Cyber-enabled crimes – sexual offending against children

https://i3.wp.com/www.mobieg.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/20130808_Child_Abuse_001.jpg

The nature of the different types of sexual offending against children

Online sexual offending against children is an ambiguous and controversial phenomenon, as it is include various behaviours, such a grooming, sharing indecent images of children (IIOC) or contacting other offenders with similar interest. Also, the role of the technology is argued amongst professionals, if it is a tool or an influencing and creative force that produced a new type of criminal. As the majority of young people use the Internet, it provide a wide range of opportunity for the offenders to contact their potential victims (Ybarra et al., 2004). According to the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (2010), it has been an increase in sexual solicitations towards children in recent years online. Furthermore, the public and experts also became more aware of the issue, however there are many areas, such as the characteristics of the perpetrators, their communications, practices and risk factors that needs to be studied and researched further (Beech et al., 2008).

In term of risks, in regards of sexual offending against children there are several such as age, gender, sexual preference, ACEs (Felitti et al., 1998), relationships and digital behaviours. Adolescents (age between 13 and 17) spend more time online unsupervised than children (12 and below), use more social networking and messaging sites and more likely to be involved in risky sexual activities, therefore they are much higher at risk for online sexual offending (Baumgartner et al., 2010; Mitchell et al., 2007; Vaala and Bleakley, 2015). According to Wurtele (2012), it is easier to get sexual compliance from adolescents due to their attention seeking, inexperience, naivety and curiosity about sex and relationships. In regard of gender, girls are the majority of the victims of online sexual offences, which mirrors offline victimisation. Boys, on the other hand – as they are more likely to engage in risky sexual behaviour – are victimised online on a higher rate. LGBTQ+ minorities also at risk, as they often visit sex/gender related sites and online communities (Baumgartner et al., 2010; Jonsson et al., 2014; Wolak et al., 2009, 2010). Furthermore, teenagers with ACEs, history of abuse, mental health issues, loneliness, and with bad relationship with their parents are more likely to seek company online. Spending more time on the Internet without supervision may lead and increase the risk of victimisation (Mitchell et al., 2007; Wolak et al., 2010). In regard of risky behaviours online by children, such as visiting adult sites and chatrooms, engaging profanity, using sexually provocative language and nicknames and sexting are considerable factors of online sexual solicitation (Baumgartner et al., 2010; Wolak et al., 2010; Malesky, 2007).

There are two main types of online sexual offending, such as online grooming and proliferation of indecent images of children (IIOC). These cyber enabled crimes, compare to their traditional equivalent are operating a much wider scale through various forms of information communications technology (ICT).

Proliferation of indecent images of children (IIOC)

Defining ‘indecent’ could be quite challenging due the ambiguous nature of the notion: Protection of Children Act 1978 and Criminal Justice Act 1988 describes IIOC as still and moving images of an abused and/or exploited children. Before the Internet the possession, distribution and production of these images were quite a rare occurrence. According to Middleton (2009) images of child abuse multiplied due the development of technology, which also reduced the cost and detection such activities and increased their availability. In 2005, one third of all sexual offences were internet related in England and Wales, which is nearly five times increase since 1999 (Home Office, 2006). According to the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (CEOP, 2012), possessing and managing IIOC are considered risky behaviour, which may also lead additional (physical) abuse. Pseudo images (digitally constructed photos) are also problematic, as they are artificially manipulated for instance a child’s face inserted on a woman’s body or the IIOC entirely built by an application therefore involve ‘no real victims’ (Quayle and Taylor, 2003; Davidson et al., 2010).

Online grooming:

This form of offence against children is defined as a process in which by the offender prepares the victim and the environment for the purposes of the abuse, for instance getting the child’s trust and compliance, also obfuscating the crime itself (Craven et al., 2006). O’Connell (2003) models online grooming as process made of the offender’s efforts regarding accessibility, opportunity and vulnerability. This research identified seven stages in this process, such as: friendship and relationship forming; risk assessment; exclusivity; sexual; fantasy re-enactment, and damage limitation. Furthermore, according to Bryce (2010) offenders and their activities are frequently overlap, for instance producers, consumers and distributors of IIOC are involved in several forms of exploitation and abuse simultaneously.

