Exceptional clearance is an important but often misunderstood concept in law enforcement statistics. While it serves a legitimate purpose in criminal legal reporting, the system is very much vulnerable to manipulation. So today, I’m breaking down what exceptional clearances are, how they function, and the ways they can be misused.
What Are Exceptional Clearances?
In law enforcement, a case is typically considered “cleared” when an arrest is made and charges are filed. However, sometimes circumstances prevent an arrest despite law enforcement identifying the offender and having sufficient evidence. This is where exceptional clearances come in.
According to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program, a case can be exceptionally cleared when:
- A suspect has been identified
- Sufficient evidence exists to support an arrest and prosecution
- The exact location of the offender is known
- There is a reason outside law enforcement control that prevents an arrest
These “reasons outside law enforcement control” include:
- Death of the offender
- Prosecution declined (for reasons other than lack of evidence)
- Extradition denied
- Victim refuses to cooperate in prosecution
- Juvenile offender referred to juvenile authorities without formal charges
The Legitimate Purpose of Exceptional Clearances
Exceptional clearances serve several important functions:
- They provide a more accurate picture of police effectiveness by recognizing situations where cases are solved but traditional arrest isn’t possible
- They acknowledge the investigative work that leads to identifying perpetrators
- They create statistical accountability for cases that would otherwise remain officially “unsolved”
- They help allocate resources by distinguishing between truly unsolved cases and those resolved by other means
How Exceptional Clearances Can Be Abused
Despite their legitimate purpose, the exceptional clearance system has significant potential for abuse:
Inflating Clearance Rates
Departments under pressure to improve their clearance statistics may misuse exceptional clearances to make their performance look better. For example:
- Classifying cases as exceptionally cleared when evidence is actually insufficient
- Using victim non-cooperation as an excuse when cases are difficult to prosecute
- Counting cases as cleared when only minimal investigation occurred
Limited Oversight
The criteria for exceptional clearances often involve subjective judgment. What constitutes “sufficient evidence” or “victim non-cooperation” can be interpreted broadly, and there’s typically little external review of these determinations.
In fact, a Georgia Police Department used the Exceptional Clearance process to resolve rape cases, misusing it entirely.
Even in Southwest Michigan, Exceptional Clearances do happen, albeit quietly and with zero fanfare…if Prosecutors, Attorney Generals, and Sheriffs Associations can do anything about it.
Distorting Public Understanding
When police departments report their clearance rates, they often combine traditional clearances (arrests) with exceptional clearances into a single percentage. This can give the public a misleading impression about how many individuals are actually facing repercussions in the court system.
Creating False Incentives
The ability to count cases as cleared without making arrests can create perverse incentives:
- Pressuring victims to decline prosecution to “clear” difficult cases, which sometimes happens in Domestic Violence cases
- Focusing investigative resources on cases that can be easily exceptionally cleared rather than more serious offenses
- Prematurely closing investigations once minimum criteria for exceptional clearance are met
Real-World Examples
Various investigations by journalists and watchdog organizations have found questionable patterns in exceptional clearance rates:
- Some departments have exceptional clearance rates for violent crimes that far exceed national averages
- Cases being cleared due to “victim non-cooperation” without documented evidence of investigators even attempting to work with victims
- Wide disparities in exceptional clearance rates between similar departments, suggesting different standards
Improving the System
The exceptional clearance system could be strengthened through:
- Greater transparency in reporting, separating traditional and exceptional clearances
- Independent audits of exceptionally cleared cases
- More specific documentation requirements to justify exceptional clearances
- Training to ensure consistent application of standards
- Public education about what clearance rates actually mean
Conclusion
Exceptional clearances serve a legitimate purpose in law enforcement reporting, but like many systems, they’re vulnerable to misuse. Understanding how these statistics work helps citizens better evaluate police performance and advocate for accountability. The goal should be a system that accurately reflects both the work of law enforcement and the reality of justice served, rather than one that can be manipulated to create a misleading impression of effectiveness.
