www.cops.usd

Robbery of Taxi

Drivers

By Martha J. Smith

Problem-Oriented Guides for Pol

Problem-Specific Guides Ser

No. 
www.PopCenter.org

Got a Problem? We’ve got answers!

Log on to the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing webs

at www.popcenter.org for a wealth of information to help

you deal more effectively with crime and disorder in your

community, including:

• Web-enhanced versions of all currently available Guides

• Interactive training exercises

• On-line access to research and police practices

• An on-line problem analysis module

Designed for police and those who work with them to

address community problems, www.popcenter.org is a grea

resource in problem-oriented policing.

Center for Problem-Oriented Policin
Robbery of Taxi Drivers

Martha J. Smith

This project was supported by cooperative agreement

#2004CKWXK002 by the Office of Community Oriented Policing

Services, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions contained

herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent

the official position of the U.S. Department of Justice. References

to specific companies, products, or services should not be

considered an endorsement of the product by the author or the

U.S. Department of Justice. Rather, the references are illustrations

to supplement discussion of the issues.

www.cops.usdoj.gov

ISBN: 1-932582-50-9

March 2005

Problem-Oriented Guides for Police 

Problem-Specific Guides Series

Guide No. 34

About the Problem-Specific Guides Series 

About the Problem-Specific Guides Series

The Problem-Specific Guides summarize knowledge about

how police can reduce the harm caused by specific crime

and disorder problems. They are guides to prevention and

to improving the overall response to incidents, not to

investigating offenses or handling specific incidents. The

guides are written for police–of whatever rank or assignment–

who must address the specific problem the guides cover. The

guides will be most useful to officers who:

• Understand basic problem-oriented policing principles

and methods. The guides are not primers in problemoriented policing. They deal only briefly with the initial

decision to focus on a particular problem, methods to

analyze the problem, and means to assess the results of

a problem-oriented policing project. They are designed

to help police decide how best to analyze and address a

problem they have already identified. (An assessment

guide has been produced as a companion to this series

and the COPS Office has also published an introductory

guide to problem analysis. For those who want to learn

more about the principles and methods of problemoriented policing, the assessment and analysis guides,

along with other recommended readings, are listed at the

back of this guide.)

• Can look at a problem in depth. Depending on the

complexity of the problem, you should be prepared to

spend perhaps weeks, or even months, analyzing and

responding to it. Carefully studying a problem before

responding helps you design the right strategy, one that

is most likely to work in your community. You should

not blindly adopt the responses others have used; you

must decide whether they are appropriate to your local
ii Robbery of Taxi Drivers

situation. What is true in one place may not be true

elsewhere; what works in one place may not work

everywhere.

• Are willing to consider new ways of doing police

business. The guides describe responses that other

police departments have used or that researchers have

tested. While not all of these responses will be appropriate

to your particular problem, they should help give a

broader view of the kinds of things you could do.

You may think you cannot implement some of these

responses in your jurisdiction, but perhaps you can.

In many places, when police have discovered a more

effective response, they have succeeded in having laws

and policies changed, improving the response to the

problem.

• Understand the value and the limits of research

knowledge. For some types of problems, a lot of useful

research is available to the police; for other problems,

little is available. Accordingly, some guides in this series

summarize existing research whereas other guides illustrate

the need for more research on that particular problem.

Regardless, research has not provided definitive answers to

all the questions you might have about the problem. The

research may help get you started in designing your own

responses, but it cannot tell you exactly what to do. This 

will depend greatly on the particular nature of your local

problem. In the interest of keeping the guides readable, not

every piece of relevant research has been cited, nor has

every point been attributed to its sources. To have done so

would have overwhelmed and distracted the reader. The

references listed at the end of each guide are those drawn

on most heavily; they are not a complete bibliography of

research on the subject.
About the Problem-Specific Guides Series 

• Are willing to work with other community agencies

to find effective solutions to the problem. The police

alone cannot implement many of the responses

discussed in the guides. They must frequently implement

them in partnership with other responsible private and

public entities. An effective problem-solver must know

how to forge genuine partnerships with others and be

prepared to invest considerable effort in making these

partnerships work.

These guides have drawn on research findings and police

practices in the United States, the United Kingdom,

Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the Netherlands, and

Scandinavia. Even though laws, customs and police practices

vary from country to country, it is apparent that the police

everywhere experience common problems. In a world that

is becoming increasingly interconnected, it is important

that police be aware of research and successful practices

beyond the borders of their own countries.

The COPS Office and the authors encourage you to provide

feedback on this guide and to report on your own agency’s

experiences dealing with a similar problem. Your agency

may have effectively addressed a problem using responses

not considered in these guides and your experiences and

knowledge could benefit others. This information will be

used to update the guides. If you wish to provide feedback

and share your experiences it should be sent via e-mail to

cops_pubs@usdoj.gov.
iv Robbery of Taxi Drivers

For more information about problem-oriented policing,

visit the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing online at

www.popcenter.org or via the COPS website at

www.cops.usdoj.gov. This website offers free online access to:

• the Problem-Specific Guides series,

• the companion Response Guides and Problem-Solving Tools

series,

• instructional information about problem-oriented policing

and related topics,

• an interactive training exercise,

• on-line access to important police research and practices,

and

• an on-line problem analysis module.
Acknowledgments 

Acknowledgments

The Problem-Oriented Guides for Police are very much a

collaborative effort. While each guide has a primary author,

other project team members, COPS Office staff and

anonymous peer reviewers contributed to each guide by

proposing text, recommending research and offering

suggestions on matters of format and style.

The principal project team developing the guide series

comprised Herman Goldstein, professor emeritus,

University of Wisconsin Law School; Ronald V. Clarke,

professor of criminal justice, Rutgers University; John E.

Eck, professor of criminal justice, University of Cincinnati;

Michael S. Scott, clinical assistant professor, University of

Wisconsin Law School; Rana Sampson, police consultant,

San Diego; and Deborah Lamm Weisel, director of police

research, North Carolina State University.

Nancy Leach and Cynthia Pappas oversaw the project for

the COPS Office. Rebecca Kanable edited the guide.

Research for the guides was conducted at the Criminal

Justice Library at Rutgers University under the direction of

Phyllis Schultze.

Contents

About the Problem-Specific Guide Series . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i

Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v

The Problem of Robbery of Taxi Drivers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Related Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Factors Contributing to Robbery of Taxi Drivers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Understanding Your Local Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Asking the Right Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Incidents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Taxi Company Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Victims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Offenders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Locations/Times . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Measuring Your Effectiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Responses to The Problem of Robbery of Taxi Drivers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

Vehicle Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Money Matters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Other Driver Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

Policing Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

Industry Rules, Regulations, and Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Responses With Limited Potential for Effectiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

Appendix: Summary of Responses to Robbery of Taxi Drivers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

Endnotes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

About the Author . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

Contents 
viii Robbery of Taxi Drivers

Recommended Readings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

Other Problem-Oriented Guides for Police . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
The Problem of Robbery of Taxi Drivers 

The Problem of Robberies of Taxi Drivers

The guide begins by describing the problem and reviewing

factors that increase the risks of robbery of taxi drivers.

The guide then identifies a series of questions that might

assist you in analyzing your local taxi robbery problem.

Finally, the guide reviews responses to the problem and

what is known about these from evaluative research and

police practice.

One of the biggest barriers to understanding the problem

of taxi driver robbery is the lack of data specifically

collected on this crime. Most police departments do not

record the circumstances surrounding a robbery incident 

in a way that allows taxi robberies to be identified easily.

Much of what is known about taxi robbery is based on

information recorded on assaults and homicides by

occupation.† These data consistently show that, as an

occupation or industry, taxi drivers have the highest or

among the highest risk of job-related homicide and

assault.1 Robbery is the motive for more than half of all

work-related homicides (80 percent) and non-fatal assaults

(60 percent).2 A U.S. study that did look at robbery

victimization data by occupation also found that taxi

drivers were among those most often robbed.3

Even the information that is available, however, is likely 

to be incomplete.4 Many drivers work as independent

contractors and, as such, may not be eligible for workers

compensation (one of the main data sources for studies of

occupational assault). More importantly, the structure of

compensation for services in the industry (where time off

means no income) decreases the incentive drivers might

otherwise have to report crimes to the police or other

official sources. That may be especially true if drivers see

† No studies focused specificall

taxi driver victimization have be

carried out in the United States

though such research has been 

in Australia (Mayhew, 1999; Hai

1997; Keatsdale Pty. Ltd., 1995)

Canada (Stenning, 1996), the Un

Kingdom (Westmarland and

Anderson, 2001; Smith, forthco

and the Netherlands (Elzinga, 1

Mayhew (2000b) provides a

comprehensive review of the st

that have looked at taxi driver as
2 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

the crime as relatively minor, they do not think the police

can do anything about it, or they think that the police will

not take their crime problems seriously.† The problem of

under-reporting may be particularly acute in relation to

attempted robberies since these are likely to be seen by

drivers as less severe incidents. However, attempted

robberies may be particularly useful to understand when

developing problem-solving strategies since they were

successfully disrupted for some reason.

To understand taxi robberies it is necessary to understand

the industry in which cab drivers operate. The compensation

that drivers receive is related to the number of fares they

have in a given shift, the distance they travel, the amount

of tips they receive, and the costs of the vehicle (and any

fees paid for access to fares via radio dispatch, if they use

this service). Robbery depletes driver revenue and has the

potential for injury and death. Therefore, drivers must

continually balance the competing concerns of increasing

revenue through accepting fares and of risking potential

revenue loss (and potential physical harm). Knowing how

the taxi industry is organized in a particular locality is an

important first step in developing a taxi driver robbery

problem-solving strategy related to that place.

In general, there are two different types of taxi services:

• “hackney” cabs that can pick up fares off the street or

from taxi stands. (This type of service is also referred to as

“ply-for-hire” service, “medallion” cabs in New York City,

or some other term related to the color of the vehicles,

such as “black cabs” in London.)

• “livery” cabs that must be booked through a central

dispatching office. (This service is also known under a

variety of local names, such as “mini-cabs” in London and

“car services” in the New York metropolitan area.)††

† If police do not take crimes

seriously, then this may lead to

additional problems. For example,

Mayhew (1999) noted the belief

among some drivers that police

failure to take small fare evasions

seriously may embolden offenders

and lead to more serious incidents

with drivers.

†† The term “gypsy cab,” which

historically has been limited to

services that operate without the

needed licenses in an area, is

increasingly being used in New York

City to refer to livery services

(Marosi, n.d.).
The Problem of Robbery of Taxi Drivers 

Problem-solvers need to look at the types of services

offered in the community in order to look for patterns of

offending. Some patterns may be typical for only one set

of drivers, if more than one type of service operates in

that area, particularly if prevention techniques and

equipment differ among the different types of services 

or ownership relationships.†

In general, there are two types of vehicle-driver ownership

relationships:

• the owner-driver–where the driver of the vehicle also owns

the cab. Owner-drivers may operate without a radio or may

lease radio and radio-dispatch services from a company

that handles telephone bookings.

• the driver-lessee–where the driver leases the vehicle

from the owner. Leasing arrangements may be very

different in different locations and may result in a variety

of pressures and constraints on drivers and owners.

Drivers may lease their vehicles full-time or by shifts,

may not drive the same vehicle for each shift, and may

receive all of the proceeds of their fares or only a

percentage. Drivers without full control over their

vehicles may not be able to determine the types of

safety equipment that are present in their cabs. Owners,

on the other hand, may have a few cabs or may operate

large fleets of vehicles. The different situations of

owners may influence their ability or willingness to

purchase expensive safety features, such as driver screens,

digital cameras, and global positioning satellite technology.

However, the size of the owner’s fleet may not necessarily

determine whether equipment is installed. For example,

economies of scale may make some owners more likely

to install certain equipment while others may operate in

a monopoly situation and decide such expenditures are

not necessary.

† The recent drop in the level of

homicides among livery drivers i

New York City (Luo, 2004) may 

an example of how the preventi

equipment on different types of 

services can affect the victimizat

patterns of drivers. In the early 

yellow cab drivers and livery driv

in fleets were required to have

bulletproof partitions in their ca

Homicides among these drivers

dropped following this initiative

(Marosi, n.d.). Livery drivers wh

were owner-drivers were not req

to have bulletproof partitions in 

cabs until 2000 when the regulat

changed following a spate of

murders of livery drivers. With t

new initiative, all livery drivers w

required to install partitions or

surveillance cameras. Establishin

direct link between the requirem

for new equipment and the drop 

homicides among livery drivers i

difficult to do unambiguously,

however, since other initiatives (

as increased use of decoy officer

targeting of taxi robbery locatio

use of special decals that allow p

to stop drivers without probable

cause or reasonable suspicion, an

tougher sentencing laws) were al

place. In 2001, a program was al

started in New York City to inst

emergency contact systems in ye

and livery cabs using global

positioning satellite technology a

cell phone links (Mayersohn, 200
4 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

Taxi services are usually regulated by some governmental

or quasi-governmental body.† Both hackney and livery

services may be regulated by the same oversight agency.

