1. I
n 1987, the movie RoboCop was released to the American public. Ro-
bocop was a science fiction action film based in Detroit where a police
officer was brutally murdered by a gang of criminals and subsequently
revived by the malevolent mega-corporation Omni Consumer Products
(OCP) as a superhuman cyborg law enforcer known as “RoboCop.” Back in
1987, the idea of a robotic police officer roaming crime ridden urban streets
looked far-fetched; an idea residing solely in the minds of creative science
fiction buffs. Yet, in 2014, with the rapid advances in technology, is a Robo-
cop such a far-fetched concept?
Yes and No. Suddenly, the answer is not so clear cut.
There is no doubt of the increasing presence of rapid technological advances
in today’s society. Smartphones. iPads. iPod. Drones. Robotics. While police
officers are struggling to keep up with technology being utilized by suspects
and the public-at-large, a great deal of this technology is being designed and
geared toward enhancing and supporting law enforcement. As advances in
science and DNA testing greatly aided the investigator in crime scene col-
lection and analysis, technology is increasingly playing a greater role in daily
police work, offering faster and reliable assistance. Yet, with each advance, a
challenge most often accompanies any unsettling change.
MOUNTAINS OF DATA
There is an old saying that necessity is the mother of invention. Through-
out history, not surprisingly, technology has always been a major driver of
policing and police organization (RAND Corporation, 2011). In the 1990s,
New York City introduced the concept known as CompStat, a multilayered
dynamic approach to crime reduction. Here, the NYPD utilized Geographic
Information Systems (GIS) to map crime and identify problem spots. From
there, ranking NYPD executives met with local precinct commanders to
discuss
problems
in their
respective
areas. As
a result,
many de-
partments
began to
utilize this
approach
to patrol
crime ridden areas and target personnel to these problem spots.
When the Great Recession descended upon the globe, law enforcement
took a significant blow. All across the United States, no law enforcement
agency was spared. Budget shortfalls caused many departments to drasti-
cally cut costs and, more importantly, personnel. To fill the gap left by the
lack of human resources, many agencies were forced to adapt to different
techniques of policing. While economic activity appeared to grind to a halt,
criminal activity certainly did not. Many agencies turned to technology to
improve their efforts and “do more with less.”
Most agencies were looking to allocate dwindling personnel more effi-
ciently. Hence, many agencies turned to “mountains of data” produced by
technology in order to more effectively deploy scant resources. Many agen-
cies employed the predictive policing model. The predictive policing model
uses complex mathematical algorithms to alert police officers to targeted
locations in real time (Friend, 2013). Predictive analytics relies on certain
data-analysis software to predict where crimes are likely to take place. For
5 September/October 2014
Continued on Page 6
By Kerry, McCartney-Prout, NESPIN Criminal Intelligence Analyst
RoboCop World?RoboCop World?
Future of
Policing

2. example, police in Richmond, VA adopted an advanced data-mining and pre-
dictive analytics program in 2006 in an ambitious campaign to reduce crime.
In the first year of use, the city’s homicide rate dropped 32%, rapes declined
19%, robberies fell 3%, and aggravated assaults dropped 17% (Daly, 2013).
Agencies throughout the country, including Memphis, TN; Los Angeles, CA;
and Lafourche Parish, LA, also employ analytic models and software and re-
port great success.
First introduced in CompStat, crime mapping in law enforcement is now the
norm. Geography often has a major influence on where and when criminal
activity takes place. Advanced GIS desktop computing and software programs
have made computerized crime maps much more commonplace. Now, ana-
lysts map where crime occurs, combine the resulting visual display with other
geographic data (such as location of schools, parks and industrial complexes),
analyze and investigate the causes of crime, and develop responses. Recent
advances in statistical analysis make it possible to add more geographic and
social dimensions to the analysis (National Institute of Justice, 2013). Police
agencies are beginning to deploy crime maps to their patrol officers with “hot
spots” of criminal activity hoping an increased presence will deter criminal
activity.
