Police undercount violent crimes

Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by frenchperson, Oct 23, 2008.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Link here:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7685908.stm

    It's not at all like the police to get involved in something underhand like this. There are only some forces involved, resulting in a rise in serious violent crime of 22% for the second quarter of this year.

    It must be totally accidental.
     
  2. Crime figures have been massaged for years. It's not the bobby on the ground who's out there dealing with these 'non-existent' crimes who's at fault, it's the politically motivated management.
     
  3. Statisticians.....cnuts!
     
  4. It's sort of reassuring to think that if some vicious hoodlum was to set about Gordon Brown with a baseball bat, it may be recorded as shoplifting. I'll therefore remain upbeat, and try to take something positive from this bad news.
     
  5. Biscuits is right. Over the years I have been told to record all crimes or to record only what is absolutely necessary. Detection rates have been balanced by being sent out to detect minor crimes to match serious, but undetected ones. All depending upon the political ( in its wide sense) flavour at the time. ovt and police are masters at massageing figures. A good test is, would you use public transport at night?
     
  6. If I understand this correctly, this is based on the British Crime Survey that is little better than an opinion poll.

    A better picture of what's happening in this country is given by the violent crime arrest figures published by the Home Office. These show a doubling of the number of arrests for violent offences from 600 thousand to 1.2 million in the past seven years.

    Is Ian Blair still trying to tell us that crime in London is so low that people don't bother to lock their doors?
     
  7. Someone I know in the UK was recently forcibly detained in hospital overnight for being drunk and causing crminal damage. On being released the following morning, clearly unarmed, and at 5'10" and about 12 stone, he was grabbed by six waiting policemen and tazered at least twice, before being re-detained under the Mental Health Act.....violent crime? Seems everyone is at it.
     
  8. mercurydancer

    mercurydancer LE Book Reviewer

    scrofula

    How can that be? no one can be detained in hospital involuntarily apart from it being under the Mental Health Act, or actually under some form of legal arrest. Being drunk and breaking stuff wont do it. There has to be clear signs of being at a risk of himself or others based upon a mental health or dual diagnosis. When the MHA is used, there are checks and balances to prevent such an instance as you suggest. I cant tell from your post if the man has mental health history or if he was injured to such an extent that he was unconscious on admission to hospital, or if it was a Mental Health Hospital or a general one.

    I'm not doubting you I just cant see how it fits together. I have known of some instances of people being thrown out of hospital to be arrested on the hospital entrance but not under the MHA. I can imagine a scenario if someone has self-discharged, but that means he wasnt forcibly detained.
     
  9. First off, the 'under recording' is not 'under counting.'

    Put simply, that means that the crimes were recorded. No-one has suggested that crimes have not been recorded.

    The reality is that the classification depends upon the intent behind the assault, not the level of injury sustained.

    Another reality is that only a small number of police forces in England and Wales have been sampled. It's likely that this mis-recording will be much more widespread than stated.
     
  10. I could fill a library with this subject, never mind write a book about it.

    I could talk about attempt burglaries being crimed as criminal damage, because the area has been hammered with burglaries and the crime manager is getting it in the neck. Or I could tell you about the bloke, who after shouting that all police are racist, then called me a f*cking honky. I promptly arrested him for racially aggravated public order. Only to learn later that the CPS dropped that and alternatively charged him with Drunken Disorderly.

    Criming Standards. Those two words really don't sit well together. Criming double standards more like.
     
  11. Nevertheless, my point remains; the same number of crimes have been recorded and not as implied, that crimes have gone unreported.

    On the subject of Crime Recording Standards, who is to blame in your opinion?
     
  12. Believe me, many crimes go unreported. In a totally unscientific straw poll style way, ask your friends whether they have been the subject of crime. Then ask whether they bothered to report it. The results may surprise you.
    With regard to crime reporting itself, the police are much more ethical about whether to actually record a crime or not. It is very very difficult NOT to crime an incident in my force area. Generally, if a crime is reported and te officer has no reasonable grounds to doubt the authenticity of the incident, then the officer will crime it.
    Who do I think is to blame for the mis-reporting? The central govt imposed targets which have encouraged distortion of crime levels in the country as a whole. Kids throwing eggs at a bus being recorded as criminal damage for example. Common sense decisions and discretion for officers being taken away would be another reason.
    The other issue to consider is the world of difference between charging standards and recording standards. The first being decided by the police, the latter being decided by the CPS. Talk about pulling in different directions.
     
  13. mercurydancer

    mercurydancer LE Book Reviewer

    Thank you scrofula that makes a lot of things much clearer.

    The guy was bailed. I'm not a police officer but I would imgaine that some form of mental health assessment would have been done at the police station and on his bail and release.

    I may be (!) a cynic but some peeople do try to claim false illness to avoid spending time in a cell. I dont know, his injuries or illness may have been real. The admission to the hospital wasnt for psychiatric reasons as the hospital isnt a mental health trust. His intended self-discharge(which hospital staff cant really overrule) is important. It shows he has capacity. It may be that hes kicked off in hospital, he's discharged himself and the staff have alerted the police to intervene at the hospital door. This is by no means unusual. If there is a dual diagnosis, that is mental health and drug or alcohol related issues, then the MHA would apply.

    I'm not allowed a taser in my hospital as it is well known that I would immediately use it on senior managers who say things like "stakeholders" and "focus groups"