U.S. Department of Justice 

Office of Justice Programs

 

Crime and Justice in the 

United States and in England

and Wales, 1981-96

Bureau of Justice Statistics 

In 1995 victim surveys, crime rates for robbery, assault, burglary, and motor 

vehicle theft are higher in England (including Wales) than in the United States.

1981 1986 1991 1996

0

2

4

6

8

Robbery: Survey crime rate per 1,000 population

United States

England

1981 1986 1991 1996

0

3

6

9

12

15

18

21

Assault: Survey crime rate per 1,000 population

United States

England

1981 1986 1991 1996

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Burglary: Survey crime rate

per 1,000 households

United States

England

1981 1986 1991 1996

0

10

20

30

England

United States

Motor vehicle theft: Survey crime rate

per 1,000 households

Survey crime rate per 1,000 population

Assault

Survey crime rate per 1,000 households

Burglary Motor vehicle theft

Robbery

Survey crime rate per 1,000 households

 Survey crime rate per 1,000 population
Crime and Justice 

in the United States 

and in England and 

Wales, 1981-96

By Patrick A. Langan, Ph.D.

BJS Statistician

and 

David P. Farrington, Ph.D. 

BJS Visiting Fellow, University of Cambridge

October 1998, NCJ 169284

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Bureau of Justice Statistics
U.S. Department of Justice

Bureau of Justice Statistics 

Jan M. Chaiken, Ph.D. 

Director

Patrick A. Langan, Ph.D., BJS Statistician, and David P. Farrington, Ph.D.,

BJS Visiting Fellow and University of

Cambridge, wrote this report. Jeffry

Anderson, Margaret Ayres, Gordon

Barclay, Allen Beck, Sharon Birch, Jeff

Butts, Billy Burns, Robyn Cohen,

Patrick Collier, Judy Egger, Pat

Mayhew, Catriona Mirrlees-Black,

Chris Nuttall, Andrew Percy, Craig

Perkins, Michael Rand, Bill Sabol,

Reese Satin, Howard Snyder, Roger

Stevens, and Doris Wilson provided

data. David Levin verified the report.

Rhonda Keith and Tom Hester

produced the report. Marilyn

Marbrook, assisted by Yvonne Boston

and Jayne Robinson, produced the

final publication.

 Contents

ii Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

Highlights iii

Crime rates from victim surveys 1

Crime rates from police records 4

Reporting of crime to police 7

Police recording of crime 10

Victim surveys versus police records 12

Convictions per 1,000 population 14

Convictions per 1,000 offenders 17

Percent sentenced to incarceration 21

Incarcerations per 1,000 population 24

Incarcerations per 1,000 offenders 27

Incarceration sentence length 30

Time served 32

Percent of sentence served 34

Days at risk of serving 36

Justice system’s impact on crime 38

Justice system changes 41

Racial disparities in incarceration 44

Methodology 45

Comparability 45

 International crime victim surveys 47

Sources of American data 50

American survey offenses 50

American police-recorded offenses 50

American convictions 51

American probability of incarceration 53

American sentence length, time served, and days at risk of serving 54

American homicide 56

An American offender’s probability of arrest, and an arrested 

 offender’s probability of conviction 56

Racial disparities in American incarceration rates 57

Sources of English data 58

English survey offenses 58

English police-recorded offenses 58

English convictions 58

English probability of incarceration 59

English sentence length, time served, and days at risk of serving 59

English homicide 59

Racial disparities in English incarceration rates 60

Prior research 60

Notes on figures 1-82 61

References 64

Appendix 1: Data used in figures 1-82 67 

Appendix 2: U.S. and English-Welsh databases for the study 81
 Whether measured by surveys of

crime victims or by police statistics,

serious crime rates are not generally

higher in the United States than

England. (All references to England 

include Wales.) According to 1995

victim surveys — which measure

robbery, assault, burglary, and motor

vehicle theft — crime rates are all

higher in England than the United

States (figures 1-4 of the report beginning on page 1). According to latest

(1996) police statistics — which

measure incidents reported to police of

murder, rape, robbery, assault,

burglary, and motor vehicle theft —

crime rates are higher in England for

three crimes: assault, burglary, and

motor vehicle theft (figures 5-10). The

1996 crime rate for a fourth crime

(robbery) would have been higher in

England than the United States had

English police recorded the same

fraction of robberies that came to their

attention as American police (figure 15).

 The major exception to the pattern of

higher crime rates in England is the

murder rate. The 1996 U.S. murder

rate is vastly higher (nearly six times)

than England's, although the difference

between the two countries has narrowed over the past 16 years (below,

and figure 5 of the report).

 Firearms are more often involved in

violent crimes in the United States than

in England. According to 1996 police

statistics, firearms were used in 68%

of U.S. murders but 7% of English

murders, and 41% of U.S. robberies but

5% of English robberies.

 Since 1981, an offender's risk of being

caught, convicted, and sentenced to

incarceration has risen in the United

States for all six measured crimes

(murder, rape, robbery, assault,

burglary, motor vehicle theft) but has

fallen in England for all but murder

(figures 43-48).

 U.S. crime rates — whether measured by surveys of crime victims or by

police statistics — generally fell in the

early 1980's, rose thereafter until

around 1993, and then fell again

(figures 1-10). For most U.S. crimes

(survey estimated assault, burglary,

and motor vehicle theft; police-recorded

murder, robbery, and burglary), the

latest crime rates (1996) are the lowest

recorded in the 16-year period from

1981 to 1996. By comparison, English

crime rates as measured in both victim

surveys and police statistics have all

risen since 1981. For half of the

measured English crime categories, the

latest crime rates (1995 for rates from

victim surveys; 1996 for rates from

police statistics) are the highest

recorded since 1981 (figures 1-10). 

As a result of different crime trends in

the two countries —

 the U.S. robbery rate as measured in

the victim survey was nearly double

England's in 1981, but in 1995 the

English robbery rate was 1.4 times

America's (figure 1)

 the English assault rate as measured

in the victim survey was slightly higher

than America's in 1981, but in 1995 the

English assault rate was more than

double America's (figure 2)

 the U.S. burglary rate as measured in

the victim survey was more than double

England's in 1981, but in 1995 the

English burglary rate was nearly double

America's (below, and figure 3 of the

report)

 the English motor vehicle theft rate as

measured in the victim survey was 1.5

times America's in 1981, but in 1995

the English rate for vehicle theft was

more than double America's (figure 4)

 the U.S. murder rate as measured

in police statistics was 8.7 times

England's in 1981 but 5.7 times in

1996 (figure 5)

 the U.S. rape rate as measured in

police statistics was 17 times England's

in 1981 but 3 times in 1996 (figure 6)

 the U.S. robbery rate as measured in

police statistics was 6 times England's

in 1981 but 1.4 times in 1996 (figure 7)

Highlights

Highlights iii

1981 1986 1991 1996

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

Murder: Police-recorded crime rate

per 1,000 population

United States

England

1981 1986 1991 1996

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Burglary: Survey crime rate

per 1,000 households

United States

England
 the U.S. assault rate as measured

in police statistics was 1.5 times

England's in 1981, but in 1996 the

English assault rate was slightly

higher than America's (figure 8)

 the U.S. burglary rate as measured in

police statistics was slightly higher than

England's in 1981, but in 1996 the

English burglary rate was more than

double America's (below, and figure 9

of the report)

 the English motor vehicle theft rate as

measured in police statistics went from

1.4 times America's in 1981 to nearly 2

times in 1996 (figure 10).

According to statistics on the criminal

justice systems in the two countries

(1994 in the United States; 1995

in England) —

 a person committing a serious crime

in the United States (rape, robbery,

assault, burglary, and motor vehicle

theft, but not murder) is generally more

likely than one in England to be caught 

and convicted (below, and figures

25-30 of the report)

 courts in the United States are generally more likely to sentence a convicted

offender to incarceration (for robbery,

assault, burglary, and motor vehicle

theft, but not murder or rape) than

courts in England (figures 31-36)

 for all offenses (murder, rape,

robbery, assault, burglary, motor

vehicle theft), courts in the United

States sentence convicted offenders to

longer periods of incarceration than

courts in England (below, and figures

49-54 of the report)

 for all offenses (murder, rape,

robbery, assault, burglary, motor

vehicle theft), the length of time in

confinement before being released is

longer for incarcerated offenders in the

United States than in England (figures

55-60)

 the fraction of the sentence served

before release is generally about the

same in the United States and England

(figures 61-66).

Since 1981 —

 an offender's risk of being caught,

convicted, and incarcerated has been

rising in the United States but falling in

England (below, and figures 43-48 of

the report)

 sentences for serious crime generally

have not been getting longer in the

United States, while in England

sentences generally have been getting

longer for violent crimes (figures 49-54)

 in general, the length of time in

confinement before release has not

been rising in the United States but it

has been rising for violent crimes in

England (murder, rape, and robbery)

(figures 55-60)

 the fraction of the sentence served

before release has not been showing

any clear general trend in the United

States, while in England the sentence

fraction served has been staying fairly

stable for murder, rape and robbery,

but has been dropping for assault,

burglary, and motor vehicle theft

(figures 61-66)

 the risk of criminal punishment has

been rising in the United States and

falling in England (figures 67-72). 

iv Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

1981 1986 1991

0

100

200

300

1995

Rape convictions per 1,000 alleged rapists

England

United States

1981 1986 1991 1996

0

10

20

30

Burglary: Police-recorded crime rate

per 1,000 population

United States

England

1981 1986 1991

0

48

96

144

192

240

288

Average incarceration sentence imposed on

convicted murderers, in months

1995

England

United States

1981 1986 1991

0

5

10

15

Number of incarcerated motor vehicle thieves

per 1,000 alleged vehicle thieves

1995

United States

England
Crime rates from victim surveys 

Crime rates from victim surveys 1
2 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

Figure 4

For additional information on these graphs, see the section labeled Notes on figures 1-82.

Figure 1

1981 1986 1991 1996

0

10

20

30

England

United States

Motor vehicle theft: Survey crime rate

per 1,000 households

1981 1986 1991 1996

0

2

4

6

8

Robbery: Survey crime rate per 1,000 population

United States

England

1981 1986 1991 1996

0

3

6

9

12

15

18

21

Assault: Survey crime rate per 1,000 population

United States

England

Figure 2

Figure 3

1981 1986 1991 1996

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Burglary: Survey crime rate

per 1,000 households

United States

England
One of the best ways to determine the

level of serious crime in a country is

through crime victim surveys. In these

surveys of the general public, samples

of persons are asked whether they had

been victimized by crime in the recent

past. Interviewers ask about all crime,

whether reported to police or not.

National crime victim surveys are

conducted in both the United States

and England (including Wales). 

In 1995 —

 survey-estimated robberies totaled

1.1 million in the United States and

313,000 in England

 survey-estimated assaults totaled 1.9

million in the United States and 823,000

in England

 survey-estimated burglaries totaled

4.8 million in the United States and 1.8

million in England

 survey-estimated motor vehicle thefts

totaled 1.1 million in the United States

and 1⁄2 million in England.

The higher volume of crime in the

United States is due, at least in part,

to the greater population size of the

United States. A more meaningful

comparison is between the crime

rates of the two countries.

According to victim surveys, which

country has higher crime rates?

 In 1995 (the latest year that could be

compared), serious crime rates

measured in victim surveys were all

higher in England than in the United

States (statistically significant at the

95% confidence level).

According to 1995 crime victim surveys,

the —

 English robbery victimization rate was

1.4 times the U.S. rate (7.6 per 1,000

population versus 5.3) (figure 1)

 English assault victimization rate was

2.3 times the U.S. rate (20.0 versus

8.8) (figure 2)

 English burglary victimization rate was

1.7 times the U.S. rate (82.9 per 1,000

households versus 47.5) (figure 3)

 English motor vehicle theft victimization rate was 2.2 times the U.S. rate

(23.6 versus 10.8) (figure 4).

According to national surveys of

crime victims, is the crime rate

increasing or decreasing in each

country?

 U.S. crime rates as measured in

victim surveys generally (robbery,

assault, and motor vehicle theft) fell in

the early 1980's, rose thereafter until

around 1993, and then fell again

(figures 1, 2, and 4). For survey

estimated assault, burglary, and motor

vehicle theft, the latest U.S. rates

(1996) are the lowest recorded in the

16-year period since 1981. By

comparison, English crime rates as

measured in victim surveys all rose.

For robbery and assault, the latest

English rates (1995) are the highest

recorded since 1981 (figures 1-4). 

Comparing 1981 crime rates from victim

surveys to rates for 1995 (the latest

year that U.S. and English surveys

have in common), the rate of victimization from —

 robbery rose 81% in England (4.2 per

1,000 population rising to 7.6), but fell

28% in the United States (7.4 dropping

to 5.3) (figure 1)

 assault rose 53% in England (13.1

rising to 20.0), but declined 27% in the

United States (12.0 dropping to 8.8)

(figure 2)

 burglary doubled in England (40.9 per

1,000 households rising to 82.9), but

was cut in half in the United States

(105.9 declining to 47.5) (figure 3)

 motor vehicle theft rose 51% in

England (15.6 rising to 23.6), but stayed

virtually unchanged in the United States

(10.6 in 1981, 10.8 in 1995) (figure 4).

As a result of different crime trends in

the two countries —

 the U.S. victim survey rate for robbery

was nearly double England's in 1981,

but in 1995 the English robbery survey

rate was 1.4 times America's (figure 1)

 the English victim survey rate for

assault was slightly higher than

America's in 1981, but in 1995 the

English assault survey rate was more

than double America's (figure 2)

 the U.S. victim survey rate for

burglary was more than double

England's in 1981, but in 1995 the

English burglary survey rate was

nearly double America's (figure 3)

 the English victim survey rate for

motor vehicle theft was 1.5 times

America's in 1981, but in 1995 the

English survey rate for vehicle theft was

more than double America's (figure 4).

Crime rates from victim surveys 3
Crime rates from police records 

4 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

Figure 5 

Figure 7

1981 1986 1991 1996

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

Murder: Police-recorded crime rate

per 1,000 population

United States

England

Figure 6 

1981 1986 1991 1996

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Rape: Police-recorded crime rate

per 1,000 female population

United States

England

1981 1986 1991 1996

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

Robbery: Police-recorded crime rate

per 1,000 population

United States

England

Figure 8

1981 1986 1991 1996

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

Assault: Police-recorded crime rate

per 1,000 population

United States

England

Figure 9

1981 1986 1991 1996

0

10

20

30

Burglary: Police-recorded crime rate

per 1,000 population

United States

England

Figure 10

1981 1986 1991 1996

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Motor vehicle theft: Police-recorded crime rate

per 1,000 population

United States

England

For additional information on these graphs, see the section labeled Notes on figures 1-82.
Police in both the United States and

England (including Wales) keep annual

statistics on the volume of crime that

comes to their attention. According 

to latest police statistics (1996) —

 police-recorded murders totaled

19,650 in the United States and 681 in

England

 police-recorded rapes totaled 95,770

in the United States and 5,759 in

England

 police-recorded robberies totaled

537,050 in the United States and

74,035 in England

 police-recorded assaults totaled

1,029,810 in the United States and

228,636 in England

 police-recorded burglaries totaled

2,501,500 in the United States and

1,164,583 in England

 police-recorded motor vehicle thefts

totaled 1,395,200 in the United States

and 493,489 in England.

The higher volume of crime recorded by

the police in the United States is due, at

least in part, to the larger population of

the United States (265 million in 1996)

as compared to that of England and

Wales (52 million). A more meaningful

comparison is between the crime rates

of the two countries.

According to latest police statistics

(1996), is the serious crime rate

higher in the United States or

England?

 In 1996, rates of murder, rape, and

robbery recorded by the police were all

higher in the United States than in

England, while assault, burglary, and

motor vehicle theft rates were all higher

in England than in the United States.

According to police statistics for

1996 —

 the U.S. murder rate was 5.7 times

higher than England's (0.074 per 1,000

population versus 0.013) (figure 5)

 the U.S. rape rate was about 3 times

higher than England's (0.71 per 1,000

female population versus 0.22) (figure

6)

 the U.S. robbery rate was 1.4 times

higher than England's (2.0 versus 1.4)

(figure 7)

 the English assault rate was 1.1 times

higher than the U.S. rate (4.4 versus

3.9) (figure 8)

 the English burglary rate was 2.4

times higher than the U.S. rate (22.4

versus 9.4) (figure 9)

 the English motor vehicle theft rate

was 1.8 times higher than the U.S. rate

(9.5 versus 5.3) (figure 10).

According to police statistics, is the

crime rate increasing or decreasing

in each country?

 U.S. crime rates as measured in

police statistics generally (all crimes

except burglary) fell in the early 1980's,

rose thereafter until around 1993, and

then fell again (figures 5-10). For

murder, robbery, and burglary recorded

by the police, the latest U.S. rates

(1996) are the lowest recorded in the

16-year period from 1981 to 1996. By

comparison, crime rates as measured

in English police statistics have all risen

since 1981. For rape, robbery, and

assault recorded by the police, the

latest English rates (1996) are the

highest recorded since 1981 (figures 6,

7, and 8).

 The major exception to the U.S.

pattern is the steady decline in the

burglary rate since 1981. The major

exception to the English pattern is 

downturns since 1993 in rates of

burglary and motor vehicle theft.

According to police statistics —

 the English murder rate rose slightly

after 1981 (0.011 per 1,000 population

in 1981, 0.013 in 1996), while the U.S.

rate fell in the early 1980's, increased

thereafter until 1991, and then fell

again, reaching a 16-year low in 1996

(0.098 in 1981, 0.074 in 1996) (figure 5)

 the English rape rate rose almost

continuously after 1981, reaching a

16-year high in 1996 (0.04 per 1,000

female population in 1981, 0.22 in

1996), while the U.S. rate fell in the

early 1980's, rose thereafter until 1992,

and then fell again, returning in 1996 to

its 1981 level (0.7) (figure 6)

 the English robbery rate rose fairly

continuously since 1981, reaching a

16-year high in 1996 (0.4 in 1981, 1.4

in 1996), while the U.S. rate fell in the

early 1980's, rose thereafter until 1991,

and then fell again, reaching a 16-year

low in 1996 (2.59 in 1981, 2.02 in 1996)

(figure 7)

 the English assault rate rose fairly

continuously since 1981, reaching a

16-year high in 1996 (2.0 in 1981, 4.4 in

1996), while the U.S. rate fell in the

early 1980's, rose thereafter until 1992,

and then fell again (2.9 in 1981, 3.9 in

1996) (figure 8)

 the English burglary rate generally

rose from 1981 to 1993 and fell thereafter (14.5 in 1981, 22.4 in 1996), while

the U.S. rate fell fairly continuously after

1981, reaching a 16-year low in 1996

(16.5 in 1981, 9.4 in 1996) (figure 9)

 the English motor vehicle theft rate

generally rose from 1981 to 1993 and

fell thereafter (6.7 in 1981, 9.5 in 1996),

while the U.S. rate fell in the early

1980's, rose thereafter until 1991, and

then fell again (4.7 in 1981, 5.3 in 1996)

(figure 10).

Crime rates from police records 5
As a result of different crime trends in

the two countries —

 the police-recorded U.S. murder rate

was 8.7 times England's in 1981 but

5.7 times in 1996 (figure 5)

 the police-recorded U.S. rape rate

was 17 times England's in 1981 but 3

times in 1996 (figure 6)

 the police-recorded U.S. robbery rate

was 6 times England's in 1981 but 1.4

times in 1996 (figure 7)

 the police-recorded U.S. assault rate

was 1.5 times England's in 1981, but in

1996 the English assault rate was

slightly higher than America's (figure 8)

 the police-recorded U.S. burglary rate

was slightly higher than England's in

1981, but in 1996 the English burglary

rate was more than double America's

(figure 9)

 the police-recorded English motor

vehicle theft rate went from 1.4 times

America's in 1981 to nearly 2 times in

1996 (figure 10).

6 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96
Reporting of crime to police

 Reporting of crime to police 7
8 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

1981 1986 1991

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Burglary: Percent reported to police

United States

England

1995

Figure 11

1981 1986 1991

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1995

Robbery: Percent reported to police

England

United States

Figure 12

1981 1986 1991

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Assault: Percent reported to police

1995

England

United States

For additional information on these graphs, see the section labeled Notes on figures 1-82.

Figure 13 Figure 14

1981 1986 1991

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

England

United States

Motor vehicle theft: Percent reported to police

1995
The level of crime recorded in police

statistics depends partly on how often

victims report crime to police. Comparisons of police statistics between

countries can be misleading if victims 

in one country call police more often 

than victims in another country.

Information on how often victims (and

others) report crime to police is available from victim surveys. In these

surveys, victims are asked whether 

the police were notified or otherwise

became aware of the crime.

Is serious crime reported to police

more often in the United States or

England (including Wales)?

According to crime victims in 1995, 

the percentage reported to the police

was —

 for robbery not significantly different

between England (57% reported to the

police) and the United States (55%)

(figure 11)

 for assault significantly greater in the

United States (54%) than in England

(40%) (figure 12)

 for burglary significantly greater in

England (66%) than in the United

States (50%) (figure 13)

 for motor vehicle theft not significantly

different between England (98%) and

the United States (88%) (figure 14).

Historically (after 1981) —

 robbery is more often reported to the

U.S. police than the English police

(figure 11)

 assault is more often reported to the

U.S. police than the English police, but

the historical pattern for assault is less

consistent than for other crimes (figure

12)

 burglary is more often reported 

to the English police than to the U.S.

police (figure 13)

 motor vehicle theft is more often

reported to the English police than to

the U.S. police, although the difference

is typically small (figure 14).

Are crimes being reported to police

more often today than in the past?

 Reporting of crime to police is showing no clear trend in either England or

the United States. A possible exception

is English robbery, for which reporting

to police has generally risen since

1983. In 1983, 39% of robberies were

reported to police in England; in 1995,

57% were reported (figure 11).

Reporting of crime to police

 Reporting of crime to police 9
Police recording of crime 

10 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96 

Figure 15

1981 1986 1991

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1995

Robbery: Percent recorded by police

England

United States

Figure 16

1981 1986 1991

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Assault: Percent recorded by police

England

United States

1995

Figure 17

1981 1986 1991

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1995

Burglary: Percent recorded by police

England

United States

Figure 18

1981 1986 1991

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1995

Motor vehicle theft: Percent recorded by police

England United States

For additional information on these graphs, see the section labeled Notes on figures 1-82.
The level of crime recorded in police

statistics depends not only on how often

victims report crimes to police, but also

on how often police record as crimes

the incidents that are reported to them.

Police do not always record as a crime

every allegation that comes to them.

Sometimes police find insufficient

evidence that a crime has occurred.

Alleged crimes go unrecorded because

of poor record keeping. Police also

weed out crimes they do not

consider to be serious.

Comparison of the volume of crime

that victims said they reported to police

during the year with the volume that

police actually recorded that year

reveals how often police record as

crimes those incidents that come to

their attention.

Are police more likely to record

crimes in the United States or

England (including Wales)?

 Compared to police in England, police

in the United States more often record

as crimes those alleged offenses that

are reported to them. 

According to 1995 statistics, of all —

 robberies reported to police, 78%

of U.S. robberies were recorded as

robberies in police statistics, compared

to 35% of English robberies (figure 15)

 assaults reported to police, virtually all

U.S. assaults were recorded as

assaults in police statistics, compared

to 53% of English assaults (figure 16)

 burglaries reported to police, 72% of

U.S. burglaries were officially recorded

by police, compared to 55% of English

burglaries (figure 17)

 motor vehicle thefts reported to police,

virtually all U.S. vehicle thefts were

officially recorded in police statistics,

compared to 83% of English vehicle

thefts (figure 18).

Are police today recording more of

the violent crime that comes to their

attention?

 A growing fraction of the violent

crime reported to police is being

officially recorded in both the United

States and England.

From 1981 to 1995, the percentage

of reported crimes that were officially

recorded in police statistics —

 rose from 65% to 78% for U.S.

robberies, and from 24% to 35% for

English robberies (figure 15)

 rose from 61% to virtually 100% for

U.S. assaults, and from 41% to 53% for

English assaults (figure 16).

Are police today recording more of

the property crime that comes to

their attention?

 A growing fraction of the burglaries

reported to police are being officially

recorded in the United States. In

England, the trend is in the opposite

direction, with a progressively smaller

percentage of property crimes being

officially recorded since 1981.

