ROBBERY m THE STATE CF MwHIGAN, 1972: Awmmm ‘ "‘ Thesis for the Degree of. M. S. MICHIGAN. STATE UNWERSiTY ‘ DAVID BRUCE REED, m, and WILLZAM ROGER WALDROP ; 1973 ‘ ’ ' u Lu um; Wm flu (w M 113m m w; ”1: m u ' J '"d‘ :1? {if _/ ABSTRACT ROBBERY IN THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 1972: A TYPOLOGY BY David Bruce Reed, III, and William Roger Waldrop Although many different types of offenses constitute the crime of robbery, from a well-planned bank robbery to the forceful theft of a quarter from a young school boy, all offenses involve the use or threat of force to take prOperty from an individual. Robbery creates anxiety because it is usually committed by a stranger in an unexpected and poten- tially violent manner. The purpose of this thesis is to determine, through examination of existing Michigan State Police reports of investigation of the crime of robbery for 1972, the character of the crime of robbery, its victim, the offender, and the offender‘s methods of committing the crime. The research was conducted through the analysis of 509 Michigan State Police reports of investigation for 1972. The reports were examined in detail and certain data were extracted as they appeared on a master items of-inventory list. _This list, which was comprised of some 989 items of data, included such major areas of consideration as: general data--type of robbery, when occurred, closed by David Bruce Rood, III, and William Roger WaldrOp arrest, etc; victim(s) of the robbery; object and places of the robbery; offender data-—race, age, descriptions, etc; offender modus operandi; offender apprehension and disposi- tion data. A master compilation of data was tabulated and various findings and correlations were made. Extreme care was taken to maintain individual case integrity throughout the compilation of data. The findings indicate that August is the month in which most robbery offenses were reported to have occurred. Both armed robberies and strong-arm robberies occurred most frequently between the first and the fifth of the month. Strong-arm robberies were also reported at a relatively high rate during the period from the sixteenth to the twentieth of the month. Most robberies occurred on Friday, Saturday, and Monday. The highest rate of armed robberies occurred during the period 10.:01 p.m. and 12:00 p.m., while strong-arm robberies were reported most frequently during the 2:01 a.m. to 4:00 a.m. time period. Analysis of victim data revealed that 70 percent of the offenses were one victim robbery offenses. The race of the victims was reported as 96.7 percent white and 3.1 percent black. Most victims were eighteen to twenty-five years of age. Males were victims of robbery offenses more often than females. Most victims had not had a prior rela— tionship, of even the shortest duration, with the offender David Bruce Reed, III, and William Roger Waldrop prior to the robbery. Initial contact by the offender was with the victim's consent in most cases of strong-arm robbery offenses. The male citizen in an open area was the most fre- quent object of attack of the strong-arm offender. Gas stations, residences, and grocery stores were the most frequent objects of the armed robbery offender. Most robberies were committed by two or more offenders; 94 percent of the offenders were male; most were white. Negroes were involved in armed robberies more than strong-arm robberies. Most offenders of all races were seventeen to twenty-one years of age. Most armed robbery offenders used hand guns to commit the crime. Vehicles were used by offenders in most cases of both types of robbery. The most frequently used disguise or method of concealing the face by the offender was the ski mask and silk stocking over the face. Most offenders robbing a commercial establishment pretended to be a customer or to be shopping prior to committing the crime. Robbery offenders were reported to have entered and exited the front door of a dwelling or business most often. Most armed robbery offenses were committed by offenders with one accomplice. Similarities in the modi Operandi of the various offenders provide meaningful data for analysis of the David Bruce Reed, III, and William Roger Waldrop overall crime of robbery. However, dissimilarities and special methods of operation used by the offender are the most important when the investigator desires to identify subjects for an arrest. ROBBERY IN THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 1972: A TYPOLOGY BY David Bruce Reed, III, and William Roger Waldrop A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE School of Criminal Justice 1973 ,oproved by: ' r “L‘A. C ‘ L .101 I ' Chairman) I g /. /_,//, {ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors wish to express their gratitude and appreciation to the Michigan State Police and more specif- ically to Lieutenant Raymond Coger and Detective Sergeant Darrell POpe of the Licensing and Modus Operandi Section for their direct assistance and support in this study. Without their enthusiastic c00peration and encouragement, this analysis of the crime of robbery in Michigan for 1972 may not have been possible. The authors are especially grateful to Dr. Robert C. Trojanowicz for the expert guidance and assistance he has given us, not only in the preparation of this thesis, but as our faculty advisor throughout this year of graduate studies. Finally and most importantly, it is with deep humility that we acknowledge Michigan State Police Trooper Stephen B. DeVries, who, at the age of thirty-two, was shot and fatally wounded by an armed robber on October 12, 1972. Although we never became acquainted with TrOOper DeVries, we know that his was the ultimate contribution to the cause of justice. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . C O O O O C O O 0 LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . LIST OF FIGURES O O O O O O O O O 0 Chapter 1. 2. 3. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . DEFINITION OF THE PROBLEM . STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . DELIMITATIONS . . . . . . ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY DEFINITION OF TERMS . . . ASSUMPTIONS . . . . . . . REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . GENERAL DATA . . . . . . General Nationwide Data General Michigan Robbery Data . . THE ROBBERY VICTIM . . . THE PLACE AND OBJECT OF THE THE ROBBERY OFFENDER . . The Professional Robber The Opportunist Robber iii ROBBERY Page ii vi viii 10 10 12 l4 14 17 18 19 24 26 27 27 iv Chapter Page The Addict Robber . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 The Alcoholic Robber . . . . . . . . . . 28 THE OFFENDER METHOD OF OPERATIONS . . . . . 29 OFFENDER USE OF FORCE . . . . . . . . . . . 34 4. METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 5. AN ANALYSIS OF ROBBERY, STATE OF MICHIGAN, 1972 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 GENERAL DATA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 STATE POLICE CASE DISPOSITION DATA . . . . 52 THE VICTIM OF THE ROBBERY OFFENSE . . . . . 54 Sex of the Victim . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Race of the Victim . . . . . . . . . . . 56 Age of the Victim . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Victim-Offender Relationship . . . . . . 58 THE PLACE AND OBJECT OF THE ROBBERY . . . . 60 Items Taken . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 Value and Recovery of Items Taken . . . . 63 THE ROBBERY OFFENDER . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Offender Sex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 Offender Race . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 Offender Age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 Offender Height and Weight . . . . . . . 68 Offender Eye Color, Hair Color, Hair Types 0 I O O I O O O O O O O O 0 70 Other Offender Data . . . . . . . . . . . 72 Chapter OFFENDER USE OF WEAPONS . . . . . . OFFENDER USE OF VEHICLES . . . . . OFFENDER MODUS OPERANDI . . . . . . Offender Clothing . . . . . . . . Offender Pretensions . . . . . . Offender Accomplices . . . . . . Offender Methods of Entry and Exit General Offender Trademarks . . . Offender Treatment of Victim(s) Trademarks . . . . . . . . . . 6. GENERALIZATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . GENERAL DATA . . . . . . . . . . . THE VICTIM . . . . . . . . . . . . THE PLACE AND OBJECT OF THE ROBBERY THE OFFENDER . . . . . . . . . . . OFFENDER USE OF FORCE . . . . . . . OFFENDER METHOD OF OPERATIONS . . . 7. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . SUMMARY 0 O O O O O O O O I O O O O CONCLUSIONS--ROBBERY IN THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 1972 o o o o o o o o o BIBLIOGRAPHY O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 APPENDIX Page 73 75 80 80 81 83 84 85 87 90 90 91 92 92 93 94 96 96 100 103 107 Table 10. ll. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. LIST OF TABLES Type of Weapon and Characteristics of Robbery Offenders . . . . . . . . . . Use of Force by Robbery Offenders . . . Reports of Investigation Reviewed . . . Reports of Robbery for Each Month, 1972 Reported Dates of the Month of Robbery Offenses O O O O O I O O O O O I O O 0 Robbery Offenses by Day of Week . . . . Robbery Offenses by Hour of Day . . . . Robbery Offenses--Investigative Status; Michigan State Police Reports Only. Armed RObbery--l 97 2 o o o o o o o o 0 Robbery Offenses--Investigative Status; Michigan State Police Reports Only. Strong-Arm RObbery--1972 o o o o o o 0 Robbery Offenses--Number of Victims Involved in an Offense . . . . . . . . Reported Sex of the Victims . . . . . . Reported Race of the Victims . . . . . . Reported Age of the Victims . . . . . . Victim-Offender Relationship and Witness Data 0 I I O I O I O O I O O O O O O 0 Places and Objects of the Robbery . . . Items Reported to Have Been Taken in the RObbery O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 vi Page 35 37 42 47 48 50 51 52 52 54 55 56 58 59 61 62 Table 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. Reported Estimated Values of Items Taken and Percentage Recovered . . . . . . . Reported Reported Reported Reported Reported Reported Reported Reported Reported Offender Offender Offender Offender Number of Offenders in Offenses Sex of Robbery Offenders . . . Race of Robbery Offenders . . . Age of Robbery Offenders . - . Height of Robbery Offenders . . Weight of Robbery Offenders . . Eye Color of Robbery Offenders Hair Color of Robbery Offenders Hair Type/Style of Offenders . Weapons--Armed Robbery . . . . Use of Weapons . . . . . . . . Vehicles . . . . . . . . . . . Use of Vehicles Involved in the Robbery . . . . . . . . . . . . . Offender Offender ClOthing O O O O I O O O O O Q PretenSions O O O O O O O O O I Offender-Accomplice(s) Data . . . . . . Offender Methods of Entry and Exit of Dwelling or Business . . . . . . . . . General Offender Trademarks . . . . . . Offender Treatment of Victim(s) Trademarks Other Offender Treatment of Victim(s) Tradenlarks O O I O O O O O O O 0 O O 0 vii Page 64 65 66 67 69 68 70 71 71 72 74 76 77 79 81 82 83 84 86 87 88 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page I. Jurisdictional Areas of Responsibility, Michigan State Police Districts . . . . . . 44 viii Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION Anxiety has been created and exists today as the way of life for many of the citizens of this nation. The life- styles of many people have been greatly affected by the amount of crime that occurs in some areas of the country. While many of the leaders of the nation declare progress in combating crime, many people continue to become victims of- ruthless crimes, not only on the streets, but within their homes, places of business, or places of employment. Crime rates continue to increase. Not only are all types of crimes continuing to increase rapidly, but one of the most feared crimes--robbery--is increasing more rapidly than most other kinds. Nationally, the total amount of crime increased 11 percent in 1970; robberies increased 17 percent. Robberies increased another 11 percent in 1971 when compared with 1970. Since 1966, the robbery rate has increased some 145 percent.1 The crime of robbery attacks the individual citizen both physically and financially. Often times the victim is physically injured and suffers a great financial loss. He 1Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. Department of Justice, Uniform Crime Reports for the United States,ll97l (Washington: Government Printing Office, l97l), p. 15. l looks to the criminal justice system to efficiently apprehend and remove the criminal from his environment, so that he may maintain a suitable degree of security of his person and property. Thus, the victim hopes that he will not again be selected and subjected to this crime of violence. Each administrator in the criminal justice system has an obligation to cause his respective agency to make the environment as safe or secure as is possible for the citi- zenry. Eradication of the causes of crime is a hOpeful but distant goal. The process of "crime cause elimination" is and will continue to be somewhat slow; crime and delinquency, however, are immediate and pressing. The urgency of imme- diate action is reflected in widespread public demand for greater safety and security. I The police are looked to by most citizens as the most immediate and responsible agency capable of doing something about the crime of robbery in their community. In order to become more efficient in combating this crime, the police must become more knowledgeable about the crime itself, the offender, and most important, the offender's method of Operation. Although many different types of crimes constitute robbery, from a well-planned bank robbery to the forceful theft of a quarter from a young school boy, all offenses involve the use or threat of force to take property from an individual. Because robbery incorporates two threatening elements, force and theft of property, the offense causes more intense reaction from the public than, for example, simple assault or larceny. It creates anxiety because it is usually committed by a stranger in an unexpected and poten- tially violent manner. Often times the victim feels he was the target of the robber through chance and, of course, the obvious unpredictability of the crime makes it even more threatening. This all makes robbery a particularly approp- riate crime to examine in detail; and the fact that rates of robbery are increasing faster than rates for other serious offenses, except larceny, indicates the need for more detailed studies of the crime. It is not the purpose of this study to examine the causes of robbery, but it is more the purpose of this paper to examine in some detail the overall crime, its victim, and, most importantly, the offender. Additionally, when an in-depth analysis is made of the crime, the police administrator can, with legitimate data, better plan and formulate enforcement programs to more effectively enforce the laws. This is especially true when studies of this nature might reveal to the agency adminis- trator certain shortcomings in present administrative or investigative techniques. An outgrowth of an in-depth analy- sis of a crime such as robbery might also afford improvement in agency efficiency and ability to provide meaningful investigative assistance. For example, a "quick access" modus operandi file, available to subordinate agencies and other law enforcement agencies would be useful. Another important aspect of this particular crime analysis is that it has provided the researchers a unique opportunity to gain first-hand knowledge of all aspects of the crime of robbery as reported by the Michigan State Police in 1972. In the past, changes in total crime rates have been monitored to determine the effectiveness or lack thereof, of particular types and methods of law enforcement. Studies of these total assessments have not yielded viable theories or apprOpriate courses of action which are specific or applic- able enough to develOp or advance greatly our understanding of crime or our confidence in the criminal measures we have develOped. "Knowledge has been blurred by focusing on the similarities of all crimes and criminals rather than their differences."2 Robbery is one of those many crimes which has been subjected to the "grouping and totaling" process. This thesis is intended to offer a more concise examination of the crime of robbery and hopefully will provide greater insight into some of the aspects of this serious offense. 2John E. Conklin, Robbery and the Criminal Justice System (New York: J. B. Lippincott Company, 1972), p. viii. Chapter 2 DEFINITION OF THE PROBLEM Robbery is'a crime against the person; it is also a crime against property. Robbery is defined by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) as "stealing or taking anything of value from the person by force or violence or by putting in fear, such as strong-arm robbery, stickups, armed robbery, assault to rob, and attempt to rob."1 According to published national statistics, this crime of violence continues to increase each year. Yet, even these compilations of rates or statistics of the crime probably understate the actual amounts of the crime. A 1965-66 national survey revealed that 35 percent of the robbery cases were not reported to the police. The national survey on the extent of unreported crime also revealed that the reason most frequently given for all offenses was that the police could not do anything.2 In the state of Michigan, robbery is the most prev— alent crime of violence. In 1969 there was a total of 1Bruce J. Cohen (ed.), Crime in America (Itasca, Illinois: F. E. Peacock Publishers, Inc., 1970I, p. 329. 2President's Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice, Task Force Report: Crime and Its Impact-—An Assessment (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1967), p. 18. 22,880 reported offenses of strong-arm and armed robbery. The total robbery figure in 1970 was 30,758. In 1971 there was a decrease of reported robbery offenses to 29,698. The apparent decrease occurred in reported urban offenses. Rural area offenses have continued to increase at an average annual rate of 23 percent. The total pOpulation of the state in 1970 was 8,875,083 persons. These figures indicate that during the year 1970, one in every 288 persons was the victim of robbery. This may not be totally correct because in many cases there was more than one victim of the same crime. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM The problem of this study is to determine, through examination of.existing State Police reports of investigation of the crime of robbery in the state of Michigan, 1972, the character of the crime of robbery, its victim, the offender, and the offender's methods of committing the crime. ANALYSIS Given the information obtained by examination of State Police robbery reports, it is the intent of this study to answer, among others, the following questions: 3Michigan State Police, State of Michigan, 1971; Uniform Crime Report (East Lansing, Michigan: State PoIiCe Headquarters, 1972), p. 17. 1. How many robberies, armed and strong—arm, were investigated by the Michigan State Police (MSP)? 2. How many cases were closed by arrest? How many cases were open at the end of 1972? How many cases were closed by lack of suspects and evidence? 3. What was the number of victims per crime? Were there more male or female victims and what was their race and age? Did the victim have some kind of consentual rela- tionship with the offender prior to the crime? Were there witnesses? 4. What were the objects and places of the various robberies? 5. How many offenders were involved in the crime? What were the physical characteristics of the offenders? What kind or make and model of vehicle did the offender use? How did he use the vehicle? What types of weapons did offenders use? 6. What was the method of Operation, "modus Oper- andi," of the offender? What did he take in the robbery? What was the value and how much was recovered? 7. What was the disposition of the offender at the end of 1972, or was he or she still in a fugitive status when the case was closed? 'DELIMITATIONS The examination of the Michigan State Police reports of investigation of robbery was undertaken with the aim of a detailed extraction of appropriate information about the crime by assigning code numbers from a master list of encoded items of information to a work sheet on each report. Each report was reviewed against the master list of items of information and apprOpriate code numbers were assigned to each report. If the item of information was not on the report, it was either not recorded or in the appropriate cases it was assigned an "unknown" code number in that par- ticular category of the report. All of the reports of robbery for the year 1972 which were on file at the State Police Headquarters in East Lansing were reviewed by the authors. These were the reports submitted by the subordinate State Police districts to the State Police Headquarters during the year. Eight districts exist in the State Police organization in Michigan and all submitted their reports of investigation of robbery to the headquarters. There was some disparity in report completeness among the various posts within the districts. However, for the most part, the disparity among reports existed primarily within the individual post and among the trOOpers or detectives who conducted the robbery investi- gation. There is no hypothesis, as such, stated in this thesis. The only hypothesis suggested in this paper is that, despite the unpredictability of the robber, the crime of robbery is suitable for study and analysis, and that meaning- ful crime prevention and investigative data may be derived from such a study. It has also been theorized by the authors that the study of the modi operandi and trademarks of robbery offenders presents an interesting dilemma, in that simi- larities identified will provide meaningful data for study of the overall crime, yet it will be the dissimilarities and special characteristics of the offender that will lead to his arrest and eventual conviction. Every effort has been made to examine the total crime with emphasis on the offender's method of Operations. Every effort was made to maintain case integrity for final tabulation on the master worksheet so that correlation could be accomplished. Most importantly, extreme care was taken by both authors to be as completely objective as possible throughout the study and analysis. This paper does not give consideration to those robbery offenses which were part of more serious offenses. A robbery in this instance was included statistically in the more serious offense category. For example, if the robber kills his victim in the act of robbery, the crime would have statistically been counted as a murder and not indicated as a robbery. It is felt that the number of cases 10 in this category is insufficient to affect the findings of the study. ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY This study is undertaken with the recognition that a basic review of pertinent literature is necessary to pro- vide a basis from which to progress logically in the study of the crime of robbery in Michigan for the year 1972. The review of the literature is arranged so that it parallels the primary categories of the analysis. The analysis is comprised of the following major categories: (l)General data--type of robbery, when occurred, closed by arrest, etc; (2) Victim(s) of the robbery; (3) Object/place of the rob- bery; (4) Offender information; (5) Offender vehicle; (6) Offender weapon; (7) Taken in the robbery; and (8) Offender modus Operandi. The analysis is followed by a generalization chapter, which relates the general findings of the analysis to the literature reviewed. Finally, a summary and some con- clusions are offered relative to the overall study. DEFINITION OF TERMS The most commonly used terms are defined in the context in which they are used in this study. 11 Armed robbery: Robbery in which any weapon or object 4 is employed to constitute force or threat. Arrest(s) made, case still open: One or more sub- jects in custody after authorized arrest. Case still open pending court proceedings, other arrest(s), or other dispo- sitions. Assistance by State Police to cityyor county agencies: This includes State Police assistance, for example, in such matters of assistance in robbery investigation as roadblocks or service of warrants. Case closed by arrest: Subject arrested by State Police through warrant authorized by prosecuting attorney. Case is closed after arrest and subsequent court proceedings or other dispositions. Crimes of violence: Four categories of the seven index crimes are included under crimes of violence-~murder, rape, aggravated assault, and robbery. Index crimes: Seven crimes chosen for comprehensive statistical reporting: murder, rape, assault, robbery, burglary, larceny, and car theft. Modus operandi: The method of operation thought to be characteristic of a criminal and habitually followed by him. 4Ibid., p. 7. 12 Robbery: Includes the stealing or taking away of anything of value from a person by force or violence; or through fear, such as strong-arm holdups, stickups, and armed robbery. Includes assault to rob and attempts to 5 rob. Strong-arm robbery: No weapon is used. It includes muggings and similar offenses where no weapon is used and strong—arm tactics are employed to deprive the victim of his prOperty. This is limited to feet, arms, fists, etc.6 Typology: A "purposive, planned selection, abstrac- tion, combination, and (sometimes) accentuation of a set of criteria with empirical referents that serves as a basis for O I D "7 comparison of empirical cases. ASSUMPTIONS The Michigan State Police is both an urban and rural law enforcement agency. The reports which were reviewed included rural, urban, and suburban crimes of robbery. Since this agency does overlap in jurisdictional functioning and responsibility with all other law enforcement agencies of the state, the following basic assumptions are made: 51bid., p. 17. 61bid. 7John C. McKinney, Constructive Typology and Social Theory (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1966), pp. 3, 203. 13 State Police investigations of robbery in 1972 are representative of robbery investigations throughout the state of Michigan. The 509 State Police reports analyzed provide a valid sample for analysis of the crime of robbery in the state of Michigan for the year 1972. Chapter 3 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE The purpose of this chapter is to provide a basis from which the study of the crime of robbery can progress and lead to some valid conclusions and possibly provide some new knowledge about the crime and its perpetrators. Although robbery is recognized as one of the more serious and preva- lent crimes that confronts our society, there is a relatively small amount of useful literature written on the subject. An attempt has been made to deal with the various aspects of the crime in a manner which parallels the treatment given to the analysis of the crime in Chapter 5. GENERAL DATA Armed robbery is distinguished from strong-arm robbery by the presence of a weapon or object which is used to consummate the crime. Strong—arm robbery includes robberies which are committed mainly through the use of bodily force. Robbery, like many other crimes, occurs at a higher rate during certain months of the year. It also tends to vary in rate both as to seasons and times of the day. Ramsey Clark contended, "Violent crimes tend to 14 15 to be more frequent in the summer. Murder, rape, and assault occur most often in July. Robbery, burglary and auto theft occur most frequently in the fall."1 He went on to say that robbery reaches its highest rate in December. He stated, "Robberies nationwide tend to be 30 percent higher than the national average in December and 15 percent lower in April and May."2 Mr. Stephen Schafer of Northeastern University recognized that FBI crime reports suggest that murder follows a seasonal pattern and occurs more frequently in the summer months, except for a high rate in December. However, he differed with Ramsey Clark relative to seasonal patterns when he stated, "Similar patterns can be observed regarding forcible rape and robbery, but without a flare up in winter months"3 [emphasis our own]. Male and female criminals, respectively, commit crimes at different times of the day. Male criminals tend to commit most of their crimes during the hours of darkness, while female criminals are more apt to commit crime during daylight hours. Male criminals commit violent crimes at night three times more often than lRamsey Clark, Crime in America (New York: Simon and Schuster, Inc., 1971), p. 37. 21bid. 3Stephen Schafer, The Victim and His Criminal (New York: Random House, 1968), p. 85. 16 in the daytime. Male criminals commit violent crimes mainly on weekdays.4 Schafer's source of research stemmed from both the criminal cases and the characteristics of Florida's criminal inmate pOpulation from July 1, 1962, to June 30, 1963. His research was limited to those who had been incarcerated for any of the three major violent crimes: criminal homicide; aggravated assault; or theft with violence, including rob- bery.5 Schafer, in his Florida study, made the following major findings relative to the season, to include month; day and time of day; and the criminal conduct of violent crimes: 1. Male criminals commit violent crimes mainly on weekdays and more than twice as frequently as on weekends. 2. Females commit violent crimes mainly on weekends, mostly on Sundays, and least of all on Fridays. 3. Males commit most of their violent crimes in winter (December-February) and in the spring (March-May). 4. Females commit most of their violent crimes in the autumn (September-November). 4Ibid., p. 86. 51bid., p. 57. 17 5. It was found that all age groups prefer the night for violent crimes; but those in age group twenty-one to thirty prefer the night hours for crime more than do other age groups. 6. The highest relative frequency of violent day- light crimes is committed by offenders who are thirty-one to fifty years old. 7. Only slightly less frequent than aggravated assault is the daytime frequency of robbery. 8. At night, robberies and burglaries are the most frequent among violent crimes. 9. In every period of the day, on every day of the week, and in every season of the year, the stranger is most often the victim of the robbery. Schafer speculated that the high incidence of thefts of violence on weekdays might be attributed to the fact that most places of business are open during that period.6 General Nationwide Data Statistics computed for 1967 reveal that on a nationwide basis one robbery takes place every two and one half minutes. In 1967, robbery made up 5 percent of the total crime index and represented about 41 percent of the violent crimes. In 1971, it made up 6 percent of the crime 61bidol pp. 87-88. 18 index and represented 48 percent of the crimes of violence. The heaviest volume of robbery occurred in the north central states (31 percent of the total). Between 1960 and 1967, robbery increased 88 percent in volume. From 1966 to 1971, robbery increased in volume 145 percent. In 1967, the clearance rate was 30 percent, while in 1971 the nation's law enforcement agencies were successful in solving 27 per- cent of the crimes of robbery. Robbery rates in larger cities were nine times as great in 1967 as in the suburban areas. In 1971, robbery rates in the larger cities were nine times greater than the rates in the suburban areas.7 General Michigan Robbery Data A total of 29,698 robberies was reported by law enforcement agencies in Michigan in 1971. Of that number, 19,324 were armed robberies and 10,374 were strong-arm. A total of 4,591 of the state's reported robbery offenses was cleared by arrest. Of a total of 4,822 arrests for this offense, 1,277 involved juveniles under the age of seventeen. One hundred fifty of these were females. Of the 29,698 robberies reported in 1971, some 28,401 were classified as . . . 8 urban area crimes, while 1,297 were rural area crimes. 7Cohen, Op. cit., p. 335; and U.S. Uniform Crime Reports, 1971, op. cit., p. 15. 8Michigan Uniform Crime Report, 1971, op. cit., pp. 10-108. 19 In 1972, 26,182 robberies were reported to Michigan law enforcement agencies; 8,212 were strong—arm robberies and 17,970 were armed robberies. Armed robbery arrests in 1972, on a statewide basis, were made of 3,363 offenders; 1,381 strong-arm robber offenders were arrested.9 THE ROBBERY VICTIM The study of any crime, especially a crime of vio- >lence, should include at least a cursory consideration of the victim of the crime. A study of criminal-victim relationships might point out the need for recognizing the role of the vic- tim and his responsibility in the crime. The crime of robbery often times includes more than one victim. Schafer contended, ". . . The victim has a major part to play in the search for a criminal justice and a functional solution to the problem."10 He further stated, "An immense volume of information has been accumulated about crime, but we have little knowledge about the criminal and even less about the victim and his connec- 11 tion to the crime and criminal." In reviewing the Task Force Report: Crime and Its Impact--An Assessment, little was found that directly focuses 9As stated by Detective Sergeant Darrell Pope, Michigan State Police, telephone conversation, May 18, 1973. loSchafer, Op. cit., p. 5. llIbid., p. 6. 20 on the robbery victim. The national statistics in the report dealt mainly with the crime of homicide and the victim- offender relationship. It was noted that for all index crimes, to include robbery, the risks for victimization are concentrated in the lower income levels and the risks decrease steadily at higher income levels. Victim rates per 100,000 population were indicated as 58 white victims as compared to 204 nonwhite victims. The rates for victimization shown for index offenses against men are almost three times as great as those for women. The victimization rate for women is highest in the twenty to twenty-nine age group. The concen- tration of robbery offenses against women in this age group is also particularly noteworthy. The age group twenty to twenty—nine was also the highest rate age group for male robbery victims. The next highest robbery victim rate was 12 “in the forty to forty-nine age group. Wolfgang and Cohen, in their book Crime and Race, also reviewed the findings shown in the Task Force Report mentioned above. They indicated a reluctance to accept the validity of the assumption that since statistics indicate that blacks attack, rob, and assault others more than do whites, most people tend to anticipate and fear attacks by blacks. They surmised that there is too little data about 12Task Force Report: Crime and Its Impact--An Assessment, op. cit., p. 80. 21 the race of the victim as related to the race of the offender. They attributed this problem to the lack of a systematic nationwide collection of criminal statistics that encompass the victim-offender relationship. Wolfgang and Cohen cited a Chicago victim study by Albert J. Reiss, Jr., which explored victim-offender relationships for crimes of rape, robbery, and assault. They noted that a white woman's risk of being attacked by a black is less than half that of being victimized by a white. They concluded that a white woman is more likely to be victimized by another white woman than by a black woman, and a black woman is more likely to be victimized by a black woman than by a white man or woman. Similarly, white and black men are both more likely to be victims of their own race than of another race.13 Wolfgang and Cohen found the above results consistent with André Normandeau's study of 1,722 cases of robbery that occurred in Philadelphia between 1960 and 1966. Normandeau reported that 76 percent of the robberies were intraracial: in 63 percent blacks robbed blacks, and in 13 percent whites robbed whites.l4 3Marvin E. Wolfgang and Bernard Cohen, Crime and Race, Conceptions and Misconceptions (New York: Institute of Human Relations Press, 1970): PP. 49-50. l4André Normandeau, "Trends and Patterns in Crimes of Robbery" (unpublished dissertation, University of Penn- sylvania, 1968), cited by Marvin E. Wolfgang and Bernard Cohen, Ibid., p. 50. 22 Wolfgang and Cohen summarized some major findings about victims and offenders in the crimes of violence as follows: 1. Whites are less likely than blacks to be victims of major violent crimes. An individual black or white has most to fear from persons of his own race. Both men and women are most likely to be victimized by men of their own race. White women are least likely to be victims of major violent crimes, but black women run a risk greater than do white men. Among the few crimes that cross racial lines Negro men are the most likely offenders. In cases of robbery, whites are most likely to be victimized by Negroes. Negro men are the most likely victims in cases of robbery and major assaults with a dangerous weapon resulting in injury. Negroes figure most frequently in major crimes against the person, both as victims and as offenders. Wolfgang and Cohen provided a mostly "black and white" treatment of victimology. They did not discuss other races in the victim-offender relationship in the crime of robbery or major crimes of violence. It was difficult to determine their exact meaning of the term "major crimes of violence." They concluded with a discussion of victim self-protection. This treatment is especially useful information for the police administrator to use in general and crime prevention planning. They stated: Because Negroes are the victims of murder, rape, robbery and assault much more often than whites, we might expect them to be more concerned with 15Wolfgang and Cohen, op. cit., p. 51. 