Common regulatory features of these agencies include:

• setting fares,

• licensing drivers and vehicles (including regulating the

number of vehicles within particular areas),

• controlling the conditions of vehicles, and 

• monitoring the behavior of drivers.

Police departments may try to set up partnerships among

regulatory agencies and industry representatives (including

radio-dispatching companies, owners, associations of

owners, drivers, driver associations, and labor unions) to

help implement problem-solving initiatives.†† The partners

in the problem-solving process may need to understand

both how the industry is regulated in an area and the

context in which past regulation was implemented before

they can begin to assess the best responses to current

problems.

Related Problems

This guide focuses on robbery of taxi drivers. It does not

address crimes by taxi drivers against passengers or other

drivers.††† In addition, it does not attempt to address fully

the following crimes against drivers:

• homicide,

• assault,

• threats of physical violence,

• verbal aggression or harassment,

• hate speech,

• fare evasion, or

• vandalism.

† One oversight model is illustrated by

the New York City Taxi and Limousine

Commission (see www.nyc.gov/html/

tlc/html/home/home.shtml) while

another model involves the direct

control of taxi services by the local

police department, as found in Boston

with the Hackney Carriage Unit.

†† Examples of partnerships involving

taxi representatives can be found in

Melbourne, Australia (Taxi Driver

Safety Committee, 1996), Manitoba,

Canada (Manitoba Taxicab Board,

1991), and Manchester, England

(Manchester City Council, 2003).

While the Manchester partnership has

focused on late-night city center travel

and disorder problems, rather than

robbery, it is an example of the type of

partnership initiative that has developed

under the Crime and Disorder Act

1998 directing local governmental

authorities in England and Wales to 

set up crime and disorder partnerships

with the police and other agencies,

audit local crime, set up strategic plans

to address these problems, and carry

them out (see, e.g., Home Office,

1998).

††† Sexual assaults on women have

been the focus of a large number of

enforcement initiatives in London

recently under the Project Sapphire

umbrella (see 

www.met.police.uk/sapphire/).
† A crime “script” is a shorthand

term developed to help describe 

stages in an unfolding crime eve

similar to the “modus operandi”

(Cornish, 1994).

The Problem of Robbery of Taxi Drivers 

It also does not include robbery involving delivery services

of perishable items, such as pizzas or Chinese food, or of

valuables, such as cash.

While robbery is the primary motive for many attacks and

resulting injuries across all occupations,5 this finding may

be location-specific for taxi drivers.6 Some research in

Australia7 and Britain8 has found that alcohol plays a role in

driver assaults, but it is not clear that these assaults are

primarily a subset of robbery-related assaults nor how

prevalent they are compared to robbery-motivated assaults.

Some drivers have suggested that driver behavior, such as

over-charging, taking the long way around, and aggression

or rudeness, may lead to aggression by passengers.9 It is

unclear whether, or how often, this aggression escalates

into a later robbery event or whether other types of verbal

harassment or hate speech are related to taxi driver robbery.

There is some evidence, however, that driver pursuit of

fare evaders can result in robbery.10 Policing agencies may,

therefore, find it useful to look carefully at a variety of

incidents involving taxi drivers in order to understand the

taxi robbery problems in their area.

Policing agencies seeking to limit the number of taxi driver

robberies in their area need to try to understand where the

links between crimes can be made, as well as how the series

of actions in a robbery crime “script”† develop and how

they relate to prevention schemes. For example, prevention

measures, such as safety shields between drivers and

passengers, designed to help prevent one type of crime

(robbery) may also help prevent other crimes (homicides

and assaults). Yet, drivers in some areas have been concerned

that they may depersonalize them or go against a culture

that prizes friendliness, banter, and lack of social

divisions.11 This might result in lower tips and possibly
6 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

increased fare evasion and vandalism. If these unwanted

consequences do not materialize, then it may be easier for

drivers to accept the prevention measures against the rarer

robbery event. Thus, police agencies seeking to understand

a local taxi driver robbery problem may wish to monitor

other offenses against drivers both before and after

implementing new prevention initiatives.

Factors Contributing to Robberies of Taxi Drivers

Understanding the factors that contribute to your problem

will help you frame your own local analysis questions,

determine good effectiveness measures, recognize key

intervention points, and select appropriate responses.

Taxi drivers are at risk of robbery due to a combination of

factors related to the nature of their job:

• They have contact with a large number of strangers or

people they do not know well.

• They often work in high-crime areas.

• They usually carry cash with them in an unsecured manner

and handle money as payment.

• They usually work alone.

• They often go to, or through, isolated locations.

• They often work late at night or early in the morning.

These risk factors, among others, have been mentioned in

a number of studies of workplace homicide and violence

in general.12
The Problem of Robbery of Taxi Drivers 

Not all places pose the same degree of danger in relation

to these factors, nor do all drivers have the same degree of

exposure to these risk factors. For example, even within a

given locality, there may be a great deal of variability in the

designs and features of the vehicles themselves. Some cabs

may be purpose-built vehicles,† equipped with driver safety

screens, radios, charge card machines, global positioning

satellite (GPS) tracking, and digital infrared cameras. Other

cabs in that area may have none of these features.

One study in Australia found that robberies were most

likely to be carried out by young men who were inebriated

and hailed the cab from the street or taxi stands.13 In other

places, robberies may be most likely to follow calls to

dispatchers by women, with drivers arriving to find a man

with a gun and no women.14 Drivers must be made aware

of the common patterns for robberies in their area, but

should also be aware that they may not always be able to

identify potential robbers or robbery situations before the

event unfolds.

† Purpose-built vehicles are thos

designed specifically for use as

taxicabs, such as Checker cabs a

the London cab.

Understanding Your Local Problem 

Understanding Your Local Problem

The information provided above is only a generalized

description of taxi driver robbery. You must combine the

basic facts with a more specific understanding of your

local problem. Analyzing the local problem carefully will

help you design a more effective response strategy.

Asking the Right Questions

The following are some critical questions you should ask in

analyzing your particular problem of taxi robbery, even if

the answers are not always readily available. Your answers to

these and other questions will help you choose the most

appropriate set of responses later on.

To understand the problem of taxi robberies it is important

for local police agencies to understand the types of services

normally provided by taxis operating in their jurisdiction.

The central distinction is between hackney cabs and livery

cabs (discussed above). Other distinctions among types of

taxi services may also be important for understanding the

environment in which drivers normally work.

Incidents

• How many robberies of taxi drivers occur in your

jurisdiction? What has been the trend over time in recent

years?

• What percentage of all robberies in your jurisdiction is of

taxi drivers?

• What percentage of taxi robberies results in injury or death

to the driver?

• How many attempted robberies of taxi drivers occur?

What is the ratio of attempted taxi driver robberies to

completed taxi driver robberies?
10 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

• What percentage of robberies of taxi drivers is reported

to police? Is there an agency that victims may report to

other than the police?

Taxi Company Practices

• Is the industry primarily operated by large vehicle-leasing

firms or by independent owner-operators who pay set fees

for radio equipment and access to fares through them? 

• Do many of the taxis in the area operate without being

attached to a radio-cab company? 

• Are taxis allowed to cruise the streets for fares? Are they

limited to taxi-stand pick-ups? 

• Are there regulations that limit taxi drivers’ discretion in

accepting fares?

• Do drivers receive any compensation for lost wages due to

crime victimization, crime-related injuries, complaint filing,

or case prosecution?

• What policies, if any, have taxi companies in your

jurisdiction enacted to prevent robbery of their drivers?

• Do taxi companies authorize drivers to refuse to pick

up or drop off passengers in certain areas of the

jurisdiction? If so, do crime reports indicate that these

areas are in fact unsafe? Has this practice created any

controversy in the community?
Understanding Your Local Problem 

It is also important for police agencies to understand the

types of passengers normally frequenting cabs in the area

and why they take taxis. Common passenger types include:

• the disabled and the elderly;

• non-drivers–including the poor, those who have lost their

licenses, and the young;

• those unable or unwilling to drive because of their alcohol

or drug consumption;

• regular passengers;

• those going to the airport or train station; and 

• business people.

Victims 

• Which type of driver is most commonly a robbery victim

in the area–the hackney, or ply-for-hire, driver who can

pick up fares from the street or the driver limited to prebooked fares? Are there differences between these drivers

in the types of vehicles they use or in the safety equipment

on the vehicles? Is there a difference in the amount of

interaction among drivers of these types of taxis? Do the

drivers in these groups belong to different ethnic groups,

have different levels of experience, or represent different

age groups?

• Were the robbers picked up off the street by a taxi licensed

only for pre-booked fares, suggesting that the drivers were

risking their license to take the fare?

• Were the drivers in the cab when the robbery started?

• Did the victims have, and use, safety screens?

• Did the cabs have a digital camera or a global positioning

satellite (GPS) system?

• Do the victims usually operate with a radio or have a CB in

the cab? 
12 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

• Do the cabs have some type of alarm, such as a trouble

light on the outside of the cabs, an alarm that is triggered

at the dispatch office, or a procedure for using a trouble

code word?

• Were the victims able to summon help during the

incident? If so, was enough information given to locate

the driver? If help arrived, at what point in the robbery

incident did someone appear?

• Did the victims have a weapon (e.g., gun, knife, tire iron,

pepper spray, or flashlight)? Were they able to use it?

• Are drivers usually injured during, or after, the robbery?

If so, what types of injuries do they suffer?

• Is the proportion of drivers from particular demographic

groups who are robbed approximately the same as the

proportion of drivers from these groups in the local

taxi industry as a whole?

• How fearful are taxi drivers in your jurisdiction of

robbery? How has that fear level changed over time?

Offenders

• Are most of the robbers passengers in the cab? 

• Do the offenders most often hail the cab from the

street, or call for a cab from a phone booth or mobile

phone, or from a particular location? 

• Did the robber operate on his/her own or with an

accomplice? Was the offender from an identifiable

group? Were the victim and the offender from the same

ethnic or racial group? Was the robber male or female?

• Did the offender intimidate the driver through threats

or harassment prior to the robbery?

• Did the offender appear to be an opportunistic offender

or one who seemed to be experienced in carrying out

this type of offense?

• Was the perpetrator armed with a weapon? If so, what

type of weapon? When was the weapon first shown or

threatened?
Understanding Your Local Problem 

Locations/Times

• In what parts of town do the robberies tend to occur or

cluster? Where was the pick-up location? What

destination was given? Where was the actual robbery

done? Was the driver or cab taken to another location

after the robbery?

• Were the robbery sites given as the destinations at the

beginning of the taxi trips?

• Are the areas where robberies occur similar in design?

For example, are they difficult to maneuver in, or do

they involve complicated street plans where drivers can

become easily lost? 

• Are incident areas clustered geographically? Do these

areas also have high rates of fare evasions? Do

experienced drivers tend to avoid these areas?

• Do robberies involving drug addicts occur more often

in certain geographic areas, such as near dealers’

residences?

• When do these robberies mainly occur (time of day, day

of week, month, season)? Do these times correspond to

driver shifts? For example, do robberies tend to occur

toward the end of a shift on a busy night? As drivers

are returning to base or home? Or do robberies tend to

occur when drivers are not busy, suggesting they may be

taking risks to increase their takings?

• Do robberies in certain places occur more often at

certain times of the day?

• Are the robbery locations normally deserted at the time

of day when the incidents occurred there?
14 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

Measuring Your Effectiveness

Measurement allows you to determine to what degree your

efforts have succeeded, and suggests how you might modify

your responses if they are not producing the intended

results. You should take measures of your problem before

you implement responses to determine how serious the

problem is, and after you implement them to determine

whether they have been effective. All measures should be

taken in both the target area and the surrounding area.

(For more detailed guidance on measuring effectiveness,

see the companion guide to this series, Assessing Responses 

to Problems: An Introductory Guide for Police Problem-Solvers.†

)

Due to the problems involved in finding comparable

surrounding areas, police agencies may try to get comparison

figures from similar types of cities or local areas within the

region.

Police and industry efforts to record the number of

robberies of taxi drivers more accurately may lead to an

increase in reported crimes that reflects only reporting

practices and does not indicate a real increase in the

number of incidents. If police agencies or taxi regulators

try to increase robbery and attempted robbery reporting

levels, then they should do this several months prior to the

implementation of any new preventive measures.

