Marshals Service reports drop in fugitive captures
WASHINGTON — Teams of federal agents assigned to track down people on the run from serious criminal charges are locking up thousands of fewer fugitives, even as more local police agencies say they lack the time and money to chase them on their own.
Arrests by those teams, led by the U.S. Marshals Service, have plunged nearly 25 percent since their peak in 2009, mostly because the Marshals Service narrowed the types of cases its officers can investigate. The result is that agents arrested nearly 24,000 fewer fugitives for state and local crimes last year than they had five years earlier, according to Marshals Service reports.
Those fugitive teams are part of a decade-old attempt by the federal government to help overwhelmed police departments locate felony suspects they couldn't track down by themselves, especially those who flee beyond the reach of local police.
“In the bad budget times, we had to refocus our priorities,” said Jeff Tyler, the Marshals Service's head of domestic investigations, who oversees its fugitive-tracking offices. “We recognize that just going after every fugitive available, we didn't have the resources to do it.”
Instead, he said, the agency's fugitive task forces focus almost exclusively on tracking down the “worst of the worst,” particularly violent fugitives, who often take longer to find.
The policy changes frustrate critics who say the federal government needs to stake out a bigger role in helping local police agencies find — and, in particular, retrieve — fugitives, especially when they escape across state lines.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.