 |
Background Briefing
DO THE OFFICIAL CRIME FIGURES TELL THE FULL STORY?
David G. Green
2003/04: Crimes Omitted from the British Crime Survey
Crimes with child victims
When comparing the BCS and recorded crime the following adjustments were made by the Home Office
in 2003/04 to allow for the exclusion of under 16s. The calculations are contained in a separate document
obtainable from the Home Office, 'Comparing BCS and police counts of crime'. The Home Office
assumed that 12% of woundings were against under 16s, and reduced the recorded crime total by 47,581.
Robbery was reduced by 19%, or 18,191 offences. Theft from the person was reduced by 7% or 10,083
offences. And assault was reduced by 21% or 55,766 offences. In total 131,621 recorded crimes were
carried out against under 16s, but excluded for the purpose of comparison with the BCS figures.
We can get a little closer to the true figure by using BCS estimates of the crimes not reported to the police
and, if reported, not recorded. The Home Office has produced a 'best estimate' of the proportion of crimes
recorded by the police.
Best Estimate of Crimes Against Victims aged 11-15, excluded from the BCS
|
Home Office estimate of recorded
crimes with victims aged
11-15 |
Best estimate of % of real
crimes recorded by the police |
Best estimate of actual
crimes against victims
aged 11-15 |
| Woundings |
47,581 |
29% |
164,072 |
| Robbery |
18,191 |
27% |
67,374 |
| Theft from the person |
10,083 |
22% |
45,831 |
| Assault |
55,766 |
20% |
278,830 |
| Total |
131,621 |
|
556,107 |
Source: Crime in England and Wales 2003/2004, Table 3.01.
In other words, when the Government claims that the BCS provides the most reliable picture of crime, it is
missing out 556,107 offences against children under 16. It is also missing out offences against shops,
offices and manufacturers. How many crimes against these victims are excluded?
Crimes against shops and offices
We can make similar calculations to those for the under 16s. The Home Office estimated that in 2003/04,
50% of vandalism (which includes arson and criminal damage to buildings) was against commercial
premises, that is 573,761 offences. Similarly 11% of thefts from motor vehicles, were against commercial
victims, 59,992 offences; 8% of thefts of motor vehicles, 17,072 offences; 8% of attempted thefts of
motor vehicles, 6,349 offences; 11% of attempted thefts from motor vehicles, 10,656 offences; and 6% of
vehicle interference and tampering, 5,669 offences. Altogether this produces a total of 673,499 recorded
offences, excluded for the purpose of comparison with the British Crime Survey.
Best Estimate of Crimes Against Commercial Victims, Excluded from the BCS
|
Home Office estimate of recorded crimes against
commercial victims |
Best estimate of % of real
crimes recorded by the police |
Best estimate of actual
crimes against
commercial victims |
| Vandalism |
573,761 |
23% |
2,494,613 |
| Theft from motor vehicle |
59,992 |
36% |
166,644 |
| Theft of motor vehicles |
17,072 |
86% |
19,851 |
| Attempted theft of motor
vehicle |
6,349 |
46% |
13,802 |
| Attempted theft from
motor vehicle |
10,656 |
46% |
23,165 |
| Vehicle interference and
tampering |
5,669 |
46% |
12,324 |
| Total |
673,499 |
|
2,730,399 |
Source: Crime in England and Wales 2003/04, Table 3.01.
These figures make no allowance for theft from commercial premises. In The Economic and Social Costs of
Crime, published by the Home Office in 2000, the authors estimated the real number of thefts from shops
by multiplying the number of recorded offences by 100. Why did they choose 100? The figure was based
on a study by Professor Farrington of Cambridge University who has estimated that the multiplier should
be between 100 and 1,000. The Home Office opted for the lowest figure in the range, 100, which produced
an estimate of nearly 31 million instances of shoplifting. The report acknowledges that this figure may be
on the low side and suggests another formula, also based on the work of Professor Farrington. He has
estimated that for every criminal cautioned for or convicted of shoplifting, about 150 offences have
actually been carried out. The Home Office further assumes that each offender in the official figures has
been convicted for two acts of shoplifting. In 1998 120,000 individuals were cautioned for or convicted of
theft from a shop. Using the Farrington formula the Home Office estimated that the total number of
offences was 36 million. (The calculation is 120,000 x 2 x 150 = 36 million. See p. 16, note 17 of The
Economic and Social Costs of Crime.)
Professor Farrington's estimate is based on a detailed study of shoplifting, but to multiply recorded crime
by 100 may strike many observers as rather arbitrary. Another indicator that could be used is the
Commercial Victimisation Survey (CVS) carried out by the Home Office in 1994 to discover crime in
1993. The survey found 6,932,000 thefts by retailers' customers or unknown persons (but not counting
employees or 'outsiders') in 1993. In that year only 275,607 acts of shoplifting were recorded by the
police. If that ratio of recorded crime to actual crime is used, then the multiplier would be 25.2. In 2003/04
301,796 thefts from shops were recorded by the police. If multiplied by 25.2 the total is 7,605,259.
This means that the amount of shoplifting not counted by the BCS in 2003/04 was somewhere between 7.6
million and 31 million, depending on which Home Office report is preferred.
On the most cautious of assumptions, there were 556,107 offences against people under 16 and, on
similarly cautious assumptions, there were 2,730,399 offences against commercial victims, not including
shoplifting. If shoplifting is included, based on the CVS and again making only the most cautious of
assumptions, another 7,605,259 should be added, producing a grand total of 10,891,765 offences. That is,
still leaving out many offences recorded by the police (including drug offences and sexual offences), we
should add 10.9 million offences to the 11.7 million reported by the BCS for 2003/04, a total of 22.6 million.
Note: Civitas wishes to record its thanks to the Home Office for checking and confirming the accuracy of
the comparisons between the BCS and recorded crime in 2001/02. The same method was used by Civitas to calculate the 2002/03 and 2003/04 figures, but they have not been checked by the Home Office.
Thanks are due to Jonathan Morris, Ben Cackett and Nadia Martin for research assistance.
|
 |