Prolific Shoplifters in Nottinghamshire

Report for Nottinghamshire Police and Crime Commissioner

Professor Simon Holdaway5th June, 2014

Contents

Introduction.................................................................................................................1

Shoplifting...................................................................................................................2

Research methods......................................................................................................3

Shoplifting – the extent of the problem in Nottinghamshire.........................................4

Offenders....................................................................................................................4

Gender and Age..........................................................................................................5

Ethnicity.......................................................................................................................6

Employment................................................................................................................6

Residence...................................................................................................................6

Offences......................................................................................................................7

Goods stolen...............................................................................................................9

Shoplifting reduction tactics......................................................................................11

Sentencing................................................................................................................14

Recommendations....................................................................................................16

Executive summary

Findings

Data about sixty-three prolific shoplifters offending in Nottinghamshire between July 2012–July 2013 have been analysed. The extent of their crime requires special consideration and a prevention strategy related to along with measures to address other types of shoplifters and their offences.

The research literature about shoplifting is meagre. None of it deals with persistent shoplifters. One important study, however, reminds us that the effectiveness of security personnel seems to be limited. Crime prevention measures, including the use of drug and alcohol rehabilitation programmes, are probably of more importance.

52 (82.5%) of the prolific offenders were male. 11 (17.5%) were female.

40 (63%) of the offenders were between 28 and 46 years of age. This is the typical age-range for all offenders.

Almost all offenders were white Europeans (56 of 63). 5 of the 56 were from Eastern Europe. 7 were recorded as Black

About 80% (50) of them were unemployed during the research period. Just 3 of the 63 offenders (4.8%) were employed.

Most offenders (39) lived in The City Central, North and South areas and it seems they moved to and from premises frequently. One offender lived outside Nottinghamshire.

Before the research year, 89% (56 of 63) of the offenders committed individually between 26 and 50 shoplifting offences. 10 committed individually between 11 and 25 offences and 13 committed individually over 51 offences.

Between July 2012-July 2013, 7 offenders each committed over 10 shoplifting offences, 6 each committed just fewer than 10. 9 offenders each committed 8

offences. The 41 other offenders continued to commit theft from shops during this period.

During the research period, the 63 offenders stole 1510 items whilst committing 541 separate offences of shoplifting

The most frequently stolen goods were food and alcohol, followed by personal hygiene products, clothing and chocolate. The point is somewhat speculative but it seems the goods were for personal use as well as for sale in illegal markets, the size of which may well have expanded during recent years.

The gross value of 40% of goods stolen was over £50. However, this is not an indication of the cost of dealing with the prolific offenders. The costs of deploying shop, police officer, administrative staff and many other factors have to be calculated.

50 of the 63 offenders have been supervised within a programme of integrated offender management. This included tagging, other management tactics and work with drug and alcohol rehabilitation agencies.

Officers have assessed a very significant majority of the group, 60, as misusing drugs and alcohol. Their offences sustain their drug and, or alcohol dependency.

Drugs and alcohol rehabilitation programmes are clearly within a broad definition of policing and crime prevention. The majority of the prolific offenders had been assessed by police officers as having drug and, or alcohol problems. During the research year, however, just 16 drug and 2 alcohol rehabilitation orders were aspects of 541 sentences delivered by courts.

An officer working in Nottinghamshire Police Integrated Offender Management team developed an innovative project (Operation Dormouse) to address the problem of prolific shoplifting in the city area. The co-location of police and alcohol, drugs and other personnel was central to this work. Extensive data were shared between all agencies involved. The commitment of retail managers and their security staff was vital. Local policing teams were also engaged. A close partnership between the police and staff from other agencies was therefore central to the work undertaken.

37% (167) of the 232 cases for which sentencing data were available involved imprisonment, with an average sentence of 55 days. 28 days was the median length of sentence, the middle number of all sentence lengths. Many sentences were far shorter than 28 days.

97% of the 232 offenders for which sentencing records were available were arrested for 7 or 8 further offences from 2 to 5 months and onwards after their first arrest during the research year.

