« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
The Interface between the Scottish Police Service and the Public as Victims of Crime: Victim Perceptions
CHAPTER FIVE: INTERVIEWS WITH INDIVIDUAL VICTIMS
REPORTING THE INCIDENT
Reason for reporting the crime
When asked why they had reported the crimes to the police, many respondents claimed to have done so because they understand that course of action to be appropriate when faced with being the victim of a crime. Typical comments included:
"It was my first reaction; there was no one else that I could have called."
"Items of property had been stolen and basically, the property had been vandalised so it was a police matter."
"There was a crime committed against me."
"Well it was a crime that needed to be reported to the police because there's a lot of it happening."
"Because you have to report a crime, we are told this all our lives, it's the only way we can support the police."
For some respondents, practical issues such as potential insurance claims as a result of theft or damage were important:
"I thought it was the right thing to do, and of course for insurance purposes. They usually get a constable number or something."
Some respondents felt that it was their duty to report crimes in order to try to assist the police in reducing the numbers of offenders by apprehending them:
"Well, to me, if you don't report it, you're just giving the ones that's doing it plenty of scope to carry on doing it. It's costing you money every time; I don't touch the insurance like. I've got full comp and I've never claimed yet and I don't intend to if possible."
"Because of the nature of the crime and I wanted the person to be caught."
For other victims issues of the security of property were viewed as important;
"My husband called the police because the patio door was broken."
"I got home from my daughter's house and realised that someone had broken into the garage."
Other victims were unaware of the crimes against them until they were informed by the police:
"The police contacted me to tell me that my car was broken into."
"The police contacted me in the middle of the night to tell me that my car was broken into."
Method of reporting the crime
When asked the method of reporting the crime to the police, 86% (24) of personal interviewees had done so by telephone. Two had been informed of the crime by the police and one had reported by visiting the local police station in person.
Only three respondents had utilised the 999 emergency service to report the incident with reasons for doing so given as below:
"That's the easiest one to use basically, you get dealt with quicker. That's what I've always been told."
"Because I felt a mad sort of urgency and if I did 999 there was a better chance of the criminal being caught … and also, I considered it to be an emergency."
"I phoned the emergency services, 999, who put me through to my local police station."
Reasons for phoning local police stations directly rather than using the 999 service were:
"That was the most convenient for me."
"The most convenient because I'll tell you why, my windows were knocked in so we had to phone and that's when we discovered my garage was broken into at the same time."
"I always feel like 999 is really for real emergencies."
"Yes, I mean I was there so I just used the phone. It's not an emergency getting your motor done. If you need an ambulance or something like that, that's when you use 999, not for any other reason. If somebody appears next door with guns or something, then I probably would use 999."
"I would never use the emergency service's time in this way. They get loads of calls from people who report this type of stuff … wasting their time."
The vast majority of respondents stated that using the telephone to report the crime was by far the most convenient method. One respondent who had personally visited the police station to make his report had unfortunately destroyed potential evidence by cleaning up his car that had been broken into and then using it to drive to the police station.
Direct involvement with the crime and perceived threat to self and others
Victims were asked whether they were directly involved in the crime themselves. Eleven per cent (3) replied that they had been in bed at the time their homes had been broken into while the other 90% (25) reported that they were not personally involved. Two of the victims who had been personally involved reported that they felt that they might have been in danger at the time:
"After it had happened you do think of this because he was influenced by drugs and drink. It's quite easy to imagine what could have happened if he had ventured further into the house because he had entered in through the kitchen and the living room's off the kitchen, and it would have been quite easy, because I just felt if he was brazen enough to enter the house at that time of night, put the lights on in the house, he's quite capable of coming upstairs." (female victim of domestic housebreaking)
"Yes of course we were. If we woke up when the burglar was in the house, who could say what could have happened." (male victim of domestic housebreaking).
The third of these three victims reported that he had not felt that he had been in danger.
Respondents were asked about what they perceived to have been the biggest threat to themselves or others at the time of the incident. Some respondents had experienced fear of injury or assault to themselves or other parties as follows:
"I was pretty scared for my daughter, that was the biggest threat. I was fearful, you know. That was the only thing. In fact, she ended up going to Australia for three years to get away. She's home now, but she had to go because she was getting frightened." (male, vehicle and property offences and threats).
"My husband actually chased him.".
"Well, as I said it was very difficult to say what could have happened if we disturbed the crook … he could have been crazy with drugs or something." (male victim of domestic housebreaking).
"I suppose that the young boys about could have set the car on fire, which would have been dangerous." (female victim of vehicle related crime).
Other respondents reported that the biggest threat for them was fear of further victimisation:
"There was no obvious threat to me or my wife personally, but it did worry us about people breaking in, you know, we were very concerned after it happened twice. We weren't concerned that that particular offender might return, but basically just for future offences that might occur." (79 year-old male victim of domestic housebreaking).
"The biggest concern was, because we live in a, it's a common stairwell, the door downstairs is constantly open, they have people coming and going at any time. The biggest concern really was, could it happen again basically. Yes, definitely because we're on the top floor, it's quite hard for anybody to see what's going on, basically." (23 year-old female victim of domestic housebreaking)
"I think the first time I just thought, oh, you know, but as for the second time I just kept feeling, is this going to keep going on and on? And I didn't really feel that anything was getting done about it. So I suppose the threat of it keep on continuing to happen.." (24 year-old victim of vehicle-related offence).
