The 2006 Crime Stats Analysis - Time for the Truth
The 2006 Crime Stats Analysis - Time for the Truth
( A Prime Time Crime Exclusive)
By Scott Newark
We have this quaint saying in the criminal justice business that used to characterize our work; “The Truth, the Whole Truth and Nothing But the Truth.” The recent 2006 Crime Statistics put out, by some strange reason, the Minister of Industry are indicative, however, that for some, truth has become a casualty of self interested spin.
Headlines and newscasts leads from media outlets told the “story” last week: “Crime own to lowest levels in 25 years”. The average Canadian, especially the average urban dweller, in say Edmonton, Calgary, Ottawa, Vancouver, Winnipeg, Regina, Surrey, Montreal and yes, Toronto the Not So Good Anymore might have a hard time wondering if their reality was the same as the Industry Canada (?) analysts. Same thing goes, by the way, for folks living in smaller urban centers whose day to day experiences don’t quite mirror this latest government report. An ever ready cadre of public trough resident criminologists were immediately on hand however to pontificate that any public perception that there might actually be…you know…more crime than before was ignorance fueled by media sensationalism.
No doubt it’s just a co-incidence that these crime stats are released in the dead of summer although the simple acceptance of them without critical analysis by the media and the supposedly ‘new’ Harper government is disappointing. The truth is there but it takes some drilling down and comparative analysis to actually find it concealed as it is behind a bureaucratic shell game of mixing apples and oranges and deliberately excluding the fruit that is unquestionably rotten. In fact, stripped of all the statistical scam, this year’s crime stats are an even starker reminder than normal that things are bad and getting worse when it comes to crime in Canada.
Let’s start with what Juristat actually reports and how they choose to report it because those are the first clues to the deliberately deceptive reporting on crime in Canada. Fortunately, as is often the case in honest data analysis, they are also the first indicators of what the truth really is.
What the Juristat crime stats include…..and what they don’t.
Let’s begin with the survey itself. Buried in the introductory fine print is the admission of what it is and what it isn’t.
Reporting of crime
It is crimes that get reported to the police and which the police then report to the stats gatherers (and even that is watered down in multiple count/crime incidents where only the most ‘serious’ crime is counted). It isn’t crimes that occur that don’t get reported for a variety of reasons including, according to the Report, “…not wanting to involve the police…” which is an alarmingly growing phenomena in big cities. One of the reasons cited for this previously was “…fear of reprisals from aggressors” but this has curiously been sanitized from the current edition. One stat that is definitely not reported, but should be, is the number of unsolved violent crimes which is increasing because witnesses, and victims, are alarmingly concluding that the bad guys are more powerful than the good guys. As someone with twenty five plus years experience in our justice system I’d regretfully add ‘because nothing will happen’ and ‘because as a victim you can expect grief, expense and abuse’ to the reasons why crime is under reported.
This reality of under reporting isn’t irrelevant. In recognition of that fact, the same folks that conduct this police reported survey also conduct a community survey to directly identify persons victimized by crime (itself with highly restrictive parameters). If the ‘good news’ interpreters of the Crime Stats report are correct then presumably there should be a close co-relation of crimes reported, right? Guess what? The last such survey showed, when asked, Canadians reported crime happening to them at a rate three times higher than what the Crime Stats reveal.
Clearly, the most serious violent crimes such as homicide, robberies etc. are more likely to come to the attention of the police and thus be ‘reported’ while less serious property crimes are more likely to go unreported. Ironically, the supposed drop in crime which Juristat reports is “…driven by declines in non violent crimes…” whereas “…increases were seen in many serious violent crimes.” In other words, Juristat’s announced ‘drop’ in crime is based on an increase in violent crime that is more likely reported and a decrease in reporting of property crime that is less likely reported.
Finally, because many of us appear to have accepted more crime as inevitable is by no means the same thing as saying that crime is decreasing or that we could not take measures to reduce crime if we chose to do so.
Crime rate versus crimes committed
The rate of crime reflects the number of crimes committed in relation to a fixed amount of the population. If the population increases (as it has by more than 10% since 1989) then there will be an inevitable decline in the crime rate unless the volume of crime continues to increase beyond even its recent explosive growth. Put in non-Justice Department terms, there are more of us out there for robbers, killers, car thieves, and child molesters to choose from. Somehow I don't take great comfort in this. This year’s Juristat reports a 2006 population of 32,623,490 which is an approximate 1% increase from 2005 and approximately 4% since 2002 which are the comparator years used for this year’s analysis.