Types of offenders:

According to Bryce (2010) online offenders are not share many characteristics, except being male. On the contrary, Babchishin’s (2011) meta-analysis of online sex offenders indicates they are high likely to be young, single, jobless, Caucasian and high intelligence, also with no criminal record (Webster et al., 2012). The study categorised these criminals as intimacy seeking, adaptable and hyper sexualised offenders. In contrast, in a 2007 paper Howitt and Sheldon revealed that offenders often in a relationship and have children themselves. In regards to cover their online activities, offenders use various level of protection to hide their identity, communications and IIOC. Carr (2004) have found only a quarter of the offenders she interviewed used some kind of security measure, however nowadays more and more technology available for criminals (Tor for example) to hide their activities.

Strengths and weaknesses of policing/prevention strategies in regard sexual offending against children

In recent years, information and communication technologies (ICT), especially mobile phones, internet has become essential to adolescents’. ICTs provide a platform for education, entertainment, networking, also it could be a valuable resource for the disadvantaged and marginalised youth (Guan and Subrahmanyam, 2009). However, as ICT become more common, the risk it presents also become more extensive, such as invasion of privacy, cyberbullying, online grooming, sexting, dating abuse, and proliferation of IIOC (Zweig et al., 2013).

Prevention

To answer these cyber-enabled crimes, several prevention strategies, programs, guidelines and methods have been implemented. Several websites (such as https://www.nspcc.org.uk) has been created in order to inform parents and children in regards the risk and dangers online, and provide advice how to avoid them. They advise and warn about risky websites and behaviours, how to protect ones privacy and identity, offline communication and potential steps a parent can do to prevent victimisation.

In regards to sexting via mobile phones, there are numerous educational campaigns exist to raise the issues and consequences of such activity. However, as they focusing mainly sexting amongst children, they disregard such communication between adult and children, which is quite problematic. Overall, the existence of these online-safety related sites is a positive thing, however their usefulness, efficiency and impact is not known entirely (Wurtele et al., 20016).

Role of the Parents

According to Wildsmith et al. (2013) good relationship between parents and their children significantly reduce the risk of online victimisation. Furthermore, parental supervision also a protective element in relation to online safety (Whittle et al., 2013). As we discussed in the previous section, there are several online-safety website available for parents if they wish to access relevant material. However, these resources often amplify the risks online, such as kidnappings or sexting (Vaala and Bleakey, 2015), also they recommend to supervise and limit their children’s activity online and use protective applications. While these practices work with young children, adolescents are not limited to use one ‘safe’ device. In regard of sharing personal information, which is not directly related to online sexual offending (Finkelhol, 2014), it is highly recommended not to share on social media. Furthermore, there are few issues in regards prevention methods through parents, such as lack of knowledge or device at home, barriers to articulate and discuss a sensitive subject or existing domestic struggle. These factors exaggerate the risks of online sexual offending, therefore these children should be able access external help and support, through schools and other institutions.

Schools’ role in online safety

Another line of defence and prevention lies within the classroom, where information regarding ICT risks can be thought. They can provide a qualified personnel and the technology to deliver internet safety education to the children and allow class debate and discussion about online threats, prevention and virtual etiquette. Moreover, there are online education programmes, like iKeepSafe but they mainly focus on ‘panic driven’ advice and ‘untested assumptions’ in regard internet safety and victimisation (Finkelhor, 2014). Although, these initiatives have the tendency of victim blaming and sexist communication (Dobson and Ringrose, 2016). As these efforts focus on prevention, legal advice also should be given just as how to recognise online and offline sexual offences and how to respond to them appropriately (Wolak et al., 2009; Wolak and Finkelhor, 2013, Wurtele, 2012). However, adolescents instead of reporting online related sexual offending to authorities, they more likely to share it with their peers according to Katz (2013) and Whittle (2014). In reflection above, we can assert that education plays a critical role in prevention of online solicitation, however adolescents should be involved in a much greater degree, in cooperation with ICT actors and law-enforcement agencies.

