South Durham Criminal Incident Reports for September 2024

Do you find reporting like this valuable? Support Southpoint Access as a subscriber or advertising sponsor and make it possible to keep this information flowing to readers in our community!

According to the City of Durham Police Department’s LexisNexis Community Crime Map, during the past month our South Durham neighborhoods have seen a range of criminal activities and incidents, from property crimes like larceny and vandalism to more serious offenses, including assault and sexual violence.

The data indicates that residents between Aug. 24 and Sept. 11 have reported:

• Thefts: 27.
• Motor vehicle thefts: 26.
• Aggravated assaults: 9.
• Arson: 2.
• Blackmail/extortion: 2.
• Commercial burglaries: 6.
• Commercial robbery: 1.
• Death investigations: 10.
• Disorderly conduct: 1.
• Drug/narcotics violations: 10.
• Fraud/forgery: 22.
• Harassment/intimidation: 22.
• Kidnapping/human trafficking: 1.
• Missing person/runaway: 3.
• Motor vehicle burglaries: 22.
• Motor vehicle thefts: 26.
• Offenses against family – neglect: 1.
• Residential burglaries: 10.
• Robbery of individuals: 2.
• Sex offenses: 8.
• Simple assault: 33.
• Vandalism: 23.

Here’s a sampling of recent incidents around our area. ChatGPT assisted with the analysis of the data:

Aggravated Assault

Aug. 24

• 10:38 p.m.: Home of offender/multi-family in the 600 block of Barton Street.

Aug. 25

• 12:54 a.m.: Home of victim/single-family in the 2100 block of Charles Street.
• 1:35 a.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 900 block of Wadesboro Street.
• 4:25 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 4200 block of Garrett Road.

Aug. 29

• 7:01 p.m.: Parking/drop lot/garage in the 600 block of East Main Street.

Aug. 30

• 12:06 a.m.: Home of victim/single-family in the 600 block of Dunbar Street.

Sept 2

• 2:15 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 2800 block of Bainbridge Drive.

Sept. 4

• 8:24 a.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 5100 block of Revere Road.
• 9:45 p.m.: Home of offender/single-family in the 2500 block of Lane Street.

What Does the Data Tell Us?

Aggravated assault typically involves a physical attack or the threat of violence using a weapon or with the intent to cause serious injury.

1. Locations of Incidents:

• The incidents occurred in residential areas, including both single-family and multi-family homes (e.g., Barton Street, Charles Street, Wadesboro Street, Dunbar Street, Bainbridge Drive, Revere Road, Lane Street). This suggests that many of these assaults are likely tied to domestic violence, family disputes, or conflicts between neighbors or acquaintances.
• A few incidents took place in public spaces, such as a parking garage on East Main Street. This shows that some assaults may also occur in more open or public areas, though these instances are less frequent compared to those in private homes.

2. Timing of Incidents:

• The incidents are distributed across different times, including late at night (e.g., 12:54 a.m., 1:35 a.m.) and during the day (e.g., 4:25 p.m., 2:15 p.m.). This suggests that assaults occur both in the context of late-night domestic disputes and daytime altercations.
• The late-night assaults might point to situations where alcohol or drugs play a role, especially in cases of domestic violence or disputes among acquaintances.

3. Residential Nature of Assaults:

• The fact that a large number of these assaults occurred in homes—whether single-family or multi-family—indicates that a significant portion of aggravated assaults in South Durham are likely the result of domestic violence or family-related disputes. This aligns with broader trends in aggravated assault, where individuals are often assaulted by someone they know, including partners, family members, or close acquaintances.
• The presence of multi-family residences as frequent locations could suggest that close living quarters may contribute to heightened tensions or conflicts, leading to violence.

4. Weapons or Serious Intent:

• Since aggravated assault involves the use of a weapon or serious physical force, it is likely that some of these incidents involved knives, firearms, or other dangerous objects. The seriousness of this crime points to situations where perpetrators intended to cause significant harm, often in the heat of an argument or conflict.

5. Public and Private Safety Concerns:

• Although most incidents took place in homes, the presence of assaults in public places such as a parking garage highlights concerns about public safety. Even though these are less common, assaults in public areas can create a heightened sense of vulnerability, especially for people using public facilities or parking lots.

6. Potential Contributing Factors:

• Domestic violence likely plays a significant role in many of these incidents, particularly those occurring in residential settings. These types of assaults are often linked to ongoing relationship conflicts, emotional stress, or substance abuse.
• In cases where assaults occurred in public spaces, contributing factors could include random altercations, disputes between acquaintances, or road rage incidents.

7. Impact on the Community:

• Fear and insecurity: Aggravated assaults, especially in residential areas, can lead to fear and insecurity among neighbors. These incidents disrupt the sense of safety within homes and communities, particularly when they involve weapons or result in serious injury.
• Emotional and financial strain: Victims of aggravated assault often experience significant emotional trauma, in addition to medical expenses and potential legal battles that arise from these violent encounters.

Overall Insight

This data indicates that most assaults are taking place in residential settings, suggesting that domestic violence and family disputes are driving factors behind many of these violent incidents. The presence of multi-family residences points to the potential for conflicts between neighbors or within close living quarters. A smaller number of assaults occurring in public spaces, such as a parking garage, highlights additional concerns about public safety in certain areas. Overall, the data underscores the seriousness of these crimes, which often involve weapons or significant physical force, leading to substantial harm and trauma.

Recommendations

1. Domestic Violence Prevention and Support:
   • Implement programs aimed at addressing domestic violence, such as community outreach, counseling services, and hotlines for victims to seek help before situations escalate into violence.
   • Community education campaigns can raise awareness about the signs of domestic violence and provide resources for those in need of assistance.
2. Increased Security in Public Spaces:
   • Strengthen security measures in public areas such as parking lots and garages by installing surveillance cameras and increasing police patrols in high-risk areas.
   • Encourage businesses and residents to take proactive measures to ensure safety in shared spaces, particularly in multi-family residential buildings.
3. Conflict Resolution Programs:
   • Offer conflict resolution programs to address disputes within neighborhoods or multi-family living environments. These programs can provide people with tools to de-escalate arguments before they turn violent.
4. Substance Abuse Support:
   • Many violent incidents may be tied to alcohol or drug use. Offering substance abuse prevention and rehabilitation programs could help reduce the occurrence of violence tied to substance-induced altercations.

By focusing on these strategies, the community can work to reduce the prevalence of aggravated assault and foster a safer environment for all residents.

Arson

Aug. 24

• 5:40 p.m.: Other residence/multi-family in the 2800 block of Rochelle Street.

Aug. 25

• 12:15 a.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 4600 block of University Drive.

Blackmail/Extortion

Sept. 3

• 12 p.m.: Cyberspace in the 700 block of Keystone Park Drive.

Sept. 4

• 5:20 p.m.: Cyberspace in the 2300 block of Cherry Creek Drive.

What Does the Data Tell Us?

This data provides the following insights:

1. Use of Cyberspace for Crime:
   • Both reported incidents of blackmail/extortion occurred in cyberspace, specifically associated with physical addresses on Keystone Park Drive and Cherry Creek Drive. This suggests that these crimes were carried out online, indicating a shift toward digital crime as opposed to traditional physical extortion methods.
   • The use of cyberspace aligns with modern trends in cybercrime, where perpetrators exploit digital platforms to intimidate, threaten, or extort victims for money or information.
2. Targeting of Specific Locations:
   • The fact that both incidents are tied to specific addresses could mean that they involve individuals or businesses in those areas, but the incidents themselves likely occurred via digital channels. It’s also possible that these addresses are linked to offices or homes of victims or offenders who were involved in the extortion schemes.
3. Time and Frequency:
   • Both incidents happened within a short span of time—one on Sept. 3 at noon and the other on Sept. 4 at 5:20 p.m. This close timing might indicate a rising trend or ongoing operation, or it could suggest that a single group or individual is responsible for multiple cases in the area.
4. Common Tactics:
   • Given that both crimes involved cyberspace, it’s likely that common methods such as phishing, ransomware, or threatening communications were employed. In blackmail and extortion schemes, criminals often use tactics like demanding payments in exchange for not releasing sensitive information, threatening reputational damage, or exploiting personal weaknesses.

Overall Insight:

This data reflects the growing presence of cybercrime within the community. With both cases taking place in cyberspace, it highlights the vulnerability of individuals and businesses to digital threats. This underscores the importance of cybersecurity awareness and precautions, especially for those operating online or handling sensitive information. The data also suggests that authorities may need to focus on combating online extortion schemes through targeted investigations and increased public education about how to recognize and avoid such threats.

Burglary – Commercial

Aug. 23

• 2:47 a.m.: Convenience store in the 4700 block of NC Highway 55.

Aug. 26

• 2:02 p.m.: Hotel/motel in the 1800 block of NC Highway 54 East.
• 5:30 p.m.: Construction site in the 500 block of East Main Street.

Aug. 30

• 6 p.m.: Commercial office building on Morcroft Lane.

Sept. 7

• 5:23 a.m.: Convenience store in the 2900 block of Durham-Chapel Hill Boulevard.

Sept. 8

• 12 a.m.: Specialty/store in the 5100 block of Farrington Road.

What Does the Data Tell Us?

This data reveals several key insights:

1. Types of Targets:

• The incidents occurred at various types of commercial properties, including convenience stores, hotels/motels, construction sites, commercial office buildings, and specialty stores. This suggests that businesses, regardless of size or industry, are at risk for burglary.
• The presence of construction sites and commercial offices among the targets may indicate that equipment, materials, or valuable office assets (like electronics) are being stolen, as these locations often contain items of high resale value.

2. Time of Incidents:

• Most incidents occurred either in the early morning (e.g., 2:47 a.m. at a convenience store on Aug. 23, 5:23 a.m. at another store on Sept. 7) or later in the day (e.g., 6 p.m. at a commercial office on Aug. 30). This suggests that burglars may target businesses when they are either closed or at less busy times, indicating a preference for low-visibility or low-traffic periods to minimize the chance of being caught.