The following are potentially useful measures of the

effectiveness of responses to taxi robbery:

• reductions in the number of robberies (and attempted

robberies) of taxi drivers (and in the proportion of taxi

robberies in comparison to all robberies in the area),

controlling for taxi business volume and the number of

taxis;

† Also see Problem Solving Tips: A

Guide to Reducing Crime and Disorder

through Problem-Solving Partnerships

(U.S. Department of Justice COPS

Office, 2002).
Understanding Your Local Problem 

• reductions in the number of repeat robbery victimizations

of taxi drivers, controlling for the number of drivers;

• reductions in the proportion of completed robberies to the

number of attempted robberies of taxi drivers;

• reductions in the reported response time of police and

other drivers to calls for assistance;

• reductions in the number of homicides of taxi drivers (and

in the proportion of driver homicides in comparison to all

homicides in the area), controlling for taxi business volume

and the number of taxis;

• reductions in the number of driver assaults (and in the

proportion of taxi driver assaults in comparison to all

assaults in the area), controlling for taxi business volume,

the number of taxis, the number of drivers, and the

number of years of experience of drivers;

• reductions in the number of repeat assault victimizations

of taxi drivers, controlling for the number of drivers;

• reductions in the severity of injuries resulting from

robberies and attempted robberies of taxi drivers,

controlling for the number of assaults;

• reductions in the time taken off following robbery or

attempted robbery by taxi drivers, controlling for the

number of assaults;

• reductions in the number of workers compensation claims

filed by taxi drivers following robberies or attempted

robberies, controlling for taxi business volume and the

number of drivers;

• reductions in the number of driver complaints of harassing

comments (a possible precursor to a robbery), controlling

for taxi business volume;

• reduction in driver turnover in the industry, controlling for

taxi business volume;

• reductions in reported fear among drivers of being crime

victims;
16 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

• reductions in the number of passenger complaints to the

taxi regulator (including service refusals overall, and those

based on claims of racial or ethnic discrimination and

residential discrimination (both in terms of pick-ups from

residences and street hails once the destination has been

given), controlling for taxi business volume and the

number of taxis; and

• reductions in passenger volume.

Police agencies, taxi regulators, or industry representatives

should measure the extent to which initiatives have been

adopted to help ensure that any apparent success (or

failure) is correctly attributed to the appropriate antirobbery initiative. If police or regulators are to assess

prevention efforts accurately, then there must be cooperation

among the various information holders. One way to

accomplish this would be to document the crime prevention

hardware and systems on a vehicle at the time it is inspected

by the taxi regulator, with owners being required to report

changes between inspections with an easy-to-use reporting

form. Also, the agency operating a grant or loan program

to support the installation of particular security devices

should keep records of the vehicles receiving the equipment

and forward this information to taxi liaison officers in

policing agencies or to those in the regulator’s office who

monitor crimes against drivers. And finally, police agencies

instituting new patrol practices in response to taxi crime

should document when these initiatives begin so that their

effectiveness can be monitored more accurately. As this

listing clearly indicates, no one stakeholder can perform

the assessment needed to determine what works in a

particular area. Cooperation is crucial for accurate assessment.
Understanding Your Local Problem 

Getting information from taxi drivers about the volume of

their business may be difficult if they are not required to

keep a log of their trips since they deal in cash and some

of them may be reluctant to disclose the extent of their

earnings, particularly if they do not report all of their

income for tax purposes or to the owner of the vehicle

(where the owner is entitled to a percentage of the

takings). Also, driving a taxi is often an entry-level job for

many new, and undocumented, immigrants who also may

be reluctant to report any information to policing agencies

or taxi regulators.

Responses to the Problem of Robbery of

Taxi Drivers

Your analysis of your local problem should give you a

better understanding of the factors contributing to it.

Once you have analyzed your local problem and established

a baseline for measuring effectiveness, you should consider

possible responses to address the problem.

The taxi industry is often regulated by an agency within

local government, by an independent commission, or by

the police.† These bodies set fares and limit the number of

licenses permitted within particular areas, as well as control

the conditions of vehicles and monitor the behavior of

drivers. Often the jurisdictional boundaries between these

regulatory agencies and police are not clear to everyone

affected. The problem is compounded if the regulatory

agency does not deploy inspectors during the late night or

early evening hours. The police may be called upon to act

in areas for which they have little training. They may be

asked by drivers to resolve complaints that are civil, rather

than criminal in nature–such as fare evasion in some

locations. Taxis may operate outside their home jurisdiction

and taxis from other areas may drop passengers off in

local policing areas. Coordination between police and the

taxi regulators may require the appointment of a special

officer.

The development of industry-wide responses should involve

not only the police and the regulatory bodies covering a

service area, but also other interested groups such as

drivers, drivers’ associations, vehicle owners, and radio-cab

booking companies. One researcher has commented that

voluntary measures, even with wide support among drivers,

do not have much chance of penetration into the industry

without the support of owners.15 Sometimes these agencies

Responses to the Problem of Robbery of Taxi Drivers 

† In Boston, the taxi industry is

regulated by the Boston Police

Department (the Hackney Carria

Unit) while in New York City, th

Taxi and Limousine Commission 

the rules for both hackney and l

services (see www.nyc.gov/html

html/home/home.shtml).
20 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

† But see Department of

Infrastructure, Energy and Resources

(2003) for an example of a regulatory

impact statement on the requirement

that security cameras be installed in

taxicabs in Hobart, Tasmania,

Australia, where the costs and

benefits of security cameras, driver

safety shields, and emergency lights

and duress alarms are each set out.

†† Mayhew (2000a) presented a

comprehensive review of prevention

strategies related to assaults of taxi

drivers.

require a single type of safety device, such as a bulletproof screen between passengers and drivers, while at

other times they may allow drivers or owners to choose

from several possible devices, such as safety screens, digital

surveillance cameras, or automatic vehicle locators (AVLs)

in combination with an alarm.16 Policies that provide some

choice among safety measures may represent a compromise

among competing interest groups rather than a judgment

about comparative effectiveness.† However, because so

little is known about the effectiveness of most of these

measures, it is too soon to draw conclusions about whether

it is more useful to focus on a single prevention measure

or to allow a variety of measures to operate within a single

area.

The responses recommended below are reasonably likely to

have some beneficial effect in preventing robberies of taxi

drivers; however, unless otherwise noted, none of these

responses has been properly evaluated for effectiveness.

Since so little research has been done in this area, it is too

early to label measures as ineffective. This is why the last

three responses are included but discussed separately as

responses with limited potential for effectiveness. It is also

important to note that, although installation costs are

frequently cited as reasons for not implementing particular

problem-solving strategies, a number of grant or loan

programs have been set up, such as those in New York

City17 and Washington, D.C.18

The following response strategies provide a foundation of

ideas for addressing your particular problem. These strategies

are drawn from a variety of research studies†† and police

reports. Several of these strategies may apply to your
Responses to the Problem of Robbery of Taxi Drivers 

† A report from the Manitoba

Taxicab Board (1991) presents a

extensive discussion of taxi scre

†† The importance of industry-w

use of safety screens in an area h

been illustrated with the case of 

York City livery drivers. If livery

drivers owned the cab they drov

they were exempt from the mand

shield requirement directed at

hackney cabs in the 1990s. Whil

homicide deaths among hackney

drivers dropped, livery drivers

continued to be victimized (Mar

n.d.). In 2000, following a numb

killings of livery drivers, all liver

drivers were required to install e

a shield or a digital surveillance

camera (Luo, 2004; see also New

York City Taxi and Limousine

Commission, 2000b). Homicides

have declined markedly for livery

drivers since 2000. It is difficult 

credit shields completely for this

change, however, since a number 

other prevention programs were 

in effect in that period.

community’s problem. It is critical that you tailor responses

to local circumstances, and that you can justify each response

based on reliable analysis. In most cases, an effective

strategy will involve implementing several different

responses. Law enforcement responses alone are seldom

effective in reducing or solving the problem. Do not limit

yourself to considering what police can do. Give careful

consideration to who in your community shares responsibility

for the problem and can help police better respond to it.

Vehicle Equipment

1. Separating drivers from passengers. Screens or

partitions should be effective if they make it more difficult

for robbers to carry out the type of threat most common

with taxi robberies in an area.† For example, bullet-resistant

screens (and bulletproof plates behind the driver’s seat) are

designed to prevent robberies with a gun when the robber

is seated behind the driver. In the only well-designed

evaluation of a security measure in a taxicab found for this

review, bullet-resistant safety screens between drivers and

passengers both reduced the number of assaults on drivers

and were cost effective.19 Given the probable links between

driver assault and robbery, this result should apply to

robbery reduction as well.††

Physically separating drivers from their fares can help prevent driver assault

and/or robbery.
22 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

† Passenger injury was seen as a

major problem in New York City

cabs. The “Celebrity Talking Taxi”

Program, begun in 1997, used

recordings by celebrities to remind

passengers to wear their seat belts

(New York City Taxi and Limousine

Commission, 2002). The program

was abandoned in 2003 following 

a study of passenger compliance

(Feuer, 2003). The recordings were

seen as annoying and repetitive,

leading many passengers to defy the

recommendation to buckle-up.

Although taxis in many large U.S. cities have driver safety

screens, this is by no means a universal feature in all

vehicles. Screens have been seen to have the following

disadvantages:20

• expensive to install,

• do not fit well in vehicles that are not purpose-built

vehicles,

• limit driver-passenger interaction (and, therefore, possibly

limit tips),

• can interfere with heating and air conditioning circulation,

and 

• can lead to head injuries following sudden stops where

passengers have not been wearing seat belts.†

However, as one study found, drivers who have been the

victims of assaults or robberies may be more likely to want

screens in their cabs than those who have been the victims

of less serious crimes.21 If taxi regulators require drivers 

to have screens in their vehicles, then they must provide

drivers with information about the types of attacks that

screens can protect them against, such as whether they are

shatter resistant as well as being bulletproof.

2. Recording activity with security cameras. Security

cameras in taxis can serve a variety of interests related to

robbery prevention. Police and prosecutors can use the

images to help catch offenders and increase the evidence

available for conviction. For drivers who may be more

interested in prevention than detection, surveillance

cameras in taxis may deter would-be robbers (or attackers)

who do not want their images caught on camera. Notices

to customers of the presence of cameras should increase

their deterrent effect. To achieve a similar deterrent effect,

prosecutors need to ensure that successful prosecutions

using camera evidence are highly publicized within their
Responses to the Problem of Robbery of Taxi Drivers 

area. One danger for drivers having cameras in their cabs 

is that they may begin to rely on the camera as a substitute

for their own careful assessment of their passengers and

may fail to use their normal precautions.

Security cameras in taxis can capture robberies in progress.

www.toronto-crimestoppers.com

The types of cameras available for use in taxicabs have

become increasingly sophisticated in the last 10 years.22

Digital cameras, with infrared capability, can be connected

to systems that hold a large number of images. Drivers

must be aware whether their system writes over images 

or can retain a certain number of images if an alarm is

triggered. If camera images are stored on equipment held

in the trunk of the cab, there is a possibility that when

robbery events are caught on camera, offenders may try to

destroy the equipment (and cab) to eliminate the evidence.

Systems that transmit the images to a central location away

from the taxi should help to overcome this problem if

offenders are aware of how these systems work. Industry

representatives should explore technological innovations

that make vehicle destruction less likely.
24 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

† This would require images to be

stored and accessed only through a

central computing facility, such as

one run by the police department or

the industry’s oversight commission.

These images would then only be

downloaded in special circumstances,

such as when a crime occurs or a

complaint has been made against the

driver. Protection against passenger

complaints is seen by many drivers 

as an additional advantage of having

cameras in their cabs and may

encourage drivers to install them.

Cameras can also be used to help

prove or disprove complaints against

drivers–if the images have been

preserved.

†† The effectiveness of cameras in

taxis is a hotly debated issue (see

Rathbone, n.d.).

Not all passengers like cameras.23 Part of this may be due

to uncertainty over how their images will be used. Regulators

need to set up strict safeguards to protect passenger

privacy. Legislation over use of the images may provide

some protection, but this may also be achieved if the

images are not available to the drivers.† Clearly, much

depends on the technology used.

Some cities, such as New York City, Chicago, and Sydney,

Australia, permit drivers to have cameras in their taxis in

lieu of driver safety shields.†† Police-industry partnerships

need to be aware that not all prevention devices may be

equally effective against robbery. Crime displacement may

occur if potential robbers see one set of drivers as less

protected than drivers with other devices in their cabs.

3. Using a radio or alarm to call for help. Although

alarms and radios may be used to call for help, drivers 

may find it very difficult during robberies to use radios

(dispatching or CB) or mobile telephones to call for help.

Some devices require drivers to hold down a button while

speaking or press a series of buttons to connect with the

listener. Furthermore, it may become apparent to the

assailant that the radio or telephone has been activated or

that the driver is broadcasting the cab’s location or using a

code indicating that there is trouble. This could put the

driver in additional peril. Radios can be disabled and help

may not arrive immediately.
Responses to the Problem of Robbery of Taxi Drivers 

The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Adminstration

has advocated so-called “open mikes.”24 These devices

block the airwaves on that channel, broadcasting whatever

comes from the open mike. Accidentally switching on 

an open mike may be a particular problem if the open

channel is also the company’s dispatching channel since 

it is blocked when left “open” and the driver cannot be

contacted to close it. If the driver carries a mobile phone,

the dispatcher has that number, and mobile phone use by

taxi drivers is not prohibited, then that problem may be

overcome.

Drivers can use alarms to signal to some central location

(taxi company or police station) that they are having

trouble or they can be used to set off a “trouble light” on

the vehicle itself that cannot be seen by the passengers.