"Keys were taken from a lock-up garage, which could have meant a further crime." (52 year-old female repeat victim of vehicle-related crime)
When asked if they had made their concerns about their personal safety clear to the police, 48% claimed that they had done so with statements which included:
"Oh, yes, they knew about it, they knew about it, but they couldn't prove it unless somebody actually seen them doing it. They know too who did it, but, as I say, they couldn't prove unless somebody was there to see it." (68 year-old male victim of vehicle related offence).
"Yes I did, I actually went up and XXX Police Station was really good and they came out with a female and a male and the male was fingerprinting the car and the female was speaking to myself and my mum." (24 year-old female victim of domestic housebreaking).
"Yes, because we both got a clear sighting of what he looked like."(30 year-old female victim of domestic housebreaking).
"Yes, I did, I explained that my daughter was very upset and that I was very concerned for her at the time." (64 year-old male victim of domestic housebreaking).
"Yes I reported that I had discovered that my house had been broken into on returning from work." (32 year-old female victim of domestic housebreaking).
Of those who did not make this clear, 8 (29%) respondents claimed that the police had never asked that sort of question. For example:
"No, I was never asked that question: they only wanted to know where the car was parked."
"No, I don't think they were interested in that anyway."
Response times
With regard to response times, personal victims experienced a variety of responses and expressed numerous opinions. Thirteen respondents (47%) reported a response in the form of a police presence on the scene within half-an-hour, some within minutes:
"Very quick, yes very quick. I must admit yes, very quick. They were here just within minutes."
"They were with us within half an hour of the call."
"They were actually very quick, it was within half an hour and the police were sort of there, I was at work, I realised first thing in the morning and I was just driving to work and I realised that the passenger side of the car had been damaged and things had been taken. So when I got to work I phoned them and within half an hour they were there, it was quite quick."
"Well, between the phone call and them arriving back to our house was about twenty minutes."
"The police were marvellous; they appeared in about ten minutes … about thirty minutes later the CID appeared and the crime prevention officer. I was very impressed by the standard of service that we received from all concerned."
"They were there within 15 minutes, they were very fast."
A further 7 respondents (25%) reported a presence within 'a few hours' as follows while 5 (18%) reported a slow response which sometimes required a further call to the police before officers attended the scene:
"I'm trying to think now, because I went up to the police station that day too I gave my details and it was a good, maybe about a week, a week and a bit later before I actually got someone contacting me."
"They were very slow to respond, perhaps about three hours. They were very busy I suppose."
I had to call them twice before they came, so it seemed very long.
"Two uniformed officers arrived at my house just over four hours later."
The three other victims had been initially informed of the crime by the police as opposed to discovering it themselves and so, consequently, there was no recordable delay in response.
It is interesting to note that most victims appeared to have had a fairly low expectation with regard to response times since only five (18%) reported that response times were their main concern at the time of reporting the incident. Those for whom this was the case made the following comments:
"It was really my main concern in the morning, yes. But I mean it was done quite quickly so it wasn't a major concern, I never got to the stage where I was really concerned about it."
"Yes, I was concerned that the car would be stolen if left unattended and unsecured. Therefore speed of response was important to me."
"Yes speed was quite important because you are advised not to tamper with anything until the police appear."
"Yes, of course it was. I was concerned for my daughter because she was already worried as my wife was in hospital getting a heart by-pass operation, as you can imagine, this put the tin hat on it for her."
The majority of victims were less concerned about the speed of response and took more pragmatic views:
"No, I wasn't concerned because the event had already happened, and on both occasions the police reaction was excellent."
"No, just to see how quick they got up to see if they could get them, to see if they could catch them, but they couldn't get hold of them. I think they had a car or something, they must have gone off in a car quick."
"At that time everything was just a complete blur because of what had happened, I was quite upset. So the time response wasn't really an issue to me. I knew that it would probably be around about that time if not longer. So no, it wasn't really an issue to me I would say. I think it was really just trying to find out what had been taken."
"No, it didn't really bother me. I wasn't in a hurry for anything."
"No, I didn't really care either way, the deed was done already."
Response received from the police
In all but one case two officers attended the scene of crime. On the other occasion a single police officer attended to take a statement. There appeared to be three broad areas of response experienced:
1. Those respondents who felt that the initial response had been a satisfactory one from their point of view.
2. Those who expressed an accepting but ambivalent attitude towards the response.
3. Those who had experienced some degree of dissatisfaction with the initial response.
Comments made by the first group of respondents included:
"Basically, they asked, obviously, what the situation was. When they arrived here they were actually very good because I was in a bit of a state. They were quite calm in that sense and basically, they were just asking what had been taken, different questions like that because it was a rather bizarre break in that we had, we were quite baffled by it as well. I mean I think I had a level head in a certain sense because my dad is a police officer also. It gave me a bit of an advantage to it and I don't know, they were very good, I have to admit because initially we had a police officer and then two officers from CID came after that." (23 year-old female victim of domestic housebreaking).
"The first, well we had a few visits that night from them. So in the twenty minutes it was one officer coming back to let us know that another two officers had caught him." (30year-old female victim of domestic housebreaking).
"They were fantastic. They checked the whole house and the garden looking for evidence I think. They made sure that the whole house was safe and secure; the joiner boy from crime prevention replaced the window immediately. The special policeman took some fingerprints and some stuff from the kitchen." (64 year-old male victim of domestic housebreaking).
"They were sympathetic to me and were really very nice." (19 year-old female victim of vehicle related crime).
"The police were very good; they took fingerprints and explained that there had been a spate of similar incidents in the area at the time." (50 year-old female victim of both types of crime).
The experiences of the second group included:
"They were okay, polite and didn't give much hope of a resolution, for example getting the car back." (47 year-old male victim of vehicle related crime).
"They took a statement from me and inspected the damage to my car."