From 1981 to 1995, the percentage of

reported crimes that were officially

counted in police statistics —

 rose from 58% to 72% for U.S. burglaries, but fell from 70% to 55% for

English burglaries (figure 17)

 remained at around 95% for U.S.

motor vehicle thefts, but fell from virtually 100% to 83% for English motor

vehicle thefts (figure 18).

In both England and the United

States, police are recording a

growing fraction of the violent

crimes (robberies and assaults)

reported to them. U.S. police

recorded 63% in 1981 and 93% in

1995. English police recorded 37%

in 1981 and 46% in 1995, bringing

England in 1995 to about the level

the United States was in 1973 (44%).

What changes in policing might

explain the trend in both countries

toward more complete recording

and more formal handling of violent

crimes that come to police

attention?

1. Police have become more

professional.

2. Police operations have become

more computerized.

3. Calls to police are increasingly being

electronically recorded, creating an

audit trail. Consequently, police are

keeping closer track of responses to

calls.

4. Police have become increasingly

responsive to demands that domestic

violence be handled more formally and

be treated more seriously. In the

United States, for example, a growing

number of States now mandate arrests

in all domestic assaults — misdemeanor as well as felony. In States

where arrest is not mandatory, new

laws now permit police to make

probable cause arrests even when the

police themselves have not witnessed

the violence. Previous laws had

required that the victim file a formal

complaint when no police had

witnessed the crime.

5. Society has perhaps become more

litigious. In response to the growing

threat of civil suit, police have adopted

what might be called “defensive

policing.” In defensive policing, the

actions police take toward victims,

witnesses, suspects, and the general

public are closely managed by formal

procedural rules established by police

departments in part to protect police

from suits. Among other things, the

rules define situations in which police

have a duty to act. Fewer decisions are

left to police discretion.

Police recording of crime 11
Is the violent crime rate higher in the

United States or England?

 Crime rates are available from two

different sources — from victim surveys

and from police statistics — and

sometimes the answer depends

on which source is compared.

According to the latest comparable

figures on violent crime (1995), victim

surveys indicated higher violent crime

rates in England (including Wales) than

in the United States, while police statistics indicated the opposite:

 According to victim surveys, the

1995 robbery rate was higher in

England than in the United States (7.6

versus 5.3) (figure 1), but according to

police statistics the robbery rate was

higher in the United States than in

England (2.2 versus 1.3) (figure 7).

 According to victim surveys, the

1995 assault rate was much higher in

England than in the United States (20.0

versus 8.8) (figure 2), but police statistics showed a slightly higher assault

rate in the United States than in

England (4.2 versus 3.9) (figure 8).

Why did 1995 police statistics

indicate higher violent crime rates in

the United States than in England,

while 1995 victim surveys indicated

higher violent crime rates in England

than in the United States?

 If robbery were more often reported to

police in the United States than in

England, that might help to explain why

the U.S. rate of robberies from police

statistics is higher than England's. But

robberies were not more often reported

to the U.S. (55% reported) than to the

English (57% reported) police (figure

11). However, U.S. police did more

often than the English police record

robberies that came to their attention.

Of all robberies reported to police in the

United States in 1995, an estimated

78% were ultimately recorded as

robberies in police statistics (figure 15).

Of those reported to English police, a

much smaller proportion — 35% — was

officially recorded as robberies.

 The assault rate from police statistics

is higher in the United States than in

England for two reasons. One is that

assaults in 1995 were more often

reported to police in the United States

(54%) than in England (40%) (figure

12). The other is that, compared to

police in England, police in the United

States recorded a higher proportion of

assaults that came to their attention in

1995 (virtually all in the United States

versus 53% in England) (figure 16).

In 1996 the rate of robbery recorded

by police was higher in the United

States (2.0 per 1,000 population)

than in England (1.4 per 1,000 population) (figure 7). Is that because

American police recorded a greater

fraction of the robberies that were

reported to them than English

police?

As noted above, in 1995 American

police recorded 78% of all robberies

reported to them, while English police

recorded 35% (figure 15). In other

words, American police were about

twice as likely as English police to

record a robbery coming to their

attention in 1995. Assuming the same

was true for rates of robbery recorded

by police in 1996, the English rate is not

directly comparable to the American

rate because American police recorded

a greater fraction than English police of

the robberies reported to them. Had

English police recorded the same

fraction of robberies that were reported

to them as had American police, the

English robbery rate would have been

2.8 per 1,000 population, exceeding the

American rate of 2.0 robberies per

1,000.

Is the property crime rate higher in

the United States or England?

Both victim surveys and police statistics

for 1995 indicated higher property crime

rates in England than in the United

States.

 For the property offense of burglary,

the rate from victim surveys was higher

in England than in the United States

(82.9 per 1,000 households versus

47.5) (figure 3), and the rate from police

statistics was also higher in England

than in the United States (23.9 per

1,000 population versus 9.9) (figure 9).

 For the property offense of motor

vehicle theft, the rate from victim

surveys was higher in England than in

the United States (23.6 per 1,000

households versus 10.8) (figure 4), and

the rate from police statistics was also

higher in England than in the United

States (9.8 per 1,000 population versus

5.6) (figure 10).

Victim surveys versus police records

12 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96
Are trends in crime rates derived

from victim surveys similar to trends

in police-recorded crime rates in

both countries?

 In England (including Wales), 1981-

1995 crime trends calculated from

police statistics corresponded closely

to 1981-1995 crime trends obtained

from victim surveys. By contrast, in

the United States for the period 1981

to 1996, the correspondence was less

close.

Trends in police-recorded crime rates

can be compared to trends in survey

rates for robbery, assault, burglary,

and motor vehicle theft.

In England from 1981 to 1995 —

 the rise in the police-recorded robbery rate corresponded closely to the

rise in the robbery rate as estimated

from victim surveys (r = + .91) (table 1)

 the rise in the police-recorded assault

rate corresponded closely to the rise

in the survey assault rate (r = + .88)

(table 1)

 the rise in the police-recorded

burglary rate corresponded closely

to the rise in the survey-estimated

burglary rate (r = + .95) (table 1)

 the rise in the police-recorded vehicle

theft rate corresponded closely to the

rise in the vehicle theft rate as documented in victim surveys (r = + .98)

(table 1).

In the United States from 1981 to

1996 —

 the rise in the police-recorded robbery

rate corresponded fairly well to the rise

documented in victim surveys

(r = + .56) (table 1)

 changes in the police-recorded

assault rate did not correspond at all

to changes in the assault rate as estimated from victim surveys (r = - .15)

(table 1)

 a striking correspondence existed

between the drop in the policerecorded burglary rate and the drop

in the survey-estimated burglary rate

(r = + .97) (table 1)

 changes in the police-recorded vehicle theft rate corresponded closely to

vehicle theft rate changes documented

in victim surveys (r = + .86) (table 1).

Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96 13

**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

*Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

correlations between a victim-survey crime rate and a police-recorded crime rate, 6 years of data spanning the period 1981 to 1995.

spanning the period 1981 to 1996; correlations between two victim-survey crime rates, 6 years of data spanning the period 1981 to 1995;

the period 1981 to 1996. English correlations between two police-recorded crime rates are based on 16 years of data

The table shows Pearson correlation coefficients. U.S. correlations are all based on 16 years of data spanning

Note: For rape, rates are per 1,000 female population; for all other crimes, rates are per 1,000 population or per 1,000 households.

Shaded = correlations between English crime rate trends

Unshaded = correlations between U.S. crime rate trends

Motor vehicle theft .816* .944** .860* .955** .965** .982** .597 .771 .899* X

Burglary .752 .968** .965** .967** .951** .852* .809 .862* X -.227

Assault .787 .905* .952** .880* .784 .708 .953** X .474 .249

Robbery .624 .811* .912* .780 .677 .536 X .700** .601* .207

Victim survey estimated rate of — 

Motor vehicle theft .726** .828** .786** .832** .955** X -.183 -.078 -.588* .861**

Burglary .715** .829** .851** .812** X -.419 .540* .418 .969** -.081

Assault .691** .988** .929** X -.692** .916** -.255 -.145 -.807** .705**

Robbery .687** .964** X .488 .185 .619* .558* .414 .064 .825**

Rape .725** X .688** .849** -.354 .874** -.134 .083 -.511* .771**

Murder X .565* .968** .337 .352 .493 .653** .539* .246 .770**

Police-recorded rate of —

Murder Rape Robbery Assault Burglary theft Robbery Assault Burglary theft

vehicle vehicle

Motor Motor

Police recorded rate of — Victim survey estimated rate of —

Table 1. Correlation between trends in crime rates as measured by data from police records and victim surveys

in the United States and England, from 1981 to 1995/96
Convictions per 1,000 population

14 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

1981 1986 1991

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

1995

Rape conviction rate per 1,000 male population

England

United States

Figure 20

1981 1986 1991

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

1995

Murder conviction rate per 1,000 population

England

United States

Figure 19

Figure 21

1981 1986 1991

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

1995

Robbery conviction rate per 1,000 population

England

United States

Figure 22

1981 1986 1991

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1995

Assault conviction rate per 1,000 population

England

United States

Figure 23

1981 1986 1991

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

1995

Burglary conviction rate per 1,000 population

England

United States

Figure 24

1981 1986 1991

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1995

Motor vehicle theft conviction rate per 1,000 population

England

United States

For additional information on these graphs, see the section labeled Notes on figures 1-82.
Depending on the circumstances, a

person charged in the United States

with a serious crime can be prosecuted

in a State court, a Federal court, or a

juvenile court. Likewise in England

(including Wales), depending on the

circumstances, the case can go to the

Crown Court, a magistrate court, or a

juvenile court (a specialized magistrate

court).

U.S. Federal courts treat persons 18

years of age and older as adults. In

the vast majority of States, a defendant

is considered an adult once he or she

reaches the age of 18; in a small number of States, age 17 is the beginning

of adulthood; in a few States it is age

16. In England, adulthood in the eyes

of the law begins at age 18. Before

1992, it was age 17.

In both countries, a juvenile charged

with or previously found delinquent of

a serious crime can be prosecuted in

the adult court rather than the juvenile

court. In America, State and Federal

laws define special circumstances in

which adult prosecution of a juvenile is

automatic (for example, a juvenile

charged with murder, rape, or armed

robbery), and circumstances in which

such prosecution is at the discretion of

either the juvenile court or the prosecutor. English law requires that all

juveniles charged with homicide be

prosecuted in the Crown Court (the

adult court) rather than the juvenile

court (called the youth court in England). If the crime is not a homicide

but is one that is punishable by at least

14 years confinement for an adult (for

example, household burglary), or the

crime is carried out with an adult

accomplice, the English juvenile court,

at its discretion, can commit the juvenile for trial in the Crown Court. Commitment for trial in the Crown Court is

distinguished from commitment for sentencing in the Crown Court. When a

juvenile is convicted in the English

juvenile court but the magistrate 

believes the juvenile deserves a longer

sentence than the maximum that the

juvenile court can impose (12 months),

the juvenile can be committed to the

Crown Court for sentencing. In such

a case the maximum sentence the

Crown Court can impose is 2 years.

The total number of convictions (juvenile and adult combined) in the United

States is not directly comparable to the

English total because the U.S. population is far larger than the English population. Naturally the United States has

more convictions: it has roughly five

times more people than England. A

more meaningful comparison is between conviction rates per 1,000 population, a measure that takes into

account the difference in population

size. 

The U.S. conviction rate per 1,000

population is higher than England's

for murder, rape, and robbery. Is

that because the United States has

higher rates of victimization from

murder, rape, and robbery? Or

because the criminal justice system

in the United States is more likely

than the English system to catch and

convict murderers, rapists, and

robbers?

 The higher U.S. conviction rate for

murder is explained entirely by the

higher U.S. murder rate. According to

the most recent statistics on crime

(1996) and the justice system (1994 in

the United States, 1995 in England),

the U.S. murder rate is nearly six times

the English murder rate (figure 5).

Correspondingly, the U.S. murder

conviction rate per 1,000 population is

nearly six times England's (.059 versus

.010) (figure 19).

 The higher U.S. conviction rate for

rape is attributable both to the higher

U.S. police-recorded rape rate and to

a United States criminal justice system

that catches and convicts rapists at a

higher rate than England’s system.

According to the most recent statistics

on crime (1996) and the justice system

(1994 in the United States, 1995 in

England), the U.S. police-recorded

rape rate is three times England's

(figure 5), but the U.S. rape conviction

rate is over eight times England's (.212

versus .025) (figure 20), indicating that

a rape in the United States is more

likely to lead to conviction than one in

England.

 The higher U.S. conviction rate for

robbery cannot be attributed to a higher

U.S. robbery victimization rate since,

according to the latest figures, the U.S.

robbery victimization rate is lower than

England's. Instead the reason for the

higher U.S. robbery conviction rate is

that the English criminal justice system

is less likely than America's to catch

and convict robbers. According to the

most recent statistics on robbery victimization (1995) and the criminal justice

system (1994 in the United States,

1995 in England), the English robbery

victimization rate is 1.4 times the U.S.

rate (figure 1), but the U.S. robbery

conviction rate is nearly 3 times

England's (.30 versus .11) (figure 21),

indicating that a robbery in the United

States is more likely to lead to conviction than one in England.

The English conviction rate per 1,000

population is higher than the U.S.

conviction rate for assault, burglary,

and motor vehicle theft. Is that

because England has higher rates

of victimization from assault,

burglary, and motor vehicle theft?

Or because the criminal justice

system in England is more likely

than the U.S. system to catch and

convict assaulters, burglars, and

motor vehicle thieves?

 The higher English conviction rate

for assault is attributable to a higher

English assault victimization rate, not 

Convictions per 1,000 population 15
to different performance by the English

justice system. According to the most

recent statistics on assault victimization

(1995), the English assault victimization

rate is 2.3 times the U.S. rate (figure 2).

However, according to the most recent

conviction statistics (1994 in the United

States, 1995 in England), the English

assault conviction rate is 1.4 times the

U.S. assault conviction rate (.61 versus

.44) (figure 22), indicating that an

assault in England is less likely to lead

to conviction than one in the United

States. 

 The higher English conviction rate

for burglary is attributable to a higher

English crime rate for burglary, not to

different performance by the English

justice system. According to the most

recent statistics on burglary victimization (1995), the English burglary victimization rate is 1.8 times the U.S. rate

(figure 3). However, according to the

most recent conviction statistics (1994

in the United States, 1995 in England),

the English burglary conviction rate is

1.1 times the U.S. burglary conviction

rate (.78 versus .73) (figure 23), indicating that a burglary in England is less

likely to lead to conviction than one in

the United States.

 The higher English conviction rate for

motor vehicle theft is attributable to a

higher English crime rate for motor

vehicle theft, not to different performance by the English justice system. 

According to the most recent statistics

on motor vehicle theft victimization

(1995), the English motor vehicle theft

victimization rate is 2.2 times the U.S.

rate (figure 4). However, according to

the most recent conviction statistics

(1994 in the United States, 1995 in

England), the English motor vehicle

theft conviction rate is 1.6 times the

U.S. conviction rate (.34 versus .21)

(figure 24), indicating that a motor

vehicle theft in England is less likely

to lead to conviction than one in the

United States.

Have conviction rates per 1,000

population been rising or falling

in each country?

From 1981 to the latest year of conviction data (1994 in the United States,

1995 in England) —

 The U.S. murder conviction rate rose

steeply (.045 in 1981 rising to .059 in

1994), while the English rate rose

modestly (.009 in 1981 rising to .010

in 1995) (figure 19). Unlike the rise in

the U.S. conviction rate, the rise in

the English conviction rate is linked to

an increase in the country's murder

rate.

 The U.S. rape conviction rate rose

sharply (.099 in 1981 rising to .212 in

1995), while the English rate rose

comparatively modestly (.015 in 1981

rising to .025 in 1995) (figure 20).

Unlike the rise in the U.S. conviction

rate, the rise in the English conviction

rate could partly be explained by an

increase in the country's rape rate,

although the increase in the English

rape rate (more than 5 times) was far

higher than the modest increase in the

rape conviction rate.

 Both the U.S. (.28 in 1981 rising to .30

in 1994) and the English (.10 in 1981

rising to .11 in 1995) robbery conviction

rates increased slightly (figure 21). The

U.S. conviction rate modestly rose while

the robbery victimization rate fell. In

England, by contrast, the conviction

rate rose modestly while the robbery

victimization rate soared.

 The U.S. assault conviction rate rose

sharply (.16 in 1981 rising to .44 in

1994), while the English rate fell sharply

(1.12 in 1981 falling to .61 in 1995)

(figure 22). The rise in the U.S. 

conviction rate was accompanied by a

decline in the assault victimization rate.

By contrast, the decline in the English

conviction rate was accompanied by a

steep rise in the assault victimization

rate.

 Both the U.S. (.97 in 1981 falling to

.73 in 1994) and the English (1.69 in

1981 falling to .78 in 1995) burglary

conviction rates fell, and the English

rate fell more than the U.S. rate (figure

23). The falling English rate was

accompanied by a steep rise in the

burglary victimization rate. The falling

U.S. conviction rate was accompanied

by a steep decline in the burglary victimization rate. However, the conviction

rate decline was less steep than the

victimization rate decline, indicating that

the risk of burglary conviction was

actually rising in the United States

during the period. 

 The U.S. motor vehicle theft conviction rate rose sharply (.07 in 1981 rising

to .21 in 1994), while the English rate

fell sharply (.83 in 1981 falling to .34 in

1995) (figure 24). The rising U.S.

conviction rate was accompanied by a

stable victimization rate for vehicle theft.

By contrast, the falling English conviction rate was accompanied by a rising

victimization rate for vehicle theft.

16 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96
Convictions per 1,000 offenders

Convictions per 1,000 offenders 17
18 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

Figure 25

1981 1986 1991

0

200

400

600

800

1995

Murder convictions per 1,000 alleged murderers

England

United States

Figure 26

1981 1986 1991

0

100

200

300

1995

Rape convictions per 1,000 alleged rapists

England

United States

Figure 27

1981 1986 1991

0

10

20

30

1995

Robbery convictions per 1,000 alleged robbers

England

United States

Figure 28

1981 1986 1991

0

20

40

60

1995

Assault convictions per 1,000 alleged assaulters

England

United States

Figure 29

1981 1986 1991

0

10

20

30

1995

Burglary convictions per 1,000 alleged burglars

England

United States

Figure 30

1981 1986 1991

0

20

40

60

1995

Motor vehicle theft convictions per 1,000

alleged vehicle thieves

England

United States

For additional information on these graphs, see the section labeled Notes on figures 1-82.
Is a person committing a crime in

the United States more likely or less

likely to be caught and convicted

than one committing a crime in

England?

According to latest conviction figures

(1994 in the United States, 1995 in

England) —

 with the exception of murder, a

person committing a crime in the United

States is more likely to be caught and

convicted than one committing crime in

England (including Wales).

The number of persons convicted in

1994 of —

 murder for every 1,000 alleged

murderers was 487 in the United States

and 555 in England, indicating that a

murderer's risk of conviction is slightly

greater in England than in the United

States (figure 25)

 rape for every 1,000 alleged rapists

was 188 in the United States and 100 in

England, indicating that a rapist's risk of

conviction in the United States is nearly

double that in England (figure 26)

 robbery for every 1,000 alleged

robbers was 22 in the United States

and 6 in England, indicating that a

robber's risk of conviction in the United

States is nearly four times that in

England (figure 27)

 assault for every 1,000 alleged

assaulters was 25 in the United States

and 14 in England, indicating that an

assaulter's risk of conviction in the

United States is nearly double that in

England (figure 28)

 burglary for every 1,000 alleged

burglars was 14 in the United States

and 6 in England, indicating that a

burglar's risk of conviction in the United

States is more than double that in

England (figure 29)

 motor vehicle theft for every 1,000

alleged vehicle thieves was 18 in the

United States and 12 in England,

indicating that a vehicle thief's risk of

conviction is 50% greater in the United

States than in England (figure 30).

Is an offender's risk of being caught

and convicted rising or falling in

each country?

 An offender's risk of being caught and

convicted is rising in the United States

but falling in England.

From 1981 to the latest year of conviction data (1994 in the United States,

1995 in England), the number of

persons convicted of —

 murder per 1,000 alleged murderers

has risen 43% in the United States (340

in 1981 rising to 487 in 1994) but fallen

12% in England (631 in 1981 falling to

555 in 1995) (figure 25)

 rape per 1,000 alleged rapists has

risen 94% in the United States (97 in

1981 rising to 188 in 1994) but fallen

63% in England (272 in 1981 falling to

100 in 1995) (figure 26)

 robbery per 1,000 alleged robbers has

risen 29% in the United States (17 in

1981 rising to 22 in 1994) but fallen

40% in England (10 in 1981 falling to 6

in 1995) (figure 27)

 assault per 1,000 alleged assaulters

has nearly tripled in the United States 

(9 in 1981 rising to 25 in 1994) but

fallen 66% in England (41 in 1981

falling to 14 in 1995) (figure 28)

 burglary per 1,000 alleged burglars

has risen 40% in the United States (10

in 1981 rising to 14 in 1994) but fallen

78% in England (27 in 1981 falling to 6

in 1995) (figure 29)

 motor vehicle theft per 1,000 alleged

vehicle thieves has more than doubled

in the United States (7 in 1981 rising to

18 in 1994) but fallen 77% in England

(53 in 1981 falling to 12 in 1995) (figure

30).

Are persons committing a crime

unlikely to be caught and convicted

in both countries?

In both countries, persons committing

a crime are unlikely to be caught and

convicted. The major exception is

murder.

According to latest statistics (derived

from figures 25-30 covering 1994 in the

United States, 1995 in England), the

likelihood of conviction was about —

 50% for murder in both countries

 20% for rape in the United States and

10% in England

 2% for robbery in the United States

and less than 1% in England

 2% for assault in the United States

and 1% in England

 1% for burglary in the United States

and less than 1% in England

 2% for motor vehicle theft in the

United States and 1% in England.

However, these estimates must be

interpreted cautiously. For example,

the rape conviction likelihood is inflated

because it is based on the number of

convictions divided not by the total

number of rapes but by just the number

recorded by police. 

In other respects, all of these estimates

(including rape) are conservative

because, to be precise, the data used

to calculate them estimate the likelihood

of an offense leading to conviction, not

the likelihood of an offender being

convicted sooner or later. To estimate

the likelihood of an offender being

convicted, the number of different 

persons convicted is divided by the

Convictions per 1,000 offenders

Convictions per 1,000 offenders 19
number of different persons committing

the crime. But in available data, persons who are convicted more than

once or who commit crime more than

once during the year are counted over

and over again.

Such overcounting is particularly prevalent in the data on the number of

persons committing crime because the

typical offender commits more than one

crime over the course of a year (the

typical violent offender commits from 2

to 4 violent crimes per year and the

typical property offender commits from

5 to 10 per year according to Blumstein

and others, 1986, page 4).

Some adjustment can be made for

their overcounting. For example, if the

typical robber in the United States

commits 4 robberies per year, the likelihood that a person committing robbery

will be convicted of robbery during the

year is nearly 8%, not 2%.

At first glance that might seem like a

small difference but a 1 in 12 chance of

conviction (the equivalent of 8%) is

considerably greater than a 1 in 50

chance (the equivalent of 2%). Furthermore it should be stressed that,

despite the adjustment, the 8% is still

conservative because it is the probability that a robber will be convicted just

of robbery during the year. Obviously

the likelihood that a robber will be

convicted of robbery or some other

offense during the year is greater than

just the probability that he will be convicted of robbery. How much greater is

not known but for two reasons it is

probably substantial.

One reason has to do with the practice,

common both in England and the

United States, of downgrading offenses.

Because of downgrading, when persons are convicted of a crime, the crime

they are convicted of is often less

serious than the one for which they

were originally arrested and charged (in

the United States, downgrading occurs 

in 40% of violent crime convictions and

25% of nonviolent convictions according to Reaves, 1998, tables 26 and 27).

The other reason is related to the fact

that persons who commit a crime

typically commit more than one a year.

Importantly the crimes they commit

typically differ from one another. For

example, a man committing a robbery

one day may commit a burglary the

next. While he might not be caught for

the robbery, he might be caught and

convicted for the burglary. Consequently his chance of conviction is

greater than just the chance he takes

of being convicted of the robbery.

Over periods longer than a year, the

probability of an offender being 

convicted can be quite high. For

example, Farrington (1989, pages

339-423) found that 58% of English

males who admitted to committing

burglary were eventually caught and

convicted of burglary at least once

before reaching age 33.

