Logo

New crime prediction software being rolled out in the nation's capital should reduce not only the murder rate, but the rate of many other crimes as well.
Software Predicts Criminal Behavior
A computer program is helping law enforcement determine who is most likely to commit crime.

Developed by Richard Berk, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania, the software is already used in Baltimore and Philadelphia to predict which individuals on probation or parole are most likely to murder and to be murdered.

In his latest version, the one being implemented in D.C., Berk goes even further, identifying the individuals most likely to commit crimes other than murder.

If the software proves successful, it could influence sentencing recommendations and bail amounts.

"When a person goes on probation or parole they are supervised by an officer. The question that officer has to answer is 'what level of supervision do you provide?'" said Berk.

It used to be that parole officers used the person's criminal record, and their good judgment, to determine that level.

"This research replaces those seat-of-the-pants calculations," he said.

Technology Helps Determine Level of Supervision Needed for People on Probation or Parole

Murders, despite their frequent appearance on cop dramas and the evening news, are rare crimes. On average there is one murder for every 100,000 people. Even among high-risk groups the murder rate is one in 100. Trying to predict such a rare event is very difficult, so difficult that many researchers deemed it impossible.

"It's like trying to find the needle in the haystack," said Berk.

New advances in computer technology, however, can sift through that haystack more quickly and more accurately than ever.

Beginning several years ago, the researchers assembled a dataset of more than 60,000 various crimes, including homicides. Using an algorithm they developed, they found a subset of people much more likely to commit homicide when paroled or probated. Instead of finding one murderer in 100, the UPenn researchers could identify eight future murderers out of 100.

Berk's software examines roughly two dozen variables, from criminal record to geographic location. The type of crime, and more importantly, the age at which that crime was committed, were two of the most predictive variables.

Technology Doesn't Predict Future Crimes

"People assume that if someone murdered then they will murder in the future," said Berk. "But what really matters is what that person did as a young individual. If they committed armed robbery at age 14 that's a good predictor. If they committed the same crime at age 30, that doesn't predict very much."

Baltimore and Philadelphia are already using Berk's software to help determine how much supervision parolees should have. Washington, D.C. is now set to use the algorithm to help determine lesser crimes as well. If those tests go well, Berk says the program could help set bail amounts and suggest sentencing recommendations.

Predicting future crimes does sound, well, futuristic, said Berk. Even his students at the University of Pennsylvania compare his research to the Tom Cruise movie "Minority Report."

Nevertheless, he said, "We aren't anywhere near being able to do that."

Scientifically, Berk's results are "very impressive," said Shawn Bushway, a professor of criminal justice at the State University of New York at Albany who is familiar with Berk's research.

Predicting rare events like murder, even among high-risk individuals, is extremely difficult, said Bushway, and Berk is doing a better job of it than anyone else.

But Berk's scientific answer leaves policymakers with difficult questions, said Bushway. By labeling one group of people as high risk, and monitoring them with increased vigilance, there should be fewer murders, which the potential victims should be happy about.

It also means that those high-risk individuals will be monitored more aggressively. For inmate rights advocates, that is tantamount to harassment, "punishing people who, most likely, will not commit a crime in the future," said Bushway.

"It comes down to a question of whether you would rather make these errors or those errors," said Bushway.

Source:
abcnews

Minority report? No more like the police state and thought police of George Orwell's 1984!

President Obama tried Wednesday to channel public outrage about the Gulf of Mexico oil spill into support for a climate-change bill, seeking to redefine an issue that threatens to tarnish his presidency.

In a speech at Pittsburgh's Carnegie Mellon University, Obama made one of his strongest pitches for comprehensive climate legislation, arguing that the case for breaking the nation's addiction to fossil fuels has been made clearer by the environmental catastrophe in the gulf.

The president vowed to gather votes for the climate bill in the "coming months" and repeated his intention to roll back billions of dollars in tax breaks for big oil companies, to tap natural gas reserves as an alternative to coal, and to increase reliance on nuclear power -- although energy experts said that such a program would leave the country just as dependent on offshore oil.

"I will make the case for a clean-energy future wherever I can, and I will work with anyone from either party to get this done. But we will get this done," Obama said. "The next generation will not be held hostage to energy sources from the last century."

Allies of the president have argued for weeks that the administration should stop talking about BP, the oil company responsible for the spill, and instead tap into the public attention to the catastrophe in hopes of giving it at least some redemptive value in the long term.

"The oil disaster adds new urgency and a new opportunity for connecting with the public," said Daniel J. Weiss of the Center for American Progress. "The administration was going to do it anyway, but this gives it a new way to talk about it."

Those urging action have sent White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel briefs that argue for a final push on the climate legislation, and others have had conversations with climate adviser Carol M. Browner and legislative director Phil Schiliro.

In an online column posted Wednesday, Weiss and CAP President John D. Podesta argued that "the horrible BP oil disaster has reminded Americans that we must reduce our oil use," adding: "We share the view that this presents an unprecedented opportunity to take bold action to achieve this goal."


Energy experts warned that climate legislation would have little impact on the need to search for oil in the Gulf of Mexico to meet U.S. demands. Offshore oil provides a growing portion of U.S. oil production, and deep-water wells account for a rising share of the offshore output. The gulf provides about 40 percent of U.S. oil production.

Obama's earlier mandate to improve automobile fuel efficiency will do much more than a climate bill to cut oil use, but even a sharp drop in U.S. consumption would leave the nation a net importer and thus dependent on offshore oil. The president made this point when he endorsed an expansion of offshore drilling weeks before a drilling rig exploded April 20 and triggered the spill.

"The president is correct that we need more [renewable energy], but we need more oil, too," said J. Robinson West, chairman of PFC Energy, a Washington consulting firm.

The leading supporters of climate-change legislation on Capitol Hill cheered Obama's remarks as a clear step up from his rhetoric in recent months, when he often left unclear whether he was going to push for energy reform this year.