Police Directive Halves Retail Crime Investigations, Documents Reveal

Recent documents obtained by RNZ indicate that over 5,000 complaints of shoplifting valued below $500 were not pursued for investigation due to a directive from the New Zealand Police. This directive, which was in effect for an undisclosed period, aimed to implement “nationally standardised value thresholds” for assessing theft and fraud cases.

The directive specifically addressed the operations of the File Management Centre (FMC), outlining precise thresholds for various types of theft and fraud. According to the document, general theft was set at $200, petrol drive-offs at $150, and shoplifting at $500. The thresholds for fraud were even higher, with payWave and online scams set at $1,000 and all other fraud at $500.

Impact on Crime Reporting and Investigations

The implications of this directive are significant. By instructing officers to file cases below these thresholds without regard for additional investigative avenues or potential leads, the police effectively reduced the volume of retail crime investigations. This approach has attracted criticism from various stakeholders, including retailers who argue that it undermines efforts to combat shoplifting and fraud in their businesses.

The police’s guidance stated, “When assessing files with these offences, you will apply the relevant value threshold and file any file under that threshold regardless of any lines of inquiry or IFA score.” This instruction has raised concerns regarding the impact on both retailers and the broader community.

Response from Retailers and Law Enforcement

Retailers across New Zealand have expressed frustration with the reduced capacity for investigations. Many business owners feel that the directive sends a message that certain types of theft are tolerated, potentially emboldening criminals. The lack of police follow-up on these lower-value crimes is seen as detrimental to maintaining public safety and trust.

In contrast, the New Zealand Police have defended the directive as a necessary measure to allocate resources efficiently. A spokesperson noted that the initiative aimed to focus on higher-value crimes, which are more likely to yield significant results in investigations.

While the police maintain that this policy was designed to streamline operations, the fallout from it continues to generate heated discussions among law enforcement, businesses, and the public. The revelations about the directive and its consequences come at a time when retail crime is increasingly under scrutiny, raising questions about the effectiveness of law enforcement strategies in addressing these issues.

As the situation evolves, stakeholders from all sides are closely monitoring the impact of this directive on crime rates and retail security. The future of retail crime investigations in New Zealand may hinge on the ongoing dialogue between law enforcement and the business community as they seek to find common ground in tackling these challenges.