Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Public vs. Private Law Enforcement

  1. #1

    Public vs. Private Law Enforcement

    I posted this thread on another site and thought it might be informative to the readers of the PIU forum.

    I have been reading several rather long, drawn out studies relating the pros and cons of public vs. private law enforcement. There have been a number of studies done, I am not privy to all but I have been reading one in particular that seems to have made some interesting observations and come to, I think, interesting conclusions.

    I won't try to drop all this on ya here but I will give you just a taste and if your interested in further research I will give you the links at the end of this post.

    The article I am reading was written by two professors: “The Fugitive: Evidence on Public versus Private Law Enforcement from Bail Jumping,” with Alex Tabarrok, Journal of Law and Economics. 47(1):93-122, 2004. and the second: Alexander Tabarrok an associate professor of economics in the department of economics at George Mason University.

    Their paper basically put forth this Abstract:

    "After being arrested and booked, most felony defendants are released to await trial. On
    the day of the trial, a substantial percentage fail to appear. If the failure to appear is not
    quickly explained, warrants are issued and two quite different systems of pursuit and
    rearrest are put into action. Public police have the primary responsibility for pursuing
    and rearresting defendants who were released on their own recognizance or on cash or
    government bail. Defendants who made bail by borrowing from a bond dealer, however,
    must worry about an entirely different pursuer. When a defendant who has borrowed
    money skips trial, the bond dealer forfeits the bond unless the fugitive is soon returned.
    As a result, bond dealers have an incentive to monitor their charges and ensure that they
    do not skip. When a defendant does skip, bond dealers hire bail enforcement agents,
    more colloquially known as bounty hunters, to pursue and return the defendants to
    custody. We compare the effectiveness of these two different systems by examining
    failure to appear rates, fugitive rates and capture rates of felony defendants who fall
    under the respective systems. We apply propensity score and matching techniques."

    ... and after the entire article... the conclusion at the end read:

    Conclusions
    "When the default was for every criminal defendant to be held until trial, it was
    easy to support the institution of surety bail. Surety bail increased the number of releases
    relative to the default and thereby spared the innocent some jail time. Surety release also
    provided good, albeit not perfect, assurance that the defendant would later appear to stand
    trial. When the default is that every defendant is released, or at least when many people
    believe that "innocent until proven guilty" establishes that release before trial is the ideal,
    support for the surety bail system becomes more complex. How should the probability of
    failing to appear and all the costs this implies, including higher crime rates, be traded-off
    against the injustice of imprisoning the innocent or even the injustice of imprisoning the
    not yet proven guilty? We cannot provide an answer to this question but we can provide
    a necessary input into this important debate."

    "Defendants released on surety bond are 28 percent less likely to fail to appear than
    similar defendants released on their own recognizance and if they do fail to appear they
    are 53 percent less likely to remain at large for extended periods of time. Deposit bonds
    perform only marginally better than release on own recognizance. Requiring defendants
    to pay their bonds in cash can reduce the FTA rate to a similar rate than that for those
    released on surety bond. Given that a defendant skips town, however, the probability of
    recapture is much higher for those defendants on surety bond. As a result, the probability
    of being a fugitive is 64 percent lower for those released on surety bond compared to
    those released on cash bond. These finding indicate that bond dealers and bail enforcement
    agents ("bounty hunters") are effective at discouraging flight and at recapturing defendants."

    ... and the last sentence in the conclusion being....

    "Bounty hunters, not public police, appear to be the true long arms of the law."

    I post this here in the public arena for your observation only... I do not agree or disagree with the above statistics... I merely post them here for your thoughts.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    83

    Thumbs up Re: Public vs. Private Law Enforcement

    Quote Originally Posted by William Marx, Sr. View Post
    I posted this thread on another site and thought it might be informative to the readers of the PIU forum.

    The article I am reading was written by two professors: “The Fugitive: Evidence on Public versus Private Law Enforcement from Bail Jumping,” with Alex Tabarrok, Journal of Law and Economics. 47(1):93-122, 2004. and the second: Alexander Tabarrok an associate professor of economics in the department of economics at George Mason University.


    ... and the last sentence in the conclusion being....

    "Bounty hunters, not public police, appear to be the true long arms of the law."

