators were required to monitor CCTV screens. In addition, some felt that operators could not possibly attend to all the sources of information within the control room (e.g. radio, screens, phones, town link radio etc.) Many control rooms now boast a wall full of monitors which could not possibly be watched at all times with the small number of operators generally staffing the control rooms.
“If there aren’t enough people monitoring the systems it's a waste of money.” (Detective Constable)
Methods of communication Effective methods of communication were said to facilitate information sharing between police and operators and thus impact positively on policing. Police and operators who shared information and trusted each other were able to become a more effective team. Good communication, in conjunction with a good working relationship, was identified as a vital factor in facilitating the optimum use of CCTV. This ties in with the workload discussion in Chapter 3 as respondents reported that well-informed operators were able to tailor demands to police accordingly, resulting in less inappropriate deployment and better police/operator relations. Figure 4.2 shows that police radio and private phone lines, where the police have a direct phone link with CCTV operators, were the most commonly reported methods of communication used between CCTV operators and the police. In other cases public phone lines, including mobile phones, were used. These are, of course, responses from individual officers and respondents were not distributed evenly between forces or BCUs. It was therefore not possible to determine accurately how means of communication varied at the force/BCU level.
22
Figure 4.2. Method of communication between police and CCTV control room
Base: 113 officers who described a particular method used in the most recent CCTV incident.
Police radio “The CCTV control room has a police radio. Police radio enables officers to ask for cover and provides a back-up.” (Detective Constable)
Although it was not possible to quantify from the unstructured interviews, it appeared that police radio was generally used as a one-way device. Thus, operators were able to hear about the nature and location of incidents and respond by deploying the cameras, starting recording, or responding to police instructions about what needed to be filmed. Using police radio helped operators in developing their understanding of police requirements. Interviews highlighted the importance of immediate response, but also the value of having direct contact with CCTV operators to guide (on identification and evidence collection) and be guided (to incidents and to individuals). Thus the ideal situation was considered to be the ability for two-way communication, and in some forces the police radio was able to do this. Although the police radios allowed instant two-way communication, officers highlighted the data protection issues surrounding civilian use of police radio. Indeed many officers felt that the requirements on data protection prevented police radios from being located in CCTV control rooms unless a police officer was present.10 Issues about security of information were highlighted in relation to methods of communication. Airwave was often cited, as a means of resolving these. Airwave is a piloted police radio system which allows greater security against members of the public tapping into and listening to police broadcasts. It also allows a number of dedicated talk groups, which could be organised geographically or operationally, effectively allowing for a CCTV talk group including officers and CCTV operators. Airwave could thus provide a way to overcome perceived difficulties with civilians using police radio. ACPO is currently providing guidance to ensure correct procedures are followed.
10 ACPO is developing guidance on the use of police radio. The ACPO view is that police radios may be used in CCTV control rooms provided that adequate measures are in place to ensure compliance with the Data Protection Act.
14%
16%
44%
11%
15%
Public phone linePrivate phone linePolice RadioLink schemeOther
23
Telephone Figure 4.2 also shows that there were a number of police and CCTV operators that continued to rely on public telephone or dedicated ‘hotlines’ for means of communication. Using a private phone line eliminates the data protection issues, but at the cost of losing the instant communication link. Using public lines, i.e. simply dialling into the police station, created delays in the system. Some officers complained that operators had to queue when using the public system and in one force even said they dialled 999. Clearly this was not acceptable if CCTV was to be a responsive tool.
“It is frustrating that air channels cannot be monitored by LA staff, because it builds in a time delay.” (Inspector)
‘Link’ systems
“Centre link is used by door staff, links in with the council CCTV system and acts as an early warning and evidence gathering system (it has replaced Pubwatch), CCTV control room staff are key to this.” (Inspector)
For the purpose of this report, the term ‘Link’ systems is used encompass a range of initiatives under titles such as Shopwatch, Pubwatch, Citycentre Link. These make use of CCTV and radio communications technology to allow businesses, CCTV control rooms and police to exchange information and alert one another to potential trouble. All of these are based on the same principle of linking up a number of bodies in order to prevent crime occurring within a particular area or venue. The systems described by officers sometimes made use of dedicated radio channels and/or shared CCTV resources. For instance a typical Shopwatch would involve CCTV being linked in by radio with store detectives; the CCTV operators might also be linked in with the police radio and the local patrol officers might carry a Shopwatch radio. Through these mechanisms the three parties shared relevant information, which allowed them to be more proactive and effective when dealing with retail crime, for instance. Participants portrayed Link schemes as extremely useful and around a quarter of those respondents mentioned a Link system when discussing methods of communication between the police and CCTV. Of those that completed structured questionnaires, 11 per cent of participants reported using Link systems to communicate with operators when asked about their most recent CCTV generated incident, and nine per cent when asked about the most significant CCTV–related incident.
24
5. Conclusions and further research This report reflects police perceptions and does not attempt to demonstrate any link between any of the factors raised in the interviews and the actual effectiveness of CCTV, for example in reducing crime. This would be a complex and long–term piece of research, in part because of the difficulties of measuring how effective a system is. However, the issue of what is meant by effectiveness underlies the research questions highlighted below and ought to be considered in any research which does take place, for example through taking account of crime data or evidence of offender behaviour rather than reported benefits/disbenefits of CCTV.
