Police are refusing to investigate more than two million reported crimes every year, including huge numbers of burglaries and thefts, The Sunday Telegraph can disclose.

 

Almost four out of 10 offences are "screened out" as unsolvable within hours of being reported to police, and the cases are closed.

 

No officer visits the scene of the crime and no attempt is made to catch the culprit. As many as two-thirds of burglaries are not investigated in some areas, according to police figures.

 

Even robberies and violent crimes can be screened out, while other cases involve fraud, theft and vandalism.

 

Among 12 English and Scottish forces which released figures under Freedom of Information laws, 788,000 crimes were screened out last year from a total of 2,029,000 recorded offences - a rate of 39 per cent.

 

The findings suggest that out of six million offences reported to forces in the UK last year, around 2.3 million were not investigated.

 

source: Sunday Telegraph

Whats the point of having a police force then? WTF do they do all day?

I doubt even that big database that they want so badly can help them with this.

Sounds like some stuff is just so minor they don't even want to touch it.

The figures don't really surprise me. There must be plenty of occasions when it's ovious that they're not going to solve the crime even if they have 50 officers working on it ful time for six months. So why waste the money? i suspect a lot of them are relatively minor theft cases which are only reported so that the victim can make an insurance claim.

 

I was burgled a few years ago. The police came round (within less than an hour of being called) and made a pretty thorough search for any forensic information which may have helped solve it. They didn't find anything except for one footprint. They also spoke to the neighbours to check whether they'd seen anything. They hadn't. I suspect they dedicated relatively little time to the case after their visit and, frankly, I don't blame them. I think they would almost certainly have been wasting their time.

 

I also don't think the story is exactly "new". I'm sure this has been the case for many years.

This is totally disgusting, it seems the police only want to investigate crimes that are easy to solve, after all they just care about clear up rates and don't actually care about finding those responsible.

so much for living in 'a police state' then!

 

all crimes should be investigated and most of these burglaries are carried out by repeat offenders ..... of course they WOULD be caught if there was a national dna database.

of course they WOULD be caught if there was a national dna database.

 

Nonsense... Suedehead said that coppers found only a footprint in his burglary case... How you gonna get DNA off that...? :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

Most burglars are too clever to leave evidence behind, they wear gloves, masks, etc....

 

As for street robberies... Well, yeah, course you may find DNA evidence there, but it wont have a timecode on it, will it...? You'll probably find DNA evidence of literally dozens, if not hundreds of people who may have just been passing by the area at any given time.... Again, not very effective....

 

This is totally disgusting, it seems the police only want to investigate crimes that are easy to solve, after all they just care about clear up rates and don't actually care about finding those responsible.

 

They think it's a more valuable use of their time to prowl around and catch out motorists going a few MPH above the speed limit mate.... <_< They dont give a sh!t because it spoils their clear-up ratios to look into street robberies or burglaries....

 

Police spend far too much time doing paperwork and not enough time out on the beat policing, to book a suspect involves some THIRTEEN forms which is absolutely ridiculous :manson: the officers should be out policing and catching criminals not filling out forms

 

I think that private security companies should be given powers of arrest and even do street patrols and so on to lessen the load on the police force, private security companies should be given far greater powers, neighbourhoods where there is a chav problem could for instance have Group 4 or Securicor or one of those companies doing patrols and the government foot the bill and private firms could do beat policing too to have a more visible presence on the streets

Police spend far too much time doing paperwork and not enough time out on the beat policing, to book a suspect involves some THIRTEEN forms which is absolutely ridiculous :manson: the officers should be out policing and catching criminals not filling out forms

 

I think that private security companies should be given powers of arrest and even do street patrols and so on to lessen the load on the police force, private security companies should be given far greater powers, neighbourhoods where there is a chav problem could for instance have Group 4 or Securicor or one of those companies doing patrols and the government foot the bill and private firms could do beat policing too to have a more visible presence on the streets

 

You'd honestly trust a private firm to police our street...?? Do me a favour.. Private firms would be even LESS accountable than the lot we already have doing it.... How, exactly would a person wrongfully arrested, detained or beaten up by Corporate Coppers be able to excercise their rights to complain...? You're totally nuts mate, most security guards are either jumped up little Hitlers who let the uniform go to their heads, or bone-idle lazy tossers who fall asleep the first chance they get...

 

You know what the real problem is - "arrest quotas"... Absolute bloody nonsense that, it's the whole reason why motorists are continually harrassed by police even when they're only a few mph over the limit or if a brake light doesn't work properly..... Harrassing motorists is a damn sight easier way of coppers making their quotas than actually investigating crime innit....?