CAMERAS EVERYWHERE
In today’s society, cameras are literally everywhere. Whether mounted on a
pole on a street corner as a deterrent to speeding through red lights or held in
the hand of a teen to take a selfie, it appears someone is always watching and
capturing every minute of daily life. For law enforcement, cameras and digital
surveillance are providing crucial evidence in combatting criminal activity. For
example, in Boston, surveillance footage allowed federal agents to identify the
Boston Marathon bombers within days of the terrorist incident. In Camden,
NJ, severe budget shortfalls forced the police force to reorganize the depart-
ment under county auspices and install 121 cutting edge cameras covering
virtually every inch of the sidewalk and gunshot mapping microphones. As a
result, Camden, NJ has seen a dramatic 43% drop in shootings and 22% per-
cent drop in violent crime (Zernike, 2014).
Slowly, camera and surveillance technology is becoming more perfected. 3VR,
a technology company, is developing a camera that uses technology to enable it
to make a fully searchable virtual template of your facial features—distance be-
tween the eyes, skin pigmentation, hair length and color, orientation of facial
features, and so on, hoping to become the “Google of surveillance video”
(RAND Corporation, 2011). This company is hoping the technology will
greatly reduce the workloads of police departments by cutting down on
the number of hours dedicated to searching for suspects via surveillance
footage.
Along with predictive analytics to recognize behavior patterns, these
camera systems are becoming integrated to isolate criminal behavior in
a particular area. Cameras can be programmed to constantly and quietly
monitor activity and alert authorities when there is something suspicious
that needs to be addressed (RAND Corporation, 2011). Police are utiliz-
ing these cameras not only to combat quality of life issues such as speeding
and graffiti but increasingly to deter drug dealing and violence.
Beyond utilizing cameras to deter crimes, officers are also wearing video
cameras, or patrol cars are equipped with cameras in order to ensure
professionalism. The ability to record video footage of events involving the
public from a patrol car perspective has proven invaluable in such mat-
ters as traffic stops, criminal investigations and arrests, internal affairs,
and training (Schultz, 2008). Here, the footage from these cameras have
assisted in securing convictions, exonerating officers in internal investiga-
September/October 2014 6
Continued on Page 7

3. 7 September/October 2014
tions, resolving citizen complaints, and providing training scenarios for less
seasoned officers.
DRONES, ROBOCOPS AND MORE?
During the Christmas season in 2013, Amazon.com announced it would
soon begin using drones to deliver its goods to customers. Sure, Amazon.
com accomplished its primary goal with the announcement – creating
buzz through a successful marketing ploy. After all, drones are banned for
commercial use. Without jumping through some pretty steep political and
regulatory hoops, police agencies are currently not allowed to deploy drones
either.
Yet, visiting law enforcement product shows, one can see where the future is
headed. In Police Magazine, writer Mark Clark writes that he saw “a product
that was dubbed a ‘nano hummingbird’ aerial vehicle that can slip through
an open window like a bird and beam audio/video surveillance to remotely
located officers” (2013).
Many agencies are now
researching possible drone
technology. The Baltimore,
Maryland Police Department
is one of the those agencies,
noting that “drone cameras
can aid in search-and-rescue
missions, quickly record
crash scene images, and
provide officers with critical
information as volatile situa-
tions such as mass shootings
and barricades unfold” (An-
derson, 2014). Again, such
use of drone technology is
still subject to Federal Avia-
tion Administration (FAA)
regulation and guidelines are
yet to be issued.
Artificial Intelligence and
robotics are dramatically
changing how police respond to dangerous incidents. Many large po-
lice forces use robots for particularly dangerous situations, like disarm-
ing bombs or performing reconnaissance on a possible hostage situation
(Strickland, 2014). Police robots come in various shapes and sizes and are
controlled by skilled technicians and officers trained in their use. Primar-
ily, these robots are used in bomb removal and disposal. Most, if not all, of
these robots are equipped with cameras and audio systems, allowing police
to monitor hostile situations. Robots can also be utilized in hostage negotia-
tions for their audio capability, allowing officers to speak with perpetrators
at a relatively safe distance.
AND NOW THE CHALLENGES…
And while technology advances, challenges abound. Police agencies em-
ploying this technology must be concerned about storage and security
capabilities of their department:
* The storage of mountains of data could become a problem for law enforce-
ment agencies in the future. As author Mark Clark points out, “there are
choices right now, but the reality is that all of the digital evidence storage so-
lutions of today are in their infancy. From what I heard at the future trends
program, terabytes are the new megabytes, and tomorrow, exabytes will be
the new terabytes. It’s mind-boggling to consider where all the bytes will
be stored and secured. Police agencies better start thinking seriously about
storage solutions” (2013).