Nature and use The research identified a number of crime types that respondents reported to be predominantly affected by CCTV. Assault, theft and public order were the top three offences, followed by suspicious behaviour, drug-related offences and robbery. The report highlights that CCTV is being used on a daily basis for–low level offences such as public order, as opposed to being used purely as an investigative tool. As this has been established the next step is to ask how CCTV can be used proactively to reduce crimes as well as being used as a reactive tool. Research questions: • What is the impact of CCTV on crime generally and on fear of crime? • What is the impact of CCTV on offender behaviour? • Would local marketing of CCTV success increase or prolong any deterrent effect?
Seizure and evidence Seizure of CCTV evidence is a regular occurrence – for most it is a weekly or almost daily task. Despite officers recognising the tremendous value of CCTV evidence, often the necessary procedures were seen to be time consuming and unrewarding. Disclosure laws, relating to the police’s obligation to provide defence lawyers with any relevant CCTV footage, had an enormous impact in adding to the amount of time spent on evidence gathering. Bound up in the police responsibility for providing defence teams with copies of the CCTV footage, are issues of decoding, obtaining authorisation for seizure and ensuring that the evidence is in a format that can be played in court. Many respondents felt that the CCTV operators and other civilian staff could do more to assist with the evidence–gathering procedure. Methods vary across forces; some forces seem to have individuals responsible for viewing and copying tapes (some civilian, some police staff). Research questions: • Does the amount of work generated by CCTV evidence seizure, warrant a dedicated
resource? • Is it cost effective to employ someone who can be responsible for the evidence–gathering
demands of CCTV? • If so should they be police staff or civilian? Some case study work may be useful since some forces have adopted or are trialling centralised imaging units. It may be worth conducting a qualitative exploration of the relationships between police and various strands of the criminal justice system addressing the following issues. • What problems have the police come up against in preparing or presenting evidence for
prosecutions. What are the implications of this?
25
• What do the courts need in terms of CCTV evidence and how can the police ensure they get it?
• What do the courts need in terms of compatible equipment to show CCTV evidence and how can the police ensure they get it?
Many participants referred to equipment and image quality when asked about the disadvantages of CCTV. Quality and nature of equipment and images impact on time taken to obtain the correct footage and in some instances prevent it from being obtained at all. This especially seems to be a problem amongst private schemes and may be an issue of education. Individual police forces have used different methods to tackle the issue of poor quality images; some forces have produced leaflets giving maintenance advice to distribute to private schemes in their force area. If schemes take heed of forces advice, this will have positive impacts on police time, in gathering evidence. Case study based research might address: • what lessons for good practice and partnership work can be taken from forces?
Time Most officers agreed that CCTV increased the workload of officers; however, most also agreed that the benefits were worthwhile. CCTV is a tool that can save a large amount of time, through identifying suspects in major investigations for instance. However, it can generate more calls for service, and prove resource intensive in relation to the seizure of evidence. Detailed analysis of time spent, time saved, and the outcomes in measurable policing terms of CCTV–related work would help to determine whether CCTV was a cost-effective tool for most forces and worth the enormous investment at local and national level. Cost/benefit analysis How much time and money does CCTV save or cost the criminal justice system and other agencies? • Analysis of rank demands: who specifically is affected by additional demands generated
by CCTV and how?
Training/operators The findings from the study, in relation to the human element of CCTV, provide a simple message: invest in the operator in order to maximise the potential benefits of the scheme. However, it is not enough to provide good operator training. The operators must be provided with the mechanisms that allow them to share the information that CCTV provides. These mechanisms include effective methods of communication, information/intelligence–sharing protocols with police and finally as a result of these, a good working relationship with the local police. The question remains as to what extent information sharing between police and operators impacts on operator productivity. Research in this area should take into account the overlaps with the work of the national evaluation team in Leicester. Research questions • What are the optimum working conditions for operators, for example number of screens,
rotation of duties, length of shifts and level of training? • How does operator training/increased information sharing with the police impact on job
satisfaction and operator performance? • What is the impact of CCTV staff regularly attending police briefings on CCTV–generated,
police demand, or how can operators help manage CCTV–generated police demand?
26
Communication Good communication, in conjunction with good working relationships, was felt to be a vital factor in facilitating the maximum use of CCTV. Interviews highlighted the importance of immediate response and the value of having direct contact with CCTV operators to guide (on identification evidence collection) and be guided (to where the trouble was). The ability for two-way communication was considered the ideal situation. One–way communication (police radio listen–in facility) could be useful for the police to provide commentaries as incidents developed, also helping CCTV operators to develop an understanding of the demands on the patrolling officers at any one time, allowing them to tailor their requests/demands accordingly. Research questions Explored through detailed observational studies and focused interviews in a small number of forces. • What is the relationship between effective police response and method of
communication? • What security of information and data protection issues are raised by use of police radio
and Airwave? How can these be resolved? • Effective methods of communication facilitate the building of relationships and inevitably
lead to information sharing. • Is there a relationship between CCTV demand and police/CCTV method of
communication? Reference Spriggs A., Argomaniz J., Gill M. and Bryan J. (2004) Public attitudes towards CCTV, Home Office Online report.
Produced by the Research Development and Statistics Directorate, HomeOffice
This document is available only in Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF)through the RDS website
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds
Email: [email protected]
ISBN 1 84473 563 X Crown copyright 2005