 

Group 4???? :lol: :lol: :lol: Would this be the same Group 4 who let prisoners escape from their vans while on their way to court...?? Oh please mate, you're killing me.... :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: Best laugh I've had in ages, that..... :P

You know what the real problem is - "arrest quotas"... Absolute bloody nonsense that, it's the whole reason why motorists are continually harrassed by police even when they're only a few mph over the limit or if a brake light doesn't work properly..... Harrassing motorists is a damn sight easier way of coppers making their quotas than actually investigating crime innit....?

 

spot on

 

in our local paper last night an investigation into a fcukin p**** RING was abandoned and officers transfered to 'softer' targets in order to meet quotas.

Nonsense... Suedehead said that coppers found only a footprint in his burglary case... How you gonna get DNA off that...? :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

Most burglars are too clever to leave evidence behind, they wear gloves, masks, etc....

 

As for street robberies... Well, yeah, course you may find DNA evidence there, but it wont have a timecode on it, will it...? You'll probably find DNA evidence of literally dozens, if not hundreds of people who may have just been passing by the area at any given time.... Again, not very effective....

 

30 years ago a little girl (lesely molseed) was abducted, never seen again, though her underwear was found... police kept it and yesterday some bloke was jailed for her abduction and presumed death. he was caught by dna.

 

true... dna would not benefit burglary stats much, but it would certainly help with rape stats as we are now at an all time low in convicting perpetrators. the tide needs to swing in favour of the victims, most of who dont even report the crime, victims must report it immediately and get the scum who do it.

30 years ago a little girl (lesely molseed) was abducted, never seen again, though her underwear was found... police kept it and yesterday some bloke was jailed for her abduction and presumed death. he was caught by dna.

 

true... dna would not benefit burglary stats much, but it would certainly help with rape stats as we are now at an all time low in convicting perpetrators. the tide needs to swing in favour of the victims, most of who dont even report the crime, victims must report it immediately and get the scum who do it.

 

From my understanding, the bloke who did it was caught out on another charge anyway, so, okay, while it certainly helped that police had his DNA, the facts are, he was still known to coppers.... I know where you're trying to say with this, but even this is STILL not going to convince me to support a national DNA database, the fundamental facts are it is still open to too much abuse, I dont like the thought of faceless Govt agencies and quangos being able to access my DNA, I dont trust the Govt, ANY Govt with this sort of power at their disposal.... We've all seen the abuse of CCTV footage, and footage being sold off to TV production companies and video companies to make progs like "Police Camera Action", "Cops" and so on, so, if this is what CCTV footage is being used for, I shudder to think who'll be 'buying up' our DNA profiles; Pharmaceutical companies?? Dodgy docs carrying out iffy "experiments"??? Sorry mate, dont trust 'em....

 

And the majority of rape cases still rely on the credibility of witness testimony, despite DNA evidence - it all boils down to who juries believe.... Scientific evidence plays very little part in securing rape convictions, which is why only 1 in 20 succeed..... Another thing that David Cameron said that actually made sense - boys should be taught that no means no in sex education classes... If we educate the young, then we wont need to increase conviction rates, because the crime itself wont even occur....

yep he was caught on another charge...30 years later, luckily he wasnt a serial offender otherwise he could have been another fred west, toturing and murdering hundereds of girls.

 

whilst i share your concerns to a degree about trusting the government, imho the good dna technology can do far outweighs it.

 

theres no reason why safeguards couldnt be put in place so it cant be abused.

imho the good dna technology can do far outweighs it.

 

theres no reason why safeguards couldnt be put in place so it cant be abused.

 

Like the "safeguards" that are supposed to be in place so nuisance callers and marketing researchers can't call you up on your phone and "cold call" you, whether you're X-directory or not....? Please..... <_<

 

If that doesn't work, I dont exaclty have much confidence in any "safeguards" to stop abuse of a DNA database either.....

 

Another reason why I dont support a DNA databasea and question its effectiveness (well, two actually...) -

 

SECONDARY DNA TRANSFER (a pretty fukkin BIG one if you ask me....)

 

THE FACT THAT CERTAIN DRUG COMBINATIONS CAN TEMPORARILY ALTER DNA PATTERNS AND SOME SURGICAL PROCEDURES CAN PERMENANTLY ALTER DNA.....

 

Good news for any budding serial killer or rapist out there innit....? If I was embarking on a career in serial killing, I'd be stocking up on these drugs.....

30 years ago a little girl (lesely molseed) was abducted, never seen again, though her underwear was found... police kept it and yesterday some bloke was jailed for her abduction and presumed death. he was caught by dna.

 

true... dna would not benefit burglary stats much, but it would certainly help with rape stats as we are now at an all time low in convicting perpetrators. the tide needs to swing in favour of the victims, most of who dont even report the crime, victims must report it immediately and get the scum who do it.

The low conviction rate for rape is largely down to the number of cases where the issue is whether the alleged victim consented. DNA won't help at all in those cases.

The low conviction rate for rape is largely down to the number of cases where the issue is whether the alleged victim consented. DNA won't help at all in those cases.

