Official statistics on crime give an account of crime as opposed to a count on crime We may ask ourselves what accounts for crime? Crime can be described often

Linda Wade CRI101 Page 5/9/2007

Official statistics on crime give an account of crime as opposed to a count on crime

We may ask ourselves what accounts for crime? Crime can be described often as an illegal act that has been prohibited by the criminal law, and there are many different definitions of a criminal act. Those acts that are serious such as assault and murder often make headline news via the media. Where as minor offences for example drunken and disorderly are often unreported. One can argue that it depends on the context of the crime as Shearing, (1989) suggests that the key problem with crime reflects on “societies struggle around order that can instigate crime.” (Maguire, 2002 p.334.) It is here that the police, courts, and other agencies, including the home office have collectively agreed to record the rate of crime utilizing statistical analysis. Moreover, one can argue that there are hidden agendas for those establishments involved, and whether their definitions and representation of crimes are correct? During the course of this essay we will look at some of the statistical representations that have been put forward by some of those agencies, to establish whether indeed the official statistics are correct.

The police in United Kingdom (UK) and Wales along side the home office first began recording criminal incidents in 1876 (Maguire, 2002 p.334.) Yet the British Crime Survey (BCS) did not evolve until 1982. The police as an organization have a major impact in determining what criminal offences need to be reported and those that do not. White (1999) quotes that “the police are the gatekeepers of the criminal justice system who exercise considerable discretion over whether a person enters the criminal justice system or stays outside it.” (Mc Conville & Wilson, 2002 p.8.) Therefore it can be established that what one officer may observe as a crime can be the complete opposite to another’s, especially when the majority of police officers use their discretion when deciding to arrest an individual for an offence. This therefore constitutes that hidden crime such as domestic disputes, and anti-social behaviour may often go unreported due to the police officers discretion. But on the other hand the Independent (22nd July 2004) has broadcasted that overall crime in UK and Wales has fallen by 39% since 1995, and the chances of becoming a victim to crime 26% (Independent 2004.) Surely this suggests that there are fewer deviants around, and according to professor Wiles whom was interviewed by the Independent, suggested that the stability is all down to economic change. He also stated that more people are employed therefore there is little or no need to commit crime.

Although professor Wiles is correct in suggesting that the economy is stable at present, he has obviously failed to recognize that certain crimes such as common assault have increased. The majority of police forces have statistically reported to the home office that there is an increase in violence against another person, and in the northeast region alone the percentage = 43% see appendices 1. However more notably we can recognize that the home office statistics for this crime in England and Wales has been manipulated, as they have failed to include the London region when comparing the statistics as ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

One reason for this manipulation may have something to do with the government’s current political agenda towards crime. As the daily Telegraph (22nd October 2004) have reported, that since labour has had political gain violent crime has risen by 11% in the second quarter of this year and gun crime has been reported to have risen by 3% in June. Yet Tony Blaire was adamant that crime had fallen since Labour had gained power. Therefore we can establish that statistical analysis of crime has been manipulated.

However, we cannot always believe what the media portray, as Cohen (1972) suggested the press were often the actors involved in over exaggerating specific crimes, causing a distortion of events, whilst stereotyping the perpetrators involved. In other words causing a moral panic amongst society where the average individual in society would believe that they might be the next victim. One example of this was portrayed in Daily Telegraph (29th October 2004) “Woman has tongue bitten off by sex attacker” surely this headline alone would cause most women to fear for their own safety. However the media cannot be solely to blame for initiating such moral panics, as the collection of statistical data about crime via the BCS is often influenced via criminal social trends that are reported by other agencies such as the police, courts, Home office etc (Maguire, 2002 p.322.)

Although the criminal statistical measures have had there disadvantages they can also be beneficial. Maguire (2002) noted that there has been a significant change in certain aspects of their recordings of crime in the UK since 1997. He recognised that BCS has initiated more qualitative data research, besides the quantitive data that was originally used. It is here that techniques such as interviewing and observational methods have been introduced to enable unreported crimes such as domestic violence to be recorded. This has been made accessible via the accident and emergency services, which was reported by the Home office in 2000. Plus the BCS have managed to gather much more detailed information on the types of offences occurring, the allocated area, where and when the criminal offence can take place, including the victims losses. This information alone has allowed other agencies to develop for example environmental criminology it is here that they have targeted specific area’s of crime, providing resources where and when needed (Maguire , 2002 pp.325-26.)

