‘Hotspot policing’ — We must recalibrate tactics after Nichols killing

When robber Willie Sutton was asked why he robbed banks, he famously said “because that’s where the money is.” This has also been the sensible rationale for hotspot policing.

Yet the ruthless killing of Tyre Nichols was perpetrated by the now disbanded Street Crimes Operation to Restore Peace in Our Neighborhoods (S.C.O.R.P.I.O.N.) policing unit, which was billed from its inception as an example of hotspot policing.

To cut crime without breeding brutality, the path forward requires distinguishing policing that is geographically focused but also anchored by community partnerships and proper guardrails from specialized units like S.C.O.R.P.I.O.N. that lack transparency and accountability.

It’s illogical to randomly spread officers over an entire jurisdiction regardless of violent crime rates and the number of calls received from various neighborhoods. But for jurisdictions to benefit from hotspot policing without getting burned, they must take several steps: 1) prioritize focused deterrence through police visibility and institute guidelines on tactics that do not exempt specialized units; 2) focus on preventing and solving serious crimes; 3) build collaborative relationships with community groups and neighbors; and 4) adopt performance measures that ensure officers are not judged by their number of arrests or other metrics that can create perverse incentives.

First, while the S.C.O.R.P.I.O.N. unit was justified in concentrating resources on high crime areas, its use of unmarked cars suggests it overlooked a core goal of hotspot policing, which is deterring street crime. Indeed, the success of hotspot policing in driving down serious crime rates in many jurisdictions has been attributed to its role in establishing a highly visible police presence, thereby discouraging street crimes ranging from auto thefts to muggings by increasing the perceived chance of being caught.

Unmarked cars detract from such visibility — and are even illegal in some states. Their most defensible role may be in creating an element of surprise in daytime traffic enforcement, although this practice can endanger drivers with visual or hearing impairments. Pittsburgh, among other cities, recently abandoned units that seek to surprise those engaged in seemingly suspicious activity using unmarked cars and plainclothes officers, sometimes referred to as “jump out squads.” Not only does this tactic ignore the evidence supporting crime deterrence through visibility, it risks injuring civilians who are later determined not to have broken the law, especially when “jump outs” target those carrying guns in a state like Tennessee, which legalized open carry without a permit in 2021.

Second, the need to focus hotspot policing on serious criminal activity has long been clear. Research has found that hotspot policing in New York City and many other cities contributed to significant reductions in crime over three decades. However, before being discontinued, the stop-and-frisk component of this strategy in New York City  violated the rights of countless individuals. Most of these people were not involved in any illegal activity, while thousands of others were in possession of small amounts of marijuana.

Beyond its harm on specific individuals, stop-and-frisk also exacerbated criminal justice inequities, as New Yorkers with a joint in more upscale neighborhoods were unlikely to be similarly buttonholed. Moreover, the practice perpetuated distrust between communities and police, making it less likely that residents would cooperate with officers by providing the information needed to solve serious crimes.

The reason, or perhaps pretext, for pulling over Nichols was reckless driving, though no evidence substantiating this has yet emerged. The S.C.O.R.P.I.O.N unit was legitimately concerned with recent carjackings, but randomly pulling over cars in certain neighborhoods falls far short of the reasonable suspicion needed to constitutionally justify a stop, or a search, let alone the violent behavior of the officers.

One way to maximize the benefits of hotspot policing is to more precisely define criminal activity, or at least the crimes that warrant the costly process of arresting and jailing someone. This can come from state law, city ordinance, or department policy. For example, legalizing marijuana would have taken nearly 14,000 arrests off the table in Tennessee in 2021. The S.C.O.R.P.I.O.N. unit has seized at least 170 pounds of marijuana.

States can also reclassify a broad range of conduct so that officers must, by default, issue a citation rather than make a custodial arrest. For instance, following the 2015 death of Sandra Bland after her arrest for failure to signal, Texas lawmakers still must act to limit arrests for minor traffic infractions. Even in the absence of action in state capitols, other avenues exist for setting limits and priorities, including ordinances passed by city councils, local citizen initiatives and the adoption of internal police department policies.

In addition to avoiding unnecessary negative interactions with citizens, hotspot policing should be oriented toward creating and nurturing reciprocal relationships with community members. This approach was validated by a 2020 UCLA study of a policing initiative in Los Angeles, which found that when officers cultivated relationships with public housing residents over a period of five years, it led to lower crime and greater mutual trust. Key aspects of the initiative included community engagement forums where officers heard from neighbors, and a “Safe Passage” program that enlisted officers to walk kids to school amid parental concerns about their safety. Similarly, another Los Angeles program, Gang Reduction and Youth Development (GRYD), which provides violent interruption and public health services to youths in high crime areas, has been found to reduce violent crime by 20 percent.

Finally, even a properly limited and appropriately collaborative vision for hotspot policing can be undermined by primitive metrics and inadequate training. A drawback of creating a specific unit such as S.C.O.R.P.I.O.N. for hotspot policing is that it can accentuate the impetus to produce tangible results to justify continued funding. In this case, city leadership had touted outcomes such as the number of arrests and amount of cash seized by S.C.O.R.P.I.O.N. Focusing on such measures not only incentivizes unnecessary arrests, but also ignores the possibility that, if the presence and work of police is effective in deterring crime, fewer arrests could be a sign of that success.

Accordingly, the Council on Criminal Justice’s Violent Crime Working Group found that a better public safety outcome measure is reduced victimization. Just as we should incentivize progress in deterring and solving crimes against persons, we must also track processes such as building relationships and outcomes such as fostering trust. These metrics are harder but not impossible to measure. For example, the Chicago Police Department dashboard tracks the level of confidence in police by neighborhood.

Communities most affected by crime understandably want more policing focused on stopping serious crime, even as members also march against police brutality and its disparate impact on Black Americans. Will the unconscionable killing of Tyre Nichols drive changes that ensure hotspot policing is carried out with tactics that are focused and transparent, enhancing oversight and public trust?

That is up to our policymakers and police agencies. They must set boundaries, build bridges with communities, and take a holistic approach to accountability and training that maximizes the public safety benefits of policing while minimizing its collateral damage.

Marc A. Levin, Esq. is Chief Policy Counsel for the Council on Criminal Justice and can be reached at mlevin@counciloncj.org and on Twitter at @marcalevin. Khalil A. Cumberbatch is Director of Strategic Partnerships at the Council and can be reached at khalil@counciloncj.org and on Twitter at @KhaCumberbatch. Together, they lead the Council’s Centering Justice initiative.