    I post this here in the public arena for your observation only... I do not agree or disagree with the above statistics... I merely post them here for your thoughts.

    First, It is important to point out that Alexander Tabarrok is a professor at George Mason, and is also the author of the study by Alex Tabarrok in the Journal of Law and Economics. I am uncertain who the other professor you are citing is.

    However, the study speaks for itself. Lacking is the mention of the breakdown of conditions of release. Some conditions that apply across the board to both public and private bail bond release require the use of collateral. In these situations, the private sector will be more likely to require it on all conditions, where the public (courts) may not require it unless insisted upon by prosecutors.

    Also, high-profile cases often involve defendants with fluid capital. When prosecutors are concerned that posting the cash will only allow a defendant to skip out of trial, then Nebbia-type conditions requiring the collateral of friends and family (as opposed to the defendant's own property which she/he may abandon for the sake of liberty) as more efficient. (see U.S. v. Nebbia) However, there are some who skip out anyway (by leaving the country), and use their fluid financial resources to repay friends and family. Then, only diligent public enforcers are likely to even follow-up on such skips. They are likley to retire before bringing these white-collar absconders to trial. Public enforcers will then wait until the defendant gets caught entering the U.S. In some cases they may have to trick the defendant into entering jurisdictions with extradition agreements.

    In any event the likelihood of pursuing a defendant may be more closely related to conditions, or lack thereof, required by the government. Private bail bond agencies almost always require conditions for issuing their bonds.

    So, have you found any studies that delineate the conditions that were used to attempt to assure compliance with the government releases compared to the bail bonds of the private sector?

    Interesting study, is it not?

  3. #3

    Re: Public vs. Private Law Enforcement

    Quote Originally Posted by Gerry Adams View Post
    First, It is important to point out that Alexander Tabarrok is a professor at George Mason, and is also the author of the study by Alex Tabarrok in the Journal of Law and Economics. I am uncertain who the other professor you are citing is.
    <<<<<<<<<< deleted>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Some conditions that apply across the board to both public and private bail bond release require the use of collateral. In these situations, the private sector will be more likely to require it on all conditions, where the public (courts) may not require it unless insisted upon by prosecutors.
    I actually know nothing of the authors of the study... just included their credentials for identification only...

    I might mention that collateral is always involved with bonds that I post... whether it be something that I physically hold or whether it is simply the financial facts and stability of the indemnitor on the bond. Frankly I am much more concerned about the financial assets and stability of the indemnitor than the defendant, although having said that I do of course look at everyone involved. If the indemnitor/cosigner owns their home, has a good job and has a solid financial foundation... and of course knows full well the consequences of a FTA... I will certainly do the bond on those conditions... and frankly, the "high end" bonds... lets say $100,000 and up... I just don't look for or do that many. My bread and butter are the smaller local bonds that come in on a daily basis... I leave the big stuff to the "high fliers" in the business. As to the relationship of "liquid assets" to skips... I think the bonds you are addressing are way above my paygrade and those "white collar crooks" that skip the country... well, I don't believe they make up a major portion of the statistics discussed in this study... just my opinion of course but I got the feeling that what this study addresses is the rank and file... the everyday FTA's that happen in many of the small daily courts across the studies field and while the larger bonds are certainly included, they probably don't have that much of an effect on the overall study.

    Just one other observation... I have never heard a court or a prosecutor (Commonwealth Attorneys in Virginia) ask for collateral in a case... other than requiring a "full cash bond" ... the prosecutor would certainly ask for a bond if the defendant held with no bond should ask the court to have one set, but the collateral or 'property bond' is usually set by the magistrate if the bond is set at the time of the arrest... the defendant cannot put up his own property in Virginia anyway... but an indemnitor can place anything of value.. although generally it would be an auto title or deed of trust that has a net value equal to or more than the bond amount. Short of that, a bondsman steps in and writes the bond and collateral is then up to him in the case and of course as the study indicates... collateral certainly is a deterrent to FTA's.... especially if Momma's house is on the line...!