3. Geographic Spread:

• These burglaries are spread across different locations, from highways (NC Highway 55 and NC Highway 54) to urban streets (East Main Street, Farrington Road). The variety of locations indicates that these crimes are not isolated to any one part of the city or commercial area, suggesting a widespread issue affecting businesses in different neighborhoods and types of business districts.

4. Possible Motivations:

• The fact that convenience stores and construction sites are frequently targeted suggests that quick cash items, tools, or materials may be primary motivations. Convenience stores often have cash on hand and easy-to-sell goods like cigarettes or alcohol, while construction sites may have valuable tools or equipment.
• Commercial offices may also contain electronics (computers, monitors, etc.) or other items that can be easily stolen and sold.

5. Potential Vulnerabilities:

• Hotels and motels being included in the list of burglary targets could point to vulnerabilities in security protocols, such as lack of surveillance or limited security personnel. Additionally, construction sites and office buildings may have less comprehensive after-hours security, making them attractive to burglars.

Overall Insight:

The commercial burglary data suggests that businesses across a range of industries are vulnerable to theft, particularly during low-traffic hours (early morning or late evening). This highlights the need for better security measures such as surveillance systems, alarms, and possibly on-site security personnel, particularly for businesses that hold valuable inventory, cash, or equipment. Given the wide geographic spread, commercial areas throughout the community may benefit from increased police patrols or community security initiatives aimed at deterring theft in commercial zones.

Burglary – Motor Vehicle

Aug. 22

• 9:30 p.m.: Hotel/motel in the 7800 block of Leonardo Drive.

Aug. 23

• 4:47 a.m.: Hotel/motel in the 4800 block of Page Creek Lane.
• 6 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 1400 block of Holly Hill Drive.
• 7:30 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 4300 block of Waterford Valley Drive.

Aug. 26

• 3 p.m.: Parking/drop lot/garage in the 2600 block of Page Road.
• 4:30 p.m.: Commercial office building in the 201200 block of West Alexander Drive.
• 5:42 p.m.: Commercial office building in the 4300 block of Emperor Boulevard.

Aug. 28

• 1 a.m.: Convenience store in the 3000 block of South Miami Boulevard.
• 8 p.m.: Hotel/motel in the 5200 block of Page Road.

Aug. 29

• 3:06 p.m.: Shopping mall in the 8000 block of Renaissance Parkway.

Sept. 4

• 3:35 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 300 block of Tarleton East.
• 6 p.m.: Restaurant in the 3500 block of Mt. Moriah Road.
• 9:36 p.m.: Amusement park in the 4500 block of the Durham-Chapel Hill Boulevard.

Sept. 5

• 6:35 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 5800 block of Tattersall Drive.

Sept. 6

• 10 p.m.: Home of victim/single-family on Chancery Place.

Sept. 7

• 11 p.m.: Home of victim/single-family in the 400 block of Pearson Drive.

Sept. 8

• 10:45 a.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 1100 block of Medlin Road.
• 11 a.m.: Grocery/supermarket in the 1100 block of NC Highway 54 West.

Sept. 9

• 12 a.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 5000 block of South Alston Avenue.

Sept. 10

• 7:30 a.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 4600 block of University Drive.
• 11:30 a.m.: Home of victim/single-family in the 1800 block of Bradford Circle.
• 1:20 p.m.: Parking/drop lot/garage in the 2100 block of Charles Street.

What Does the Data Tell Us?

This data provides important insights into the frequency, location, and nature of motor vehicle burglaries:

1. Prevalence and Frequency:

• With 22 incidents reported over a relatively short time span, motor vehicle burglaries represent a significant portion of crime in this dataset. This suggests that vehicles, whether parked in residential or commercial areas, are frequent targets for burglars.

2. Common Locations:

• Hotels/motels (e.g., Leonardo Drive, Page Creek Lane, Page Road) and parking/drop lots/garages (e.g., Page Road, Charles Street) are frequent sites of motor vehicle burglaries. This suggests that locations with a large number of unattended vehicles, especially in temporary or overnight parking, are attractive targets.
• Residential areas (e.g., Holly Hill Drive, Tarleton East, Tattersall Drive, Pearson Drive) are also common burglary sites, indicating that personal vehicles parked outside homes are at risk. Multi-family residences seem particularly vulnerable.
• Commercial areas, such as shopping malls (Renaissance Parkway) and restaurants (Mt. Moriah Road), also feature in the list, showing that burglars target vehicles in busy commercial zones, possibly during the day when people are away from their cars for longer periods.

3. Timing of Incidents:

• The burglaries happened at various times, from early morning (e.g., 1 a.m., 3 a.m.) to evening hours (e.g., 6 p.m., 9:30 p.m.). The fact that incidents are spread throughout the day suggests that burglars strike at both night and day, depending on the location, with hotels/motels and residential areas being high-risk during late hours and commercial locations more vulnerable during the day.

4. Potential Targets in Vehicles:

• Burglars likely target vehicles for valuable items left inside, such as electronics (GPS devices, laptops), wallets, purses, and other easily resellable items. Vehicles in busy or transient locations (like hotels or shopping malls) may be especially vulnerable if owners leave valuables in plain sight or assume their vehicles are secure.

5. Vulnerable Vehicle Types and Areas:

• The data suggests that multi-family residences and commercial lots are particularly prone to vehicle burglaries. In multi-family residences, vehicles may be parked in shared lots or streets, where security measures (e.g., surveillance, gated access) may not be as stringent as in single-family homes.
• In commercial zones, large parking lots make it easier for burglars to act unnoticed, especially in areas without extensive surveillance or security patrols.

Overall Insight:

This data indicates a pervasive issue affecting both residential and commercial areas. It underscores the importance of securing personal belongings in vehicles, such as by removing valuables from plain view, locking doors, and parking in well-lit or monitored areas. For businesses and residential communities, installing better surveillance systems and patrols in parking lots could deter thieves. Additionally, public awareness campaigns encouraging drivers to take extra precautions with their vehicles, especially in vulnerable areas like hotels or multi-family residences, may help reduce incidents.

Burglary – Residential

Aug. 21

• 10:02 a.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 5900 block of Tattersall Drive.

Aug. 23

• 6 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 1700 block of Palmer Street.

Aug. 24

• 3:29 a.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 200 block of Laurel Avenue.

Aug. 26

• 12:40 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 1200 block of Rose Garden Lane.
• 9:30 p.m.: Shed/residential outbuilding in the 600 block of Bacon Street.

Aug. 27

• 12 a.m.: Shed/residential outbuilding in the 110 block of East Main Street.
• 9 p.m.: Shed/residential outbuilding in the 1200 block of Worth Street.

Aug. 31

• 12 p.m.: Multi-family residence in the 3500 block of Louis Stephens Drive.

Sept. 8

• 8:35 a.m.: Home of victim/single-family in the 800 block of Springdale Drive.

What Does the Data Tell Us?

This data provides several insights into the nature of these crimes, focusing on residential areas:

1. Types of Residences Targeted:

• Both single-family and multi-family homes were targeted in the reported burglaries, but multi-family residences appear more frequently. This suggests that burglars may perceive multi-family dwellings, such as apartments or townhomes, as easier targets due to:
  • Greater anonymity and access in buildings with multiple units.
  • The likelihood that neighbors are less familiar with each other, reducing the chance of someone noticing suspicious activity.
  • Fewer or lower-quality security measures in some multi-family units compared to single-family homes.

2. Locations of Incidents:

• The burglaries occurred in various neighborhoods, with incidents reported in streets like Tattersall Drive, Palmer Street, and Worth Street. This suggests that residential burglaries are not confined to one specific area or neighborhood but are instead dispersed across the community.
• The presence of outbuildings or sheds (e.g., Bacon Street, Worth Street) in the data indicates that burglars also target external storage spaces for tools, bikes, and other valuable items that may be less secure.

3. Timing and Patterns:

• Incidents occurred at various times of the day, with no clear pattern regarding whether daytime or nighttime burglaries were more common. For instance:
  • Aug. 24 at 3:29 a.m. (multi-family residence on Laurel Avenue).
  • Aug. 26 at 12:40 p.m. (multi-family residence on Rose Garden Lane).
  • Aug. 31 at 12 p.m. (multi-family residence on Louis Stephens Drive).
  • This variability suggests that burglars may strike when homes are unoccupied, such as early morning or midday, when residents may be at work or school.

4. Potential Motivations:

• Residential burglaries typically involve the theft of electronics, jewelry, cash, or other valuable household items that are relatively easy to transport and resell.
• The targeting of sheds and outbuildings indicates that burglars may also be after outdoor equipment, tools, or bicycles, which may be stored with less security than items inside homes.

5. Security Vulnerabilities:

• The data suggests that some homes may lack adequate security, such as alarm systems or surveillance cameras, making them more appealing targets for burglars.
• Multi-family residences could have shared entrances or unsecured entry points (e.g., back doors, windows), which may be exploited by burglars. Additionally, homes with sheds or outbuildings may have weaker locks or less frequent monitoring, providing easy opportunities for theft.

Overall Insight:

The residential burglary data highlights a widespread issue affecting both single-family and multi-family homes. Multi-family dwellings appear particularly vulnerable, likely due to shared spaces and potential gaps in security measures. The wide range of times for these incidents shows that burglars strike opportunistically, likely when homes are unoccupied.

Recommendations:

• Improved home security measures, such as installing alarm systems, surveillance cameras, and strong locks for doors, windows, and outbuildings, can reduce vulnerability.
• Community awareness campaigns encouraging neighbors to watch out for suspicious activity and report it may deter burglaries in residential areas.
• Better security protocols in multi-family buildings, such as controlled access points and well-lit areas, could help prevent burglaries in those environments.

Death Investigation

Aug. 22

• 12 a.m.: Home of victim/single-family in the 100 block of Laurel Avenue.