20 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96
Percent sentenced to incarceration

Percent sentenced to incarceration 21
22 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

1981 1986 1991

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1995

Percent of convicted assaulters sentenced

to incarceration

England

United States

Figure 34

1981 1986 1991

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1995

Percent of convicted robbers sentenced

to incarceration

England

United States

Figure 33

1981 1986 1991

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1995

Percent of convicted rapists sentenced

to incarceration

England

United States

Figure 32

1981 1986 1991

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1995

Percent of convicted murderers sentenced

to incarceration

England

United States

Figure 31

Figure 35

1981 1986 1991

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1995

Percent of convicted burglars sentenced

to incarceration

England

United States

Figure 36

1981 1986 1991

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1995

Percent of convicted motor vehicle thieves

sentenced to incarceration

England

United States

For additional information on these graphs, see the section labeled Notes on figures 1-82.
In the United States, various types of

institutions are used to incarcerate

persons convicted of crime. There are

State prisons and local jails for adults

convicted in State courts; Federal

prisons for persons convicted in

Federal courts; and various types of

residential institutions (for example,

training schools) for juveniles found

delinquent in juvenile courts.

In England (including Wales), adults

are incarcerated in either prisons (for

persons ages 21 and over) or young

offender institutions (for persons ages

15-20). Juveniles in England are incarcerated in two types of facilities: those

that are exclusively for juveniles

(secure accommodation for juveniles),

and those for persons under age 21

(young offender institutions). Unlike

the United States, where juveniles and

adults are kept in separate institutions,

English young offender institutions

confine juveniles and adults together.

This report focuses only on incarceration, but there are many other

sentences that offenders receive in

both countries, such as probation,

community service, and fines.

Are courts in the two countries

equally likely to sentence a

convicted offender to incarceration?

 Courts in the United States are more

likely to sentence an offender to incarceration than courts in England. Two

exceptions are offenders convicted of

murder or rape.

According to the latest court figures

(1994 in the United States, 1995 in

England) —

 96% of convicted U.S. murderers and

a nearly identical percentage of English

murderers (94%) were sentenced to

incarceration (figure 31)

 82% of convicted U.S. rapists were

sentenced to incarceration, which is

less than the 95% of English rapists

(figure 32)

 79% of convicted U.S. robbers

and 67% of English robbers were

sentenced to incarceration (figure 33)

 62% of convicted U.S. assaulters

and 27% of English assaulters were

sentenced to incarceration (figure 34)

 60% convicted U.S. burglars and 38%

of English burglars were sentenced to

incarceration (figure 35)

 55% of convicted U.S. motor vehicle

thieves and 30% of English motor

vehicle thieves were sentenced to

incarceration (figure 36).

Are courts in both countries

sentencing relatively more convicted

offenders to incarceration today than

in the past?

 In the United States, the percentage

of convicted offenders receiving an

incarceration sentence has been fairly

stable since 1981. In England, the

percentage has been less stable but

has shown no long-term trend.

However, since 1991 the percentage

receiving an incarceration sentence has

been rising in England for murder,

assault, burglary, and motor vehicle

theft.

From 1981 to the latest year of

sentencing data (1994 in the United

States, 1995 in England), the percentage of convicted offenders receiving

an incarceration sentence has been —

 staying at about 95% for U.S. murder

while increasing to 94% for English

murders (up from 85% in 1981 and up

from 89% in 1991) (figure 31)

 staying at about 82% for U.S. rape

and staying at about 95% for English

rape (figure 32)

 staying at about 80% for U.S. robbery

while falling somewhat to 67% for

English robbery (down from 74% in

1981 and 79% in 1987) (figure 33)

 staying at about 60% for U.S. assault

while rising to 27% for English assault

(up from 13% in 1981 and up from 15%

in 1991) (figure 34)

 rising slightly to 60% for U.S. burglary

(up from 54% in 1981) and rising to

38% for English burglary (up from 29%

in 1981 and up from 28% in 1991)

(figure 35)

 staying at about 50% for U.S. motor

vehicle theft and rising to 30% for

English vehicle theft (up from 25% in

1981 and up from 14% in 1991) (figure

36).

Percent sentenced to incarceration 23
Incarcerations per 1,000 population

24 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

Figure 37

1981 1986 1991

0.000

0.010

0.020

0.030

0.040

0.050

0.060

1995

Murder incarceration rate per 1,000 population

England

United States

Figure 38

1981 1986 1991

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

1995

Rape incarceration rate per 1,000 male population

England

United States

Figure 39 Figure 40

1981 1986 1991

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

1995

Assault incarceration rate per 1,000 population

England

United States

Figure 41 Figure 42

1981 1986 1991

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

1995

Motor vehicle theft incarceration rate

per 1,000 population

England

United States

1981 1986 1991

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

1995

Burglary incarceration rate per 1,000 population

England

United States

1981 1986 1991

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

1995

Robbery incarceration rate per 1,000 population

England

United States
The total number of convicted offenders

(juvenile and adult combined) sentenced to incarceration in the United

States is not directly comparable to the

English total because of the vast difference in the number of people that live

in the two countries. Naturally the

United States incarcerates more people

than England (including Wales): far

more people live in the United States.

A more meaningful comparison is

between incarceration rates per 1,000

population, a measure that takes into

account the difference in population

size. 

The U.S. incarceration rate per 1,000

population is higher than England's

incarceration rate. Is that because

the United States has higher crime

rates? Or because the criminal

justice system in the United States is

more likely than the English system

to catch and convict criminals? Or

because convicted criminals in the

United States are more likely to be

incarcerated?

 The higher U.S. incarceration rate for

murder is explained entirely by the

higher U.S. murder rate. According to

the most recent statistics on the murder

rate (1996) and the justice system

response (1994 in the United States,

1995 in England), the U.S. murder rate

is nearly six times the English murder

rate (figure 5). Correspondingly, the

U.S. murder incarceration rate per

1,000 population is nearly six times

England's (.056 versus .010) (figure

37).

 The higher U.S. incarceration rate for

rape is attributable both to the higher

U.S. police-recorded rape rate and to a

United States criminal justice system

that is more likely than England's to

catch and convict rapists. According to

the most recent statistics on crime

(1996) and the justice system (1994 in

the United States, 1995 in England), the

U.S. police-recorded rape rate is three

times England's (figure 6), but the U.S.

rape incarceration rate is seven times

England's (.175 versus .024) (figure

38), indicating that a rape in the United

States is more likely to lead to incarceration than one in England. However, the higher U.S. incarceration rate

for rape is not a function of a higher

probability of an incarceration sentence

being imposed following a conviction.

 The higher U.S. incarceration rate for

robbery cannot be attributed to a higher

U.S. robbery victimization rate since,

according to the latest figures, the U.S.

robbery victimization rate is lower than

England's. Instead the reason for the

higher U.S. robbery incarceration rate is

that the United States criminal justice

system is more likely than England's to

catch, convict, and incarcerate robbers.

According to the most recent statistics

on crime (1995) and the criminal justice

system (1994 in the United States,

1995 in England), the English robbery

victimization rate is 1.4 times the U.S.

rate (figure 1), but the U.S. robbery

incarceration rate is 3 times England's

(.23 versus .08) (figure 39), indicating

that a robbery in the United States is

more likely to lead to incarceration than

one in England. This is largely because

a robbery in the United States is more

likely to lead to a conviction.

 The higher U.S. incarceration rate for

assault cannot be attributed to a higher

U.S. assault victimization rate since,

according to latest figures, the U.S.

assault victimization rate is lower than

England's. Instead the higher U.S.

assault incarceration rate is due to the 

higher rate at which the United States

justice system catches, convicts, and

incarcerates assaulters. According to

the most recent statistics on crime

(1995) and the criminal justice system

(1994 in the United States, 1995 in

England), the English assault victimization rate is 2.3 times the U.S. rate

(figure 2), but the U.S. assault incarceration rate is 1.7 times England's (.27

versus .16) (figure 40), indicating that

an assault in the United States is more

likely to lead to incarceration than one

in England.

 The higher U.S. incarceration rate for

burglary cannot be attributed to a higher

U.S. burglary victimization rate since,

according to latest figures, the U.S.

burglary victimization rate is lower than

England's. Instead the higher U.S.

burglary incarceration rate is attributable to the higher rate at which the

United States justice system catches,

convicts, and incarcerates burglars.

According to the most recent statistics

on crime (1995) and the criminal justice

system (1994 in the United States,

1995 in England), the English burglary

victimization rate is 1.7 times the U.S.

rate (figure 3), yet the U.S. burglary

incarceration rate is 1.4 times England's

(.43 versus .30) (figure 41), indicating

that a burglary in the United States is

more likely to lead to incarceration than

one in England.

 The higher U.S. incarceration rate for

motor vehicle theft cannot be attributed

to a higher U.S. vehicle theft victimization rate since, according to latest

figures, the U.S. vehicle theft victimization rate is lower than England's.

Instead the higher U.S. burglary incarceration rate is attributable to the higher

rate at which the United States justice

system catches, convicts, and incarcerates vehicle thieves. According to the

most recent statistics on crime (1995)

and the criminal justice system (1994 in

the United States, 1995 in England), the

English motor vehicle theft victimization

rate is 2.2 times the U.S. rate (figure 4),

yet the U.S. vehicle theft incarceration

rate is 1.2 times England's (.12 versus

.10) (figure 42), indicating that a motor

vehicle theft in the United States is

more likely to lead to incarceration than

one in England.

Incarcerations per 1,000 population 25
Have incarceration rates per 1,000

population been rising or falling in

both countries?

 With the exception of the burglary

incarceration rate, incarceration rates

per 1,000 population have been rising

in the United States. In England, incarceration rates per 1,000 population

have been rising slightly for murder,

rape and robbery; showing no clear

trend for assault; and declining sharply

for burglary and motor vehicle theft.

However, the sharp decline for burglary

and motor vehicle theft appears to

have ended in the early 1990's.

From 1981 to the latest year of incarceration data (1994 in the United

States, 1995 in England) —

 Both the U.S. murder incarceration

rate (.042 per 1,000 population in 1981

rising to .056 in 1994) and the English

rate rose (.008 in 1981 rising to .010 in

1995) (figure 37). Unlike the rise in the

U.S. incarceration rate, the rise in the

English incarceration rate occurred

because of an increase in the country's

murder rate.

 The U.S. rape incarceration rate rose

sharply (.082 per 1,000 male population in 1981 rising to .175 in 1994),

while the English rate rose comparatively modestly (.014 in 1981 rising to

.024 in 1995) (figure 38). Unlike the

rise in the U.S. incarceration rate, the

rise in the English incarceration rate

occurred partly because of a marked

increase in the country's rape rate.

The contrast between the modest

increase in the incarceration rate and

the marked increase in the crime rate

indicated that the risk of incarceration

following a rape in England was

decreasing.

 Both the U.S. (.22 in 1981 rising to

.23 in 1994) and the English (.07 in

1981 rising to .08 in 1995) robbery

incarceration rates rose slightly (figure

39). Unlike the rise in the U.S. incarceration rate, the slight rise in the

English incarceration rate was accompanied by a soaring robbery victimization rate. The contrast between the

slight increase in the incarceration rate

and the marked increase in the crime

rate indicated that the risk of incarceration following a robbery in England was

decreasing.

 The U.S. assault incarceration rate

rose sharply (.10 in 1981 rising to .27

in 1994), while the English rate rose

slightly (.15 in 1981 rising to .16 in

1995) (figure 40). Unlike the rise in the

U.S. incarceration rate, the slight rise in

the English incarceration rate was

accompanied by a steep rise in the

assault victimization rate. However,

the rise in the English incarceration

rate (figure 40) was far less steep than

the rise in the English assault rate

(figure 2), indicating that risk of incarceration for English assault was falling

during the period.

 Both the U.S. (.52 in 1981 falling to

.43 in 1994) and the English (.49 in

1981 falling to .30 in 1995) burglary

incarceration rates fell, with the English

rate falling more than the U.S. rate

(figure 41). The falling English incarceration rate was accompanied by a

steep rise in the burglary victimization

rate, indicating that the risk of incarceration after a burglary was falling in

England. The falling U.S. incarceration

rate was accompanied by a falling

burglary victimization rate. However,

the incarceration rate decline was

less steep than the victimization rate

decline, indicating that the risk of incarceration for burglary was actually rising

in the United States during the period.

 

 The U.S. motor vehicle theft incarceration rate rose sharply (.04 in 1981

rising to .12 in 1994), while the English

rate fell sharply (.21 in 1981 falling to

.10 in 1995) (figure 42). The rising

U.S. incarceration rate was accompanied by no clear trend in the victimization rate for vehicle theft. By contrast,

the falling English incarceration rate

was accompanied by a rising victimization rate for vehicle theft. Therefore,

the risk of incarceration after a motor

vehicle theft was decreasing in

England and increasing in the United

States.

26 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96
Incarcerations per 1,000 offenders

Incarceration per 1,000 offenders 27
28 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

Figure 43 Figure 44

Figure 45

Number of incarcerated assaulters

per 1,000 alleged assaulters

1981 1986 1991 1995

0

5

10

15

20

United States

England

1981 1986 1991

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Number of incarcerated rapists

per 1,000 alleged rapists

1995

England

United States

Number of incarcerated robbers

per 1,000 alleged robbers

1981 1986 1991

0

5

10

15

20

25

1995

England

United States

Figure 46

Figure 47

1981 1986 1991

0

2

4

6

8

10

Number of incarcerated burglars

per 1,000 alleged burglars

1995

United States

England

Figure 48

1981 1986 1991

0

5

10

15

Number of incarcerated motor vehicle thieves

per 1,000 alleged vehicle thieves

1995

United States

England

For additional information on these graphs, see the section labeled Notes on figures 1-82.

1981 1986 1991

0

200

400

600

800

Number of incarcerated murderers

per 1,000 alleged murderers

1995

England

United States
Are persons committing a serious

crime equally likely in the two

countries to be caught, convicted,

and incarcerated?

 A person committing a serious crime

in the United States is more likely to be

caught, convicted, and incarcerated

than one committing a crime in England

(including Wales). The sole exception

is murder.

According to the latest available figures

(1994 in the United States, 1995 in

England), the number of persons incarcerated for —

 murder for every 1,000 alleged

murderers was 466 in the United States

and 523 in England, indicating that a

murderer's risk of incarceration is 12%

greater in England than in the United

States (figure 43)

 rape for every 1,000 alleged rapists

was 155 in the United States and 94 in

England, indicating that a rapist's risk of

incarceration is 65% greater in the

United States than in England (figure

44)

 robbery for every 1,000 alleged

robbers was 17 in the United States

and 4 in England, indicating that a

robber's risk of incarceration in the

United States is more than four times

that in England (figure 45)

 assault for every 1,000 alleged

assaulters was 15 in the United States

and 4 in England, indicating that an

assaulter's risk of incarceration in the

United States is nearly four times that

in England (figure 46)

 burglary for every 1,000 alleged

burglars was 8 in the United States and

2 in England, indicating that a burglar's

risk of incarceration in the United States

is four times that in England (figure 47)

 motor vehicle theft for every 1,000

alleged vehicle thieves was 10 in the

United States and 4 in England, indicating that a vehicle thief's risk of incarceration in the United States is more

than double that in England (figure 48).

Is an offender's risk of being caught,

convicted, and incarcerated rising in

each country?

 The risk of incarceration is rising for

persons committing crime in the United

States but falling for those committing

crime in England. The one exception is

murderers in England. Their risk of

being caught, convicted, and incarcerated has remained essentially

unchanged since 1981.

Since 1981, the number of persons

incarcerated for —

 murder per 1,000 alleged murderers

has risen 46% in the United States (319

in 1981 rising to 466 in 1994) but fallen

2% in England (533 in 1981 falling to

523 in 1995) (figure 43)

 rape per 1,000 alleged rapists has

risen 96% in the United States (79 in

1981 rising to 155 in 1994) but fallen

62% in England (245 in 1981 falling to

94 in 1995) (figure 44)

 robbery per 1,000 alleged robbers has

risen 31% in the United States (13 in

1981 rising to 17 in 1994) but fallen

41% in England (7.1 in 1981 falling to

4.2 in 1995) (figure 45)

 assault per 1,000 alleged assaulters

has nearly tripled in the United States 

(5.6 in 1981 rising to 15.4 in 1994) but

fallen 30% in England (5.4 in 1981

falling to 3.8 in 1995) (figure 46)

 burglary per 1,000 alleged burglars

has risen 53% in the United States (5.5

in 1981 rising to 8.4 in 1994) but fallen

72% in England (7.8 in 1981 falling to

2.2 in 1995) (figure 47)

 motor vehicle theft per 1,000 alleged

vehicle thieves has nearly tripled in the

United States (3.6 in 1981 rising to 9.9

in 1994) but fallen 73% in England

(13.1 in 1981 falling to 3.5 in 1995)

(figure 48).

Incarceration per 1,000 offenders 29
Incarceration sentence length

30 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

Figure 49

1981 1986 1991

0

24

48

72

96

120

144

Average incarceration sentence imposed on

convicted rapists, in months

1995

England

United States

Figure 50

Figure 51 Figure 52

Figure 53

1981 1986 1991

0

12

24

36

48

60

Average incarceration sentence imposed on

convicted burglars, in months

1995

England

United States

Figure 54

1981 1986 1991

0

6

12

18

24

30

Average incarceration sentence imposed on

convicted motor vehicle thieves, in months

1995

England

United States

For additional information on these graphs, see the section labeled Notes on figures 1-82.

1981 1986 1991

0

12

24

36

48

60

Average incarceration sentence imposed on

convicted assaulters, in months

1995

England

United States

1981 1986 1991

0

48

96

144

192

240

288

Average incarceration sentence imposed on

convicted murderers, in months

1995

England

United States

1981 1986 1991

0

24

48

72

96

120

Average incarceration sentence imposed on

convicted robbers, in months

1995

England

United States
In the United States, incarceration

sentence lengths are either determinate

or indeterminate. In imposing an

indeterminate sentence, the judge

sets the maximum length of time the

offender can be confined before being

released. A parole board decides when

an adult offender with an indeterminate

sentence is released; a juvenile court

judge or an authorized State agency

decides the release date for a juvenile

offender with an indeterminate sentence. In most States, sentences

imposed in adult courts and juvenile

courts are indeterminate. Before 1987,

sentences imposed in Federal courts

were also indeterminate.

An adult sentence of "10 to 20 years"

is an example of an indeterminate

sentence. What makes the sentence

indeterminate is the fact that, at the

time of sentencing, the offender cannot

know how long he or she will serve

before being released because the

offender cannot know when the parole

board will grant release. All that is

known is a specified time range.

By contrast, a determinate sentence

has no time range: it is a single

maximum period of time, such as "20

years." The length of time that the

offender with a determinate sentence

will serve is whatever maximum term

was imposed, less whatever number of

days or months was deducted from the

sentence for good behavior or special

achievements.

Before 1992 the English sentencing

system was largely indeterminate.

Except for sentences under 101⁄2

months, all sentences were indeterminate. That changed in 1992, when a

more determinate sentencing system

was adopted. Today, as in 1992, the

only sentences that are indeterminate

are those that are at least 4 years long.

In the United States the maximum

juvenile sentence is typically “until age

18” or “until age 21.” In England, before

1992 the maximum was 1 year. In

1992 the maximum was set at 1 year

for juveniles sentenced in the juvenile

court and 2 years for those sentenced

as juveniles in the Crown Court.

Unlike the United States, England

does not have the death penalty. Both

countries have life sentences, but there

is a difference. In the United States,

"life without the possibility of parole"

and "life with the possibility of parole"

are sentencing options available in

most States. By contrast, life with the

possibility of parole is the only type of

life sentence available in English courts.

Which courts — those in the United

States or those in England — impose

longer incarceration sentences?

 Incarceration sentences are longer in

the United States than in England

(including Wales).

According to latest figures (1994 in the

United States, 1995 in England) incarceration sentences, on average,

were —

 3 years longer for murder in the

United States than in England (266

months in the United States versus 230

in England) (figure 49)

 nearly 4 years longer for rape in the

United States than in England (123

months in the United States versus 77

in England) (figure 50)

 4 years longer for robbery in the

United States than in England (89

months in the United States versus 40

in England) (figure 51)

 nearly 3 years longer for assault in the

United States than in England (48

months in the United States versus 14

in England) (figure 52)

 over 2 years longer for burglary in the

United States than in England (43

months in the United States versus 15

in England) (figure 53)

 over 1 year longer for motor vehicle

theft in the United States than in

England (24 months in the United

States versus about 9 in England)

(figure 54).

Are sentences getting longer in both

countries?

 Of the six crimes investigated,

sentence lengths are getting longer for

only one crime in the United States: 

murder. In England, sentences are

getting longer for three crimes: murder,

rape, and robbery.

From 1981 to the latest year of

sentencing data (1994 in the United

States, 1995 in England) —

 U.S. incarceration sentences lengthened by 11 months for murder (average

of 255 months in 1981 rising to 266 in

1994); English sentences lengthened

by 6 years (155 months in 1981 rising

to 230 in 1995) (figure 49)

 U.S. incarceration sentence lengths

for rape showed no clear trend, while

English rape sentences lengthened by

3 years (average of 40 months in 1981

rising to 77 months in 1994) (figure 50)

 U.S. incarceration sentence lengths

for robbery showed no clear trend,

while English robbery sentences lengthened by 1 year (average of 27 months

in 1981 rising to 40 months in 1994)

(figure 51)

 Both U.S. and English incarceration

sentence lengths for assault showed no

clear trend (figure 52)

 Both U.S. and English incarceration

sentence lengths for burglary showed

no clear trend (figure 53)

 Both U.S. and English incarceration

sentence lengths for motor vehicle theft

showed no clear trend (figure 54). 

Incarceration sentence length 31
Time served

32 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

Figure 56

1981 1986 1991

0

12

24

36

48

60

72

Incarcerated rapists: average time served,

in months

1995

England

United States

Figure 57

Figure 58

1981 1986 1991

0

6

12

18

24

30

Incarcerated assaulters: average time served,

in months

1995

England

United States

Figure 59

1981 1986 1991

0

6

12

18

24

Incarcerated burglars: average time served,

in months

1995

England

United States

Figure 60

1981 1986 1991

0

12

24

36

48

60

Incarcerated robbers: average time served,

in months

1995

England

United States

1981 1986 1991

0

24

48

72

96

120

144

Incarcerated murderers: average time served,

in months

1995

England

United States

Figure 55

1981 1986 1991

0

3

6

9

12

15

Incarcerated motor vehicle thieves: average time

served, in months

1995

England

United States

Figure 58
In both the United States and England

(including Wales), virtually all convicted

offenders sentenced to incarceration

are eventually released. The amount

of time they serve before release is

almost always shorter than the sentence that the court imposed. There

are two major reasons. Good behavior

while in confinement earns incarcerated

offenders early release in both countries. Also, parole boards in England

and in most States give offenders a

chance to demonstrate their readiness

to return to society by releasing them

early and placing them on parole.

During the time they are on parole,

they must stay out of trouble and follow

the rules of their parole. Otherwise they

can be returned to confinement to complete their sentence.

Prior to 1992 in England, parole boards

had jurisdiction over inmates with

sentences of 101⁄2 months or more.

Such inmates were eligible for parole

after serving one-third of their sentence

(or a minimum of 6 months) and had to

be released from confinement once

they had served two-thirds. Those with

sentences under 101⁄2 months were

automatically released after serving

two-thirds of their term unless they

misbehaved in prison and lost remission. Beginning in 1992, all English

inmates, regardless of sentence length,

were required to serve a minimum of

one-half of their sentence. Once they

serve half, those with sentences under

four years are automatically released

and those with sentences of four years

or more become eligible for parole.

Parole regulations in the United States

vary from State to State, between

Federal and State parole, between

State and local jurisdictions and over

time. Consequently, they cannot be

simply described. Some States and

the Federal Government abolished

parole, replacing it with a system in

which the inmate can reduce the period

in confinement through good behavior,

but requiring some minimum

percentage of the sentence be served

(for example, 85% of Federal

sentences over one year). Most States

have parole boards with jurisdiction

over persons with sentences of a year

or more. The point at which an inmate

becomes eligible for parole depends on

numerous factors (for example,

sentence length, type of felony), and

the factors vary from State to State.

"Time served" is the amount of time

that incarcerated offenders spend in

confinement before being released.

Is time served in confinement before

release equally long in the two

countries?