A long term strategy to address shoplifting in Nottinghamshire, including offences by prolific offenders, is required. It should be developed on the basis of documented outcomes from Operation Dormouse and further systematic analysis of all relevant data. The approach to prolific offenders taken so far has led to reductions in offending but the extent to which such intense, closely coordinated work can be sustained, not least within the context of budget reductions, is a moot question for consideration.

Whatever the approach taken retail firms can be expected to play a greater role in the introduction of security measures to prevent shoplifting. Householders routinely purchase equipment to protect their property. This should also apply to measures such as tagging for retail firms.

Introduction

This report provides an analysis of 63 offenders charged with shoplifting in Nottinghamshire on 5 or more occasions during the 12 months between July 2012 and July 2013.1 During this period 1543 offenders were arrested for shoplifting. The majority, 1003 (65%), did not go on to repeat their offence. The proportion of all shoplifters committing just one offence in the previous 12 months, June 2011- June 2012, however, was higher. 71% of all offenders committed one offence during that period. Increases in the number of offenders committing more than one repeat offence of shoplifting were also recorded. Generally, increases in the rate of re-offending by shoplifters have been documented.

A strategic assessment of shoplifting in Nottinghamshire should take into account citizens’ views of which crimes should be addressed as a priority along with priorities for policing which extend beyond crime reduction. When limited police resources to address public and other priorities are also necessarily included in a strategic assessment, it is appropriate to consider a starting point that might lead to an important reduction in one type of crime through giving particular attention to prolific offenders committing it. The crime is committed frequently and has particular characteristics which means that it cannot be reduced dramatically, certainly in the short to medium terms. Shoplifting in Nottinghamshire may be considered such a crime. It cannot be reduced dramatically in the short term. A starting point to reduce it lies with addressing offences by a group of prolific offenders.

Shoplifting generally remains a significant problem within Nottinghamshire and has been increasing. The 63 offenders forming the subject of this report are a special group whose offending is more than likely to continue. This report is about a group of offenders who commit many offences, expend large amounts of police and shop staff time, and cause Nottinghamshire’s shops and public services considerable financial harm.2 Between July 2012 and July 2013, 63 offenders committed 541 offences of shoplifting, which accounted for 7.2% of all shoplifting and 0.8% of all crime. The extent of offending by these offenders has therefore been considerable. Within the substantial number of people who have been charged with shoplifting during the last 12 and more months, they are a group that can be the focus of concerted action.

1 65 offenders were originally identified as within this group. Data about 63 were available. This made no significant difference to the veracity of the analysis undertaken.2 Dr James Hunter, Nottingham Trent University, who is conducting significant research about shoplifting in Nottinghamshire has assessed the cost of the crime within the city of Nottingham to be £24 million pounds per year.

7

Shoplifting

The research literature about shoplifting is sparse and none of it deals with offences by persistent shoplifters. More attention has been given to psychological characteristics of offenders, especially those of menopausal women offenders, than to the situations in which crimes occur. None of this work about offenders’ psychological characteristics is relevant to understanding persistent shoplifters in Nottinghamshire.

John Burrows’s Home Office research describing how retain crime can be analysed effectively to prevent offences remains helpful (Burrows 1988). In an extensive review of the literature and based on problem-oriented policing analysis, Ron Clarke has suggested many crime prevention measures to reduce shoplifting (Clarke 2003). His booklet is useful as a guide to crime prevention measures for shoplifting but like other research, does not deal with persistent offenders as a group requiring special attention that includes, but also extends beyond, problem-oriented and ‘situational’ analyses.

A small amount of research has focused upon the specific contexts within which shoplifting takes place and the relative impact of different prevention measures to reduce it. A helpful, experimental study introduced innovations in nine stores with high levels of shoplifting. Two introduced tagged goods; two, new display designs; and two, security guards. Three stores were not changed, acting as controls for the experiment (Farrington, Bowen et al. 1993). The authors express caution about the displacement of offending from a store using, for example, tags, to another where less secure methods are used. They also warn about the development of new methods of offending to circumvent prevention measures. These are abiding problems. The authors concluded that,

‘ electronic tagging caused a lasting decrease in shoplifting; store redesign caused an immediate decrease that was wearing off after six weeks; and the uniformed guard had no effect on shoplifting. A program of research focusing on crime analysis and situational prevention of shoplifting is recommended, especially aiming to achieve lasting benefits from store redesign (Ibid. p.2)’.