    One other quick point... in Virginia, if an indemnitor wants to post a "cash" bond, the magistrate is bound to notify certain government agencies of monies over a certain amount (I believe it is $10,000... not sure of this figure)... this has caused many a poster to back up and use a bondsman rather than have his funds reported... (of course the bondsman is supposed to report larger sums also... I believe this is due to the recent rulings related to terrorist fundings since 9/11... but this is a different issue)

    But the study does reflect data and statistics that tend to show that my industry (bondman and BEA) are a necessary and cost effective part of the LE community.

  4. #4

    Re: Public vs. Private Law Enforcement

    Eric Helland is the other author on the article... I failed to include his name... sorry ... his credentials are: Eric Helland is a Senior Economist at RAND's Institute for Civil Justice, an associate professor of economics at Claremont McKenna College, and a member of the plenary faculty at the Claremont Graduate School. Eric's research focuses on law and economics and regulation.

    You can review his stuff at the following: http://www.rand.org/about/people/h/helland_eric.html

  5. #5

    Re: Public vs. Private Law Enforcement

    Quote Originally Posted by Gerry Adams View Post
    So, have you found any studies that delineate the conditions that were used to attempt to assure compliance with the government releases compared to the bail bonds of the private sector?
    Gerry, this is the only study I have even looked at.... I made it through the first 4 pages and then had to take a nap.... then I breezed through the next 50 or so pages which was comprised of page after page of statistics that were wwwwaaaaayyyyy over my head... but the last paragraph was the clincher and that combined with the opening page or two is what brought me to post this article.... I am a small town country bondman who is a retired UPS truck driver. I have been in the bond business for 10 years or so and the only way you can get me to go to Richmond (the nearest large town... 65 miles away) is to promise to take my out to eat at a good Italian restaurant... I only write bonds outside of my little 5 or 6 county jurisdiction if I personally know the family involved and they specifically ask that I do the bond... which does happen occasionally... other than that... when I get a call from the "big city" I call my "big time bondsman buddies" and let them take over. I only say all this to clarify and respond to your pertinent question... "...have you found any studies that delineate the conditions..." hell, Gerry, I'm not sure I know what "delineate" means.... have a nice day my friend...

  6. #6
    Mark Messare - is offline Lifetime Professional Management Member

    Corporate Agency Member of:
    International Private Investigators Union (IPIU)
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    171

    Re: Public vs. Private Law Enforcement

    Hello Everyone:

    These are truly interesting studies. I just wanted to post because I really liked the thread title, Public vs Private Law Enforcement. I remember before September 11th 2001, the main attitude of Public law enforcement was "leave it to us, we're the professionals.". Being a member of the military and a NYS peace officer, I understand why people would say that. However, I have always believed that it is never the question of either one or the other. The solution is that both must work hand in hand with each other. Since Sept 11th, the trend has begun to turn and many professionals are learning to rely on the public law abiding citizens and professionals in private law enforcement to fill in gaps in our nations security.

    I love that IPIU has such a vision for helping the ordinary citizens to have the tools to become the professional, even if they have never been a part of the "good ol' boy club" like so many who move into the private sector.

    Just thought I'd ad my two cents..

    Mark.

    www.privatelawenforcement.com

  7. #7
    Rebecca Mitchell -'s Avatar
    Rebecca Mitchell - is offline *
    Private Investigator Forum Member

    Professional Management Member of:
    International Private Investigators Union (IPIU)
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    223

    Re: Public vs. Private Law Enforcement

    Well , I can say in my honest opinion , I believe private is sometimes better than public . Having officers in family they even said there are things private can do better than public , whether it's bondsmen , bounty , or investigating . But what do I know , I'm just a lil old southern country gal who lives in the city ; who just wanted to throw her 2 cents in . LOL ! However , I do believe in this day and time we should learn to work together hand and hand with public lawenforcement and the private sector.

  8. #8
    Mark Messare - is offline Lifetime Professional Management Member

    Corporate Agency Member of:
    International Private Investigators Union (IPIU)
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    171

    Re: Public vs. Private Law Enforcement

    Rebecca:

    You are absolutely correct. Private law enforcement officers have freedom to move and do things that the Public sector is often restricted by jurisdiction. When I took the Bail Enforcement course in NYS I was suprised to know how free that was. One problem we have in the private sector is liability and often we work with a smaller budget. This means less equipment, and less protection if we 00000 something up. THis is a key reason why we should be working together. Plus, the public law enforcement sector may have expertise in specific areas that the PI does not.

