Technolo -

I
in

California Departme. . .-

"l'hl's case study focuses on intranet 

prepared for the! ?Technology Acqu;  I 

 

and Justice in partnership with Gov -  I 5
National Institute of Justice (NIJ), . :l
study are Raymond Dujssault, RaiseI "a I I.

Julie Wartell, Senior Research and
The report has been reviewed by ih
pending ?nal review.

I


BaCkground The state of California has the severit     I 
to back it up. With those statisticso  a a . 

gang-related crime. Combating that 

i

monolithic police and sheriff?s deparlt I  I   -
departments throughout the state, Ii gr.

 

Over time, a grass roots-developed-. ?9 .
had developed in Californiamoderate success. By 1995, though;

has faced signi?cant hurdles in overfal

objections and silspicions regardian   

2w:  g! 
Justice (Cal DOJ) and numerous local l; lI L. .- j' 
more robust and user?friendly systerirIL been embraced by most of the state" I 
exposed to it. However, in additioht . I 

 

I . I if .
With the establishment ofthe  I n. w.
to have an investigations tool and w. ji ?j  I 
proliferation and lgrowihgoi violent all . 2
effort out of the LL03 l?lnqelesSheriiI?f?E I  .  -  .

ure the vast amo' - 

to attempt to cap

i .



hundreds of dliielent law enforcemAlthough the gai problfm first title gang  I:   I

In the last seven; to, ten ears, gan -   
like Sacramentolagswel as In pre  I  

Angeles and Sai  Diego:

7

include Stockton rid Frsnol As [a in  

 

 

ditficult?to?use, eba - ~t   
 pOHtlcaL erg; ?tIeCtU Ill GIase    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:u

In 1993, the st insona rd limijatioi   .-
what ol tions ?ight We ailabl'      .
implenfentatio I of . . 
the outbated EAT syem. 5   
database and I nk analyss tool w.  ,1   i - 
Irvine, Californii . lt resids on -. l: 3  a I
friendly; web inc uding Netgivrnun?Since Cal DOleiewed GREATs di 59:4.   L, . i;
biggest drawheloks, they ere Jew .  Internet teohn llo'gies to teir gang  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Of?cers at various depa ments, w" z: 
systerri (maian about th politioal 4 1  up    i   
in one Eregard: the I i   1;    9'
blocksiof information req ired . 
remem'ber. As? one serg ant saidevery In addition, if investigatm

 

 

 

 

 

 



 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

entire state forga gang?reated s?usp a!     Irv i -.  
This effort ate PD 3 lot of staff Hour;   1 

i .  
Finally; one of igges't .: in:

- . ll  :55   
Don Mace, SpeCIal Age In Ch'arg?  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

l.  ..
vendor; because the van or retaine; as: - 

node Had to be; paid for eparatiely.

I. .
- . - f'-l -vI?Procjuremeint Phae 1

Cal DJ ?rst Hogan looking into re I.  
the? task, the werelusi  
Justice Planninfg (OCJP) that as I A  A
changes, they turned to comgute  -               
1995, this consiultantwo ed 0 th ..   A   
people; was like pulling teth. . 5  g-j:   ?y - 
way Of iresultswould. gay out any more unds. eTh A 

sourcel and th- potential did I
systenl. i 

After lending ;100:00u03' Jsliiliztl      
answe was 0'3 WUTS- Bahatth? "Nil  I 
  'rOVem    if . I 

went  to th raw'i'g board    
 
  
 
  
 
  
    
  
  

 

 

ti?elal?nsihip writ tIIe vestate and locaI I enforcemet. IIT 
It"  

Sat 00st, and Ia ries of meetings as

   g, the Cal I I
heyhad not bad clear in this d'Ieires  I 
between End the stat b? bd -

:Inon to make a dmposal. A't theiscon

don't want a Iihk We want a placme

 

DOJ. In De ember 1995, Cat II OJ 
vendor sketche out the ?rst utlin of   I

 

Clint DOJ went; t- OCJP with at feasbility I 
time, Orion waslined up with theSn D. I I

Node Advisory I ommittee (CGNA )1 a 

and was compl ted in Janua .

Throughout DonI Mac wia
funds and coor
supervisor at the time. 

 

?What we laid; as our requIremnts  1.. .-

already had our of a close prorieta

anyone into and Iernqhu it   r- 4 3

 

In addition to co taining text?ased dat 

about evely pie 9 of informationi 
and photograph  nicknamesthat gangs of evry type survi Igl I 

'i'l?trough an eas fgraphlcal  erI ihtrfa
to use collected. giang data an Inpge

I


informationinvestigative that alto i v.31,
between dispart? informatiq) Ii I
be accessed thr. hlaptop$ 
useyetCGNAC IS at} alisory board Hat:
GRELAT was la 3 r,

I I

agree It] abaIn I tfhearchaic$ Ste I I    I I
over to an (an-Ipa ed advisory {Ie fr  F.