[Read the rest here] H/T from Crux-of-the-Matter via JacksNewsWatch
( A Prime Time Crime Exclusive)
By Scott Newark
We have this quaint saying in the criminal justice business that used to characterize our work; “The Truth, the Whole Truth and Nothing But the Truth.” The recent 2006 Crime Statistics put out, by some strange reason, the Minister of Industry are indicative, however, that for some, truth has become a casualty of self interested spin.
Headlines and newscasts leads from media outlets told the “story” last week: “Crime own to lowest levels in 25 years”. The average Canadian, especially the average urban dweller, in say Edmonton, Calgary, Ottawa, Vancouver, Winnipeg, Regina, Surrey, Montreal and yes, Toronto the Not So Good Anymore might have a hard time wondering if their reality was the same as the Industry Canada (?) analysts. Same thing goes, by the way, for folks living in smaller urban centers whose day to day experiences don’t quite mirror this latest government report. An ever ready cadre of public trough resident criminologists were immediately on hand however to pontificate that any public perception that there might actually be…you know…more crime than before was ignorance fueled by media sensationalism.
No doubt it’s just a co-incidence that these crime stats are released in the dead of summer although the simple acceptance of them without critical analysis by the media and the supposedly ‘new’ Harper government is disappointing. The truth is there but it takes some drilling down and comparative analysis to actually find it concealed as it is behind a bureaucratic shell game of mixing apples and oranges and deliberately excluding the fruit that is unquestionably rotten. In fact, stripped of all the statistical scam, this year’s crime stats are an even starker reminder than normal that things are bad and getting worse when it comes to crime in Canada.
Let’s start with what Juristat actually reports and how they choose to report it because those are the first clues to the deliberately deceptive reporting on crime in Canada. Fortunately, as is often the case in honest data analysis, they are also the first indicators of what the truth really is.
What the Juristat crime stats include…..and what they don’t.
Let’s begin with the survey itself. Buried in the introductory fine print is the admission of what it is and what it isn’t.
Reporting of crime
It is crimes that get reported to the police and which the police then report to the stats gatherers (and even that is watered down in multiple count/crime incidents where only the most ‘serious’ crime is counted). It isn’t crimes that occur that don’t get reported for a variety of reasons including, according to the Report, “…not wanting to involve the police…” which is an alarmingly growing phenomena in big cities. One of the reasons cited for this previously was “…fear of reprisals from aggressors” but this has curiously been sanitized from the current edition. One stat that is definitely not reported, but should be, is the number of unsolved violent crimes which is increasing because witnesses, and victims, are alarmingly concluding that the bad guys are more powerful than the good guys. As someone with twenty five plus years experience in our justice system I’d regretfully add ‘because nothing will happen’ and ‘because as a victim you can expect grief, expense and abuse’ to the reasons why crime is under reported.
This reality of under reporting isn’t irrelevant. In recognition of that fact, the same folks that conduct this police reported survey also conduct a community survey to directly identify persons victimized by crime (itself with highly restrictive parameters). If the ‘good news’ interpreters of the Crime Stats report are correct then presumably there should be a close co-relation of crimes reported, right? Guess what? The last such survey showed, when asked, Canadians reported crime happening to them at a rate three times higher than what the Crime Stats reveal.
Clearly, the most serious violent crimes such as homicide, robberies etc. are more likely to come to the attention of the police and thus be ‘reported’ while less serious property crimes are more likely to go unreported. Ironically, the supposed drop in crime which Juristat reports is “…driven by declines in non violent crimes…” whereas “…increases were seen in many serious violent crimes.” In other words, Juristat’s announced ‘drop’ in crime is based on an increase in violent crime that is more likely reported and a decrease in reporting of property crime that is less likely reported.
Finally, because many of us appear to have accepted more crime as inevitable is by no means the same thing as saying that crime is decreasing or that we could not take measures to reduce crime if we chose to do so.
Crime rate versus crimes committed
The rate of crime reflects the number of crimes committed in relation to a fixed amount of the population. If the population increases (as it has by more than 10% since 1989) then there will be an inevitable decline in the crime rate unless the volume of crime continues to increase beyond even its recent explosive growth. Put in non-Justice Department terms, there are more of us out there for robbers, killers, car thieves, and child molesters to choose from. Somehow I don't take great comfort in this. This year’s Juristat reports a 2006 population of 32,623,490 which is an approximate 1% increase from 2005 and approximately 4% since 2002 which are the comparator years used for this year’s analysis.
[Read the rest here] H/T from Crux-of-the-Matter via JacksNewsWatch
posted by Stephen at 7:05 PM
1 Comments:
While Scott Newark's analysis might be correct, don't forget that he was the designated lobbyist for the Canadian Police Association while they were actively lobbying for Bill C-68.
Post a Comment
<< Home - Resource Library and Main Page