When looking at the official statistics in general towards crimes that affect age, class, gender and race have the majority of crime rates really changed at all? Historically specific crimes were thought to have occurred in inner cities since Charles Dickens era. Walkowitz (1992) noted that Dickensian individuals living in those dirty overcrowded houses off dark alleyways were more capable of crime. Plus there was a significant class division, which was also implemented by racial inequality due to the African immigrants who had fled their country and ended up living in the UK (Muncie et al , 2002 p.156.)

It was not so long ago that the UK home office figures reported that Afro Caribbean youths living in the London area were more likely to carryout a street robbery compared to white youths. Infact in 1984 the police arrested 52% Afro-Caribbean men when indeed only 14% of non-whites lived in the area. Feldman (1993) recognised that in general African Caribbean’s would commit more opportunist offences compared to their white counterparts, yet while, white individuals were carryout the majority of offences. He also recognised that the offenders colour was only recognised for certain crimes, and this did not include ‘white collar’ crimes. The reason being that they were regarded as not being in the position to carryout such crimes (Brewer, 2000 p.25.)

There is also evidence to suggest that males carry out the vast majority of crimes that are committed in the UK. White (1999) noted that crime was more likely to occur amongst young adolescent males from working class backgrounds that predominantly lived within a rough environment (Munchie & McLaughlin (2002) p.167.) However, in 1999 female offences were found to be at the lower part of the spectrum at 33% compared to males. The home office (2000) records for females carrying out crimes such as handling stolen goods and theft have increased at 59%, drug offences 12% and violence against another 9%. It can be observed that there is a significant trend in the last decade that woman are carrying out more offences. Moreover, Gelsthorpe & Morris (2002) noted that there is an significant increase of there involvement with drugs (Maguire et al, 2002 p.496.)

In conclusion, one can suggest that there is evidence that official statistics are indeed manipulated, often to fit political agenda and/or economic gain. It can also be observed in the way they are collated, and how they are interpretated by the individual agencies involved, as they are trying to support there own ethos, strategies and opinions for there own gain. We have observed that the miss use of such statistics can exaggerate a societies perception of ethnic, age and gender related crimes as Feldman (1993) and White (1999) noted. Although the importance of such statistics are well documented and can be advantageous for policy making, via educating and insuring that the correct resources are available for specific areas of crime. One way of doing this would be to target those young adolescent males before they pursue a future in crime.

References:

Cohen, S (1972) “The Construction and Deconstruction of Crime.” In: Muncie, J & McLaughlin, E (2002) The Problem with Crime: London: Sage Publishers.

Feldman, RS (1993) “Criminals.” In: Brewer, K. (2000) Psychology and Crime: Great Britain: Heinemann.

Gelsthorpe, L & Morris, A (2002) “Gender & Crime.” In: Maguire, M.Morgan, R et al (2002) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology 3rd ed. Great Britain: Oxford university press:

Home office (2003/04) “Criminal Statistics carried out by the Police.”[Internet] 22.10.04

“Labour has political Gain”, Daily Telegraph (22nd October 2004) [Internet] www.telegraph.co.uk.

Maguire, M (2002) “Recorded Crime.” In: Maguire, M, Morgan, R et al (2002) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology 3rd Ed. Great Britain: Oxford university press.

Shearing, C (1989) “Sociological Theories of Crime.” In: Maguire, M, Morgan, R et al (2002) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology 3rd ed. Great Britain:Oxford university press

Walkowitz, (1992) “Crimes Historically.” In: Muncie, J & McLaughlin, E (2002) The Problem with Crime: London:Sage Publishers.

White, A, (1999) “The Structure and Organization of Criminal Justice System in England & Wales”. In: Mc Conville & Wilson (2002) Handbook of Criminal Justice Process: Oxford: Oxford university press.

Wiles, (2004) “Intererview on Economic change.” The Independent (22nd July 2004, pp.1-2)

“Woman has tongue bitten off”, Daily Telegraph (29th October 2004) [Internet] www.telegraph.co.uk.

Appendices 1 - Sanctions of Detections by Police Force and region, 2003/04.