Aug. 23

• 10:30 a.m.: Home of victim/single-family in the 200 block of Alumni Avenue.
• 3:40 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 5900 block of Farrington Road.

Aug. 24

• 12 a.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 700 block of South Roxboro Street.

Aug. 27

• 5:20 a.m.: Other/unknown in the 1200 block of East Pettigrew Street and South Alston Avenue.

Aug. 29

• 12 a.m.: Home of victim/multi-family on Balmoray Court.
• 10:55 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 4500 block of Hope Valley Road.

Sept. 1

• 11:30 p.m.: Home of victim/single-family in the 4100 block of Lumley Road.

Sept. 6

• 2:51 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 1300 block of Seaton Road.

What Does the Data Tell Us?

This data provides significant insights into the context and characteristics of the incidents being investigated:

1. Residential Focus:

• Most of the death investigations occurred at residential locations, including both single-family and multi-family homes. This suggests that many of these deaths likely took place in domestic settings, which may point to natural causes, unattended deaths, or possible criminal activities occurring within the home.
• Specific locations, like Laurel Avenue, Alumni Avenue, and Farrington Road, are mentioned multiple times, indicating that these are neighborhoods where such incidents are occurring, although it doesn’t suggest a clear pattern of repeat occurrences in the same exact spot.

2. Types of Residences:

• The data shows a mix of single-family and multi-family homes involved in death investigations. The presence of multi-family residences might indicate environments with higher population density, where people live in closer quarters and might not notice or report deaths immediately, such as in the case of elderly or isolated individuals.

3. Time of Incidents:

• The data doesn’t provide specific patterns in terms of times of death, but it does indicate that these investigations happen at all hours, such as:
  • 12 a.m. on several occasions (e.g., South Roxboro Street, Balmoray Court).
  • 10:30 a.m. on Alumni Avenue.
  • Late evening (e.g., 10:55 p.m. on Hope Valley Road).
• This variety suggests that deaths are being discovered at different times, possibly by family members, neighbors, or authorities, depending on the circumstances.

Disorderly Conduct

Aug. 22

• 7:44 a.m.: Service/gas station in the 1900 block of NC Highway 55.

Drugs/Narcotics Violation

Aug. 21

• 7:56 p.m.: Home of offender/multi-family in the 5900 block of Tattersall Drive.

Aug. 22

• 10:26 a.m.: Highway/road/alley/street/sidewalk in the 600 block of Fayetteville Street and East Lakewood Avenue.
• 2:57 p.m.: Highway/road/alley/street/sidewalk in the 1400 block of Angier Avenue and South Goley Street.
• 6:28 p.m.: Highway/road/alley/street/sidewalk in the 1200 block of Merrick Street and Simmons Street.
• 8 p.m.: Highway/road/alley/street/sidewalk in the 1600 block of Fayetteville Street and Moline Street.

Aug. 23

• 12:35 p.m.: Highway/road/alley/street/sidewalk in the 900 block of Angier Avenue.

Aug. 24

• 11:06 a.m.: Highway/road/alley/street/sidewalk in the 900 block of Alston Avenue and Price Avenue.

Aug. 25

• 12:46 p.m.: Hotel/motel in the 900 block of Slater Road.

Aug. 26

• 4:13 p.m.: Park/playground in the 200 block of South Elm Street.

Aug. 29

• 10:37 a.m.: Highway/road/alley/street/sidewalk in the 1800 block of Southpoint Crossing Drive and NC Highway 54 West.

What Does the Data Tell Us?

This data offers valuable insights into the nature and distribution of drug-related offenses in the community:

1. Location Patterns:

• Most of the drug/narcotics violations occurred in public spaces, such as highways, streets, sidewalks, and even a park/playground (South Elm Street). This suggests that drug activity is happening in open, public locations, often in areas where there is a lot of foot traffic and visibility.
• Specific streets such as Fayetteville Street, Angier Avenue, Merrick Street, and Goley Street appear multiple times, which may indicate that these streets are hotspots for drug-related activity. This could signal issues like open drug markets or known areas for drug trafficking.

2. Residential and Community Spaces Involved:

• Some incidents occurred in or near residential areas (e.g., Tattersall Drive, Price Avenue), pointing to the possibility of drug use or distribution within communities. This might suggest that certain neighborhoods are dealing with the presence of drugs in residential settings, either through small-scale dealing, use, or even addiction issues among residents.
• The presence of violations in or near hotels/motels (e.g., Slater Road) and playgrounds may reflect that drug-related activities are often centered in places with transient populations or where people may congregate.

3. Time and Frequency:

• The data spans multiple days and times, indicating that drug activity occurs both during the daytime and evening hours. For instance:
  • 7:56 p.m. at Tattersall Drive (residential)
  • 8 p.m. at Fayetteville and Moline Street (public)
  • 11:06 a.m. at Alston Avenue and Price Avenue (public)
• This lack of a time pattern suggests that drug activity is continuous throughout the day and not limited to certain hours, indicating a more persistent issue.

4. Public Safety Concerns:

• The presence of drug/narcotics violations in parks and sidewalks indicates a potential public safety concern, as these areas are commonly frequented by families and children. Drug activity in these spaces could lead to concerns about exposure to illegal activities and the risk of violence or accidental drug encounters (e.g., discarded needles).
• Hotels and motels are often linked to transient populations and can be hubs for drug use or trafficking, especially if they are located in areas with less security or oversight.

5. Criminal Activity and Law Enforcement Focus:

• Drug-related offenses are typically associated with other criminal activities, such as theft, vandalism, or assaults, as drug users or traffickers often engage in additional illegal behavior. The frequency and distribution of these violations suggest that law enforcement may need to focus on specific neighborhoods or public areas where drug activity is more prevalent.
• The data also indicates that drugs are not confined to hidden or private areas but are present in public spaces, requiring increased law enforcement patrols and community engagement to address the issue.

Overall Insight:

The data points to a pervasive issue of drug-related activity in both public spaces and residential areas, with certain streets and neighborhoods acting as hotspots. The widespread presence of drugs in parks, streets, and transient locations like hotels suggests a significant public safety concern, with potential risks to families and community members.

Recommendations:

• Increased police presence in known hotspots, particularly around streets frequently mentioned, public parks, and playgrounds, could help reduce drug activity in these areas.
• Community outreach programs focused on drug education, prevention, and rehabilitation may help address the root causes of the problem, particularly in residential areas where drug use may be more prevalent.
• Improved safety measures in public spaces, such as better lighting, surveillance cameras, and regular patrols, could deter drug activity and make these areas safer for residents.

Fraud/Forgery

Aug. 23

• 12 a.m.: Cyberspace in the 400 block of Cross Country Way.
• 5 p.m.: Convenience store in the 7500 block of NC Highway 751.

Aug. 24

• 6:30 a.m.: Convenience store in the 100 block of Herbert Street.
• 2:30 p.m.: Shopping mall in the 700 block of Audubon Lake Drive.

Aug. 25

• 9:18 a.m.: Cyberspace in the 700 block of South Alston Avenue.
• 10:05 a.m.: Department discount store in the 4200 block of University Drive.

Aug. 26

• 12 a.m.: Grocery/supermarket in the 200 block of NC Highway 54 West.

Aug. 27

• 5:30 p.m.: Restaurant in the 5400 block of South Miami Boulevard.
• 7:58 p.m.: Drug store/doctor’s office/hospital in the 400 block of East Woodcroft Parkway.
• 9:01 p.m.: Bank/savings and loan in the 1800 block of Martin Luther King Jr. Parkway.

Aug. 28

• 7:32 p.m.: Home of victim/single-family in the 331500 block of View Street.
• 8:17 p.m.: Restaurant in the 3100 block of Shannon Road.
• 9:10 p.m.: Drug store/doctor’s office/hospital in the 400 block of East Woodcroft Parkway.

Aug. 29

• 4:45 p.m.: Home of offender/multi-family in the 5500 block of Primary Drive.
• 5:59 p.m.: Cyberspace in the 1600 block of Snowmass Way.

Aug. 31

• 7:28 a.m.: Convenience store in the 1200 block of University Drive.

Sept. 2

• 12 a.m.: Cyberspace in the 1200 block of Haventree Road.

Sept. 4

• 3:48 p.m.: Cyberspace in the 1300 block of Cook Road.

Sept. 5

• 12 a.m.: Cyberspace in the 1800 block of Martin Luther King Jr. Parkway.
• 9:43 a.m.: Other residence/multi-family in the 1900 block of Riddle Road.

Sept. 7

• 11:59 a.m.: Convenience store in the 100 block of West Cornwallis Road.

Sept. 9

• 4:30 p.m.: Convenience store in the 400 block of East Woodcroft Parkway.

Sept. 10

• 12:04 a.m.: Grocery/supermarket in the 1800 block of Martin Luther King Jr. Parkway.

What Does the Data Tell Us?

The data provides several key insights into the types, locations, and nature of these crimes:

1. Diverse Targets and Locations:

• Fraud and forgery incidents occurred across a wide range of locations, including cyberspace, convenience stores, drug stores, restaurants, grocery stores, department stores, and private residences. This variety of locations suggests that fraud and forgery affect both businesses and individuals, with incidents happening in both physical and digital spaces.
• The frequent mention of cyberspace locations, such as on Cross Country Way, South Alston Avenue, Cook Road, and others, shows that online fraud is a major component of these crimes, likely including identity theft, phishing scams, and financial fraud conducted over the internet.
• Physical fraud at locations like convenience stores, restaurants, drug stores, and banks (e.g., NC Highway 55, Woodcroft Parkway, Martin Luther King Jr. Parkway) suggests more traditional forms of fraud, such as the use of counterfeit money, fraudulent checks, or stolen credit cards.

