Otherwise another SR/SPD fluff piece on this Unit wouldn’t be coming out AGAIN. Perhaps it is because sometime in April SPD’s actual DV Data will be released to the Public as required by law…but who knows?

http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2016/mar/15/spokane-police-domestic-violence-unit-means-more-v/

http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2015/feb/13/spokane-family-justice-center-combines-range-of/

 

Or it could be that the Cops offered a reporter one of those infamous media ride-a-longs for some kind of a story…who knows?

 

__________________________________

BACKGROUND:

(12) Commencing January 1, 1994, records of incidents of domestic violence shall be submitted, in accordance with procedures described in this subsection, to the Washington association of sheriffs and police chiefs by all law enforcement agencies. The Washington criminal justice training commission shall amend its contract for collection of statewide crime data with the Washington association of sheriffs and police chiefs:

(a) To include a table, in the annual report of crime in Washington produced by the Washington association of sheriffs and police chiefs pursuant to the contract, showing the total number of actual offenses and the number and percent of the offenses that are domestic violence incidents for the following crimes: (i) Criminal homicide, with subtotals for murder and nonnegligent homicide and manslaughter by negligence; (ii) forcible rape, with subtotals for rape by force and attempted forcible rape; (iii) robbery, with subtotals for firearm, knife or cutting instrument, or other dangerous weapon, and strongarm robbery; (iv) assault, with subtotals for firearm, knife or cutting instrument, other dangerous weapon, hands, feet, aggravated, and other nonaggravated assaults; (v) burglary, with subtotals for forcible entry, nonforcible unlawful entry, and attempted forcible entry; (vi) larceny theft, except motor vehicle theft; (vii) motor vehicle theft, with subtotals for autos, trucks and buses, and other vehicles; (viii) arson; and (ix) violations of the provisions of a protection order or no-contact order restraining the person from going onto the grounds of or entering a residence, workplace, school, or day care, provided that specific appropriations are subsequently made for the collection and compilation of data regarding violations of protection orders or no-contact orders;

(b) To require that the table shall continue to be prepared and contained in the annual report of crime in Washington until that time as comparable or more detailed information about domestic violence incidents is available through the Washington state incident based reporting system and the information is prepared and contained in the annual report of crime in Washington; and

(c) To require that, in consultation with interested persons, the Washington association of sheriffs and police chiefs prepare and disseminate procedures to all law enforcement agencies in the state as to how the agencies shall code and report domestic violence incidents to the Washington association of sheriffs and police chiefs.

 

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=10.99&full=true#10.99.010

If you notice the date the above law was enacted you might compare it to my retirement date from SPD and consider that a lot of work went into the law starting in 1991, and someone of course got stuck with the implementation process for SPD. It took a lot of work from both Cops and Victim Advocates to get the law off the ground.

https://files.acrobat.com/a/preview/474dda7c-bb33-4f17-93ce-90c87ad9390b

 

________________________________________

 

 

The first rule for any Investigative Reporter when it comes to Criminal Justice Data is simple, “NEVER EVER TRUST IT!”, always do your homework and take a good look at what you are being feed, as well as why you are being feed it.

 

The best place to start is right here:

http://www.waspc.org/crime-statistics-reports

 

So you don’t have to do it, and I already had the data readily available from my complaint against Frank Straub claiming 8,000 DV Calls per year, which was investigated by Teresa Sanders, I’ll break it down for you.

 

Domestic Violence Crimes reported by SPD to WASPC from 2010 to 2014:

2010 (3,238) DV Crimes Reported…DV Protection Orders (993)

2011 (3,185) DV Crimes Reported…DV Protection Orders (1,011)

2012 (3,231) DV Crimes Reported…DV Protection Orders (780)

2013 (3,185) DV Crimes Reported…DV Protection Orders (1,010)

2014 (3,238) DV Crimes Reported…DV Protection Orders (994)

2015 (?????) DV Crimes Reported…DV Protection Orders (????)

 

Now compare the data in the SR story:

“716 new arrests or charges for violating domestic violence protection orders”

I have NO IDEA what “new arrests or charges means”? Does it mean that this unit was responsible for 716 new arrests or charges in addition to arrests and charges made outside the Unit? If so that is outstanding and may be the best numbers in the State, especially when you consider Tacoma PD’s 2014 NIBRS DV Arrest Data. (* SPD and SCSO are NOT NIBRS Compliant…another story.)