Alarms triggered easily through the pressing of a toggle

switch at the driver’s foot, on the steering wheel, or on the

radio itself may also be accidentally switched on. While

this may be avoided if the driver has to confirm the alarm,

this puts an extra burden on the driver as an incident is

unfolding.

In an area with foot or vehicle traffic, passersby may see

trouble alarms and summon police. Publicity about trouble

lights should increase awareness among those outside the

taxi industry about the meaning of these lights and avoid

confusion with “ready-for-hire” lights on hackney cabs.

Drivers and dispatchers need to be carefully trained by the

taxi companies:

• To understand what events are serious enough to warrant

calling for help.

• To know how their alarm systems work, what their

limitations are, and whether these limitations can be

overcome.
26 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

Police officers must be carefully trained in the protocols

for response so that they do not increase the potential

harm to the driver. Police departments must understand

the problems that may arise with these systems and should

review with taxi drivers and dispatching companies their

response protocols.

4. Keeping track of vehicle locations with automatic

vehicle location (AVL) systems. Systems using global

positioning satellite (GPS) technology have advantages

over systems that require drivers to broadcast their locations

during a robbery incident. With GPS systems, all that is

required is the triggering of an alarm and the monitoring

of that alarm signal by someone who can send help.

Taxi dispatching companies are increasingly using GPS

systems to determine which driver is closest to a pick-up

location. Some drivers do not like them because they do

not take into account driving times to locations or because

they allow too much oversight of the driver’s movements.

Driver resistance to having an alarm system linked to GPS

tracking may be overcome if the systems are independently

installed (such as by the taxi-oversight commission or

agency) and monitored (by the commission or the local

police department).

5. Putting trunk latches on the inside of vehicle

trunks as well as near drivers. All taxi vehicles should be

equipped with a latch that allows someone to open the

trunk from the inside. This feature is not designed to

reduce the number of robberies but to reduce the potential

harm to drivers who may be locked in the trunk following

a robbery incident. Trunk latches near the driver’s seat may

be standard features on many cars used as taxis. They

permit drivers to open trunks without getting out of the

cab, which may prove useful late at night if the driver does

not think it is safe to exit the cab.
Responses to the Problem of Robbery of Taxi Drivers 

6. Disabling vehicles. Systems that allow cabs to be

disabled remotely by having the engine turned off may

become more readily available.25 They could be activated by

a silent alarm and used to disable a vehicle during a

robbery or to prevent a getaway. Drivers using this

technology must be trained in how to respond safely to

both the lack of engine power and to a variety of potential

responses by offenders.

Money Matters

Given that one of the reasons that taxi drivers are at risk

of robbery is that they carry cash with them, a number of

different strategies have been developed to limit the

availability of cash in taxis.

7. Eliminating cash payments. Drivers should be

encouraged to use payment systems that are cashless.

Systems used, or proposed, include:

• Credit or debit cards. (The most efficient systems appear to

be those in which small machines are installed in the cabs.

Some may even be set up so that the passenger swipes the

card. This may encourage customer use in areas where

passengers are distrustful of drivers. Some companies

handle credit cards centrally by calling in the information

though this may be a time-consuming process.) 

Machines that allow taxi drivers to accept

credit cards are becoming more common.
28 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

• Farecards. (Areas that use farecards for public transportation

should consider including taxis in the system. If this

technology becomes less expensive, it may be possible for

communities or companies to run their own systems.)

• Accounts accessible through mobile phones. (This system

allows the mobile phone to be used to gain access to debit

accounts.26)

• Accounts for regular customers, such as restaurants,

hospitals, and social services. (Authorized passengers

merely sign a bill. Drivers can use this “money” to help 

pay their own account with the dispatching company.) 

• Personal checks. (Individual drivers may accept personal

checks from passengers. This may be considered

financially risky even when check guarantee cards are

present.)

Cashless systems can be unpopular with drivers for a

number of reasons:

• Drivers may feel that their regular customer base is

unlikely to be able to move to a cashless system and

they will lose trade if it is the only alternative offered.

• It may be expensive for drivers to install the technology

necessary to handle these systems. (It may not be seen

as cost effective if their customer base is unlikely to use

a cashless system and there is no pre-existing farecard

system in their area.)

• Passengers may try to use stolen credit or debit cards,

or pass bad or stolen checks so the driver may be

concerned about receiving payment from the credit 

card company or bank.

• Drivers may wish to limit any records that accurately

reflect their income. (Drivers working for companies

may conceal their real income if the company is

supposed to receive a percentage of the takings. Drivers

may not report all of their income to the government,

particularly their tips.)
Responses to the Problem of Robbery of Taxi Drivers 

† Australian research has shown 

that many robberies involve sma

amounts of money–less than $3

(Keatsdale Pty. Ltd., 1995).

As more businesses move toward a cashless system,

however, drivers should eliminate cash (as much as

possible) so that they are not a sure source of cash for

would-be robbers. Nevertheless, if cashless systems operate

along side regular cash operations, then drivers will still be

at fairly high risk of robbery.†

8. Dropping money off. Drivers should be encouraged to

drop off cash during their shifts. They can drop the cash

at home, at cash machines, and at dispatching offices

(where individual slots and compartments can be set up 

to hold each driver’s money separately from the others).

Drivers may not use drop-off locations if they are not

convenient or they perceive their risk of robbery in the

taxicab to be low.

If the taxicab carries a sign indicating that the driver

carries only a limited amount of cash (and the drop off is

actually carried out), then the dropping off not only limits

driver loss but could limit the risk of robbery in the

vehicle. However, this strategy carries risks. Drop-off

routines must be varied to prevent robbers from staking

out drop-off locations and carrying out hold-ups as drivers

leave their cabs. Dispatching offices holding driver cash

must be made secure against robbery as well.

9. Keeping money locked up or out of sight. Drivers

can put money in a locked safe in the cab. If a safe is used,

it is not clear whether this should be advertised (as in

convenience stores). It is possible that such advertising

might lead to the escalation of the incident from a robbery

to a robbery with an abduction of the vehicle, and possibly

the driver.27 This might lead to greater injury to the driver

and damage to the vehicle.
30 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

Several methods can be used to prevent passengers from

seeing that drivers are carrying large amounts of money

and knowing where it is kept. The first two techniques

listed below may be more effective since they do not

involve a possible confrontation with passengers:

• Drivers can keep cash for making change separate from

the bulk of their takings so only a small amount of

money is seen.

• Taxi regulators can limit the amount of cash that drivers

are required to carry to make change for passengers.

(This limit should then be advertised in the cab where

fares are posted.) 

• Drivers can say they don’t have change and offer to

stop at a convenience store or gas station to allow the

passenger to get change. (They can claim they just made

a cash drop or just started their shift.)

• Drivers may also tell passengers that they cannot change

large bills (or post a notice to this effect), citing

“company policy” even if they do not work for a

company.

10. Minimizing expectations about the amount of

money present. Passengers frequently ask drivers whether

they have “been busy” during their shift. While this may be

friendly interest or normal small talk, drivers are frequently

advised to play down how busy they have been by saying

they have just started their shift or have not been very

busy. This is done in case the passenger is using the

question as a precursor to a robbery.

Other Driver Practices

Drivers may learn these practices from other drivers–e.g.,

family or friends in the business–or through driver safety

education programs (see No. 28 below).
Responses to the Problem of Robbery of Taxi Drivers 

† For example, the New York Ci

Taxi and Limousine Commission 

out some of this information in 

easy-to-use format for passenger

(and drivers) at www.nyc.gov.htm

tlc/html/passenger/faq_pass.sh

†† New York City and Washingt

D.C., have recently dealt with hig

profile campaigns and lawsuits ag

service refusals on the ground th

they amount to illegal racial prof

or residence discrimination. In N

York City, the recent campaign ag

service refusal on racial grounds

began in response to a complain

actor Danny Glover in 1999 who

highlighted the problem facing m

African-Americans and Hispanic

the city (Yinger, n.d.). Mayor Gi

reinstated sting operations by po

officers that resulted in immedia

suspension of the driver, along w

other sanctions for repeat offend

The immediate suspension meas

was later overturned by a federa

judge as it did not meet the

requirement for a fair hearing pr

to suspension (Padberg v. McGrath

McKechnie, 2002). In Washington

D.C., there have been a number 

lawsuits filed in which discrimin

service refusal has been alleged 

Kovaleski, 2003; Mitchell v. Diam

Cab Company, 2003). A report by 

Equal Rights Center (2003) cited 

D.C. Taxicab Commission for

neglecting its responsibilities in t

civil rights area for failing to inves

discrimination complaints prom

and thoroughly and for not establi

effective fines and penalties for

drivers or companies (see also

Kovaleski and Chan, 2003).

11. Controlling who gets in. Drivers use a number of

techniques to control who gets in their cabs. Robbers may

sneak up on drivers to catch them by surprise. More often,

however, these techniques are used by drivers to allow

them to assess the potential risks they think passengers

pose prior to letting them in their cabs. Once passengers

get in, it can be very difficult for drivers to remove them.

Access control techniques include:

• Screening who enters the cab. Using this technique, drivers

can exclude people by behavior or demeanor (using

abusive language, inability to stand, carrying food, or

having bloodied clothing) (see also No. 29 below).

Passenger screening is most controversial, however,

when it involves refusing passengers from particular

ethnic or racial groups (racial profiling) or failing to

pick up or drop off passengers at certain locations or

areas of a town (residential discrimination). To meet the

public service mission of the industry and prevent

invidious discrimination, taxi regulators usually set out a

limited set of circumstances under which a driver can

refuse a fare and provide a mechanism for passengers to

make complaints for service refusals.† Although it is

usually drivers who are penalized for illegal service

refusals, regulators can seek to have companies held

accountable for the behavior of their drivers, both

ethically and legally, particularly when the service

refusal is racially motivated.††

One of the reasons police agencies need to be concerned

about taxi robbery is that robbery and fear of robbery fuel

discriminatory practices if drivers perceive that they are at

unreasonable risk merely by picking up certain passengers

or going into certain neighborhoods. This problem is likely

to be more difficult to deal with than racial profiling within

policing agencies. Instead of dealing with a situation in
32 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

† According to this research, as crime

was falling in the city, service refusal

complaints were rising. These

complaints were highest when the

demand for cabs was highest, as

measured by time spent cruising for

customers. This is because when

there are a lot of cabs looking for

passengers (either because there are

more cabs or the fares are high),

cabbies cannot afford to be as

selective as they can be when there

are fewer cabs on the road and fares

are lower. In addition, this research

cited passenger surveys suggesting

that service refusals (both of

minority and non-minority passengers)

appeared to be related to the pressure

to make money and the desire to

work only in certain areas of the city.

which an officer is compelled by law to refrain from an

action unless it can be justified, here, the driver is compelled

by law to act unless the non-action can be justified. In

effect, the law is telling one group in a risky industry

(police officers) to be risk averse, while it is telling another

group in another risky industry (taxi drivers) that they

cannot be risk averse. However, if the robbery risks are

low, then it becomes easier for drivers to comply with the

law and more difficult for them to justify illegal refusals on

grounds of high risk. In effect, the low actual risks allow

drivers to be both risk averse and not engage in racial or

residential discrimination.

One commentator has suggested that general rates of

service refusals in New York City are not related to crime

levels but rather to the economics of driving a cab.28,† This

finding points to a need for policing agencies to use a

problem-solving approach to illegal service refusals–looking

at the data on serious crimes against taxi drivers in an area

(including type of crime, area, and characteristics of

offenders), the number of taxis in service (and the fees

paid for cab rental), and the enforcement mechanisms

available against drivers and companies who use racial

profiling or other illegal screening techniques to ensure

that these are all geared to help limit the practice.

• Keeping doors locked while drivers are waiting for the 

next fare.

• Keeping windows rolled up enough to prevent someone

from reaching in.

• Taking regular riders as much as possible.

• Limiting the number of passengers. (The number of

passengers that may be taken in a cab is usually limited

by law or by the driver’s insurance coverage. These

limits primarily relate to road safety issues and are

based on the size of the vehicle. Drivers sometimes,
Responses to the Problem of Robbery of Taxi Drivers 

† The trip sheet may be required 

the regulator or company to kee

track of driver income, but it ma

also be used to document patter

of robbery if the driver is killed 

seriously incapacitated during th

crime.

however, will impose their own limits on the number of

passengers they will take in certain situations as a means

of avoiding potential trouble. For example, they may

not stop to pick up four young men on a Saturday night,

preferring to wait for a fare with fewer passengers (or

fewer young men).) 

12. Directing passengers to particular seats in the cab.

Drivers are frequently warned not to allow passengers to

sit directly behind them if there is no partition or screen.

Drivers may not follow this advice if they do not want to

risk provoking passengers or letting them know they do

not trust them.

13. Finding out the destination before moving. One

rule of thumb cited repeatedly is to get the passenger’s

destination “up front.” It is seen as a sign of potential

trouble if the passenger refuses to give a destination at the

beginning of the trip or changes the destination while en

route.

Drivers can use a trip sheet (in which all pick-up times and

destinations are recorded),† cite company policy, or radio

in to the dispatcher if customers refuse to give a destination.

