There are few collections of data more mischievous than the periodic dance of the crime statistics released by various cities and towns.
The most obvious challenge is the limited number of data points with which you are working to evaluate trends in a limited geographic area, with a limited number of people. The difference between a “trend” and an occasional aberration? Open to interpretation.
For instance, in 2008, Miami proudly reported that the city had no homicides in October — the first time in 42 years that the city went murder-free for a whole month. Well, OK. That was good news. At least the police were honest enough to admit the most amusing frailty in homicide data analysis: Sometimes, you just get lucky and the potential murderer has a bad aim. In that fateful October, one victim was shot in both legs and his femoral artery was pieced, but the emergency room docs performed a life-saving miracle.
Another blip on the radar may be the occasional nutball, who boosts the incidence of crime for the time that he roams the streets, without necessarily being representative of a city population’s instincts for crime. One gentleman this year in Flint, Mich., was sent off to trials for three fatal stabbings and six additional knife attacks. He was Flint’s very own little crime wave.
Although the powers-that-be are reluctant to bring it up, there is a suspicion (and a reality) that some local police departments pretty up the statistics a bit to make their crime fighting prowess look better than it really is. The Nashville police department is “reviewing” its procedures after a news investigation found that most sex-crime reports were being labeled something else and kept out of the annual crime statistics.
When a locale experiences a flurry of unexplained, embarrassing crimes, is it a trend, or a quirk? In January, Prince George’s County in Maryland experienced 13 homicides in the first 11 days of the year. No single, rational explanation — the county police shuffled a number of detectives to units more directly involved in reducing the body count.
In Hartford last month, Mayor Segarra practiced for a scheduled appearance on the Comedy Channel, by announcing a “goal” of having “no crime in the city.” Part of his giddiness was the 2010 crime report, which indicated a drop in serious crime from the previous year. Public relations being the chancy business that it is, 2011 began in the city with a double homicide.
At best, the “serious crime” numbers are a frustrating mess, including such stuff as burglary and auto theft mixed in with the murders and rapes and armed robberies.
For cities such as Hartford, struggling to attract middle-class folks, or at least retain the ones that already live there, the annual crime report is tough news — whether the numbers go up or down. The politicians are reluctant to break out the numbers in such a way as to suggest that the “good” neighborhoods remain relatively creature-free, while the magic of zoning, housing discrimination and socio-economic instincts encourage the bad guys to stick to their own kind.
Hartford Police Chief Daryl Roberts hinted at the reality, when he noted that “people are picking up guns to settle arguments.” The “people” he was talking about don’t tend to pick fights with suburban commuters.
A mathematician playing with Los Angeles Police Department crime statistics has come up with this prediction: 17 percent of the sprawling city’s burglaries will occur in a 5-percent area.
Stay tuned for next year’s Hartford crime report. The numbers will be encouraging, or discouraging. Or something.
Laurence D. Cohen is a freelance writer.