    I appreciate your insights,

    Mark.

  9. #9
    Rebecca Mitchell -'s Avatar
    Rebecca Mitchell - is offline *
    Private Investigator Forum Member

    Professional Management Member of:
    International Private Investigators Union (IPIU)
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    223

    Re: Public vs. Private Law Enforcement

    Mark ,

    Thank you for commenting back . I 'm still new to all this and still learning . My brother who's an officer was the one pushing me into the private sector , because he said I was good at finding out things and getting information needed when I want . LOL !
    I took the Global School of Investigation course last year and graduated , now I'm just trying to get into the training and biz end of it .

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    49

    Re: Public vs. Private Law Enforcement

    Good evening, I feel the city officers have their duties & the private has the time to zeroe in on the involved persons.we have the time & leaveway.

  11. #11
    Mark Messare - is offline Lifetime Professional Management Member

    Corporate Agency Member of:
    International Private Investigators Union (IPIU)
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    171

    Re: Public vs. Private Law Enforcement

    Harold:

    You hit the nail on the head!! Everyone has an important part to play, public & private sector. The more we learn to work together and get the job done, the quicker we will fill in the gaps in our nations security.

  12. #12
    Robin L Hudson Jr's Avatar
    Robin L Hudson Jr is offline Private Investigator Forum Member

    Member of:
    International Private Investigators Union (IPIU)
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    68

    Re: Public vs. Private Law Enforcement

    Good Sunday everyone,

    another thing I've been noticing recently in major cities (Chicago for one), is they're slowly moving towards using private companies to enforce traffic and other minor crimes (Armed Security Officers and such). Not saying if it's a good idea or not, but the shift IS happening as we speak.

    By us being in the private sector, I feel that we will have some MAJOR opportunites coming our way. I hope the Security company makes a GREAT showing in Chicago with this opportunity, because it will help us all (Citizens, Public and Private LE).

  13. #13
    Robin L Hudson Jr's Avatar
    Robin L Hudson Jr is offline Private Investigator Forum Member

    Member of:
    International Private Investigators Union (IPIU)
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    68

    Re: Public vs. Private Law Enforcement

    Looks like Oakland, CA is going Private also.


    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1240...ml#mod=djemITP

    APRIL 21, 2009

    Cash-Strapped Cities Try Private Guards Over Police


    Oakland, Facing Pressure to Crack Down on Crime, Is Among Towns Seeking to Improve Safety While Reducing Spending

    By BOBBY WHITE

    OAKLAND, Calif. -- Facing pressure to crack down on crime amid a record budget deficit, Oakland is joining other U.S. cities that are turning over more law-enforcement duties to private armed guards.

    The City Council recently voted to hire International Services Inc., a private security agency, to patrol crime-plagued districts. While a few Oakland retail districts previously have pooled cash to pay for unarmed security services, using public funds to pay for private armed guards would mark a first for the city.

    Hiring private guards is less expensive than hiring new officers. Oakland -- facing a record $80 million budget shortfall -- spends about 65% of its budget for police and fire services, including about $250,000 annually, including benefits and salary, on each police officer.

    In contrast, for about $200,000 a year the city can contract to hire four private guards to patrol the troubled East Oakland district where four on-duty police officers were killed in March. And the company, not the city, is responsible for insurance for the guards.

    Oakland is not alone in seeking to improve public safety while reining in spending. This month, the Chicago City Council, facing a possible $200 million budget deficit, proposed expanding the responsibilities of private armed security forces by authorizing them to write traffic citations. In New Orleans, neighborhood committees have sought to expand special tax incentives to pay for private security for neighborhood patrols.

    In Oakland -- a city east of San Francisco with about 400,000 people -- hiring security guards is the latest nontraditional measure in its attempt to reduce crime. Last year, Mayor Ron Dellums announced a partnership with the Guardian Angels, a volunteer crime patrol organization, in the midst of a rash of restaurant-takeover robberies. The partnership disbanded after authorities apprehended suspects in the robberies.

    Though violent crime in the city was down in the first three months of 2009 from a year ago, the city remains one of California's most violent, with 124 homicides last year and about 25 so far this year. Police also must deal with long-running tensions with residents: The killing of an unarmed man by transit police in January sparked weeks of protests, and two months later the four officers were killed in East Oakland by a parolee.