 Time served is greater in the United

States than in England, mostly because courts impose longer sentences

in the United States than in England.

According to latest available figures

(1994 in the United States, 1995 in

England) time served, on average,

was —

 longer for murder in the United States

(101⁄2 years) than in England (8 1/4

years) (figure 55)

 longer for rape in the United States

(51⁄2 years) than in England (nearly 4

years) (figure 56)

 longer for robbery in the United States

(31⁄2 years) than in England (nearly 2

years) (figure 57)

 longer for assault in the United States

(2 years) than in England (6 months)

(figure 58)

 longer for burglary in the United

States (11⁄2 years) than in England (6

months) (figure 59)

 longer for motor vehicle theft in the

United States (just under 1 year) than in

England (3 months) (figure 60).

Is time served getting longer in both

countries?

 Of the six crimes investigated, time

served is getting longer for two crimes

in the United States (murder and rape)

and three crimes in England (murder,

rape, robbery).

From 1981 to the latest year of data

(1994 in the United States, 1995 in

England) —

 time served for murder rose nearly 3

years in both the United States (94

months in 1981 rising to 127 in 1994)

and England (69 months in 1981 rising

to 100 in 1995), reflecting increases

over the period in the lengths of murder

sentences imposed (figure 55)

 time served for rape rose 8 months in

the United States (59 months in 1981

rising to just over 67 in 1994) despite

the fact that sentence lengths for rape

had not increased; while time served

for rape rose 2 years in England (20

months in 1981 rising to 44 in 1995),

reflecting an increase in the length of

rape sentences imposed (figure 56)

 time served for robbery was trendless

in the United States; while time served

for robbery rose over 7 months in

England (13 months in 1981 rising to

just over 20 in 1995), reflecting an

increase in the length of robbery

sentences imposed (figure 57)

 time served for assault was trendless

in both the United States and England

(figure 58)

 time served for burglary was trendless

in both the United States and England

(figure 59)

 time served for motor vehicle theft

was trendless in the United States but

decreased in England (figure 60).

Time served 33
Percent of sentence served

34 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

Figure 61 Figure 62

Figure 63

Figure 64

1981 1986 1991

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

1995

Incarcerated assaulters: Percent of sentence served

England

United States

Figure 65

Figure 66 1981 1986 1991

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

1995

Incarcerated vehicle thieves: Percent of sentence served

England

United States

For additional information on these graphs, see the section labeled Notes on figures 1-82.

1981 1986 1991

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

1995

Incarcerated robbers: Percent of sentence served

England

United States

1981 1986 1991

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

1995

Incarcerated rapists: Percent of sentence served

England

United States

1981 1986 1991

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

United States

England

Incarcerated murderers: Percent of sentence served

1995

1981 1986 1991

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

1995

Incarcerated burglars: Percent of sentence served

England

United States

Figure 66

Figure 63
Is the fraction of the sentence served

in confinement before release about

the same in the two countries?

 The fraction of the sentence that is

served before release is generally

about the same in the United States

and England (including Wales).

According to latest figures (1994 in the

United States, 1995 in England), on

average, the fraction of the sentence

that was served before incarcerated

offenders were released was —

 about the same in the United States

(48%) and England (43%) for murder 

(figure 61)

 about the same in the United States

(55%) and England (57%) for rape

(figure 62)

 about the same in the United States

(48%) and England (51%) for robbery

(figure 63)

 about the same in the United States

(49%) and England (45%) for assault

(figure 64)

 about the same in the United States

(42%) and England (44%) for burglary

(figure 65)

 slightly higher in the United States

(47%) than in England (40%) for motor

vehicle theft (figure 66).

Is the fraction of the sentence

served before release rising in

both countries?

 Since 1981 in England, the fraction

served has generally stayed constant or

fallen. In the United States, the fraction

served generally dropped through

around the mid-1980's and has risen

since then.

 Since 1981, the sentence fraction

served has stayed fairly constant for

English murderers (45% in 1981 and

43% in 1995), while the U.S. fraction

has risen fairly consistently (37% in

1981 rising to 48% in 1994) (figure 61).

 Since 1981, the fraction of the

sentence served has stayed at around

50% for English rapists, while the U.S.

fraction fell to 43% in 1986 and has

generally risen since then, reaching

55% in 1994 (figure 62).

 Since 1981, the fraction of the

sentence served has stayed at around

49% for English robbers, while the U.S.

fraction fell to 44% in 1986 and has

generally risen since then, reaching

48% in 1994 (figure 63).

 Since 1981, the fraction of the

sentence served by assaulters has

generally fallen in England (56% in

1981 falling to 45% in 1995), while

the U.S. fraction fell to 46% in 1986 and

has generally risen since then, reaching

49% in 1994 (figure 64).

 Since 1981, the fraction of the

sentence served by burglars has generally fallen in England (58% in 1981

falling to 44% in 1995) and the United

States (47% in 1981 falling to 42% in

1994) (figure 65).

 Since 1981, the fraction of the

sentence served by motor vehicle

thieves has generally fallen in England

(60% in 1981 falling to 40% in 1995),

while the fraction served in the United

States generally fell through the late

1980's (46% in 1981 falling to 42% in

1988) and has generally risen since

then (47% in 1994) (figure 66).

Percent of sentence served 35
Days at risk of serving

36 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

Figure 67 Figure 68

1981 1986 1991

0

2

4

6

Days of incarceration a burglar risks serving

1995

United States

England

1981 1986 1991

0

60

120

180

240

300

360

Days of incarceration a rapist risks serving

1995

United States

England

Days of incarceration a murderer risks serving

1981 1986 1991 1995

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

United States

England

Figure 69

1981 1986 1991

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Days of incarceration an assaulter risks serving

1995

United States

England

Figure 70

Figure 71 Figure 72

1981 1986 1991

0

2

4

6

Days of incarceration a vehicle thief risks serving

1995

United States

England

For additional information on these graphs, see the section labeled Notes on figures 1-82.

1981 1986 1991

0

7

14

21

28

Days of incarceration a robber risks serving

1995

United States

England
The risk of punishment an offender

runs for committing a particular crime

depends both on how long those who

are caught typically serve for committing such a crime, and on the likelihood

of being caught, convicted, and incarcerated. The two are combined in a

single measure of risk called "the

number of days (or months or years) of

incarceration an offender risks serving."

By this measure, is the risk of

punishment the same in the two

countries?

 By this measure, the risk of punishment is generally greater in the United

States than in England (including

Wales).

According to the latest figures (1994 in

the United States, 1995 in England) —

 a person committing murder risked

nearly 5 years of incarceration in the

United States versus a little over 4

years in England (figure 67)

 a person committing rape risked 11

months of incarceration in the United

States versus 4 months in England

(figure 68)

 a person committing robbery risked

22 days of incarceration in the United

States versus 3 days in England (figure

69)

 a person committing assault risked 11

days of incarceration in the United

States versus 1 day in England (figure

70)

 a person committing burglary risked

5 days of incarceration in the United

States versus less than 1 day in

England (figure 71)

 a person committing motor vehicle

theft risked 3 days of incarceration in

the United States versus less than 1

day in England (figure 72).

Is the risk of punishment rising or

falling in both countries?

 The risk of punishment is generally

rising in the United States and falling in

England.

From 1981 to the latest year of available data (1994 in the United States,

1995 in England), the risk of punishment for committing —

 murder rose 2.4 years in the United

States (914 days in 1981 rising to 1,802

in 1994) and rose 1.3 years in England

(1,117 days in 1981 rising to 1,590 in

1995) (figure 67)

 rape rose 6 months in the United

States (143 days in 1981 rising to 319

in 1994) and fell 24 days in England

(151 days in 1981 falling to 127 in

1995) (figure 68)

 robbery rose 5 days in the United

States (17 days in 1981 rising to 22 in

1994) and stayed constant in England

(2.8 days in 1981 and 2.6 in 1995)

(figure 69)

 assault rose 7 days in the United

States (4 days in 1981 rising to 11 in

1994) and fell in England (1 day in 1981

falling to .7 in 1995) (figure 70)

 burglary rose 2 days in the United

States (3 days in 1981 rising to 5 in

1994) and fell by 1 day in England (1.5

days in 1981 falling to .4 in 1995)

(figure 71)

 motor vehicle theft rose 2 days in the

United States (1 day in 1981 rising to 3

in 1994) and fell by more than 1 day in

England (1.9 days in 1981 falling to .4

in 1995) (figure 72).

Days at risk of serving 37
Is there a connection between

trends in legal punishment and

trends in crime in the two

countries?

The two countries differ greatly in how

their justice systems responded to

crime throughout the 1980's and continuing into the 1990's. For example,

during that time an offender's risk of

conviction rose in the United States

but fell in England (including Wales).

Such differences in punishment trends

might help explain why crime trends

since 1981 differed between the two

countries. In theory, raising the risk or

severity of punishment might lead to

crime decreases, and lowering the risk

or severity of punishment might lead to

crime increases.

To investigate these possibilities, 

correlations were computed between

punishment trends and crime trends

in the two countries. Negative correlations (for example, a falling conviction

rate and a rising crime rate) were interpreted as possible support for the

theory. Correlations dealt with two

separate types of punishment trends: 

trends in the risk of punishment, and

trends in the severity of punishment.

Two measures of punishment risk are

the conviction rate (defined as the

number of convictions per 1,000

alleged offenders) and the incarceration rate (defined as the number of

incarcerations per 1,000 alleged offenders). Four measures of punishment severity are the percent of

convicted offenders sentenced to incarceration, sentence length, time served,

and percent of sentence served. A fifth

is "days of incarceration at risk of

serving," although this measure

actually combines elements of both risk

and severity.

U.S. trends were based on data for

seven points in time (1981, 1983, 1986,

1988, 1990, 1992, and 1994); English

trends were based on six (1981, 1983,

1987, 1991, 1993, and 1995).

Detecting a statistically significant

relationship between crime and punishment trends is difficult when trends are

based on so few points in time. Consequently, statistical significance was not

given more weight than other criteria

for evaluating results. Other criteria

used were strength and direction of

correlations between punishment

trends and crime trends, and consistency of correlations across offense

categories.

Major findings were:

 Negative correlations in England

between trends in punishment risk

and crime trends offer the strongest

support for the theory that links falling

risk of punishment to rising crime (table

2). Specifically, since 1981 the conviction rate fell in England, and English

crime rates (both police-recorded crime

rates and crime rates from victim surveys) rose (figures 1-10 and figures

25-30). Likewise, the incarceration

rate fell, and English crime rates (both

police-recorded rates and victim survey

rates) rose (figures 1-10 and figures

43-48).

 In England, correlations between

punishment severity and crime trends

were mixed (table 2). Roughly half

were positive and half were negative.

The major exception was motor vehicle

theft: correlations were fairly consistently strong and negative between

trends in punishment severity (however

measured) for motor vehicle theft and

trends in the rate of vehicle theft (however measured) (figures 4, 10, 36,

54,60, 66, and 72). Specifically, the

percent of convicted motor vehicle

thieves sentenced to incarceration,

their average sentence length, their

average time served, the percent of

sentence they served, and the number

of days of incarceration they were at

risk of serving all fell since 1981. At

the same time, the motor vehicle theft

rate, as measured in both victim

surveys and police statistics, generally

rose.

 In the United States, correlations

between punishment risk and crime

trends were mixed (table 2). About

half were positive and half were negative. Moreover, negative correlations

were often low. Furthermore, correlations between trends in punishment

risk and trends in crime were predominantly negative when crime trends

were measured with victim surveys but

predominantly positive when measured

with police statistics. In short, trends in

punishment risk had an inconsistent

relationship with trends in crime in the

United States. The major exception is

burglary, where there were consistent

negative correlations: the risk of punishment (whether measured by the

conviction rate or the incarceration

rate) rose, and the burglary rate

(whether measured in victim surveys

or police statistics) fell (figures 3, 9, 29,

and 48).

 In the United States, correlations

between punishment severity and

crime trends were mixed (table 2).

Approximately half were positive and

half were negative. Moreover, in

instances where there were negative

correlations, they were often weak.

Furthermore, unlike results from

England, correlations between punishment severity and survey crime rates

often had a different sign than correlations between severity and policerecorded rates for the same crime.

In short, trends in punishment severity

had an inconsistent relationship with

trends in crime in the United States.

The major exception is burglary,

where there were consistent negative

correlations: for most measures of

severity (percent of convicted offenders sentenced to incarceration; sentence length imposed; time served),

increases in severity of punishment

for burglary were associated with

decreases in the burglary rate regardless of whether the burglary rate was

Justice system’s impact on crime

38 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96
measured using victim surveys or

police statistics (figures 3, 9, 35, 53,

and 59).

To summarize, notable consistencies

and notable inconsistencies both

characterized results relating punishment trends to crime trends. Notably 

consistent was the close association in

England, across the different crime

types, between falling risk of punishment (however measured) and rising

crime rates (however measured).

Notable inconsistent results were those

between England and the United

States; between trends in punishment

risk versus trends in punishment severity; between police statistics and victim

surveys; between different measures of

punishment severity; and between

different offenses. The major exception

was burglary, where trends were fairly

consistent irrespective of country,

source of crime-rate data, or type of

punishment trend. 

Possible explanations for the inconsistencies are:

 Victim surveys may provide a more

reliable measure of crime trends than

police statistics. If so, that may explain

inconsistencies between victim surveys

and police statistics.

 Changes in the risk of punishment are

widely thought to have a greater impact

on crime rates than changes in punishment severity. If so, that may explain

why punishment risk trends and crime

trends were more consistently associated with one another than were

punishment severity trends and crime

trends.

 Most U.S. crime rates fell in the early

1980's, increased until the early 1990's,

and then fell again. Yet linear correlation was used to analyze these nonlinear trends. Perhaps nonlinear correlation would show a closer association

between punishment trends and crime

trends in the United States.

 The fact that all trends were based on

a small number of points in time (seven

in the United States, six in England)

suggests a more general explanation

for inconsistencies. That number of

data points may be adequate for

documenting a relationship between

punishment trends and crime trends

only if major changes occur in

Justice system’s impact on crime 39

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)

*Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed) 4

Motor vehicle theft -.943** -.951** -.301 -.533 -.987** -.888* -.951**

Burglary -.970** -.964** .258 .759 .522 -.788 -.982**

Assault -.995** -.790 .826* .544 .379 -.724 -.713

Robbery -.981** -.964** -.775 .681 .712 .533 -.317

Victim survey estimated rate of —

Motor vehicle theft -.883* -.899* -.331 -.672 -.974** -.792 -.890*

Burglary -.934** -.956** -.019 .815* .711 -.686 -.967**

Assault -.901* -.684 .654 .775 .614 -.866* -.475

Robbery -.868* -.852* -.811 .896* .897* .437 .030

Rape -.953** -.968** .434 .969* .933** .613 -.699

Murder -.907* -.483 .782 .641 .638 .241 .482

Police-recorded rate of —

England’s crime rate

Motor vehicle theft .546 .583 .409 .518 -.208 -.790 .517

Burglary -.826* -.880** -.899** -.680 -.524 .687 -.874*

Assault -.146 -.132 .267 -.421 -.449 .319 -.178

Robbery -.606 -.595 -.111 -.581 -.440 .696 -.612

Victim survey estimated rate of —

Motor vehicle theft .774* .791* .389 .544 -.100 -.784 .729

Burglary -.835* -.841* -.830* -.518 -.334 .632 -.789*

Assault .950** .957** -.347 .267 .277 -.299 .935**

Robbery .215 .288 .370 -.153 -.045 .207 .169

Rape .844* .835* -.573 .487 .776* .389 .865*

Murder -.031 -.015 .178 .206 -.162 -.252 -.040

Police-recorded rate of —

United States’ crime rate

Percent of 

sentence 

served

Days of

incarceration

at risk of

serving

Average 

time

served

Average

incarceration

sentence

imposed

Percent of

convicted

offenders

sentenced to

incarceration

Incarceration

rate:

incarcerations

per 1,000

alleged

offenders

Conviction rate:

convictions per

1,000 alleged

offenders

Risk of punishment Severity of punishment

Correlation between crime rate trends and trends in —

Table 2. Correlations between 1981-1994 trends in U.S. crime rates and U.S. trends in legal punishment; 

and correlations between 1981-1995 trends in English crime rates and English trends in legal punishment
punishment trends during the study

period in both countries, which was not

the case here. English conviction

rates, for example, declined sharply

during the study period. The increase

in U.S. conviction rates was modest

by comparison. Consequently, the

negative correlations between rising

U.S. conviction rates and falling crime

rates were relatively modest for most

crime rates derived from victim

surveys, whereas the negative

correlations between falling English

conviction rates and rising English

crime rates were uniformly strong. The

implication is that punishment trends

and crime trends should not always be

expected to have the same relationship

in two countries over any period of

time. 

 Some crimes (such as burglary) are

more rationally motivated than others

(assault, for example). Consequently, 

in comparison with other crimes, those

that are committed by more rationally

motivated offenders — by persons

who, for example, plan their crime and

weigh their chances of being caught —

are probably more influenced by

increases or decreases in the likelihood or severity of punishment. The

implication is that punishment trends

and crime trends should not always be

expected to have the same relationship

irrespective of type of crime. 

 A positive correlation between

punishment and crime trends was interpreted as possible evidence that

increasing punitiveness does not

reduce crime. Such an interpretation

may not always be justified. For

example, if the crime rate rose over

some period of time but was kept from

soaring by increasingly punitive policies

over that period, it would be a mistake

to interpret the observed positive

correlation between punishment and

crime trends as evidence that increasing punitiveness had no crime reduction benefit. Perhaps some of the

inconsistent findings described above

stem from misinterpreting positive

correlations. By the same token,

perhaps some of the inconsistencies

stem from misinterpreting negative

correlations. Interpreting a negative

correlation as possible evidence that

increasing punitiveness reduces crime

may not always be justified. For example, crime rates can fall for reasons

having nothing to do with increasing

punitiveness. To illustrate, demographic changes in the age and race

composition of the U.S. population

might explain 41% of the drop in the

U.S. murder rate from 1981 to 1996;

47% of the drop in the police-recorded

U.S. robbery rate; and 19% of the drop

in the police-recorded U.S. burglary

rate.

Justice system’s impact on crime

40 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96
Justice system changes

Justice system changes 41
 

42 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

Figure 73 1981 1986 1991

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1994

probability of conviction

probability of arrest for

persons suspected of

murder

for persons arrested for

murder

Probability: United States murder

Figure 74

 1981 1986 1991

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

probability of conviction

for persons arrested for

rape

probability of arrest for

persons suspected of

rape

1994

Probability: United States rape

Figure 75

1981 1986 1991

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

probability of conviction

for persons arrested for

robbery

probability of arrest for

persons suspected of

robbery

1994

Probability: United States robbery

Figure 76

 1981 1986 1991

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

probability of conviction

for persons arrested for

assault probability of arrest for

persons suspected of

assault

1994

Probability: United States assault

Figure 77

 1981 1986 1991

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

probability of conviction

for persons arrested for

burglary

probability of arrest for

persons suspected of

burglary

1994

Probability: United States burglary

 1981 1986 1991

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

probability of conviction

for persons arrested for

motor vehicle theft

probability of arrest for

persons suspected of

motor vehicle theft

Probability: United States motor vehicle theft

1994

Figure 78

For additional information on these graphs, see the section labeled Notes on figures 1-82.

Figure 73
Reasons for divergent trends

in legal punishment in England

(including Wales) and the

United States 

Changes in the likelihood of conviction

and incarceration can be explained

more convincingly than changes in

crime rates. The English decreases in

the probability of conviction were

caused by —

 the increasing use of recorded

cautions and unrecorded warnings for

detected offenders (Home Office, 1985,

1990b; Farrington, 1992)

 the Police and Criminal Evidence Act

1984, which increased procedural safeguards for accused persons (Irving and

MacKenzie, 1989) 

 the introduction of the Crown Prosecution Service in 1986, with lawyers

replacing police officers as prosecutors, leading to an increasing

tendency to drop cases rather than

prosecute them (Home Office, 1993,

table 6.2).

There were also measures affecting

specific offenses. For example, from

1993 onwards, the police were increasingly likely to charge assault offenders

with "common assault" rather than

"wounding."

There were two main reasons why

the time served and sentence length

for homicide increased in England:

 Murder convictions (carrying a

mandatory life sentence) increased,

whereas manslaughter convictions fell.

For example, in 1981, 126 offenders

were convicted for murder and 262 for

manslaughter, whereas in 1995, 214

offenders were convicted for murder

and 241 for manslaughter.

 The average time served by lifesentence prisoners increased, from

126 months in 1981 to 163 months in

1995.

The English decreases in the probability of incarceration in 1987-91 were

caused by —

 pronouncements by the Home Office

(roughly equivalent to the U.S. Department of Justice) encouraging judges

and magistrates to avoid sending

offenders to prison as far as possible,

especially for non-violent offenses such

as burglary and vehicle theft (Home

Office, 1988, 1990a)

 the downgrading of the offense of

unauthorized taking of a motor vehicle

to a non-indictable offense (in the

Criminal Justice Act 1988), which

encouraged judges to treat it as a

relatively trivial offense and to use

non-custodial penalties.

As has been noted (Wilson,1997),

up to and including the Criminal Justice

Act 1991 (which greatly restricted the

ability of sentencers to pass custodial

sentences), Home Office policy makers

were primarily concerned with reducing

the prison population.

In contrast, in America during the

1980's and continuing into the 1990's,

growing emphasis was placed on retribution, deterrence, and incapacitation

as major goals of the justice system.

One way the change revealed itself

was a rising risk of conviction for

persons committing crime. Reasons

varied across crime categories but, in

general, the rise in risk of conviction

occurred both because police made

more arrests relative to the number of

persons committing crime, and prosecutors obtained more convictions

relative to the number of persons being

arrested (figures 73-78). (These same

trends cannot be investigated for

England because there are no nationwide English data on arrests.) 

Another change was in prison release

policies. Since around 1986 growth

has occurred in the fraction of the

sentence that prisoners served before

they were released, especially for

violent offenders (figures 61-66). For

example, the U.S. Congress passed

legislation requiring that Federal

prisoners with sentences longer than 1

year serve at least 85% of their

sentence (McDonald and Carlson,

1992, page 8). 

In England, Home Office policy

changed in 1993. Judges and magistrates were encouraged to make more

use of custodial sentences, and new

laws were introduced to facilitate this.

For example, the Criminal Justice Act

1993 repealed the provision in the

Criminal Justice Act 1991 that barred

judges from imposing longer sentences

for persons with previous convictions.

Another repealed provision had barred

judges from punishing more severely a

person who had harmed two or more

victims than a person who had harmed

one.

These new English policies were

popular with the general public. For

example, in one 1993 survey, 88%

thought that too lenient court sentences

caused crime and 86% thought that

prison sentences should be imposed to

make criminals suffer (Kirby and

Cusick, 1993).

There are many possible explanations

for changes in crime rates over time.

However, many of the relevant 

factors — such as the trend toward

single parent families, the aging of the

population, and routine activities — 

vary similarly over time in America and

England (Farrington and Langan,

1992). Hence, they cannot explain

divergent crime trends between the two

countries.

Justice system changes 43
In the United States, the incarceration rate of blacks is six times the

incarceration rate of whites. Is racial

disparity markedly worse in the

United States than in England?

 Racial disparity is no worse in the

United States than in England (including Wales).

In the United States in 1991—

 of the 160.8 million white adults,

approximately 636,000 were incarcerated in a local jail, a State prison, or a

Federal prison on any given day, or 396

per 100,000 population

 of the 20.6 million black adults, about

528,000 were incarcerated, or 2,563

per 100,000 population

 of the 5.6 million adults of other races,

roughly 36,000 were incarcerated, or

643 per 100,000 population.

In England in 1991 —

 of the 36.7 million white adults,

approximately 37,600 were incarcerated on any given day, or 102 per

100,000 population

 of the roughly three-quarter million

black adults, about 5,000 were incarcerated, or 667 per 100,000 population

 of the 1.2 million adults of other races,

an estimated 2,800 were incarcerated,

or 233 per 100,000 population.

In 1991 —

 the black incarceration rate was

approximately six times the white incarceration rate in both England and the

United States

 the incarceration rate for persons of

other races was roughly two times the

white incarceration rate in both England

and the United States.

Racial disparities in incarceration

44 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96
In this report, "England" includes both

England and Wales.

