Belated crime-solving solution

By Cito Beltran

My wife lost her handbag to two thieves posing as customers at Terry’s restaurant on Leviste St. in Legazpi Village, Makati. After losing her wallet, car keys and credit cards, one would think that the manager or people running the establishment would have at least waived the staggering P1, 500 lunch for 3 pax. Instead, she earned the consolation price of having her very own DVD copy of how the thieves, sat next to her, used Terry’s oversized menus to flick her handbag to the floor, slowly picked up and slipped my wife’s bag into a backpack and walked out without ordering anything. Ironically, one of my wife’s friends had lost her iPhone in the same restaurant last year, and when she kicked up a fuss, the phone magically reappeared a few days later.

One does not rub salt on the wound, so I graciously refrained from asking why they even went back to a restaurant with such history! In any case, we all know the common excuse of businesses with such shoddy security: “the establishment is not responsible for your belongings,” so in return, consumers like us also have the right not to endorse places with bad customer service or security. In this day and age of Twitter and Facebook, that can be bad for business.

To be honest, it is not my intention to dump on Terry’s since they also qualify as victims in the scenario. The manager did what he could to help my wife find a locksmith, although I managed to get there from Pasig faster than the neighborhood lock picker.

So with all that behind us, I have to ask: what is my wife who is a foreigner suppose to do with a personalized copy of how she was robbed in the heart of Makati City? It occurred to me to call my friend Ted Failon at ABS-CBN so they can air the CCTV clip in their “i- Patrol mo” to warn others. But 9 out of 10 times, all you achieve is find yourself victimized once more when the nation sees how totally unaware you are that someone is robbing you. In my short stint as a press photographer in the police beat, I know that unless I can get Vice President Binay to scream at the police commander and turn over their “pets”, those cretins will soon be robbing someone today in another Makati restaurant. I guess all I can say is that the City of Makati is no longer relatively crime free as it used to be. So visitors beware.

Back to the CCTV video coverage, I was actually suppose to write about the CCTV for today after I heard that Quezon City had passed a city ordinance making it mandatory for all business establishments to install CCTV cameras. For the record I support the ordinance and believe that the more “eyes” we have, the better chances we have of fighting crime. However, I can’t help wondering if making CCTV installations mandatory is a half-assed approach to crime prevention in Metro Manila?

Yes CCTVs will serve as a deterrent, and as proven in recent crimes that were solved through CCTV footages, a good setup is very useful. But what worries me is that CCTV footages only serve as recorder and provider of belated evidence of a crime or criminal presence in the area. By itself, the CCTV does not stop the break-in, the rape, the shooting or commission of most crimes recorded by the CCTV camera. The equipment is merely a mute witness providing testimony, not actually preventing crime.

For some strange reason, why are our Congressmen, government officials both local and national, as well as law enforcement authorities silent about the need to seriously multiply not just increase the number of police officers in the streets? In spite of the serious lack of warm bodies patrolling streets, why do law enforcement officials try to sell us the idea that there are enough “force multipliers” in the form of barangay tanods and local traffic enforcers? Why is every commercial and business district forced to make up for the deficit by hiring privately paid and powerless security guards to deter crime? Is it because of the fact that most security agencies are owned in one-way or another by ex and current police officials, Congressmen and local officials?

The fact of the matter is tanods and security guards have no useful police powers or inclination to go beyond their eight-hour duties and responsibilities. Yes there are enough brave souls who have served beyond the call of duty, even dying on the spot, but by and large, tanods and security guards ARE NOT the police and should not be the backbone of the country’s crime prevention system. In the same manner, it is a dangerous course we trek if we rely upon technology to reduce criminality. What we need is an equal or superior force to face criminals, not just cameras.

What worries me about local ordinances making CCTV mandatory is that it will simply benefit manufacturers and importers of the equipment and create a false sense of security among citizens. At the very least it creates a false impression that the ordinance will reduce the crime. While I congratulate the officials of Quezon City on their initiative, I think that the city as large as it is and having one of the highest numbers of congressional representatives, should now take the initiative to force the issue of multiplying the number of policemen especially for Metro Manila.

Only a real police officer, with real training and real weapons, can stop crime, not a camera!