These techniques may also be used to legitimize a request

to get out of the cab if the destination is not given (see

No. 16 below).

14. Sharing destination information with others.

Drivers should be encouraged by companies, the police,

and regulators to keep as many people informed of their

whereabouts as possible, especially where cameras or GPS

systems are not used. Drivers should inform the dispatcher

(or another driver) of their whereabouts, proposed route,

and destination each time a new passenger gets in the cab.

If drivers do not work for a radio-dispatching company,
34 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

they must rely on other drivers for support. When drivers

let someone know where they are going, this also lets the

passenger know that someone knows this information as

well.

15. Putting additional people in the cab. In some places,

such as Jersey City, New Jersey, drivers do not always work

alone in their cabs at night but carry another person in the

passenger seat for back up. This practice appears to be

intended primarily to increase driver safety but may be

intimidating for some passengers. Another practice that

can provide additional oversight involves taking unrelated

riders together in the same vehicle. Although drivers are

provided with additional oversight with shared riding, they

may also have more conflicts to deal with between

passengers, especially when some of them have been

drinking. The benefits for passengers may be mixed since

they may have shorter waiting times for cabs, but may not

want to ride with strangers.

16. Setting rules and asking those who don’t meet

them to get out. Drivers may set rules such as no

smoking or eating in the cab–and may ask passengers to

get out of the cab if they don’t follow them. These rules

are individual ones that may not be sanctioned by the

commission or agency that governs taxi operations. Drivers

may also ask passengers to leave if they are aggressive

toward them. Drivers may think that failure to stand their

ground over minor matters will be seen as a weakness and

lead to more serious aggression or be used as an excuse for

a robbery.
Responses to the Problem of Robbery of Taxi Drivers 

† In a study of taxi drivers in Ca

Wales, drivers related a number o

incidents in which they tried to g

police stations for assistance late 

night only to find that the statio

were not open (Smith, forthcom

17. Trying not to provoke passengers. Drivers are often

told not to use aggressive language with customers since

this may provoke an attack. Drivers may also establish

patterns of interaction, such as always explaining to

passengers which route they plan to take, to eliminate later

disputes over fares. Drivers may find it difficult to both set

rules (No. 16 above) and to try not to provoke passengers.

Driver training sessions may help them deal with these

types of problems (see No. 28 below).

18. Knowing where to go for help late at night. If

drivers know which locations, such as police stations or

sub-stations, fire stations, convenience stores, or gas

stations, are open or staffed 24 hours, then they can use

this information:

• To drop off unruly passengers and prevent an incident

from escalating to a robbery.†

• To gain assistance in dealing with an unfolding robbery.

• To get help following a robbery.

19. Allowing others to see inside the cab. Taxicab

owners and drivers should keep the vehicle’s windows 

free of obstructions so passersby can see inside the taxi.

Tinted glass impedes surveillance by those outside the 

cab. Drivers are also encouraged to drive along the main

roads and well-lit side roads if possible late at night.

Obstruction-free windows are part of the package of

measures related to lower numbers of convenience store

robberies in a number of studies.29
36 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

20. Limiting where the cab will make a drop off.

Drivers should be wary of making a passenger drop off in

a dark, isolated, or out-of-the-way location because these

do not permit surveillance by others or allow the driver to

see if someone is lurking at the destination. Similarly,

vehicles can be boxed in if an attempt is made to drop off

passengers in alleys or dead-ends. Drivers should approach

these locations with caution, particularly if other drivers in

the area have reported these spots as sites for robbery, fare

evasion, or vehicle damage.

21. Staying in the cab unless it is safe to get out.

Drivers are frequently advised not to chase fare evaders

since they may find themselves in an isolated area and be

attacked and robbed by the “runners” or their compatriots.

During or after a robbery incident, drivers are sometimes

advised to get out of the cab if they are sure it is safe to

do so. This is an area in which driver training, based on

experience in an area, should guide drivers in how best to

judge whether to exit a cab during or after an incident.

22. Limiting injury when a robbery occurs. Taxi drivers

are frequently advised to cooperate with those trying to

rob them by handing over their money and not fighting

back.

Drivers should carry first aid kits in their cabs even if this

is not required by their local regulatory agency. These

could help limit any injury they receive during a robbery 

or assault.

Similarly, drivers should keep an extra key in a pocket to

allow them to use their cab if the robbers have taken their

keys. This is particularly important if they have been

abandoned in a remote location and have no radio or

telephone.
Responses to the Problem of Robbery of Taxi Drivers 

Policing Practices

There are various organizational approaches police agencies

can take to address taxi robbery problems. Special units

could be set up to deal with taxi driver robbery if the

number of incidents appears high. These units should be

used to help determine patterns in taxi robbery and then

develop strategies to address what they find. For example,

they may target specific areas with high numbers of robbery

incidents using decoy taxis driven by police officers.

Police may also want to have a more general taxi unit that

deals with a variety of taxi-related crimes, developing

expertise in the area. The taxi unit should:

• Establish protocols for learning about common robbery

scripts, utilizing crime analysis techniques as well as

crime mapping technology.

• Develop easy ways for drivers to report crimes against

them.

• Attend meetings and meet informally with drivers,

owners, and dispatchers.

• Establish contacts with unlicensed drivers or otherwise

learn about their position in the industry.

23. Authorizing police stops. In New York City, the

Taxi/Livery Robbery Inspection Program (TRIP) has 

been used to stop cabs on the street without the need for

establishing reasonable suspicion or probable cause. Under

this program, taxi owners sign a voluntary registration

form allowing police to stop their cab for a brief inquiry

and a visual inspection of the vehicle. Owners also agree

to have all drivers of the vehicle sign a consent form with

similar provisions. Decals of participation are placed on

the back window in the vehicle and in the passenger

compartment, which note in English and Spanish that 
38 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

† See Spelman (1990) for a discussion

of repeat offender programs.

the cab may be stopped at any time and visually inspected

for the driver’s safety. A registry of participating vehicles is

kept, as well as a detailed activity log of all police stops.

The constitutionality of this program was recently upheld

by the New York Court of Appeals.30 TRIP differs from

earlier programs that were struck down by the Court of

Appeals31 and the U.S. District Court.32 The earlier programs

involved too much discretion for police in how to carry

out the stops. A program in Boston (TIP), similar to TRIP

in New York City, has been upheld by the U.S. Circuit

Court.33 The Boston Police inform drivers where they will

have their check points so that drivers who feel danger or

concern can drive by and turn on their cab’s amber light

(an alarm signal) for the officers to see (Sweeney, 2004).

24. Targeting repeat offenders. If police intelligence

indicates that a few offenders are responsible for a number

of different taxi driver robberies or attempted robberies 

in a local area, then a repeat offender program should be

used to target these individuals or groups of offenders.†

Police investigation techniques, as well as crime pattern

analysis, should be used to establish how best to target 

the offenders. For example, the New York City Police

Department has used decoy drivers to combat taxi robberies

in certain areas.34 While detection and prosecution should

operate to incapacitate those who have committed a crime,

to increase possible deterrent effects, publicity should be

used to highlight any successful prosecutions under the

program.
Responses to the Problem of Robbery of Taxi Drivers 

† “Excuses” refers to the ways in

which offenders rationalize their

behavior to themselves and othe

it does not imply a legal or mora

excuse for their offending.

Industry Rules, Regulations, and Practices

Setting up rules, regulations, and practices that control the

industry and reduce both actual and perceived unfair or

dangerous practices by drivers may increase sympathy for

drivers and limit the excuses† offenders may offer for

targeting taxi drivers.

25. Controlling the environment around taxi stands.

Taxi regulators and city planners should keep surveillance

considerations in mind when deciding on the placement 

of taxi stands (both official stands that allow passengers to

hire vehicles on the spot and unofficial ones where

company drivers may wait for their next fare). Drivers

waiting for fares at taxi stands should not be put at risk 

of surprise by potential robbers. They should be able to

see who is approaching their vehicle from all directions.

Adequate lighting and clear lines of sight will allow

passersby to see what is happening at the stand. Other aids

to surveillance by others include the placement of closed

circuit television (CCTV) cameras near stands and the

direct supervision of stands at particular hours by police

officers, taxi inspectors or taxi wardens.35

Official taxi stands are frequently placed at busy locations,

such as near airport or train station exits, shopping centers,

and late-night venues, to make it easy for passengers to

find cabs. Stands may also be placed near businesses open

for 24 hours, such as convenience stores or gas stations.

26. Eliminating passenger and driver conflict over

money. Industry practices and the rules and regulations

laid out by taxi and limousine commissions and other local

licensing agencies must set clear rules about taxi fares.

These include:
40 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

† For example, the New York City

Taxi and Limousine Commission

(2001) recently raised the flat-rate

amount that drivers could charge for

going from JFK Airport to anywhere

in Manhattan to $35.

†† Taxi dispatchers at Newark

Airport ask passengers in the taxi

queue where they are going and write

the fare on a sheet that is given to

the passenger. The sheet contains

taxi rules and regulations, as well as

information about who to contact 

to complain about over-charging or

other offenses by drivers.

• Requiring (and checking the operation of) taxi meters or

posting clear guidelines for zoned fares. (Actual or

suspected over-charging by drivers may reduce driver

credibility across the industry and provide excuses for

potential offenders to victimize drivers.)

• Setting fixed fares for certain routes, such as trips from

airports into the city center,† or placing taxi dispatchers

at taxi stands to set the fares for each destination.††

• Allowing drivers to ask for advance payment or partial

payment for out-of-town or long-distance fares. (This

rule is primarily aimed at eliminating fare evasion;

however, it may also be useful for robberies carried out

by those seeking to do the crime in an isolated area who

do not have the money to pay for the trip. Some drivers

may be reluctant to seek payment up front if they think

it indicates distrust of the passengers and may lead to

conflict or lower tips.)

• Setting charges for passenger soiling of the interior of

the vehicle, such as through urination or vomiting or

the spilling of beverages or food.

27. Setting driver competency standards. Regulatory

agencies should set standards for driver and vehicle

competency in areas where lack of such standards may lead

to dangerous situations for passengers, conflicts over

routes, and other frustrations and misunderstandings that

are likely to lead to aggression, physical attacks, or

robberies. The most common areas noted as needing some

level of competency are:

• driving,

• language skills, and

• knowledge of roads and area routes and short cuts.
Responses to the Problem of Robbery of Taxi Drivers 

Local needs will help determine what these standards

should be in a particular area.

28. Running driver safety training programs. Police

agencies, regulators, or industry or driver associations can

use driver safety training to help inform drivers of some 

of the common ways that taxi driver robbery incidents in

their area unfold. Ways of trying to prevent the incident at

each stage of this “script” can be devised. This type of

training may be particularly useful for:

• new drivers;

• drivers who have been robbery or assault victims;

• drivers from ethnic minority groups, particularly those

whose language skills in the primary language in an area

are not strong; and 

• drivers who may be seen by robbers as particularly

vulnerable (due to their age, sex, or national origin).

Area experts, such as experienced police officers and

former drivers, should run these sessions so that drivers

see them as worthwhile. Payment for the sessions can be

made by the drivers, the dispatching companies, the local

government, or by grants. Details of the exact “scripts” or

“modus operandi” used by offenders should not be made

public to discourage imitation. Formal training has not

been found to be associated with lower victimization levels

among Canadian drivers.36 Programs should inform drivers

of various Internet sites that contain driver safety

information or information about how taxis are regulated

in their area. These include:

• www.taxi-l.org/index.htm (contains a large variety of

materials on taxis),
42 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

• http://crimeprevention.rutgers.edu/crime/robbery/taxi/

taxi.htm (provides information on strategies that taxi

drivers can use to help them avoid becoming crime victims),

• www.nyc.gov/html/tlc/htmlhome/home/shtml (the home

page of the New York City Taxi and Limousine Commission),

• http://dctaxi.dc.gov/dctaxi/site/default.asp (the home

page of the District of Columbia Taxicab Commission).

• http://www.puc.state.pa.us/transport/motor/

motor philly taxicabs.aspx (sets out information from

the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission on

Philadelphia Medallion Taxicabs).

29. Screening passengers by the dispatching company.

Companies often keep records of passengers who have

caused trouble for drivers in the past. The rationale for

doing this is that it either prevents the passenger from

using that taxi service or it allows drivers to decide whether

or not they want to pick up the passenger. This type of

blacklisting may also be done by location. When this

happens, it may penalize those who move into the residence

of a former offender, those who live with offenders, or

even those who live in the same apartment complex. These

blacklisting practices may be over-inclusive in their scope if

they focus on passenger address and they can result in racial

and residential discrimination if the practices are not

limited to actual behaviors of past passengers (see No. 11

above).
Responses to the Problem of Robbery of Taxi Drivers 

Companies can use Caller ID to check to see whether the

call is coming from a private or public address, a telephone

booth, or a mobile phone. This technology has several

uses: it can be used to trace callers if they fail to show up,

evade the fare, or attack or rob the driver and it allows

companies to match the telephone number to blacklisted

numbers (if they have such a list). Passengers calling for

cabs from public telephone booths or mobile phones may

be more closely scrutinized by drivers since they are less

traceable than some other passengers are.