Policing, Technology and Policy

Technology enabled crimes against children, such as online grooming or IIOC, however it also provide methods to prevent such crimes. Government and Law Enforcement bodies, like the Hi-Tech Crime Unit (HTCU), the Police Central e-Crime Unit (PCeU) and Home Office’s Centre for Applied Science (CAST) are working together to develop technological solutions to answer challenges of the Police, such as preventing online child abuse or investigate it (Lilley, 2016). Furthermore, Police use ‘forensic investigation tools’ (Association of Chief Police Officers, 2007) and search engines have embedded algorithms to reduce accessibility to IIOC through their platforms (Steel, 2015). The acknowledgement of unique strategies regarding online sex offenders become prevalent during UK’s first significant investigation of IIOC (Operation Ore) in 1999. In 2004, the National Probation Service for England and Wales considered banning sex offenders using ICT. In 2007, the Home Office recognised that issues regarding protection of children needs to be addressed according to ICT developments. They suggested policies with mandatory email registration, polygraph test and tagging for registered sex offenders. By 2010, these plans were discussed in the mainstream media (Beckford and Stokes, 2010) and tracking email addresses’ of sex offenders has been stopped due Human Right concerns. The notion of limiting offenders’ access online content has been tried in 2011, and the Court of Appeal stated:

‘A blanket prohibition on computer use or internet access is impermissible. It is disproportionate because it restricts the defendant in the use of what is nowadays an essential part of everyday living for a large proportion of the public, as well as a requirement of much employment’ (Regina v Smith (2011) EWCA Crim 1772)

Therefore, law enforcement agencies were required to utilise and develop alternative crime prevention methods in order to accommodate the legal, technological and professional requirements.

Situation specific crime prevention

Situational crime prevention theories in practice using ICTs to limit the offender’s ability to access IIOC (Taylor and Quayle, 2016). However this approach has its own limitations, such as the ‘hidden’ nature of the crime, the offender’s technological capability and the Internet itself, where the crime takes place. For instance, a monitoring software allows authorities to notice any wrongdoing, collect evidence and act immediately if necessary. However, offenders could avoid this detection with an unknown device for the authorities. Furthermore, resources of the Police are finite, therefore it needs to be optimised and existing technical and legal challenges to be resolved in order to apply successfully this prevention strategy (Lilley, 2016).

Non-situational crime prevention

This form of approach does not require a computer or other device with Internet connection as it is a more direct approach. Using tag (electronic monitoring) to monitor and track sex offenders, might deter, but not prevent someone to commit a crime. On the other hand, tagging could be an effective way to supervise low risk offenders and reduce reoffending, which may be a cost effective alternative to imprisonment (Padgett et al., 2006; National Audit Office, 2006). Apart from Gies et al. (2012) study, which shows that even high risk sex offenders comply more and offend less likely when monitored, there are limited research on this topic, especially in regard to reoffending, deterrence, effectiveness and how this technology alters the offenders’ behaviour (Criminal Justice Joint Inspection, 2012). Polygraph also can be used to observe sex offenders compliance and it can increase the quality of criminal history convicted offenders’ provide (Grubin et al., 2004). Conversely, the use of this technique has been critiqued by academics that it is ‘coercive’ and consent is ‘illusory’ (Bull et al., 2004), also it disrupts offenders’ rehabilitation (Wilcox, 2013).

Conclusion

In this limited version of Rapid Evidence Assessment (REA) cyber-enabled crimes, such as sexual offending against children and relevant policing/prevention strategies were evaluated. Within these topics, this paper focused on indecent images of children (IIOC), online grooming, the types of offenders, several prevention methods and techniques, legal and technological challenges. In terms of procedure and narrowing the available material, this REA used articles published in the US, UK and EU between 2010 and 2020, including all research methods. These literature were identified mainly in Web of Science and in Edinburgh Napier University LibrarySearch engine.

Technological developments influenced criminality and victimisation in the last two decades, creating new type of crimes, risks and challenges for authorities. Online sexual offending against children is one of these cyber-crimes, which gained attention from the public and academics considerably. Two main theme emerged in regard this offence: grooming and proliferation of indecent images. Both of these, target children where and when they are most vulnerable, unsupervised, having difficulties and/or unaware of the risks they taking. In regards the offenders, this scooping of articles have found several inconsistencies in their characteristics, such as their background and relationships. Furthermore, prevention methods of these offences are multi-agency, technology, legislation and resource dependent, with different level of success rate. Also, these approaches are often not well researched, therefore we don’t know much about their impact and efficiency on criminal behaviour and reoffending. Overall, this simplified REA have found that online sexual offences are prevalent and serious threats to children, but law enforcement agencies and legislative bodies aware of this issue and taking preventive measures. However, the sensitive and hidden nature of this type of crimes, also because the several legal and technological issues present, it is challenging to paint an accurate picture on this criminal activity, therefore it is more difficult to prevent it.

