Police say they will 100 percent investigate crimes, irrespective of value. File photo Photo: Glenda Wakeham
A police directive to staff says they will no longer be investigating allegations of shoplifting below $500, petrol drive-offs below $150, and online frauds below $1000 regardless of lines of inquiry as part of a new nationwide directive.
However, there's confusion about the reality of the situation with police conceding the wording of the directive "could have been clearer" but saying police will continue to investigate reports if there are avenues of inquiry to explore.
RNZ has seen a directive that was recently sent to staff relating to police's File Management Centre (FMC) titled 'Assignment Changes - Theft and Fraud'.
The directive said that from 26 March the FMC was applying "nationally standardised value thresholds" when assessing theft and fraud files.
The value thresholds are - general theft $200, petrol drive off $150, shoplifting $500, fraud (paywave, online, scam etc) $1000, and all other fraud $500.
"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 enquiry or IFA score."
The Police instructions relating to Case Management define an IFA score as "a numeric value derived from a series of weighted factors which gives an indication of the solvability of the case, based on the presence or absence of certain key lines of enquiry".
The directive to staff says all files with a line of inquiry and over the value threshold would be assigned to the appropriate district workgroup.
"No further triaging or district rules will be applied by FMC (i.e. no recidivism considerations or CCTV requests)."
RNZ approached police for comment on the directive on Wednesday.
On Friday, Police's National Retail Investigation Support Manager Matt Tierney confirmed police was "standardising" its approach to reports of lower-level crime, "ensuring more consistency nationwide" and freeing up frontline staff to focus on "the most significant incidents and prolific offenders."
"Previously, Districts applied their own thresholds to the management of lower level offences, resulting in inefficiencies and inconsistencies across the country. The standardising follows consultation and feedback from districts looking for more consistent ways to better manage how cases were triaged, and processed."
He said there was no change to the way police assessed and responded to reports of "lower-level crime".
"Police staff across the board consistently triage all reports made to us and assess their priority, in order to determine next steps."
Tierney said that if a 111 call was placed regarding an incident such as shoplifting which had just occurred, and the offender was still there or had only just left, this had always been - and would continue to be prioritised for dispatch by police.
"This means that, pending availability, officers will typically be immediately dispatched. This is regardless of the value of goods taken.
"However, the reality is that police cannot attend every such report right away - but we need people to keep reporting incidents to us, so we continue to have a picture of when and where offending is occurring."
He said the public could be "rest assured" that each report had always been, and would continue to be, assessed on its individual merits.
"Reports through 105, or Auror, where there is clear accompanying evidence to support a potential prosecution - CCTV, for example - will continue to be forwarded to Districts for further follow-up.
"However, if there is no provided or potential further evidence to support a report below a certain threshold, the possible lines of enquiry are limited - meaning that unless further supporting evidence comes to light, no further action can be taken."
Tierney said police knew it was "likely to be frustrating for victims" if police cannot progress their report.
"But we need to ensure that our staff focus on cases where we have potential leads.
"We would continue to urge people to report all offending, no matter how low-level. It is this information that allows us to track patterns, and link offences together - potentially leading to significant prosecutions.
"Police's focus is on holding the most harmful retail offenders to account, meaning those who are undertaking brazen and dangerous retail offending, such as aggravated robbery. Increasingly, various technologies are helping police identify and hold to account more prolific offenders."
Further pressed on the directive by RNZ's Checkpoint, Tierney said the value of the crime did not change the way that police investigate.
Asked what police would do if the offender had left the scene after stealing $450 worth of goods and police were called, Tierney said it depended on the level of evidence available.
He said the examples given in the directive would be "investigated as part of a wider investigation" into offenders when police are "looking at the offender as a whole".
Tierney said the document seen by RNZ was not his document and that it was an internal email sent out by another senior police officer.
Asked if police's position had changed since the directive was sent out, he said it had not.
"But it needs to be read and understood in its entirety. You're focusing on the value that's not the whole entirety of the email."
Asked what the purpose of supplying the dollar values was, he said Checkpoint would have to ask the author of the report.
Tierney said police would be seeking prosecutions on files below the financial levels.
He said the directive had been "taken out of context and possibly misunderstood".
"Police will 100 percent investigate crimes, irrespective of value."
"I can assure the New Zealand public that that person will be prosecuted and put before the courts. There's no change in that at all. Whether they're arrested on site or arrested later after the fact, and it could be, you know, up to a year after the fact, they'll still be held to account for whatever that value is."
He said he had only been made aware of the email after RNZ made inquiries.
"There's multiple 1000s of emails that go through police every day. I'm not privy to all of them, so it's not unusual, but it's good that it has come through, and we can seek clarification and we can explain how we can explain our point."
In response to further questions a police spokesperson said while the wording of the directive RNZ had seen "could have been clearer", it must not be considered in isolation.
"There have been a number of conversations and discussions around getting this to a nationally-consistent place.
"This is more of a back-channel streamlining of initial report assessment - practically speaking, the public can be reassured that if there is something for police to follow-up with, we will do so."
Police Minister Mark Mitchell declined to comment.
Labour police spokeserson Ginny Andersen told RNZ retail crime was "continuing to go up under this government's watch".
"People are already feeling frustrated that when they call the police they don't always get a response. Rather than telling Kiwis that thefts under $200 don't matter, maybe the government should focus more on finding the 500 police officers they promised, but failed to deliver."
Do you know more? Email sam.sherwood@rnz.co.nz.