(21 year-old female victim of vehicle related crime).
"They simply took down my details and then they left." (36 year-old male victim of vehicle related crime).
"One officer came and took my details and then just left." (28 year-old victim of vehicle related crime).
For the third group who expressed some dissatisfaction the following were some of the comments made about the initial response:
"Very little." (24 year-old victim of vehicle related crime).
"One uniformed, yes and then two CID came up after and took the prints. They said they were quite happy, they got plenty of prints, which didn't do me a lot of good." (54 year-old male domestic housebreaking victim).
"They just took my details as usual, and said that they would be in touch if they found someone for the crime, but one officer advised me 'not to hold my breath' waiting for the criminal to be caught, it happens a lot around here and it is usually related to drugs in some way." (42 year-old male victim of vehicle related crime).
"To be honest, I think they thought that I was a bit stupid for driving the car and all that … they took some details and then they sent an officer to my house later that night to check for other evidence … I did feel stupid … but I just reacted to what happened, someone had been at my stuff." (56 year-old male victim of both vehicle and property crimes).
Participant were asked if they had been advised by the police as to how their case would be progressed. Again, this question provoked three broad areas of response from victims:
1. Those who were able to confirm that they had been informed of the manner in which the case would be progressed.
2. Those who reported that they had been given a partial explanation.
3 .Those who claimed that they had received no explanation of the procedures by the police at all.
The first group (25%) of seven respondents supplied some comments as follows:
"Well, they sort of told us they would try their best to get the person responsible for it. I don't think they got, well we had lawyers and that with the case and everything, but we didn't get anywhere. I think they were a bad lot, they were a bad lot." (68 year-old male victim of vehicle related crime).
"Yes, the CID officer told me what they would be doing." (64 year-old male domestic housebreaking victim).
In the second group more cautious comments were made by respondents:
"He told me that he would be in touch if he needed any further information." (28 year-old female victim of vehicle related offence).
"They said that someone from the CID would either phone or call round."
(32 year-old female domestic housebreaking victim).
"I don't know, I can't recall. They certainly … the detective went to the scene immediately and examined it and the police officer took copious notes of what had happened." (79 year-old male victim of domestic housebreaking).
The third group who claimed that they had been supplied with no explanation of the manner in which the case would be progressed comprised 15 respondents (54%) who made the following comments:
"No, they just said that they would be in touch if there were any developments." (21 year-old female victim of vehicle related crime).
"No, they never mentioned anything like that." (26 year-old female, both property and vehicle crimes).
"No, not at all, they didn't explain anything." (19 year-old female victim of vehicle related crime).
"No, they just said they'd get somebody up to take prints off it and that."
(54 year-old male victim of domestic housebreaking).
Despite the low levels of explanation of how their cases would be progressed, respondents displayed relatively low levels of concern about this. Only nine (32%) respondents in this cohort felt that it would have been helpful to have received more information from the police with regard to how their cases would be progressed. Comments made included:
"Yes, I would have liked to have been told what I should do next, this was the first time anything like this has happened to me."
"Yes, I would have liked him to help me a bit more, but I suppose they were very busy."
"Yes, [I would have liked to know more about] the chances of finding the perpetrators of the crime."
"Yes, I would have liked to know a bit more about what to do, it was my first car and I had never had any trouble before so I didn't have a clue what to do next."
"It might have helped having a timescale of how long it would generally take but it's still ongoing now, it must be still ongoing because I haven't heard anything else from them. So, you know, roughly about how long it would take."
The majority of respondents however (19 [68%]) reported that they were content with the information as supplied by the police, making such comments as:
"I was satisfied that all my questions were answered, they were here for about an hour … maybe even more."
"I just wanted to get the whole thing over with and get back to bed."
"I was satisfied with what was happening."
"I didn't expect them to do much."
"Not necessarily at that point, everything was explained quite well there and then. They were really quite efficient in that sense there. So no, that would have been fine."
"No, I think they covered everything. I felt that they were all very helpful at that stage."
Respondents were asked to express the degree of satisfaction they felt regarding the police response to the reporting of the incident. Four (14%) of the cohort felt unreservedly very satisfied, making comments which included:
"Very satisfied. They couldn't have been more helpful."
The group of 21 respondents who reported being satisfied made comments including:
"I don't think they could have done anything else."
"Satisfied. There was not much more that he could have done."
"Satisfied. I was satisfied that they seemed to be doing everything that they could, but they told me not to hold out much hope that my goods would be recovered."
"Satisfied- they were very helpful, they were very good. I'll give them their due for that."
"Satisfied- nothing really to add to that regarding the initial response. It's just really the after side of it that could have been followed up slightly better."
The group that reported that they were not satisfied at all (3 respondents, or 11%) made the following comments:
"Not satisfied at all. Nothing came out of it and I was left wondering what happened."
"Not satisfied at all. As I said, the second time I got broken into, this time I had a different stereo and the face of the stereo comes off, all that was left was the back of the stereo and I got broken into the same way with a key and the only thing that got taken was the back of the stereo, which would be no use to anybody whatsoever. Again, it was a kind of personal thing and again, XXXX police station said it was more of a personal thing. My trainers, which I'd worn, had been taken as well, so it's just things like that. Again, I had to phone up and find out who was the officer dealing with this particular case and he was quite helpful. At first he said he'd speak to the one that was supposed to be dealing with the other one and I said, would you please let me know what happens and he said, yes and he never got back to me. Because I don't even know when they actually spoke to him, if it was for the first one or the second one."
One respondent who was a repeat victim said that she had received very different treatment on different occasions, having received satisfactory treatment on one occasion but completely unsatisfactory treatment on another occasion.