23 self—protection. The survey [Washington, D.C., 1966] found this true for black women, but not for black men. While 67 percent of Negro women had high self- protection scores, only 33 percent of the Negro men did so (compared to 65 percent for white women and 50 percent for white men). In general, according to the survey, Negro women are most influenced by theirl6 perceptions and fears of crime than any other group. Morton Hunt, a free-lance writer who specializes in behavioral science, and most particularly in psychology, has written a book entitled The Mugging. In it he dealt with victimology in a very practical way, with particular emphasis on the victims of muggings. Hunt attributed predisposition of victims to attack to several factors. Although every city dweller is potentially a mugging victim, some are far more predisposed to become victims than others. Those per- sons on the streets or sidewalks late at night are three times as likely to be victimized. The elderly are more likely to become victims because they are too slow-moving and less capable of strong resistance. Those persons living in working-class or middle-class neighborhoods are more prone to be victims since the decay of the urban areas has pushed crimes more toward suburbia. Hunt contended that almost half of all robberies are interracial, the victims being whites and the offenders Negroes (or, in some cities, Puerto Ricans) who are total strangers to them. "Non-white muggers most often choose white strangers as their victims not only to 16Ibid., p. 52. 24 avoid being recognized and caught, but because such peOple, by and large, are more likely than non-whites to have a fair amount of cash on them. . . ."17 Muggings are classified as strong-arm robberies in Michigan State Police reporting and statistical compilations of crimes. THE PLACE AND OBJECT OF THE ROBBERY In discussing this particular aspect of the crime of robbery, consideration is given mostly to the place of the robbery. For example, a bank will be the object of the robbery, while the teller is considered to be the victim. A male or female on the street or in a parking lot might be both the victim and the object of the armed robbery or strong-arm robbery. .In the latter example, the object of the robbery might be categorized as a citizen female or male, indicating that they were both the object and the victim of the robbery. The President's Commission on Law Enforcement treated this aspect of a crime as the "place where the victim- ization occurs." That treatment tends to put the most empha- sis on the victim rather than on the intended objective of the offender; for example, a gas station. The Task Force Report: Crime and Its Impact--An Assessment revealed that on the national level in 1965, 7Morton Hunt, The Mugging (New York: Atheneum, 1972), pp. 6-7. 25 9 percent of all robberies were of service stations or chain stores, almost 1 percent were of banks, and more than 20 percent were of other types of commercial establishments. Further, among the organizations that were robbed, 80 per- cent reported only one robbery but 2 percent had as many as five. Also in 1965, based on reports from 646 cities with a total pOpulation of 75,400,000, the following types of robberies occurred by the percentages indicated: Highway (street) 51.4% Commercial house 20.2% Gas or service station 5.9% Chain store 2.7% Residence 9.1% Bank .9% Miscellaneous 9.9%18 The 1971 Uniform Crime Reports indicated that during the period from 1966 to 1971 robbery of banks increased 122 percent. During this same period, gas or service sta- tion holdups increased 73 percent, chain store robberies 220 percent, street robberies 151 percent, robberies in residences 167 percent, and holdups of other commercial or business establishments rose 121 percent. There was no distinction made between the objects of strong-arm and armed robbery.19 John E. Conklin made a rather thorough study of rob- bery in the city of Boston during the period from 1964 to 18Task Force Report: Crime and Its Impact--An Assessment, op. cit., pp. 14, 83. 19 U.S. Uniform Crime Reports, 1971, 0p. cit., p. 15. 26 1968. His findings showed that during that period street robbery, purse snatching, and residential robbery increased almost 2 percent. Commercial robberies during the same per- iod declined 3.1 percent. He assumed this decrease was due to a general decline in the population of Boston during this period, which seemed to indicate a reduction in the commer- cial enterprise targets.20 THE ROBBERY OFFENDER In the state of Michigan in 1971, 4,822 arrests were made for the crime of robbery. Of that total, 1,277 involved juveniles under the age of 17; 150 of the total arrested were females. The age group seventeen to twenty-one accounted for 1,933 arrests and was the age group which had the most arrests. Of the total arrests in 1971 (4,822), 1,358 sub- jects were white and 3,424 were black.21 Since the focus here is the robbery offender and how he accomplishes the crime, a typology of robbery inci— dents is of less use than a typology of offenders. Robberies that are similar in appearance are sometimes committed by quite different types of offenders. Additionally, robbery is the only crime of those crimes defined as violent by the FBI which is committed most frequently by a stranger. 20Conklin, Op. cit., p. 41. 21Michigan Uniform Crime Report, 1971, op. cit., pp. 17, 26-270 27 Conklin developed a typology of offenders based on interviews with sixty-seven inmates of Massachusetts prisons who were serving time for robberies committed in Boston between January 1, 1968, and June 30, 1970. All inmates wereadult males, and three-fifths of them were blacks. He classified the robbery offenders in several categories: The Professional Robber He exhibits a long-term, deep commitment to robbery as a means of getting money and carries out his holdups with skill and planning. Conklin stated, "Although the pub— lic may see him as typical of robbery offenders, he is grad- ually being replaced in their mind by the third type of offender. . . the drug-using offender."22 The Opportunist Robber Conklin labeled the opportunist robber as the most common type. The opportunist rarely manifests a long-term commitment to robbery. He usually selects targets which net him small amounts of money, often less than $20. Targets are chosen for their accessibility and vulnerability, rather than the amount of money they can provide. Favored victims include elderly ladies with purses, drunks, cab drivers, and people who walk alone on dark streets. According to Conklin's estimate, professional robbers tend to be white, in their 22Conklin, Op. cit., p. 63. 28 mid-twenties, and from middle- or working-class backgrounds, while Opportunists are usually black, in their teens or early twenties, and from lower-class families. The Addict Robber This category includes both heroin addicts and other regular users of drugs whose crimes are related to the use of drugs. Their level of commitment to robbery, according to Conklin, is quite low, although their commitment to theft is high. Conklin revealed that drug-using robbery offenders engage in less planning than professionals prior to their crimes, but plan more than Opportunists. The addict robber is more susceptible to arrest because he is more careless in choosing his targets due to the desperation he often exper- iences to gain funds to support his habit. Conklin concluded, "While the professional usually employs a firearm and the Opportunist commonly carries no weapon at all, the addict robber may or may not carry a weapon."23 The Alcoholic Robber The alcoholic robber has no commitment to robbery as a way of life, nor has be any commitment to theft as a way to get money. Conklin deduced that the alcoholic robber does not plan his crime in advance. He normally does not employ . 24 weapons, unless he normally carries one. 23Ibid., p. 72. 24Ibid., p. 76. 29 Conklin's four types of robbers vary in terms of commitment to crime, plans made to carry out the crime, and reasons for committing the crime. THE OFFENDER METHOD OF OPERATIONS The "modus Operandi" of the robber denotes his method of Operations. Some investigative agencies endeavor to maintain comprehensive modus Operandi files to assist in identifying the crime as one committed by a known criminal or as one of a series committed by an unidentified criminal. According to William Dienstein, the success of the use of the modus Operandi system depends to a large degree on the ability of investigating officers to discover and report methods and facts essential to proper classification of the crime in the file and the operator of the file and his ability to classify data and search for data already available. He contended that the place and method of attack identify the known criminal, and that the modus operandi system is a useful tool in identifying a crime as having been committed by a known criminal. Dienstein stated, "If the methods of operation used in the commission of an offense have been skillfully classified, it should be possible to select every offense committed by the same criminal."25 25William Dienstein, Techniques for the Crime Inves- tigator (Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas, 1952), pp. 62-63. 3O Dienstein further asserted that holdup men fall into many classifications. Some Operate only against service stations, others against grocery stores, liquor stores, older men, the handicapped, women, etc. Some will display a knife, others a blunt instrument, others a gun. "The modus operandi of the robber is extremely important for each sticks to his own method. What a holdup man will say to his victim may be the key to his identity."26 Dienstein most likely was asserting his facts based on studies of arrest success in relation to the use of the modus Operandi file. However, evidence was not present to show that a statement such as the one above, "Each robber sticks to his own method," is in fact valid. Probably a more just treatment of the matter would be that mp§p_or pgpy_robbers continue to employ their own methods in subsequent robberies. Jerome Skolnick addressed the modus operandi concept in relation to the policeman's disposition to stereotype offenders by their race. He used the modus operandi concept as an example of how police are called on in many aspects of their work to make "hunch judgments” based on loose corre- lations. He stated, . . . The concept of modus Operandi is nothing more than a technique for drawing defeasible analogies between one criminal pattern and another. In effect it is a stereotype, probably right more than wrong, which may not be claiming much. Similarly, ethnic stereotypes 261bid., p. 76. 31 like the modus operandi of criminal, become part of the armory of investigation. The methodological approach of many robbers is prob- ably best illustrated by a notebook belonging to a convicted robber, E. H. W., Jr., who was a Caucasian and forty-six years of age. His notebook contained, among other items, the Psychology of Robbery. Some of the information in the notebook was stated as follows: uawrd I. THE ROBBER Feels reluctant to perform a mean act on another innocent person. It is more natural to want to per- form a friendly act. Dislikes to be an object of curiosity in the eyes of onlookers. It is more natural to act in a manner which will be considered normal and respectable. Fears the possibility of some form of reprisal since such danger always exists. The sum of the above feelings produces a reluctance to act on his part. It is the natural law against robbery. , Each successful robbery produces the elation of victory as well as material reward. A well executed attack produces respect and compli- ance by the victim and also tends to delay any possible reaction from witnesses. He is self reliant since no training or advice is available. Prior experience is totally lacking in effect. III. EXECUTION Casually drive past, note activity. Park, await routine police patrol, if feasible. Drive to parking spot and get out and walk to selected loitering point. Note potential observers. Get into the mood. York: 7Jerome H. Skolnick, Justice Without Trial (New John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1966), p. 83. 32 4. Enter and walk around before taking single item to register. 5. Execute and depart per plan. Note observer action if any. IV. HAZARDS AND OTHER FACTORS Loitering gives an observer time to get suspicious. Look casual in dress and demeanor. Tape 3 left fingers. Change jackets in the car while driving or remove same. Put on glasses or cap, sit low. 5. Leave bags and other things somewhere near escape area. 6. Parking spot should hide license number, color and, if possible the make and model of the car. 7. Initial getaway should have 1 or 2 confusing turns. 8. Avoid possible police road block. 9. Consider probable directions of approach of the police. 10. Armed employees, or manager will keep gun generally in three different places. Beware of person in adjacent room.28 autumn—1 The above information was apparently of vital impor- tance to a convicted armed robber, and is enlightening in that it does indicate his methodical approach to the crime of robbery. Although the information in the notebook may have lacked depth, it did consider three important phases of a robbery: approach, confrontation, and escape. Perhaps these three phases could be the major classification used to identify and classify appropriate items of information in establishing a modus Operandi on the crime and the criminal. 28E. H. W., Jr., "A Notebook," unpublished, pages unnumbered, cited by Robert G. May in "Violence in Armed Robbery: The Relationship of Consanguinity and Other Var- iables" (unpublished thesis, Michigan State University, 1970), PP. 34-35. 33 Most sources of information on the subject of modus operandi seem to dwell principally on the criminal. It may be necessary at the onset of an investigation to place most emphasis on the modus operandi of the crime which has taken place, especially when there are unknown or partially des- cribed suspects. Comparison of similar crimes might reveal slight or obvious similarities in the way the crime was committed. HOpefully, suspects will be identified and, through correlation, related to the crime of particular investigative interest. Richard L. HOlcomb indirectly approached the opera- tive habits of the armed robber when he outlined for possible victims of robbery methods and actions by which to protect themselves, lower the loss, and increase their ability to assist in the apprehension of the felon. Some of his con- clusions and characterizations of the armed robber were: 1. They are always dangerous. 2. They do not stop to consider the consequence of their acts. 3. Many are not normal mentally. 4. The circumstances of every robbery will be different. 5. Three types of armed robbers: amateurs, pro— fessionals, mentals. 34 While Holcomb‘s treatment of armed robbery is mostly crime prevention or victim oriented in nature, it does outline for the potential victim or organization some common patterns of behavior of the armed robber.29 OFFENDER USE OF FORCE In his 1964 to 1968 Boston study, Conklin also dealt with the use of force in robbery. Table 1 indicates a sum— marization of his findings of the relationships between choice of weapon and the age, race, and number of offenders involved in the robberies. The information shown was based on information given to investigating officers by the rob- bery victims. It is apparent that in both 1964 and 1968 juveniles were much more likely to rob without any weapon than were adults, and that adults were much more likely than juveniles to use firearms. Table 1 also reveals that in both years black offenders were more apt to commit unarmed robberies than whites; and that whites were more likely to employ weapons, especially firearms, when they robbed. Conklin attributed this difference to the fact that black robbers are generally younger than white ones, and younger offenders are more apt to rob while unarmed. Conklin con- tended that the difference in the use of weapons is largely 29Richard L. Holcomb, Armed Robbery (Iowa City, Iowa: Bureau of Public Affairs, 1949), pp. 1-44. 35 .mod .6 .Amkma ..ou puoocflmqu .m "xnow szv Emumwm moflpmSh HOCHEHHO may pawlwumnnom .cfiaxcoo .m GLOW "mousom .mmmmusmoumm mm @mmmmnmxm mum mquEsc Had "muoz ham mam mam mma 5mm mma mom mma mam Hem om av HOQESQ Hmuoe m.m m.n H.0H h.ma m.m m.ma o.oa h.n m.m o.aa n.m o.o mcommm3 umnwo n.5m a.mm 0.5m m.nm m.vm e.av m.om 0.5H «.mm m.mm m.m m.m Eummuflm m.ma m.om m.oa m.om a.ma m.aa H.Hm p.mm w.ma a.mm n.mH m.ma mmflcm H.6v o.ov «.mm m.mm m.mm N.¢m «.mv a.mv o.mm a.mm o.mh 5.05 commoB oz moma «mad mama vmma moma voma mmma vmma mmma vmma mwma vmma mumpcmmmo Hmpcmmmo commoB muoE no on mmufinz mxomam mpaspd mmaflcm>5h mo mmxe 038 O mumpcmwmo huwnflom mo mOHumflHmuomnmno USO commmz mo mama .H OHQOB 36 attributable to the nature of the offenders and the types of robberies they commit.30 The number of offenders involved in the robbery also relates to the use of a weapon. Conklin stated, "Robbers who commit crimes in groups of two or more are somewhat less likely to use a weapon than are robbers who operate alone."31 He contended that since blacks rob in groups more often than whites, the pattern of theft by groups is also related to the differences shown in Table l of the use of weapons by blacks and whites. The offender who operates alone is more apt to use firearms or other weapons than are groups. Conklin attrib- uted this to the need for security that an accomplice could .provide if there was one. He concluded that there are four functions served by weapons to the robber: (1) buffer zone between the offender and the victim, (2) intimidation of the victim, (3) to make good a threat, and (4) to insure escape from the scene of the robbery.32 Physical force used by the robber was also discussed by Conklin. He reported his Boston study findings relative to physical force as shown in Table 2. These findings were based on material collected from police reports. According 30Conklin, op. cit., pp. 105-106. 