Many circumstances could render these conclusions questionable. The opening of hyper-markets since 1993 is just one. Whatever qualifications might be made, two basic points of lasting importance remain. First, the findings are somewhat counter-intuitive. The introduction of security guards did not have a lasting effect to reduce shop theft. With that point in mind, other crime prevention measures were given precedence over the use of security guards. We need an open mind when new prevention measures to reduce shoplifting are considered.

8

Second, the detailed findings of the experiment reported are not directly transferable to this analysis but the clear reminder that effective policing through crime prevention measures, placing physical police personnel in a secondary, supportive position is timely.3 A solution to the prevention of prolific shoplifting could lie as much, and maybe more, with preventive and rehabilitation services than with police offender management, store security or the use of security personnel.

Research methods

An extensive web search of academic sources to find research publications began the research. As mentioned, it is surprising that very little research about shoplifting generally and none about persistent offenders have been undertaken. This does not mean that general and specialist knowledge about undertaking criminological research and the analysis of offender data are irrelevant when shoplifting is studied. Rather, it means that shoplifting is a subject that has not captured research attention, which is interesting given the considerable financial losses companies experience and the capacity of the offence to inflate police crime statistics. There is scope for the large supermarket chains and others to fund jointly further research with relatively small sums of money that would bring great benefit, including greater cost effectiveness. Research including interviews with offenders would be particularly useful.

Staff at the Police and Crime Commissioner’s Office (PCC) identified shoplifting as a high volume offence and, as part of a strategic analysis of crime in Nottinghamshire generally, reviewed police recorded statistics. ‘Recorded statistics’ are emphasised because information from crime surveys reveals clearly that more offences occur than those included in official crime statistics. It can be assumed reasonably that the subjects of this research have committed more offences than those included in the police records analysed. Initial analysis revealed the group of 63 persistent shoplifters and the need for basic research about them.

It was agreed that data about key dimensions of the subject would be analysed and Nottinghamshire Police were approached to provide them. They were data about:

1. The offender2. The modus operandi of the offence and the type of goods stolen3. The location of the offence4. The prosecution and subsequent court process5. The sentence passed

3 I use the idea of ‘policing’ to include all measures and personnel concerned with preventing crime. From this perspective store security personnel are police officers.

9

A member of Nottinghamshire’s Police staff put the relevant data into spreadsheets (for which I am very grateful) but information about a number of highly relevant variables was not available because it was not recorded or the time taken to retrieve it was too demanding. Points 4 and 5 above, for example, have not been analysed adequately because all relevant data were not available. Inconsistency in the recording of information was also apparent. This is unfortunate and a basic problem for the analysis of crime data in Nottinghamshire.

Data about 63 offenders and their offences from July 2012-July 2013 were nevertheless analysed, as far as possible, to glean an understanding of the offenders and their offences. Apart from when indicated, the number of offenders researched is 63.

Shoplifting – the extent of the problem in Nottinghamshire

During the year July 2011- July 2012 (the year before the period covered by this report) 1543 offenders were arrested for shoplifting offences. The majority, 987 (64.18%), were arrested and dealt with once in this 12 month period. In 2012, the proportion of people who committed shoplifting and arrested on more than one occasion rose to 71%, indicating a greater proportion of offenders repeating their offence.

For example, a third (35.82%) was arrested more than once for a different shoplifting incident during the same 12 month period. In the previous year, it was 28.78%. In fact, 7.0% were arrested four or more times for different shoplifting incidents indicating that the risk of being arrested and the deterrent effects of sentences were not significant for a group of repeat offenders. Furthermore, 1% went on to commit 8 or more offences with one offender being arrested and dealt with for shoplifting on 15 occasions within one year.

Offenders

We begin with offenders’ personal characteristics, remembering that unless indicated otherwise, the number of offenders is 63.

