Welcome! By the end of this Module you will:
Computer-based Predictive Policing
Modern Risk Assessment in Criminal Justice
Main challenges
Main Methods, Impact & Challenges
Importance of Data for DV Responses
Successful Case Study from Spain: VioGén II System
Open Source Intelligence for DV Cases (Open Source Intelligence, OSINT)
Mobile Apps
Electronic Bracelets
Traditional Reactive Policing:
Focuses on responding to crimes after they occur.
Proactive Policing:
Uses data to allocate resources (e.g., increased patrols in high-crime areas), deterring crime & improving response times.
Predictive Policing: Analyzes historical data to identify high-risk times & locations, revealing crime patterns & circumstances.
Key Benefits:
Examples:
Assaults after bar closures or burglaries during holidays.
Example:
Predicting robberies near a new bar may involve factors like closing time, neighborhood income, housing density, or nearby bars.
More data enhances prediction accuracy, aiding better police responses.
Purpose:
Predicts the likelihood of crimes involving specific individuals to inform critical decisions, including sentencing, parole, probation, & protective orders.
Why It Matters:
More reliable predictions mean more effective resource allocation & improved protection for victims & communities.
From Traditional to High-Tech:
Practical Applications:
Purpose:
Assess danger levels to guide protective measures.
Methods:
Impact:
Better tools ensure high-risk cases are identified, empowering officers to protect victims effectively.
Challenges:
Technology Enhancements:
DV often involves repeated, escalating violence, making context critical for effective police action (e.g., risk doubles by the 3rd call, triples by the 6th, & quadruples by the 8th).
Officers need comprehensive data, including non-criminal records, to improve responses.
Linked systems could provide access to criminal justice, social service, & health care data.
Examples: Patterns of injuries in medical records, victim support center reports, or substance abuse histories.
Established in Spain (2007) to coordinate police responses to DV through the Internal Security Studies Group.
Involves multiple stakeholders: victims, aggressors, witnesses, technicians, & doctors.
Integrates National Police, Civil Guard, & local police forces.
In 2024 updated VioGen II System released.
Source: González Álvarez, López Ossorio, Muñoz Rivas (2018)
Aggressor Factors:
Cases are classified into five risk levels: Unappreciated, Low, Medium, High, & Extreme. Based on the risk classification, officers implement mandatory & optional protection measures, & these measures are designed to be proportional to the risk level.
Provide 24-hour support contact & periodic phone follow-ups.
Occasional surveillance & regular check-ins with the abuser.
Frequent surveillance & electronic monitoring of the abuser.
Constant victim surveillance & intensive control of the abuser.
34 for risk & 9 for protection, grouped into 5 dimensions:
Outcomes:
Positive Evolution: No new incidents.
Negative Evolution: New incidents, whether reported or not.
While the VioGen II system has improvements over its predecessor, it still presents some potential gaps:
Transparency & Accountability:
Data Accuracy & Emotional Factors:
Victim Communication:
Integration & Information Sharing:
System Scalability:
Challenges in handling high case volumes & user traffic.
These gaps highlight areas for potential improvement, including enhancing flexibility, training, transparency, & communication within the system.
The Spanish VioGén system, while innovative in coordinating police response and providing risk assessments for gender-based violence cases, has notable gaps that impact its effectiveness. First, the system’s transparency and accountability are criticized. VioGén’s algorithm automatically assigns a risk level to each case, heavily influencing police protection measures without clear accountability. Police officers seldom deviate from the algorithm’s recommendations, which can limit professional judgment and lead to over-reliance on automated scoring, potentially affecting case-specific responses and victim safety.
Another significant issue is the VioGén questionnaire itself, which is used to gather information during emotionally charged moments. Victims often report their experiences immediately after an incident, which can lead to responses clouded by trauma or confusion. This has led to concerns about the reliability of the input data, as many women struggle to provide accurate details while under distress. The system’s design also includes limited training for officers on effectively communicating the questionnaire’s purpose, leading to inconsistencies in how it’s administered and understood by victims.
Moreover, there is minimal communication with victims about their assessed risk levels, as many victims report they are unaware of their designated risk category or the corresponding protection plans. Addressing these transparency, consistency, and information-sharing gaps is crucial for VioGén’s improvement and better support for victims of gender-based violence.
Mobile applications empower victims to discreetly report DV & provide authorities with real-time information for rapid response. Features typically include:
Benefits for Police:
Spain – AlertCops: Sends geolocated alerts directly to police for immediate assistance.
Serbia – SOS App: Multilingual reporting for emergencies, adapted for visually impaired users.
Montenegro – Be Safe App: Discreet alerts for victim safety.
Greece – Panic Button App: Emergency alert with geolocation sent to police.
Armenia – Safe YOU App: Sends geolocated alerts & connects victims to resources.
Retreaved from:
https://alertcops.ses.mir.es
BENEFITS
PURPOSE
EXAMPLES
CHALLENGES
Co-funded by the CERV Daphne EC Program. Grant Agreement no. 101096908