Roger: Did you see the letter by Dan Coffey in the Tribune?
Diana: No. What is it about?
R: Something about a new parking garage being the work of Al Qaeda … or maybe the East Spring Street Neighborhood Association.
D. They’re the pointy-headed progressives, right?
R: ESNA, or Al Qaeda?
D: Yes.
R: Absolutely. I wonder if Coffey actually wrote the letter.
D: Was it coherent?
R: For the most part. It had a narrative, and came to a point.
D: Then it couldn’t have been him.
R: Do you think Steve Price's wife does contract work?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Can someone please post a link to the DOJ guidelines for how many police officers a city our size is supposed to have? I don't doubt that they exist, but I have never been able to locate them.
While you're at it, whomever you are - it would be nice to see the relative crime rates of cities in Indiana, the actual number of police officers we have in relation to the DOJ guidlines, and the official usage statistics of the downtown parking garage. I'm sure some reader has this information on hand.
Was it coherent? I'm still laughing.
This is from the person whose picture was on the CJ website in front of a person with a sign (to the President)
I Suport You!
Spelling his, not mine. Ugh. Coherence and literacy are not popular variables these days.
Wait til your married for 20+ and you will have a different spin on those kind of morning conversations.
Was it coherent? Priceless!
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/cvict.htm
I read, first with amusement, then with genuine concern, the deceptive letter to The Tribune from District 1 Council Member Dan J. Coffey in Sunday’s edition.
With help from my bride, I quickly found the Department of Justice’s Web statistics page, managed by DOJ’s Bureau of Justice Statistics. As Mr. Coffey was brazen enough to try (yet again) to pose as an expert and to (yet again) mislead the public and especially The Tribune’s readership, we both thought it might be instructive to report to you the actual and official numbers on crime in New Albany.
In isolation, of course, crime rates are meaningless. And to any victim and to any community, any crime is undesirable. But when statistics, manufactured or actual, are used by a politician to support goals inimical to the welfare of the public he purports to serve, a challenge is in order.
Coffey chose to compare New Albany with the much larger city of Gary, Indiana. Gary, of course, is part of an enormous metropolitan area that dwarfs our own. It is somewhat notorious among Indiana cities for a high crime rate. Mr. Coffey wrote that our own city’s crime rate is higher than Gary’s.
New Albany(37,080) has 37% of the population reported for the city of Gary (100.065), so while we will report the raw numbers, we will also report the comparative numbers. That is, if New Albany maintained its current rate for various crimes, but actually contained 100,065, we are reporting a calculated number.
Here are the facts for the latest reporting period (2005):
Violent crimes: Gary – 718; New Albany – 166/New Albany adjusted – 447. Thus New Albany’s violent crime rate is 62.4% of that of Gary.
Murder/Non-negligent manslaughter: Gary – 58; New Albany – 0.
Forcible rape: Gary – 70; New Albany – 11/New Albany adjusted – 30, or 42% of that of Gary.
Robbery: Gary – 306; New Albany – 62/New Albany adjusted – 167, or 55% of that of Gary.
Aggravated assault: Gary – 284; New Albany – 93/New Albany adjusted – 250, or 88% of that of Gary.
Property crimes: Gary – 5,310; New Albany – 2,331/New Albany adjusted – 6,290, or 55% of that of Gary.
Note that property crimes (burglary, larceny, etc.) is the only reported statistical category in which New Albany even begins to have a crime rate approaching that of Gary. Anyone who wishes to examine even that category will discover that the only reason our rate exceeds that of Gary is that our larceny numbers are higher. Rates for burglary (home invasion, breaking and entering), the most serious property crimes, are far below Gary’s. Larceny is defined by the DOJ as “the unlawful taking, carrying, leading, or riding away of property from the possession or constructive possession of another. Examples are thefts of bicycles or automobile accessories, shoplifting, pocket-picking, or the stealing of any property or article which is not taken by force and violence or by fraud. Attempted larcenies are included. Embezzlement, confidence games, forgery, worthless checks, etc., are excluded.”
So New Albany has more “reported” petty crime than Gary, Indiana. That could be because the residents of New Albany report more petty crimes. It could be because our police department treats petty crimes more seriously than Gary’s police department.
Does any of what is reported here justify Mr. Coffey’s statements? Or is Mr. Coffey, once again, lying to the public?
Though not easy to navigate, readers can visit
Bureau of Justice Statistics
to compare New Albany's crime statistics with any other city's. I guess Mr. Coffey never imagined someone might actually do so and thus refute his barefaced lies.
Thanks for posting a link to the stats. I've seen that page before and it is easy to find. I wonder why Coffey hasn't seen it.
Any luck with the DOJ guidelines? I couldn't even find that in the Stites law library - and that's saying something - probably that I'm looking in the wrong place.
"I wonder why Coffey hasn't seen it."
Brandon,
What makes you think that he has not seen it?
I have been looking for guidelines for law enforcement to population ratios. The only thing I have found on the Department of Justice website is a link to the FBI website. It looks like those guidelines may be FBI guidelines.
I have run out of time but I did find a report on the FBI site of actual law enforcement ratios for 2006.
The average for Midwestern cities in the same size range as New Albany was 2.1 full-time law enforcement employees including civilian employees per 1,000 population.
At the beginning of the report there was a caution that these were actual numbers not to be mistaken for FBI guidelines.
NAGirl -Thanks.
Iam: I guess I was giving him the benefit of the doubt. Maybe he misinterpreted it.
Post a Comment