30. Exempting drivers from seat belt use. Taxi drivers

who drive cabs without safety screens between themselves

and their passengers should be permitted to decide when

they will wear their seat belts.37 Seat belts can be used to

strangle someone from behind.

Responses With Limited Potential for Effectiveness

Because so little is known about taxi robberies and their

prevention, the only responses included here are ones that

appear to hold little promise as effective protection

strategies against robberies.

31. Locking passengers in. Purpose-built taxicabs, such

as the newer versions of London cabs, have systems that

lock passengers in when the driver’s foot is on the brake.

The driver can also control the locking mechanism

independently. Posted signs and warning lights describe the

braking system and notify customers when it is in operation.
44 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

Drivers can use this type of system to prevent nonpayment of fares as well as keep passengers from getting

out where it is not safe. Locking passengers in when no

screen is present is likely to escalate the use of violence

against drivers. Locking passengers in when there are

screens may lead to vehicle damage.

32. Working only during the day. Some drivers choose to

work only during the daytime hours due to the risks of

crime victimization and encountering difficult passengers

at night. While this response may be effective for

individual drivers, it holds little promise across an industry

that relies in large part on nighttime trade. Furthermore,

this strategy will only show limited results since not all

robberies occur at night.

33. Carrying a weapon. Many drivers carry something in

their cabs that can be used as a weapon in an attack, such

as a blunt instrument or spray.38 It is not known whether

potential offenders will try to avoid drivers who they think

may be carrying a weapon. The primary danger for drivers

carrying such weapons is that the weapons may be used

against them. In addition, it may not be legal for them to

carry these types of weapons in their cabs.
Appendix: Summary of Responses to Robbery of 

Taxi Drivers

The table below summarizes the responses to taxi driver

robbery, the mechanism by which they are intended to

work, the conditions under which they ought to work best,

and some factors you should consider before implementing

a particular response. It is critical that you tailor responses

to local circumstances, and that you can justify each response

based on reliable analysis. In most cases, an effective

strategy will involve implementing several different responses.

Law enforcement responses alone are seldom effective in

reducing or solving the problem.

Appendix

1. 21 Separating drivers Keeps offenders ...most robbers Screens are 

from passengers from reaching attack from back expensive to install

drivers to carry seat, screens are passengers need to 

out threats fitted on all cabs, wear seat belts to 

and cabs are prevent suddenpurpose-built or stopping injuries 

large

2. 22 Recording Increases chances ...camera and Cameras need to

activity with of offenders any resulting be well-designed

security cameras being caught, prosecutions are for the

may discourage publicized environment,

offenders from passengers may

from doing crime question how

images will be 

used, offenders

may try to destroy

camera evidence,

resulting in 

escalation of the 

crime event

Response Page No. Response How It Works Works Best If... Considerations

No.

Vehicle Equipment
46 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

3. 24 Using a radio or Permits the driver ...technology is Good training in 

alarm to call for to notify others easy to use and use of equipment

help that a crime is in unlikely to be and clear protocols 

progress or has tripped accidentally, for use response

occurred location and are needed 

problem can be

communicated,

and help is close 

at hand

4. 26 Keeping track of Allows a third ...used with an Systems are

vehicle locations party to know alarm system, expensive to install

with automatic where the cab is system is and clear protocols

vehicle location if an alarm or constantly for response are 

(AVL) systems distress call is monitored, and needed

received help is close at 

hand

5. 26 Putting trunk Allows drivers ...driver is not Latches in trunks

latches on the imprisoned in badly hurt when are designed to

inside of vehicle trunks to get out, placed in the trunk, reduce level of

trunks as well as and prevents driver is able to injury while latches

near drivers drivers from correctly assess the in vehicles require

having to get out dangerousness of driver judgement

if the vehicle if a a situation of a situation that

situation seems may not always be

unsafe clear

6. 27 Disabling vehicles Prevents vehicles ...it is safe to stop Potential response

from getting to the cab and it is in from offenders 

desired place for an area where help may escalate the

robbery or is readily available, incident

offenders from and it is safer to

getting away in have robbers

vehicles unable to get away

than to have them

escape after a 

robbery

Response Page No. Response How It Works Works Best If... Considerations

No.
Appendix 

Money Matters

7. 27 Eliminating cash Lowers the ...variety of Nature of regular 

payments amount of ready payments methods clientele may make

cash in vehicles, results in little or it difficult for 

making drivers less no cash in vehicle drivers to move to

attractive targets a cashless system,

and use of even

small amounts of

money may still

make drivers

attractive to some

offenders

8. 29 Dropping money Lowers the ...it is easy and Securing alternative

off amount of ready safe for drivers to sites may be 

cash in vehicles, drop money off at difficult or costly,

making drivers ATMs, home, or with some 

less attractive base alternatives (ATMs

targets providing records

of money earned

9. 29 Keeping money Makes it difficult ...drivers can refer Money locked in

locked up or out for offenders to to some rule or safes, with notice

of sight find or get money, practice that given, could escalate

or to know exact confirms that the incident to 

amount carried little money is kidnapping or

available vehicle theft

10. 30 Minimizing Prevents offenders ...it is reasonable Offenders may not

expectations from expecting or to believe the believe drivers, may

about the amount being tempted by driver is telling be willing to rob

of money present the knowledge of the truth them even for a 

large amounts of very small amount

cash present of money

Response Page No. Response How It Works Works Best If... Considerations

No.
48 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

11. 31 Controlling who Allows driver to ...robberies in an Not enough is 

gets in assess who enters area are committed known about

the vehicle and by offenders who robbers to make 

when, and how have characteristics them easily 

many people enter that make them identifiable so 

the vehicle, since easily identifiable, screening can 

keeping people out such as being lead to racial 

is easier than unruly, and allow or residential

getting them out the driver to legally discrimination,

once they are in refuse them entry with drivers 

violating regulations

that usually require 

them to take all

passengers (except

in limited

circumstances)

12. 33 Directing Keeps passengers ...the cab is not Where safety

passengers to from sitting in the crowded and the screens have been 

particular seats seats most passenger is not installed, passengers

in the cab associated with insulted by the should not be able 

robberies in an request to sit in the front

area seat if it is within

the barrier

13. 33 Finding out the Identifies those ...offenders do Drivers should be

destination before who are not not have a plausible alerted when

moving seeking a ride but destination to offer passengers change

are looking for a driver destination en 

good location to route

carry out a 

robbery

14. 33 Sharing Informs passengers ...offenders are This strategy may

destination that someone uncertain who and not provide any

information with outside the cab how many people additional crime

others knows of their know destination prevention effect

destination and or, if given within if the cab has an

possible route or sight of another AVL device

has seen them driver, whether

another driver can

identify them

Other Driver Practices

Response Page No. Response How It Works Works Best If... Considerations

No.
Appendix 

15. 34 Putting additional Increases the ...increasing the These schemes may 

people in the cab perceived difficulty number of people only be popular

of doing a robbery in the cab does among passengers

and if successful, not lead to where cabs are 

the risk that the increased problems scarce (ride-sharing)

offender will be for driver, such as and driver 

identified conflicts among companions are 

passengers not seen as

increasing the risk

of assault on

passengers by 

drivers

16. 34 Setting rules and Informs potential ...driver rules are Research on the

asking those who offenders that backed up by unfolding of

don't meet them drivers are willing official rules from robbery events is

to get out to control what the regulator or limited 

happens in the taxi company

cab, or deflects 

potential offenders

away from the cab 

at an early stage 

of what may 

become a robbery 

event

17. 35 Trying not to Prevents ...drivers know the Taxi regulators may

provoke passengers from types of responses eliminate some

passengers using driver or situations that sources of conflict

behavior as an may provoke an between drivers

excuse for criminal aggressive response and passengers

behavior or escalate by setting rules

aggression by for handling

passengers common situations (No. 26) or running

training programs 

for drivers (No. 28

18. 35 Knowing where Increases drivers' ...those at the Drivers must be

to go for help late chances of gaining 24-hour location kept informed

at night assistance before, know it has been when 24-hour

during, or after a identified as a place locations close

robbery event where assistance down, particularly

may be sought and if they are police

are trained in stations

handling these 

types of situations

Response Page No. Response How It Works Works Best If... Considerations

No.
50 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

19. 35 Allowing others Increases the ...robbery occurs This measure has

to see inside the possibility that a in an area where not been evaluated

cab third party will see there is vehicle or in relation to

the driver in street traffic taxicabs though it

trouble and call is among a group

the police of factors found to

be effective in 

limiting 

convenience store 

robberies

20. 36 Limiting where Protects driver ...driver is aware Demonstrates the 

the cab will make from being of the physical importance of

a drop off surprised by the layout of the street having good data

passenger or prior to entry into available to drivers

others at the it about where crimes

drop-off location have occurred

or limited in his/

her ability to get 

away, allows 

onlookers to 

monitor events 

more easily

21. 36 Staying in the cab Provides driver ...driver is Drivers should be unless it is safe to with a (limited) protected by a trained to assess

get out physical barrier to screen or otherwise risks of leaving 

an attack from physically separated vehicles in

outside the cab from the offender different robbery

and may be a scenarios and

means of getting types of cabs, as

away from an they may vary

offender located greatly

in the cab

22. 36 Limiting injury Keeps the robbery ...driver is not so Does not prevent

when a robbery from escalating seriously injured the crime from

occurs into a robbery with that he/she cannot occurring but may

injury, or one with carry out protective be useful in

serious injury activities limited situations

Response Page No. Response How It Works Works Best If... Considerations

No.
25. 39 Controlling the Allows drivers and ...area can be Orderly waiting at

environment others to see who controlled to allow stands may increase

around taxi stands is waiting at the orderly waiting and the ability of all

stands or to turn taking by present to look

supervise activity passengers and for signs of danger

in the area drivers among passengers 

as they enter cabs 

as well as while the 

cabs and passenger

are waiting

26. 39 Eliminating Prevents common ...rules set up While this strategy

passenger and conflicts that may actually eliminate may be used to

driver conflict escalate into the conflict rather serve additional

over money aggressive than setting up concerns besides

behaviors additional conflicts crime prevention,

in terms of

robbery, these 

standards may also 

prevent passengers 

from using driver 

behavior as an 

excuse for criminal 

behavior

Appendix 

Policing Practices

23. 37 Authorizing police Allows police to ...protocol Program used

stops stop a cab without followed by police must pass

reasonable is understood by constitutional

suspicion or drivers standards and limit

probable cause the intrusion to the

passengers

24. 38 Targeting repeat Incapacitates those ...police can gather Requires substantial

offenders who have the information police and other

committed and needed to identify criminal justice

may be most likely and locate repeat system resources,

to commit future offenders, and have as well as accurate

taxi robberies the resources to information about

find them the offenders

Response Page No. Response How It Works Works Best If... Considerations

No.

Industry Rules, Regulations and Practices
52 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

27. 40 Setting driver Prevents common ...it is clear what While this strategy

competency conflicts that may types of knowledge may be used to

standards escalate into or competency are serve additional 

aggressive related to driver- concerns besides

behaviors passenger conflicts crime prevention,

in terms of

robbery, these 

standards may also 

prevent passengers 

from using driver 

behavior as an 

excuse for criminal 

behavior

28. 41 Running driver Helps drivers deal ...programs are The costs of

safety training with situations in run by experts in running the

programs which their the field and are program should

response may seen as effective be split among

affect whether a by drivers the beneficiaries

robbery is of better driver

committed or not training, which 

may include the 

public, policing 

agencies, local taxi 

companies, as well 

as the drivers 

themselves

29. 42 Screening Uses lists of ...the blacklist is Can be overpassengers by the previously based on passenger inclusive if it relies

dispatching troublesome identification rather on location or

company passengers or than address address since other

addresses, or location, and non-troublesome

technology passengers causing potential passengers (Caller-ID), to set one type of trouble may be included

up blacklists are also likely to do on the blacklist

robberies and could result 

in racial or 

residential 

discrimination if

the focus is not 

on the actual past 

behavior of

passengers

Response Page No. Response How It Works Works Best If... Considerations

No.
Appendix 

30. 43 Exempting drivers Prevents an ...local area Should not be

from seat belt use offender from conditions provide needed if cabs are

using a belt to a safe backdrop equipped with a

strangle the driver for beltless driving screen between

and allows the the passenger and

driver to exit the the driver

vehicle quickly

Response Page No. Response How It Works Works Best If... Considerations

No.

