Inter-Agency Collaboration and Cooperation in Seattle Police Paper Example

Introduction

Currently, the criminal justice system of America is addressing issues that have become increasingly complex and are embedded in difficult yet complicated social problems. To a much greater extent than before, professionals in the criminal justice system have been called upon to give out solutions that would not only address immediate criminal behavior but also reduce and put an end to the same. To effectively do this, no criminal justice agency is given an authority to provide solutions alone, and therefore many agencies are turning to non-orthodox solutions of collaborative justice to serve as an effective strategy in addressing criminal issues. Huxham (1996) defines collaboration as the process of working together to attain a common goal that seems impossible to reach without the efforts of other people. A true partnership has been evident in the Seattle Police department, and this department will be used as a case study in this essay.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Seattle Police case study

The Drug Market Initiative is the latest collaborative approach in the Seattle Police Department. This initiative is focused on strengthening the deterrence strategy that has been used a couple of times in Seattle (Center for Evidence-Based crime policy 2018). In collaboration with the Seattle Neighborhood group, the Seattle Police Department has launched a Drug Market Initiative to reduce the number of drug dealers in the areas. Within the program, low-risk drug dealing in this area were called in a meeting and told that was presented with an opportunity to escape the long arm of the criminal justice systems if they could give up their drug operations. In the event the drug dealers continue dealing in drugs, they would deter the police on arresting and prosecuting them. This initiative was launched on the fall of 2009 in the Seattle community.

Apart from collaborating with the community, this collaborative initiative involved neighboring law enforcement jurisdiction and also partnered with the King of County Prosecutors of efforts to create high-level detainment and sentences for known offenders. This program did not only involve the police, the community and high volume drug dealers; petty vehicle theft offenders were also included. The Seattle Police Department also partnered with Seattle University with a purpose of surveying residents in every community to know about their biggest concerns of public safety. The patrol officers and community people were highly involved in decision making.

Because the Seattle Police Department had never incorporated hit spots policing, this was one of the solutions suggested in reducing the rate of drug dealing and car thefts. In combining hot spot policing, the department employed two solution models that focused on crime hot spots and place-based policing. In their first solution model, the focus would be on density hot spots of street areas with high volumes of call for service. Basing on the Koper Curve principle, Seattle officers in this solution were to visit the most elevated area of crime and block these areas for fifteen minutes during the time they are called for service. Another model of hot-spot policing was based on probability hot spot areas of property crime. This kind of crime is common in the city and in this model the department made plans to monitor the effectiveness of the Predpol software in spotting locations with massive crimes.

The results of these strategies were a team of dedicated officers who would not stop at anything to see a reduction in crime. Cuts in drug dealing operations are vehicle thefts evident because of officers who knew areas to be targeted and worked with neighbors who made it easier for police to arrest criminals. Residents and business owners got to know and trust officers and as a result reduction of crime was more natural. Working with community groups was the most effective partnership Police department of Seattle ever made. Community groups, therefore, had the most impact in helping the police customize services in the neighborhood. From the list of partners, I do not feel there was a partner with the least impact. Community groups helped identified areas of high drug activities and theft, the king of county prosecutors helped create measures of detainment and prosecution, the University of Seattle was helpful in identifying statistics of theft while officers assisted increased patrol. All these measures are useful and highly required in the collaborative efforts to reduce crime. Therefore, there was no least impactful partner.

The outcome of collaboration could be increased if the size of the Seattle Department Police would be increased. Expanding the police department at Seattle means an increase in patrol officers and investigation detections that would be deployed in areas where crime is low as well. To increase the outcome of this policing, I believe the incorporation of police technology would be a useful tool. If the Seattle Police Department would utilize techniques such as predictive policing software, vehicle license plate readers, dashboard cameras, vehicle mobile data computers, and facial recognition software, then insecurity will no longer be a threat to community members.

Conclusion

From the Seattle Police Department case study, true collaboration is more than just engaging in network activities. Instead, true partnership is a representation of adequate and appropriate approaches to problem-solving any time the preferred goals is beyond reach.

References

Center for Evidence-Based crime policy. (2018). Seattle Police Case study 2014 Retrieved from https://cebcp.org/evidence-based-policing/what-works-in-policing/seattle-police-case-study-2014/

Huxham, C. Ed. (1996). Concepts in Creating Collaborative Advantage. (London: Sage).