3lIbid., p. 107. 32 Ibid., pp. 107-111. 37 to Conklin's Boston study, the proportion of all incidents involving actual force declined from 52 percent in 1964 to 46 percent in 1968. Specifically, the decline occurred in the category of offenses in which victims were beaten, punched, or struck with weapons by offenders. Conklin asserted that one possible explanation for this decline is that wider use of weapons effectively raised levels of intimidation, making victims less inclined to risk actual violence by resisting.33 Table 2. Use of Force by Robbery Offenders Force used by offender 1964 1968 .No force used 40.2 47.3 Victim made to lie down or removed from scene 7.8 6.6 Shoved, pushed, or knocked to ground 27.0 27.3 Beat, punched, or hit with a weapon 20.5 14.0 Cut, stabbed, or shot with a weapon 4.5 4.7 Total number 396 847 Note: All numbers are expressed as percentages. Source: John E. Conklin, Robbery and the Criminal Justice System (New York: J. B. Lippincott Co., 1972), . 113. 33Ibid., p. 112. 38 The Uniform Crime Reports! 1971 did not deal with the use of weapons for any crime other than for the crime of murder. Schafer's Florida investigation of criminal—victim relationships as a crime factor indicated that in the vio- lent crimes, homicide, aggravated assault, burglary, and robbery, the gun is used most often, followed by cutting and stabbing, and then by other methods. He went on in some detail about the day of the week and time of the day in which certain types of weapons or degrees of force are used. The gun is used in most cases during any period of the day and on any day of the week. Blunt objects are used minimally during evening hours. Most barehanded violent crimes occur in the daytime. Schafer held that cutting and stabbing instruments are used mainly on weekdays and on Saturdays during the weekend. He further asserted that the gun is used more than other weapons during every season of the year, but is used most frequently in the summer and winter months. Barehanded crimes seem to occur mostly in the autumn. Finally, Schafer concluded, ". . . The correla— tion of criminal methods and instruments to different seasons is not well understood."34 34Schafer, op. cit., pp. 99-100. Chapter 4 METHODOLOGY The purpose of this study is to examine the crime of robbery in the state of Michigan as it was reported to and investigated by the Michigan State Police during 1972. Further, it is the intent of this study to analyze the crime, its victims, and the perpetrators, through the review and collection of information from all Michigan State Police reports of investigation for 1972, and through detailed analysis to determine how the robberies were com— mitted. It is anticipated that this study could also pro- vide a basis for a comprehensive "modus operandi" file which would aid all police agencies in the state to more effi- ciently and effectively combat the crime of robbery. The analysis is based on the study of 509 State Police reports of investigation of robbery. The authors reviewed these reports as objectively as possible. Prior to initiation of the analysis, several planning meetings took place during which a complete list of items to be inven- toried on each report was designed. Certain rules of objectivity and interpretation were also agreed upon. The list of items used to inventory each report is shown in the Appendix. This list, which was comprised of 989 items, 39 40 included such major areas of consideration as: l. 10. General Information: Classification of the report (robbery, armed or robbery, strong—arm), month-date—day and hour of the offense. Victim Data: Number of victims, sex, race, age, consentual relationship with the attacker, wit- nesses, etc. Object of the Attack: Residence, gas station, grocery store, citizen male, female, etc. Suspect/Offender Data: Number of suspects/ offenders each report, sex, race, age, and physical descriptions. Suspect/Offender Vehicle Involved in the Crime: Make, model, body style, and color. Weapon(s) Used by Suspect/Offender: Knife, fire- arm, caliber, etc. Modus Operandi: Wears, pretends to be, asks for, weapon use, vehicle use, accomplice(s), other trademarks. What Taken: Money, checks, wallet, firearms, etc.; value of loss and percentage of recovery. Method of Apprehension: For example, all points bulletin, preliminary or follow-up investigation, hot pursuit, etc. Offender Disposition: For example, charge dropped, confinement one year, not guilty by 41 court, victim declines to make sworn complaint. Findings relative to offender apprehension and disposition are not included as major categories in the study. A worksheet was made on each of the 509 reports, encoding the applicable information. The average time taken to review each report was thirty to forty minutes. Table 3 indicates a recapitulation of cases analyzed. There was a necessity to categorize reports according to jurisdiction or agency responsibility and by the type of robbery. The cate- gories used are as follows: 1. Armed robbery, State Police primary investi- gative agency. 2. Strong-arm robbery, State Police primary inves— tigative agency. 3. Armed robbery, State Police assistance to a city or county agency. 4. Strong-arm robbery, State Police assistance to a city or county agency. The encoded worksheets for each report were posted to a master worksheet on which each case was recorded according to its category and appropriate items of informa- tion. The master compilation of data was then tabulated and various findings and correlations were made. The time devoted to the posting of 509 individual cases to the master worksheet was approximately 160 man hours. This, 42 coupled with the time used to encode each case (thirty to forty minutes), may indicate the need for computerization of robbery offense information. The amount of man hours needed to accomplish a thorough examination of the offenses might be more expensive over a long period of time than the use of computers to retain an essential data base. Table 3. Reports of Investigation Reviewed Total reports of investigation examined 593 Reports unfounded, or otherwise not apprOpriate for analysis 84 Total reports of investigation analyzed 509 — Armed robbery investigated by Mich. State Police 249 Armed robbery MSP asst. to other police agencies 129 Total armed robberies analyzed 378 Strong-arm robbery investigated by Michigan State Police 112 Strong-arm robbery MSP asst. to other 19 police agencies ___. Total strong-arm robberies analyzed 131 Total robberies analyzed 509 All tables are expressed as times of occurrences unless otherwise indicated. Also, the number of cases con- sidered to find the indicated data is shown at the bottom of the table. The use of tables was considered to be the most practical method for displaying the data found in the analyses. 43 Finally, a brief description of the organization of the Michigan State Police is appropriate. A map which indi- cates the jurisdictional or geographical responsibility of each of the State Police districts is shown in Figure 1. There are eight districts in the state. The total robberies, armed and strong-arm, examined in each of the districts is as follows: District Armed Strong-arm l 55 12 2 104 30 3 110 34 4 37 10 5 39 24 6 15 10 7 10 5 8 8 6 Cases in which the State Police assisted other agen- cies were analyzed only as to date and time data, victim information, object and place of the robbery information, and offender information relative to sex, race, and age. Many of the assist to other agency reports did not include sufficient information for further detailed analyses. 44 Figure l.--Jurisdictional Areas of Responsibility, Michigan State Police Districts. Chapter 5 AN ANALYSIS OF ROBBERY, STATE OF MICHIGAN, 1972 This analysis is made with the intent of providing an in-depth examination of the crime of robbery in Michigan. The 509 Michigan State Police reports of investigation which were reviewed in detail were found to contain sufficient data to provide a somewhat detailed data base. As was indicated in Table 3, page 42, 509 reports were analyzed, of which 249 were ones in which the State Police had primary investigative responsibility. Strong-arm robberies in which complaints had been made directly to the State Police num- bered 112. Unfounded reports in each of these categories were not examined in detail. Reports were also analyzed in which the State Police assisted city police agencies in ninety-six armed robbery cases and sixteen strong-arm rob- bery cases. They assisted county police agencies in thirty- three armed robberies and three strong-arm robbery cases. These assist cases were also analyzed. When applicable, the tables will indicate "MSP Only" as reports in which the complaint had been made directly to the State Police by the victims or witnesses. "MSP Ass't" reports are indicative of reports resulting from 46 47 a request from city and county police agencies to the State Police for assistance in investigating a crime of robbery. GENERAL DATA Table 4 outlines the total cases of robbery which were reported to the State Police in each of the months of 1972. The variances in the number of incidents that occurred can best be recognized in the "Total All Robbery" column. Table 4. Reports of Robbery for Each Month, 1972 Armed Strong-arm Total MSP MSP MSP MSP all Month only asst. Total only asst. Total robbery Jan 26 14 4O 7 2 9 49 Feb 16 10 26 14 l 15 41 Mar 15 8 23b 4 2 6 29b Apr 16 13 29 3 2 5b 34 May 20 8 28 10 O 10 38 Jun 20 ll 31 10 l 11 42 Jul 20 14 34 14 3 17a 51 Aug 30 11 41a 14 1 15 56a Sep 21 9 3O 12 5 17a 47 Oct 20 3 23 9 1 10 33 Nov 25 12 37 11 0 11 48 Dec 20 11 31 4 1 5b 36 Unknown/ not rep't 0 5 5 0 0 O 5 aHighest rate. b Lowest rate. Note: Numbers indicate occurrences in all 509 reports analyzed. 48 The most offenses occurred in the month of August, while the fewest robberies were reported to have occurred in March. Armed robbery appeared to be most frequent during the summer months and the month of January. Strong—arm robbery offenses occurred most frequently in the months of July, August, and September. February was also a high-rate month for strong-arm robberies. An examination of the number of offenses reported by the date of the month reveals the findings shown in Table 5. Table 5. Reported Dates of the Month of Robbery Offenses 1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 25-31 Armed--MSP 43 40 34 37 52 43 Armed--MSP Ass't ‘ 27 17 16 22 16 25 Total armed 70 57 50 59 68 68 Strong-arm--MSP 23 18 17 22 17 15 Strong-arm-- MSP ass't _3 _£_ _3, __ _i __ Total strong—arm 29 l9 19 26 21 17 Total armed and strong-arm 99 76 69 85 89 85 (19.7%) (15.1%) (13.7%) 06.9%) (17.7%) (16.9%) It appears that robberies reached their lowest rate in the middle of the month, while the first days and the period let-25th of the month accounted for 37 percent of 49 the cases in which the date was reported. Strong—arm rob— beries were reported to occur at the lowest rate during the last six days of the month. A possible explanation for the high rate reported during the period 21-25 day of the month is that at least two days of that period were on a weekend during eight months of 1972. At least two days of the period 1-5 day of the month were on a weekend during four months of 1972. All categories of the crime of robbery—~armed and strong-arm—-were also studied to determine the day of the week on which the robbery offenses were reported to have taken place. As revealed in Table 6, it was found that the armed robbery rate was highest on Fridays and Saturdays. Strong-arm robberies occurred mostly on Fridays, Saturdays, and Tuesdays. The lowest day-rate for both types of robbery appeared to be Sundays. Forty—six percent of the reported offenses occurred on weekends (Friday through Sunday), while 54 percent occurred Monday through Thursday. It was also interesting that while the highest rate of armed robberies was on Saturdays, the highest rate of strong—arm robberies was on Fridays. 50 Table 6. Robbery Offenses by Day of Week Mon Tue Wed Thur Fri Sat Sun Armed--MSP 41 29 36 38 40 47 18 Armed--MSP ass't 19 14 17 15 22 21 15 Total armed 6U. 43 53 53 62' 68 33 Strong arm-~MSP 14 19 10 14 24 17 14 Strong—arm--MSP A l 4 1 l 4 5 3 ass t Total strong-arm 15 23 ll 15 28 22 17 Total armed and strong-arm 75 66 64 68 90 90 50 (15%) (13%) (13%) (13%) (18%) (18%) (10%) The hour of the day in which the crime of robbery occurred was examined relative to the number of crimes reported. Table 7 indicates the number of armed and strong- arm robberies reported during the twenty-four hour period. Most armed robberies appeared to occur during the 6:01 p.m. to 4:00 a.m. period. The rate of strong-arm robberies increases sharply after 4:00 p.m. and remains relatively high, reaching a peak during the period 2:01 a.m.-4:00 a.m. Of the reported times of occurrence of armed robberies, 65 percent took place during hours of darkness--8:01 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.; 59 percent of the strong—arm robberies occurred during that same period of time. The highest rate of armed robberies occurred during the period 10:01 p.m.-12:00 p.m. 51 Table 7. Robbery Offenses by Hour of Day Armed Strong-arm MSP MSP MSP MSP only ass't Total only ass't Total 12:01- 2 a.m. 23 18 41 13 V 2 15 2:01— 4 a.m. 22 13 35 18 4 22a 4:01- 6 a.m. 9 9 18 3 l 4 6:01- 8 a.m. 2 5 7b 0 0 ob 8:01-10 a.m. 9 1 10 l 0 l 10:01-12 a.m. 6 9 15 4 o 4 12:01- 2 p.m. 12 5 17 6 2 8 2:01— 4 p.m. 14 6 20 8 0 8 4:01- 6 p.m. 16 4 20 12 3 15 6:01- 8 p.m. 22 11 33 16 2 18 8:01-10 p.m. 45 16 61 16 3 19 10:01-12 p.m. 53 22 75a 15 2 17 Time unknown/ not reported 16 10 26 0 0 0 aHighest rate b Lowest rate Note: Numbers indicate occurrences in all 509 reports analyzed. 52 STATE POLICE CASE DISPOSITION DATA All of the reports of investigation that were solely State Police reports and not assistance to other agencies were analyzed to determine the reported disposition or classification of the case as of 31 December, 1972. Tables 8 and 9 summarize this information on armed and strong—arm cases, respectively. Table 8. Robbery Offenses--Investigative Status; Michigan State Police Reports Only. Armed Robbery-—l972 Closed by arrest 54 Investigation open--arrest(s) made 21 Investigation open--no arrest(s) 67 Investigation closed--1ack of evidence/suspect 98 Investigation closed-—request of victim 9 Total armed robberies——MSP 249 Table 9. Robbery Offenses--Investigative Status; Michigan State Police Reports Only. Strong-Arm Robbery--l972 Closed by arrest 22 Investigation Open-—arrest(s) made 3 Investigation open--no arrest(s) 10 Investigation closed--lack of evidence/suspect 66 Investigation closed--request of victim 11 Total strong-arm robberies--MSP p H N It was noted that many of the cases that were closed due to lack of suspects or evidence were closed due to poor suSpect descriptions by victims and witnesses. The research 53 revealed also that in most cases little or no physical evi- dence could be detected at the scene of the robbery. Of the 249 armed robbery cases considered, only 22 reports indicated that identifiable fingerprints were discovered at the scene. One case indicated that an offender's note was recovered. A spent slug or shell casing was recovered from two armed robbery scenes. It was apparent that no usable evidence was found at the scene in 67 percent of the cases of armed robbery and 60 percent of the strong- arm robbery cases. Offenders were apprehended in various ways. The "all points bulletin" accounted for the arrest of eighteen armed offenders and six strong-arm offenders. The victim, according to the reports, did not apprehend any offenders. Non-police personnel were reported to have apprehended two armed robbery offenders. Police in "hot pursuit" appre- hended twelve armed robbers and two strong-arm offenders. In 1971, the Michigan State Police received 261 complaints of armed robbery, of which 24 were closed by arrest; strong-arm robbery complaints numbered 127, of which 19 were reported to be closed by arrest. Unfounded reports are included in the above total complaints for 1971. No attempt has been made in this study to affect the findings by comparing the Michigan State Police robbery investiga- tion rates of 1971 with those of 1972. The above 1971 data are provided for information only. 54 THE VICTIM OF THE ROBBERY OFFENSE The study of the robbery victim included research to discover whether the individual crime involved single or multiple victims, the victim's sex, race, age, and his rela- tionship with the offender prior to the offense. Also, the presence or absence of witnesses to the Offense was deter- mined during this portion of the study. Table 10 indicates the number of cases in which there was one victim, two or more victims, or whether the victim data were unknown or not reported. Many of the assistance to other agency reports did not include complete victim data. Table 10. Robbery Offenses--Number of Victims Involved in an Offense Two or more Victim data One victim . . Victims per unknown/not offense offense reported Armed--MSP 170 (70%) 73 (30%) 6 Armed--MSP ass't 45 13 71 Total armed 215 86 77 Strong-arm—-MSP 97 (88%) 13 (12%) 2 Strong-arm--MSP ass't l4 0 5 Total strong-arm 111 13 7 Total armed and strong-arm 326 99 84 (77%) (23%) 55 Seventy percent of the State Police reports of armed robbery were one-victim offenses, while 88 percent of the State Police strong-arm robberies were one victim offenses. A detailed analysis of the State Police (MSP ass't) victim information is not offered here since many of the cases had unknown victim data. Sex of the Victim Table 11 outlines the sex of the victims of both armed and strong-arm robberies. A total of 588 persons reported to be victims were considered in this portion of the study. One out of 3.72 victims of armed robbery was a female. One out of every 4.93 victims of strong—arm robberies was a female. A larger percentage of males were victims of strong-arm robberies than of armed robberies. Table 11. Reported Sex of the Victims Male victims Female victims Armed--MSP 244 122 Armed--MSP ass't 60 19 Total armed 304 (68%) 141 (32%) Strong-arm--MSP 103 26 Strong-arm--MSP ass't ll 3 Total strong-arm 114 (80%) 29 (20%) Total armed and strong-arm 418 170 (71%) (29%) 56 Race of the Victim The races of the victims of the reported robberies are indicated in Table 12. Note that the race of 142 of the victims of armed and strong-arm was unknown. The State Police complaint report used for robberies does not require the police officer to indicate the race of the victim. How- ever, in most cases the race of the victim was indicated, thereby providing sufficient victim-race information for