The respondents were asked if they got all of the help that they felt they needed. Of these 20 (72%) replied that they were satisfied, and their comments included:
"Yes, I'm not asking for any help at the moment. I think I'm just waiting to get calls from them really, you know, because I've got property, they found some of my property and they said that when it was resolved they would send me a letter to go and collect the property and that hasn't happened as yet."
"I don't believe I need any help."
"Yes, considering that I had messed everything else up, the officers were great … I think they had a laugh at me but that was understandable."
One elderly respondent was slightly confused about the help he was getting and responded:
"Well, that's a dodgy one. I wouldn't say we were getting all the help that we could get, we're getting some."
When asked to explain further he replied:
"It's hard to say, but I mean, I think a presence, they have stepped up their presence in the street recently and being around on patrol but I mean they can only do that, I appreciate they can only do that for so long. I mean that is helping but the minute they stop I would reckon they'll [the offenders] be starting within the next week or two."
Five respondents (18%) reported that they had not received all the help they needed including such comments as:
"No, they were not helpful at all."
"No, I would have liked to have some questions answered, but you don't like to ask too many questions."
"No, I mean the only thing I got was for my insurance. … So the only help I really got from them was the incident number so I could claim my insurance, but apart from that, I didn't get any help from the second one, that was even worse than the first one." [This respondent had been the victim of repeat vehicle related crime]
When respondents were asked about whether they have experienced any problems as a result of the crime many initially replied 'No' but went on to qualify their answers as follows:
"No, not really, we had some inconvenience to replace some objects but that's why we have insurance."
"No, just the expense of the clean up."
"No, it's just as I said earlier, we were a bit concerned, you know, a wee bit unsure about future possible break-ins."
"No, not now, no. For a while we was kind of worried and one thing or another, what was going to happen next."
"No, just the inconvenience and of course now I have my new reputation as the village idiot."
Other respondents were less reticent about discussing the problems that had arisen for them as a result of the incidents and made the following comments:
"The initial couple of weeks after it, it was an ordeal to be left in the house myself. I wouldn't stay in the house myself at night and things like that."
"Well, it was obviously quite upsetting and financial, yes because I'm a student."
"I had to get the window replaced and I lost my no claims bonus."
"I wasted a lot of time on the phone after it all trying to get the car back on the road."
"Yes, well we only … we had bought the house in September and this is us now selling the house. …to this day we don't know what happened to him and also it's not very pleasant going to your bed at night and wakening up every five minutes thinking every creak is him again."
The main problems experienced by the victims interviewed appeared to be
1. Fear of further victimisation, which was greatly exacerbated in instances where victims had not been informed as to the outcome of cases.
2. The financial losses incurred.
3. Inconvenience caused which was disruptive and made it difficult for victims to get on with their lives and move on from the offence.
Respondents were asked about the costs (both financial and psychological) to themselves and families resulting from the offences and made the following comments:
"It would probably about 1700 … With regards to the jewellery, it was all 21 st birthday presents … so that was obviously sentimental …the computer had been given as a present for moving through to Edinburgh, my mum and dad had paid for it so it was really upsetting. Yes it does have implications mentally on you."
"I'd say probably about 1000. … psychologically, I don't know if this person [the offender] has been spoken to or not so I'm very wary of going out obviously and realising that if he's been contacted about this crime, he might not be very happy."
"Well it cost about roughly 300. … I was a bit down about it, I suppose I was a bit actually. It was my car, so I was a bit upset and a bit scared to drive it for a while. So it's a bit scary leaving it outside the house again, thinking if it was going to happen again or not."
"There was no cost financially and I wouldn't even put an estimate on how it's affected us. … I would never have moved from this area if it hadn't been for that. … and also the fact that we know what he looks like and there's a possibility we could bump into him."
"In financial terms, a few hundred pounds I suppose. In practical terms, I suppose it was the inconvenience of the whole thing. I lost a day of work and
I had to arrange alternative transport for a few days."
"The cost of replacing some items was high but it is the emotional stuff that can't be replaced so easily. Things like a telly and stuff can be replaced but I lost my mother's wedding ring and that had sentimental value to me; you can't replace that stuff. My daughter doesn't like to stay home alone now either."
"The financial cost was scary. I had to get all the locks and the ignition changed too. I never felt right driving it again so I had to get rid of it. [When asked by the interviewer if the victim had obtained a replacement car, the following reply was given] No, I can't afford another car, I had to pay a garage to take the old one away."
"I repaired most of the damage myself and the insurance sorted the rest … it was just the shock of finding out that someone else had been in my garage."
As may be observed from the comments above, the financial costs of the crime were in a number of instances viewed by victims as easier to cope with and overcome than the inconvenience, or more importantly the loss of items of emotional value which were viewed by respondents as irreplaceable. In addition, several victims reported a loss of the previous sense of security that they had experienced and said that they had become fearful of repeat offending. In one instance this was so serious that the family was attempting to sell its home in order to move away from the area.
In the majority of cases (18, 65%) respondents felt that the costs of crime borne by the community must be high. As one respondent remarked:
"… I suppose psychologically, it's a bit hard to see they're worrying about it but I think people do kind of feel disappointed."
While another respondent said:
"On the community, I think it was a shock because neighbours that I had spoken to said that they had lived in the area for years and it was always children breaking into huts, never houses."
Others claimed:
"Oh, I think the cost must be increasing … we read all the petty crime that's going on, which involves a lot of police time. So the costs are bound to be increasing."
"I think the cost of crime to the community is very high in terms of wasting police resources, the police have to spend time chasing small crimes like this, and all the paperwork involved, which means that they have less time to catch criminals."