2. Geographic Spread and Repetition:

• Certain locations and types of businesses are mentioned multiple times (e.g., NC Highway 751, University Drive, East Woodcroft Parkway). This repetition suggests that certain areas or business types (like convenience stores and grocery stores) may be more vulnerable to fraud, possibly due to high transaction volume, lower levels of scrutiny, or the fact that these businesses often handle large amounts of cash and credit card transactions.
• The incidents are spread across a range of neighborhoods and commercial districts, showing that fraud and forgery are widespread issues affecting various parts of the community, without being isolated to a specific geographic area.

3. Online and Digital Fraud:

• The presence of several fraud cases tied to cyberspace indicates a strong digital component to these crimes. This could include:
  • Identity theft: Fraudsters stealing personal information to open accounts or make purchases.
  • Phishing scams: Targeting individuals or businesses to gain sensitive information like passwords or financial details.
  • Online payment fraud: Using stolen or counterfeit credit card information to make online purchases.
• The rise in cyber-related fraud reflects a growing trend toward digital crime, where criminals exploit the anonymity and convenience of the internet to commit fraud, often across state or even international lines.

4. Types of Fraud/Offenses:

• The data likely includes a mix of financial fraud (e.g., using stolen credit cards or counterfeit checks) and identity theft (e.g., online scams or forging personal information).
• Fraud involving retail and convenience stores might include counterfeit money or fraudulent checks, while online/cyberspace-related fraud is likely to involve phishing scams, credit card fraud, or identity theft.
• The range of businesses affected by these incidents suggests that criminals are targeting places where large numbers of transactions occur or where security checks may be less stringent, such as retail stores, restaurants, or small businesses.

5. Possible Motivations and Methods:

• Fraud and forgery often involve attempts to obtain money, goods, or services illegally by using false information, counterfeit documents, or stolen identities.
• The variety of locations and methods indicates that fraudsters may use multiple tactics, such as:
  • Fake checks or counterfeit currency at stores and restaurants.
  • Stolen credit card numbers for online purchases.
  • Phishing emails or phone calls to trick victims into providing personal information.
  • Fraudulent loan applications or false identities used to secure financial services from banks or loan agencies.

6. Vulnerable Populations and Businesses:

• The data suggests that both individuals and businesses are victims of fraud and forgery. Individuals are likely targeted through identity theft and cyberspace fraud, while businesses, especially convenience stores, restaurants, drug stores, and grocery stores, may be more vulnerable to financial fraud in person.
• Online fraud could particularly affect those who are less aware of the latest cybersecurity threats or who may not have robust security measures in place, such as smaller businesses or individuals with limited digital literacy.

Overall Insight:

The fraud/forgery data suggests that these crimes are both diverse and widespread, affecting a broad range of locations and involving both traditional and digital forms of fraud. The rise in cyberspace-related fraud reflects the increasing prevalence of online financial crimes, while traditional businesses like convenience stores and grocery stores remain vulnerable to in-person fraud involving counterfeit money, stolen cards, or fake checks.

Recommendations:

• Businesses: Strengthen security protocols by improving transaction verification systems, such as using chip readers, monitoring transactions for suspicious activity, and training staff to recognize counterfeit currency or fake checks.
• Individuals: Increase awareness of cybersecurity threats and take steps to protect personal information, such as using strong, unique passwords, enabling two-factor authentication, and avoiding phishing scams.
• Law enforcement: Focus efforts on digital crime units to combat the growing issue of cyber fraud while continuing to work with local businesses to detect and prevent financial fraud at the retail level.
• Community education: Launch initiatives to educate residents and business owners about recognizing and reporting fraudulent activity, both online and in-person.

Harassment/Intimidation

Aug. 22

• 9:30 a.m.: Parking lot/drop lot/garage in the 8000 block of Renaissance Parkway.

Aug. 23

• 3:29 p.m.: Bar/nightclub in the 200 block of Hood Street.
• 8:28 p.m.: Convenience store in the 1200 block of University Drive.
• 9:22 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 1800 block of Williamsburg Road.

Aug. 25

• 12 a.m.: Department discount store in the 4200 block of University Drive.

Aug. 26

• 9:59 a.m.: Cyberspace in the 1300 block of South Briggs Avenue.
• 5:30 p.m.: Highway/road/alley/street/sidewalk in the 200 block of NC Highway 54 West.

Aug. 27

• 2:06 p.m.: Specialty/store in the 2900 block of Fayetteville Street.

Aug. 28

• 2:16 p.m.: Cyberspace in the 1400 block of Sedwick Road.
• 2:29 p.m.: School-elementary/secondary in the 5200 block of Revere Road.

Aug. 29

• 9:11 a.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 3800 block of Booker Avenue.
• 6:22 p.m.: Restaurant in the 1600 block of NC Highway 55.

Aug. 30

• 1:50 a.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 6300 block of Monterrey Creek Drive.

Aug. 31

• 11:48 a.m.: Parking/drop lot/garage in the 4200 block of Garrett Road.

Sept. 2

• 9:36 a.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 4400 block of Emerald Forest Drive.

Sept. 4

• 2 p.m.: Cyberspace in the 3300 block of NC Highway 55.

Sept. 5

• 5:30 p.m.: Highway/road/alley/street/sidewalk in the 1100 block of University Drive.

Sept. 7

• 12:07 p.m.: Other residence/single-family in the 1700 block of Palmer Street.

Sept. 8

• 10:29 p.m.: Cyberspace in the 600 block of Barton Street.

Sept. 10

• 3 p.m.: Highway/road/alley/street/sidewalk in the 1700 block of East Cornwallis Road.
• 8:11 p.m.: Convenience store in the 2900 block of Chapel Hill Road.

What Does the Data Tell Us?

The data reveals several important patterns and insights regarding the nature of these crimes and their potential impact on the community:

1. Diverse Locations and Victims:

• Harassment and intimidation incidents took place in a wide variety of locations, including:
  • Residential areas (e.g., Williamsburg Road, Booker Avenue, Monterrey Creek Drive).
  • Public/commercial spaces, such as parking lots, convenience stores, restaurants, schools, and cyberspace.
• This variety indicates that harassment and intimidation can occur almost anywhere, affecting both individuals in private (homes) and public (workplaces or commercial areas) settings. The frequent involvement of cyberspace suggests that online harassment is also a concern, reflecting the growing trend of cyberbullying or digital threats.

2. Schools and Cyberspace Involvement:

• Several incidents occurred in or around schools, pointing to the potential for bullying or conflicts involving students. This could indicate issues with school safety or unresolved interpersonal conflicts within educational environments.
• The multiple occurrences in cyberspace (e.g., Sedwick Road, Cherry Creek Drive, Barton Street) suggest that digital harassment is becoming more prevalent, likely involving activities such as cyberbullying, online threats, or intimidation via social media platforms. This points to the increasing role of technology in enabling harassment from a distance, often anonymously.

3. Public and Private Harassment:

• Harassment occurred both in public spaces (such as parking lots, gas stations, and restaurants) and in residential areas (multi-family and single-family homes). This duality shows that harassment and intimidation are not restricted to one type of environment; victims can face these threats at home, in public, or even digitally.
• The incidents in commercial locations (e.g., convenience stores and restaurants) may involve customer disputes, workplace conflicts, or even random acts of aggression in public spaces.

4. Potential Motivations and Relationships:

• Harassment and intimidation are often interpersonal crimes involving power dynamics, personal conflicts, or unresolved grievances. Incidents occurring in homes or schools could involve domestic issues, bullying, or ongoing personal disputes.
• In cyberspace, incidents may involve online bullying, stalking, or threats, often exacerbated by the anonymity and distance provided by the internet. These crimes can be emotionally damaging and difficult to escape for victims, as online harassment can persist across various platforms and channels.

5. Day-to-Day Occurrence:

• The reported incidents span different days and times, showing that harassment and intimidation can happen at any time. There is no clear time pattern, with incidents taking place:
  • Early in the morning (e.g., 9:30 a.m. on Renaissance Parkway).
  • Late at night (e.g., 8:28 p.m. at University Drive).
  • Middle of the day (e.g., 12 p.m. on Castlerock Drive).
• This variability suggests that there is no specific high-risk time for harassment, but rather it depends on the nature of the relationship and circumstances surrounding the involved individuals.

6. Community Impact:

• The data shows that harassment and intimidation are widespread and affect various segments of the population, from students in schools to adults in both public and private spaces.
• The online aspect of these crimes, combined with their occurrence in public locations like parking lots, schools, and homes, suggests that the community may face ongoing interpersonal tensions or issues with conflict resolution.

Overall Insight:

The data highlights the pervasive nature of these crimes, affecting people in their homes, schools, public spaces, and online. It underscores the growing issue of cyberbullying and online harassment, as well as the presence of interpersonal conflicts in both residential and commercial areas. The wide distribution of locations suggests that no one space is safe from harassment, and individuals can be targeted anywhere—whether at home, in school, or while out in public.

Recommendations:

1. Cyber Harassment Prevention: Schools and community organizations should implement programs that address cyberbullying and provide resources for individuals to report and manage online harassment. Strengthening digital literacy around privacy and safety online could help reduce these incidents.
2. Conflict Resolution Programs: In both schools and residential communities, implementing conflict resolution and interpersonal communication programs could help mitigate personal disputes before they escalate into harassment or intimidation.
3. Increased Support for Victims: Offering support services, such as counseling, legal advice, or access to law enforcement resources for victims of harassment, can help individuals who are experiencing ongoing threats or intimidation, particularly in online spaces where they might feel vulnerable or isolated.
4. Public Awareness: Raising community awareness around the impact of harassment—both in-person and online—can encourage bystander intervention and create a more supportive environment for those who are being targeted. This might include workshops on recognizing and reporting harassment, as well as public campaigns to promote respect and empathy in both digital and physical spaces.

Kidnapping/Human Trafficking

Aug. 30

• 1:48 p.m.: Parking/drop lot/garage in the 5300 block of Lumley Road.

Missing Person/Runaway

Aug. 28

• 9:43 p.m.: Other residence/multi-family in the 3800 block of Booker Avenue.

Aug. 30

• 11:46 a.m.: Home of victim/single-family in the 300 block of Cook Road.