analysis. Table 12. Reported Race of the Victims Caucas Negro Mex Orient Ind Unk Armed--MSP 274 9 l 0 2 80 Armed--MSP ass't 48 l 0 0 0 30 Total armed 322 10 1 0 2 110 Strong-arm--MSP 97 2 l O 2 27 Strong-arm-—MSP ass't 7 2 0 0 0 5 Total strong-arm 104 4 l 0 2 32 Total armed and strong-arm 426 14 2 0 4 142 (95.7%) (3.1%) (.4%) (0%) (.8%) Of the total reported races of victims of armed robbery, 96 percent were white or Caucasian and 3 percent were Negro. A possible explanation for the wide contrast in these two rates might be that the State Police organization 57 is in fact more suburban or rural oriented in its juris- dictional responsibilities than had been thought. Yet, later when an analysis of the race of the offenders is revealed this explanation may not seem as valid as might be expected. The comparative dissimilarity between the rates for black and white victims of strong-arm robbery is also noteworthy. Caucasian victims accounted for 94 percent of the strong-arm robbery victims, while only 3 percent of the victims were Negroes. It is also interesting that so few Mexican-Americans and American Indians were victims of the crime of robbery. The Indian victims were reported, for the most part, by the Michigan Upper Peninsula State Police district. Further, correlation of the black victims with the race of their offenders revealed that three of the fourteen black victims were the victims of white offenders. One was the victim of Mexican-American offenders. The remainder (ten) were the victims of other blacks. Age of the Victim Table 13 indicates the ages of the victims of rob- beries. For total robberies, the age group 18-25 appeared to be the age group which applied to most of the reported victims. The victims who were reported to be 51 years of age or older were the next highest age category reported 58 as victims of the crime. Again, there were quite a few cases in which the age of the victim was not reported or victim data were unknown. The number of victims under 18 years of age was proportionately higher for strong-arm robberies than armed robberies. The lowest number of vic- tims of armed robberies was age group 18 or under, while the lowest number of victims of strong-arm robberies was reported in the age group 26-35 years of age. E1 Table 13. Reported Age of the Victims Under 18-25 26-35 36-50 51 yrs Age 18 yrs yrs yrs yrs or more Unk *7 Armed--MSP 26 105 43 42 59 91 Armed--MSP ass't 6 12 7 10 3 41 Total armed 32 117 50 52 62 132 Strong-arm--MSP 23 28 18 22 26 12 Strong-arm-- MSP ass't .3 .1” .1 .1. .1 .1 Total strong-arm 26 29 19 23 3O 16 Total armed and strong-arm 58 146 69 75 92 148 (13%) (33%) (16%) (17%) (21%) Victim-Offender Relationship An attempt was made to analyze each of the cases which resulted from complaints made by victims or witnesses directly to a State Police post to determine to some extent 59 the victim-offender relationship. Table 14 summarizes these findings and also indicates whether there were witnesses to the crime. Table 14. Victim-Offender Relationship and Witness Data Armed Strong-arm Prior relationship: yes 17% 32% no 83% 68% Initial contact with victim's consent: yes 47% 55% no 53% 45% Witnesses to the offense: yes 29% 22% no 71% 78% Note: MSP ass't to other agencies not included in compu- tations. It appears that in both types of robbery and in most cases there was not a prior relationship. For purposes of the analysis, prior relationship was determined to have existed if the offender had been a relative, friend, acquaint- ance, or had been associated with the victim prior to the actual crime taking place. For example, if a man walked in and robbed the victim with no previous association, prior relationship was indicated as pp, If the man had been drink- ing in a bar with the offender(s), prior relationship was 60 indicated as yep. There is some overlap of prior relation- ship with the next category, "initial contact with victim's consent." For example, if the offender came in the grocery store or gas station and engaged the victim in conversa- tion and under some pretension established an initial con— sentual relationship with the victim, ygg was indicated as applying to that circumstance. It was found that in 47 per- cent of the armed robbery cases which indicated a relation- Fa ship there was some kind of consentual relationship between i the victim and the offender. Initial contact was with the victim's consent in strong—arm robberies more often than ”PM“ .1. not. Witnesses were present in 29 percent of the armed robbery cases. This correlates closely to the State Police arrest rate. Arrests were made in 30 percent of the armed robbery cases. THE PLACE AND OBJECT OF THE ROBBERY The places and objects of armed and strong-arm robberies as reported by the State Police are indicated in Table 15. As might be suspected, the male and female citizen on the street or in an Open area was most often the victim of strong-arm robbery. The gas station was the object of armed robbers in sixty-five cases. Male citizens, grocery stores, and other commercial establishments were 61 most often the places or objects of the armed robber. Citizens, male or female, were considered as objects of the robbery only when they were out in the open on a street or in a parking lot, etc. Victims were present at the place of the robbery, but they are not accounted for in this table. Table 15. Places and Objects of the Robbery Armed Strong-arm Total Citizen--male 49 77 126 Citizen--female 18 19 37 Residences 49 13 62 Hitchhikers 17 10 27 Vehicles 29 9 38 Gas stations 65 2 67 Grocery stores 49 4 53 Bars 18 0 18 Banks 16 0 16 Other commercial estab. 54 0 54 Object not reported: 11 Note: Numbers indicate occurrences in all 509 reports analyzed. Items Taken Table 16 indicates the items reported to have been taken in the robberies. These figures include only items 62 Table 16. Items Reported to Have Been Taken in the Robbery Item Armed Strong-arm Money 196 78 Checks 13 Credit cards Purses Wallets 34 18 Securities 0 Binoculars, cameras 0 Firearms 3 Stereo components/radios 21 l Televisions 5 1 Jewelry 13 3 Watches 13 4 Foodstuffs and household goods 7 3 Clothing 7 4 Narcotics 3 0 Musical instruments 3 0 Furs 0 l Cigarettes 3 2 Auto/truck ll 5 Sporting goods 2 0 Nothing taken 32 9 Note: Numbers indicate times of occurrence in 361 cases. Data included from "State Police only" reports. 63 reported to have been taken in cases in which the complaint was made directly to the State Police by the victim or witness. The figures do not include State Police assistance to other agencies. As might be expected, money was taken most often in both types of robbery. There did not seem to be any correlation between the race or number of offenders in each case with what was taken. It appeared that except for robberies of commercial establishments, the offender(s) took everything which was considered to be of value. In most robberies of commercial establishments, the offender took money from the cash register. However, in some cases victims were searched and wallets with money were taken. Nothing was taken in thirty-two cases of armed robbery and nine cases of strong-arm robbery. These cases were classi- fied as "attempted robberies" by the Michigan State Police. Value and Recovery of Items Taken The value of items taken, which was often estimated by the victim for inclusion in the reports, is indicated in Table 17. Also, the percentage of property recovered is indicated for each type of robbery. These figures are all expressed as number of cases applicable to each category. It appears that strong-arm robbers got less-valuable items than armed robbers. However, the recovery rate seemed to be prOportionately higher for strong-arm robberies. 64 Table 17. Reported Estimated Values of Items Taken and Percentage Recovered Armed Strong—arm Value $ 50 or less 52 51 $ 50 to $100 35 10 $ 100 to $500 65 23 $ 500 to $1000 11 0 $1000 or more 23 5 Unknown or not reported 31 14 Recovered None recovered 165 77 25% or less 1 l 26% to 50% 3 l 51% to 75% 2 0 76% to 99% 8 6 All recovered 18 11 Unknown or not reported 20 7 Nothing taken/ unsuccessful attempt 32 9 Note: sex, race, age, hair color and type, height, weight, and Robbery offenders were physically characterized by eye color. of cases in which one offender had perpetrated the crime. Likewise, it was interesting to note that most cases had two or more offenders. THE ROBBERY OFFENDER It was also important to determine the number Numbers indicate times of occurrence in 361 cases. Data included from "State Police only" reports. Table 18 summarizes the number of 65 offender(s) for each type of robbery. Other offender/ accomplice information is provided later in the offender trademarks discussion. Table 18. Reported Number of Offenders in Offenses Lone Two or more Unknown robber robbers subject(s) Armed—-MSP 79 163 7 Armed--MSP ass't 47 74 _8 Total armed 126 237 15 Strong-arm--MSP 29 75 8 Strong-arm--MSP ass't 3 l4 2 Total strong-arm 32 89 10 Total armed and strong-arm 158 326 25 (33%) (67%) All of the offender physical information which has been analyzed and that will be offered here is based on victim/witness descriptions to the police and police des- criptions of arrested offenders. There is no distinction made here between the descriptions of arrested'subjects and victim/witness described offenders. Offender Sex Table 19 summarizes the offender sex data of both types of robbery. These figures, as indicated, also 66 include assistance to other agency case data. Ninety—six percent of the armed robbery offenders were reported to be males; 89 percent of the strong-arm robbery offenders were indicated to be male offenders. Of the strong—arm robbery offenders, 11 percent were female, while 4 percent of the reported armed robbery offenders were females. Table 19. Reported Sex of Robbery Offenders my Male Female Unknown subjects subjects subject(s) Armed--MSP 524 f 20 7 Armed-—MSP ass‘t 206 ll 8 y Total armed 730 (96%) 31 (4%) 15 Strong-arm--MSP 216 25 8 Strong-arm--MSP ass't 42 6 2 Total strong-arm 258 (89%) 31 (11%) 10 Total armed and strong-arm 988 62 25 (94%) (6%) Offender Race Offender race was reported as indicated in Table 20. There were more Caucasian offenders than Negro offenders in both types of robbery. Negro offenders were involved dis- proportionately more in armed robberies than strong-arm robberies. Comparison of the number of Negro offenders in 67 all robberies with the number of reported Negro victims shown earlier in Table 12 is also important. Table 20. Reported Race of Robbery Offenders Other/ Cau Negro Mex Orient Ind Unknown Armed—-MSP 276 221 10 2 3 32 Armed--MSP ass't 98 102 _6 9 0 11 Total armed 374 323 16 2 3 43 Strong-arm--MSP 145 52 13 0 10 21 St:::?;arm"msp 16 23 3 o o 6 Total strong-arm 161 75 16 0 10 27 Total armed and strong-arm 535 398 32 2 13 70 (51%) (38%) (3%) (0%) (1%) (7%) Note: Numbers indicate descriptions by victim/witnesses or arresting police. In an earlier explanation of the low Negro victim rate, the State Police rural and suburban responsibility was offered as a possible reason for the disparity between the number of reported white and black victims. If that explan- ation is valid, then many Negro offenders apparently travel to the suburban and rural areas to commit the crime of robbery. An additional explanation for the low Negro victim rate may be that many of the black victims may not report the offense to the police or at least not to the State Police. 68 Offender Age Table 21 outlines the findings of research conducted to determine the ages of the reported offenders. It appears that the age group 17-21 accounted for the most offenders, while the lowest number were 51 or over. The 22-25 age group was also indicated as the age group of many offenders. The numbers on Table 21 indicate the number of offenders reported to be in each age group. (See page 69.) Offender Height and Weight The heights and weights of the described offenders are indicated in Tables 22 and 23. The findings indicate that persons 5'10"-6'1" were most often involved in the crime of robbery. The strong-arm robber tends to be heavier than the armed robber (161-170 lbs.). The highest number of armed offenders weighed 151-160 lbs. Table 22. Reported Height of Robbery Offenders. Under 5'2"- 5'7"- 5'10"- 6'2" 5'2" 5'6" 5'9" 6'1" and over Unk Armed robbery 3 46 123 178 38 156 Strong-arm robbery 4 17 35 57 8 120 Total 7 63 158 235 46 276 Note: Numbers indicate times of occurrence in 361 cases. Data included from "State Police only" reports. 69 mam m ma mm mm mm cam oam mm sumumcouum . can UmEum Hmuoa as a HH m m ma me me em 8661660666 H6809 mm m 4m: m m MI MI MI «I a.mmm mmzuusumamcouum km a m h m we mm mm mm mmzuusumumqouum mmm a m MA on so mva emu mm pmsum amuoe Hm m m m1 MI mm. mm mm m 8.666 mmzuupmsna mma a 6 OH «H em oaa mod mm mmzuupmsua xcc OHOE Ho mum mum mum mum mum muw mum ma mm< mum Hm omuae ovuwm mmuam omumm mmumm amuse amps: mumccmmmo humanom «0 mod omuuommm .HN magma 70 Table 23. Reported Weight of Robbery Offenders Armed Strong-arm Weight robbery robbery . Total 100 lbs. or less 1 2 3 101-110 lbs. 8 l 9 111-120 lbs. 8 6 14 121-130 lbs. 17 4 21 131-140 lbs. 32 5 37 141-150 lbs. 39 15 54 151-160 lbs. 50a 10 60a 161-170 lbs. 32 18a 50 I. 171-180 lbs. 37 12 49 1 181-190 lbs. 23 6 29 191-200 lbs. 11 7 18 201-210 lbs. 3 3 6 211-220 lbs. 3 l 4 221-230 lbs. 1 l 2 231-240 lbs. 1 l 2 Over 241 lbs. 3 l 4 Weight unknown 275 148 423 ~ aIndicates highest weights. Note: Numbers indicate times of occurrence in 361 cases. Data included from "State Police only" reports. Offenderque Color, Hair Color, Hair Types Information extracted from the reports of investi- gation relative to offender eye color, hair color, and hair types is shown in Tables 24, 25, and 26, respectively. Much of this information was unknown or not reported, yet most of the known data on these three tables came from police arrest data or victims and witnesses who had the time or opportunity to observe the offender closely. 71 Table 24. Reported Eye Color of Robbery Offenders Black Blue Brown Gray Hazel Green Unk Armed robbery . l 44 127 l 17 3 351 Strong-arm robbery 1 19 34 l 6 6 174 Total 2 63 161 2 23 9 525 Note: Numbers indicate times of occurrence in 361 cases. Data included from "State Police only" reports. Table 25. Reported Hair Color of Robbery Offenders >1 6 S a§ .2 .8888...” 388 rd 0 O DOOM°UHQA4 AH 34 HH>1H4J0£$JG m m m AQDOQM3¢CD Armed robbery 181 29 113 13 0 l 3 5 0 0 199 Strong-arm robbery 46 26 6O 5 O 0 0 0 0 0 104 Total 227 55 173 18 0 l 3 5 0 0 303 Note: Numbers indicate times of occurrence in 361 cases. Data included from "State Police only" reports. 72 Table 26. Reported Hair Type/Style of Offenders \ p v m H :3 C‘. C: m o 'H 3 m >: «H >1 ~l'CS O '0 .C) 3H H O ‘20) >1 0‘ G H - a: 00 H H HO > C: .54 m +J s ~H.G : 44 .ca) :6 o Q m D-o an UV) U 41 BM 3 s—‘l D Armed robbery 0 8 2 26 4 54 2 51 396 StrOng-arm robbery 0 3 0 0 3 l 1 37 190 Total 0 ll 2 26 7 60 2 3 88 586 Note: Numbers indicate times of occurrence in 361 cases. Data included from "State Police only" reports. As indicated in the above tables, most offenders had brown or blue eyes, and black or brown hair. The Afro hair style appeared to be the style of many offenders, while most offenders were reported to have long hair. This infor- mation does not reveal any astonishing findings, since the eye colors, hair color, and hair styles found to be most common among offenders are quite common for the general pOpulation. However, the findings do provide some insight into offender physical characteristics. Other Offender Data Further research of reports of which complaints had been made directly to the State Police revealed other infor- mation about robbery offenders. There were very few incidents 4... 1...": , V -fu-R an: 73 of sexual activity associated with the crime of robbery. The offender had some kind of sexual relationship with the victim in only four instances. Attempts were made on four occasions either to kiss, fondle, or caress the Victim(s). Other noted observations relative to both armed and strong- arm robbery offenders were as follows: Narcotic users -- 27 offenders Homosexual —- l offender Ex-convict -- 6 offenders Parolee -- 7 Offenders Had been drinking -- 15 offenders Incessant talker —- 3 offenders The offender was posing as a hitchhiker in fifteen armed and strong-arm robberies reported directly to the State Police by the complainant. Of the offenders who were arrested, 119 were reported as having submitted to arrest without resistance. .One offender was noted to have resisted arrest with a firearm. Offenders who chose to run or fight upon arrest were sixteen in number. OFFENDER USE OF WEAPONS An attempt was made to identify the various weapons used in the crime of armed robbery. The range of weapons used varied from the index finger of a man holding up a 74 pizza delivery man from behind, to a sawed—off double-barrel shotgun used to rob an elderly couple in their home. The number of times respective types of weapons were used and, if applicable, their reported caliber or gauge, is shown in Table 27. Table 27. Offender Weapons--Armed Robbery Miscellaneous Weapons TE Blackjack -- l Switchblade -— 11 i ” Bottle/can opener -- 1 Other knives' -- 21 : Club, bat or stick -- 3 Missile, brick, etc. -- l i Butcher knife -- 5 Tire iron -- 4 . Pocket knife -- 10 Unknown object —- l6 3 Firearms E-' Automatic, Blue Steel (BS) -- 30 Revolver, B.S., Automatic, Nickel or Chrome -- 3 Long Barrel -- 19 Revolver, B.S. -- 33 Revolver, Nickel, Revolver, B.S., Snub -- 28 Chrome -- 14 Revolver, other -- l Pistol, no desc. -- 57 Rifle -— 7 Rifle, sawed-off v -— 2 Shotgun, single barrel —— 8 Single barrel, Shotgun, double barrel —- 2 sawed—off —- 9 Shotgun, no description -- 2 Double barrel, sawed-off -— 3 Calibers of weapons used: .22 cal. -- 22 .45 cal. —— 4 .25 cal. -- 8 .12 gauge -— 8 .32 cal. -- 3 .16 gauge -- l .38 cal. -- 28 .410 gauge —- 5 Other cal. Unknown cal. or gauge -- 6 or gauge —- 67 Note: Numbers indicate times of occurrence in 249 cases. Data include "State Police only" reports. 