 

if the victims had the confidence to go to the police directly then the examination could support wether or not force was used, this of course doesnt help passive victims but all the same anything that increases conviction rates must be a good thing, musnt it?

Like the "safeguards" that are supposed to be in place so nuisance callers and marketing researchers can't call you up on your phone and "cold call" you, whether you're X-directory or not....? Please..... <_<

 

If that doesn't work, I dont exaclty have much confidence in any "safeguards" to stop abuse of a DNA database either.....

 

Another reason why I dont support a DNA databasea and question its effectiveness (well, two actually...) -

 

SECONDARY DNA TRANSFER (a pretty fukkin BIG one if you ask me....)

 

THE FACT THAT CERTAIN DRUG COMBINATIONS CAN TEMPORARILY ALTER DNA PATTERNS AND SOME SURGICAL PROCEDURES CAN PERMENANTLY ALTER DNA.....

 

Good news for any budding serial killer or rapist out there innit....? If I was embarking on a career in serial killing, I'd be stocking up on these drugs.....

 

ok then, chuck it out <_< let hundereds if not thousands of offenders get off... but you would want that wouldnt you, you seem more concerned with the criminals rights then the victims.

 

stop p***ing about... no systems anywhere near foolproof or perfect, especailly the one we have got in place. most of the flwas can be rectified and backed up with other means of forensics will produce a pretty safe case, far safer then the one we are using now and far more effective.

if the victims had the confidence to go to the police directly then the examination could support wether or not force was used, this of course doesnt help passive victims but all the same anything that increases conviction rates must be a good thing, musnt it?

But it's not DNA which would determine whether force was used. One of the reasons why the conviction rate has been falling for a long time is that more people are now reporting rape. But, as I said earlier, most of those extra reported cases are where the issue of whether consent was given. In those cases, a lot of jurors are reluctant to deliver a guilty verdict because of the effect it will have on the accused. That undoubtably means that a lot of men are being acquitted when they shouldn't be.

 

Also, a lot of complaints are withdrawn by the alleged victim so the case never gets to court for a whole range of reasons. While that means that some innocent men are spared the ordeal of facing one of the most serious offences on the statute book, it also means that other men get away with it.

 

The biggest problem with rape where the alleged victim and the defendant know each other is that there are rarely any independent witnesses. It ism generally one person's word against another. Given the consequences for the defendant, it's not really surprising that the convistion rate in these cases is so low.

 

I'm not saying that the current conviction rate is acceptable. It clearly isn't. I'm merely trying to show why it's so low. I only wish I knew what the solution was.

The police are ridiculous tbh, me and my friends can't stand outside Telford Shopping Center!!! or sit on steps we get forced to go on benches

whilst other people get to sit there. Weve never done anything wrong but because were like 'grebby teenagers' the police assume were gonna trash the area or something pfft ¬¬

They spend so much time doing that yet do little else pfft

ok then, chuck it out <_< let hundereds if not thousands of offenders get off... but you would want that wouldnt you, you seem more concerned with the criminals rights then the victims.

 

stop p***ing about... no systems anywhere near foolproof or perfect, especailly the one we have got in place. most of the flwas can be rectified and backed up with other means of forensics will produce a pretty safe case, far safer then the one we are using now and far more effective.

 

 

You just dont have any logical arguments to counter to mine and Suedehead's perfectly legit concerns about this whole thing, so you'll resort to being abusive and silly "arguments" which are nothing more than a petulant child chucking all their toys out of a pram... GROW UP MATE.... Who said anything about "chucking it out"?? I'm saying it should only be targeted against crims and offenders, not ordinary Joe Public.... I'm not particularly concerned with the rights of criminals, I'm concerned with MY rights to have MY privacy and MY liberties as a law abiding citizen respected by this fukkin Govt, the Govt has NO right to catalogue, control or watch me without a damn good reason, bottom line, and if you dont get that simple argument then bugger off and live in relatively crime-free Saudi Arabia or China mate if that's the sort of society you want to live in.... I want Britain to be FREE even if that does mean a slight chance of an increase in criminality, it sure beats the Saudi/Chinese alternative.....

 

The facts are, the Govt would disseminate this information on our DNA to just about anyone who would bid for it, if the watchdog system that's in place to stop companies getting X-directory numbers is pretty ineffective, then I seriously doubt any "DNA Watchdog" will maintain the integrity of a National DNA database either, and I would say it was a hell of a more important issue than just a few phone numbers going astray, you can change your number pretty easily, not so easy to change your DNA, unless you're willing to go through some incredibly painful bone marrow transplant surgery.... You're gonna willingly give these b/astards your DNA, the very thing that makes you who you are, the very essence of your being, probably the most personal, private thing about yourself....???? Than you're a fool, and you'd may as well give the buggers your house keys and 24/7 access to your house while you're at it, because "if you've nothing to hide...." and all that...... <_<