"Well it puts a drain on the local police force who already have their hands full … the usual is you can't get a policeman when you want one because they are out chasing stuff like this … it's a waste of time."
In general, the respondents exhibited sympathy for the police in having to pursue what they saw as hopeless tasks. As may be expected, respondents had a variety of views on the general level of service that they had received from the police. Some of the negative opinions included:
"I'm not very satisfied at all, they didn't take it any further as far as I know: the person that committed the crime is still walking about doing the same things."
"Really disappointed. I mean I've always been brought up to think that the police are the people to help you and good people and all this type of thing. … and just to let me know what's going on."
Repeat victims reported that they had received very different treatment on different occasions and procedures and been generally inconsistent between cases:
"On the first occasion, I felt that the officers handling the case seemed a bit more alert and brighter, but on the second occasion, I was not impressed at all."
Other respondents expressed opinions praising the police as follows:
- The service was spot on, that's all I can say.
- I thought they were very helpful, more than I had expected of them really.
- Excellent, first class. We have a small station here and the police are very friendly and they dealt with the problems we had very efficiently.
- Well as far as the service goes they were really very helpful. They were very nice and came up and tried their best. We had the CID and everything up and they were very good.
- The service was very good. They knew what they were doing in regards to the situation at hand. … However, the follow up service could have been better.
PROGRESS OF THE CASE
Information and liaison
A relatively small number (10) of respondents reported that they had been told about the kind of evidence that the police would need and how they would go about obtaining it. Comments by those who had been so informed included:
"Yes, I was told that the police would look for forensic evidence and that they would be checking what they found against all their other records."
"They told me they would be looking for forensic evidence … like blood or fingerprints and stuff on the glass."
"Well, they only told us that you needed witnesses to see who did it, that way they could charge them."
"Basically they initially took, for the computer, a lot of … serial numbers and descriptions of the jewellery … they told us that they would be looking into pawnbroker and things along that line."
"They tried for fingerprints both times. The first police officer I spoke to for the first crime, he said that he had checked around second hand shops to see if there was anything, similar stereos coming up."
"DNA samples were taken from the house. … Fingerprints as well as DNA."
Those who claimed that they had not been informed said:
"Not really, they just said 'we'll go round about and see if anybody had seen anything. [the interviewer reminded the respondent that he had stated earlier that the police had taken fingerprints, to which the respondent replied] Yes, they did, they did get a lot of fingerprints but they've never been back to tell me."
"No, what's the point in that? It was a broken window … we all know that they never catch the ones that did it."
"No I wasn't told either about the kind of evidence nor how they intended to try and collect it."
"No, that's not our business to know that kind of stuff … too many people say 'what are they [police] doing about such and such … I say let them get on with it."
Respondents were asked if they had been informed by the police that they would be kept in touch with progress. Fourteen respondents (50%) reported that they had been informed at the time of the offence by officers verbally. The respondents had been given different levels of expectation by officers:
"They mentioned to us if they, basically, found anything that they would be in touch with us, but other than that we weren't told if they would keep us up to date with what was going on."
"Yes, I was told that and I asked, especially the second one, I asked, could you please get back to me because the first one I haven't and that didn't happen."
"Well initially yes, we were certainly led to believe we would be and we were also led to believe that it was an instant open and closed case because there was so much evidence against him."
"Yes, they said, 'If we hear anything, we'll let you know.'"
"They promised to tell me if anything developed, but never got back to me."
Asked if the police had in fact kept them in touch with information about the progress about the case 21 (75%) respondents said that this had not happened. Their comments included:
"That was the last I heard from anyone."
"I had to find out from him, that's the scary thing, you know, you find out from the person you've accused and it's not very nice."
"No, I never heard from them again until they called me to take part in this research."
"No I never heard from them again, I don't know why they gave you my name as a contact."
"No, that was about four months ago and I haven't heard a thing from them."
The participants were asked if they had themselves contacted the police to find out what progress was being made on the case and if so, how that request was responded to. It was found that 5 respondents (18%) had taken the initiative to ask for a progress report and had the following comments to make:
"I phoned them just to find out what the situation was basically. It just seemed that at that stage nothing had been recovered or information had been found, so it was just trying to continue with it basically. I think they did take it quite seriously."
"I mean I went to the police station and they were really helpful and they were like, we will do it, if it was us [the victim had involved two police stations in the crime and felt that now neither really wanted ownership of the crime] we would go round and say, right, but of course, the second police station didn't even get in touch with me, I just phoned them."
"The response has been 'It's out of our hands now. We can't tell you anything, contact the courts.'"
"They were always polite and told me what I needed to know."
"I did call once but I felt that they brushed me off."
When asked if they had a 'named officer' who would deal with their case throughout the enquiry, 11 (40%) reported that they had. Of these, 7 respondents said they were happy with this situation. For example:
"This was very useful; it's a nice friendly approach and meant that I could become familiar with how the system works."
"It was very helpful to speak to someone who knows you."
"If I was to phone up I wouldn't know who I would be talking to or whether they knew what I was talking about. So having someone who knew who I was, yes… it was a reference point."
Other respondents were less than happy with the arrangement, with one, for example, saying that:
"When I phoned up and asked about, can I speak to the, I can't even remember his name now, and asked to speak to the officer they said he's on holiday just now and I'd call back and "well actually he's not here, he should be in tomorrow", and then I'd call back and it would be "well no he's not here just now." It would be just ridiculous excuses that didn't even make sense because one minute he's on holiday, the next he's actually there. So I felt that was kind of unhelpful too".