75 The pistol appeared to be the weapon most fre- quently used by the offender(s). Of the firearms utilized in the robbery cases studied, 85 percent were handguns. Shotguns also seemed to be quite popular. The sawed-off shotgun and the snub-nose revolver were also frequently used. The .38 and .22 caliber pistols and the .12 and .410 gauge shotguns were the type and size of firearms most frequently used to commit the crime. All types of knives were used by the offenders. They were used by some forty- seven offenders. Table 28 indicates how the weapon(s) were used by the offenders. Note that in most instances there was little hesitation on the part of the offender to show the weapon to the victim and point it at him. This information is important, in that it is part of the modus operandi of the offender. The low numbers indicated in the table are as important as the large ones in determining the modus oper- andi of the crime and the offender. (See page 76.) OFFENDER USE OF VEHICLES Vehicles were used in the perpetration of the rob- bery in most cases. Table 29 outlines the type, model, and color of the vehicles used by offenders. (See page 77.) Table 28. Offender Use of Weapons 76 Number of times used Held in right hand Held in left hand Covered in cloth, newspaper, etc. From bag/box From belt From holster Keeps in pocket or belt Keeps hand in pocket Racks or cocks weapon Shown to victim Points weapon at victim Multiple weapons Lays on counter Indicates presence of weapon, but does not show 13 11 194 184 22 23 Note: Numbers indicate times of occurrence in 249 cases. Data include "State Police only" reports. 77 Table 29. Offender Vehicles Armed Strong-arm No vehicle 77 (31%) 40 (36%) One vehicle 167 (67%) 67 (60%) Two or more vehicles 5 (2%) __5 (4%) Total 249 cases 112 cases Vehicle description Vehicle involved, no desc. 67 21 Michigan license plates 50 13 Out-of-state license plates 6 4 Fe Chrysler—made autos l4 2 Ford-made autos ‘ 31 ll ' GM-made autos: 'Chevrolet 21 11 Pontiac 15 3 . Oldsmobile 9 3 ; Buick/Cadillac 7 4 5 Independent: Nash l l 3! Foreign: Volkswagon 4 2 1- others 4 2 “ Trucks 4 6 Model of vehicles: 1964 and older 18 11 1965 to 1969 38 14 1970 to 1973 24 4 Body style: Camper/van 6 l Sedan, 2 door 37 7 Sedan, 4 door 13 8 Convertible 6 2 Station wagon 4 l . . Bottom/ Bottom/ Vehicle colors. $22. solid TOE, solid Black 27 5 6 5 Blue 3 28 0 12 Green 3 11 l 10 Red-maroon 0 13 0 9 White 5 l7 5 4 Gray 0 3 0 l Brown-tan 0 15 0 2 Yellow 1 l4 0 1 Gold 0 3 0 l Note: Numbers indicate the times of occurrence in 361 cases. Data include "State Police only" reports. 78 A greater percentage of strong—arm robberies was committed without vehicles than armed robberies. This relates to the large number of citizens on the street or in the open being the victims of the strong—arm robber. Two or more vehicles were used in relatively few cases of both types of robbery. "General Motorsémade" vehicles were used in most instances, while Ford and Chrysler products were second and third in preference. The most prevalent descrip— tion offered of body style and color was a two-door sedan that had a black top and a blue bottom or was solid blue. This was the case in both types of robbery. Some uses that the offenders made of their auto— mobiles as well as the victim's automobile are indicated in Table 30. This, too, is modus operandi information that might be useful to the investigating officer in investi— gating the crime of robbery. Note the number of offenders that escaped in an auto. The figures indicated for each type of robbery are proportionately similar, except in the "follows victim's auto" category, where more strong—arm offenders used that technique than armed robbers. It is also noteworthy that the victim was forced to accompany or drive in several instances of both types of robbery. Again, the low numbers indicate dissimilarities that may assist the investigator in identifying suspects. _ .. f . , 1 lim- 79 Table 30. Offender Use of Vehicles Involved in the Robbery Armed Strong-arm Offender: Abandons get-away vehicle 8 1 Covers license plates 4 l Escapes in auto 145 52 Uses stolen auto 6 1 Uses stolen plates 1 0 Attacks victim parking or in parking lot 10 6 Disables victim's auto 3 5 Drives off in victim's auto 17 3 Follows victim's auto 3 7 Forces victim to accompany or drive 28 14 Hides in victim's auto 2 0 Jumps into victim's auto 9 7 Locks victim in trunk or attempts 4 0 Forces victim to lie or sit on floor of auto 2 l Note: Numbers indicate the times of occurrence in 361 cases. Data include "State Police only" reports. 80 OFFENDER MODUS OPERANDI In addition to the modus operandi information dis— cussed relative to offender weapons and vehicles, certain other data relative to the offender's trademarks or modus Operandi were extracted from the "State Police only" reports. The assistance to other agency reports in many cases did not provide sufficient information for analysis. All tables relative to trademarks contain data from "State Police only" reports. All numbers in the tables indicate the number of instances in which the trademark was detected during the analysis of the reports of armed and strong-arm robbery. Offender Clothing A wide range of types of clothing was worn mainly by armed robbers. Strong-arm robbers, for the most part, did not appear to try to take precautions against later identification by changing their appearance prior to the crime. Table 31 summarizes the findings relative to the offender's clothing and dress. Numerous offenders used ski masks and silk stockings to conceal their identity. Several bank robbery offenders wore trench coats during the commission of the crime. Sev- eral offenders wore sun glasses over a ski mask. .-.--_ -.___— - IV Qm’ . 81 Table 31. Offender Clothing Armed Strong-arm Cap, baseball, etc. 33 1 Ski mask/stocking cap 34 0 Hood 7 0 Cloth over face 0 Facial makeup/mask/disguise 3 0 Paper bag over head 0 Silk stocking over face 16 0 if} Gloves 20 0 [ J Sun glasses 9 0 1 Regular glasses 6 3 I Flashy clothing 9 2 ‘ Trench coat 7 1 in Note: Numbers indicate the times of occurrence in 361 cases. Offender Pretensions Many of the offenders did not merely walk in to a business and commit the crime. They normally would pretend to be shopping or to be a customer who was there for a legitimate purpose. It was noted that several were recog- nized to have been in the place of business, for example a grocery store, on a previous day or earlier in the day of the robbery. Table 32 outlines some of the pretensions used by offenders. 82 Table 32. Offender Pretensions Armed Strong-arm Offender pretends to be: Shopping/customer 99 4 Seeking directions or assistance 16 6 Family friend 9 3 Drunk l 0 t Injured, hurt, dead 1 0 i1 Seeking friend or relative 3 0 1 Utility man 1 0 Police officer 1 0 5 Utility man 1 0 A Note: Numbers indicate the times of occurrence in 361 cases. Additionally, the offender in some instances would approach the victim and ask for a particular product, a service, or, for example, use of the telephone. Some of the items asked for and the number of instances were as follows: beer, wine, or whiskey -— 13 change -- 8 cigarettes -- 10 food, meats, etc. -- 10 gas, oil, air -- 6 information -- 5 use of tools -- 3 use of telephone —- 8 money owed -- 3 water -- l 83 The above data are applicable for both armed and strong-arm robberies. However, again the strong-arm offender did not use pretenses as frequently in the commission of the crime. In only six instances did the strong-arm offender ask for something prior to his crime. Offender Accomplices Table 33 indicates the findings relative to the offender and whether he had accomplices. It also indicates the instances when the accomplice was a different race or sex. Table 33. Offender-Accomplice(s) Data Armed Strong-arm One accomplice 95 36 Two accomplices 38 23 Three accomplices 19 11 Four or more accomplices ll 5 Accomplice different race 5 3 Accomplice female 14 10 Accomplice implied l l Accomplice in vehicle 26 4 No accomplice 79 29 Note: Numbers indicate the times of occurrence in 361 cases. 84 It was apparent that the strong-arm offender had accomplices more frequently than the were few instances of accomplices of armed offender. There a different race. The accomplice was implied when the offender led the victims or witnesses to believe by his actions or conversation that an accomplice was outside or where he could not be seen. Offender Methods of Entry and Exit Table 34 outlines the offender's means of entry and exit to and from a dwelling or business. As can be seen, most armed and strong-arm offenders entered and exited the front door. The side and rear doors were used next most frequently. Table 34. Offender Methods of Entry and Exit of Dwelling or Business Armed Strong-arm Entry: Front door 112 12 Side or rear door 18 2 Window 3 0 Rings doorbell or knocks 3 0 Hides in building 2 0 Enters with Victim(s) 6 0 Forces entry--anywhere 16 2 Exit: Front door 107 11 Side door 11 2 Rear door 13 1 Window 2 0 Note: Numbers indicate the times of occurrence in 361 cases. 85 General Offender Trademarks Each report was analyzed and checked against the master list of modi operandi indicated in the Appendix. Particular attention was given to the methods that the offenders used to commit their crimes. Two items that were not included on the master list were: offender pretends to be providing assistance, and offender escapes on foot. It was found that in many instances the offender did escape on foot. It was also apparent that many victims were "set up" by the offender, who pretended to provide some kind of assistance. These two items should be included on any future modus operandi checklist. Table 35 indicates the findings relative to general offender trademarks. Many offenders simply demanded money from the cash register of the business, while others not only took money from the cash register but had the Victim(s) empty their pockets. Some fifteen offenders demanded additional money from the business safe. Of the sixty-two residences that were objects of robbery, the offender ransacked the dwelling in twenty-five instances. Business places were not as thoroughly searched as residences. Note that there was only one instance reported in which the offender motioned to his victim and did not talk. 86 Table 35. General Offender Trademarks Armed Strong-arm Approaches victim/object on foot 125 36 Beckons or motions 7 O Carries shopping bag, bundle or clothing 1 0 Brings own bag (paper, cloth, etc.) 16 0 Cuts, rips, pulls telephone 22 l Orally demands money from Victim(s) 190 62 Demands business/company money only 41 3 Demands paper money only 3 0 Demands money be put in a bag 11 0 Demands money from safe 15 0 Does not talk, motions l 0 Jumps over counter or bar 1 0 Jumps from concealment 14 10 Loiters inside 28 6 Loiters outside 32 29 Offers to procure women/liquor 2 0 Ransacks premises 23 2 Takes hostage or kidnaps 10 3 Telephones accomplice 2 0 Offender removes money from cash register/box 19 0 Uses note 1 0 Note: Numbers indicate the times of occurrence in 361 cases. 87 Offender Treatment of Victim(s) Trademarks Tables 36 and 37 are aimed at summarizing the offender's treatment and relationship with the Victim(s) at the scene and during the commission of the robbery. Each of the items is meant to be self-explanatory. Table 36. Offender Treatment of Victim(s) Trademarks Armed Strong-arm Victim(s): Tortured Blindfolded Drunk Gagged Homosexual Lured to ambush Searched Shot Shot at Stabbed Taped Tied (rope/cord) Tied (wire) Tied (other) Opening/closing place of business Made to face wall Coat pulled over head Dragged between buildings Locked up Forced into bedroom Told not to seek help or call police N N PM u OOHOOI—‘OOHOOOOWONONl—‘H F‘ F‘ ONI—‘NO‘NWNNGDI—‘Nbi-‘bdwo Hra wLn N b) Note: Numbers indicate the times of occurrence in 361 cases. 88 Table 37. Other Offender Treatment of Victim(s) Trademarks Armed Strong-arm Assaults Victim(s) bodily 51 86 Assaults with weapon 21 0 Calls victim by some name 5 l Follows Victim(s) 5 18 Forces Victim(s) to lie down 52 9 Forces Victim(s) to kneel l l Forces Victim(s) to rear 19 O Forces Victim(s) to walk away 9 6 Forces Victim(s) into basement 4 0 Forces Victim(s) into toilet 6 0 Forces Victim(s) to lie on bed 4 0 Forces Victim(s) into cooler/ refrigerator 4 0 Forces Victim(s) to disrobe 2 2 Puts weapon to victim's head/throat 39 0 Sits beside/starts idle conversation 13 6 Grabs purse/money bag 5 12 Returns wallet/purse to victim 21 6 Offender shoots promiscuously ‘ l4 0 Threatens to kill 39 5 Note: Numbers indicate the times of occurrence in 361 cases. 89 In the above tables as well as the previous ones, particular attention must be given to those trademarks with low instances of occurrence. Any one of them could well be the dissimilarity that establishes the modus operandi of the criminal that aids in his identification. For example, the trademark "forces his Victim(s) to kneel" occurred only once in each type of robbery (Table 37). This will assist the investigator in eliminating suspects and hopefully will enable him to establish the identity of offender(s) who have used similar techniques in the past. It was also interesting to note that in thirty-nine instances the offender showed little reluctance to put a weapon to the head or throat of the victim (Table 37). Chapter 6 GENERALIZATIONS The purpose of this chapter is briefly to compare the findings mentioned in the review of the literature rela- tive to robbery with those found as a result of the analysis of the Michigan State Police reports of investigation of crimes of robbery during 1972. GENERAL DATA Robbery offenses occurred on a monthly basis generally, as was indicated in the review of the literature. Instead of December being the peak cold month as was advocated by Ramsey Clark, this study revealed that January is the winter month in which most robberies occurred. Relative to the day of the week on which male and female offenders commit vio- lent crimes, findings in this study differed from those of Schafer, which were based on his Florida study. A detailed analysis was made of female offender data to determine when they had been involved in the crime of robbery. Since in most instances in this study females were accomplices of male offenders, the monthly, day of week, and time of day data shown in the findings also apply to female offenders. The findings of this study are contradictory to Schafer's 90 91 finding that females commit violent crimes mainly on week— ends, mostly on Sundays, and least of all on Friday. This study revealed that most female offenders were involved in strong-arm robberies on Friday. Findings of this study also revealed that July was the month in which most female offenders were involved in strong—arm robberies, while Schafer contended that females commit most of their violent crimes from September to November. Other findings relative 'na to seasonal data outlined in the literature reviewed are generally in agreement with the findings of this study. THE VICTIM . The findings of this study relative to the race of the victims are not consistent with certain data dis- cussed in the review of the literature. Several possible explanations were offered for the sharp difference between the number of black victims and the number of white victims. While Wolfgang and Cohen contended that whites are less likely than blacks to be victims of major violent crimes and that Negro men are the most frequent victims in cases of robbery, this analysis revealed that white men are most likely in the state of Michigan to be the victims of both types of robbery. A study and correlation was made of the cases involving Negro victims to determine the race of the offenders in each case. Three of the fourteen black victims 92 were attacked by white offenders. One was victimized by Mexican—American offenders. The remainder were the victims of black offenders. This is consistent with Wolfgang and Cohen's findings relative to offender and victim race data. Findings in this study relative to age and rate of victim- ization were consistent with data submitted in the litera- ture review. THE PLACE AND OBJECT OF THE ROBBERY The 1965 national statistics relative to the places and objects of robberies coupled with the 1971 Uniform Crime Reports on the same subject appear to be generally consistent with the findings of this study. However, this analysis provided a more in-depth description of the places and objects of robberies as they were reported in Michigan offenses. THE OFFENDER Conklin labeled various types of robbery offenders according to their commitment to the crime, plans made to carry out the crime, and their reasons for committing the crime. It is difficult to label the bulk of the offenders described in this analysis. If one were using Conklin's categories, he might say that the offenders examined in the robbery reports for this study were for the most part 93 "Opportunists" prone toward professionalism. It was obvious in many of the armed robbery cases that the offender(s) had indeed planned their crimes and had deep commitments to accomplish them. The addict robber was not identified as such in many reports; however, one might suspect that since the 17-21 age group applied to most offenders, drugs was the motive for many of the crimes. The findings of this study indicated that black offenders were more apt to commit armed robberies than strong-arm robberies. This is contrary to the findings of Conklin's study. While white offenders committed more armed, robberies than blacks, a higher proportion of blacks com- mitted armed robbery than strong-arm robbery. Offender age data in this study were generally cOnsistent with those indicated in the literature on the subject. OFFENDER USE OF FORCE Throughout this analysis, it was noted that the offender in most cases was willing to use the amount of force necessary to consummate the crime. Again, general agreement exists between the treatment in the literature review of offender force and the findings of this study. Hand guns appeared to be the most frequently used weapons. Most offenders pointed the weapon at the victim. A more thorough analysis of weapon use and description was made in this study than was made in the literature review. 