Policy Report: County Lines

County Lines is a criminal drug distribution network originating from mayor cities, exploiting vulnerable individuals, especially children and infiltrating into the countryside to distribute Class A drugs to a wider audience. This almost invisible web of criminal operation gives almost an impossible task to the authorities as it is so complex by its multidimensional nature as it is present in the physical and online space, also extend geologically across the UK and involves not just the trade of drugs, but exploitation, abuse, grooming and violence. This policy report will paint a picture how County Lines exploit children and at risk individuals, explore the current policies regarding substance misuse and propose new policy implications, strategies and recommendations in order to tackle the issue.

Importance and Context

Child Criminal Exploitation (CCE)

As County Lines is a form of exploitation that primarily affects children and young vulnerable and disadvantaged people, therefore it is important to explore the context of this phenomenon before we discuss the topic in detail.

CCE is very complex issue as it involves the exploitation, manipulation, coercion and control of a person under 18 to participate in a criminal/ gang activity. This complicated relationship between the offender(s) and victim(s) which might appear consensual, may also include financial/sexual abuse, grooming, violence and drug related crimes. (Firmin, 2018; Sherlock, 2019; Robinson, 2019; HM Government, 2018) According to the National Crime Agency (2017; 2019) child criminal exploitation cases on the rise, identifying County Lines as the main cause as they grow and closely linked together. Children’s Commissioner (2019) reports that around 46,000 children involved in gang activity and a further 313,000 at risk of being involved.

Regarding existing academic research and understanding the connection between CCE and County Lines, unfortunately limited amount of data available. On the contrary, there are numerous news reports on the issue, but they are not reliable, nor painting accurate picture of the phenomenon. In addition the notion of CCE hides the fact, that not only children but other vulnerable groups are also victims of exploitation in relation to County Lines (Robinson et al., 2019).

County Lines

County Lines defines a criminal operation run by urban gangs, involves drug supply to distant rural areas, child exploitation, human trafficking, modern slavery, sexual abuse and violence. In practice a criminal group infiltrates into a countryside location in order to funnel drugs into the area from a major city. The drug transported and distributed by vulnerable children, promoted on social media and coordinated through mobile phone by senior gang members. (Andell and Pitts, 2018; Robinson et al., 2019; Spicer, 2018; Coomber and Moyle, 2018)

When drug markets in big cities grow to a certain point, where dealers cannot find new customers, because “growing number of dealers is not accompanied by a growing number of users” (Ruggiero, 2010, p.51), they expand their businesses outside their city to find new users, retail their product, and grow their network and income. (National Crime Agency 2016; Coomber and Moyle, 2018)

The drug is produced in a city like London, Birmingham, Liverpool (National Crime Agency, 2016) by senior gang members. Heroin is the most frequently (79%) supplied substance, followed by crack cocaine (70%) according to the NCA and it get transported and sold by exploited children as they less likely to be searched and caught by the police. This provides the dealers anonymity and the ability to extend their network in a distance and maximise their earnings. They also exploit vulnerable people (drug addicts, elderly, individuals with mental health issues and the poor) to use their properties to accommodate the runners and distribute the drug to the local consumers, this practice called cuckooing (Spicer et al., 2019).

Cuckooing

Cuckooing, according to the police is an essential part of the County Line drug trafficking operation. Taking over – using manipulation and intimidation – a vulnerable individual’s home by a dealer or a gang provides a hidden environment (disguised from the public and the police) for their criminal activities. (Essex Police, 2018; Spicer et al., 2019).

The consistent demand for Class A drugs and the fact that the market shifted away from public sight makes the County Lines successful, as it is a constantly growing, almost invisible drug market. Also the special relationship we discussed above, between the actors (gang members, dealers, runners, consumers) makes the phenomenon even more complex and difficult to understand, dismantle and eradicate as it is not just a simple drug dealing offence, these people involved socially, financially, geographically, emotionally and sexually.

