Paul just informed me about this article that criticizes us for supposedly "ignoring leap day crimes."
In this ridiculous article this "journalist" states:
"You have to go to the fine print—an asterisk at the bottom of the stats—to get what's kind of an explanation: "Crime figures for February 29, 2008 . . . were excluded to ensure accurate comparisons.""
Well, duh. How else would we continue to claim to be down in crime if we have to count crimes that occurred on a day that didn't even happen last year? Some journalist this clown is. I mean, there was no February 29, 2007, so why would we want to count that day this year? CompStat is all about numbers, folks. Mike tells me every single week that the numbers need to look great, otherwise I better start packing my suitcases. It's a team effort and I do my part.
And, of course, this prick had to bring up that jerk-off Bratton and what he does in Los Angeles:
" It's a no-brainer. One member of the LAPD CompStat unit, surprised that such a question about Leap Day stats would even come up, told the Voice: "That's a day. There was crime that day. So it was included.""
I've ordered Paul to make sure the author has his press credentials revoked and is permanently blacklisted. Because if I don't react quickly to this who knows what'll be printed up in the papers next, ie. "Rampant Index Crime Reclassification," "Complaint Downgrading," "Crimes Being Sent To Circular File," etc, etc. We can't have that.
No comments:
Post a Comment