94 Offender use of bodily force was also generally con— sistent with the findings of Conklin's Boston study, which were indicated in Table 2. Michigan offenders propor— tionately tend to use less bodily force than was indicated in Conklin's findings. Perhaps an explanation may be that the victims were subjected to more intimidations through threats or use of weapons. For the most part, the victims appeared to be obedient to the commands or directions of the assailant. One difference with the Conklin findings was that a greater percentage of victims was made to lie down or kneel, or they were removed from cloSe'proximity to the scene. OFFENDER METHOD OF OPERATIONS It appears that this study went into more detail relative to offender modus Operandi than was discussed in the review of the literature. An attempt was made to deal with modus Operandi in a more general nature during the review, while the actual analysis of Michigan robberies for 1972 went into much more detail on the subject. Dienstein's conclusions relative to modus operandi use in investigations were all valid. However, whether some holdup men Operate only against particular businesses, for example service stations, is a point of contention. Also, his point that the weapon used is an item of information 95 that can identify certain subjects is also questionable. Although the findings in Chapter 5 do not indicate those arrests made of subjects identified through their particular modus operandi, a small number of such arrests were made. Crimes will be solved by thorough analysis of the modus operandi, but in such cases all possible aspects of the modus should be considered. After having examined the modus operandi employed in each of the robberies reported to the F71 State Police in 1972, it is impossible to assert that each I offender who held up service stations only robs service stations. It would also be an overstatement to say that particular offenders only use certain types of weapons in i"; each of their crimes. Probably the most apparent lesson learned in studying the modus operandi aspects of robbery has been that the total crime must be analyzed and all pertinent data extracted and noted so that the complete story of the robbery is known. Chapter 6 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The purpose of this thesis was to determine, through analysis of the 1972 Michigan State Police reports of robbery investigation, the character of the crime of robbery, its victim, the offender, and the offender's methods of committing the crime. Throughout this study an attempt has been made to address each aspect of the crime of robbery in a methodical manner. The general data, victim data, offender data, and offender method of operations data were offered in those major categories so that a distinction could be made between the various aspects of the crime. This summary will follow the same general format. SUMMARY Of 593 Michigan State Police robbery reports of investigation, 509 were examined in detail and provide the basis for this analysis of robbery in the state of Michigan for 1972. Most robbery offenses were reported to have occurred in the month of August. Both armed robberies and strong—arm robberies occurred most frequently between the first and the fifth of the month. Strong—arm robberies were 96 97 also reported at a relatively high rate during the period from the sixteenth to the twentieth of the month. The lowest rates of robbery occurred on Sundays. Most robberies occurred on Friday, Saturday, and Monday. Most armed rob- beries appeared to occur during the time period from 6:01 p.m. to 4:00 a.m. The highest rate of strong—arm robberies occurred during the 2:01 a.m. to 4:00 a.m. time period. The highest rate of armed robberies occurred during the Ffil period from 10:01 p.m. to 12:00 p.m. Analysis of victim data revealed that 70 percent ”but“ "a A‘i. ‘. 'l.’ of the State Police reports of armed robbery were one- . 4i. 1'. m victim offenses, while 88 percent of the strong-arm rob- beries were one-victim offenses. The race of the victims was reported to be 96.7 percent white, while only 3.1 per— cent were reported to be black. Victim data revealed that the age group 18-25 was reported to be the age group in which the highest rate of victims appeared. More strong- arm robbery victims had some kind of prior relationship with their assailant than did armed robbery victims. There were witnesses to the crime of armed robbery in 29 percent of the cases. This correlates closely with the arrest rate, which was 30 percent of the armed robbery cases. Gas stations were the favorite objects of the armed robbery offender. Male and female citizens on the street or in some other open area experienced high robbery rates. 98 The male citizen was the most frequent object of the strong- arm robber. The most frequent item taken in a robbery was money; sixteen robbers took the victim's automobile or truck. The total value of items taken in each case of robbery was most frequently at least $100.00 but not more than $500.00. In most instances vfluni property was taken, none was recovered. Most robberies of both types were committed by two or more offenders. Male offenders outnumbered female offenders almost sixteen to one. Negro offenders were involved in armed robberies more frequently than strong-arm robberies. The Negro offender rate contrasts sharply with the Negro victim rate. Most robbery offenders were white, seventeen to twenty-one years of age, 5'10" to 6'1" tall, 151 to 160 lbs. in weight, had brown eyes, and had black hair. There were reports indicating that twenty-seven offenders were narcotic users. Most armed robbery offenders used handguns to commit the crime. The most predominately used caliber of weapon was a .38 caliber (pistol). Knives of all descrip- tions were also frequently used by offenders. Most offenders showed and pointed the weapon; twenty-three offenders indi- cated they had a weapon, but did not show it. Vehicles were used by offenders in armed robberies in more instances than in strong-arm robberies. Armed 99 robbery offenders did not use a vehicle in 31 percent of the cases reported; strong-arm offenders did not use a vehicle in 36 percent of the reported offenses of strong- arm robbery. The favorite make of automobile for the armed robber was a Ford. The strong-arm robber frequently used Chevrolet automobiles. Offenders' vehicles were described most frequently to be three to seven years old. The most frequently reported colors of automobiles were: black tOp, blue bottom, or an automobile which was all blue. Vehicles were the means of escape for most offenders. The reported modi operandi of the many offenders indicated several findings. The predominate method of covering the face during the offense was by the wearing of a ski mask. Silk stockings pulled over the face were also used in several robbery offenses. Many offenders entered a place of business and pretended to be a customer or shopping prior to consummating their crime. Another frequent pre- tension was when the offender pretended to be providing assistance to or seeking aid from the victim. Strong—arm offenders had accomplices in more instances than armed robbery offenders. Most of the female offenders were accomplices of male offenders. There was a wide variety of trademarks of offenders extracted from the reports. Many offenders verbally demanded money. Some demanded money from a cash register only. 100 Others also demanded money from a safe. Business places were not ransacked to the extent that private residences were during a robbery. During the robbery, victims were treated by offenders in varied ways. Some were gagged, tied with rope, tied with wire, locked up, or blindfolded. Others were assaulted bodily, with a weapon, forced to lie on a bed, and many had their lives threatened by the offender. CONCLUSIONS-~ROBBERY IN THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 1972 1. Too little in-depth data relative to the crime of robbery is available to the student of criminology. 2. There is a seasonal variation in robbery rates. There is also a variance between armed robbery rates and strong-arm robbery rates by the time of the day in which most offenses of each type occur. 3. One-victim robbery offenses occur more often than offenses in which two or more victims are present. Males are victims of robbery offenses more often that females. Females were more apt to be victims of armed robbery offenders in Michigan in 1972 than of strong—arm robbers. 4. The race of most victims of robbery was white. Of all the victims of robbery offenses reported to the State 101 Police, 3.1 percent were black. The most frequently reported age of the victim was eighteen to twenty—five years of age. 5. Most victims had not had a prior relationship, of even the shortest duration, with the offender prior to the robbery. Initial contact by the offender was with the victim's consent in most cases of strong-arm robbery offenses. 6. The male citizen in an Open area is the most frequent object of the strong-arm robber. Gas stations, residences, and grocery stores are the most frequent objects of the armed robbery offender. 7. Most robberies were committed by two or more offenders; 94 percent of the offenders were male, and most were white. Negroes were involved in armed robberies more frequently than strong-arm robberies. Most offenders of all races were seventeen to twenty-one years of age. 8. Most armed robbery offenders used handguns to commit the crime. 9. Vehicles were used by offenders in most cases of both types of robbery. 10. The most frequently used disguise or method of concealing the face by the offender was the ski mask and silk stocking over the face. 11. Most offenders robbing a commercial establish— ment pretended to be a customer or to be shopping prior to committing the crime. 102 12. Most offenses of armed robbery were committed by offenders with one accomplice. 13. Robbery offenders entered and exited the front door of a dwelling or business most often. 14. Trademarks or information relative to modi operandi of the offenders can be extracted from existing reports of investigation to provide an initial data base for a modus Operandi file. Generally, the similarity of modi operandi of the various offenders provides meaningful data for analysis of the overall crime of robbery. However, particular dis- similarities and special methods of operation used by the offender are the most important to consider when the inves- tigator desires to identify subjects for arrest. Computer- ized modus Operandi files can provide an information source to connect the criminal with a known modus operandi with a particular crime. Computer-based modus operandi files will also afford the analysis potential to link unsolved crimes with unknown perpetrators. BIBLIOGRAPHY 103 1'" .- 1 n L: ‘z‘n W. BIBLIOGRAPHY A . PRIMARY SOURCES Clark, Ramsey. Crime in America. New York: Simon and Schuster, Inc., 1971. Cohn, Bruce J. (ed.). Crime in America. Itasca, Illinois: F. E. Peacock Publishers, Inc., 1970. Conklin, John E. Robbery and the Criminal Justice System. New York: J. B. Lippincott Company, 1972. Dienstein, William. Techniques for the Crime Investigator. Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas, 1952. Holcomb, Richard L. Armed Robbery. Iowa City, Iowa: . Bureau of Public Affairs, 1949. 1 ! Hunt, Morton. The Mugging. New York: Atheneum, 1972. May, Robert G. "Vioence in Armed RObbery: The Relationship of Consanguinity and Other Variables." Unpublished thesis, Michigan State University, 1970. McKinney, John C. Constructive Typology and Social Theory. New York: Appleton—Century-Crofts, Inc., 1966. Michigan State Police. State of Michigan, 1971 Uniform Crime Report. East Lansing, Michigan: State Police Headquarters, 1972. President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice. Task Force Report: Crime and Its Impact-- an Assessment. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1967. Schafer, Stephen. The Victim and His Criminal. New York: Random House, 1968. Skolnick, Jerome H. Justice Without Trial. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1966. 104 105 U.S. Department of Justice. Federal Bureau of Investiga— tion. Uniform Crime Reports for the United States, 1971. Washington: Government Printing OffiCe, 1971. Wolfgang, Marvin E., and Bernard Cohen. Crime and Race, Conceptions and Misconceptions. New York: Institute of Human Relations Press, 1970. B . SECONDARY SOURCES Bristow, Allen P. Effective Police Manpower Utilization. Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas, 1969. Caldwell, Robert G. Criminology. New York: Ronald Press Co., 1956. Clift, Raymond E. A Guide to Modern Police Thinking. Cincinnati: The W. H. Anderson Company, 1965. Committee for Economic Development. Reducing Crime and Assuring Justice. A Statement on National Policy by the Research and Policy Committee. New York: N. N., 1972. Holcomb, Richard L. (ed.). Municipal Police Administration. 5th ed. Chicago: The International City Manager's Association, 1961. Leonard, V. A. Criminal Investigation and Identification. Springfield, IllinOis: Charles C. Thomas, 1971. . Police Organization and Management. Brooklyn, New York: The Foundation Press, Inc., 1951. . The Police Detective Function. Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas, 1970. Lewin, Stephen (ed.). Crime and Its Prevention. Vol. XL, No. 4. New York: H. W. Wilson Co., 1968. O'Hara, Charles E. Fundamentals of Criminal Investigation. 2nd ed. Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas, 1970. President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice. Task Force Report:inhe Police. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1967. . Task Force Report: Science and Technology. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1967. 106 Radzinowicz, Leon. The Need for Criminology, London: Heinemann Educational Books, Ltd., 1965. Remington, Frank J., and others. Criminal Justice Adminis- tration. Indianapolis: The Hobbs-Merrill Company, Inc., 1969. Saunders, Charles B., Jr. Upgradinggthe American Police. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1970. Weston, Paul B., and Kenneth M. Wells. Criminal Investiga- tion: Basic Perspectives. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1970. . Elements of Criminal Investigation. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1971. Wilson, 0. W., and Roy C. McLaren. Police Administration. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1972. APPENDIX 107 4. .9 . 1f‘:14"'41‘1i_ ..ff 11....X A“ (Chi-I . E ' m- “Jul—x MASTER LIST OF ITEMS OF INFORMATION USED BY THE AUTHORS IN ANALYZING ROBBERY REPORTS OF INVESTIGATION Code No. General Information 001 Robbery armed 002 Robbery strong-armed 003 January 004 February 005 March 006 April 007 May 008 June 009 July 010 August 011 September 012 October 013 November 014 December 015 lst-Sth day 016 6th-10th day 017 llth-lSth day 018 l6th-20th day 019 let-25th day 020 26th-31st day 021 Monday 022 Tuesday 023 Wednesday 024 Thursday 025 Friday 026 Saturday 027 Sunday 028 1201 am-0200 am 029 0201 am-0400 am 030 0401 am-0600 am 031 0601 am-0800 am 032 0801 am-lOOO am 033 1001 am-1200 noon 034 1201 pm-0200 pm 035 0201 pm—0400 pm 036 0401 pm-0600 pm 037 0601 pm-0800 pm 038 0801 pm-1000 pm 039 0101 pm—1200 mn 040 Unfounded report 041 Closed by arrest 108 Code No. General Information 042 043 044 045 046 047 048 049 050 051 052 053 054 055 056 057 058 059 060 061 061A 062 063 064 065 066 066A 067 068 069 070 071 072 073 074 Arrest under 18 yrs. Service rendered Asst. to county PD Asst. to city PD State Police only Arrest(s) - open No arrest — open No arrest - closed Victim Information One victim Two or more victims Male victim Female victim Victim, sex unknown Victims, both sexes Negro victim Caucasian victim Mexican victim Oriental victim Indian victim Other ethnics Race unk./not reported Victim under age 18 Victim 18—24 yrs. Victim 25-34 yrs. Victim 35-49 yrs. Victim 50 or more Age unk./not reported Prior relationship No prior relations Relationship unknown Contact with consent Contact w/o consent Crime witnessed Crime not witnessed Unknown witnesses 075-100 Unassigned Code No. Object of the Attack 101 Accounting office 102 Advertising office 103 Airlines office 104 Appliance store 105 Armory 106 Art, antique, auction 107 Attorney's office 108 Auto access. store 109 Auto dealer 110 Auto rental 111 Auto repair 112 Auto wash 113 Auto wrecker service 114 Bail/bondsman 115 Bakery 116 Bank 117 Bar 118 Barber shop 119 Beauty shop 120 Beer/party store 121 Bicycle/motorcycle shop 122 Boat sales/supply 123 Bonding agency 124 Book/stationery store 125 Bowling alley 126 Brewery 127 Bldg/modernization 128 Bldg. & loan assn. 129 Butcher/meat store 130 Camera/photo shop 131 Candy/confect. store 132 Cemetery office 133 Charitable home 134 Check cash service 135 Church 136 Cigar/tobacco shOp 137 City office 138 Cleaners 139 Clothing store--fem. 140 Clothing store--male 141 Clubs--private 142 Coal yard office 143 Contractors 144 County office 145 Credit union 146 Crisis center 147 Dairy 148 Dance band 109 Code No. Object of the Attack 149 Dance hall 150 Delicatessen 151 Dentist office 152 Department store 153 Dime store 154 Discount store 155 Doctor's office 156 Drug manufacturer 157 Drug store 158 Dry goods store 159 Duplicating service 160 Electrical repair 161 Electrical supply 162 Employment office 163 Farm supply store 164 Factory 165 Federal office 166 Finance/loan co. 167 Florist 168 Fruit/veg. stand 169 Funeral home 170 Furniture store 171 Furriers 172 Garbage removal 173 Garden shop 174 Gas station 175 Garage 176 Gift shop 177 Golf course/shOp 178 Grocery store 179 Guns/gunsmith 180 Hamburger stand 181 Halls-catering 182 Hardware store 183 Hat shop 184 Hospital office 185 Hotel office 186 Ice cream parlor 187 Ice skating rink 188 Insurance office 189 Jewelry/jeweler 190 Junk/scrap yard 191 Kennels 192 Kindergarten 193 Laundry/laundromat 194 Library 195 Lumber company 196 Lunch room Code No. Object of the Attack 197 Mail service 198 Machine shOp 199 Meat market 200 Motel office 201 Musical inst. store 202 Mutual fund office 203 Newsdealers 204 Newspaper company 205 News stand 206 Nursery/landscape office 207 Nursing home 208 Office equip. store 209 Optical/Optician 210 Outboard motor/marine 211 Packaging service 212 Paint store 213 Parking lot 214 Pawnshop 215 Pet store-supply 216 Plumbing store 217 Pool room 218 Poultry store 219 Printer, binder, etc. 220 Public utility 221 Pizza shop 222 Publishing service 223 Radio shop 224 Railway express 225 Real estate office 226 Repair store 227 Restaurant 228 Restaurant (chain) 229 Roller skating rink 230 School-public/parochial 231 Second-hand store 232 Shoe repair 233 Shoe store 234 Sporting goods store 235 Stadium office/locker 236 State office 237 Surplus store 238 Tailor shOp 239 Telegraph office 240 Telephone booth 241 Theater 242 Travel/trans. office 243 Trucking terminal 110 Code No. Object of the Attack 244 Upholstery shop 245 Union hall 246 Variety/novelty store 247 YMCA/YWCA 248 Armored car 249 Baby sitter 250 Bank messenger 251 Citizen--fema1e 252 Citizen-—ma1e 253 Delivery man 254 Ice cream vendor 255 Insurance collector 256 Jewelry salesman 257 Newsboy 258 Rent collector 259 Hitchhiker 260 Private apartment 261 Apartment manager 262 Rooming house 263 House trailer 264 Priv. Res. (single family) 265 Priv. Res. (2 or more fam.) 266 Vacant apartment 267 Vacant residence 268 Motel/hotel residence 269 Airplane 270 Boat/ship 271 Bus 272 Taxicab 273 Truck 274 Automobile 275-279 Unassigned 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 Suspect Information One suspect Two or more suspects One person arrested Two or more arrested No suspect (subj. unk) Unfounded report Arrest(s)/others