Those respondents who had not been given a named officer to deal with expressed their views as follows:
"As I said earlier it's a very small station and if I wanted to I'd just go in and personally ask them. It's just down the road from me."
"I thought it was pile of shit. I thought it was very bad on their part, very, very lackadaisical, not intending to do anything, or not wanting to bother, to come away with a pile of shit like that."
"I didn't think about it much at the time, but thinking back it would have been easier if they had given me a contact name that I could have phoned."
"I think it would have been very useful to have that service."
"That would have been a good idea, it would save you repeating your story over and over."
Respondents were asked if they had been informed about other sources of support available to them as a victim of crime. Fifteen respondents (54%) reported they had not been given such information. The twelve who had been informed, reported as follows:
"Yes, I was told about Victim Support but I decided not to use them."
"Yes, they told me about the crime prevention officer who would help to advise me how to prevent it happening again."
"Yes, they told me about Victim Support … I wasn't really interested. They also told me about extra security and stuff, my house is off the main road… it wouldn't help to have alarms fitted, no one would see it."
"I was told about Victim Support, but I decided it wasn't necessary to contact them. I'd also, previously, had a visit from a crime prevention officer after an earlier event, and they sort of went over the property and gave me advice on security arrangements."
"Well somebody did get in contact with us. It wasn't,… it was more for the shed, but we said no, not to bother… because we thought, what difference could it make, we didn't think at the time."
"Yes, I mean, they offered counselling services if we needed those. … we were obviously told about why it had been easy to get through our door and this and that, and they advised us to change the locks there and get the communal door fixed but there's five other flats here and it's quite hard work to get that done. I mean, everybody say's they'll agree to it, but then when it comes down to the matter of money, it's a case of no, I can't do that."
"I went down and seen them {Victim Support} down in the halls, down the town… they do a stand on a Thursday or a Friday … I was going to go back down and see them again."
Participants were asked if it would have been useful to have been told about other services available to victims of crime. Only four respondents (14%) claimed that such information would have been useful. They commented:
"Yes, it would have been good when my house was broken into, I have two small children and I was left feeling very vulnerable, maybe it would have helped to have made me less vulnerable."
"Yes, I would have liked to have been told anything at that time, I hadn't a clue."
"Yes, I think it would have helped if they had provided me with a contact for someone at Victim Support, especially at the time of the incident, as I was very upset and it took me quite a while to get over it."
When asked if they had been informed about crime prevention or safety/security procedures nine respondents (32%) reported that they had been, with one respondent commenting:
"They told me to try and park where there is more light, but I told them that often there was no choice and that you had to take what was available."
Another respondent (who was a repeat victim) reported having been advised that her car had been broken into because she had parked it with the driver's door adjacent to the pavement and if she was to park with the passenger door by the pavement, it would be less likely to happen again. Other respondents commented:
"Yes, it might have been but I'm not sure that it would have made any difference."
"Well I had security lights installed already and that didn't deter the thief."
Asked how those who had received information about security had made use of it, they reported:
"I got the locks changed on my house and got a burglar alarm."
"I changed all my point of entry and exit locks. The windows are all covered by window locks."
"I've got one of these alarm things, I bought one of them … we've got deadlocks, the windows all locked and everything."
"Well, I was provided with a little kit, which included a pen to mark all your things in case it happened again."
Other changes to security measures resulting from the crime were reported as follows:
"I try to park in the most well lit part of the road now. I am more careful and a bit more aware of car theft."
"I have had an alarm fitted to my car and I'm being a bit more vigilant I suppose."
"We put deadlocks on the front and back door. We also put contact alarms on the back windows, the back door and the front door and security lights also. We also put a gate up at the side of the house."
Respondents were asked to comment on whether they think the responsibility for their property is solely that of the owner, or whether the police are responsible as public servants, whether it is a matter of joint responsibility of yourself and the police as public servants, or whether they had other views. Thirteen respondents (48%) felt that it was a joint responsibility between themselves and the police. Their comments included:
"Well, I feel maybe it's a joint, I mean I've done as much as I possibly can to make sure my car is secure."
"Joint responsibility, I am mostly responsible but we pay taxes for the police services. It must be their responsibility to keep the streets safe."
"Joint responsibility. That's why the police are there, to keep the streets safe to park your car."
Fourteen (52%) of respondents felt the responsibility was entirely theirs. Their comments included:
"I'd probably say myself, because I don't really think the police can be everywhere at the same time, because if they are in this street, there's probably someone two streets along getting burgled."
CRIMES THAT WERE SOLVED
Nine respondents had initially stated that the crimes that had been committed against them had been solved. However, it became evident as the interviews progressed that many of the respondents did not really know about the final outcome of their individual cases. The following quotations illustrate this:
"No, they didn't even tell me that they got someone for the crime, I had to find that out from a neighbour whose car was also done the same night. I called the station and they told me nothing."
"They explained that the people that they arrested were being charged and that a report was being sent to the Procurator Fiscal's office and that it would be up to them to decide whether or not to bring a prosecution."
"Some young lad was taken to court but I don't know how he got on in court. The police advised me to look at the local papers but I never saw a thing."
Final outcome of the case
When asked about the final outcome of the case seven respondents commented that they did not know the final outcome. Others made assumptions about the outcome of the case. One respondent assumed that because of the time that had elapsed since the crime had been committed, coupled with the fact that he had never been given any other information from the police, the case must be closed:
"As far as I know it must be because I've never heard any more. It must be six or seven years ago now since anything happened, as far as the house goes and the car, 1996 I think was the last time."
Another respondent made assumptions that the case was still on going based on the fact that the stolen goods had not been returned:
"Well, I understand that, … the only reason I understand that, is that they haven't said 'look the case has finished and come and collect your stuff'."