Policy Recommendations and Implications

Current policies

The UK Drug Strategy 2017 aims to tackle the nation’s drug issue with two primary goals: reducing illegal drug use and increase the numbers of people recovering from their addiction. These goals backed by four main themes, such as reducing the demand of drug use, drug supply restrictions, improving the recovery of individuals and a broad initiative to tackle harms of illegal substances. The Strategy involves health, housing and education policies all across England, however Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are developed their own unique and local approach. It also integrates alcohol focused prevention programmes, intervention and treatment into the Strategy as those substances are key drivers of delinquency.

The Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 regulates the control of substances in the UK, it sorts drugs into three (A, B and C) classes and defines the penalties, aggravating and mitigating factors and provide guidelines for related offences and sentencing. The Act differentiate between possession of controlled substance and possession of drug with the intention to supply, which is counts as a trafficking offence (Drug Trafficking Act 1994), however the use of drug does not count as a crime.

Social Responsibility Act 2011 and Police Reform invented Temporary Class Drug Orders (TCDO) to provide legislators a more efficient way to answer the New Psychoactive Substances (NPS). The Psychoactive Substances Act 2016 regulates, criminalise and ban psychoactive substances, also penalise the production, supply and possession and also provides sufficient powers to authorities.

Recommendations

1, Communication Strategy

County Lines are multi-dimensional complex phenomenon challenging traditional police practices and requiring new approaches, cooperation between law enforcement agencies, third sector and local communities. Sharing intelligence and data, being transparent is crucial to identify and to take action against criminal exploitation, drug trade and gang culture (National Crime Agency, 2017).

Raising awareness within the community also an essential part of the Strategy. For instance The Children’s Society, a charity that provides prevention, mental health and supporting services for young people, especially whom involved in County Lines, CCE and substance misuse. They also lobbying and conducting research in order to influence policy makers to help vulnerable, marginalised, discriminated and at risk children.

Educating and informing young people about the forms of exploitation also essential as they likely to justify and neutralise (Sykes and Matza, 1957) their abuse, exploitation and unequal relationship with other gang members.

Working together with residents to tackle the core causes of involvement with the County Lines, such as social inequalities, poverty, housing issues, homelessness, stigma, and substance dependency could help reduce the harm done by involvement in drug related activities and could potentially prevent all form of exploitation and related offences.

2, Data Collection

In order to communicate and understand better the issues of CCE and County Lines authorities require accurate and up to date information. Therefore data collection methods need to improve in term of accuracy, consistency and quality.

First, the government should re-evaluate the CCE as a category, as it does not reflect the data collected on children nor on criminal exploitation. There should be a category that records children affected by exploitation and separate category for those who receiving aid from children’s services. This would prevent unnecessary stigmatisation and labelling. Also the category does not include those exploited individuals whom involved in County Lines, but grew into adulthood.

Second, the National Referral Mechanism (NRM) and special markers should be implemented all across the services, agencies and databases, such as children’s services, police and missing person databases to achieve consistency, efficiency and to be able to create nationwide picture of the issue (Counting lives, 2019).

3, Harm Reduction Strategy & Policing

This Strategy engaging communities in order to build trust between the authorities and the community, addressing individual’s needs and reducing the harms of drug use. It also including and recognising how substance dependency affecting people, their family and the wider community. Therefore the police, third sector and health professionals should work together to help achieving the goals above and to increase public health and safety (Krupanski, 2018).

In practice authorities can create facilities and harm reduction services, such as needle programs, medication treatments, substance analysis schemes and NHS supervised drug consumption rooms. The implication of these would prioritize victims’ life over criminalisation, therefore encourage the police not to arrest and press charges when overdose happens, carry and use opioid antidote (naloxone), prioritize and protect victims and witnesses in drug related crimes and work closely with health actors (NHS).

Applying this approach to policing would benefit drug addicts, their relatives, the police and the whole community. Research (Van Den Berg et al., 2007) showed that it could reduce the prevalence rates of HIV and hepatitis C, decrease the numbers of needle injuries and increase the homeless people’s involvement with drug services. It also affects reoffending, crime rates and indirectly prison population, just as the police’s good relationship to the public. To effectively combat and prevent County Lines policing and policy making should prioritise substance harm reduction over prohibition.