Responses With Limited Potential for Effectiveness

31. 43 Locking Prevents ...there is a screen If there is no

passengers in passengers from between passengers screen, then

exiting the cab and drivers passengers may

without the attack the driver

driver's awareness unless he/she has

or permission exited the vehicle

32. 44 Working only Keeps drivers from ...industry May only work for

during the day working during the conditions allow some drivers since

times when drivers to make a the company may

robberies most living only working require 24-hour

often occur daytime hours and availability, and

no nights may only be a 

limited protection 

since some 

robberies occur 

during the daytime

33. 44 Carrying a weapon Acts as a means ...driver is trained May result in

for drivers to in use of this weapon being

protect themselves weapon used against driver

during a crime or 

may deter 

offenders from 

attacking drivers 

who they think 

are armed

Endnotes 

Endnotes

1 Castillo and Jenkins (1994); Rosen (2001).

2 Casteel and Peek-Asa (2000).

3 Block, Felson, and Block (1984).

4 Mayhew (1999).

5 Casteel and Peek-Asa (2000).

6 Bourette and Hanes (2000).

7 Haines (1997).

8 Smith (forthcoming).

9 Smith (forthcoming).

10 Mayhew (1999).

11 Easteal and Wilson (1991).

12 NIOSH (1995); Fisher, Jenkins, and Williams (1998).

13 Mayhew (1999).

14 Okeson and Smith (1997).

15 Haines (1998).

16 Stone and Bienvenu (1995).

17 Schwartzman (2001); Mayersohn (2001); New York City Taxi and Limousine

Commission (2000b).

18 Jackman and Smith (2001).

19 Stone and Stevens (2000).

20 Stone and Bienvenu (1995).

21 Mayhew (1999).

22 Pflaum (n.d.); New York City Taxi and Limousine Commission (2000a).

23 Jackman and Smith (2001).

24 U.S. Department of Labor (2000).

25 Mayersohn (2001).

26 Pandya (2001).

27 Easteal and Wilson (1991).

28 Schaller (1999).

29 Casteel and Peek-Asa (2000).

30 People v. Abad (2002). 31 Matter of Muhammad F. and People v. Boswell (1999). 32 U.S. v. Santiago (1996). 33 U.S. v. Woodrum (2000).
56 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

34 Luo (2004).

35 Manchester City Council (2003).

36 Stenning (1996).

37 Radbone (1997).

38 Stenning (1996).
References 

References

Block, R., M. Felson, and C. Block (1984). “Crime

Victimization Rates for Incumbents of 246 Occupations.”

Sociology and Social Research 69(3):442-451.

Bourette, S., and A. Hanes (2000). “Assaults, Slayings from

Halifax to Calgary Frightening Cab Operators.” Globe

and Mail, January 5. www.taxi-l.org/toronto02.htm

Casteel, C., and C. Peek-Asa (2000). “Effectiveness of

Crime Prevention through Environmental Design

(CPTED) in Reducing Robberies.” American Journal of

Preventive Medicine 18(4S): 99-115.

Castillo, D., and E. Jenkins (1994). “Industries and

Occupations at High Risk for Work-Related Homicide.”

Journal of Occupational Medicine 36(2):125-132.

Cornish, D. (1994). “The Procedural Analysis of Offending

and Its Relevance for Situational Crime Prevention.” In

R.V. Clarke (ed.), Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 3.

Monsey, New York: Criminal Justice Press.

Department of Infrastructure, Energy and Resources

(2003). “Taxi Industry Amendment (Security Cameras)

Regulations 2004 – Regulatory Impact Statement.”

www.transport.tas.gov.au/miscellaneous.html

Easteal, P., and P. Wilson (1991). Preventing Crime on

Transport: Rail, Buses, Taxis and Planes. Canberra:

Australian Institute of Criminology.

Eck, J. (2002). Assessing Responses to Problems: An Introductory

Guide for Problem-Solvers. Washington, D.C.: U.S.

Department of Justice. www.popcenter.org
58 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

Elzinga, A. (1996). “Security of Taxi Drivers in the

Netherlands: Fear of Crime, Actual Victimization and

Recommended Security Measures.” Security Journal

7(3):205-210.

The Equal Rights Center (2003). Service Denied: Responding to

Taxicab Discrimination in the District of Columbia.

Washington, D.C.: The Equal Rights Center.

www.equalrightscenter.org/

Feuer, A. (2003). “In Cab, Elmo and Friends Will Stop the

Nagging.” The New York Times, February 9.

Fisher, B., E.L. Jenkins, and N. Williams (1998). “The

Extent and Nature of Homicide and Non-fatal

Workplace Violence in the United States: Implications

for Prevention and Security.” In M. Gill (ed.), Crime at

Work: Increasing the Risk for Offenders, Vol. II. Leicester,

United Kingdom: Perpetuity Press.

Haines, F. (1998). “Technology and Taxis: The Challenge

of Uncoupling Risk from Reward.” Security Journal

10(2):65-78.

———— (1997). Taxi Driver Survey-Victoria: Understanding

Victorian Taxi Drivers’ Experiences of Victimization and

their Preferred Preventative Measures. Melbourne: Victorian

Taxi Driver Safety Committee.

Home Office (1998). The Crime and Disorder Act: Guidance on

Statutory Crime and Disorder Partnerships. London, United

Kingdom: Home Office Communication Directorate.

www.homeoffice.gov.uk/docs/cdaguid.html
Jackman, T., and L. Smith (2001). “Taxi Camera Develops

Its First Lead for Police: Armed Robbery in Mount

Vernon Caught in Digital Clarity.” Washington Post,

August 22.

Keatsdale Pty. Ltd. (1995). Taxi Driver Safety: A Report to the

NSW Department of Transport. Burleigh Waters,

Australia: Keatsdale Pty. Ltd.

Kovaleski, S. (2003). “Taking a Stand Against

Discrimination: D.C. Taxi Company Settles Suit over

Refusal to Pick up Black Passenger.” The Washington

Post, October 16.

Kovaleski, S., and S. Chan (2003). “D.C. Cabs Still Bypass

Minorities, Study Finds: City Crackdown Called

Sporadic.” The Washington Post, October 7.

Luo, M. (2004). “Police Measures Avert Livery-Cab

Killings.” The New York Times, February 7.

Manchester City Council (2003). “New ‘Taxi Warden’

Service for Manchester City Centre.”

www.manchester.gov.uk/news/2003/dec/taxi.htm

Manitoba Taxicab Board (1991). Taxicab Safety Shields:

Report & Recommendations. Winnipeg: Manitoba Taxicab

Board. www.taxi-l.org/shields.htm

Marosi, R. (n.d.). “One of the Most Dangerous Jobs in

New York: Gypsy Cab Driver.” New York: Columbia

University News Service. www.taxi-l.org/marosi.htm

Mayersohn, N. (2001). “A Mayday System for New York

Taxi and Livery Cabs.” The New York Times, November

16.

References 
Mayhew, C. (2000a). “Preventing Assaults on Taxi Drivers.”

Report No. 179. Canberra, AUS: Australian Institute of

Criminology.

www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/index4.html

———— (2000b). “Violent Assaults on Taxi Drivers:

Incidence Patterns and Risk Factors.” Report No. 178.

Canberra, AUS: Australian Institute of Criminology.

www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/index4.html 

———— (1999). “Occupational Violence: A Case Study

of the Taxi Industry.” In C. Mayhew and C. Peterson

(eds.), Occupational Health and Safety in Australia: Industry,

Public Sector and Small Business. St. Leonards, NSW, AUS:

Allen and Unwin.

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

(NIOSH) (1995). “Preventing Homicide in the

Workplace: Workers in Certain Industries and

Occupations are at Increased Risk of Homicide.”

NIOSH Alert, Publication No. 93-109.

New York City Taxi and Limousine Commission (2002).

“TLC Survey to Measure Effectiveness of ‘Celebrity

Talking Taxi’ Program.” Press Release No. 02-11.

www.nyc.gov/html/tlc/html/news/press_main.shtml

———— (2001). “July 1, 2001 is Effective Date of $35

Flat Fair from JFK Airport to Manhattan: TLC Directs

Stickers Must Reflect New Flat Fare.” Industry Notice

No. 01-14.

www.nyc.gov/html/tlc/html/news/ind_archive.shtml

———— (2000a). “TLC Directs Livery Base Owners to

Familiarize Drivers with Digital Camera Operation

Protocols.” Industry Notice No. 00-25.

www.nyc.gov/html/tlc/html/news/ind_archive.shtml

60 Robbery of Taxi Drivers
References 

———— (2000b). “ITLC [sic] Sets July 21 as Date for

Compliance with Rule Requiring Partitions or Cameras

in Independently Owned/Operated TLC-Licensed

Vehicles.” Industry Notice No. 00-21.

www.nyc.gov/html/tlc/html/news/ind_archive.shtml

Okeson, S., and A. Smith (1997). “Cabbies Not Afraid

Despite Shooting Death.” Copley News Service,

November 4.

Pandya, N. (2001). “Pay Your Way with a Mobile.” The

Guardian, September 22.

Pflaum, G. (n.d.). “Camera Surveillance Systems for Taxis.”

No longer available at www.ventil-taximagazin.com/

Magazin/Beitrag.mag1699_0020799b.htm

Radbone, I. (1997). Taxi Safety Initiatives Study: Final Report.

Adelaide: University of South Australia.

Rathbone, C. (n.d.). “Taxicabs San Francisco: Effectiveness

of Taxi Security Cameras Not Established.”

c.rathbone.home.att.net/cameras.htm

Rosen, J. (2001). “A Labor Perspective of Workplace

Violence Prevention: Identifying Research Needs.”

American Journal of Preventive Medicine 20(2):161-168.

Schaller, B. (1999). “Causes and Solutions to Service

Refusals.” GothamGazette.com, December.

www.schallerconsult.com/taxi/refusal.htm

Schwartzman, P. (2001). “For Cabdriver, Each Night Brings

Prayer for Survival.” Washington Post, May 6, pp. C8.
62 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

Smith, M. (forthcoming). Developing Crime Prevention

Techniques for Taxi Drivers: A Study of Taxi Drivers and

Crime Prevention in Cardiff. Final Report for Safer

Cardiff Ltd.

Spelman, W. (1990). Repeat Offender Program for Law

Enforcement. Washington, D.C.: Police Executive

Research Forum.

Stenning, P. (1996). Fare Game, Fare Cop: Victimization of, 

and Policing by, Taxi Drivers in Three Canadian Cities.

Ottawa: Department of Justice, Canada.

www.taxi-l.org/papers.htm

Stone, J., and M. Bienvenu (1995). Assaults Against Taxi

Drivers and Protection Strategies. Raleigh, North Carolina:

Southeastern Transportation Center.

Stone, J., and D. Stevens (2000). “Effectiveness of Taxi

Partitions: Baltimore, Maryland, Case Study.”

Transportation Research Record 1731:71-78.

Sweeney, A. (2004). Personal communication. Captain,

Boston Police Department, Hackney Carriage Unit.

March 18.

Taxi Driver Safety Committee (1996). Progress Report to the

Minister for Roads and Ports. Melbourne, Australia:

Victorian Taxi and Tow Truck Directorate.

U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community

Oriented Policing Services (COPS) (2002). ProblemSolving Tips: A Guide to Reducing Crime and Disorder

through Problem-Solving Partnerships. Washington, D.C.:

COPS.
U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health

Administration (OSHA) (2000). Risk Factors and

Protective Measures for Taxi and Livery Drivers.

Washington, D.C.: OSHA.

www.osha.gov/OSHAFacts/taxi-livery-drivers.pdf

Westmarland, N., and J. Anderson (2001). “Safe at the

Wheel? Security Issues for Female Taxi Drivers.”

Security Journal 14(2):29-40.

Yinger. J. (n.d.). “Case: Discrimination by Taxi Drivers in

New York City.” faculty.maxwell.syr.edu/jyinger/

PPA786/readings/taxi.html

Cases cited:

Matter of Muhammad F. and People v. Boswell, (1999) 94 NY2d

136, cert. denied, 531 US 1044 (2000).

Mitchell v. Diamond Cab Company, (2003) 2003 U.S. Dist.

LEXIS 12492.

Padberg v. McGrath-McKechnie, (2002) 203 F. Supp. 2d 261

(E.D.N.Y.), affd 60 Fed. Appx. 861 (2nd Cir.), cert.

denied, 2003 U.S. LEXIS 7738.

People v. Abad, (2002) 98 NY2d 12.

U.S. v. Santiago, (1996) 950 F. Supp. 590.

U.S. v. Woodrum, (2000) 202 F3d 1 (1st Cir.), reh and reh en

banc denied 208 F3d 8 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 531 US

1035.

References 

About the Author 

About the Author

Martha J. Smith

Martha J. Smith is an associate professor of criminal justice in 

the School of Community Affairs at Wichita State University in

Wichita, Kansas. She teaches courses in criminological theory to

graduates and undergraduates, as well as a criminal procedure

course for graduate students. Her research interests include crime

on public transit and paratransit (taxis); vandalism; and decisionmaking by victims, offenders, police officers, and judges. Dr.

Smith has worked as a senior research analyst at the New York

City Criminal Justice Agency, the executive director of the

Nebraska Criminal Defense Attorneys Association, the research

director at the Center for Crime Prevention Studies at Rutgers

University, and a research consultant in London. She has been

involved in a number of different types of research projects, and

has taken the lead in studies of crime on the New York City

subway system, crime prevention measures used by taxi drivers in

Cardiff, Wales, and vandalism decision-making among youngsters

in London. She recently edited (with Derek Cornish) Theory for

Practice in Situational Crime Prevention. Dr. Smith has taught at

the University of Nebraska at Omaha and at Cardiff University.

