Abstract
This paper explores the existing literature on the active detection of crimes using remote sensing technologies. The paper reviews sixty-one studies that use remote sensing to actively detect crime. Considering the serious consequences of misidentifying crimes or sites of crimes (e.g., opening that place and its residents up to potentially needless intrusion, intimidation, surveillance or violence), the authors were surprised to find a lack of rigorous validation of the remote sensing methods utilized in these studies. In some cases, validation was not mentioned, while in others, validation was severely hampered by security issues, rough terrain and weather conditions. The paper also considers the potential hazards of the use of Google Earth to identify crimes and criminals. The paper concludes by considering alternate, “second order” validation techniques that could add vital context and understanding to remotely sensed images in a law enforcement context. With this discussion, the authors seek to initiate a discussion on other potential “second order” validation techniques, as well as on the exponential growth of surveillance in our everyday lives.
Highlights
Criminologists call crimes that have occurred, but that are not recorded or reported, the “dark figure of crime”, and they form a group of important missing statistics in understanding crime
This dark figure exists for two main reasons: victims fail to report crimes, and law enforcement agents are unable to detect crimes
Crime mapping using remote sensing technologies is becoming increasingly quotidian with increasing ease of image access and analysis
Summary
Criminologists call crimes that have occurred, but that are not recorded or reported, the “dark figure of crime”, and they form a group of important missing statistics in understanding crime. Despite the ease with which these data flow to us, validation of our findings based on these images remains critical; competing sensors, processing methodologies and the familiarity of analysts with the limitations of the data they are using can present very real challenges to the ethical and accurate use of remote sensing in law enforcement and/or litigation [13]. While “first order” validation protocols, such as the collection of ground reference data, over flights and the use of higher spectral or spatial resolution images, are critical to assessing the accuracy of remotely sensed processes, they may not always be useful, possible or sufficient in the context of criminal investigations. We propose going beyond the “first order” validation protocols that are standard in remote sensing to ensure accurate assessments of remotely sensed crime are occurring in ethical and contextually-situated ways
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
