TELEMASP Bulletin, Volume 1, Number 9, December 1994 Page: 3
12 p. ; 28 cm.View a full description of this periodical.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
3
Crime Specific Policing in Houston* Analysis
Table 1 depicts UCR crime statistics from 1989 through
1993 for Houston and, to provide comparison, the five other
largest cities in Texas. The combined cities' statistics are a
summation of data from the five other cities in the table. The
offenses of burglary, robbery, and auto theft are listed
separately. Also listed is Suppressible Part I, which is a
summation of burglary, robbery, and auto theft. The data
indicate that crime in urban Texas has dropped in all of the
categories listed. Note that Houston's drop in crime occurred
predominately in 1992; the other cities and the state as a
whole dropped more in 1993.
Tables 2 and 3 contain summary data on the total amount of
crimes in the aforementioned categories for Houston and the
other five largest cities both 30 months pre- and 30 months
post-655 implementation (January 1992). Houston had
substantially greater drops in offense incidents among all
categories. The 27.8% drop in Suppressible Part I offenses
represents a34.4% greater decline than the20.7% dropin the
comparison cities.
Figures 1 through 5 graph the month-to-month crime figures
for Houston between July 1989 and June 1994 (30 months
pre/post). Reported crime decreased between 1989 and
1994 overall. Of note is that there is a precipitous drop in
several crimes that corresponds with the implementation of
655 in January of 1992. The charts show the seasonal peaks
associated with crime, usually in July. Of particular impor-
tance is the fact that the peaks before the 655 program are
substantially higher than the seasonal peaks after 655. This
is exemplified in Figure 4, Suppressible Part I Crimes
(burglary,robbery, auto theft), where the peaks in July 1989,
1990, and 1991 are substantially greater than in July 1992,
1993 and 1994.
Robbery (Figure 1) dropped from an average of 1,070.9 to
899.1 cases per month, a 171.76 average per month drop
(p < .0001). Auto theft (Figure 2) dropped from 3,359.1 to
2,332.2 cases per month, a 1,026.93 average per month drop
(p < .0001). Burglary (Figure 3) dropped from 3,536.8 to
2,307.3 cases per month, a 1,229.5 average per month
decrease (p < .0001). Total Part I (Figure 5) offenses
dropped from 15,339.6 to 11,774.5 cases per month, a
3,565.1 average per month decrease (p < .0001). Non-
violent Part I offenses (burglary, theft, auto theft, arson)
dropped from 13,346.8 to9,733.9casesper month,a3,612.87
average decrease per month (p < .0001). Of note is that all
major UCR Part I offenses dropped significantly except for
aggravated assault which increased from 767.3 to 1,010.2
cases per month, an average increase of 242.9 cases per
month (p <.0001) (see the inset box, Cooking the Books?).Cooking the Books?
An immediate response by skeptics is that Houston
must be manipulating the reporting/recording of Part
I offenses. A full analysis of the issue is obviously
beyond the scope of this bulletin. However, members
of the Police Research Center did visit with a repre-
sentative of the Texas Department of Public Safety
Uniform Crime Reporting Section. The emphatic
response was that there is no indication of changes in
reporting/recording practices. Another fact which
must be noted is the increase in aggravated assault in
1992. It is generally accepted that no other Part I
offense is more subject to definitional ambiguity (and
hence susceptibility to manipulation) than aggravated
assault. If anything, the otherwise unexplained in-
crease in this offense rate indicates more, not less,
assiduous reporting/recording.
PartIIoffenses in Houston followed atrend exactly opposite
that of Part I offenses. Note that many Part II offenses are
actually arrests (as opposed to reported offenses), and thus
indicative of proactive, aggressive policing. Detection and
reports of Part II offenses and non-criminal incidents in-
creased dramatically following implementation of 655.
Whereas Part I offenses dropped precipitously in January
1992, Part II offenses show aprecipitous increase. Weapons
offenses (Figure6)increased an average of40.5offenses per
month (p < .0001). Similarly, DWI offenses (Figure 7)
increased from 409.1 to 705.4 offenses per month, a 296.3
(72%) average per month increase (p <.0001). Some Part II
offenses decreased during this time, but the decrease was not
significant. For example, vandalism decreased an average
of 69.1 cases per month (p < .077) and drug offenses
decreased an average of 26.4 cases per month (p < .363).
However, in general, Part II offenses (Figure 8)increased in
the two-and-one-half years following the implementation of
655. Part II offenses increased an average of 1,147.1 cases
per month (p < .0001).
'Public order' incidents increased an average of 1,060.7
cases per month (p < .0001). This is graphically depicted in
Figure 9 which shows the sharp increase in the number of
curfew and loitering violations. These offense averages
before 655 were essentially at zero. After 655, the average
was 324.3 cases per month. This change represents better
than any other statistic the pre/post difference in patrol
strategy. Figure 10 depicts the narrowing of the gap between
Part I and Part II offenses in Houston.
Of note as well is the narrowing of the standard deviations
associated with several Part II offenses. For example, the
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Periodical.
Hoover, Larry T. TELEMASP Bulletin, Volume 1, Number 9, December 1994, periodical, December 1994; Huntsville, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth1624790/m1/3/: accessed July 17, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.