A central aim of the report was to track

similar cases in both countries for the

same years across the major stages of

the criminal justice system: from commission of an offense, to reporting to

police, to conviction and sentencing

and, lastly, to release from confinement. However, neither country has

annual national data tracking individual

offenders by some unique identifier. 

For many years since 1981, aggregate

national data are available on the major

stages (for example, crimes committed,

persons convicted, persons sentenced

to custody). These separate counts

do not arise from tracking the same

individuals across stages, but they

permit reasonably accurate estimates

of the flow of offenders from one stage

to the next.

Arrest statistics comparing England

and the United States are not included

in the report because England does not

have nationwide arrest data. Statistics

on "larceny" are not included because

the United States does not have

nationwide conviction and sentencing

data on larceny and because the

report’s focus is on serious crimes.

For this report, numbers and probabilities were calculated for 7 years in the

United States (1981, 1983, 1986, 1988,

1990, 1992 and 1994) and for 6 years

in England (1981, 1983, 1987, 1991,

1993 and 1995). The year 1981 was

selected as the starting point for

comparing the two countries because

cross-country comparisons of crime

victim surveys were critical for the

study and 1981 was the first year

covered in the national English crime

victim survey (Hough and Mayhew,

1983). The U.S. years of 1986, 1988,

1990, 1992, and 1994 were selected

because complete national information

on convictions and sentencing (Federal

plus State plus juvenile) — which is

crucial for comparing justice systems

across countries — is largely available

only for these years. Though complete

U.S. information was not available for

1981 and 1983, availability of English

victimization data and English justice

system data for these years made

1981 and 1983 ideal for comparison

purposes. Consequently, procedures

were devised for estimating 1981 and

1983 convictions and sentences in the

United States. 

Significance tests

Certain differences discussed in this

report were tested for statistical significance at the 95% confidence level: 

U.S.-England differences in victimization rates from national crime surveys

(all were significant); and U.S.-England

differences in percent reported to

police (significant differences are noted

elsewhere). The only other places

where significance tests were run are

in tables 1 and 2.

Comparability

There are three problems of comparability: between the United States and

England, over time, and between victim

survey and criminal justice data. It is

easier to specify legal definitions of

offenses in England because laws

apply nationally, whereas in the United

States laws differ from State to State.

However, legal definitions of burglary,

robbery, motor vehicle theft (including

unauthorized taking of motor vehicles),

and murder (murder and nonnegligent

manslaughter in the United States;

murder, manslaughter and infanticide

in England) seem quite comparable in

both countries. In both, attempts are

included with completed crimes in

police data, except for murder. 

Attempted murder is a separate legal

category in England, but it is included

in aggravated assault in the United

States. While U.S. assault figures

shown in this report include attempted

murder, English figures do not.

However, because the number of

police-recorded attempted murders

and the number of convictions for

attempted murder are rare compared

to "woundings," adding attempted

murders to the English assault figures

would not have made a significant

difference in results. For example, in

1996, police recorded 674 attempted

murders and 174,583 wounding

offenses, and courts convicted 56

persons of attempted murder and

28,348 of wounding.

Between 1981 and 1995, the legal

definitions of murder, robbery, and

burglary did not change substantially in

England or the United States, and the

legal definition of motor vehicle theft

did not change in the United States. In

England, unauthorized taking of a

motor vehicle was downgraded from an

indictable (more serious) to a summary

(less serious) offense in the Criminal

Justice Act 1988 (which went into effect

on October 12, 1988). Also, a new

offense of aggravated vehicle taking

was created by the Aggravated Vehicle

Taking Act 1991 (which went into effect

on April 1, 1992). Hence, for comparability with earlier years, English motor

vehicle theft in 1995 comprised four

legal categories: theft of a motor

vehicle (indictable), unauthorized

taking of a motor vehicle (summary),

and aggravated vehicle taking (indictable and summary).

Rape is a more problematic offense.

In England in 1981, rape had to involve

a male offender and a female victim,

and required penetration of the vagina

by the penis. Husbands could not be

convicted of raping their wives. No

male under age 14 could be convicted

of rape, but female offenders were

included in the rape statistics if they

aided and abetted rape. However, the

minimum age for a rape conviction was

decreased from 14 to 10 — the minimum age of conviction for other

offenses — in the Sexual Offenses

(Amendment) Act 1993 (which went

Methodology

Methodology 45
into effect on September 20, 1993).

The definition of English rape was

changed in the Criminal Justice and

Public Order Act 1994 (which went into

effect on November 1, 1994) to include

male victims, spouse victims, and anal

intercourse. In the United States forcible rape statutes now may include male

or female offenders, male or female

victims, spouse victims, anal intercourse, and other sexual acts.

However, it is likely that the great

majority of rape offenses in England

and the United States are comparable,

involving male offenders, female

victims, and vaginal intercourse.

Consensual sex with minors is placed

in a different legal category in both

countries.

Assault poses the greatest problem

of comparability between the United

States and England. In England, the

national victim survey (and the policerecorded figures) distinguishes between

the indictable offense of wounding

(causing actual or grievous bodily

harm) and the summary offense of

common assault. Wounding occurs if

the victim receives some kind of cut or

wound, where the skin or a bone is

broken, or medical attention is needed,

whereas common assault occurs if the

victim is punched, kicked or jostled, with

negligible or no injury. Minor bruising or

a black eye count as negligible injury.

Attempted assaults are not counted as

wounding in the British victim survey.

In the United States, the national victim

survey (and the police-recorded figures)

distinguishes between the index

offense of aggravated assault and the

non-index offense of simple assault. 

An aggravated assault occurs if the

victim suffers knife, stab, or gun

wounds, broken bones, or teeth

knocked out, if the victim is knocked

unconscious, or if any weapon is used.

A simple assault occurs if the victim

receives cuts, scratches, bruises, a

swelling, or a black eye, or if no weapon

is used.

The U.S. category of aggravated assault is not exactly comparable to the

English category of wounding because

of all the assaults without injury in the

U.S. category. On the other hand, the

U.S. category of aggravated assault

completed with injury is significantly

narrower than the English category of

wounding, since the English category

includes assaults causing cuts,

scratches, or severe bruising, which

would be counted as simple assaults

in the United States. Despite problems

of noncomparability, there seemed little

alternative but to compare wounding in

England with aggravated assault in the

United States. The legal definitions of

both offenses did not change between

1981 and 1995, so changes over time

should be reliable. Ideally, it would be

desirable in both countries to code the

severity of injuries, so that similar

assaults could be compared.

In both countries, efforts have been

made to ensure that crime definitions in

the national victim survey are comparable to those in official (police) statistics, 

but some differences are inevitable.

For example, the U.S. crime victim

survey does not include crimes against

organizations or against persons under

12, and the English crime victim survey

does not include crimes against organizations or against persons under 16.

However, when estimating the fraction

of victim-reported offenses that were

recorded by police, adjustments were

made to the police statistics to make

them comparable to victim survey

estimates.

While crime definitions were reasonably

comparable between England and the

United States, characteristics of

the crimes differed between the two

countries. For example, according to

1996 police statistics, firearms were

used in 7% of English murders (Home

Office, 1997, table 3.2) but 68% of U.S.

murders (FBI, 1997, table 2.9). Likewise, according to 1996 police statistics

on robbery, 41% of U.S. robberies (FBI,

1997, page 29) but 5% of English

robberies (Home Office, 1997, table

A4.5, page 65) involved a firearm.

Furthermore, according to latest victim

survey statistics (1995 in England; 1996

in the United States), 28% of U.S.

robberies involved a firearm compared

to 4% of English robberies. How other

characteristics differed between U.S.

crimes and English crimes was not

investigated because of limited available data. 

46 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96
International Crime Victimization Surveys

Methodology 47
48 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96 

For additional information on these graphs, see the section labeled Notes on figures 1-82.

Figure 79

1988 1991 1994

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

1995

England

United States

Robbery: Percent of population victimized

1988 1991 1994

0%

2%

4%

6%

England

United States

1995

Assault: Percent of population victimized

Figure 81

1988 1991 1994

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

England

United States

1995

Burglary: Percent of households victimized

Figure 82

1988 1991 1994

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

England

United States

1995

Auto theft: Percent of households victimized

Figure 80
England (including Wales) has

higher crime rates than the United

States according to 1995 national

crime victimization surveys. Are

English crime rates higher than

U.S. crime rates according to 1995

international crime victimization

surveys?

Earlier in the report, U.S. and English

crime rates were compared based on

data compiled from national crime

victimization surveys in the two countries. English crime rates for 1995

were found to be higher than U.S.

crime rates for all four crime categories

compared (robbery, assault, burglary,

and motor vehicle theft) (figures 1-4).

However, the two national crime

victimization surveys (called the "British

Crime Survey" in England and the

"National Crime Victimization Survey"

in the United States) were not specifically designed to be comparable to one

another. For example, in the British

Crime Survey, sampled respondents

are asked about victimizations that

occurred over a 12-month period; in

the U.S. National Crime Victimization

Survey they are asked about crimes

over a 6-month reference period. Also,

the British Crime Survey does not use

bounded interviews (a technique for

minimizing the tendency of respondents to unintentionally inflate the

number of victimizations that occurred

in the reference period by mentioning

crimes that occurred before the reference period) whereas the U.S. National

Crime Victimization Survey does use

bounded interviews.

In view of such design differences

between the two surveys, it is reasonable to ask whether England's higher

1995 survey crime rates might merely

reflect counting differences rather than

real differences in criminal victimization. One reason for doubting that

possibility is that the design differences

do not all operate to make England’s

crime problem appear worse than

America’s. For example, two counting

differences are England’s 12-month

reference period (versus America’s 6)

and England’s unbounded interviews

(versus America’s bounded ones).

While England’s unbounded interviews

do artificially make England crime rates

look worse than America’s, England’s

12-month reference period operates in

the other direction, artificially making

America’s crime situation look worse

than England’s. That is because

people have an easier time remembering crimes that occurred during the last

6 months than the last 12.

The question of whether England's

higher 1995 survey crime rates are

possibly attributable to different data

collection procedures is perhaps best 

answered by comparing crime rates

from victimization surveys that are

more nearly identical in design. Such

surveys exist. They are called the

international crime victimization

surveys and are completely distinct

from the national crime victimization

surveys. Three international crime

victimization surveys have been

conducted in England (including

Wales) and the United States: one

covering crimes committed in 1988,

one covering those committed in 1991,

and one covering those in 1995

(Mayhew and van Dijk, 1997, page 34

and table 1 of appendix 4). Nearly the

same years (1987, 1991, and 1995)

were surveyed in the two countries'

national crime victimization surveys.

International surveys have a major

shortcoming not present in national

surveys: their small samples and low

response rates. However, the major

strength of the international crime

victimization surveys is that they were

specifically designed for international

comparisons. Design differences that

hinder comparisons between the

national surveys are not present in the

international surveys. Consequently, if

results from international surveys

agree with results from national

surveys, confidence is enhanced that

findings from the national surveys are

not merely a reflection of their major

weaknesses for international

comparisons.

 

Turning now to the international crime

victimization surveys, results largely

parallel those from the national surveys

in three respects:

First, the international survey (figures

79-82) and the national survey (figures

1-4) both indicated that England had a

higher 1995 victimization rate than the

United States for each type of crime

(robbery, assault, burglary, motor

vehicle theft). 

Second, the national and the international surveys also showed some

similarities in trends since around

1987. According to both, England did

not have generally higher victimization

rates than the United States in the late

1980’s, but by 1995 England's rates

had all risen to levels exceeding those

in America. 

Third, the country that had the higher

victimization rate according to the

national survey was typically the

country that had the higher rate

according to the international survey.

For example, both surveys agree that

the robbery rate during the late 1980’s

was higher in the United States than in

England; the 1991 U.S. robbery rate

was higher than the English rate; and

the 1995 English robbery rate was

higher than the U.S. rate. More generally, of the 12 comparisons that could

be made (the 3 for robbery plus 3 for

assault, 3 for burglary, and 3 for auto

theft), 8 agreed on which country had

the higher victimization rate. There

was perfect agreement for robbery and

mostly agreement for burglary and auto

theft, although mostly disagreement for

assault. 

Methodology 49
American survey offenses

The number of victim-survey offenses,

comparable household and population

figures (numbers of persons aged 12

or over), and the probability of reporting

to the police were obtained from the

National Crime Victimization Survey

(NCVS). For example, the NCVS

estimated that there were 5,482,720

household burglaries in 1994 and that

51% of them were reported to the

police (BJS, 1997, tables 1 and 91).

Since there were an estimated

100,807,650 households in 1994,

the survey burglary rate was 54.4 per

1,000 households; about one in every

18 households was burglarized in 1994

(disregarding repeat victims).

The NCVS was redesigned in 1992 to

encourage more complete recall of

crimes, especially those committed by

intimates or family members (see

Perkins and others, 1996, Appendix II).

More detailed screening questions were

used, with more explicit specification of

different kinds of acts. To assess the

effect of the redesign, half of the 1992

interviews were carried out with the old

questionnaire format, and half were

carried out with the new questionnaire

format. It was concluded that the

redesign led to an increase of about

20% in the estimated number of burglaries and of about 24% in the estimated

number of aggravated assaults, but had

no significant effect on the estimated

number of robberies or motor vehicle

thefts, as revealed by victims (Rand,

Lynch, and Cantor, 1997). The redesign had a much greater effect on the

estimated number of rapes (up 157%);

however, victim-survey rapes are not

included in this report, because there is

no comparable victim-survey estimate

of rape for England.

The redesign affected not only

estimates of the frequency of aggravated assault and burglary, but also

estimates of the "percent reported to

police" for these two crimes. Under

the old questionnaire format, 62% of

aggravated assaults were reported to

police in 1992, versus 55% under the

new format. For burglary, 54% were

reported under the old; 51% under the

new. In both cases, percent reported

to police declined, possibly because

the biggest effect of the redesign was

to stimulate recall of less serious forms

of these two crimes. Being less serious

forms, they are less likely to be

reported to police.

As a result of the redesign, NCVS

estimates (both frequency and percent

reported to police) of aggravated assault and burglary for 1992 and beyond

are not comparable to pre-1992 estimates. Consequently, pre-1992 NCVS

estimates of frequency and "percent

reported to police" for aggravated assault and burglary (but not for robberies

or motor vehicle thefts) were backadjusted to make the pre-1992 figures

comparable to post-1991 figures. For

example, every pre-1992 burglary

estimate was increased by 20%. Similar

adjustments were made to the numbers

of offenses reported to the police.

For comparability with the BCS, only

completed motor vehicle thefts in the

NCVS were counted. All burglaries,

robberies, and aggravated assaults

were counted. 

The average number of offenders per

offense provides the link between

offenses and offenders. This was

obtained from three sources. For

robbery, rape, and aggravated assault,

the figures were estimated from the

table routinely published in the NCVS

(for example, BJS, 1992a, table 70).

For burglary and vehicle theft, the

figures were estimated from unpublished NCVS data. The homicide

figures were estimated from the FBI's

Supplemental Homicide Reports.

Since the average number of offenders

per offense was often based on small

numbers but could greatly affect probability estimates, the average figure over

all years (1981-94) was used in all calculations. This was 1.4 for burglary, 1.5

for motor vehicle theft, 1.8 for robbery,

1.5 for aggravated assault, 1.2 for rape,

and 1.15 for homicide.

American police-recorded offenses

The numbers of police-recorded crimes

were obtained from the 1995 UCR (FBI,

1996, table 1) and the 1996 UCR (FBI,

1997, table 1), which show the latest

estimates of the numbers of index

crimes committed in each year from

1981 to 1996. The UCR figures for

forcible rape are restricted to female

victims. The latest estimates of the

resident population in each year were

obtained from the Bureau of the Census (1996, table 14). For example,

there were 2,712,800 burglaries of

all kinds in 1994. Since the resident

population was estimated to be

260,341,000 in 1994, the policerecorded burglary rate was 10.4 

burglaries per 1,000 persons.

The numbers of police-recorded

offenses that were comparable to

survey offenses were estimated in

various ways. For burglary, the estimated proportion of residential as

opposed to non-residential burglaries

was used (for example, FBI, 1995, table

23). Since this was close to two-thirds

in every year, its average value in

1981-94 of .67 was used for each

year's calculations. Thus, in 1994, the

number of comparable police-recorded

burglaries was estimated to be

1,817,576 (2,712,800 x .67) For aggravated assault, the police-recorded

figure was reduced by 5% to take

account of the estimated proportion of

assaults on victims under age 12

(estimated from 1993 NIBRS data by

Jarvis, 1994) and hence excluded from

NCVS.

For robbery, the estimated proportion 

of offenses with personal victims was

used (for example, FBI, 1995, table 23).

On average in 1981-94, 78% of

Sources of American data

50 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96
robberies were against persons (street,

residential, miscellaneous) rather than

businesses (banks, gas stations, convenience stores, commercial); this

fraction was used for each year's

calculations. The number of robberies

was further reduced by 2% to take

account of the estimated proportion of

robbery victims under age 12 (Jarvis,

1994). It was then increased by 11%

to convert the number of incidents to

the number of victimizations, because

the UCR counts robbery incidents while

the NCVS counts robbery victimizations (that is, one victim = one offense).

The regular table in the NCVS (for

example, BJS, 1992a, table 56) shows

an average ratio of victims to incidents

of 1.11 in 1981-94.

For motor vehicle theft, it was assumed

that the proportion of completed offenses in the UCR figures was the same

as in offenses reported to the police by

victims. For example, according to the

NCVS in 1990 (BJS, 1992a, table 101),

94.8% of completed vehicle thefts were

reported to the police; 42.5% of

attempted vehicle thefts were also

reported to the police. It was determined that 78.7% of reported vehicle

thefts were completed as opposed to

attempted. Over all years, the average

was 80%, and there was no sign of a

trend in these percentages, so this

figure was used in all cases. Applying

80% to the number of police-recorded

vehicle thefts (1,635,900) yielded an

estimate of 1,308,720 police-recorded

completed thefts in 1990. This figure

was further reduced by 17% (to

1,086,238) to take account of the

proportion of vehicle thefts involving

business as opposed to personal

victims (Biderman and Lynch, 1991).

The number of police-recorded offenses that were comparable to survey

offenses makes it possible to estimate

the probability of a survey offense

being recorded by the police. For

example, for burglary in 1994, comparing 5,482,720 survey offenses to

1,817,576 comparable recorded

offenses yields the estimate that the

police were recording 33% of all

burglaries.

It is similarly possible to estimate the

probability that a survey offense

reported to the police would be

recorded by the police. For burglary

in 1994, comparing 2,796,187 offenses

(5,482,720 x .51) reported to the police

with 1,817,576 comparable recorded

offenses yields the estimate that the

police were recording 65% of offenses

reported to them. This probability was

slightly greater than 1 for vehicle theft

in 1986, presumably reflecting the fact

that the estimated number of vehicle

thefts varies within a confidence interval and that almost all that are reported

to the police are recorded by the police.

All probabilities estimated as greater

than 1.0 were set to 1.

American convictions

In the United States, the total number

of convictions is the sum of State

convictions plus Federal convictions

plus juvenile convictions. For example,

for burglary in 1994, there were an estimated 161,975 convictions (98,109

State; 146 Federal; 63,720 juvenile).

The conviction rate per 1,000 population was calculated by dividing this by

the resident population of persons

aged 10 or over (since few persons

under 10 are convicted); this was

221,890,000 in 1994 (Bureau of the

Census, 1996, table 14). Hence the

conviction rate for burglary in 1994 was

0.73 per 1,000 population; disregarding

repeat offenders, about one in every

1,400 persons was convicted of

burglary.

Federal convictions 1981-1994

Data on Federal convictions were

obtained from the BJS Federal Justice

Statistics Program (FJSP) (for 1981-

1988: BJS, 1992b, 1993, table 9) (for

1990: Langan, Perkins and Chaiken,

1994) (for 1992: Langan, 1996) (for

1994: Langan and Brown, 1997b).

State convictions 1986-1994

State court convictions were obtained

from the National Judicial Reporting

Program (NJRP) (for 1986: Langan,

1989) (for 1988: Langan and Dawson,

1990) (for 1990: Langan, Perkins and

Chaiken, 1994) (for 1992: Langan,

1996) (for 1994: Langan and Brown,

1997b). Motor vehicle theft was not

shown separately in 1986 and 1988,

so it was estimated as 18% of larceny

convictions, since 18% of larceny

convictions in 1990-94 were for motor

vehicle theft. The number of rape

convictions in 1986 was estimated

using the 1988 figure because the

figure from the 1986 NJRP survey

was thought to be unreliable. The rape

convictions include female offenders,

but consistently 99% of convicted

offenders were male (Langan, 1989:

Langan and Dawson, 1990; Langan

and Dawson, 1993; Langan and Graziadei, 1995; Langan and Brown,

1997a).

State convictions 1981 and 1983

Since the NJRP only began in 1986,

it was necessary to back-estimate the

number of convictions in State courts

in 1981 and 1983. Previously (Farrington, Langan, and Wikström, 1994), this

was achieved by assuming that the

change in the number of adults convicted for a particular crime was the

same as the change in the number

of adults arrested for that crime.

However, an estimation method

based on prison admissions proved to

be more defensible empirically.

 Methodology 51
In choosing between different estimation methods, the main criterion was

how well they reproduced known

changes in the number of convictions in

State courts in 1988-94. The first NJRP

survey, in 1986 (Langan, 1989), was

based on a random sample of 100

counties, whereas all subsequent NJRP

surveys have been based on a random

sample of 300 counties. Hence, it was

thought that changes in convictions in

1988-94 would be more reliable than

changes in convictions in 1986-94. In

1988, a total of 218,096 persons were

convicted in state courts of

murder/nonnegligent manslaughter,

rape, robbery, aggravated assault,

burglary or motor vehicle theft (Langan

and Dawson, 1990, table 1); the corresponding figure in 1994 was 262,435,

an increase of 20% (Langan and

Brown, 1997a, table 1). 

The number of adults (age 18 or over)

arrested for these six offenses, according to the UCR, was 965,462 in 1988

and 993,121 in 1994, an increase of 3%

(FBI, 1989, 1995). However, the

number of new admissions to State

prisons (new court commitments plus

violators returned with new sentences)

for these six offenses was 123,706 in

1988 (obtained by applying the 1988

offense distribution of new court commitments to the 1988 total number of

new admissions) and 144,940 in 1994

(obtained by applying the 1994 offense

distribution of new court commitments

to the 1994 total number of new admissions), an increase of 17% (Perkins

and Gilliard, 1992, table 1-5; BJS,

1991, tables 5.10a and 5.16; Brown

and others, 1996, tables 5.10a and

5.16; BJS, 1994, table 1-5). Hence,

the increase in the number of new

admissions to State prisons corresponded closely to the increase in the

number of convictions in State courts;

the number of new admissions was

57% of the number of convictions in

1988 and 55% in 1994. Also, the

number of new admissions to State

prisons according to State prison

records (as compiled through the

National Corrections Reporting

Program and National Prisoner Statistics) was similar to the number of

persons sentenced to prison according

to State court records (as compiled in

the NJRP), which was 125,471 in 1988

and 152,378 in 1994, an increase of

21% (Langan and Dawson, 1990;

Langan and Brown, 1997a).

The numbers of new admissions to

State prisons (new court commitments

plus violators returned with new sentences) for 1981 and 1983 were

obtained by applying the offense

distribution of new court commitments 

(Greenfeld and Minor-Harper, 1984,

table 3; Beck and Hester, 1986, table 3)

to the total number of new admissions

to State prisons (BJS, 1983; BJS,

1986). For example, there were

164,857 new admissions in 1981,

27.2% of which were for burglary,

leading to an estimate of 44,841

burglars admitted. Since the corresponding figure for 1988 was 49,539,

about 10.5% more burglars were admitted in 1988 than in 1981. Since the

number of convictions for burglary in

State courts in 1988 was 101,050, it

was estimated that the corresponding

number of convictions in 1981 was

91,467. All estimates of convictions in

State courts in 1981 and 1983 were

similarly based on changes in numbers

of sentenced persons admitted to State

prisons.

Estimates of juvenile convictions

1986-94

The number of juvenile convictions

was defined as the number of petitioned juvenile court cases resulting

in an adjudication for which the juvenile

received a disposition other than

transfer/waiver (to the adult court) or

dismissal/release. (Transferred cases

were excluded because they would

appear in State conviction figures.)

