As the first of many guest articles on the subject of criminology, this one will look briefly at the topic of crime rates. Because they have become so important to the crime control industry (like my friend at the conference), media agencies, politicians, and ourselves, I thought we would take a more critical look.

Crime rates are seldom what they seem. Often blurted out in a newscast, they are rarely explained. In fact, they are usually presented as magical representations of "truth," that is, accurate representations of what takes place in our towns and cities. They fact is, they are not. The collection, compilation, processing, and reporting of crime statistics involves countless professionals at all levels. Police officers, police-department employees, Statistics Canada employees, researchers, and the media are all involved in the process. In a sense, when a crime happens, it has a myriad of hurdles to jump before it enters into statistics that you and I hear on the news. Lets look at some (but certainly not all) of the factors that eventually determine the nature of the numbers you and I eventually hear.

Perhaps the most important factor is under reporting. Since the 1960s criminologists have become aware that between 40% and 50% of all criminal offences go unreported (this, of course, is not the case for homicide which tends to be the most accurate statistic). The reasons for this are numerous. First, many people simply don't trust the police and, thus, decide not to report the incident. Second, depending on the crime (usually property crimes) many people feel that the incident wasn't serious enough to warrant police attention. Third, individuals often feel that the police can't do anything about the situation after it has happened. Fourth, some victims are reluctant to report an incident to the police in fear of retaliation by the offender; this, of course, tends to happen more often in cases of spousal assault and/or rape.

Unfortunately the list doesn't stop there. In addition to the victim's reporting tendencies, the officers on scene play an essential role in how, or if, the offence is recorded. Because officers have considerable discretion, it is not uncommon for officers to not officially record an incident. This sometimes happens when the officer sees the offence as trivial (usually with no apparent damage and no threat to future safety) or when the situation appears under control the latter happens, for example, when officers are sometimes convinced by the perpetrator that "everything is fine;" mandatory arrest regulations (in some parts of the United States) have changed this to some extent, however.

All-in-all it is not surprising that a large percentage of offences go unreported. Yet the "filtering" process continues once the offence has been reported. For example, not too long ago police officers entered data into the Uniform Crime Report database (UCRI). Interestingly, only the most serious offence which took place at a given time would be recorded. Therefore, if a individual broke into three cars and then proceeded to murder a man on the street, only the murder would be officially entered into the database. Of course, the break and enters would likely be addressed, but they would not be entered into the official UCR database. The result? An staggering number of less serious crimes were never incorporated into the official statistical records. Thankfully this is no longer the case as the UCR system has been upgraded considerably (sometimes referred to as UCRII).

I haven't explored all the reasons why crime is largely under-reported/recorded, but I think the point is relatively clear. Crime rates are actually higher than they are reported to be. (Whether or not we are becoming a more criminal society will be discussed at a later time. Suffice to say that not all is doom-and-gloom.) What lies in between the offence on one hand, and the final statistic on the other, are people; people who make decisions about what happened, what should be recorded, and what eventually "matters." Numbers are created by people, and people create they very rules that are used to generate our crime rates. So, the next time your local newspaper suggests that the "crime rate" is increasing or decreasing, take a moment to consider the number of people involved in creating that number and what it may, or may not, be reflecting.

Next week we'll look some of the basic ideas behind the study of crime victims. Who is or is not likely to be victimized today. It's a sensitive topic, but extremely important for us all. Until then, don't stop asking questions!

Suggested Reading:
Vincent Sacco and Leslie Kennedy. The Criminal Event Toronto: Nelson, 1998.
John Hagan. Crime and Disrepute. California: Pine Forge, 1994.

About Patrick Parnaby
Patrick Parnaby is currently completing his Ph.D. in Sociology at McMaster University in Hamilton. His current research includes Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design and the sociology of deviance. E-mail Patrick at patrick@mycaledon.com

Comments? Questions? Have your say in our Message Boards!