 

Since we don’t know what “new arrests or charges means” if it represents additional arrests and charges from what Patrol Division does it is scary to think what the grand total might be considering as a comparison that in 2014 Tacoma reported 832 DV Order Violations of which somewhere around 210 resulted in arrests and from what SPD “Summary Reported” in 2014 as DV Order Violations at 994.

 

 

“548 new arrests on other domestic violence charges;”

 

Again, I’m not sure what this means from the standpoint of normal law enforcement operations at SPD.

Does it mean that in addition to the normal process of arrest and follow-up that was done by the previous DV Units, this new Unit initiated 548 more arrests? Does it mean that this new Unit initiated 548 new arrests beyond the normal case flow? If the answer to either question is YES…then JUST WOW…I’m Impressed…but on the other hand if this is the typical bunk I’m not impressed. The question is…548 new arrests out of how many, and where were they initiated?

 

“437 visits to victims’ homes, according to department statistics.”

 

Let me see if I have this correct… (437) home visits in 2015 over the 12-month period means an average of 31 home visits per month…right?

 

The department created the domestic violence unit about 18 months ago, doubling the number of dedicated detectives from two to four and adding two more officers.

Since then, one detective has been reassigned to the human trafficking unit. Another officer position has been temporarily vacant since January, said Sgt. Brad Hallock, who oversees the unit. But the remaining members of the unit are getting results.

 

According to the current staffing level in the news story (4) that works out to (8) home visits per month by assigned staff, or take away the Patrol Cop assigned to the Unit, (11) home visits per month by a Detective, or (3) per week. Frankly, IMO not very impressive especially since we don’t know where the number (437) was derived from and whether or not it involved normal Detective case follow-up beyond the initial investigative interview, if there actually was one.

 

 

I found this statement in the story real odd:

 

Patrol officers are usually the first to respond to domestic violence calls as they happen, writing a report and arresting suspects if they have probable cause. Schneider and Geren follow up the next day: checking on victims, tracking down suspects who weren’t home the night before, and talking to neighbors who might be able to help.

“This is kind of like fishing,” Schneider said.

 

Odd, because it is nothing new! Since at least 1969 Patrol makes the initial response takes the report, makes the arrest, Detectives do the follow-up on felony DV Cases and some Misdemeanor cases depending on the facts. That is the way it is done almost everywhere. I don’t think I could ever draw a correlation between working DV Cases and “fishing”, I enjoy fishing.

 

 

 

Quite a stretch here:

 

In 2014, 44 percent of municipal court domestic violence assault cases were dismissed, most often because of problems with witnesses. In 2015, that number was down to 31 percent. Bingham said the change is because the Family Justice Center can better support victims through the court process.

 

This must be one of those absurd lawyer statements. How in the world could anyone draw that conclusion where there is only 18 months of questionable data and no comparables?

 

As far as problems with witnesses, as Mr. Bingham surely knows a recanting victim in a DV case should NEVER be a determining factor in prosecuting the case. You might want to bone up on your own DV Manual Mr. Bingham it is covered in here. Once you have done that can I please get my Nissen Affidavit?

 

https://files.acrobat.com/a/preview/577a9ceb-7e31-4e74-b999-4e71cc41ce2f

 

 

I wish it was true!

‘It’s saving lives’

After talking to a victim, Geren and Schneider’s next task was to check on a man who reportedly called his ex-girlfriend, threatening to slit her throat and kill her. The pair had been dating for 23 years before breaking up around Christmas, she told officers. She said she planned to seek a restraining order and get a concealed pistol license as a result.

 

The fact is that NO DV Program anywhere in the US has been proven to save lives. I wish there was one but there isn’t one.

Here in Spokane we can count on an average of 2-3 DV Homicides per year despite all the attempts to change things.

Since 1997 (51) DV Homicides, (17) DV Suicides, (3) DV Officer Involved Deaths

 

https://files.acrobat.com/a/preview/03b59532-4c0d-4e77-bf0a-fad6648bf3c9

 

**I’m having trouble getting through the Arleth IA case…I break out laughing every other paragraph…but I’ll get there! 🙂 

 

I REPORT YOU DECIDE!!!