"Not Prosecuting Low-Level Crimes Leads To Less Crime In Suffolk County, Research Finds" (Boston: crime)

[sawyer2]

Thoughts?

"New, first-of-its-kind research looking at Suffolk County criminal cases finds that declining to prosecute some low-level offenses can actually lead to less crime.

Researchers from three universities analyzed 67,553 misdemeanor cases in Boston, Winthrop, Revere and Chelsea from 2004 to 2018, which didn't include the tenure of current District Attorney Rachael Rollins. She took office in 2019.

People arrested but not prosecuted on low-level, nonviolent misdemeanors — like shoplifting, drug possession or motor vehicle offenses — were 58% less likely to commit another crime in Suffolk County in the following two years, according to the study."


https://www.wbur.org/news/2021/03/29...suffolk-county

https://commonwealthmagazine.org/cri...equent-arrests


The study report

https://d279m997dpfwgl.cloudfront.ne...n-Report-1.pdf

[BostonBornMassMade]

Duh.

Once you're arrested it increases your chance of getting arrested because it closes doors of opportunity while simultaneously costing you money and puts you around more serious criminals. We've known this for at least a decade now.


Arrest rates went up in the 80s only for homicides to peak in 1991... Incarceration rates went down in the 2000s and crime also went down. Voila.

[mdovell]

It depends. Broken Window Theory can be used here as well. Sometimes larger crimes do stem from smaller crimes.

Marijuana is decriminalized was made into a civil penalty and then legalized and regulated so naturally they would have a significant impact on the study. Just because there is less criminal activity that is only reflected upon actual rest if there are civil fines that won't be reflected within this.

Also keep in mind is in the same time frame that Walmart stopped Prosecuting people for less than $25