10

Gender and Age

Chart 1 below shows that 52 (82.5%) of the offenders were male. 11 (17.5%) were female.

Female Male0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Chart 1. Gender

Chart 2 below shows the age range of offenders clustered between 28 and 46 years of age. 40 of the 63 offenders were within this range. This age profile is not exceptional when compared to the overall age pattern of offending in England.

19 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 41 42 43 44 46 50 51 52 53 540

1

2

3

4

5

6

11

Chart 2. Age of offenders

Ethnicity

Almost all offenders were white and of European origin (56 of 63). Just 7 were recorded as Black. The data may not be wholly reliable but police records indicate that of the 56 offenders recorded as White European, 3 Poles, 2 Lithuanians and 1 Portuguese national were within the prolific offender group.

These findings tell us clearly that in Nottinghamshire the most prolific shoplifters are from the United Kingdom, not East European migrants working in groups.

Employment

The data about offenders’ employment status are difficult to understand and analyse. Offenders moved in and out of work during the research period. About 80% (50) of them were unemployed during the research period. Just 3 of the 63 offenders (4.8%) were employed.

Residence

Data about the distance of travel from offenders’ home residences to shops where offending took place were not available. Most offenders (39) lived in The City Central, North and South areas and it seems they moved to and from premises frequently within these areas. One lived outside Nottinghamshire. We do not know if the unemployed offenders lived in hostels or similar premises used by people who live on welfare benefits but the number living within the City areas and moving from address to address makes this likely. If this is correct, and it is reasonable to say so, offences have been committed at a relatively small number of shops and probably large supermarkets within the city boundary. Further, it has not been possible to establish if offenders living outside of Nottingham are responsible for more repeat offences than those living within the city. Ashfield has 7 recorded prolific shoplifters; West Bassetlaw has 3. All or any of these offenders could have committed multiple offences. Finally, it has not been possible to establish if offences were committed in local areas where offenders lived or whether repeat offences occurred at the same shops. Further data collection and analysis about all these matters are possible, needed and worthwhile if a strategic approach to the reduction of shoplifting is to be developed in Nottinghamshire.

12

It is also noted that numbers of prolific shoplifters do not live in all areas of high deprivation. Worksop has a considerable East European population and areas of significant deprivation. Worksop, however, had 2 prolific offenders living in the town centre. Prolific shoplifting does not appear to occur consistently in areas of high deprivation and certainly not in areas where non-UK citizens live. That does not mean that shoplifting generally is not a problem in these areas. It does inform us that we should check our assumptions and inform them with the analysis of data before taking any steps to develop a strategy to reduce shoplifting.

Offences

The data about the number of offences committed by Nottinghamshire’s prolific shoplifters are striking, to say the least. Other commentators might use more flamboyant language. As Chart 3 below indicates, 89% (56 of 63) of them had offences recorded against their names before July 2012, the start of the period of data analysis for this research.

No Yes0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Chart 3. Number of offenders with conviction before July 2012

Other data describe the number of shoplifting offences each offender committed during the 12 months between July 2012-2013. They are striking.

Chart 4 overleaf shows the number of repeated shoplifting offences committed before July 2012. The vertical axis indicates the number of the 63 prolific offenders who have committed more than one offence. The horizontal axis demonstrates the number of offences they have committed.

13

1-10 11-25 26-50 51+ N/A0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Chart 4. Number of shoplifting offences committed by offenders before July 2012.

More than half of the offenders committed individually between 26 and 50 shoplifting offences before the research year. 10 of them committed individually between 11 and 25 offences and 13 committed individually over 51 offences. We are analysing the work of very prolific offenders. A constabulary wide and local strategic plan to deal with them as a special group of shoplifting offenders should be written clearly and monitored as it is implemented.

When the number of repeat offences committed by the offenders during the research year July 2012 – July 2013 is considered a correspondingly prominent pattern emerges. Chart 5 below illustrates on its vertical axis shows the number of

3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 15 16 17 260

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

offenders and the horizontal axis shows the number of offences each offender has committed. 7 offenders committed over 10 offences, six just under 10. 9 offenders each committed 8 offences. All of the offenders continued to commit theft from shops.