    
  
   
     
   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I
.. Chan: ace came sot  abouII. 
IJOIIS litant. OFIIOI The CIGNEA meeting wesame month, .I the  
system we . declared of?pialiy 0mm? - . 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

inating the ddveiomen it" it?. I I I 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ss rootshde telop   

SELI lr?nrisir?rgly, despite
the ?Elyst?tm
witl?I Orion in Novem 
I: ,tIeIhlishrId hotwee
h: negotiath $3 at the state 
I'll 19.97., at which 
Seven months later,
It the state

   
  
 

1995 and by





 

?Why did this happen?" project dire - -r  
ll Ira: vendor felt like it was a matter at I
were responsive throu 

 

ystem Funding

 

 

 


gen Diego 

theprojeot go

  
 
     
  
  
 
   
 
 
 
   
  




i


 

and Ownershii I I .
i  .i I 

IIrIding the system we pm I  I

process- In addition, there (developed 'a I I

In the vendor being able to a -v   7 I

I?df?EEWl?l?il'e, while DCDJ was able Horn their initial OCJP grant to expa

modem left in their coffers. Obvious
$100,000, so Maceiwent back I-?fj. I . 1
its broughtom   F..- .
.prototype/demo. Orion was asking I- I . 7 i 

that this initial bid irlcluded not just 

I
softwa re tools as We?)

By this point, Mace

up an running. In the
opposed to all at  



C)
S.
03

OCJP provid $120

 

1

l-TI'rst,

 

 
   
  

ln the following yea
violence suppress funds. These

The problem for on was ?that had already spent lose to $1 millio
DOJ wanted to ?o I

user developed a 

 

.
nique agreemen .


was doing dem 0' 
In California. Very uickly, the comet I  I 
encouraged local law enforcement led   I 

the Governor's pm is. The biggest dra 
Wilson announced ta press confer: I  I 

 
 
 

.I


 

suppression funds. Coupled with th .I  I I. II 1
$520,000.. The limit to avoid hawth I I

he countered Orionl?s offer at that I  . I
and Mace applied and recered I: 3 
,1 OCJP awarde I  I . I
hardware and assi tlocal nodes  

lt Cal DOJ ?purchase? the system and became the owner, state law would not allow
ltto be sold by Orion to anyone else. That arrangement would be unworkable. Instead,
Cal DOJ and Orion agreed to a 99-year lease, which granted speci?c rights to each
party. Cal DOJ would receive the source code and contract for maintenance from Orion.
the QQ'Year term, Cal DOJ could give the software to any California justice agency.
Orton. for Its part could recoup its investment by retaining the right to sell the system

anywhere in the world, though inside California the Cal DOJ could bring on new sites
wrthout additional software licensing costs.

The System has enjoyed a huge success both in and out of California, resulting in a win-
wm for the parties involved. got a free proof of concept and they got a cutting edge

system they could sell,? said Mace. He also pointed out that through the whole process,
Orton never missed a single delivery date.

The development of the software drove the hardware needs. Ultimately, the beauty of
is that all an of?cer needs to access the system is a computer with a
browser and a password. Behind that interface, resides on the statewide
CLETS Intranet backbone. Each node requires either having a server in the user?s
of?ces to keep their data, or utilizing a server that resides at Cal DOJ. Initially, the ?rst
seven nodes (there are currently 11 nodes, including Cal DOJ) all purchased on-site
servers. More recent nodes have chosen to allow Cal DOJ to maintain their nodes, as
this reduces costs in training, maintenance, and hardware.

Servers are Compaq Proline 5000, single 200 processors with a minimum hard drive. Larger users like Los Angelesand Orange County have
had to add memory and processor resources. Those two sites currently have 512 MB of
RAM backed up by 36 GB hard drives.

Implementation Phase

Obstacles to implementing once designed and built as a prototype with the
San Diego Police Department (as described above), were largely political.

First, as noted before, despite extreme limitations?to the point of being nearly
useless?members of CGNAC had to be heavily pitched to move away from GREAT. It

was largely a question of changing from a grass roots-developed system with which they
were comfortable. More of a challenge, though, were the power, or perception of power,

issues.

Hosting and Maintaining the Data

Based on the technical aspects, it made more sense for Cal DOJ to host and maintain
the data, with the nodes accessing the data from their PCs. At that prOposal, CGNAC

and local law enforcement balked immediately. They already felt like they had seen the
state jam several other programs down their throats (like CLETS) and believed that DOJ
already had plenty of powerjust by controlling the purse strings through OCJP.