4, Diversion Strategy

This Strategy encourages authorities to apply diversion, de-criminalisation and de-stigmatisation, crime prevention and rehabilitation over prosecution and criminalisation. For instance Thames Valley’s Youth Inclusion Program available targeting vulnerable, at risk children, helping them to participate in meaningful activities. In Windsor and Maidenhead a delayed a delayed prosecution scheme offering individuals under 18 to address their substance dependency, instead of entering the criminal justice system. Custody intervention, such as the Metropolitan Police’s Divert Project Scheme approaching people (age 18-25) in custody to help them reintegrate to society via education and employment.

These strategies produce significant positive results, such as lower rate of re-offending, employment after custody, however these programs does not reach every potential offender/ at risk individual, therefore it is difficult to evaluate their outcomes. Also, these programmes are dependent on funding which could compromise and jeopardise the long term results.

Conclusion

This policy report painted a picture of the County Lines by exploring the context of the issue, such as child criminal exploitation, how the drug market operates, overviewed the current legal framework and policies, highlighted the challenges authorities face and showed how this network exploit vulnerable people, especially children. In reflection to these issues, this paper drafted four recommendations in order to tackle the concerns above. The Communication Strategy proposed a coordinated data and intelligence exchange between agencies and a community based approach, where residents and at risk individuals could communicate and work together. The second point addressed data collection methods, standards and mechanisms in place. The Harm Reduction and Policing chapter suggested practical implications for the authorities, such as improve their relation to the local community and to invest facilities, services and programs. And finally the Diversion Strategy urged authorities to divert instead of criminalise, especially young offenders. However, acknowledging the complexity of County Lines, these policy recommendations would not solve the problems, rather just reduce the harm and latitude this network operates. To eradicate this phenomenon we need to deal with the underlying issues our society suffers from, such as poverty, social inequality, homelessness, but that would be another topic for policy recommendations.

Crime Prevention Essay

This essay offering a detailed analysis of crime prevention (CP) within and beyond the criminal justice system by providing a categorical breakdown of the different ways of preventing crime. Furthermore this paper will provide theoretical justification and various examples for the different crime prevention approaches. It will also give a comparison, reflect on how their dimensions intersect each other and a critical evaluation for each CP methods.

Historically crime prevention was the main purpose of the police force (Peel, 1829). Since the 19^th century, it has changed dramatically from reactive to proactive interventions. By a contemporary definition crime prevention are actions taken by either the individuals or public agencies with a preventive measure in the psychical and social environment in order to change certain behavior and events to reduce the occurrence of a criminal act and minimize the damage caused by it (Crawford 2007; Hughes in McLaughlin and Muncie 2003). These methods can include anticipation of crime, everyday actions like closing doors behind ourselves, using identification cards and passwords, designing products a way that makes them difficult to use if they got stolen. CP can also use approaches that change offenders’ behaviour, environment and personal circumstances. Also several crime prevention policies were implemented and local communities and various agencies got involved such as the Five Towns Initiative and the Neighbourhood Watch. In recent years, crime reduction were used more commonly instead of CP as an indication and desire to not just to prevent, but significantly reduce crime.

We can categorise CP methods by two main dimensions. The first one we can divide in to three categories, such as primary, secondary and tertiary activities. Primary CP targets the general public and its main aim is to prevent crime before it happens. It includes education, socialisation, campaigns, families and community organisations such as Neighbourhood Watch. The Criminal Justice System (CJS) also plays an important role by reinforcing the main moral values and justifying the punishment of criminals (Brantingham and Faust, 1976).

The Secondary CP focuses on ‘at risk’ individuals and situations. Certain policies targets potential offenders, for example young people who are living in areas of high level of criminality or circumstances (homeless) and environment where crime high likely to happen. Schools, sporting institutions, welfare and medical staff are playing an important role in identifying and diverting those ‘at risk’ of offending. By target hardening the situations for ‘at risk’ groups by using surveillance in areas where criminal behaviour is predicted or around the homes of potential victims, crime can be deterred.

The third, tertiary CP deals with known offenders and situations associated with crime. Its main focus to prevent these individuals to offending again, using rehabilitation, diversion, reparation and sentences. It could also involve mediation between the victim and the offender, closed-circuit television (CCTV) in areas where crime often occur and electronic tagging (Davies et al., 2009).

