Book Description

In 1973 the National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice awarded a contract to the Rand Corporation to undertake a nationwide, two-year study of the effectiveness of police investigative practices. The criminal investigation process in municipal and county police departments was studied by survey, by interviews and observations, and by special data collection. In October 1975, the Rand Corporation published its findings and proposed reforms in three volumes. The principal finding of the research was that, although the solution or clearance of reported crimes is the primary focus of police investigators, most clearances are arrived at through the activities of patrol officers, members of the public, and routine police procedures, rather than investigative techniques. It was further suggested that solutions for only a very small percentage of crimes, concentrated in a few specific crime types, are generated through the use of what has been traditionally thought of as investigative efforts. Rather, it was asserted that much of this traditional investigative effort is applied to crimes which empirical evidence indicates will never be solved. As a result of this finding, along with others on fingerprint processing, the use of information systems, strike forces, victim satisfaction, and post-arrest investigation thoroughness, the researchers suggested a number of reforms intended to result in more effective and efficient investigation activity. When the study was made public, it sparked a debate in the law enforcement community. A critical analysis of the Rand research, and the researcher's response appeared in the July 1976 issue of the police chief. The critical evaluation purported to demonstrate that the Rand study contains 'procedural errors', has a 'fatally limited' data base, and 'presents conclusions that do not follow from the data presented'. In their response, the Rand researchers, while acknowledging some instances of 'imprecise or misinterpretable wordings', contend that no contradictory evidence has been brought forth that suggests their basic conclusions are erroneous. Because of the importance of the issues involved, the National Institute has compiled its report, which includes the original summary of the criminal investigation study, the critical analysis, the researchers' response, and a revised summary prepared by the researchers.