not 287-289 Unassigned 290 291 292 293 294 Female subject Male subject Indian subject Mexican subject Negro subject 111 Code No. Suspect Information 345 Weight 121-130 lbs. 346 Weight 131-140 lbs. 347 Weight 141-150 lbs. 348 Weight 151-160 lbs. 349 Weight 161—170 lbs. 350 Weight 171-180 lbs. 351 Weight 181-190 lbs. 352 Weight 191—200 lbs. 353 Weight 201—210 lbs. 354 Weight 211-220 lbs. 355 Weight 221—230 lbs. 356 Weight 231-240 lbs. 357 Weight 241 lbs. or more 358 Weight unk/not reported 359 Eyes black 360 Eyes blue 361 Eyes brown 362 Eyes gray 363 Eyes hazel 364 Eyes green 365 Eye color unk/not report 366-398 Unassigned Code No. Suspect Information 295 Oriental subject 296 Caucasian subject 297 Other ethnics 298 Race unk/not reported 299-301 Unassigned 302 Age 16 yrs. or less 303 Age 17—21 yrs. 304 Age 22-25 yrs. 305 Age 26—30 yrs. 306 Age 31—35 yrs. 307 Age 36-40 yrs. 308 Age 41—50 yrs. 309 Age 51 or more 310 Age unk/not reported 311 Hair black 312 Hair blonde 313 Hair brown 314 Hair light brown 315 Hair dyed 316 Hair gray 317 Hair partially gray 318 Hair red 319 Hair white 320 Hair auburn 321 Hair color unknown 322 Unassigned 323 Hair bald 324 Hair partially bald 325 Hair bushy 327 Hair crew cut/short 328 Hair fad/quo-vadis 329 Hair kinky 330 Hair processed 331 Hair straight 332 Hair thin/receding 333 Hair wavy 334 Hair long 335 Hair type unknown 336 Height under 5'2" 337 Height 5'2"-5'6" 338 Height 5‘7"-5'9" 339 Height 5'10"-6'1" 340 Height 6'2" or over 341 Height unknown/not report 342 Weight 100 lbs. or less 343 Weight 101-110 lbs. 344 Weight 111-120 lbs. 399 Teeth data unknown 400 Teeth false 401 Teeth with gaps 402 Teeth gold showing 403 Teeth good 404 Teeth irregular 405 Teeth missing/lower 406 Teeth missing/upper 407 Teeth protruding 408 Teeth stained/decay 409 Teeth chipped 410 Speech foreign/broken 411 Speech with lisp 412 Speaks Spanish 413 Mumbles/impediment 414 Speech rapid 415 Speech refined 416 Speaks soft or low 417 Southern accent 418 Stutters 419 Speech vulgar/profane 420 Beard 421 Eyebrows heavy/bushy 422 Goatee 423 Moustache, heavy Code No. Suspect Information 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 Moustache, medium Moustache, thin/light Moustache, Chinese Sideburns Unshaven Clean shaven Scar left cheek Scar right cheek Scar on chin Scar left ear Scar right ear Scar left eyebrow Scar right eyebrow Scar on forehead Harelipped Scar lower.lip Scar upper lip Scar on nose Pierced earlobes Birthmark(s) Protruding chin Receding chin Freckles Thick lips Thin lips Moles Pimples Pockmarks Hollow cheeks Nose broken/crooked Nose broad Nose flat Nose hooked Nose large Nose long Nose small Nose thin Nose upturned Build, thin Build, very thin Build, medium Build, muscular Build, heavy/stocky Build, very heavy Scar, left arm Scar, right arm Scar on chest 112 Code No. Suspect Information 471 Scar, left hand 472 Scar, right hand 473 Scar on neck 474 Scar, left wrist 475 Scar, right wrist 476 Amputation, left arm 477 Amputation, right arm 478 Amputation, ear(s) 479 Amputation, finger(s) right hand, 480 Amputation, finger(s) left hand 481 Amputation, left foot 482 Amputation, right foot 483 Amputation, left hand 484 Amputation, right hand 485 Amputation, left leg 486 Amputation, right leg 487 Bowlegged 488 Cauliflower ears 489 Crippled left arm 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 Crippled right arm Crippled finger(s) Crippled hand(s) Limps, left leg Limps, right leg Tattoo, left arm Tattoo, right arm Tattoo, chest/neck Tattoo, left finger(s) Tattoo, right finger(s) Tattoo, left hand Tattoo, right hand Pachuco Tattoo, initials Tattoo, names Tattoo, words/phrases Pictures Designs Ears, protruding Ears, large Ears, small Ears, close to head Face, thin Face, round Face, broad Face, long Code No. Suspect Information 516 High cheek bones 517 Caucasian features 518 Unassigned Suspect's Vehicle 519 No vehicle involved 520 One vehicle involved 521 Two or more vehicles 522 Out—of-state license 523 Michigan license 524 Unknown license 525 Chrysler 526 Dart 527 DeSoto 528 Dodge 529 Imperial 530 Valiant 531 Plymouth 532 Unassigned 533 Comet 534 Edsel 535 Falcon 536 Ford 537 Lincoln 538 Mercury 539 Thunderbird 540 Pinto 541 Toreno 542 Buick 543 Cadillac 544 Chevrolet 545 Corvair 546 Corvette 547 Oldsmobile 548 Oldsmobile F-85 549 Pontiac 550 Tempest 551 Chevrolet Vega 552 Firebird 553 Nash 554 Nash Rambler 555 Packard 556 Studebaker 557 Studebaker Lark 558-559 Unassigned 560 Austin 113 Code No. Suspect's Vehicle 561 English Ford 562 Fiat 563 Toyota 564 Jaguar 565 Mercedes—Benz 566 Metropolitan 567 M.G. 568 Morris 569 Opel 570 Peugeot 571 Porsche 572 Renault 573 Simca 574 Triumph 575 Vauxhall 576 Volkswagon 577 Volvo 578 Datsun 579 Misc. foreign 580 Bicycle 581 Motorcycle 582 Motor scooter 583 Taxi 584 Snow mobile 585 Mini-bike 586 Jeep-Scout vehicle 587 Truck, Chevrolet 588 Truck, Divco 589 Truck, Dodge 590 Truck, Ford 591 Truck, GMC 592 Truck, Studebaker 593 Truck, Volkswagon 594 Truck, Willys 595 Truck, other 596 Year, 1970-73 597 Year, 1965—69 598 Year, 1964 or older 599 Camper/van 600 Convertible 601 Coupe 602- Sedan, 2 door 603 Sedan, 4 door 604 Station wagon 605 Continental rear 606 Unknown body style 607 Other body style Code No. Suspect's Vehicle 608 Sportster/sports car 609 Pick—up truck 610 Top color black 611 Top color 1t. blue 612 TOp color blue 613 TOp color 1t. green 614 Top color green 615 Top color red/maroon 616 Top color 1t. red/maroon 617 Top color white/cream 618 Top color lt. gray 619 TOp color gray 620 Top color 1t. brown/tan 621 Top color brown/tan 622 Top color yellow 623 Top color turquoise 624 TOp color gold 625 TOp color silver 626 Top color primer paint 627 Top color bronze/cepper 628 Top color other 629 Unassigned 630 Single/bottom color black 631 Single/bottom color 1t. blue 632 Single/bottom color blue 633 Single/bottom color 1t. green 634 Single/bottom color green 635 Single/bottom color 1t. red/maroon 636 Single/bottom color red/ maroon 637 Single/bottom color white/cream 638 Single/bottom color 1t. gray 639 Single/bottom color gray 640 Single/bottom color lt. brown/tan 641 Single/bottom color brown/tan 642 Single/bottom color yellow 643 Single/bottom color turquoise 644 Single/bottom color gold 114 Code No. Suspect's Vehicle 645 Single/bottom color silver 646 Single/bottom color primer paint 647 Single/bottom color bronze/copper 648 Other paint styles 649 Veh. description unk/ not reported Suspect's Weapon 650 Acid 651 Belt 652 Blackjack 653 Bomb 654 Bottle or can 655 Brass knuckles 656 Club/bat/stick 657 File 658 Garden implement 659 Hammer 660 Hatchet/axe 661 Ice pick 662 Knife, butcher 663 Knife, pocket 664 Knife, switch blade 665 Knife, other 666 Missile/brick, etc. 667 Nitroglycerin 668 Iron pipe 669 Razor 670 Rope/twine, etc. 671 Scissors 672 Screwdriver 673 Sharp instrument 674 Tire iron 675 Unknown object 676 Pistol (no description) 677 No weapon/strong-arm 678 Rifle (no description) 679 Shot gun (no description) 680 Automatic, blue steel 681 Automatic, blue steel ‘ white grip 682 Automatic, blue steel luger/luger type 683 Automatic, blue steel luger, white grip Code No. Suspect's Weapon 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 Automatic, blue steel small/starter type Automatic, blue steel small, white grip Automatic, nickle/chrome Automatic, nickle/chrome white grip Automatic, nickle/chrome luger, luger type Automatic, nickle/chrome luger, white grip Automatic, nickle/chrome small/starter type Automatic, nickle/chrome small, white grip Revolver, blue steel Revolver, blue steel white grip Revolver, blue steel snub Revolver, blue steel snub, white grip Revolver, blue steel long barrel Revolver, blue steel long barrel, white grip Revolver, nickle/chrome Revolver, nickle/chrome white grip Revolver, nickle/chrome snub Revolver, nickle/chrome snub, white grip Revolver, nickle/chrome long barrel Revolver, nickle/chrome long barrel, white grip Revolver, hexagon barrel Revolver, other/no desc. Rifle Rifle, over & under Rifle, sawed-off Shot gun, blue steel single barrel Shot gun, blue steel double barrel Shot gun, blue steel single barrel, sawed-off 115 Code No. Suspect's Weapon 712 Shot gun, blue steel double barrel, sawed-off 713 Shot gun, nickle/chrome single barrel 714 Shot gun, nickle/chrome double barrel 715 Shot gun, nickle/chrome single barrel, sawed-off 716 Shot gun, nickle/chrome double barrel, sawed-off 717 22 caliber 718 25 caliber 719 32 caliber 720 38 caliber 721 45 caliber 722 12 gauge 723 16 gauge 724 Other gauge or caliber 724A Gauge or caliber unknown/ not reported Suspect's Modus Operandi 725 Wears cap, baseball, ski 726 Wears coveralls 727 Wears earrings 728 Wears facial bandages 729 Wears facial make-up 730 Wears false nose 731 Wears female attire (male) 732 Wears gloves 733 Wears hankie or cloth over face 734 Wears head cloth/rag 735 Held hand over face 736 Held something over face 737 Wears hood 738 Wears male attire (female) 739 Wears paper bag over head 740 Wears nylon/silk stocking over head 741 Wears sunglasses 742 Wears regular glasses 743 Wears work uniform 744 Wears Halloween mask 745 Wears wig 746 Wears a disguise Code No. Suspect's Modus Operandi 747 Wears flashy clothing 748 Wears sloppy, unkempt clothing 749 Wears fatigue jacket or parts of military cloth. 749A Wears stocking cap or ski mask 749B Wears trench coat 750 Pretends to be blind, deaf, crippled 751 Pretends to be a delivery man 752 Pretends to be drunk 753 Pretends to be injured, hurt, dead 754 Pretends to be police officer, FBI, etc. 755 Pretends to be repairman 756 Pretends to be salesman 757 Pretends to be seeking employment 758 Pretends to be seeking friend or relative 759 Pretends to be seeking house/apt/room to rent 760 Pretends to be seeking street address 761 Pretends to be seeking a loan 762 Pretends to be shopping 763 Pretends to be a utility man 764 Pretends to be seeking directions 765 Pretends to be a customer 766 Pretends to be a Western Union messenger 767 Pretends to be a friend of the family 768 Pretends to be seeking assistance 769-774 Unassigned 775 Asks for beer/wine 776 Asks for whiskey 777 Asks for change 778 Asks for cigarettes 116 Code No. Suspect's Modus Operandi 779 Asks for clothing 780 Asks for food/meat 781 Asks for gas/oil/air 782 Asks for gum/candy 783 Asks for information 784 Asks for light/match or cigarette 785 Asks for medicine/ medical supplies 786 Asks for a money order to be prepared 787 Asks for narcotics 788 Asks for a person by title/name 789 Asks for misc. service 790 Asks for tools/use of tools 791 Asks for use of phone 792 Asks for use of toilet 793 Asks for money owed 794 Asks for soft drink(s) 795 Asks for hardware items 796 Asks for coffee 797 Asks for jewelry 798 Asks for water 799-808 Unassigned 809 Held weapon in right hand 810 Held weapon in left hand 811 Covered weapon with newspaper/coat 812 Took weapon from bag/box 813 Took weapon from belt 814 Took weapon from holster 815 Keeps weapon in belt/ pocket 816 Keeps hand in pocket 817 Racks or cocks weapon 818 Weapon shown to victim 819 Keeps shot gun or rifle under clothing 820 Keeps weapon wrapped in hankie/bag 821 Lays weapon on counter 822 Points weapon at victim 823 Multiple weapons used 824 Weapon unknown/not seen, but is indicated/ implied Code No. Suspect's Modus Operandi 825—828 Unassigned 829 Abandons getaway vehicle Code No. 117 Suspect's Modus Operandi 880 Has mental/psychiatric problems Attacks while victim park— 881 Under the influence of alcohol/drugs 882—894 Unassigned 830 ing/putting car in garage 831 Covers his license plates 832 Disables victim‘s vehicle 895 833 Drives off in victim's vehicle 896 834 Escapes in a vehicle 835 Escapes in public taxi 897 or bus 836 Follows victim's vehicle 898 837 Forces victim to lie or sit on floor of vehicle 899 838 Forces victim to drive 900 839 Hides in victim‘s veh. 901 840 Hitchhikes (thug) 902 841 Jumps from vehicle 903 842 Jumps into victim's veh. 843 Locks victim in trunk 904 844 Uses stolen vehicle 845 Uses stolen license 905 plates 906 846 Forces victim to accom- 907 pany in vehicle 847-858 Unassigned 908 859 Has sexual relationship 909 with victim 910 860 Commits oral perversion 911 861 Commits sodomy 912 862 Forces victim to commit 913 oral perversion 863 Kisses, fondles, 914 caresses victim 915 864 Lifts women's clothing 916 865 Rapes victim 917 866-868 Unassigned 918 869 Attempts sexual act 870 Is narcotic user 919 871 Is homosexual 920 872 Is left handed 921 873 Is ex—convict 922 874 Is parolee 923 875 Is prostitute 924 876 Had been drinking 925 877 Was lookout 926 878 Is incessant talker 927 879 Is handsome/good looking Leaves identifiable fingerprints Leaves note to be recovered Leaves spent slug or shell case Leaves no evidence at scene Unassigned Has accomplice Has two accomplices Has three accomplices Has four or more accomplices Has accomplices of different race Has female accomplice Has implied accomplice Has accomplice(s) in vehicle Has no accomplice Unassigned Approaches on foot Shoots promiscuously Assaults victim bodily Assaults victim with weapon Attacks from behind Beckons or motions Calls victim by some name Carries brief case Carries shopping bag, bundle or clothing Cuts/rips/pulls telephone Cuts/rips/pulls taxi mike Demands paper money only Demands company money only Demands money put in bag Demands money from safe Discards clothing Does not talk/motions Follows victim Code , No. Suspect's Modus Operandi 928 Forces victim to lie down 929 Forces victim to kneel 930 Forces victim to rear 931 Forces victim to walk away 932 Forces victim into basement 933 Forces victim into toilet 934 Forces victim to lie on bed 935 Forces victim into cooler/refrigerator 936 Forces victim to tie another 937 Forces victim to disrobe 938 Forces victim to place hands/head on counter 939 Jumps over bar/counter 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 Jumps from concealment Loiters inside Loiters outside Offers to procure women/liquor Pulls blinds/curtains Puts weapon to head or throat Ransacks premises Removes footwear Returns wallet/purse Sits beside/near Stands in doorway or hallway Starts idle conversation Takes hostage/kidnaps Telephones victim Threatens to kill Uses note Removes money from drawer/register himself Tortures victim Blindfolds victim Selects drunk victims Gags victim Handcuffs victim Selects homosexual victim Lures victim to ambush Searches victim Shoots victim 118 Code No. Suspect's Modus Operandi 966 Shoots at victim 967 Stabs victim 968 Tapes victim 969 Ties victim with rope or cord 970 Ties victim with wire 971 Ties victim with other materials 972 Tells victim not to call the police 973 Attacks when victim is opening/closing store 974 Makes victim face wall 975 Brings own bag to carry money 976 Forces victim to lock doors 977 Uses spray can as weapon 978 Uses newspaper as infor- mation source 979 Avoids leaving prints by taking bottles/glass 980 Pulls victimfs coat over his head 981 Drags victim between or into building 982 Forces victim into bedroom 983 Tells victim not to seek help until he is gone 984 Demands money 985 Locks up the victim 986 Grabs purse 987 Uses knock—out drops on victim 988 Telephones accomplice 989 Unassigned 990 Enters front door 991 Enters side/rear door 992 Forces entry 993 Enters milk chute 994 Enters transom 995 Enters window 996 Knocks/rings doorbell 997 Locks door after entry 998 Hides in building 999 Enters with victim 1000 Exits front door Code No. Suspect's Modus Operandi 1001 Exits rear door 1002 Exits side door 1003 Exits window 1004 Unassigned What Taken 1005-1009 Unassigned 1010 Ammunition 1011 Animals 1012 Auto accessories 1013 Auto parts 1014 Barber supplies 1015 Binoculars 1016 Boats 1017 Books 1018 Briefcase 1019 Building material 1020 Business machines 1021 Cameras 1022 Cash registers 1023 Check writer 1024 Checks 1025 Cigarettes 1026 Clothing. 1027 Coin collectiOn 1028 Stamp collection 1030 Credit cards 1031 Dental gold 1032 Explosives 1033 Firearms 1034 Foodstuffs/beer 1035 Furs 1036 Gambling devices 1037 Household goods 1038 Medical instruments 1039 Musical instruments 1040 Other instruments 1041 Jewelry 1042 Jewelry-watches 1043 Keys/taxicab 1044 Keys 1045 Leather goods/saddles 1046 Liquor 1047 Luggage 1048 Machinery 1049 Medicines 1050 Metal 119 Code No. What Taken 1051 Money 1052 Money changer, 3 bbl. 1053 Money changer, 4 bbl. 1054 Money changer 1055 Money orders 1056 Money, paper only 1057 Narcotics 1058 Office equipment (other than machines) 1059 Paint supplies 1060 Plumbing supplies/mat. 1061 Police/security equip. 1062 Purses 1063 Radios 1064 Recorders 1065 Restaurant/fountain supplies 1066 Safes 1067 Securities 1068 Smoking accessories 1069 Sporting goods 1070 Telephones 1071 Televisions 1072 Tobacco products (not cigarettes) 1073 Tools 1074 Toys 1075 Vehicles 1076 Vending machines 1077 Wallets 1078 Wire 1079 Automobile/truck 1080 Nothing taken or unsuccessful attempt 1081-1099 Unassigned 1100 $50 or less value taken 1101 $50.01-$100 taken 1102 $100.01-$500 taken 1103 $500.01-$1000 taken 1104 $1000.01 or more taken 1105 Value unk/not reported Offender Disposition 1106-1109 Unassigned 1110 Charges dropped by police with no action taken Code No. 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127- 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 Offender Disposition Admitted to hospital or mental institution Received suspended sentence Sentenced to confinement for less than 1 year Sentenced to confinement for 1 year or more Found not guilty by court Victim declines to prefer charges/swear to comp. Prosecutor/court declined to prosecute Other disposition Disposition unk/not yet determined Offender in fugitive status Property Recovery None recovered 25% or less recovered 26—50% recovered 51—75% recovered 75-99% recovered Total value recovered 1128 Unassigned Method of Apprehensioné Investigation Status Apprehended upon request by other unit/agency Apprehended as result of all points bulletin Apprehended by victim Apprehended by non- police personnel Apprehended in hot pursuit by responding police Apprehended in preliminary investigation Apprehended by extensive investigative effort Offender surrenders voluntarily Code No. 120 Method of Apprehension/ Investigation Status 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 Offender attempts to avoid arrest by running/fighting Offender attempts to avoid arrest with firearms Offender apprehended on ID by victim, witness, etc. Offender still in fugi- tive status No arrest made-- investigation open Offender submits to arrest without resist. Investigation closed by request of victim Investigation closed by police (lack of evi- dence, suspects, leads, etc.) MICHIGQN STRTE UNIV. LIBRQRIES I III III lllllllll 1 31293102882010