Once more, with feeling

I am beginning to think that acerss deliberately misunderstands my position re: RPD and residential burglary.

I'll give it one more go. Perhaps I am either too stubborn or naive to know when it is useless to try to explain.

> I'm glad you cleared up the focus of your dissension with the police
> department, but

I am not bagging on the RPD. I think we have a professional and competent bunch of officers on the street. 100% of the officers I have interacted with have been decent guys, competent, professional, and well-intentioned. I can't vouch for the deskjockey, detective, or leadership types because I haven't met many/any of them.

On the other hand I am not a cop worshipper. I do my part by obeying the law and treating others civilly and the LEOs do their part. I think it is important to make the city and PD better by pointing out what can be improved, and when spin needs to be reconciled with reality.


> you are still wrong about RPD's priorities regarding residential burglaries.


I wish that were the case.

> Both officers and administration have pushed hard to develop patrol initiatives
> and create public awareness to battle the rise in residential burglaries that have
> plagued all of north Dallas County cities.

I am aware of this; it does not refute my assertion that there is a difference in the level of concern about residential burglaries that RPD has v. what the homeowners have. {Emphasis added to help the reader home in on my assertion}

>Articles have even been posted by the department in the Richardson Today paper
> detailing how citizens can help the police in reducing and reporting suspected
> burglars in addition to education at crime watch meetings in the affected areas.

I stay informed of city publications, RPD suggestions, and crime watch issues so none of the above is new information to me. Again, your argument does not refute my assertion that there is a difference in the level of concern about residential burglaries that RPD has v. what the homeowners have.

I agree with RPD that prevention is the key here. I will go further and say that prevention is critical because the chance that any residential burglary scene will have Crime Scene called to it is exceptionally low, and it is very rare for residential burglars to get caught. In other words, if it doesn't get prevented it won't get solved. For whatever reason.

I am doing this from memory, but I think the Aug 18th arrest was the first time residential burglars were arrested at the scene in the last several months, during which citizens reported ~130 residential burglary incidents.

> The implication that any part of the Richardson Police Department does not take a
> felony offense seriously is flawed and uninformed.

I think you are intentionally misreading or misunderstanding me. I do not claim that RPD doesn't care about residential burglaries or any other crime. I am suggesting that given pressures from above and time constraints on the street something has got to give. The choices that RPD leadership and supervisors make in prioritizing residential burglary cases is not, I am claiming, the same priority that homeowners would assign. That's my last try at explaining it.

> The implication the RPD crime scene unit does not process burglary of habitation
> crime scenes is not only uninformed, its just wrong.

I would gladly review your evidence supporting this claim. Here's how I assessed it for myself.

I have monitored, recorded, and listened to hundreds of hours of COR public service radio transmissions, including RPD. I keep the last (rollling) 10 days on hand in digital format in case I need to refer to it. I keep close tabs on the serious crimes that are reported in my area of Richardson. I can tell you with a high degree of confidence that Crime Scene is very rarely dispatched to residential burglary scenes. Crime Scene is more commonly sent to business burglarly scenes. I do not know why this is so, and I won't try to guess.

People who have asked about this have been told "there's just no evidence to process". That does not ring true to me. It would make no sense that residential burglars are wiley criminals who leave no trace while business burglars leave abundant useful evidence.

The bottom line is that in residential burglary situations Crime Scene is generally not called, even when the homeowner is asking for surfaces to be processed for prints. That, IMO, is evidence of a significant difference in priority. Even if the citizen is dead wrong and the patrolman is completely right it's still a difference in priority.

If you think I am overstating RPD's willingness to shut down residential burglary calls with little post-contact investigation (generally zero detective or Crime Scene investigation), camp out on the crime map and see how long before the residential burglary incident goes INACTIVE. Historically, very few have any kind of PENDING or other status, even if citizens are volunteering information. Many are already marked INACTIVE by the time they show up on the map (generally 2-3 days). Cross-reference the incident with the scanner traffic and see how often Crime Scene is dispatched.


> Rant all you want about the city counsel and mayor, but leave the Richardson
> Police Department out of your politics.

{squinting}

Not sure what my politics are, or what they have to do with residential burglary.