Expectations and You
Welcome to the new year.
As we begin anew, I would like to take this opportunity to talk about expectations.
From an internal perspective, law enforcement administration at the Perris Sheriff’s Station maintains three primary expectations of staff dedicated to interacting with the public on a daily basis: good service, timely report completion, and proactive policing.
First, we demand “good service” (So do you, right?). We recognize that most complaints surround the perception of poor service, lack of empathy or care on the part of the officer, or a sense that the officer behaved in a rude and discourteous manner during the contact.
Part of providing “good service” is ensuring we do all that we reasonably can do for the customer (usually a victim of some criminal act). In most cases, this means the officer should first determine whether a crime occurred or not. If a crime has occurred, the officer will attempt to identify who committed the crime. To this end, the officer should seek witnesses to the crime, and evidence that would help lead to a successful prosecution of the suspect. This also means following each aspect of the investigation to its logical conclusion while following all laws for search and seizure, and detention of persons suspected of the crime. I intentionally address this latter point to bring your attention to the fact that officers are bound to follow the law, which provides a number of rights to each one of us. This can prove to be frustrating for crime victims when their expectation of the officer surpasses the boundary of the law that prevents the officer from taking certain actions during the investigation.
Although some people expect a quick response once they call the police (I know there is a sense of relief the quicker we arrive), the reality is that a rapid response rarely leads to an immediate apprehension of a suspect or increase the chances for solving a crime. Oftentimes, operating from a “rapid response” attitude ends up leading to poor service. If the officers’ goal is to clear calls so they can respond to the next call quickly, something has to give. More often than not, the compromise is quality of service. For those who may be concerned about life-threatening calls, let me assure you that the officers give priority to these types of calls; they will leave a less serious call to handle the higher priority call, and return later with an explanation for their earlier departure. Most people understand, and expect us to give our attention to these calls in such an order.
The second expectation is to complete investigative reports in a timely manner. We recognize that the report is necessary to pass information along to others that need it to further the investigation, prosecute the case, and tracking current crime trends. Furthermore, victims need the report for their insurance company, or documentation of the incident itself. The timeliness of a report makes for an efficient conclusion of the case. Certainly, this can make the difference in a person’s level of satisfaction with how well we have served them.
Lastly, we expect our officers to be proactive in their assigned areas. If they are not handling a call for service or writing reports, we want them to spend time in identified “hot spots” (i.e., areas known for current crime trends). The purpose is to reduce or prevent further criminal activity, and identify those persons responsible for such acts.
James P. McElvain
Chief of Police