Two types of data were used to estimate the number of juvenile convictions

by offense: the nationwide number of

referrals to juvenile court, by offense;

and the percentage of referrals that

resulted in conviction. The source for

the first was the annual publication

Juvenile Court Statistics (JCS). The

source for the second was a database

maintained by the National Center for

Juvenile Justice (Snyder, 1995; Butts,

1996). Multiplying the number of juvenile court referrals by the percentage

that resulted in conviction gives the

number of juvenile convictions. For

example, there were an estimated

141,600 burglary cases in 1994 (Butts

et al., 1996, table 1), of which 45%

(Butts, 1996) were adjudicated and

received placement, probation or

another disposition (not including

transfer or dismissal), leading to an

estimated 63,720 juvenile burglary

convictions.

Estimates of juvenile convictions for

1981 and 1983

Data on the fractions of cases adjudicated and receiving various dispositions were not available before 1985.

Previously (Farrington, Langan and

Wikström, 1994), the numbers of

juvenile convictions in 1981 were

estimated from the numbers of

delinquency cases in 1981 (Snyder,

Finnegan and Hutzler, 1983, table 2),

assuming that the fractions were the

same as in 1986. However, the present

estimates were based on the correspondence between juvenile arrests

(under 18) as a percentage of all

arrests, and juvenile convictions as

a percentage of all convictions. For

example, for burglary in 1986-94, the

fraction of arrests involving juveniles

(34%) was consistently about 9 percentage points lower than the fraction

of convictions that were in the juvenile

court (43%). Since the fraction of

burglary arrests involving juveniles

was 43% in 1981 (FBI, 1982, table 31),

it was assumed that the fraction of

burglary convictions that were in the

juvenile court in 1981 was 52%. Since

52 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96
the total number of State and Federal

convictions for burglary in 1981 was

91,606, the estimated number of juvenile convictions was 99,240 (91,606 x

52/48).

Linking the number of convictions to

the total number of alleged offenders

The average number of offenders per

offense provides the link between

offenses and offenders. Since there

were an estimated 5,482,720 residential burglaries in 1994, and an average

of 1.4 offenders per offense (the average from 1981 through 1994), there

were about 7,675,808 offenders (not

necessarily different persons) at risk

of conviction for residential burglary.

Since residential burglaries comprise

67% of all burglaries, it was estimated

that there were about 11,456,430

offenders at risk of conviction for

burglaries of all types. Dividing this

by the number of persons convicted

(161,975) yields the estimate that there

were 71 offenders per conviction, or

that the average burglar could commit

about 71 burglaries per one conviction

for burglary. The corresponding probability of conviction for each burglary

offender was .014, or 14 convictions

per 1,000 alleged offenders.

The calculations for rape and homicide

were based only on police-recorded

offenses. For example, for rape in

1994, there were 102,220 recorded

offenses and 1.2 offenders per offense

(1.2 was the 1981-1994 NCVS average), yielding an estimated 122,664

offenders at risk of conviction for rape.

Dividing this by the number of persons

convicted of rape (23,047) yields the

estimate that there were about 5 offenders per conviction, that the probabiity

of an offender being convicted was .19,

or that there were 188 convictions per

1,000 alleged offenders.

American probability

of incarceration

In the United States, the total number

of incarceration sentences is the sum

of State plus Federal plus juvenile sentences. For example, for burglary in

1994, 96,369 offenders were sentenced to incarceration (73,582 State;

131 Federal; 22,656 juvenile). The

population incarceration rate per 1,000

population was calculated by dividing

this by the resident population of persons aged 10 or over (221,890,000 in

1994). Hence, the incarceration rate

for burglary in 1994 was 0.43 persons

incarcerated per 1,000 population;

about 1 in every 2,300 persons was

sentenced to incarceration for burglary.

The probability of incarceration following a conviction was calculated by

dividing the number of persons

sentenced to incarceration by the

number of persons convicted. For

burglary in 1994, this was .59

(96,369/161,975). The probability of an

offender receiving a custodial sentence

was calculated by multiplying the

probability of an offender being

convicted (0.014) by the probability of a

conviction being followed by incarceration (0.59). For burglary in 1994, this

was .008 (.014 x 0.59) corresponding

to 8 in every 1,000 alleged burglars

receiving a custodial sentence.

Federal incarceration sentences

1981-94

Data on Federal sentences were

obtained from the BJS Federal Justice

Statistics Program (for 1981 and 1983:

1982 figures are used from BJS, 1993)

(for 1986 and 1988: BJS, 1996) (for

1990: Langan, Perkins and Chaiken,

1994) (for 1992: Langan, 1996) (for

1994: Langan and Brown, 1997b).

State incarceration sentences 1986-94

Data on State incarceration sentences

were obtained from the BJS National

Judicial Reporting Program (for 1986:

Langan, 1989) (for 1988: Langan and

Dawson, 1990) (for 1990: Langan,

Perkins and Chaiken, 1994) (for 1992: 

Langan, 1996) (for 1994: Langan and

Brown, 1997b). Note, however, that

no 1988 NJRP data exist for motor

vehicle theft. For 1988 motor vehicle

theft, percentages receiving prison

and jail used 1988 larceny figures.

State incarceration sentences 1981-83

State courts in the United States

impose two types of incarceration

sentences: prison and jail. For the

years in which NJRP data were not

available (1981 and 1983), it was

necessary to estimate the percentage

of convicted persons receiving prison

and the percentage receiving jail. The

year with NJRP data closest to 1981

and 1983 is 1986, but 1986 NJRP data

are less reliable than 1988 NJRP data

because the former was based on a

sample of 100 counties whereas the

latter was based on 300 counties.

Therefore, 1981 and 1983 percentages

used 1988 percentages. Prison and

jail percentages have been stable over

the years. Therefore, using 1988

figures for 1981 and 1983 seemed

acceptable. Applying 1988 prison and

jail percentages to estimated 1981 and

1983 convictions gave the estimated

number of persons sentenced to incarceration those years. Note, however,

that no 1988 NJRP data exist for motor

vehicle theft. For motor vehicle theft in

1981 and 1983, the percentages

receiving prison and jail used 1988

larceny figures. Such percentages do

not differ much between larceny and

motor vehicle theft, according to NJRP

data for years in which the two could

be compared. 

Juvenile incarceration sentences

1986-94

As the term was used here, convicted

juveniles were juveniles who were

petitioned to the juvenile court where

Methodology 53
they were then adjudicated and finally

disposed of through placement, probation, or another disposition (not including transfer or dismissal). The number

of juvenile convictions multiplied by the

percentage that received placement

gives the number of juveniles sentenced to incarceration. Percentages

receiving different dispositions were

obtained from a database maintained

by the National Center for Juvenile

Justice (Snyder, 1995; Butts, 1996).

For example, for burglary in 1994, 36%

of convicted juveniles were given a

placement.

Juvenile incarceration sentences 1981

and 1983

Data on the percentage of convicted

juveniles sentenced to incarceration

(defined as placement) do not go back

before 1985. Estimates, by offense,

were taken from the average percentage from 1986 to 1994.

American sentence length, time

served, and days at risk of serving

Average sentence length was estimated by combining State, Federal, and

juvenile figures. For example, for

burglary in 1994, the average prison

sentence length was 69 months in

State courts (51,998 offenders) and 60

months in Federal courts (116 offenders). The average jail sentence length

was 7 months in State courts (21,584

offenders) and 9 months in Federal

courts (15 offenders). The average

juvenile confinement sentence was

18 months (22,656 offenders). The

weighted average of all these figures

was 43 months.

Similarly, average time served was

estimated by combining the State,

Federal, and juvenile figures. For

example, burglars sentenced to State

prison in 1994 would be expected to

serve 39% of their sentence, assuming 

they would serve the same percentage

of their sentence that State prisoners 

released in 1994 served, a figure that

includes time served in jail. Burglars

sentenced to jail in State courts in 1994

would be expected to serve 50% of

their sentence (the figure that was used

for jail sentences for all offenses and for

all years, since no national data exist on

percentage of jail sentence served).

Incarcerated Federal burglars would be

expected to serve 85% of their prison

sentence and 100% of their jail sentence (since Federal law requires that

100% of Federal jail sentences and a

minimum of 85% of Federal prison

sentences be served). Juvenile

burglars sentenced to incarceration

would be expected to serve 50% of

their sen- tence (the figure that was

used for juvenile incarceration sentences for all offenses and for all years,

since no national data exist on percentage of juvenile incarceration sentence

served). Using the preceding figures

on incarceration sentences, the overall

percentage of time served for burglary

was 42%. Consequently, the average

time served for burglary in 1994 was

estimated to be 18 months (since 42%

of 43 months — the overall average

incarceration sentence for burglary —

is 18 months).

"Days of incarceration an offender risks

serving" was obtained by multiplying

the probability of conviction given an

offense by the probability of incarceration given conviction and by the

average number of days served per

incarceration sentence. Thus, for

burglary in 1994, this was 4.6 days

(.014 x .59 x 548 days = 4.6 days 

when unrounded figures are used).

Federal estimates of incarceration

sentence length and time served

This report calls Federal sentences of

1 year or less "jail," and Federal sentences over a year "prison." The distinction between Federal prison and

jail sentences is important for estimating time served for persons sentenced

in 1988 and beyond because a Federal

law, which took effect in 1987, set different release policies for prison and jail

sentences. Data on Federal sentence

lengths were from the FJSP (for 1986-

1988: BJS, 1993) (for 1990: Langan,

Perkins and Chaiken, 1994) (for 1992:

Langan, 1996) (for 1994: Langan and

Brown, 1997b). For 1981 and 1983,

sentence lengths given for 1982 were

used (BJS, 1993).

The average time served for prison

sentences given in Federal courts

before 1987 was estimated from

McDonald and Carlson's (1992) report

showing that violent offenders served

54% of their sentences and property

offenders served 66%.

For 1988-94 the fraction of time served

for prison sentences was assumed to

be 85%, since this fraction, set by a

Federal law that took effect in 1987, is

the minimum time that must be served.

The average time served for jail

sentences given in Federal court was

assumed to be 100% for 1988-94, since

the same Federal law required all jail

sentences to be served in full. For

Federal defendants sentenced from

1990 to 1994, the percentage of their

incarceration sentence that they were

expected to serve was estimated by

taking a weighted average of the

number expected to serve 85% (that is,

the number sentenced to Federal

prison) and the number expected to

serve 100% (that is, the number

sentenced to jail). For example,

Federal courts in 1994 sentenced 116

burglars to prison and 15 to jail. The

116 were expected to serve 85% of

their prison sentence, and the 15 were

expected to serve 100% of their jail

sentence. The weighted average for

the 131 incarcerated burglars is 87%,

the percentage of Federal incarceration

sentences that burglars were expected

to serve. Because data were not available, the preceding method could not

be used to estimate the percentage of

incarceration sentences that Federal

defendants sentenced in 1988 were

54 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96
expected to serve. For 1988, the

percentage was estimated as the

average from 1990 to 1994.

State estimates of incarceration

sentence length and time served

1981-1983

For 1981 State prison sentences,

estimates used 1982 averages from

the National Corrections Reporting

Program (Minor-Harper and Greenfeld,

1985). The 1982 report was used

because the 1981 report (Greenfeld

and Minor-Harper, 1984) only provided

median sentence lengths, not means.

For 1983 prison sentences, estimates

were from the 1983 National Corrections Reporting Program (Beck and

Hester, 1986). The murder/nonnegligent manslaughter figures for 1981

and 1983 were weighted averages of

murder (.67) and manslaughter (.33),

reflecting the relative frequencies of

these cases among State prison

admissions. Average lengths of jail

sentences given in State courts in 1981

and 1983 were assumed to be the

same as NJRP published figures for

1988 (Langan and Dawson, 1990). 

Average jail sentence lengths for motor

vehicle theft in 1981 and 1983 used

1988 sentences for larceny.

Data from the National Corrections

Reporting Program (NCRP) were the

source for 1981 and 1983 estimates of

percentage of sentence served before

release. For 1981, percentages were

from 1981 NCRP data. Published

1981 figures on percentage of

sentence served (Greenfeld and MinorHarper, 1984) were adjusted upward to

correct for the fact that they included

time in prison before release but not

credited jail time. For the murder

adjustment, 5 percentage points were

added; for rape, 6; robbery, 6; assault,

9; burglary, 8; motor vehicle theft, 11.

The basis for the adjustment was

results of an analysis of 1992-1994

NCRP data. For 1983, percentages

used 1984 NCRP data on time served

(Minor-Harper and Innes, 1987, table

4). This report was used because it

provides time served in prison and jail

for persons released from prison. 

State estimates of incarceration

sentence length and time served

1986-1994

With few exceptions, estimates of

incarceration (prison and jail) sentence

length from 1986 to 1994 are from the

BJS National Judicial Reporting Program (for 1986: Langan, 1989) (for

1988: Langan and Dawson, 1990) (for

1990: Langan, Perkins and Chaiken,

1994) (for 1992: Langan, 1996) (for

1994: Langan and Brown, 1997b).

For 1986 and 1988, jail sentences for

motor vehicle theft use published

larceny figures. For 1986 and 1988,

the average lengths of prison sentences for motor vehicle theft are from

the National Corrections Reporting

Program (for 1986: Perkins, 1992)

(for 1988: Perkins and Gilliard, 1992).

The average time served for prison

sentences given in State courts was

estimated using NCRP data on average sentence length and average

time served (time served in prison plus

credited jail time) for first releases from

State prison. Time served divided by

sentence length gives percentage of

sentence served. In the case of burglary in 1994, 5 months jail time was

added to the average 23 months

prison time served by released prisoners, making an average 28 months

served, or 39% of the average sentence (28/72). This fraction of the

sentence was then applied to the

average 69 month prison sentence

given in State courts for burglary in

1994 (Langan and Brown, 1997a, table

3) to produce an expected time to be

served of 27 months.

Time-served percentages for State

prison sentences were from the National Corrections Reporting Program for

all years (for 1994: Langan and Brown,

1997b) (for 1992: Langan, 1996). For

1990, time-served percentages were

computed by summing time served in

prison before release (Perkins, 1993)

plus time served in jail (based on the

approximate 1992-1994 average of 10

months for murder; 6 months for all

other offenses), and dividing by the

maximum sentence length (table 2-7).

For 1988, the steps were the same as

in 1990 but the data source was different (Perkins and Gilliard, 1992, table

2-7). For 1986, the steps were the

same as in 1988 but the data source

was different (Perkins, 1992, table 2-6).

The average time served for jail sentences given in State courts is not

known, but it was assumed to be half

the sentence length (as was found in

California by Petersilia, Turner and

Peterson, 1986, page 13). 

Juvenile estimates of incarceration

sentence length and time served

There is no published source of

national data on sentence length and

time served by juveniles for different

offenses. The only nationally representative survey of youth in long-term

State juvenile institutions was carried

out in 1987. This reported that the

average time currently served by these

inmates was 7.2 months for violent

offenders and 5.0 months for nonviolent offenders (Beck, Kline and Greenfeld, 1988, table 5). Assuming that

youth were surveyed at a random point

in their sentences, the total time served

would be 14.4 months for violent

offenders and 10.0 months for nonviolent offenders. These estimates are

not too dissimilar from the total length

of stay figures published by the

National Juvenile Corrections System

Reporting Program, based on information from State juvenile correctional

agencies: 385 days for person offenses

and 250 days for property offenses

(DeComo and others, 1995, table

4-15).

Methodology 55
Offense-specific data were obtained

from the National Juvenile Corrections

System Reporting Program (Cohen,

1997). These data show the average

lengths of stay for juveniles released

in 1991 from State juvenile institutions: 

homicide 839 days, rape 655 days,

robbery 386 days, aggravated assault

389 days, burglary 265 days, and motor

vehicle theft 229 days. How much time

these juveniles spent in aftercare

supervision following their release is

unknown, but their overall sentence

length can be thought of as their time in

confinement plus their time in aftercare.

Assuming that their length of time in

confinement equals their length of time

in aftercare, the average juvenile sentence for murder in 1991 was 1,678

days (2 x 839); for rape, 1,310 days (2

x 655); for robbery, 772 days (2 x 386);

for assault, 778 days (2 x 389); for

burglary, 530 days (2 x 265); for motor

vehicle theft, 458 days (2 x 229). For

juveniles, therefore, their time-served

percentage would be 50% of their

sentence.

The preceding 1991 figures on juvenile

sentence length, time served, and percentage of time served, were used in

all years. The justification for using the

50% figure was results of an informal

survey of four States, which indicated

that the time spent in aftercare was

roughly comparable to the time spent in

confinement.

More adequate figures, collected on an

annual basis, are clearly needed both

on length of time in juvenile confinement and on length of stay in aftercare. 

American homicide

Special procedures were used to

estimate murder sentence lengths and

time served for homicide (murder and

nonnegligent manslaughter) because of

the large number of life sentences.

Similar allowances were not made for

other offenses, because of their infrequency. For example, in 1994,

whereas 23.7% of homicide cases in

State courts were given life sentences,

this was true of 1.6% of rapes, 0.9% of

robberies, 0.2% of aggravated assaults,

0.2% of burglaries, and a negligible

fraction of motor vehicle thefts (Langan

and Brown, 1997a, page 3).

Death sentences were treated as

equivalent to life sentences because

the majority of offenders given death

sentences ultimately are resentenced to

life imprisonment.

According to unpublished NCRP

tabulations, the average time served

in State prison by released homicide

cases serving life sentences was 152

months in 1990, 151 months in 1992,

and 146 months in 1994. Interestingly,

lifers who died in prison had served

almost exactly the same time as lifers

who were released (137 as opposed to

146 months in 1994). To this prisontime served was added the average

time served in jail (10 months) by

homicide offenders. The average total

time served in 1990-94 (160 months)

was used as the estimated time served

in 1981-88. The average effective

sentence length was estimated on the

basis of the fraction of time served by

homicide cases with non-life sentences. For example, this was 47% in

1994 (Langan and Brown, 1997a, table

4). Hence, the effective length of a life

sentence in State court for homicide in

1994 was considered to be 332 months

(156/.47).

A Federal law (the Sentencing Reform

Act 1984) that went into effect in 

November 1987 specified that all

Federal life sentences must be served

in full, with no parole. In 1994, 9% of

sentences in Federal court for homicide

were life sentences (Sabol, 1997), and

this percentage was used for all previous years. The average age of

homicide offenders receiving life

sentences is about 30, and about half

are white and half are black. At age 30,

a white male can expect to live 44.7

more years, and a black male 38.2

more (Bureau of the Census, 1994,

table 116). Hence, it was assumed

that the average sentence length and

time served in 1988-94 for homicide

offenders in Federal court receiving life

sentences was about 40 years (480

months). The average sentence length

and time served for 1981-86 were

estimated from the State court figures.

The average sentence length and

average time served for homicide

were estimated by combining the

State, Federal, and juvenile figures.

For example, in 1994, the average

prison sentence length was 332

months for lifers in State courts (2,846

sentenced to life and 276 sentenced

to death), 269 months for non-lifers in

State courts (8,285 offenders), 480

months for lifers in Federal courts (14

offenders), and 153 months for

non-lifers in Federal courts (127 offenders). The average jail sentence length

was 7 months in State courts (240

offenders) and 8 months in Federal

courts (5 offenders). The average

juvenile confinement sentence was 56

months (720 offenders). The weighted

average of all these figures was 266

months. Similarly, the average time

served by homicide cases in 1994 was

estimated to be 127 months, and the

percentage of time served was 48%.

An American offender's probability

of arrest, and an arrested offender's

probability of conviction

An offender's probability of arrest was

calculated by dividing the number of

persons allegedly committing a crime

by the number arrested for that crime.

The number of persons allegedly committing a crime was calculated by multiplying the number of crimes committed

by the average number of persons

committing the crime. For robbery,

assault, burglary, and motor vehicle

theft, the number of persons allegedly

committing a crime was obtained from

the NCVS; for murder, from the FBI's

56 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96
Supplemental Homicide Reports; for

the number of rapes, from the FBI's

Uniform Crime Reports; for the average

number of rapists, from the NCVS.

The probability of an arrest resulting in

a conviction was calculated by dividing

the number convicted by the number 

arrested. The number arrested was

obtained from the FBI's Uniform Crime

Reports; the number convicted, from

sources described previously.

Racial disparities in American

incarceration rates

The 1991 estimates of racial disparities

were calculated from national survey

data on adults incarcerated in State

and Federal prisons in 1991 and in

local jails in 1989 (Lynch and others,

1994). To obtain estimates of the

number of adults of each race that was

incarcerated in 1991, the incarceration

population (Lynch and others, 1994,

page 3) was multiplied by the racial

distribution of the incarceration population (Lynch and others, 1994, table 11).

To estimate race-specific incarceration

rates per 100,000 population, each

race's incarcerated population was

divided by its general population size.

Methodology 57
English survey offenses

In England the number of victim-survey

offenses, comparable population figures

(number of households and number of

persons aged 16 or over), and the

probability of reporting to the police

were obtained from the British Crime

Survey or “BCS” (Mirrlees-Black,

Mayhew and Percy, 1996; Mayhew,

1996). The figures used in the report

are the latest estimates for all years,

taking account of the 1991 Census.

For example, the BCS estimated that

there were 1,754,057 household burglaries in 1995, and that 66% of them were

reported to the police (Mirrlees-Black,

Mayhew and Percy, 1996, table 2.3).

Since there were an estimated

21,159,000 households in 1995, the

survey burglary rate was 82.9 per 1,000

households; disregarding repeat

victims, about one in every 12 households was burglarized in 1994.

Necessarily, BCS survey crime rates

for robbery and serious assault (wounding) are per 1,000 population aged 16

or over, whereas comparable NCVS

estimates are per 1,000 population

aged 12 or over. Motor vehicle theft

figures refer to completed thefts only.

Other population estimates came from

the Office for National Statistics (1996);

again, figures used in this report are the

latest estimates for all years.

The main change in the BCS over

the years was the addition of a new

screening question for domestic violence ("Has any member of your household deliberately hit you with their fists

or with a weapon of any sort or kicked

you or used force or violence in any

other way?") and a new victim form in

1993. This caused an increase in the

number of victim-survey offenses of

serious assault. Mayhew (1997) and

Percy (1998) provided serious assault

estimates with and without the new

domestic violence screening question:

691,633 (without) and 761, 205 (with)

in 1993; 823,344 (without) and 860,395

(with) in 1995. For comparability with

1981-91, the "without" figures are used

in these analyses.

For burglary, vehicle theft, robbery, and

serious assault, the average number of

offenders per offense was provided

from the BCS by Mirrlees-Black (1996).

For homicide, this was obtained from

the annual Criminal Statistics (for

example, Home Office, 1996a, page

73). As with the American calculations,

the average over all years was used in

estimating probabilities. This was 1.8

for burglary, 2.1 for motor vehicle theft,

2.4 for robbery, 2.0 for serious assault,

and 1.1 for homicide. For rape, the only

national data on the number of offenders per offense seems to be that

published by Grace, Lloyd and Smith

(1992) for offenses committed in 1985.

They reported that, for police-recorded

offenses, there were 1.1 offenders per

rape offense. This figure was used in

all calculations.

English police-recorded offenses

The numbers of police-recorded offenses were obtained from the annual

Criminal Statistics (for example, Home

Office, 1996a, tables 2.15 - 2.18).

The number of police-recorded

offenses refers to the number initially

recorded by the police in each offense

category in each year, irrespective of

later court proceedings. Assault

comprised section 5 wounding (mainly

causing grievous bodily harm) and

section 8 wounding (mainly causing

actual bodily harm). Vehicle theft

comprised theft or unauthorized taking

of motor vehicles and aggravated

vehicle taking. Only rape of a female

was counted. To illustrate rate calculations, there were 1,239,484 burglaries

of all kinds in 1995. Since the resident

population was estimated to be

51,820,000 in 1995, the policerecorded burglary rate was 23.9 burglaries per 1000 persons.

The numbers of police-recorded

offenses that were comparable to

survey offenses were provided by

Mayhew (1996). The estimation

procedures were explained by Mayhew,

Maung and Mirrlees-Black (1993,

pages 163-167). For example, the

643,645 police-recorded burglaries in a

dwelling (including aggravated burglaries) in 1995 were considered to be

comparable to the BCS burglaries. The

other main adjustments were to exclude

thefts of commercial vehicles, attempted vehicle thefts, and victims under 16.

However, robberies of business

property were counted in the BCS.

As before, dividing the number of

comparable police-recorded offenses

by the number of survey offenses yields

the probability of a survey offense being

recorded by the police. For burglary in

1995, this was .37 (643,645/1,754,057).