* And while contemplating storage capabilities, police also need to consider
the security of digital solutions. Every day, a new story emerges regarding
the hacking of personal data from large corporations. In 2011, law enforce-
ment was not spared. The cyberterrorist collaboration AntiSec, affiliated
with Anonymous and LulzSec, said it accessed and leaked hundreds of
private e-mails, passwords, Social Security numbers and credit card num-
bers for officers, along with ‘snitch information’ (CNN, 2011). Police officers
will have to work with computer security specialists to ensure that the data
collected will be secure and safeguarded against hacking.
As technology advances, costs are likely to decrease. Currently, emerging
technology can be quite expensive. While the purchase of advanced tech-
nology can be considered a one-time cost, police must not only consider
Continued on Page 8

4. the costs of storage and security measures but the time and cost of training
personnel and the maintenance of technology.
Increasingly, the ACLU and civil liberty activists are also crying foul, draw-
ing attention to what they dub the surveillance state and encroachment on
privacy. Edward Snowden’s revelations about massive data collection by the
National Security Agency (NSA) have only exacerbated tensions between
law enforcement and a skeptical public.
Police advocate that this technology is only used to enhance public safety,
pointing to various examples such as surveillance cameras providing in-
valuable assistance in the Boston Marathon bombings. It was cameras on
the street that led to the rapid identification of the Brothers Tsarnaev and
it was cameras on the streets that likely stopped them from killing even
more (Keane, 2013). Police emphasize that both data collection and video
surveillance has helped to reduce crime rates in some of the country’s most
troubled areas.
As expected, the ACLU counters that the invasion of privacy outweighs the
benefits. The benefits of centralized, and live access to, large-scale video sys-
tems don’t balance out the privacy risks (not to mention the monetary costs,
although we should expect those will fall sharply over time). As with any
technology, one can imagine scenarios where such systems save the day—
but it is even easier to imagine scenarios where such a technology is abused
and in fact such scenarios don’t require any imagination whatsoever as
experience strongly suggests abuses are inevitable (ACLU, 2014). Recently,
investigations in Congress have begun to examine federal surveillance pro-
grams at the urging of a wary American public and civil liberty advocates.
BUT CAN THE BELL BE UNRUNG…
Yet, as society rapidly evolves, one wonders if the bell of change can be
un-rung. Technology has provided enormous benefits to the global society
in a variety of areas. Law enforcement is no exception. Crime rates have
been dropping since the 1990s and the downward trend continues. Propo-
nents will naturally laud the benefits of technology and how it compliments
policing. Opponents will continue their efforts to contain its use. One thing
remains a constant - change and progress is inevitable.
REFERENCES
Anderson, J. (2014, August 24). More police departments considering the use of
drones. The Baltimore Sun. Retrieved from http://articles.baltimoresun.com
Clark, M. (2013, December 30). Are you Ready for the Future of Policing? Police
Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.policemag.com
CNN. (2011, August 6). Group says it hacked 70 U.S. law enforcement sites. Re-
trieved from www.cnn.com
Daly, G. (2013, September 19). Embracing the police force of the future. CNN.
Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com
Friend, Z. (2013, April 9). Predictive Policing: Using Technology to Reduce Crime.
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin. Retrieved from www.fbi.gov
Keane, T. (2013, April 23). Surveillance and Privacy. The Boston Globe. Retrieved
from http://www.bostonglobe.com
National Institute of Justice. (2014). Law Enforcement Equipment and Technology.
Retrieved from http://www.nij.gov
RAND Corporation. (2011). Moving Toward the Future of Policing. http://www.
rand.org
Schulz, P. (2008, June). The Future is Here: Technology in Police Departments. The
Police Chief. Retrieved from http://www.policechiefmagazine.org
Stanley, J. (2014, January 24). The Shrinking Rationale for Government Surveil-
lance Camera Systems. ACLU. Retrieved from https://www.aclu.org
Strickland, J. (2007, October 11). How Police Robots Work. HowStuffWorks. Re-
trieved from http://science.howstuffworks.com
Zernike, K. (2014, August 31). Camden Turns Around with New Police Force. The
New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com
September/October 2014 8