In the UK intelligence-led policing (ILP) has been under scrutiny at intervals, for example the latest enquiry into the use of undercover officers within an environmental group by the national inspectorate (HMIC).
I am mindful of Sergeant T's comments and the shoulder patch.
Many years substantial crime analysis on commercial robbery highlighted the attacks at post offices and to lesser extent banks. Preventative action was taken, target hardening and the robbers migrated their attention elsewhere, to smaller shops.
Then political attention was directed to mounting car crime and the response by the car manufacturers was steadily better car locks and ignition systems. Car crime slipped and then the M.O. changed, threats / use of violence to get car keys from the driver / owner. A far greater level of violence than before. Now we have the situation few cars can be stolen without the keys, where fewer stolen cars are recovered and there are more stolen cars on the road than before.
ILP led IIRC - rightly - to targeting a particular high profile drug scene in Liverpool, this took months and after arrest / conviction the new dealers were far more violent than the "old hands". Which led many to ask was the approach right?
Part of the problem is that ILP, especially with the advances of I.T., has become remote from those on the streets and is increasingly directed to support management decision-making.
Yes, commercial databases e.g. Choice Point in the USA and Credit Expert here offer opportunities for LE, notably in tracing witnesses, warrants and suspects. They also have significant drawbacks, especially from those who think and adjust their life-style.
Bookmarks