    Oakland police say they consider unarmed guards acceptable, but don't support armed guards. "People want to go with armed guards because they believe it's cheaper, but they lack adequate training [and] background checks," said spokesman Jeff Thomason. "Oakland police are better prepared for this city's streets than a few security guards."

    But some local leaders say that with a record budget deficit they have few options to reduce the city's violence. "We need a cost-effective answer to the crime we are facing," said Ignacio De La Fuente, a City Council member representing East Oakland who has led the push for armed guards. He added that he is confident the security company's armed guards -- who will have state-certified public-safety training -- are up to par.

    Mr. Dellums's spokesman, Paul Rose, says the mayor is concerned that private guards would lack proper training, putting the city at greater risk of lawsuits stemming from a shooting or other mishap. Mr. Dellums and Oakland's police union support an alternative plan, to be introduced Tuesday, that calls for the $200,000 dedicated for the private guards to be used for overtime for four police officers who would patrol the East Oakland area on foot.

    International Services, based in Torrance, Calif., declined to comment for this story. The company's chief executive, Sam Karawia, is a reserve deputy sheriff for the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department as well as the deputy director for the department's homeland-security-support unit.

    When other U.S. cities have hired uniformed guards to patrol downtown districts, they most often have acted more as cleanup crews and neighborhood ambassadors than security officials. In the 1990s, retailers in crime-plagued locales began to organize business improvement districts, which collected fees for area enhancements, including hiring armed guards who functioned as backups to local police.

    A February study of the 30 improvement districts in the downtown Los Angeles region said districts with the guards register significantly less crime than areas without them. Conducted by the Rand Corp., a policy research organization based in Santa Monica, Calif., the study found that from 1994 to 2005, violent crime dropped on average 8% more compared with the rest of the city during that period.

    Some areas of New Orleans have used armed private patrols since 1997, when residents in an east New Orleans community petitioned Louisiana's Legislature to create a tax on property owners to pay for a private force. About 20 residential tax districts have been established, employing an estimated 100 private guards. This month, seven more neighborhoods voted to create districts.

    "The guards are viewed as force multipliers, extra eyes and ears with high visibility, acting in concert with actual police officers," said John Macdonald, the lead researcher on the Rand study and a criminology professor at the University of Pennsylvania.

    Mr. Macdonald nevertheless opposes turning to a private security service to take the place of police officers. "If an unfortunate event were to happen," he says, "it could cost the public more in the long term than what the city believes it could save."

  14. #14
    Mark Messare - is offline Lifetime Professional Management Member

    Corporate Agency Member of:
    International Private Investigators Union (IPIU)
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    171

    Re: Public vs. Private Law Enforcement

    Robin: This is a great article!! Im really interested especially since Im in the process of becoming a Watch Guard Patrol company in NY. Presently the application is in the state and they are reviewing my credentials. I also heard that Schenectady NY was considering using the National Guard, Sheriff's office or maybe the NYS Troopers to help because of repeated corruption in the force. I would love to pick up this contract with our company.

    Mark.

  15. #15
    Raul Lopez--'s Avatar
    Raul Lopez-- is offline *** Certified SPI
    Private Investigator Forum Member

    Member of:
    International Private Investigators Union (IPIU)
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    78

    Re: Public vs. Private Law Enforcement

    Excellent article!

  16. #16
    Robin L Hudson Jr's Avatar
    Robin L Hudson Jr is offline Private Investigator Forum Member

    Member of:
    International Private Investigators Union (IPIU)
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    68

    Re: Public vs. Private Law Enforcement

    It's definitely some good opportunities for our industry right now. Hope things go well for you, Mark, in establishing your company there in NY!!

  17. #17
    Mark Messare - is offline Lifetime Professional Management Member

    Corporate Agency Member of:
    International Private Investigators Union (IPIU)
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    171

    Re: Public vs. Private Law Enforcement

    Thanks.. Actually I just got the paperwork back today from the state that our company is now certified to teach security training. We also have been approved to become a Watch, Guard, & Patrol company this past week. Now we're waiting to get our first Private Law Enforcement contract. I will probably use this article link in my presentation to potential clients.

    Mark.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •