The Organization of Criminal Identification Information
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
If you have issues viewing or accessing this file, please contact us at NCJRS.gov. THE ORGANIZATION OF CRIMINAL IDENTIFICATION INFORMATION J. F. Phillips - C. J. Whittaker the distri1:Jution of surnames within the criminal Canadian Police Information Centre Royal Canadian Mounted Police population conform to known distributions of other large non-criminal name files? How is the If it were such that thp, subjects of all criminal surname distribution affected by the individual record files had their'respective file numbers indel distribution? ibly tattooed on the back of their hand then, with To support properly any overall distribution it the exception of a few who would chop their hand was necessary to ascertain whether the distribution off, the identification of criminals and subsequent was stable or was affected by, for example, access to the information repository would not be monthly additions which may alter the structure so a problem. that the distribution when totally formulated only As it happens, the law enforcement community reflects its position and composition for that is not nearly as fortunate and frequently finds month. If these monthly additive influxes sup itself with minimal amounts of information upon ported the overa::! distribution, then it is statistical which it must proceed. ly 'safe' to ilS~·(.lme that the distribution, when Within this framework it is clearly evident that measured, reflects the true picture. one cannot discuss personal attribute information The associated graphs, measured from 1450, organization (data organization) without recourse 4600 and 5100 monthly record additions, reflect a to how that organized information is itself collec stable surname initial letter distribution for the tively organized (file organization). periods April 1948 and 1968 as well as August Data organization refers to the actual arrange· 1968 and individually reflect and equally support a ment of stored data and, file organization refers to total file distribution throughout 2.3 million name the structuring of the arranged data. However, the records. trouble with terminology - as with data - is that Relative to the initial qnestiOli now, the absence meaning is a function of context. Therefore, we of name criminality is reflected in and is evident· can assume an on-line, multi-tasking, transaction from the comparison of the total criminal file dis oriented law enforcement computer system within tribution to a "control" distlibution file of a one which a solution is presented. million individual, 144.5 thousand surname One of the most difficult problems encountered pension file. Group sizes are not contingent upon in the development of the viable law enforcement the surname distribution but on the individual information system is the search for a data and file distribution within each surname initial letter organization technique best suited to the magni group - there may be more surnames whose initial tude and natural distribution of names and asso letter begins with M but there are more individuals ciated index data. The solution so applied must of encompassed by the S-surname initial letter necessity optimize bulk storage utilization while at grouping. the same time not complicating or increasing the If name files and tlleir subsequent accesses were speed of information access. equally distributed across the surname groupings The organization of name-oriented crimir,al and the associated number of individuals involved identification data accepts the premise that an then, any discussions relative to groupings and individual has or employs some family name - a group sizes would be superfluous. surname. Consequently, one course of action is to Further compounding the erratic nature of such organiz.~ relative to these names and accordingly, a file is the fact that computers are not heuristic to organize the supporting name-oriented identifi and as usual rely on a finite algorithmic approach cation data. to problem solving. Like many name systems before, this is precisely Names by definition present a problem! Their what has been done! structure, their use and, their sound are all func Emt-1lIking i111tially upon this tack involved an tions of their environment. Have they been trans examination of the name distribution within the literated? Are they formally documented? Is this a file. Is a name a prerequisite to criminality? Does criminal environment where the individual motiva- 321 tion for identity concealment is high? Was the madly algorithmic and are designed to accommo name in question merely hearsay and represents date name alterations within the following areas: only a phonetic translation? 1. spelling (orthographical); Embedded within any algorithmic approach to 2. sound (phonological); 3. spelling/sound; the name-handling problem should be capabilities 4. structure (morphological); to accommodate the multiplicity and combination 5. substitutions by new and/or linguistically unrelated names of yes/no answers just to the four aforementioned (lexicographical) . situ ati ons. To this end, relative to our own peculiar context As our own experience indicated, one of the and environment, we have developed a phonetical reasons why the Soundex and Soundex-type ver ly iindexed name directory code (FIND) as a solu sions of name codification has been widely tion to the initial problem area. Primary emphasis accepted and employed, primarily in manually in the development of the FIND technique was oriented environments, is not only because they directed towards the solution of problems which provide sound-equivalent classes of proper names were pertinent to categories (1), (2) and (3). but their inherent capabiiities lie within the realm Grouping and subsequent searching relative to the of organizational smoothing which compensates latter two categories for the most part, relies on for the unevenness of name distributions. linguistic subjective intervention. In all of these However, with subjectivity removed as a conse categories there existi sub-groups which involve quence of manual-by-computer replacement, further sound and/or spelling alteration. Until such especially within a criminally-oriented environ time as computers become heuristic, there is very ment, additional emphasis must be placed on the little which can be done to compensate for the codification technique employed to compensate deliberate name abbreviations, combinations and for individual subje<.:tivity inherent within the hybridizations. employment of Soundex-type and code-to-Ietter type algorithmic approaches. By necessity, subjec Within our approach we have deliberately in tive considerations must be algorithmically creased our emphasis towards the first three cate included to compensate for: gories because of tre context within which the names are used. In North America .. it is usually the 1. the de-emphasis of the initial surname letter within the environment which influences the phonological l'~spective name code; 2. excluding the codification of silent, intrusive consonants; and ultimately the orthographic structure of a 3. the problems of the ethnic disparity of names within the name. Usually, names of different ethnic origins overall popUlation; 4. phonetic discontinuities relative to the same name within dif have been transliterated in an anglicized sense and ferent geographic areas, and, 3S such are relatively 'easy' to accommodate. 5. to compensate for, especially in the criminal environment, increased motivation towards identity concealment. However, coupled with the ethnic disparity throughout Canada we have also a bilingual Now, since the name within this structure is the bicultural national complexion. As a result, the key, attempts must be directed toward the inte phonological adjustment of names is not always grated solution of the above considerations within evident. To compensate for this type of phonetic an objective algorithmic technique. Consequently, translation, as well as orthographic transliteration, it was necessary also to try to take advantage of we have included within the structuring of the the ensuing, and as usual, erratic distribution.· FIND technique a mechanism of cross-referencillg. Rather than approaching these two problems - name codification and organization - from a To be more specific and to cite just one particu single-solution standpoint; knowing that something lar letter grouping examine the structure context would suffer, we effected a dual approach with the of 'GH'. It may be silent or have either a K/G or F initial emphasis on name codification. Its solution sound but, the silent sound in one ethnic environ was not to be dependent upon any preconceived ment may become an F-sound in another environ notion of smooth organizations, 'flat' curves or ment. Likewise, the F-sound may be a K or G equal overall distributions. The secondary problem, sound in a different geographical area. as previously stated, was to organize the file and its In Canada, to a French-speaking individual the associated data within the resultant distribution in names GOYER and BARIL regardless of their such a way as to optimize bulk storage and mini origin or ownership are pronounced GOY-AYE and mize file access. BAR-REE whereas to an English-speaking individ Most name-grouping techniques in operation or ual the name may be pronounced as before and as available today, automated or manual, are pd- GOY-ER and BAR-IL. 322 PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL ENTRY VS SURNAME INITIAL APRIL 1948 12 11 1 ~ I 10 - f-- 9 \ 11 -- 8 \ 41 \ --A 7 I - 1~ a,... til _\ 6 J 1 \ I I J~ II \ 5 , ""it ). 4 I rf 11 J II J' J\ , 'I 3 I \ I \ I Jil 1 \ 2 "\ 'I \ l./ 'I \ I 1\ I \ 1 / \ / 'I .\11 \ 'I. \ , ~, j, Ir ."...... ABCDEFGH f J KLMNOPQ RSTUVWXY Z APRIL 1968 12 11 10 1\ t 9 1--- \ I 8 \ 11\ -~ J ~~ _4t lri 7 I 6 1\ J -' \ 5 I 1\ j~ J 11 1£ _\ [\ j 4 \ / II I III 'I ,- 3 \ 1/ \ I \ I 1\ u 2 \ / \ ~~ II .\ J _\ L/: 1\ r II( , / ...... 'I -' II \ L \ 11( 1 /( , ABCDEFGH! J K l M N 0 P Q R 5 T U V W x Y Z AUGUST 12 1968 11 10 f\ \ j 9 '.