Sept. 3

• 12:20 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 2000 block of Bedford Street.

Motor Vehicle Theft

Aug. 22

• 4:30 p.m.: Highway/road/alley/street/sidewalk in the 400 block of Sowell Street.
• 10 p.m.: Shelter/mission/homeless in the 1800 block of Angier Avenue.
• 11 p.m.: Home of victim/single-family in the 2600 block of Ashe Street.

Aug. 23

• 12 a.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 2100 block of Snowcrest Trail.

Aug. 24

• 12:28 a.m.: Other residence/multi-family in the 1100 block of South Hoover Road.
• 1 p.m.: Other residence/single-family in the 200 block of North Adams Street.
• 6 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 2400 block of Dallas Street.

Aug. 25

• 5 a.m.: Other residence/multi-family in the 2200 block of South Roxboro Street.
• 6 p.m.: Parking/drop lot/garage in the 4600 block of University Drive.
• 6 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 900 block of Angier Avenue.

Aug. 27

• 6:30 p.m.: Hotel/motel in the 3600 block of Mt. Moriah Road.
• 8:45 p.m.: Highway/road/alley/street in the 28000 block of Interstate 40 Eastbound and South Miami Boulevard.
• 10 p.m.: Other residence/multi-family in the 800 block of East Woodcroft Parkway.
• 10 p.m.: Other residence/single-family in the 2800 block of Owen Street.
• 10:30 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 1000 block of South Alston Avenue.

Aug. 28

• 8:37 a.m.: Parking/drop lot/garage in the 400 block of South Dillard Street.
• 6 p.m.: Government/public building in the 500 block of South Dillard Street.
• 9 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 3000 block of Weymouth Street.
• 9:30 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 5100 block of Copper Ridge Drive.

Aug. 29

• 8:23 a.m.: Daycare facility in the 4300 block of South Miami Boulevard.

Aug. 30

• 12 a.m.: Home of victim/single-family in the 800 block of Ridgeway Avenue.
• 7:24 a.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 1100 block of Hearthside Street.
• 8 p.m.: Home of offender/multi-family in the 1300 block of South Alston Avenue.

Sept. 1

• 10 p.m.: Parking/drop lot/garage in the 2300 block of Owen Street.

Sept. 6

• 5:30 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 100 block of Merrion Park Lane.

Sept. 7

• 7:38 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 2800 block of Bainbridge Drive.

Sept. 8

• 12 a.m.: Parking/drop lot/garage in the 2500 block of NC Highway 55.
• 6:30 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 5000 block of South Alston Avenue.

Sept. 9

• 8:30 p.m.: Home of victim/single-family in the 500 block of Ascott Way.
• 9 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 500 block of Cobb Street.

What Does the Data Tell Us?

The data provides several important insights regarding the nature, locations, and patterns of vehicle thefts in the community:

1. Prevalence and Frequency:

• There are 26 reported motor vehicle theft incidents over a relatively short period, indicating that vehicle theft is a significant issue in the community. The consistent occurrence across different days and times suggests that vehicle theft is a persistent and widespread problem.

2. Targeted Locations:

• The thefts occurred in a wide variety of locations, including:
  • Residential areas (e.g., Ashe Street, South Alston Avenue, Owen Street, Merrion Park Lane).
  • Parking/drop lots/garages (e.g., South Dillard Street, NC Highway 55).
  • Hotels/motels (e.g., Mt. Moriah Road, South Miami Boulevard).
  • Public streets (e.g., Sowell Street, Angier Avenue, Interstate 40 Eastbound).
• The presence of thefts in residential neighborhoods shows that personal vehicles parked outside homes are at risk, particularly if they are not secured or if the area lacks adequate lighting or surveillance. Parking lots, especially in hotels or commercial areas, also appear vulnerable, likely due to the high turnover of cars and lack of individual monitoring, which makes it easier for thieves to target multiple vehicles.

3. Geographic Distribution:

• The data shows that vehicle thefts occur across a wide range of streets and neighborhoods, with no single area dominating. This suggests that vehicle theft is a widespread problem rather than concentrated in a specific region. However, streets like South Alston Avenue, University Drive, and Angier Avenue appear multiple times, indicating potential hotspots or areas of higher risk.
• The inclusion of transit-related locations, such as parking lots and garages near public streets, indicates that vehicles left in these areas for extended periods—such as commuters or overnight visitors—are also prime targets.

4. Types of Locations:

• Parking lots, hotels, and commercial areas are frequent targets for vehicle theft. These locations often involve vehicles left unattended for long periods, especially in hotels/motels where guests may be unaware of local crime risks, and in commercial parking lots where surveillance may be limited.
• Residential areas, especially multi-family dwellings like apartment complexes, are also commonly targeted. These areas may have shared parking and less security, making it easier for thieves to operate unnoticed.

5. Timing of Thefts:

• Vehicle thefts occurred throughout the day and night, with no strong preference for specific hours. Incidents occurred as early as 12 a.m. (e.g., Ridgeway Avenue) and as late as 10 p.m. (e.g., Owen Street). This suggests that thieves act opportunistically, taking advantage of any time when vehicles are left vulnerable, whether it’s overnight or during the day.
• Evening and late-night thefts are common, indicating that darkness and reduced visibility are likely factors that contribute to these incidents. However, thefts during the day (e.g., 7:24 a.m. at Hearthside Street) indicate that vehicle thieves also take advantage of busy times when vehicle owners may not be as vigilant.

6. Possible Motivations:

• The motivation for motor vehicle theft often includes:
  • Reselling the vehicle or its parts, particularly for high-demand cars, trucks, or SUVs.
  • Using stolen vehicles in the commission of other crimes, such as burglaries, drug trafficking, or robbery.
  • Joyriding, particularly by younger or less organized offenders, who may abandon the vehicle after use.
• Vehicles parked in hotels, parking lots, or public garages might be seen as attractive targets for thieves looking to steal a car with less chance of being caught, as these locations typically have a large number of vehicles that are unattended for extended periods.

7. Security and Vulnerabilities:

• The data highlights several potential vulnerabilities that contribute to motor vehicle theft:
  • Lack of surveillance or security patrols in hotel/motel parking lots or residential complexes.
  • Poor lighting or inadequate security measures in parking lots and garages, which provide cover for thieves to operate without being easily detected.
  • Unlocked doors, valuables in plain sight, or lack of anti-theft devices, making it easier for thieves to break into and steal vehicles.

8. Impact on Residents and Businesses:

• Theft of personal vehicles impacts not only the victims but also the broader community, leading to a loss of trust in safety measures and potential financial hardship for those whose cars are stolen, especially if the vehicle is not recovered or is damaged.
• Businesses, particularly hotels and commercial properties, may face reputational damage if customers perceive their parking areas as unsafe, potentially leading to decreased business.

Overall Insight:

The data suggests that vehicle theft is a widespread problem in both residential and commercial areas, with thefts occurring in parking lots, garages, hotels, and private residences. Thieves seem to target areas where vehicles are left unattended for long periods, especially in locations with limited security measures or poor surveillance. Both public and private locations are vulnerable, indicating that vehicle theft is an opportunistic crime that can happen at any time.

Recommendations:

1. Increase Security Measures:
   • Encourage the installation of surveillance cameras, better lighting, and security patrols in high-risk areas like parking lots, hotels, and apartment complexes.
   • Homeowners should consider installing motion-activated lights, cameras, or car alarms to deter theft.
2. Public Awareness Campaigns:
   • Educate the public about the importance of securing their vehicles, removing valuables, and using anti-theft devices like steering wheel locks.
   • Promote awareness of high-risk locations and encourage safe parking habits, especially in hotels or parking garages.
3. Law Enforcement Initiatives:
   • Law enforcement could increase patrols in identified hotspot areas (e.g., South Alston Avenue, Angier Avenue).
   • Encourage the use of bait cars or sting operations in high-theft areas to catch repeat offenders and disrupt vehicle theft rings.
4. Collaboration with Businesses:
   • Hotels, motels, and other businesses should implement stricter security protocols in their parking areas and provide clear signage about surveillance and anti-theft measures to deter potential thieves.

Offenses Against Family – Neglect

Sept. 3

• 3:18 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 1400 block of Ridgeway Avenue.

Robbery – Commercial

Aug. 24

• 9:54 a.m.: Restaurant in the 100 block of NC Highway 54 West.

Robbery – Individual

Aug. 22

• 12:30 p.m.: Parking/drop lot/garage in the 6200 block of Pine Glen Trail.

Sept. 9

• 12:41 p.m.: Highway/road/alley/street/sidewalk in the 3700 block of NC Highway 55.

Sex Offense – Fondling

Aug. 29

• 4:10 p.m.: Home of victim/single-family in the 800 block of Angier Avenue.

Sex Offense – Forcible Rape

Aug. 27

• 11 p.m.: Other/unknown in the 5200 block of Penrith Drive.

Aug. 28

• 5:48 a.m.: Home of offender/single-family in the 100 block of West Cornwallis Road.

Sept. 5

• 11:32 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 2200 block of Farmington Drive.

Sex Offense – Forcible Sodomy

Aug. 27

• 2:43 a.m.: Commercial office building in the 1100 block of South Duke Street.

Aug. 29

• 3 p.m.: Home of offender/single-family in the 900 block of Cheviot Avenue.

Sex Offense – Indecent Exposure

Aug. 24

• 12:42 p.m.: Parking/drop lot/garage in the 600 block of Old Fayetteville Street.

Sex Offense – Peeping Tom

Sept. 8

• 9:15 p.m.: Grocery/supermarket in the 212100 block of West Alexander Drive.

What Does the Data Tell Us?