When asked if they had ever been informed that the case had been closed all the respondents commented that they had never been officially informed. Respondents were then asked if it would have been useful to be given information about the case in terms of closure, and again there was a unanimous agreement that it would have been helpful to be given this information. Similarly, when asked who should have the responsibility of passing this kind of information to victims every respondent felt that that responsibility belonged to the police. Comments included:
"I think it's, somebody certainly should keep you informed. I think perhaps the police because I think more of a customer service point of view, if they've dealt with it initially I think they should follow it through."
"Yes, the police should have told me something."
"The police, I would think in the circumstances."
Respondents were asked if they were satisfied with the final outcome of the case. Only five people commented and they all stated that they were not satisfied with the final outcome:
"Unsatisfied, as a victim don't feel as though my feelings were considered."
"W ell, I didn't expect that it would be a happy ending these things never are, but I would have felt better if the whole thing had been better explained to me."
Information sharing about other criminal justice agencies
Of the nine respondents who commented that the crimes were solved, six respondents commented that the police did not explain the role of other criminal justice agencies. However, when asked if this information would have been useful to them only four respondents said that it would have been helpful to be given this information. One respondent commented that:
"Yes, if it meant that I would have known the proper way to proceed…I mean the person I spoke to on the phone told me that I shouldn't be asking them about it…I think she told me to call the court…I can't remember."
The other five respondents felt that it was not necessary to be given this type of information. Some comments included:
"I don't think that information would have helped me in any way."
Similarly:
"No, I know all that stuff anyway."
Crimes that were not solved
There was a great deal of confusion about the cases that were not solved. Many respondents had made assumptions that the case was closed because they had never been given information from the police about the enquiry. Similarly, many respondents assumed that the case was ongoing because they had never been given information to the contrary. Of the 19 respondents who stated that the case was not solved none had been given official confirmation that the case was closed. When asked if it would it have been helpful to have been told that the case was closed seven respondents felt that it would have been useful to be given this information, suggesting that knowing this information would give them a sense of closure:
"Yes, it would have been helpful to know if they caught someone or not."
"Yes maybe then it would have stopped playing on my mind so much."
"Yes, I think it would have been yes. We don't know that it's closed, I've never heard nothing. It's so funny, I just said to my wife the other day we've never seen none of them going about for years now, wherever they are. "
"Yes, it would have given some closure to the situation, yes."
Only two respondents stated that it would not have been useful, stating that it would have no effect on the resolution of the case:
"Not really, I can't see how it would have made any difference… the deed was done."
"I can't see what difference it would have made to me."
Respondents were asked about what other information they would have welcomed at this stage. Better communication about how the case was progressing was mentioned ten times. For example:
"I would like to know what is happening to the whole thing…I don't understand why they have never caught the person using my credit card."
"It would have been nice to know if anything had happened and if they had found out who was responsible."
"I would have like to have some kind of communication about how it was going, I keep looking at laddies here thinking…was it him."
"I would have liked to know if the police had got someone for the crime...or even that the police had given up on the case."
"I would have liked to have known what happened. I knew that they said that they'd take him to xxx and they'd keep him in overnight and that he'd appear in court in the morning, then something would happen then. I would have liked to have known if he had been charged and if he was jailed, basically. If he had been jailed I would have been quite satisfied but the police said to us, when I did call them up and asked for feedback, well it's in the hands of the courts and it depends on what judge you get."
However, there was a connection between prior expectations of services and actual opinions expressed by respondents. Respondents who had been repeat victims of crime had much lower expectations about the services that they should receive at this time as the following comment illustrates:
"I don't really expect to hear anything unless the police get someone for the crime…its not their place to do that'."
Similarly, another repeat victim commented that:
"Experience tells you that the police don't have the resources to keep running back and forward to tell people 'sorry but we don't have any clues…or don't worry we are still working on it'. That's just not practical and would be a further waste of police time…I wonder what people would think if they couldn't get a cop because he was out placating some poor blighter who had his window broken…they wouldn't be pleased I can tell you that."
OVERALL PERSPECTIVES
Respondents were asked about the number of police officers they had contact with throughout their case and whether they had any opinions about this. The number of contact officers was between two and four in most cases. Most of the respondents said that they had no opinions about this with comments like ' I wasn't fussed, it seemed reasonable enough' or ' I don't have any views on this, it's not something you give thought to'. However, other respondents had strong opinions about the number of police involved as the following illustrate:
"It would have been easier if only one person had been dealing with my case."
"I'd have rather had one coming with no uniform on really. Yes, with no uniform, so that nobody sees he was coming. Folk always think, oh what's the police doing at your house?"
"It just really added, I suppose, to the distress that we were already having because we had the three officers on the initial day and then the SOCO team was called out the following day. So that night we actually had to sleep on chairs on the couch because we couldn't touch anything."
"We could do with a lot less officers coming into your home.. they come with that tackity boots approach…too many officers too much noise from the radios…and have you ever heard the way that they knock your door….anyone would think that it was you that was the criminal. It made the whole thing more of a drama…my wife was so upset…I mean we were the victims after all…all this and my house was broken into."
Professionalism of the police
When asked whether all the officers involved in the case acted in a professional manner, twenty-seven respondents said yes and only one said no. However, there was some dispute about levels of professionalism, perceptions of professionalism and also about how useful it was to have a 'professional' officer in their home at a time of crisis. Perceptions of professionalism were coloured, to some extent, by the individual's prior expectations of the services that they would receive from the police. Repeat victims had lower expectations in terms of service provision.
Some positive comments included:
"Yes, they were both okay, straight forward enough and seemed plausible."