She received her bachelor’s degree in psychology and sociology

from Brown University, her law degree from New York University,

and her master’s and doctorate in criminal justice from Rutgers

University.

Recommended Readings 

Recommended Readings

• A Police Guide to Surveying Citizens and Their

Environments, Bureau of Justice Assistance, 1993. This

guide offers a practical introduction for police practitioners

to two types of surveys that police find useful: surveying

public opinion and surveying the physical environment. It

provides guidance on whether and how to conduct costeffective surveys.

• Assessing Responses to Problems: An

Introductory Guide for Police Problem-Solvers, by

John E. Eck (U.S. Department of Justice, Office of

Community Oriented Policing Services, 2001). This guide is

a companion to the Problem-Oriented Guides for Police series. It

provides basic guidance to measuring and assessing

problem-oriented policing efforts.

• Conducting Community Surveys, by Deborah Weisel

(Bureau of Justice Statistics and Office of Community

Oriented Policing Services, 1999). This guide, along with

accompanying computer software, provides practical, basic

pointers for police in conducting community surveys. The

document is also available at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs.

• Crime Prevention Studies, edited by Ronald V. Clarke

(Criminal Justice Press, 1993, et seq.). This is a series of

volumes of applied and theoretical research on reducing

opportunities for crime. Many chapters are evaluations of

initiatives to reduce specific crime and disorder problems.
68 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

• Excellence in Problem-Oriented Policing:The 1999

Herman Goldstein Award Winners. This document

produced by the National Institute of Justice in

collaboration with the Office of Community Oriented

Policing Services and the Police Executive Research Forum

provides detailed reports of the best submissions to the

annual award program that recognizes exemplary problemoriented responses to various community problems. A

similar publication is available for the award winners from

subsequent years. The documents are also available at

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij.

• Not Rocket Science? Problem-Solving and Crime

Reduction, by Tim Read and Nick Tilley (Home Office

Crime Reduction Research Series, 2000). Identifies and

describes the factors that make problem-solving effective or

ineffective as it is being practiced in police forces in

England and Wales.

• Opportunity Makes the Thief: Practical Theory for

Crime Prevention, by Marcus Felson and Ronald V.

Clarke (Home Office Police Research Series, Paper No. 98,

1998). Explains how crime theories such as routine activity

theory, rational choice theory and crime pattern theory have

practical implications for the police in their efforts to

prevent crime.

• Problem Analysis in Policing, by Rachel Boba (Police

Foundation, 2003). Introduces and defines problem

analysis and provides guidance on how problem analysis

can be integrated and institutionalized into modern

policing practices.
Recommended Readings 

• Problem-Oriented Policing, by Herman Goldstein

(McGraw-Hill, 1990, and Temple University Press, 1990).

Explains the principles and methods of problem-oriented

policing, provides examples of it in practice, and discusses

how a police agency can implement the concept.

• Problem-Oriented Policing and Crime

Prevention, by Anthony A. Braga (Criminal Justice

Press, 2003). Provides a thorough review of significant

policing research about problem places, high-activity

offenders, and repeat victims, with a focus on the

applicability of those findings to problem-oriented

policing. Explains how police departments can facilitate

problem-oriented policing by improving crime analysis,

measuring performance, and securing productive

partnerships.

• Problem-Oriented Policing: Reflections on the

First 20 Years, by Michael S. Scott (U.S. Department of

Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services,

2000). Describes how the most critical elements of Herman

Goldstein’s problem-oriented policing model have

developed in practice over its 20-year history, and proposes

future directions for problem-oriented policing. The report

is also available at www.cops.usdoj.gov.

• Problem-Solving: Problem-Oriented Policing in

Newport News, by John E. Eck and William Spelman

(Police Executive Research Forum, 1987). Explains the

rationale behind problem-oriented policing and the

problem-solving process, and provides examples of

effective problem-solving in one agency.
70 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

• Problem-Solving Tips: A Guide to Reducing

Crime and Disorder Through Problem-Solving

Partnerships by Karin Schmerler, Matt Perkins, Scott

Phillips, Tammy Rinehart and Meg Townsend. (U.S.

Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented

Policing Services, 1998) (also available at www.cops.usdoj.gov).

Provides a brief introduction to problem-solving, basic

information on the SARA model and detailed suggestions

about the problem-solving process.

• Situational Crime Prevention: Successful Case

Studies, Second Edition, edited by Ronald V. Clarke

(Harrow and Heston, 1997). Explains the principles and

methods of situational crime prevention, and presents over

20 case studies of effective crime prevention initiatives.

• Tackling Crime and Other Public-Safety Problems:

Case Studies in Problem-Solving, by Rana Sampson

and Michael S. Scott (U.S. Department of Justice, Office of

Community Oriented Policing Services, 2000) (also available

at www.cops.usdoj.gov). Presents case studies of effective

police problem-solving on 18 types of crime and disorder

problems.

• Using Analysis for Problem-Solving: A

Guidebook for Law Enforcement, by Timothy S.

Bynum (U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community

Oriented Policing Services, 2001). Provides an introduction

for police to analyzing problems within the context of

problem-oriented policing.

• Using Research: A Primer for Law Enforcement

Managers, Second Edition, by John E. Eck and Nancy G.

LaVigne (Police Executive Research Forum, 1994). Explains

many of the basics of research as it applies to police

management and problem-solving.
Other Problem-Oriented Guides for Police 

Other Problem-Oriented Guides for Police

Problem-Specific Guides series:

1. Assaults in and Around Bars. Michael S. Scott. 2001.

ISBN: 1-932582-00-2

2. Street Prostitution. Michael S. Scott. 2001. ISBN: 1-932582-01-0

3. Speeding in Residential Areas. Michael S. Scott. 2001.

ISBN: 1-932582-02-9

4. Drug Dealing in Privately Owned Apartment Complexes. Rana

Sampson. 2001. ISBN: 1-932582-03-7

5. False Burglar Alarms. Rana Sampson. 2001. ISBN: 1-932582-04-5

6. Disorderly Youth in Public Places. Michael S. Scott. 2001.

ISBN: 1-932582-05-3

7. Loud Car Stereos. Michael S. Scott. 2001. ISBN: 1-932582-06-1

8. Robbery at Automated Teller Machines. Michael S. Scott. 2001.

ISBN: 1-932582-07-X

9. Graffiti. Deborah Lamm Weisel. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-08-8

10. Thefts Of and From Cars in Parking Facilities. Ronald V. Clarke.

2002. ISBN: 1-932582-09-6

11. Shoplifting. Ronald V. Clarke. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-10-X

12. Bullying in Schools. Rana Sampson. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-11-8

13. Panhandling. Michael S. Scott. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-12-6

14. Rave Parties. Michael S. Scott. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-13-4

15. Burglary of Retail Establishments. Ronald V. Clarke. 2002.

ISBN: 1-932582-14-2

16. Clandestine Drug Labs. Michael S. Scott. 2002.

ISBN: 1-932582-15-0

17. Acquaintance Rape of College Students. Rana Sampson. 2002.

ISBN: 1-932582-16-9

18. Burglary of Single-Family Houses. Deborah Lamm Weisel. 2002.

ISBN: 1-932582-17-7

19. Misuse and Abuse of 911. Rana Sampson. 2002.

ISBN: 1-932582-18-5

20. Financial Crimes Against the Elderly.

Kelly Dedel Johnson. 2003. ISBN: 1-932582-22-3

21. Check and Card Fraud. Graeme R. Newman. 2003.

ISBN: 1-932582-27-4
72 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

22. Stalking. The National Center for Victims of Crime. 2004.

ISBN: 1-932582-30-4

23. Gun Violence Among Serious Young Offenders. Anthony A. Braga.

2004. ISBN: 1-932582-31-2

24. Prescription Fraud. Julie Wartell and Nancy G. La Vigne. 2004.

ISBN: 1-932582-33-9 

25. Identity Theft. Graeme R. Newman. 2004. ISBN: 1-932582-35-3

26. Crimes Against Tourists. Ronald W. Glensor and Kenneth J. Peak. 2004.

ISBN: 1-932582-36-3

27. Underage Drinking. Kelly Dedel Johnson. 2004. ISBN: 1-932582-39-8

28. Street Racing. Kenneth J. Peak and Ronald W. Glensor. 2004.

ISBN: 1-932582-42-8

29. Cruising. Kenneth J. Peak and Ronald W. Glensor. 2004.

ISBN: 1-932582-43-6

30. Disorder at Budget Motels. Karin Schmerler. 2005.

ISBN: 1-932582-41-X

31. Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets. Alex Harocopos and Mike Hough.

2005. ISBN: 1-932582-45-2

32. Bomb Threats in Schools. Graeme R. Newman. 2005.

ISBN: 1-932582-46-0

33. Illicit Sexual Activity in Public Places. Kelly Dedel Johnson. 2005.

ISBN: 1-932582-47-9

34. Robbery of Taxi Drivers. Martha J. Smith. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-50-9

Response Guides series:

• The Benefits and Consequences of Police Crackdowns.

Michael S. Scott. 2003. ISBN: 1-932582-24-X

• Closing Streets and Alleys to Reduce Crime: Should You Go

Down This Road? Ronald V. Clarke. 2004. ISBN: 1-932582-41-X
Other Problem-Oriented Guides for Police 

Problem-Solving Tools series:

• Assessing Responses to Problems: An Introductory Guide

for Police Problem-Solvers. John E. Eck. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-

19-3

• Researching a Problem. Ronald V. Clarke and Phyllis A.

Schultze. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-48-7

• Using Offender Interviews to Inform Police Problem

Solving. Scott H. Decker. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-49-5

Upcoming Problem-Oriented Guides for Police 

Problem-Specific Guides

Domestic Violence

Mentally Ill Persons

Student Party Disturbances on College Campuses

Vandalism and Break-Ins at Schools

Drunk Driving

Bank Robbery

Witness Intimidation

Drive-by Shootings

Runaway Juveniles

Exploitation of Trafficked Women

Disorderly Day Laborers in Public Places

Child Pornography

Crowd Control at Stadiums and Other Entertainment Venues

Traffic Congestion Around Schools

Problem-Solving Tools

Analyzing Repeat Victimization

Forming and Sustaining Problem-Solving Partnerships With Businesses

Risky Facilities
74 Robbery of Taxi Drivers

Response Guides

Crime Prevention Publicity Campaigns

Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design

Video Surveillance of Public Places

Shifting and Sharing Responsibility for Public Safety Problems

Other Related COPS Office Publications

• Using Analysis for Problem-Solving: A Guidebook for

Law Enforcement. Timothy S. Bynum.

• Problem-Oriented Policing: Reflections on the First

20 Years. Michael S. Scott. 2001.

• Tackling Crime and Other Public-Safety Problems:

Case Studies in Problem-Solving. Rana Sampson and

Michael S. Scott. 2000.

• Community Policing, Community Justice, and

Restorative Justice: Exploring the Links for the

Delivery of a Balanced Approach to Public Safety.

Caroline G. Nicholl. 1999.

• Toolbox for Implementing Restorative Justice and

Advancing Community Policing. Caroline G. Nicholl.

2000.

• Problem-Solving Tips: A Guide to Reducing Crime

and Disorder Through Problem-Solving

Partnerships. Karin Schmerler, Matt Perkins, Scott

Phillips, Tammy Rinehart and Meg Townsend. 1998.

• Bringing Victims into Community Policing. The

National Center for Victims of Crime and the Police

Foundation. 2002.

• Call Management and Community Policing. Tom

McEwen, Deborah Spence, Russell Wolff, Julie Wartell

and Barbara Webster. 2003.

• Crime Analysis in America. Timothy C. O’Shea and

Keith Nicholls. 2003.

• Problem Analysis in Policing. Rachel Boba. 2003.
Other Problem-Oriented Guides for Police 

• Reducing Theft at Construction Sites: Lessons

From a Problem-Oriented Project. Ronald V. Clarke

and Herman Goldstein. 2003.

• The COPS Collaboration Toolkit: How to Build,

Fix, and Sustain Productive Partnerships. Gwen O.

Briscoe, Anna T. Laszlo and Tammy A. Rinehart. 2001.

• The Law Enforcement Tech Guide: How to plan,

purchase and manage technology (successfully!).

Kelly J. Harris and William H. Romesburg. 2002.

• Theft From Cars in Center City Parking 

Facilities - A Case Study. Ronald V. Clarke and

Herman Goldstein. 2003.

For more information about the Problem-Oriented Guides for

Police series and other COPS Office publications, please call

the COPS Office Response Center at 800.421.6770 or visit

COPS Online at www.cops.usdoj.gov.
FOR MORE INFORMATION:

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Community Oriented Policing Services

1100 Vermont Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20530

To obtain details on COPS programs, call the

COPS Office Response Center at 800.421.6770

Visit COPS Online at the address listed below.

e03180001 Created Date: March 14, 2005

ISBN: 1-932582-50-9 

www.cops.usdoj.gov