The data offers several critical insights regarding the nature, locations, and patterns of these crimes:

1. Types of Sex Offenses:

• The data includes a range of sex offenses, specifically:
  • Fondling (1 incident)
  • Forcible Rape (3 incidents)
  • Forcible Sodomy (2 incidents)
  • Indecent Exposure (1 incident)
  • Peeping Tom (1 incident)
• This variety of offenses suggests that sexual violence in the area encompasses both contact-based crimes (like fondling and rape) and non-contact offenses (like indecent exposure and peeping). These crimes often have different profiles in terms of perpetrators and victims, with the contact-based offenses generally involving higher levels of violence or coercion.

2. Locations of Incidents:

• The incidents occurred across several types of locations, including:
  • Residential settings: Most incidents occurred in homes, both single-family and multi-family residences. For example, forcible rape occurred in multi-family residences (e.g., Farmington Drive, Penrith Drive), and fondling occurred in a single-family home (Angier Avenue). This indicates that many sexual offenses happen in private spaces, often involving individuals who know each other.
  • Commercial/office spaces: One incident of forcible sodomy occurred in a commercial office building (South Duke Street). This indicates that sexual violence can also occur in workplaces or public areas, though these cases seem less frequent than residential incidents.
  • Public/parking spaces: The incidents of indecent exposure (Old Fayetteville Street) and peeping tom (West Alexander Drive) happened in public spaces, highlighting the presence of offenders who commit crimes in areas where they may encounter strangers. These non-contact crimes often involve voyeuristic behavior or exhibitionism, affecting public safety.

3. Timing of Incidents:

• The data indicates that sex offenses occurred at different times, including:
  • Late at night (e.g., 11 p.m. on Penrith Drive for forcible rape).
  • Early in the morning (e.g., 5:48 a.m. on West Cornwallis Road for forcible rape).
  • Afternoon (e.g., 4:10 p.m. on Angier Avenue for fondling).
• This variability suggests that sex offenses are not confined to specific times of day, although late-night incidents are common for more violent offenses like rape. This pattern may indicate that offenders take advantage of the privacy and isolation that nighttime offers, particularly in residential settings.

4. Potential Risk Factors:

• The prevalence of sex offenses in residential settings suggests that many incidents may involve individuals who are acquainted or have some form of relationship. This is a common trend in sex offenses, where victims may know the perpetrators, making it easier for offenders to access private spaces.
• The occurrence of non-contact offenses (indecent exposure and peeping) in public areas indicates a risk for individuals in public spaces, especially women, as these crimes are often directed toward unsuspecting victims in parks, streets, or shopping areas. These offenses create a sense of insecurity and vulnerability in public environments.

5. Criminal Patterns:

• The data shows that more severe crimes, such as forcible rape and sodomy, occur primarily in private spaces like homes or workplaces, often involving situations where the offender can isolate the victim.
• Non-contact crimes like indecent exposure and peeping tom are more likely to occur in public spaces, where offenders may not directly interact with the victim but can still cause significant distress and fear.

6. Community Impact:

• Sex offenses, regardless of severity, have a profound psychological impact on victims and the broader community. The fact that both residential and public spaces are implicated in these crimes suggests that safety concerns exist in a variety of environments. For residents, particularly women, these crimes can create a feeling of vulnerability in both the privacy of their homes and public spaces like streets or parks.
• The data also implies a potential need for greater security measures in both public and private spaces, as well as awareness and prevention programs to help residents identify risks and protect themselves.

Overall Insight:

The data indicates a range of offenses, from violent crimes like forcible rape and sodomy to non-contact offenses like indecent exposure and peeping tom. The majority of contact-based offenses occurred in residential settings, suggesting that many victims may know their perpetrators, while non-contact offenses are more likely to occur in public spaces. The crimes take place at various times of day, though nighttime seems to be a common time for more severe offenses. The data highlights concerns about public and private safety, as both areas are vulnerable to sexual offenses.

Recommendations:

1. Public Awareness and Education:
   • Promote public safety campaigns that raise awareness about the risk of sexual violence and harassment, particularly in public spaces and residential areas. Encourage residents to report suspicious behavior, especially in areas where peeping toms or indecent exposure incidents have occurred.
   • Educate individuals on how to stay safe in public spaces, emphasizing personal safety measures such as avoiding isolated areas at night and staying aware of surroundings.
2. Enhanced Security Measures:
   • Encourage residential neighborhoods to improve home security through measures like better lighting, surveillance cameras, and neighborhood watch programs.
   • For public spaces, increase the presence of law enforcement patrols and install security cameras in high-risk areas to deter non-contact sex offenses like indecent exposure and peeping tom incidents.
3. Support for Victims:
   • Provide resources for victims of sexual offenses, including counseling services, legal assistance, and access to safe housing if needed. Offering support groups or community programs may help victims cope with the psychological impact of these crimes.
   • Ensure that law enforcement is trained to handle sexual offenses with sensitivity and urgency, particularly in cases involving known perpetrators or domestic violence situations.
4. Cyber Awareness:
   • Address online sexual harassment or intimidation, as some sex offenses may also manifest in digital spaces. Encourage individuals to take precautions to protect their privacy online and report cyber harassment when it occurs.

Simple Assault

Aug. 22

• 12 a.m.: Home of victim/single-family in the 3000 block of Newfields Place.
• 2:28 a.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 1300 block of East Lawson Street.

Aug. 23

• 3:55 a.m.: Highway/road/alley/street/sidewalk in the 400 block of NC Highway 55.
• 7:10 p.m.: Home of the victim/single-family in the 100 block of North Adams Street.

Aug. 24

• 5:25 p.m.: Highway/road/alley/street/sidewalk in the 300 block of the American Tobacco Trail.
• 6:03 p.m.: Other residence/multi-family in the 900 block of Wadesboro Street.
• 11:03 p.m.: Home of victim/single-family in the 400 block of Potter Street.

Aug. 25

• 12 a.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 2300 block of Taylor Street.
• 7:05 a.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 800 block of East Woodcroft Parkway.
• 12:40 p.m.: Highway/road/alley/street/sidewalk in the 100 block of Castlerock Drive.
• 4:26 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 1700 block of East Cornwallis Road.
• 5:33 p.m.: Highway/road/alley/street/sidewalk in the 3100 block of Fayetteville Street.
• 7:26 p.m.: Grocery/supermarket in the 8200 block of Renaissance Parkway.

Aug. 26

• 7:46 a.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 1700 block of Capps Street.
• 2:05 p.m.: Home of victim/single-family in the 2700 block of Wedgedale Avenue.
• 2:57 p.m.: Specialty/store in the 3300 block of Watkins Road.
• 5:12 p.m.: School-elementary/secondary in the 1600 block of NC Highway 54 West.

Aug. 27

• 11 a.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 5000 block of Alston Avenue.
• 1:30 p.m.: School-elementary/secondary in the 6800 block of Garrett Road.
• 10 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 200 block of Avon Lake Drive.
• 11:35 p.m.: Home of victim/single family in the 200 block of Marbella Grove Court.

Aug. 28

• 4:37 p.m.: Specialty/store in the 4700 block of NC Highway 55.
• 11:47 p.m.: Parking/drop lot/garage in the 3000 block of South Miami Boulevard.

Aug. 29

• 1:20 a.m.: Home of victim/single-family on Leitzel Court.

Aug. 30

• 10:32 a.m.: Highway/road/alley/street/sidewalk in the 800 block of Holly Bluff Lane and Belgreen Road.
• 1:55 p.m.: Highway/road/alley/street/sidewalk in the 2100 block of Holloway Street.
• 6:30 p.m.: Highway/road/alley/street/sidewalk in the 2800 block of Nation Avenue.
• 10:34 p.m.: Bar/nightclub in the 200 block of Hood Street.

Aug. 31

• 4:04 a.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 200 block of West Piedmont Avenue.
• 11:27 a.m.: Other residence/single-family in the 3500 block of Century Oaks Drive.

Sept. 2

• 4:22 p.m.: Other residence/multi-family in the 300 block of Obie Drive.

Sept. 5

• 2:40 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 5000 block of South Alston Avenue.

Sept. 6

• 1:28 a.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 600 block of Falls Point Drive.

Sept. 7

• 9:38 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 5000 block of South Alston Avenue.

What Does the Data Tell Us?

The data provides several key insights into the frequency, locations, and patterns of this type of crime:

1. Prevalence of Simple Assaults:

• With 33 incidents reported in this data, simple assault is the most frequent type of crime in this dataset. Simple assault is generally characterized by physical altercations or threats of violence that do not result in serious injury. The high frequency of these incidents suggests that interpersonal conflicts are common in the community, and often escalate into physical altercations.
• The widespread nature of these incidents reflects a pervasive issue with low-level violence that may stem from disputes, domestic situations, or random encounters in public spaces.

2. Locations of Incidents:

• Simple assaults occurred in a wide variety of locations, including:
  • Residential areas: Many incidents took place in homes, including both single-family and multi-family residences (e.g., Newfields Place, East Lawson Street, Williamsburg Road, South Alston Avenue). This suggests that many simple assaults may be related to domestic violence or disputes between family members, neighbors, or acquaintances.
  • Public spaces: There were several assaults in streets, sidewalks, parking lots, and public areas (e.g., Fayetteville Street, American Tobacco Trail, Castlerock Drive). These assaults could involve strangers or people who had a disagreement in a public setting, such as road rage, arguments, or random altercations.
  • Commercial areas: Some incidents occurred in grocery stores, specialty stores, and bars/nightclubs (e.g., Renaissance Parkway, Hood Street). These locations suggest that arguments in social or commercial environments can escalate into violence, especially where alcohol or heightened emotions may be involved.

3. Timing of Incidents:

• The data includes incidents that occurred at various times throughout the day and night, including:
  • Late at night/early morning (e.g., 12 a.m. in Newfields Place, 2:28 a.m. in East Lawson Street, 11:03 p.m. on Potter Street).
  • Afternoon and evening hours (e.g., 4:26 p.m. in East Cornwallis Road, 7:26 p.m. in Renaissance Parkway).
• This suggests that simple assaults are not confined to specific times of day. However, the frequency of late-night incidents may be tied to alcohol consumption, social gatherings, or domestic disputes, which tend to escalate during evening hours.

