1

Week 1 Discussion

The term "thief-taker" refers to an individual who was hired to retrieve stolen goods from

criminals and bring them to justice. This practice was popular in England and the United States

during the 17th & 18th centuries. However, the practice of using a thief-taker to solve crimes

was not without issues. The following are some of the problems that have been linked to the use

of a thief-taker:

 Corruption: The thief-taker was often corrupt. They would often accept bribes from

criminals in exchange for letting them go free, or they would falsely charge innocent

people with crimes. This resulted in a low level of trust in criminal justice and a feeling

of unfairness among the public.

 False allegations: Theft-takers were encouraged to make arrests and retrieve stolen

items, even if that meant falsely accusing innocent people of a crime. This resulted in

numerous false allegations and wrongful convictions.

 Violence: Theft-takers were known to use violence to retrieve stolen items or to arrest

suspects. This resulted in a culture of lawlessness and vigilantism.

 Lack of training: Thief-takers did not receive the necessary training in law enforcement

or investigative techniques, resulting in errors and lack of professionalism.

 Thieves often competed with one another for monetary rewards and accolades, resulting

in a lack of collaboration and co-ordination in their activities, thus hindering the

resolution of intricate crimes and the apprehension of perpetrators.

All in all, it can be concluded that while thief-taker solutions have been used in the past

to solve crimes, their use has been linked to a number of issues, such as corruption, false

allegations, violence, inadequate training, and lack of competition. These issues illustrate the
 2

need for a professional and trained police force that works within the framework of the legal

system and has the public's trust and confidence.

There are similarities and differences between the early American police forces and the

Metropolitan Police. These similarities include the fact that both the American and London

police forces were established in the 1800s, they both sought to keep law and order in society,

they both had a hierarchical structure with the Chief or Commissioner at the top and the officers

at the bottom, and they both used uniforms to differentiate between officers and civilians.

The main differences are as follows: Early American police forces were decentralized,

meaning each town or city had its own police department. In contrast, London Metropolitan

Police is centralized and covers the whole city. Early American policing efforts tended to

be corrupt and inefficient. Politicians appointed police officers based on their connections rather

than on merit. London Metropolitan Police was established with a professional and

impartial police force. The early American police efforts tended to control and suppress

marginalized groups such as immigrants or African Americans.

Although London Metropolitan Police did have its share of racism and discrimination in

its early days, it was founded with the goal of serving every member of society fairly. Initial

American police efforts were heavily reliant on using force (including deadly force) to keep

order. While the early American police were authorized to use groups such as immigrants or

African Americans.

In conclusion, while both the early American and London Metropolitan Police were

concerned with the preservation of law and order, the structure, professionalism, concentration,

and methodology of policing were distinct.

 3

References