Ultimately, Cal DOJ bent on this issue, agreeing to allow the nodes to keep their local
regional databases and maintain their own data, which is replicated at DOJ. ?Politically,
we had to do it," said Mace. ?Technically, it has been a constant headache.?

CAUGANG 5

 

 

 

 
  

. I 

I   IEII
- Cal DO-J continues to allow this chi
that chooses to lace its data with 
are opting forth latt rapproach. 
San Diego, whi 
system 

 

 

ll'i?ti I 
I  CI'ili 31. I
i ll l'  Training and E357 Training, on th other hand, has has apI, . i  I. II: I 
insisted on endng with a user-trite dlthe Internet. There have nt  .-  I   ?Jilin: iI .  I
?Speed and ea. 9 of iIse were our man 0  - a?  I "IiiI   - 
Tom Gates, a rmer FBI agentwho ho .5      
er?tforcement peopleand we went company for input. The system was set! I: I I 

oi?cers. It is probably the most LIser+rind 

is like having a dog that walks itselfAll costs involved in'the system havebee
local and regional nodes and Cal DOU 

each node. There is also a formalized, It
[Detectives at most nodes are not allow? I

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

training. San Diego detectives said ih
necessary to bring detectives Up to sIfe
class could be taught in a single six- Iour 

I
Impact Phase I

has had a profound effect ort
Inception. While there continue mu??n?m-D 1 I h' i- . .l-llaw enforcement reticence to embra . i
system in recent memory can boast I
"The biggest problem we have had is I I
much It. would help, and how quickly llo al

?lit/e went from 366 endv?users on the I 

I   I
said Mace. ?It helps solve cases??w a 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Success Stories F?erl?mps the most Visible of the CALI *r  II

at three juvenile girls Imiet where the girls were lured into "We heard we word it?) 530 on? BOIOthe 98th that have 3p
the criminals would not he 
would have been more ard-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In the mom," said Jim KernsIIirreasgcgo nqueeatri?ltidn't know whether it was a ?rst name, a last name, or a moniker. Maybe
pames That_ at all. Turns out that Bolo was one of the gang member's street
4 . In ormatton turned up in and gave us his real name. From

there we went to work, and no -
prison for 22 to 24 years". every one of those guys has pled and Will be 90an to

 

South of Fresno, In Kern County, the system provided the information necessary to
conclusrvely refute a murder suspect?s alibi. "Members of our gang suppression unit
were able to refute an alibi of a homicide suspect simply by retrieving a three-year-old
?eld Interview card from said Carl Sparks, Sheriff of Kern County, in a

letter thanking Oovernor Pete Wilson for funding the system. "The application is
In our day-to?day work and instrumental in our effort to suppress street-
gang criminal 

ln the San Diego area, the El Cajon Police Department called up the San Diego Police
Department with a possible gang member ID request: the name ?Maria? tattooed across
the suspect?s chest. The man was from east San Diego County; he was Hispanic; and
the incident in question occurred on Sunshine Street. The system turned
up 13 possible matches. One of those possibilities had an address on Sunshine Street.
and an arrest was made. ?Ten years ago we couldn?t have found this just relying on

card ?les; ?ve years ago the process with GREAT would have been dif?cult, uncertain,
and said Dave Rohowitz, Sergeant, San Diego Street Gang Investigations Unit.
?Today, with we made the match in less than ?ve minutes."

Drawbacks

While these successes continue to build and are being repeated in other states as well,
some drawbacks continue to exist. These are primarily political in nature or related to

police of?cers? natural resistance to accepting change.

One example is that, while the system possesses excellent and easy-to-use photo
capabilities, most of?cers still won't take the time to photograph distinctive tattoos on
known gang members. Also, quite a few of?cers are still reluctant to release the old-

fashioned ?eld interview (Fl) cards. Instead, they keep their extensive but cumbersome
paper ?les, refuse to enter gang data in the computer, and the police department is
relegated to asking volunteers to re-enter this data in the system on a regular basis.

The ?nal issue that has created friction, though it has not affected the ef?cacy of
has been the addition of new nodes. Some agencies have been resistant
to the addition of new nodes, especially those outside of traditional law enforcement
agency de?nitions, like the state parole board, which was recently added. Parole was
?nally added only because state administrators pushed it through. Other questions have
been raised when smaller departments, which may not be as security-conscious as they

should: be, have been added to the system.

In the belief that sharing information is the key to success in law enforcement, Cal DOJ
continues to push for expansion of not only in their own state but possibly

as a nationwide gang information network, all working off the same system.

CAUGANG 7