4. Domestic Disputes and Family Conflicts:

• Given that many of these incidents occurred in residential settings, it is likely that a portion of the simple assaults are related to domestic violence or disputes within families or between acquaintances. Domestic violence often results in repeated incidents, and simple assaults are a common charge in cases of family or relationship-related conflicts.
• The presence of multi-family residences as a location for several incidents could indicate neighbor disputes or arguments among people who live in close proximity, leading to physical confrontations.

5. Public and Social Conflicts:

• Simple assaults in public spaces, such as sidewalks, streets, and parking lots, suggest that random encounters or disputes between strangers may also escalate into violence. These could involve arguments over trivial matters, road rage, or misunderstandings.
• Assaults in bars, nightclubs, and stores may point to social conflicts, often exacerbated by alcohol or competitive social environments, where minor disagreements can escalate into physical altercations.

6. Potential Contributing Factors:

• Several factors may contribute to the high number of simple assaults, including:
  • Alcohol or drug use: Incidents in bars/nightclubs and late at night may be linked to alcohol consumption, which can lower inhibitions and increase the likelihood of violence.
  • Stress and mental health issues: Conflicts within homes and neighborhoods could stem from stress, unresolved disputes, or mental health challenges, leading individuals to resort to physical violence during arguments.
  • Economic or social pressures: Tensions related to financial difficulties, unemployment, or community stressors could also increase the frequency of interpersonal conflicts and assaults.

7. Impact on Public Safety:

• The high number of simple assaults, particularly in public places like streets and stores, may lead to a sense of insecurity in the community. These incidents can disrupt daily life and increase fears about personal safety, especially in areas where such assaults are frequent.
• Domestic assaults also have a significant impact on the well-being of families and can lead to ongoing cycles of violence, particularly if the underlying causes are not addressed through intervention or support services.

Overall Insight:

The data shows a widespread issue with low-level violence in the community, affecting both residential settings (likely involving domestic disputes) and public spaces (involving strangers or acquaintances). The wide variety of locations and times suggests that these incidents are frequent and unpredictable, occurring in both private homes and public environments like streets, stores, and social venues. The presence of alcohol, social conflicts, and interpersonal disputes are likely major contributors to these assaults.

Recommendations:

1. Conflict Resolution Programs:
   • Promote community-based conflict resolution programs to help individuals learn how to de-escalate situations without resorting to violence. These could be particularly useful in neighborhoods or housing complexes where disputes between neighbors or family members may occur.
2. Domestic Violence Support:
   • Increase support services for victims of domestic violence and provide intervention programs for individuals involved in family disputes. Offering access to counseling, legal support, and shelters for those in abusive relationships could help reduce repeat incidents.
3. Public Safety and Alcohol Awareness:
   • Increase police presence or security in public spaces prone to assaults, such as nightclubs, bars, and commercial areas, especially during high-risk hours (late evenings). Encourage establishments serving alcohol to promote responsible drinking and to intervene when disputes begin to escalate.
4. Mental Health and Stress Management Resources:
   • Address underlying causes such as stress, mental health issues, and substance abuse through community outreach programs that provide support for managing stress and counseling for individuals at risk of resorting to violence.
5. Community Engagement and Awareness:
   • Foster a sense of community responsibility by encouraging bystanders to intervene (safely) or report incidents of simple assault, especially in public places. Public campaigns could highlight the importance of de-escalating conflicts and recognizing the signs of domestic violence.

This comprehensive approach could help mitigate the widespread issue of simple assault, creating a safer environment both in public spaces and in residential areas.

Theft – Larceny – All Other

Aug. 22

• 12 a.m.: Shelter/mission/homeless in the 1200 block of East Main Street.
• 1:25 p.m.: Home of victim/single-family in the 800 block of Parkridge Road.
• 3:04 p.m.: Construction site in the 3600 block of Alston Avenue.
• 3:27 p.m.: Home of victim/single-family in the 300 block of South Elm Street.

Aug. 23

• 8 p.m.: Construction site in the 1000 block of Norwood Avenue.

Aug. 24

• 11:52 a.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 100 block of Tonti Way.
• 12:21 p.m.: Specialty/store in the 2300 block of Holloway Street.
• 4:45 p.m.: Home of victim/single-family in the 2800 block of East Pettigrew Street.

Aug. 25

• 8 a.m.: Convenience store in the 700 block of South Alston Avenue.
• 4:36 p.m.: Home of victim/single-family in the 2300 block of Charles Street.
• 7:39 p.m.: Home of victim/single-family in the 100 block of Laurel Avenue.

Aug. 26

• 9:18 a.m.: Convenience store in the 1200 block of Fayetteville Street.
• 5:35 p.m.: Home of victim/single-family in the 400 block of Potter Street.
• 7:36 p.m.: Convenience store in the 2500 block of Fayetteville Street.

Aug. 27

• 12 a.m.: Specialty/store in the 3900 block of Durham-Chapel Hill Boulevard.
• 12:49 p.m.: Other/unknown in the 600 block of East Main Street.
• 4:08 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 2000 block of Bedford Street.

Aug. 28

• 8 p.m.: Air/bus/train terminal in the 4300 block of Garrett Road.

Aug. 30

• 4:41 a.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 3200 block of Sugar Pine Trail.
• 6:50 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 3000 block of Ivey Wood Lane.

Theft – Larceny – Building

Aug. 22

• 1:21 p.m.: Specialty/store in the 1800 block of Martin Luther King Jr. Parkway.

Aug. 24

• 12:30 p.m.: Hotel/motel in the 4400 block of NC Highway 55.

Aug. 26

• 6:46 a.m.: Convenience store in the 100 block of NC Highway 54 West.
• 5:27 p.m.: Restaurant in the 4800 block of NC Highway 55.

What Does the Data Tell Us?

The data offers important insights into the nature, locations, and patterns of larceny in the community. Larceny, or the theft of personal property without the use of force, appears to be a significant issue, impacting both residential and commercial areas.

1. Types of Locations Targeted:

• The incidents occurred across a range of locations, including:
  • Residential areas: Homes, both single-family and multi-family residences, were frequent targets of larceny (e.g., Parkridge Road, South Elm Street, Laurel Avenue, Potter Street). This suggests that theft of personal property, such as electronics, jewelry, or other valuables, is common in these areas. Items may be stolen from both inside homes and from exterior spaces like yards or garages.
  • Convenience stores, grocery stores, and specialty stores: Several incidents occurred at commercial locations (e.g., Fayetteville Street, NC Highway 55, Holloway Street). These thefts likely involve shoplifting or stealing items from stores, which could range from smaller thefts of goods to more organized retail theft.
  • Construction sites: Multiple thefts were reported from construction sites (e.g., Alston Avenue, Norwood Avenue). These thefts may involve valuable tools, equipment, or materials, indicating that construction sites are particularly vulnerable to theft, especially when left unattended.
  • Public spaces and commercial buildings: Larceny occurred in public or semi-public spaces like parking lots, stores, and grocery markets, where unattended items like purses, phones, or electronics may be easy targets for theft.

2. Targeted Items:

• The types of items stolen likely include:
  • Personal valuables such as electronics (phones, laptops), jewelry, and wallets or purses from homes or public places.
  • Store goods, including high-demand items like alcohol, cigarettes, or electronics, stolen from convenience stores and specialty stores.
  • Construction equipment and tools from work sites, which are often left unattended and can be expensive and easy to resell.
  • Vehicles or vehicle parts (though vehicle theft is often classified separately, minor thefts from vehicles like stealing bags, electronics, or tools could be classified as larceny).

3. Patterns and Timing:

• The thefts occurred at various times, indicating that larceny is not limited to any specific time of day. Incidents were reported in the morning (e.g., 8 a.m. at South Alston Avenue), afternoon (e.g., 3:04 p.m. at Alston Avenue), and evening (e.g., 7:39 p.m. at Laurel Avenue). This suggests that thefts are opportunistic and can occur whenever valuable items are left unattended.
• The spread of incidents over different times of day may point to varying methods of operation, with some thefts occurring during busy times when people may be distracted, and others happening when there is little chance of being caught, such as during quieter times.

4. Vulnerable Areas:

• Residential areas seem particularly vulnerable to theft, as homes and surrounding spaces are often targeted for valuable items that may be left unattended or easily accessible. This could include packages left on doorsteps, unlocked garages, or vehicles parked outside.
• Construction sites are another major target, likely because they often lack continuous security and contain valuable equipment and materials that are easy to take and difficult to trace.
• Stores and commercial spaces are consistently at risk of theft, particularly if they don’t have strong security measures like surveillance cameras, anti-theft alarms, or attentive staff. Convenience stores, in particular, are likely targeted for smaller items like alcohol, cigarettes, or cash.

5. Potential Motivations and Methods:

• Opportunistic theft: Many of these incidents are likely opportunistic, where thieves take advantage of easily accessible items, such as unsecured personal property, tools, or merchandise in stores. These types of thefts often happen quickly, with little planning.
• Organized retail theft: Some incidents, particularly in commercial spaces like stores, may involve more organized theft rings, where individuals target high-value items and work in groups to avoid detection.
• Theft due to economic hardship: Some thefts, particularly from convenience stores or grocery stores, may stem from economic difficulties, where individuals steal out of necessity or desperation.

6. Impact on the Community:

• Financial loss: Larceny can cause significant financial hardship for both individuals and businesses. Stolen items, especially high-value tools or electronics, can be costly to replace, and for businesses, frequent thefts can result in a loss of revenue and increased security costs.
• Psychological impact: Repeated incidents of larceny, especially in residential areas, can create a sense of insecurity among residents. People may feel unsafe leaving their homes or belongings unattended, leading to heightened fear and distrust within the community.
• Business losses: For commercial entities, theft can result in financial losses and may require investment in additional security measures. Retail theft can also lead to higher prices for consumers, as businesses attempt to recoup losses.

