Furthermore, some cases may not have led to arrests or charges, but showed signs of problems that were likely to escalate. Police could see crime coming in the future, but could do little other than offer a bit of doorstep advice.
In other words, crime is a complex phenomenon and yet we were tackling it in less than sophisticated ways. That high prison population we keep hearing about? In part that's because our thinking on crime has been woefully inadequate.
The police were using all the tools they had, but they needed more and that meant a multi-agency approach. Hence Integrated Safety Response (ISR) was formed, and is being piloted in Christchurch and Hamilton.
Around the table every morning in Christchurch are: an ISR co-ordinator, police, Oranga Tamariki, Corrections, two representatives from the CHB for general health and mental health, and a representative for all of the other relevant agencies and the non-governmental organisations, which are numerous.
In all there are about 48 agencies including the likes of ACC, the City Mission, Stopping Violence Services, He Waka Tapu and even, I kid you not, the SPCA (people cruel to animals will often be cruel to people or vice versa).
The ISR ensures work is done with the victim, the offender, and with peripheral issues, which are largely to do with the impacts of the environment on children.
For example, if there are drug or alcohol issues, Health will hook people up with addiction services or psychologists if there are mental health issues.
Many of the NGOs run stopping violence programmes and the Ministry of Education will follow up if a child is found not to be in school. The interventions are numerous and customised for individual circumstances.
One of the keys to this, as is probably evident, is information sharing. In part that means there is no wasteful duplication of services and that providers are complementing one another. The privacy issues at play have been well canvassed, and taken seriously. The higher the risk the more information that can be shared. Often it just means telling different agencies that there is an issue without giving any details. Schools, for example, might be notified so guidance counsellors can keep an eye out for behaviour that may indicate a resumption of problems at home.
A recent evaluation found that of all the incidents put before the ISR, 78 per cent receive some intervention (many multiple interventions) and 62 per cent have not returned to the ISR, meaning no further offending.
In the two years the pilot has been running in Christchurch, there has been one murder related to family violence and that was just as the ISR was beginning and neither the victim nor the offender had come to ISR attention. The usual number of domestic homicides is three to five per year.
Are these data encouraging? Yes they are. Definitive? Nope, not yet. More time is needed to really assess the impacts on offending and reoffending. There are likely some adjustments that need to be made, and a few incremental improvements, but overall, a multi-agency approach that addresses the drivers of crime is our best shot at making significant improvements. That conclusion is not just intuitive; it's supported by best practice research.
For years we have looked at crime as an issue for police and the justice system only. That thinking is now the past. A sophisticated approach that has an eye on prevention is the future of criminal justice.
And we didn't need a crystal ball to predict it; we just needed some rationality and reason. The same things, as it happens, that make for sound crime and justice policy.
• Dr Jarrod Gilbert is a sociologist at the University of Canterbury and the lead researcher at Independent Research Solutions. He is an award-winning writer who specialises in research with practical applications.