Similarly, the probability of a reported

burglary being recorded by the police in

1995 was .55 (643,645/1,162,940).

The fact that the probability of a

reported offense being recorded was

greater than 1 for vehicle theft in 1981

and 1983 is probably a function of the

confidence interval around the number

of reported offenses and the fact that

almost all of the reported offenses

would have been recorded. The

probability was set to 1.

English convictions

The number of persons convicted for

each offense was obtained from the

annual Supplementary Criminal Statistics (for example, Home Office, 1996b,

tables S1.1A and S2.1A). It is necessary to add convictions in Crown

Courts and Magistrates' Courts. In

some cases, it was also necessary to

add different offense categories (murder, manslaughter, infanticide, and

manslaughter due to diminished

responsibility for homicide; section 5

and 8 woundings for assault; theft of a

motor vehicle, unauthorized taking, and

indictable and summary aggravated

Sources of English data

58 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96
vehicle taking for vehicle theft). As

already explained, the rape convictions

for 1995 included male and female

victims and male and female offenders.

The Supplementary Criminal Statistics

showed that 556 of the 569 convicted

offenders were male. Ayres (1997)

further specified that 547 of the 556

male offenders had female victims. 

As an example, 35,346 persons were

convicted for burglary in 1995. Since

there were an estimated 45,031,000

persons aged 10 or older in 1995

(Office for National Statistics, 1996),

the conviction rate for burglary was

0.78 per 1000 population at risk. Since

there were an estimated 1,754,057

household burglaries in 1995 and an

estimated 1.8 offenders per offense,

there were about 3,157,303 offenders

(not necessarily different persons) who

could in theory have been convicted for

household burglary. Since household

burglaries comprised about 52% of all

recorded burglaries in 1995, there were

about 6,080,100 offenders at risk of

conviction for burglaries of all types.

Dividing this by the number of persons

convicted (35,346) yields the estimate

that there were 172 offenders per

conviction, or that the probability of

conviction for each burglary offender

was .0058 in 1995 (5.8 convictions per

1,000 offenders). As before, the calculations for rape and homicide were

based only on police-recorded

offenses.

English probability of incarceration

The number of persons sentenced to

incarceration for each offense was

obtained from the Supplementary

Criminal Statistics (for example, Home

Office, 1996b, tables S1.1A and

S2.1A). As before, it was necessary to

add Crown Courts and Magistrates'

Courts and different offense categories.

It was also necessary to add different

types of custodial sentences (in 1995:

imprisonment, detention in a young

offender institution, secure hospital

order, and detention under section 53

of the Children and Young Persons Act

1933; in 1981: imprisonment, borstal

(reformatory), detention center, secure

hospital order, detention under section

53 of the Children and Young Persons

Act 1933).

As an example, 13,497 offenders were

given custodial sentences for burglary

in 1995, or 38% of all convicted burglary offenders. The incarceration rate

for burglary in 1995 was 0.30 per 1000

persons aged 10 or over. As before,

the probability of an offender receiving

a custodial sentence was calculated

by multiplying the probability of an

offender being convicted by the probability of a conviction being followed by

incarceration. For burglary in 1995,

this was .0022, corresponding to one in

every 450 burglars receiving a custodial sentence (2.2 per 1,000 offenders).

English sentence length, time

served, and days at risk of serving

Offense-specific data on average 

sentence length and average time

served in prison by released prisoners

(including juveniles) were supplied by

Burns (1996). Figures are for offenders released in 1982, 1984, 1988,

1991, 1993, and 1995. Initially, it was

thought that the following year was the

most relevant (for example, because

most robbers sentenced to incarceration in 1981 were released in 1982).

However, 1992 data were not available

at the time of the last analysis (Farrington, Langan and Wikström, 1994), so

1991 data were used, and hence 1993

and 1995 data were used

subsequently.

Offense-specific data on average

sentence length were published for

the first time in the 1995 Supplementary Criminal Statistics (Home Office,

1996b, tables S1.4, S1.5, S2.5 and

S2.6), but these figures were not used

in this report (in the interests of comparability with earlier years).

The offense categories of prisoners are

slightly different from those used in the

Criminal Statistics, but "assault" and

"wounding" in the prison data are

approximately equivalent to the two

"wounding" categories in the Criminal

Statistics, and "taking and driving

away" in the prison data covers at least

95% of those sentenced to incarceration for vehicle theft in the Criminal

Statistics (Barclay, 1993). The

average sentence length and average

time served for assault were weighted

combinations of the assault and

wounding categories (weighted by the

number of released offenders).

As an example, the average sentence

length for burglary in 1995 was 14.9

months, and the average time served

was 6.5 months, or 44% of the sentence. The average number of days

served per conviction was 76 (.382 x

6.5 x 365.25/12). The average number

of days served per burglar was 0.44

(76 x .0058).

There are no English national data

routinely published on time served in

incarceration before conviction. However, the report of the Carlisle committee (1988, page 147), based on 1987

releasees, estimated that about 10%

of a prisoner's sentence was spent on

remand before sentencing. The

English figures on time served have not

been adjusted to take this time into

account.

English homicide

As in the United States, special estimation procedures were used for homicide because of the large number

of life sentences. In England, a life

sentence (or an equivalent indeterminate sentence for a juvenile) is mandatory for murder. In 1995, 214 life

sentences (including indeterminate

section 53 orders for juveniles) were

given for murder, 12 life sentences

were given for manslaughter, and 182

non-life prison sentences (including

Methodology 59
section 53 orders) were given for

manslaughter (Home Office, 1996b,

tables S2.1A, S2.5 and S2.6). There

were also 21 secure hospital orders for

homicide. Apart from these, 55%

(226/408) of the custodial sentences for

homicide in 1995 were life sentences.

In 1995, the average time served by

homicide offenders first released from

life sentences was 13.6 years or 163

months (Burns, 1996). In concordance

with the American estimates, the effective length of life sentences was estimated on the basis of the fraction of

time served by homicide cases with

non-life sentences. For non-life homicide offenders released in 1995, the

average sentence length was 48.4

months and the average time served

was 21.0 months, or 43% of the sentence (Burns, 1996). Hence, the

effective length of a life sentence for

homicide in 1995 was considered to

be 376 months (163/.43).

The average sentence length and

average time served for homicide were

weighted averages of life and non-life

sentences. For example, in 1995, the

average sentence length was 226 x 376

(life sentences) + 182 x 48.4 (non-life

sentences), divided by 408, which

came to 230 months.

Racial disparities in English

incarceration rates

Racial disparities were calculated from

1991 national survey data on adults

incarcerated in Prison Service facilities.

To obtain estimates of the number of

adults of each race who were incarcerated in 1991, the incarceration population (Lynch and others, 1994, page 3)

was multiplied by the racial distribution

of the incarceration population (Lynch

and others, 1994, table 11). To estimate race-specific incarceration rates

per 100,000 population, each race's

incarcerated population was divided by

its general population size (Lynch and

others, 1994, table 11 note).

Prior research

This research is a continuation of two

previous projects. The first analysis

(Farrington and Langan, 1992) linked

up national-level data in the United

States and England to estimate

numbers flowing through the criminal

justice system at each stage, from

crimes committed to crimes reported

to the police, crimes recorded by the

police, offenders convicted, offenders

sentenced to incarceration, average

sentence length, and average time

served. The numbers were estimated

for 1981 and 1986 in the United States,

and for 1981 and 1987 in England. The

second report (Farrington, Langan and

Wikström, 1994) extended the previous 

analyses to between 1981 and 1991 for

England and between 1981 and 1990

for the United States. It also presented

national estimates for the six serious

offenses for Sweden in 1981 and 1991.

The methods of estimation used in the

present report are generally much

simpler than those used in previous

reports. For example, instead of using

the fraction of burglaries that were

residential in each year (as before), the

present report uses the average

fraction over all years (.67) for every

year's calculation, because this fraction

did not change over the years.

60 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96
Notes on figures 1-82

Notes on figures 1-4: National surveys

of crime victimization provided the data

for the graphics. U.S. surveys involve

interviews with persons age 12 or

older; English surveys, age 16 or older.

The first U.S. survey was done for the

year 1973; the first English survey,

1981. U.S. surveys are done every

year but less often in England. Only

the U.S. survey estimates rape victimization. In the graphics, robbery was

defined in both countries as

non-commercial robbery; assault was

defined as aggravated assault in the

U.S., and wounding in England;

burglary was defined in both countries

as residential burglary (excluding

commercial burglary); motor vehicle

theft was defined in both countries as

completed non-commercial motor

vehicle theft (excluding unsuccessful

attempts and excluding thefts

of commercial vehicles). Note that

pre-1992 U.S. estimates for assault

and burglary were adjusted to make

them comparable to later year

estimates. 

Notes on figures 5-10: Crimes that

were officially recorded in police statistics provided the data for the graphics.

Victims of all ages are counted in

police statistics. For these graphics,

murder was defined as murder or

nonnegligent manslaughter in the

United States, and murder/manslaughter or infanticide in England; rape was

defined in both countries as forcible

penetration of a female; robbery was

defined in both countries as all types of

robbery (both residential and commercial robberies); assault was defined as

aggravated assault in the United

States, and wounding in England;

burglary was defined in both countries

as all types of burglary (both residential

and commercial); motor vehicle theft

was defined in both countries as all

thefts of motor vehicles (both residential and commercial, both completed

and attempted).

Notes on figures 11-14: In the national

crime victimization surveys (described

in Notes on figures 1-4), victims are

asked whether the crime committed

against them was reported or became

known to police. Crime definitions for

the graphics are given in Notes on

figures 1-4. Note that pre-1992 U.S.

estimates for assault and burglary were

adjusted to make them comparable to

later year estimates. 

Notes on figures 15-18: To make

police data comparable to data from

victim surveys, crimes were eliminated

from police data that were outside the

scope of the specific crimes investigated in victim surveys (such as those

against persons under 12 in the United

States and under 16 in England). The

number of serious crimes recorded by

police during the year (based on

estimates from police recorded crime

data, adjusted to exclude crimes that

are outside the scope of victim

surveys) divided by the number

reported to police that year (based on

crime victimization surveys) gives the

"Percent recorded by police." Crime

definitions for the graphics are given in

Notes on figures 1-4.

Notes on figures 19-24: Data compiled

by courts nationwide (State, Federal

and juvenile courts in the United

States; juvenile and adult courts in

England) formed the basis for the

conviction rate, defined for all offenses

except rape as the number of persons

convicted during the year per 1,000

population age 10 or older. (Age 10

is the minimum conviction age in

England. No U.S. minimum exists,

but rarely do juvenile court referrals

involve children under age 10 (25,000

out of 1.5 million cases in 1994 according to Loeber and Farrington, 1998,

page 24.)) For rape, the conviction

rate is the number of convictions per

1,000 male population (ages 10 or

older), since rape is almost exclusively

a crime committed by males. In the

United States, convicted juveniles were

defined as adjudicated delinquents,

excluding those dismissed or transferred to adult court. (Transferred

juveniles who were convicted as adults

in adult court were included in State

court cases.) Since 1986, national

conviction data in the United States

have been compiled every 2 years.

National conviction data in England

are compiled annually. However, for

comparability, English convictions are

shown for years in which crime victim

surveys were conducted. U.S. convictions are shown for all years in which

national data exist or were estimated.

Convictions for vehicle theft in the

United States are conservatively

estimated. Crime definitions for the

graphics are given in Notes on figures

5-10.

Notes on figures 25-30: Conviction

data compiled by courts nationwide

(courts are identified in Notes on

figures 19-24) were used in estimates

of the number of convictions per 1,000

alleged offenders. For all crimes

except murder and rape, the number of

convictions per 1,000 alleged offenders

was obtained by dividing the number of

juveniles and adults convicted of the

specified crime during the year (based

on court conviction data) by the

number of persons committing the

crime (and therefore at risk of being

convicted) that year (based on

estimates from crime victim surveys,

adjusted to include crimes — such as

those against persons under 12 in the

United States and under 16 in England

— outside the scope of the surveys).

The number of persons at risk of

conviction is not the same as the

number of survey crimes, because

each crime can be committed by more

than one person. The number of persons at risk of being convicted was

estimated by multiplying the number of

survey crimes by the average number

of offenders per offense. For murder

and rape, the number of convictions

per 1,000 alleged offenders was

obtained by dividing the number of

Methodology 61
juveniles and adults convicted of

murder or rape in the year (based on

court conviction data) by the policerecorded number that year of juveniles

and adults "allegedly" committing

murder (alleged number of murderers =

number of police-recorded murders

multiplied by the average number of

murderers per murder according to

police data) or rape (alleged number of

rapists = number of police-recorded

rapes multiplied by the average number

of rapists per rape). More details on the

conviction data for the graphics is given

in Notes on figures 19-24. Crime definitions for the graphics are given in Notes

on figures 5-10. 

Notes on figures 31-36: Data compiled

by courts nationwide (courts are identified in Notes on figures 19-24) formed

the basis for estimates of the percentage of convicted offenders sentenced

to incarceration. In the United States,

place of incarceration includes State

prisons and local jails for adults

convicted in State courts; Federal

prisons for persons convicted in

Federal courts; residential institutions

(for example, juvenile training schools)

for juveniles convicted in juvenile

courts. In England, place of confinement includes prisons, young offender

institutions, and secure accommodation

for juveniles. Juveniles in England are

incarcerated in two types of facilities:

those that are exclusively for juveniles

(secure accommodation for juveniles),

and those for persons under age 21

(young offender institutions). More

details on the conviction data for the

graphics is given in Notes on figures

19-24. Crime definitions are given in

Notes on figures 5-10.

Notes on figures 37-42: Sentencing

data compiled by courts nationwide

(courts are identified in Notes on figures

19-24) formed the basis for the incarceration rate, defined for all offenses

except rape as the number of persons

sentenced to incarceration during the

year per 1,000 population (age 10 or

older). For rape, the incarceration rate

is the number of convicted rapists

sentenced to incarceration during the

year per 1,000 male population (age 10

or older). Incarceration is defined in

Notes on figures 31-36. More details

on the conviction data for the graphics

is given in Notes on figures 19-24.

Crime definitions for the graphics are

given in Notes on figures 5-10.

Notes on figures 43-48: Sentencing

data compiled by courts nationwide

(courts are identified in Notes on figures

19-24) were used in estimates of the

number of incarcerated persons per

1,000 alleged offenders. For all crimes

except murder and rape, the number of

incarcerated persons per 1,000 alleged

offenders was obtained by dividing the

number of juveniles and adults

sentenced to incarceration for the

specified crime during the year (based

on court conviction data) by the number

of persons committing the crime (and

therefore at risk of being incarcerated)

that year (based on estimates from

crime victim surveys, adjusted to

include crimes — such as those against

persons under 12 in the United States

and under 16 in England — outside the

scope of the surveys). The number of

persons at risk of incarceration is not

the same as the number of survey

crimes, because each crime can be

committed by more than one person.

The number of persons at risk of being

incarcerated was estimated by multiplying the number of survey crimes by the

average number of offenders per

offense. For murder and rape, the

number of incarcerations per 1,000

alleged offenders was obtained by

dividing the number of juveniles and

adults incarcerated for murder or rape

in the year (based on court conviction

data) by the police-recorded number

that year of juveniles and adults "allegedly" committing murder (alleged

number of murders = number of policerecorded murders multiplied by the

average number of murderers per

murder according to police homicide

data) or rape (alleged number of rapists

= number of police-recorded rapes

multiplied by the average number of

rapists per rape according to victim

survey data in the United States and

police data in England). Incarceration

is defined in Notes on figures 31-36.

More details on the conviction and

sentencing data for the graphics is

given in Notes on figures 19-24. Crime

definitions for the graphics are given in

Notes on figures 5-10.

Notes on figures 49-54: All figures

pertain to “maximum” sentence length

imposed. In England, sentence lengths

were based on sentences imposed on

released offenders by juvenile and adult

courts nationwide. In the United States,

adult sentence lengths were based on

sentences imposed in the year by State

and Federal courts nationwide, but

juvenile sentence lengths were not

based on sentences imposed by

juvenile courts. Unlike juvenile courts in

England, those in the United States

generally do not impose sentences of a

specified length; instead, sentences are

of an indeterminate length. Nevertheless a way was devised to specify

juvenile sentence lengths in the United

States. U.S. juvenile sentence lengths

were estimated as the sum of length of

time in confinement plus length of time

in aftercare. Assuming that length of

time in aftercare (a measure that is

largely unavailable in the United States)

equals length of time in confinement

(a measure that is somewhat available), doubling the confinement length

provides an estimate of juvenile sentence length (see the methodology

section for the justification for this

assumption). In the United States, 

juvenile sentence lengths were therefore derived from available multi-state

data on time served by juveniles before

release from incarceration. Incarceration is defined in Notes on figures

31-36. More details on the conviction

and sentencing data for the graphics is

given in Notes on figures 19-24. In both

countries, sentence lengths for murder

62 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96
included life sentences. Crime definitions for the graphics are given in

Notes on figures 5-10. 

Notes on figures 55-60: "Time served"

is based on correctional institution data

on persons released nationwide from

incarceration during the year. Incarceration is defined in Notes on figures

31-36. Fragmentary data on "time

served" had to be assembled to form

national estimates of time served in the

United States. National data on "time

served" were specially calculated in

England (for offenders released from

prisons or young offender institutions)

for years in which crime victim surveys

were conducted. For the sake of consistency, "time served" in the United

States is shown for years covered in

previous graphics. Crime definitions

for the graphics are given in Notes on

figures 5-10.

Notes on figures 61-66: National data

on released offenders show what

percentage of their total sentence they

had served before being released.

These data form the primary basis for

the "Percent of sentence served" in the

graphics. "Percent of sentence served"

is the percentage served among

offenders (juvenile and adult) released

from incarceration in the year. Incarceration is defined in Notes on figures

31-36. "Percent of sentence served"

was obtained by dividing "time served"

by "sentence imposed." Fragmentary

data on "percent of sentence served"

had to be assembled to form national

estimates of "percent of sentence

served" in the United States. National

data on sentence length and time

served were specially calculated in

England for years in which crime victim

surveys were conducted. For the sake

of consistency, "percent of sentence

served" in the United States is shown

for years covered in previous graphics.

In both countries, "percent of sentence

served" for murder included life sentences. Crime definitions for the graphics are given in Notes on figures 5-10.

Notes on figures 67-72: "Days of incarceration an offender risks serving"

were obtained by multiplying the

probability of conviction given an

offense (Notes on figures 25-30) by the

probability of incarceration given

conviction (Notes on figures 31-36) and

by the average number of days served

per incarceration sentence (Notes on

figures 55-60). Incarceration is defined

in Notes on figures 31-36. Fragmentary data on "time served" had to be

assembled to form national estimates

of "Days of incarceration an offender

risks serving" in the United States.

National data on "time served" were

specially calculated in England for

years in which crime victim surveys

were conducted. "Days of incarceration an offender risks serving" in

England is shown for years in which

crime victim surveys were conducted.

"Days of incarceration an offender risks

serving" in the United States is shown

for years covered in previous graphics.

Crime definitions for the graphics are

given in Notes on figures 5-10.

Notes on figures 73-78: All figures

pertain exclusively to the United States.

Probability of arrest for persons

suspected of committing a crime was

obtained by dividing the nationally

estimated total number of persons (all

ages) arrested (based on FBI arrest

data) by the nationally estimated total

number of persons (all ages) allegedly

committing crime that year (see Notes

on figures 25-30). Probability of

conviction for persons arrested was

obtained by dividing the nationally

estimated total number of persons

convicted (see Notes on figures 19-24)

by the nationally estimated total

number of persons (all ages) arrested.

Crime definitions for the graphics are

given in Note on figures 5-10.

Notes on figures 79-82: In these

graphs, assault includes threats;

burglary does not include attempts;

and auto theft excludes thefts of

motorcycles.

Methodology 63
Ayres, M. (1997) Personal

communication.

Barclay, G. C. (1993) Personal

communication.

Beck, A. J., and T. Hester (1986) Prison

Admissions and Releases, 1983.

Washington, DC: BJS (NCJ-100582).

Beck, A. J., S. A. Kline, and L. A.

Greenfeld (1988) Survey of Youth in

Custody, 1987. Washington, DC: BJS

(NCJ-113365).

Biderman, A. D., and J. P. Lynch (1991)

Understanding Crime Incidence Statistics. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Brown, J. M., and others (1996) Correctional Populations in the United States,

1994. Washington, DC: BJS

(NCJ-160091).

BJS (1983) Prisoners in State and

Federal Institutions on December 31,

1981. Washington, DC: BJS

(NCJ-86485).

BJS (1986) Prisoners in State and

Federal Institutions on December 31,

1983. Washington, DC: BJS

(NCJ-99861).

BJS (1991) Correctional Populations in

the United States, 1988. Washington,

DC: BJS (NCJ-124280).

BJS (1992a) Criminal Victimization in

the United States, 1990. Washington,

DC: BJS (NCJ-130234).

BJS (1992b) Federal Criminal Case

Processing, 1980-90. Washington, DC:

BJS (NCJ-136945).

BJS (1993) Federal Criminal Case

Processing, 1982-91. Washington, DC:

BJS (NCJ-144526).

BJS (1996) Federal Criminal Case

Processing, 1982-93. Washington,

DC: BJS (NCJ-160088).

BJS (1997) Criminal Victimization in the

United States, 1994. Washington, DC:

BJS (NCJ-158022).

BJS (forthcoming) National Corrections

Reporting Program, 1994. Washington,

DC: BJS.

Blumstein, Alfred, and others, eds.

(1986) Criminal Careers and “Career

Criminals.” Washington, DC: National

Academy Press.

Bureau of the Census (1994) Statistical

Abstract of the United States, 1994.

Washington, DC: Bureau of the

Census.

Bureau of the Census (1996) Statistical

Abstract of the United States, 1996.

Washington, DC: Bureau of the

Census.

Burns, B. (1996) Personal

communication.

Butts, J. A. (1996) Personal

communication.

Butts, J. A., and others (1996) Juvenile

Court Statistics, 1994. Washington, DC:

OJJDP.

Carlisle Committee (1988) The Parole

System in England and Wales. London:

Her Majesty's Stationery Office.

Cohen, R. L. (1997) Personal

communication.

DeComo, R., and others (1995)

Juveniles Taken Into Custody, Fiscal

Year 1992. Washington, DC: OJJDP.

Farrington, D.P. (1989) Self-reported

and official offending from adolescence

to adulthood. In M.W. Klein, ed., CrossNational Research in Self-reported

Crime and Delinquency. Dordrecht,

Netherlands: Kluwer.

Farrington, D. P. (1992) Trends in

English juvenile delinquency and their

explanation. International Journal of

Comparative and Applied Criminal

Justice, 16, 151-163.

Farrington, D. P., and P. A. Langan

(1992) Changes in crime and punishment in England and America in the

1980s. Justice Quarterly, 9, 5-46.

Farrington, D. P., P. A. Langan, and P.

O. Wikström (1994) Changes in crime

and punishment in America, England

and Sweden between the 1980s and

the 1990s. Studies on Crime and Crime

Prevention, 3, 104-131.

Federal Bureau of Investigation (1982)

Crime in the United States, 1981.

Washington, DC: FBI.

Federal Bureau of Investigation (1989)

Crime in the United States, 1988.

Washington, DC: FBI.

Federal Bureau of Investigation (1995)

Crime in the United States, 1994.

Washington, DC: FBI.

Federal Bureau of Investigation (1996)

Crime in the United States, 1995.

Washington, DC: FBI. 

Federal Bureau of Investigation (1997)

Crime in the United States, 1996.

Washington, DC: FBI. 

Grace, S., C. Lloyd, and L. J. F. Smith

(1992) Rape: From Recording to

Conviction. London: Home Office.

Greenfeld, L. A., and S. Minor-Harper

(1984) Prison Admissions and

Releases, 1981. Washington, DC: BJS.

Home Office (1985) The Cautioning of

Offenders (Circular No. 14/1985).

London: Home Office.

Home Office (1987) Prison Statistics,

England and Wales, 1986. London: Her

Majesty's Stationery Office.

References

64 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96
Home Office (1988) Punishment,

Custody and the Community. London:

Her Majesty's Stationery Office.

Home Office (1990a) Crime, Justice

and Protecting the Public. London: Her

Majesty's Stationery Office.

Home Office (1990b) The Cautioning

of Offenders (Circular No. 59/1990).