Overall Insight:

The data reveals a significant issue with theft in both residential and commercial settings, affecting homes, stores, and construction sites. Larceny is prevalent at different times of day and in various locations, suggesting that opportunistic theft is common, but organized theft may also be present in retail spaces. Residential areas and construction sites appear particularly vulnerable, with personal valuables, construction equipment, and store goods being common targets. The data reflects a broad issue that impacts both individuals and businesses, with significant financial and emotional consequences for those affected.

Recommendations:

1. Increased Security Measures:
   • Encourage homeowners to invest in home security systems, including cameras, motion-sensor lights, and secure locks on doors, garages, and sheds.
   • Construction sites should implement better security protocols, such as surveillance cameras, security personnel, or gated access to prevent equipment theft.
   • Stores and commercial spaces should improve their security by installing anti-theft devices, cameras, and training staff to monitor for suspicious activity.
2. Public Awareness and Education:
   • Launch community campaigns to raise awareness about the importance of securing personal property and reporting suspicious behavior.
   • Promote the use of secure delivery options for packages, such as delivery lockers or requiring signatures for high-value items, to reduce theft from homes.
3. Law Enforcement Patrols:
   • Increase police presence or community watch programs in areas prone to larceny, such as residential neighborhoods and construction sites, to deter theft.
   • Focus law enforcement efforts on identifying and dismantling organized theft rings, particularly in commercial areas.
4. Neighborhood Watch and Community Involvement:
   • Foster community-based programs, such as neighborhood watch, where residents work together to monitor suspicious activity and report it to authorities. This can help reduce thefts in residential areas.

By addressing the vulnerabilities in both residential and commercial spaces, the community can reduce incidents of larceny and create a safer environment for residents and businesses alike.

Vandalism

Aug. 23

• 10:49 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 4500 block of Emerald Forest Drive.

Aug. 24

• 11:52 a.m.: Bar/nightclub in the 2200 block of NC Highway 54 East.

Aug. 25

• 10:37 a.m.: Home of victim/single-family in the 5600 block of Crescent Drive.
• 7:20 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 3800 block of NC Highway 55.

Aug. 26

• 12:25 p.m.: Home of offender/multi-family in the 1600 Fayetteville Street.
• 1 a.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 5200 block of Penrith Drive.

Aug. 27

• 9:30 p.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 3000 block of East Weaver Street.
• 10:30 p.m.: Other residence/multi-family in the 3000 block of East Weaver Street.

Aug. 28

• 11:28 p.m.: Home of victim/single-family in the 1000 block of Worth Street.

Aug. 29

• 8:17 p.m.: Specialty/store in the 5100 block of NC Highway 55.

Aug. 30

• 8:25 a.m.: Parking/drop lot/garage in the 800 block of Fargo Street.

Aug. 31

• 9:39 a.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 5100 block of Revere Road.

Sept. 2

• 12:08 p.m.: Parking/drop lot/garage in the 2300 block of Owen Street.
• 11:36 p.m.: Home of victim/single-family in the 1100 block of Badlands Street.

Sept. 3

• 11:30 a.m. Home of victim/single-family in the 3500 block of Suffolk Street.

Sept. 4

• 9 a.m.: Home of victim/multi-family in the 1100 block of Snowcrest Trail.
• 9:54 a.m.: Highway/road/alley/street/sidewalk in the 4500 block of Durham Chapel Hill Boulevard and Garrett Road.
• 4:09 p.m.: Home of victim/single-family in the 2800 block of Courtney Creek Boulevard.

Sept. 9

• 3:11 a.m.: Hotel/motel in the 7000 block of Fayetteville Road.

What Does the Data Tell Us?

The data provides valuable insights into the nature, locations, and patterns of vandalism in the community. Vandalism typically involves the intentional destruction or defacement of property and can have significant economic, emotional, and social impacts on both individuals and the broader community.

1. Types of Locations Targeted:

• The vandalism incidents occurred in various settings, including:
  • Residential areas: Many incidents occurred at homes, both single-family and multi-family residences (e.g., Emerald Forest Drive, Revere Road, Penrith Drive). This suggests that vandals are targeting people’s private property, potentially damaging homes, cars, or external structures like fences and garages.
  • Parking lots/garages: Several incidents occurred in parking lots or drop lots (e.g., Fargo Street, Owen Street), indicating that vehicles and public parking areas are vulnerable to vandalism. Vandals may target parked cars by breaking windows, slashing tires, or defacing vehicles.
  • Commercial and public areas: Incidents were also reported at specialty stores, bars, and convenience stores (e.g., NC Highway 55, West Cornwallis Road, NC Highway 54). Vandalism in these areas could include graffiti, broken windows, or damage to business properties, which can result in costly repairs for business owners.

2. Patterns of Vandalism:

• Vandalism appears to be widely distributed across residential, commercial, and public areas, indicating that this type of crime is pervasive and affects both private and public property.
• Residential areas seem to be a common target, suggesting that property owners may be dealing with damage to personal property (e.g., cars, fences, or windows), likely resulting from neighborhood disputes, random acts of destruction, or even targeted acts of revenge.
• The presence of vandalism in parking lots and commercial spaces suggests that vehicles and businesses are frequent targets. Public and commercial spaces are often vulnerable because they are more accessible and have higher traffic, providing more opportunities for vandals to act unnoticed.

3. Potential Motivations:

• Random acts of vandalism: Many incidents may be opportunistic, where vandals damage property without a clear motive, driven by impulse or boredom, especially in public spaces.
• Personal disputes or targeted acts: In residential areas, vandalism may be the result of personal conflicts between neighbors, ex-partners, or family members. These types of vandalism can be more deliberate, targeting a specific individual’s property as a form of revenge or intimidation.
• Graffiti and tagging: In commercial and public areas, vandals may be involved in graffiti or tagging, marking buildings, storefronts, or walls with symbols, signatures, or gang-related markings. This can be especially damaging to businesses, as it often requires expensive cleaning and repairs.

4. Timing of Incidents:

• The incidents occurred at various times, showing that vandalism can take place during both the day and night:
  • Morning incidents (e.g., 9:39 a.m. on Revere Road).
  • Afternoon incidents (e.g., 12:08 p.m. on Owen Street).
  • Late-night incidents (e.g., 11:28 p.m. on Worth Street).
• The variety of times suggests that vandalism is often opportunistic, with vandals acting when they perceive the least risk of being caught. Late-night incidents might reflect situations where vandals operate under the cover of darkness, while daytime acts may occur in busy areas where property is left unattended.

5. Impact on the Community:

• Economic impact: Vandalism leads to significant financial losses for both homeowners and business owners who must pay for repairs. Damage to cars, homes, and storefronts can require costly repairs, insurance claims, and time spent restoring the property to its original condition.
• Emotional and psychological impact: For individuals, especially homeowners, vandalism can feel like a personal violation, leading to anxiety, frustration, and fear for their safety and property. Repeated incidents can cause a loss of trust in the community.
• Negative community image: Vandalism, especially in public areas or on business properties, can contribute to the deterioration of neighborhoods. Graffiti, broken windows, or damaged property give the appearance of neglect, which can lower property values, discourage tourism, and deter potential businesses from moving into the area.
• Public safety concerns: Frequent vandalism, especially when tied to graffiti or tagging, can signal gang-related activity, leading to heightened fears about community safety.

6. Vulnerable Areas and Targets:

• Residential areas and parking lots are particularly vulnerable to vandalism, suggesting that vehicles, homes, and personal property are frequent targets. Cars, in particular, may be damaged if parked in unsecured areas, and homes may be targeted for graffiti, broken windows, or other forms of property damage.
• Businesses in high-traffic commercial areas are also at risk, especially if they are in unmonitored or poorly lit areas, which offer more opportunities for vandals to act undetected.

7. Possible Contributing Factors:

• Lack of security or surveillance: Areas with limited surveillance or security patrols, such as public parking lots or neighborhoods without security cameras, may be more vulnerable to vandalism. Vandals are more likely to target properties where they believe they can act without being seen or caught.
• Social or economic tensions: Vandalism may be linked to underlying social or economic frustrations within the community, where individuals or groups express anger or dissatisfaction through the destruction of property.
• Youth-related behavior: Some vandalism incidents, particularly random or impulsive acts like graffiti or property damage, may be carried out by young people seeking thrills, attention, or peer approval.

Overall Insight:

The data reveals that vandalism is a widespread issue affecting both residential and commercial properties. Vehicles, homes, and businesses are frequently targeted, with incidents occurring at various times of day. Vandalism in residential areas may reflect personal disputes or opportunistic destruction, while vandalism in commercial spaces could be related to graffiti, tagging, or random acts of destruction. The presence of vandalism in parking lots and public areas indicates that vehicles and public property are also vulnerable, leading to financial losses and increased concerns about community safety.

Recommendations:

1. Increased Surveillance and Security:
   • Encourage homeowners and businesses to invest in surveillance cameras, motion-sensor lighting, and alarm systems to deter vandals. Public areas, particularly parking lots and commercial spaces, should consider adding security patrols or increasing lighting to reduce opportunities for vandalism.
2. Neighborhood Watch and Community Involvement:
   • Promote community watch programs where residents and business owners work together to report suspicious behavior and protect their properties. Involving local residents can help deter vandalism by increasing community vigilance.
3. Graffiti Cleanup Initiatives:
   • Implement graffiti removal programs that quickly clean up and restore vandalized areas. Prompt removal of graffiti can discourage further tagging and improve the visual appeal of neighborhoods and commercial districts.
4. Public Awareness Campaigns:
   • Launch awareness campaigns to educate residents and business owners about the importance of reporting vandalism and taking preventative measures. Highlighting the economic and social impacts of vandalism on the community may encourage more active participation in prevention efforts.
5. Youth Engagement and Education:
   • Develop programs to engage young people in positive activities, such as community service projects, art programs, or sports leagues, which can help reduce youth involvement in vandalism. Educational initiatives can also teach youth about the consequences of vandalism and the impact it has on their community.