Plod funding increases, but resolution of crimes decreases. Why?

[J Newman]

And of those offenses these days resulting in a charge and/or summons,
how many of them are for stupid crimes like calling a horse gay?

Data:
=====

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1402586/crimes-solved-england-and-wales/

"For the year ending March 2023, 5.7 percent of crime offences resulted
in a charge or summons in England and Wales. While this was an
improvement when compared with the previous four quarters, it was far
lower than in the first quarter of 2015, when 15.5 percent of crimes
were solved."


https://www.statista.com/statistics/298637/united-kingdom-uk-public-sector-expenditure-police-services/

"Public spending on the police service in the United Kingdom rose to
27.3 billion British pounds in 2023/24, the highest amount spent during
the provided time period. Between 2009/10 and 2013/14 the amount of
public money spent on the police fell from 19.3 billion pounds to just
16.35 billion pounds, due to the austerity policies followed by the UK
government at the time."

[Jethro_uk]

I suspect the metric the police and politicians use for "success" are
probably not what you are I would use for "success". The Monty Python
cheese shop being a paradigm ....

[Mark Goodge]

Post by J Newman
And of those offenses these days resulting in a charge and/or summons,
how many of them are for stupid crimes like calling a horse gay?

One obvious answer to that is that the police are increasingly having to
spend time and money on things like attending and monitoring disruptive
protests, which consume considerable resurces and yet may only result in a
handful of arrests and charges.

More generally, detection and prosecution of crimes after the event is
something that can easily be monitored with statistics, but preventing and
deterring crime is not. And yet it's vastly preferable for crimes to not be
committed in the first place than it is for crimes to be committed and the
offenders brought to justice.

Mark

[Jethro_uk]

Post by Mark Goodge
More generally, detection and prosecution of crimes after the event is
something that can easily be monitored with statistics, but preventing
and deterring crime is not. And yet it's vastly preferable for crimes to
not be committed in the first place than it is for crimes to be
committed and the offenders brought to justice.

Especially if there is any egregious misgendering going on, and peoples
thinking needs to be checked.

[Fredxx]

Post by Mark Goodge

Post by J Newman
And of those offenses these days resulting in a charge and/or summons,
how many of them are for stupid crimes like calling a horse gay?

One obvious answer to that is that the police are increasingly having to
spend time and money on things like attending and monitoring disruptive
protests, which consume considerable resurces and yet may only result in a
handful of arrests and charges.

It may appear obvious but unless you can come up with hours attending
demonstrations vs total hours worked I simply don't believe it's any
more than a drop in the ocean.

Post by Mark Goodge
More generally, detection and prosecution of crimes after the event is
something that can easily be monitored with statistics, but preventing and
deterring crime is not. And yet it's vastly preferable for crimes to not be
committed in the first place than it is for crimes to be committed and the
offenders brought to justice.

By way of example, because fraud isn't followed up, it encourages all
the more more fraud.

Also the way the justice system has ground to near halt it's hardly
surprising the police don't get many convictions. Hardly any point in
pursuing anything that will take 5 years to get to court.