Goods stolen

During the research period, the 63 offenders stole 1510 items whilst committing 541 separate offences of shoplifting. That means an average of just less than 3 items per offence. Charts 6 and 7 illustrate the types of goods stolen and the frequency with which they were stolen.

Food Alcohol Personal Hygiene

Clothing Chocolate0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Chart 6 Top 5 categories of goods stolen

Perfume Deodorant Household Products

Makeup Razor Blade0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Chart 7 Next top 5 categories of goods stolen

15

The reasons for stealing these goods are unknown. It is reasonable to propose that they were for both personal use as food and washing products figure prominently and for sale illegally. Given the number of offenders with severe drug and alcohol problems, the theft of such goods to sustain their lifestyle is likely. A linking of these data to conditions of austerity is not straightforward simply because we do not know why goods were stolen and similarly coded data about the types of goods stolen by shoplifters who do not come with the prolific category are not available. Given that just under 30% of all goods stolen was food it is likely that the size of market within which it is sold plays a significant part in motivating recidivism. It is also likely that the market place for food and personal goods has grown during the last few years of austerity.

The value of goods stolen varied, (see Chart 8 overleaf) obviously, but most were under £50 (43%). A large percentage, just over 40%, was valued between £50 and £100.

<£50 £50-£99.99 £100-£149.99 £150-£199.99 £200-£249.99 £250+0

50

100

150

200

250

Chart 8 Value of goods stolen

Two points are made about the value of goods stolen. The first is that the cost of each offence is greater than the good(s) stolen. Police and shop staff time, administrative costs when preparing and processing papers, court staff time, and more should be figured into the calculation. When that is done the value of an item increases considerably, to the detriment of private and public sector budgets. Second, although we do not know about the size and appearance of the goods stolen when offences have been committed, and remembering that more offences than those recorded are likely to have been committed, it would be instructive to know how offenders were detected and what goes though the mind of a prolific shoplifter who thinks they can walk repeatedly from a shop without paying when in possession of a number of goods that appear to be bulky. How far do in-store

16

security techniques deter these offenders? The data suggests they are less than failsafe.

Shoplifting reduction tactics

In 2012 Nottinghamshire Police began a programme of integrated offender management (IOM) for prolific shoplifters. The need for the programme, Operation Dormouse, was identified by Sergeant Jim Bell, a member of the IOM team, during a routine, divisional performance meeting. It should be noted that an individual officer using his initiative rather than a formal policy to review and respond to the analysis of crime data led to an innovative project of importance.

Working within the Principles of Offender Management, 50 prolific offenders dependent on drugs and or alcohol were selected. Sergeant Bell liaised with specialist drug and alcohol workers, leading to their co-location with police officers employed on the project. This was central to its success.

Crucially, data about offenders were shared by police and agency workers, at daily briefings and during the course of routine work. Fortnightly ‘risk and review’ meetings were attended by all personnel working on the project. Information about the prolific offenders was circulated to security staff in stores where multiple offences were committed. Nottingham City’s business forum was informed about the project and their engagement with it secured through regular meetings. Local policing teams were also included in meetings and engaged with the project responding, for example, to live information about the location and movements of an offender.

Unknown Yes0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Chart 9. Number offenders dealt with by integrated offender management

17

The extent of shoplifting by offenders managed by IOM reduced during the twelve month period of the project, which is now extended to cover the whole of the county.4

Tagging of offenders has been a further feature of IOM in Nottinghamshire. Twenty tagging units are available for use with the four hundred offenders on the IOM team’s list, the majority of who commit offences that are more serious than shoplifting. When used to control prolific shoplifters, tags permit police and others to monitor their movements by means of a signal emitted every 30 seconds that indicates their exact location and other data

All data are recorded on an online database that can be analysed to demarcate offenders’ movements precisely. Geographical zones can be created around shops which, if entered by an offender, form an area that triggers their tag to send an immediate signal to police and, or a shop. Prevention is therefore central to this tactic.

Participation in this scheme is voluntary, which means that for various reasons many offenders might not be involved in it. A compulsory scheme attached to an order of the court would be preferable and should be considered carefully at the national level. Within this consideration the administrative and related costs of monitoring have to be taken into account by the police and shop owners. Both are mentioned because, just as many householders finance the installation and maintenance of burglar alarms to protect their homes, retailers could also be expected reasonably to finance a tagging scheme to prevent crime in their shops. It is not unusual for the public and the police to share crime prevention costs routinely.

The IOM team is persuaded that tags have been an effective tactic to control prolific shoplifters. They report that few have breached their conditions and, when breaches have been identified, they have been dealt with swiftly. Where certain offenders have been suspected of taking part in crime, a check on their movements can also provide clear evidence of innocence.

Integrated offender management is a helpful tactic to prevent shoplifting by prolific offenders but only with those who also attend a concerted programme to reduce their misuse of drugs and, or alcohol. If both elements are not addressed systematically the police and agencies providing rehabilitation services are probably chasing each other’s tails in a circle that will not be broken.

The word ‘integrated’ is crucial here because Chart 10 overleaf illustrates data from police assessments of drugs and, or alcohol use by the prolific offenders. The officers dealing with them after arrest have made these assessments. A very

4 The constabulary claims that a comparison of shoplifting by the I|OM offenders during the year of and that prior to the project suggests a 51% reduction.

18

significant majority, 60, have been assessed as misusing drugs and alcohol, continuing their offending to enable them to continue their habits.

This key point, probably the most important in the report, reminds us of another made in the brief discussion of the research literature about shoplifting and in particular a report of the experimental study to assess the effects of different tactics to reduce shoplifting (ibid, 1993).

Unknown Yes0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Chart 10. Number of offenders assessed to be misusing drugs and or alcohol

That experimental study drew clear attention to the limited role played by the deployment of security (policing) staff inside shops and proposed adopting a wider notion of policing to reduce crime. Drugs and alcohol rehabilitation programmes are clearly within that wider definition of policing.

An important key to reducing prolific offending is by addressing the substance misuse that motivates it. Very recent advice from the Ministry of Justice summarises ‘what works’ in the rehabilitation of offenders and discusses programmes for drug and for alcohol misuse (Ministry of Justice 2014). More confidence is expressed in drug than in alcohol rehabilitation programmes. Neither is by any means foolproof. These programmes are nevertheless important when Nottinghamshire’s prolific shoplifters are considered.

IOM plays a role in the reduction of prolific shoplifting but is probably an expensive, short-term tactic, not least for dealing with offenders dependent on drugs or alcohol. Alcohol and drug rehabilitation programmes should obviously play an important part in addressing prolific offenders but just 16 drug rehabilitation orders and 2 alcohol

19

rehabilitation orders were passed by the courts dealing with them during the research year, which seems to be a very low figure.5

Sentencing will be discussed later but it is worth posing some questions here about the use of drug and alcohol rehabilitation orders. We do not know how many of the prolific offenders’ misuse of substances has been noted by officers when questioning them in custody. We do not know how many of those noted as users of drugs or alcohol have been described as such to a court. We do not know how many of the offenders were assessed for their level of use of drugs or alcohol. And we do not know precisely about the relationship between rehabilitation programmes and repeat offending during and after a programme has been completed. These data should be gathered routinely, if only to ensure that limited finances are used effectively and, importantly, to enable the diverse web of policing in Nottinghamshire, including its drugs and alcohol misuse rehabilitative agencies, gather and deploy the most suitable resources to deal with problems of crime reduction.

SentencingThe analysis of sentencing patterns has been restricted because the data were incomplete. Sentencing data about 232 cases (42.9%) were missing. Chart 11 below illustrates the pattern of sentencing for 309 cases, 57% of the overall sample.

UNKNOWN

IMPRISO

NMENT

SUSP

ENDED

IMPRISO

NMENT

COMMUNITY ORDER N/A

CONDITIONAL D

ISCHARGE

FINE

COSTS

SUSP

ENDED

YOUNG O

FFENDER

S INST

ITUTIO

N

YOUNG OFF

ENDER

S INSTI

TUTIO

N

NO SEPARATE

PENALTY

ABSOLU

TE DISC

HARGE

UNPAID WORK REQ

UIREMEN

T

ONE DAYS

DETENTIO

N COURT HOUSE

PENDING

0

50

100

150

200

250

5 This point needs to be placed within a context of considerable, incomplete data about sentencing.

20

It can be seen that imprisonment was the most frequent sentence. 37% (167) of the 232 cases for which data were available involved imprisonment, with an average sentence of 55 days. The range of sentence length was from 140 to 2 days, 28 days being the median length of sentence, which is the middle number of all sentence lengths.

Of 39 suspended sentences just 2 alcohol and 16 drug rehabilitation orders were made. Of 7 Community Orders made, 6 included drug and 1 an alcohol rehabilitation requirement. We do not know if more than one of these orders was given to the same offender or whether they reduced offending.

The extent and pace of recidivism by the offenders is of importance. Chart 9 below illustrates that 97% of the 232 offenders for which sentencing records were available were arrested for 7 or 8 further offences from 2 to five months and onwards after their first arrest during the research year.

Between 7 and 8th of -

fence

1 DAY 1 WEEK 2 WEEKS 1 MONTH 2 MONTHS 3 MONTHS 4 MONTHS 5 + MONTHS

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Chart 12 Time elapsed between reoffending during the research year

29% (67) of offenders were arrested one day after their sentence ended. From any perspective these data raise questions about the suitability, effectiveness and adequacy of the sentences passed. At the moment it is not possible to chart the relationship between different disposals and re-offending patterns or between other intervention like IOM and drug rehabilitation orders and re-offending.

21

Recommendations for new policies to tackle the problems identified in this analysis need to be innovative, far-ranging and, importantly, evaluated.

Recommendations

An obvious point is made as pre-amble to recommendations to deal with Nottinghamshire’s prolific shoplifters. No single intervention will reduce to any great extent these offenders’ criminal activity. No agency – police, retail security departments, rehabilitative services and others – can solve this problem whilst working alone. Concerted inter-agency work especially concerned with strategies for crime prevention needs to be undertaken. Nottinghamshire’s project to address prolific shoplifting is a clear example of this point. A very wide notion of ‘policing’ should be the foundation of all considerations to reduce prolific shoplifting.

Data and analysis

Accurate, consistent data accessible for detailed analysis are the foundation of any policy making. The research has identified shortfalls of recorded data about Nottinghamshire’s prolific shoplifters. It is not clear if the constabulary can retrieve quickly basic data for a strategic analysis of shoplifting. It would be instructive if the analysis described in this report was repeated from scratch as a means of assessing data accuracy and analytical capacity.

Further, given that prolific shoplifting is a long-standing problem in Nottinghamshire, consideration should be given to the capacity of the constabulary to identify routinely crimes that require special attention. An individual officer’s initiative led to the significant work Nottinghamshire Police has undertaken to reduce prolific shoplifting. That is highly commendable but not the basis of a strategic approach to prolific shoplifting or any other crime.

Public priorities for crime reduction

Shoplifting is a volume crime. Its economic cost is significant. Although they factor loss into their accounts, retail firms pass, through pricing policies, the costs of shoplifting to consumers. Although there is no personal victim when a theft from a shop is committed, the retail firm owning the property is a victim. Shoplifting is one crime amongst many and the fact that it has no immediate, personal victim could mean that it is less of a priority in the public mind and, therefore, for the allocation of police resources. Again, as a prelude to decisions about policy action, it is worth considering public views about shoplifting within the context of the overall pattern of crime in Nottinghamshire and a reduced police budget.

22

Prolific offenders

The 63 prolific shoplifters identified are a distinct group. They commit many offences, seem undeterred by the range of sanctions available and, if police assessments are accurate, depend greatly on the use of drugs and, or alcohol. They stand-out from other shoplifters and a distinct strategy to deal with them is required.

The management of prolific shoplifters

The precise role of IOM with prolific shoplifters should be considered. Its role as a sustainable, long-term tactic to reduce offending by prolific shoplifters should be reviewed. This is not to detract from its value but to place it in proper perspective as part of a long-term strategy to deal with shoplifting.