"Yes. They were very professional."
"Yes, as I've said they were both very professional."
"Yes they all seemed helpful."
"Oh yes, they were very nice. No, really nice. I can't say nothing against them as far as that goes, they were really nice."
"Yes, they were all really pleasant, especially when first we went up to the actual police station, they were really good. I couldn't fault them, they were really helpful."
Some negative comments included:
"Yes, they were very professional but not very friendly."
"They were friendly but very official."
"They were professional and courteous but they were not helpful."
"Yes, a bit too professional…. All uniformed and shiny buttons …It all adds to the stress, why cant they just wear plain clothes…and turn those radios down a bit…it's like an invasion from the S.S. I asked the officer to turn his radio down a few times but he couldn't hear me because of the racket from his radio."
"Yes, I suppose you could say that. I mean the SOCO officers came in, done their job and left again without saying basically two words to us other than that they couldn't find anything."
Overall satisfaction
Respondents were asked to comment on their overall satisfaction about how their case was handled by the police. Twenty-one respondents commented that they were satisfied with the overall treatment they had received from the police. Three respondents commented that they were unsatisfied with the treatment they had received and five people were undecided. Of the five who were undecided the general consensus was that they were happy with the initial police response but were dissatisfied with the overall after care service. There was also a general acknowledgement that the police were doing the best job that they could under the circumstances.
"Yes, I was satisfied that the police are doing what they can under the circumstances."
"Yes, he did all he could for me."
"Aye, it was okay, as I said their hands are tied when it comes to young offenders or joy riders."
"I wish they had got whoever had done the damage to my car, but I didn't think that they would."
"Yes I would say, they were very good as far as tending to us. They really did tend to us, coming up to see us and everything."
"Well that's a yes and a no I suppose. The initial part, yes I would say it was, it was quite good in how they handled it but the aftermath could have been handled slightly better."
Respondents were asked to comment about whether they had felt that their case had been dealt with in an appropriate way. The majority of respondents [twenty-one] commented that they were satisfied that their individual case was dealt with in an appropriate manner whereas seven respondents were not satisfied. Although comments varied there was a common complaint about lack of follow up communication between victim and police.
"Yes, I have no complaints about how the case was handled; I would have liked to have been better informed about how the case was progressing."
"No, I think that they could have done more and could have been more helpful."
"I think so, yes. I would say so. As I say, I've never heard if it was ever closed or anything like that, I don't know."
"For the nature of the case, I suppose it was yes because a house break in really isn't on the top of the priority list."
"Yes, in a sense it was handled initially in a good sense it was yes but then again, you look at another side of the coin and you think, well no it wasn't."
" I don't really know how they dealt with the case, so I would say no. Because if he had got back to me to tell me what they'd done that would be fine but they hadn't done that."
Perceptions of bad practice
Respondents were asked to comment on any ways that they thought the service received from the police could be improved. Again, the need for better communication between the police and victims of crime was mentioned by sixteen respondents. Some examples follow:
"Definitely communication, get back to me. I mean I don't expect them to come and solve it because, obviously, this type of crime is very difficult unless you've got evidence but at least come back to me to let me know what you've done."
"Yes, I mean the follow up could have been a follow up basically. As I said previously, even if it was just a call to say that they were no further on in the case, it would have been nice just as a courtesy call basically."
"Communication was poor; I would have felt less vulnerable and safer if I was told what was happening."
"It would have been better if I was told about the progress of the case…and I would have liked to know if the case was solved."
Some other recurring complaints included the delay in getting back personal belongings after the case was closed, an issue which was mentioned five times. Victim blaming was mentioned three times. Insensitivity of individual police officers was mentioned twice. One respondent commented very strongly on what he had perceived as a further invasion of his privacy caused by the police's approach to the situation, as the following quotation demonstrates:
"I think that the whole case could have been improved in some ways…. start with police attitudes. Too many officers…loud radios, they have no concern for the children in the house asleep. Oh they were very professional and all that but they didn't take into account they could be adding to the stress and trauma…I think they could do with some training in sensitivity. Another thing is that they go off and leave you in the dark about what is happening, never a call. How would they like it to happen to them?"
Other general points raised included a perceived shortage of police on the streets; too many officers attending the scene of the crime and the need for a single named contact officer for continuity in feedback.
Perceptions of good practice
Respondents were asked the question 'from your experience and involvement with the police as a victim of crime, could you identify examples of good practice in terms of the response or treatment that you received from the police?' The majority of respondents simply reiterated points that they had mentioned earlier in the interview. Some recurring themes follow:
Friendly, sensitive and reassuring officers were mentioned nine times.
"The officers were concerned for our welfare, which made us feel more at ease. They were nice friendly men."
"Yes, the way that the officers treated us was friendly and sensitive throughout the entire case."
"Well, as I said, I thought they were very helpful, they really attended to us very quick, as I said, when we were broken into or stones through the window or garage, they were up very quick."
"Yes, the personal approach …they were very friendly and put me at ease."
"Always their personal approach …this is very good and reassuring."
"As I said earlier, they have to work under big pressures all of the time, but they never made me feel like I was wasting their time, they were very helpful and sympathetic."
Response time was good [or as expected] in the majority of cases, an issue which was mentioned seven times:
"I don't know what you would call good practice, they got there very fast when I called them - I suppose that is good practice because they are very busy."
"Yes, definitely, initial response and kept informed of what was happening that particular night."
The majority of respondents commented that the police acted professionally. However, perceptions of professionalism were coloured, to some extent, by the individual's prior expectations of the services that they would receive from the police.
« Previous | Contents | Next »