The second dimension lies between the situational and social approaches (Clarke, 1992). The situational or physical CP involves altering the environment, making the offending harder to commit, reducing the chances and allowing the detection much easier (Mayhew et al. 1976). In practice it means for example the environment designed with gates, access control, improved lights, CCTV, banning alcohol consumption from public areas, steering locks and to make compliance easier installing more bins (Home Office Research Study 187, 1998). This is a direct application of environmental criminology, especially Newman’s ‘defensible space’ (1972) and Jeffrey’s (1971) CP through environmental design.

The Kirkholt Project proved that situational CP though window locks, strengthen doors, neighborhood watch schemes and victim support crime rates drops significantly. (Crawford 1998; Pease 2002) However the evaluation of the situational CP is difficult, because of the factor of crime displacement (Crawford 1998). Therefore the offence could happen in a different place, at a different time or by a different means, also the crime may happen against a different target, the type of the crime could change, just as the perpetrator.

The social approach of CP aims ‘at risk’ individuals who are considered most likely to commit an offence and steps in before any crime happens. This method could be divided by the type interventions applied, such as developmental CP which focusing on personal motivations and behavior, and community crime prevention which targets vulnerable communities (Christie, 1977) and interested in the collective as a whole (Crawford, 2007). Young people are the majority who are involved in social – developmental CP as they are the most affected by certain risk factors, such as low income, impulsiveness, low school attendance, poor parental supervision and housing, broken families, therefore they are ‘at risk’ to commit or become victim of crime (Newburn, 2007: 584). Community CP involve the community, social control (Sampson and Laub, 1993), recreational and mentoring schemes.

This method by its nature provides a long term outcome, expensive, brings very challenging goals and very difficult to evaluate. In the UK several programs were introduced, such as the Youth Inclusion Programme, targeting the ‘top 50’ undeserving between 13 and 16. The results of the program were ambiguous as there was some drop in arrest rates, but the crime rates in the relating areas are increased the same time.

Close to community- crime prevention, but a response oriented approach based on Wilson and Kelling (1982) broken windows theory, anti-social behaviors (ASBOs) has been treated with a zero tolerance policing. The theory suggests that minor crimes such as graffiti, littering and begging would increase the probability of more serious crimes, therefore applying zero tolerance towards these offences will reduce crime rates. The approach was applied in New York by William Bratton in 1994 with a significant success. However when zero tolerance policy was introduced in the UK, it had small impact on crime. This suggest that other factors might have been associated with Bratton’s crime rates (Davies et al., 2009).

Overall CP is a diverse, multidimensional product made of government bodies, local authorities, private sector, criminal justice agencies and people of the public. Crime preventing is not limited to the CJS, but a cooperation between many organizations, individuals and systems. Its success, limited mainly to the situational CP, while it ignores the socio-structural origins of crime and does not have an answer how to deal with expressive crimes (offenses that linked with emotions).

Crime and Disorder Act 1998 required various local entities to consider crime and disorder in relation to designing and building homes, transportation, lighting streets and licensing. However, there are many areas are remain to be involved in CP simply by design, systematic planning or by strict policies (Pease 2002; Tilley 2002). For instance in private sector, landlords and pub owners, whose neglect their property or allow individuals to use the premise to sell drugs should be included.

After all, the current implementations of CP methods are showing a diverse picture to us. As above this paper provided diverse examples of methods and results, the development of CP and progress in this area is needed. However, there is a possibility we might create a ‘fortress society’ by focusing and relying heavily on CP. Heavily protected houses may deter potential offenders, but it may also create a ‘gated community’ where every- day social interactions almost impossible and with constant surveillance around it might generate more fear and insecurity within the society (Tilley 2002; Crawford 2007).

Some actions could increase our social divisions even further, if we divide our areas to safe and unsafe. People living in unsafe areas could be potentially labelled as dangerous and will be excluded, feared and stigmatized. These division could be further exacerbated by wealth, as some people with more money could afford better security than others (Tilley, 2002).

Furthermore, regarding developmental CP methods, they can be problematic for example how do policies determine ‘at risk’ children or at what age they get targeted. These questions and issues should be addressed as they involve the basic rights, privacy and equity of the individuals in question (Crawford, 2007).

As a conclusion, crime prevention is very important part of the CJS, alongside of many policies. These implementations are definitely have had some success in crime reduction, however there are some topics still remain problematic such as difficult evaluation, displacement, human right issues and dangers of future development of CP. Therefore future studies of crime prevention and more critical examination of methods are required.