When IOM is used the evidence from Nottinghamshire Police is that certain features of policing are essential.

The co-location of staff from agencies delivering a range of services A liberal approach to data sharing The engagement of the business community and retail store staff The involvement of local policing teams avoiding the reduction of shoplifting

as specialist police work Communication with drug courts.

The PCC and the constabulary need to ensure that these basic features of police work are embedded in practice.

There is a strong case for the use of electronic tags to prevent prolific offenders from entering large retail stores. Specific technology needs to be developed for this purpose and agreement reached about implementation across retail chains. The requirement of an offender to wear a tag could be an aspect of a court sentence. The potential problems with this approach are similar to those related to other prevention measure but do not rule out their further consideration. Crime might be displaced to new shops; ways to circumvent the restrictions of an electronic bracelet might be devised. These, however, are not final answers to a question about the suitability of using electronic bracelets as a deterrent.

The police and the owners of retail stores could jointly finance a trial project in Nottinghamshire, to test the impact of tags on prolific shoplifting and to gain other benefits. Joint funding of crime prevention is routine in the UK and the funding of tagging by retail firms is no different from householders funding devices to prevent offences in their properties.

23

Sentencing and the courts

At the national level there is a case for further trials and consideration given to placing the use of tags to monitor offenders within legislative provisions administered by the courts.

There is a need to audit the frequency with which police assessments of drug and alcohol use by offenders are conveyed to the court. Further, the extent of OASIS and other relevant assessments to inform sentencing should be monitored.

There is a need to discuss with agencies in Nottinghamshire their existing and possible future provision of rehabilitation drug and alcohol services to prolific shoplifters and other offenders. Clearly, their views about the likelihood of successful outcomes from their work are important to any policy development. Systematic evidence of the outcomes of their work is also fundamental.

There is a need to discuss further with magistrates their sentencing of prolific shoplifters. Among topics covered should be evidence of offenders’ drug and alcohol use in relation to sentencing. In particular, the small number of rehabilitation orders used by the courts might be indicative of a lack of information about individual offenders, a lack of confidence in the impact of such orders or their limited availability. We do not know why such a small number of drug and alcohol rehabilitation orders have been used.

It would also be useful for the county Criminal Justice Board and partners whose drug and alcohol rehabilitation services are commissioned by the PCC to discuss these matters, informed by systematically gathered and analysed data.

In relation to alcohol dependency, many offenders purchase low cost alcohol from small outlets. An analysis of this subject is required and appropriate action taken by the police and the local authority when licences are renewed.

Further prevention measures

This matter was not discussed in the body of the report but what is called the ‘packaging industry’ has used technological advances to create sophisticated ways to extent the shelf-life of goods, to minimise their size and, as far as possible, to increase their security. There is a scope for research about and the development of micro-chips and other technologies within packaging designed to prevent theft from shops. Universities frequently undertake research and development of this type.

24

Further, consideration could be given to placing the requirement for such crime prevention technology on a statutory footing, associated with a kite-mark or similar security standard required of retail shops. The Association of Chief Police Officers, Business Crime Group, has recently developed with retailers what they call a ‘primary authority model’. A pilot is underway with the Co-op which, if successful, will lead to the further development and implementation of the model nationwide.

Finally, the preamble to recommendations mentioned the importance of secure evidence on which to base policy. Very few systematic studies of prolific shoplifters have been undertaken. A policy-related project focusing upon prolific offenders, hopefully including interviews with a sample of them, would establish a clear picture of what is happening and of remedies to address the situation. It would not be expensive for large companies owning chains of shops, from which large amounts of goods are stolen, to fund jointly such a project. In the medium term it could be cost-saving.

References

Burrows, J. (1988). Retail Crime: Prevention through crime analysis. London, Home Office.Clarke, R., V. (2003). Shoplifting. Washington, DC, Department of Justice.Farrington, D. P., S. Bowen, et al. (1993). " An experiment on the prevention of shoplifting." Crime prevention Ministry of Justice (2014). Transforming Rehabilitation: a summary of evidence on reducing reoffending (second edition). London, Ministry of Justice.

25

26