London: Home Office.

Home Office (1993) Criminal Statistics,

England and Wales, 1991. London: Her

Majesty's Stationery Office.

Home Office (1996a) Criminal

Statistics, England and Wales, 1995.

London: The Stationery Office.

Home Office (1996b) Criminal Statistics, England and Wales, Supplementary Tables, 1995 (4 volumes).

London: Government Statistical

Service.

Home Office (1997) Criminal Statistics,

England and Wales, 1996. London:

The Stationery Office.

Hough, M., and P. Mayhew (1983)

The British Crime Survey: First Report.

London: Her Majesty's Stationery

Office.

Irving, B. L., and I. K. MacKenzie

(1989) Police Interrogation. London:

Police Foundation.

Jarvis, J. (1994) Personal

communication.

Kirby, T., and J. Cusick (1993)

Howard's hard line wins public backing.

The Independent (November 30).

Langan, P. A. (1989) Felony Sentences

in State Courts, 1986. Washington, DC:

BJS (NCJ-115210).

Langan, P. A. (1996) Felony Sentences

in the United States, 1992.

Washington, DC: BJS (NCJ-153257).

Langan, P. A., and J. M. Brown

(1997a) Felony Sentences in State

Courts, 1994. Washington, DC: BJS

(NCJ-163391).

Langan, P. A., and J. M. Brown

(1997b) Felony Sentences in the

United States, 1994. Washington, DC:

BJS (NCJ-165149).

Langan, P. A., and J. M. Dawson

(1990) Felony Sentences in State

Courts, 1988. Washington, DC: BJS

(NCJ-126923).

Langan, P. A., and J. M. Dawson

(1993) Felony Sentences in State

Courts, 1990. Washington, DC: BJS

(NCJ-140186).

Langan, P. A., and H. A. Graziadei

(1995) Felony Sentences in State

Courts, 1992. Washington, DC: BJS

(NCJ-151167).

Langan, P. A., C. A. Perkins, and J. M.

Chaiken (1994) Felony Sentences in

the United States, 1990. Washington,

DC: BJS (NCJ-149077).

Loeber, R., and D. P. Farrington, eds.

(1998) Serious and Violent Juvenile

Offenders: Risk Factors and Successful Interventions, Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage.

Lynch, J. P., and others (1994) Profile

of Inmates in the United States and in

England and Wales, 1991. Washington, DC: BJS (NCJ-145863).

Mayhew, P. (1996) Personal

communication.

Mayhew, P. (1997) Personal

communication.

Mayhew, P., N. A. Maung, and C.

Mirrlees-Black (1993) The 1992 British

Crime Survey. London: Her Majesty's

Stationery Office.

Mayhew, P., and J. J. M. van Dijk

(1997) Criminal Victimization in Eleven

Industrialized Countries. The Netherlands: WODC.

McDonald, D. C., and K. E. Carlson

(1992) Federal Sentencing in Transition, 1986-90. Washington, DC: BJS

(NCJ-134727).

Minor-Harper, S., and L. A. Greenfeld

(1985) Prison Admissions and

Releases, 1982. Washington, DC: BJS

(NCJ-97995).

Minor-Harper, S., and C. A. Innes

(1987) Time Served in Prison and on

Parole, 1984. Washington, DC: BJS

(NCJ-108544).

Mirrlees-Black, C. (1996) Personal

communication.

Mirrlees-Black, C., P. Mayhew, and A.

Percy (1996) The 1996 British Crime

Survey. London: Home Office Statistical Bulletin (1996).

Office for National Statistics (1996)

Estimated Resident Population at

Mid-Year by Sex and Single Year of

Age, England and Wales, 1981-95.

London: Office for National Statistics.

Percy, A. (1998) Personal

communication.

Perkins, C. (1992) National Corrections

Reporting Program, 1986. Washington,

DC: BJS (NCJ-132291).

Perkins, C. (1993) National Corrections

Reporting Program, 1990. Washington,

DC: BJS (NCJ-141879).

Perkins, C. (1994) National Corrections

Reporting Program, 1992. Washington,

DC: BJS (NCJ-145862).

Perkins, C., and D. K. Gilliard (1992)

National Corrections Reporting Program, 1988. Washington, DC: BJS

(NCJ-134929).

References 65
Perkins, C. A., and others (1996) 

Criminal Victimization in the United

States, 1993. Washington, DC: BJS

(NCJ-151657).

Petersilia, J., S. Turner, and J. Peterson

(1986) Prison Versus Probation in

California. Santa Monica, CA: Rand

Corporation.

Rand, M. R., J. P. Lynch, and D. Cantor

(1997) Criminal Victimization, 1973-95.

Washington, DC: BJS (NCJ-163069).

Reaves, B. A. (1998) Felony Defendants in Large Urban Counties, 1994.

Washington, DC: BJS (NCJ-167324).

Sabol, W. (1997) Personal

communication.

Snyder, H. N. (1995) Personal

communication.

Snyder, H. N., T. A. Finnegan, and J.

L. Hutzler (1983) Delinquency, 1981.

Pittsburgh, PA: National Center for

Juvenile Justice.

Wilson, J. Q. (1997) Criminal justice in

England and America. The Public Interest, 126, 3-14.

66 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96
Appendix 1

Appendix 1 67

1996 47.2 9.1

1995 47.5 82.9 10.8 23.6

1994 54.4 11.6

1993 59.9 85.5 13 26.2

1992 58.6 12.0

1991 64.6 67.8 14.2 25.7

1990 64.5 12.7

1989 67.7 12.5

1988 74.3 11.6

1987 74.6 61.2 10.7 20.0

1986 73.8 9.7

1985 75.2 9.2

1984 76.9 9.4

1983 84.0 49.2 9.3 15.3

1982 94.1 11.2

1981 105.9 40.9 10.6 15.6

Year United States England United States England

Burglary Motor vehicle theft

Figure 3 Figure 4

1996 5.2 8.8

1995 5.3 7.6 8.8 20.0

1994 6.1 11.6

1993 6.1 5.8 12.1 16.9

1992 6.1 11.1

1991 5.9 4.5 9.9 15.4

1990 5.7 9.8

1989 5.4 10.3

1988 5.3 10.8

1987 5.3 4.4 10 14.1

1986 5.1 9.8

1985 5.1 10.3

1984 5.8 11.2

1983 6.0 3.7 9.9 10.8

1982 7.1 11.5

1981 7.4 4.2 12.0 13.1

Year United States England United States England

Robbery Assault

Figure 1 Figure 2

Appendix table 1. Data for graphs on page 2
68 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

1996 3.8819 4.3960 9.4295 22.3915 5.2593 9.4883

1995 4.1833 3.9263 9.8761 23.9190 5.6048 9.8118

1994 4.2759 4.0568 10.4202 24.3444 5.9126 10.4947

1993 4.4032 3.8388 10.9915 26.6254 6.0607 11.6161

1992 4.4181 3.7923 11.6821 26.4304 6.3148 11.4643

1991 4.3332 3.5940 12.5198 23.8643 6.5894 11.3875

1990 4.2413 3.5126 12.3594 19.7919 6.5775 9.7151

1989 3.8338 3.3894 12.7627 16.2976 6.3036 7.7627

1988 3.7025 3.0396 13.0920 16.1981 5.8294 7.2635

1987 3.5131 2.7252 13.2958 17.8872 5.2946 7.7418

1986 3.4608 2.4349 13.4455 18.5722 5.0776 8.1946

1985 3.0294 2.3762 12.8730 17.3371 4.6197 7.3498

1984 2.9021 2.2411 12.6373 17.9266 4.3708 6.9224

1983 2.7921 2.1936 13.3767 16.2706 4.3076 6.5558

1982 2.8915 2.1422 14.8881 16.2334 4.5885 7.0794

1981 2.8973 1.9749 16.4947 14.4736 4.7472 6.7009

Year United States England United States England United States England

Assault Burglary Motor vehicle theft

Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure 10

1996 0.0741 0.0131 0.7079 0.2177 2.0244 1.4235

1995 0.0822 0.0144 0.7273 0.1890 2.2095 1.3137

1994 0.0896 0.0141 0.7699 0.1912 2.3775 1.1625

1993 0.0951 0.0130 0.8060 0.1749 2.5585 1.1245

1992 0.0931 0.0134 0.8383 0.1582 2.6363 1.0315

1991 0.0979 0.0142 0.8288 0.1550 2.7272 0.8869

1990 0.0942 0.0132 0.8086 0.1304 2.5703 0.7115

1989 0.0866 0.0126 0.7464 0.1275 2.3297 0.6544

1988 0.0841 0.0124 0.7378 0.1105 2.2089 0.6227

1987 0.0826 0.0137 0.7340 0.0959 2.1270 0.6485

1986 0.0855 0.0132 0.7439 0.0890 2.2515 0.5985

1985 0.0795 0.0124 0.7283 0.0719 2.0854 0.5494

1984 0.0791 0.0125 0.6993 0.0561 2.0538 0.4997

1983 0.0825 0.0111 0.6614 0.0523 2.1650 0.4452

1982 0.0907 0.0125 0.6671 0.0525 2.3890 0.4603

1981 0.0983 0.0113 0.7059 0.0419 2.5875 0.4086

Year United States England United States England United States England

Murder Rape Robbery

Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7

Appendix table 2. Data for graphs on page 4
Appendix 1 69

1995 50.0 66.3 88.8 97.5

1994 51.0 92.4

1993 49.0 69.0 93.4 96.8

1992 51.0 92.2

1991 48.0 73.0 92.4 98.6

1990 49.0 94.8

1989 48.0 93.1

1988 49.0 89.6

1987 49.9 62.8 88.6 94.9

1986 49.9 88.5

1985 48.0 88.9

1984 47.0 86.0

1983 47.0 67.8 88.4 96.4

1982 47.0 88.6

1981 49.0 66.2 87.0 94.9

Year United States England United States England

Burglary Motor vehicle theft

Figure 13 Figure 14

1995 55.0 56.6 54.0 40.0

1994 55.0 52.0

1993 56.0 46.5 53.0 53.9

1992 58.0 55.0

1991 55.0 47.2 52.0 47.7

1990 50.0 52.9

1989 51.0 46.6

1988 57.0 48.4

1987 55.0 43.9 53.8 43.3

1986 58.0 52.9

1985 54.0 52.0

1984 54.0 47.8

1983 53.0 39.0 50.2 59.6

1982 56.0 52.0

1981 56.0 46.5 46.7 40.2

Year United States England United States England

Robbery Assault

Figure 11 Figure 12

Appendix table 3. Data for graphs on page 8
70 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

1995 72.1 55.3 100.0 82.6

1994 65.0 95.0

1993 64.8 59.4 85.9 93.5

1992 67.5 97.3

1991 70.8 62.4 87.3 94.3

1990 68.1 93.9

1989 68.9 94.3

1988 63.5 98.5

1987 63.5 64.9 97.9 89.1

1986 65.2 100.0

1985 63.9 99.8

1984 62.8 95.9

1983 61.3 69.7 93.6 100.0

1982 61.2 83.6

1981 58.1 70.4 92.8 100.0

Year United States England United States England

Burglary Motor vehicle theft

Figure 17 Figure 18

1995 78.4 34.7 100.0 52.7

1994 73.5 82.1

1993 77.4 47.2 79.4 45.3

1992 77.4 84.0

1991 88.2 47.2 98.5 52.4

1990 94.4 95.4

1989 88.1 93.9

1988 77.1 82.7

1987 76.4 38.3 76.7 48.0

1986 78.7 78.3

1985 79.4 66.4

1984 68.2 63.6

1983 70.6 35.2 65.7 37.1

1982 62.8 56.3

1981 65.1 24.3 60.6 41.3

Year United States England United States England

Robbery Assault

Figure 15 Figure 16

Appendix table 4. Data for graphs on page 10
Appendix 1 71

1995 0.6095 0.7849 0.3432

1994 0.4374 0.7300 0.2135

1993 0.8371 0.9011 0.3760

1992 0.4157 0.8376 0.2450

1991 1.0240 1.0370 0.5138

1990 0.3663 0.8253 0.2528

1989

1988 0.2544 0.7563 0.1985

1987 1.0374 1.2312 0.5897

1986 0.2641 0.8256 0.1746

1985

1984

1983 0.1872 1.1334 0.9966 1.5966 0.1071 0.6755

1982

1981 0.1626 1.1201 0.9725 1.6916 0.0738 0.8286

Year United States England United States England United States England

Assault Burglary Motor vehicle theft

Figure 22 Figure 23 Figure 24

1995 0.0101 0.0249 0.1147

1994 0.0589 0.2120 0.2967

1993 0.0104 0.0213 0.1140

1992 0.0622 0.2321 0.3247

1991 0.0101 0.0249 0.1089

1990 0.0579 0.1953 0.2984

1989

1988 0.0485 0.1709 0.2337

1987 0.0098 0.0200 0.1009

1986 0.0520 0.1760 0.2747

1985

1984

1983 0.0407 0.0089 0.0999 0.0148 0.2412 0.0922

1982

1981 0.0448 0.0089 0.0994 0.0153 0.2829 0.0951

Year United States England United States England United States England

Murder Rape Robbery

Figure 19 Figure 20 Figure 21

Appendix table 5. Data for graphs on page 14
72 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

1995 14 6 12

1994 25 14 18

1993 23 7 12

1992 25 15 20

1991 31 10 18

1990 25 14 19

1989

1988 16 11 17

1987 35 14 27

1986 18 12 18

1985

1984

1983 13 50 13 23 12 44

1982

1981 9 41 10 27 7 53

Year United States England United States England United States England

Assault Burglary Motor vehicle theft

Figure 28 Figure 29 Figure 30

1995 555 100 6

1994 487 188 22

1993 632 92 8

1992 495 189 24

1991 562 121 10

1990 455 165 23

1989

1988 427 158 20

1987 571 156 10

1986 451 162 24

1985

1984

1983 367 643 104 213 18 10

1982

1981 340 631 97 272 17 10

Year United States England United States England United States England

Murder Rape Robbery

Figure 25 Figure 26 Figure 27

Appendix table 6. Data for graphs on page 18
Appendix 1 73

1995 27.0 38.2 29.6

1994 62.1 59.5 54.9

1993 17.8 29.5 22.9

1992 60.1 60.2 54.4

1991 15.3 28.0 14.1

1990 61.1 59.2 51.6

1989

1988 61.3 60.2 48.5

1987 19 34.8 20.4

1986 59.8 57.9 49.0

1985

1984

1983 62.3 14.8 55.8 33.2 51.6 23.9

1982

1981 61.6 13.1 53.7 29.0 50.1 24.9

Year United States England United States England United States England

Assault Burglary Motor vehicle theft

Figure 34 Figure 35 Figure 36

1995 94.3 94.5 66.8

1994 95.8 82.4 78.6

1993 92.7 94.2 69.7

1992 96.0 81.8 80.9

1991 88.8 95.2 69.8

1990 93.7 81.8 81.5

1989

1988 93.7 82.4 80.2

1987 92.6 96.0 79.1

1986 93.7 82.5 77.3

1985

1984

1983 94.3 86.9 82.2 94.9 79.5 77.2

1982

1981 94.0 84.5 82.2 90.0 78.3 73.5

Year United States England United States England United States England

Murder Rape Robbery

Figure 31 Figure 32 Figure 33

Appendix table 7. Data for graphs on page 22
74 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

1995 0.1646 0.2997 0.1015

1994 0.2714 0.4343 0.1172

1993 0.1494 0.2663 0.0862

1992 0.2499 0.5041 0.1333

1991 0.1566 0.2901 0.0726

1990 0.2238 0.4889 0.1305

1989

1988 0.1560 0.4552 0.0963

1987 0.1976 0.4281 0.1204

1986 0.1580 0.4782 0.0856

1985

1984

1983 0.1167 0.1679 0.5558 0.5306 0.0553 0.1614

1982

1981 0.1001 0.1463 0.5224 0.4906 0.0370 0.2066

Year United States England United States England United States England

Assault Burglary Motor vehicle theft

Figure 40 Figure 41 Figure 42

1995 0.0095 0.0236 0.0767

1994 0.0564 0.1748 0.2332

1993 0.0097 0.0201 0.0794

1992 0.0597 0.1899 0.2626

1991 0.0090 0.0237 0.0761

1990 0.0543 0.1597 0.2432

1989

1988 0.0454 0.1409 0.1873

1987 0.0091 0.0192 0.0798

1986 0.0487 0.1451 0.2125

1985

1984

1983 0.0384 0.0077 0.0821 0.0140 0.1917 0.0712

1982

1981 0.0422 0.0076 0.0817 0.0137 0.2215 0.0700

Year United States England United States England United States England

Murder Rape Robbery

Figure 37 Figure 38 Figure 39

Appendix table 8. Data for graphs on page 24
Appendix 1 75

1995 3.84 2.24 3.52

1994 15.39 8.41 9.89

1993 4.13 2 2.83

1992 14.85 9.03 10.75

1991 4.74 2.71 2.5

1990 15.14 8.03 10.04

1989

1988 9.6 6.59 8.29

1987 6.58 4.79 5.58

1986 10.77 7.07 8.85

1985

1984

1983 7.87 7.43 7.32 7.56 6.06 10.48

1982

1981 5.59 5.38 5.51 7.77 3.59 13.1

Year United States England United States England United States England

Assault Burglary Motor vehicle theft

Figure 46 Figure 47 Figure 48

1995 523 94 4

1994 466 155 17

1993 586 87 6

1992 475 154 19

1991 499 115 7

1990 427 135 19

1989

1988 400 130 16

1987 529 150 8

1986 423 133 18

1985

1984

1983 346 559 85 202 14 8

1982

1981 319 533 79 245 13 7

Year United States England United States England United States England

Murder Rape Robbery

Figure 43 Figure 44 Figure 45

Appendix table 9. Data for graphs on page 28
76 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

1995 13.7 14.9 8.6

1994 47.8 43.1 23.5

1993 15.9 15.5 7.2

1992 49.5 46.9 27.9

1991 17.8 17.2 6.6

1990 47.4 51.5 29.3

1989

1988 53.3 48.0 24.6

1987 14.7 15.1 9.1

1986 58.8 47.8 26.8

1985

1984

1983 44.4 10.0 38.3 11.3 23.5 8.3

1982

1981 42.5 10.8 36.6 10.9 26.2 8.0

Year United States England United States England United States England

Assault Burglary Motor vehicle theft

Figure 52 Figure 53 Figure 54

1995 229.9 77.0 40.3

1994 266.4 123.0 88.8

1993 228.0 70.2 41.4

1992 252.3 124.0 87.6

1991 216.6 58.0 40.9

1990 245.2 121.9 85.5

1989

1988 252.5 140.9 90.4

1987 144.7 52.0 34.1

1986 239.5 125.2 110.8

1985

1984

1983 249.2 149.9 92.1 41.6 73.3 24.3

1982

1981 254.6 154.5 123.2 40.1 81.9 26.7

Year United States England United States England United States England

Murder Rape Robbery

Figure 49 Figure 50 Figure 51

Appendix table 10. Data for graphs on page 30
Appendix 1 77

1995 6.1 6.5 3.4

1994 23.6 18.0 11.1

1993 7.3 7.2 3.1

1992 24.0 20.2 13.3

1991 8.2 7.9 2.8

1990 22.9 21.0 12.6

1989

1988 24.4 18.9 10.3

1987 6.7 6.6 4.0

1986 26.8 21.3 13.5

1985

1984

1983 22.6 5.2 17.5 5.8 12.5 4.7

1982

1981 21.3 6.0 17.1 6.3 12.1 4.8

Year United States England United States England United States England

Assault Burglary Motor vehicle theft

Figure 58 Figure 59 Figure 60

1995 99.8 44.2 20.5

1994 126.9 67.6 42.8

1993 105.1 35.7 19.5

1992 122.2 69.5 42.0

1991 95.2 29.5 20.4

1990 112.8 59.9 41.4

1989

1988 112.3 62.4 41.0

1987 65.8 27.2 16.6

1986 108.9 53.4 48.9

1985

1984

1983 105.7 63.7 46.9 20.5 37.9 11.3

1982

1981 94.0 68.8 59.3 20.3 41.0 13.1

Year United States England United States England United States England

Murder Rape Robbery

Figure 55 Figure 56 Figure 57

Appendix table 11. Data for graphs on page 32
78 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

1995 44.5 43.6 39.5

1994 49.3 41.7 47.4

1993 45.9 46.5 43.1

1992 48.5 43.0 47.9

1991 46.1 45.9 42.4

1990 48.2 40.8 43.0

1989

1988 45.7 39.4 41.7

1987 45.6 43.7 44.0

1986 45.5 44.5 50.3

1985

1984

1983 50.9 52.0 45.7 51.3 53.4 56.6

1982

1981 50.1 55.6 46.7 57.8 46.1 60.0

Year United States England United States England United States England

Assault Burglary Motor vehicle theft

Figure 64 Figure 65 Figure 66

1995 43.4 57.4 50.9

1994 47.6 54.9 48.2

1993 46.1 50.9 47.1

1992 48.4 56.1 48.0

1991 44.0 50.9 49.9

1990 46.0 49.1 48.4

1989

1988 44.5 44.3 45.4

1987 45.5 52.3 48.7

1986 45.4 42.7 44.1

1985

1984

1983 42.4 42.5 51.0 49.3 51.8 46.5

1982

1981 36.9 44.5 48.1 50.6 50.1 49.1

Year United States England United States England United States England

Murder Rape Robbery

Figure 61 Figure 62 Figure 63

Appendix table 12. Data for graphs on page 34
Appendix 1 79

1995 0.71 0.44 0.36

1994 11.05 4.60 3.36

1993 0.92 0.43 0.26

1992 10.87 5.55 4.37

1991 1.18 0.64 0.21

1990 10.53 5.13 3.85

1989

1988 7.12 3.80 2.59

1987 1.34 0.95 0.67

1986 8.78 4.57 3.62

1985

1984

1983 5.41 1.18 3.90 1.33 2.31 1.47

1982

1981 3.62 0.98 2.86 1.47 1.32 1.88

Year United States England United States England United States England

Assault Burglary Motor vehicle theft

Figure 70 Figure 71 Figure 72

1995 1,590.19 126.82 2.59

1994 1,801.56 318.74 22.05

1993 1,875.12 94.07 3.33

1992 1,765.72 326.98 24.37

1991 1,446.10 103.12 4.30

1990 1,464.87 245.66 23.97

1989

1988 1,368.38 247.53 19.88

1987 1,058.56 124.27 3.80

1986 1,401.37 216.90 27.38

1985

1984

1983 1,114.12 1,083.20 121.52 125.87 16.40 2.77

1982

1981 913.98 1,117.03 143.33 151.47 16.70 2.81

Year United States England United States England United States England

Murder Rape Robbery

Figure 67 Figure 68 Figure 69

Appendix table 13. Data for graphs on page 36
80 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

1994 0.140 0.177 0.035 0.409 0.076 0.190

1993

1992 0.139 0.178 0.035 0.429 0.074 0.215

1991

1990 0.152 0.163 0.034 0.404 0.077 0.203

1989

1988 0.122 0.128 0.032 0.342 0.086 0.160

1987

1986 0.116 0.155 0.032 0.377 0.077 0.187

1985

1984

1983 0.101 0.126 0.031 0.420 0.066 0.144

1982

1981 0.081 0.113 0.028 0.368 0.064 0.090

Year arrested convicted arrested convicted arrested convicted

being being being being being being

an offender offender an offender offender an offender offender

an arrested an arrested an arrested

 Probability of: Probability of: Probability of:

U.S. assault U.S. burglary U.S. motor vehicle theft

Figure 76 Figure 77 Figure 78

1994 0.824 0.591 0.298 0.630 0.056 0.382

1993

1992 0.824 0.601 0.299 0.632 0.058 0.407

1991

1990 0.853 0.534 0.318 0.518 0.062 0.376

1989

1988 0.920 0.464 0.348 0.455 0.060 0.329

1987

1986 0.810 0.558 0.338 0.478 0.061 0.388

1985

1984

1983 0.915 0.401 0.360 0.288 0.054 0.331

1982

1981 0.834 0.407 0.320 0.301 0.047 0.361

Year arrested convicted arrested convicted arrested convicted

being being being being being being

an offender offender an offender offender an offender offender

an arrested an arrested an arrested

 Probability of: Probability of: Probability of:

U.S. murder U.S. rape U.S. robbery

Figure 73 Figure 74 Figure 75

Appendix table 14. Data for graphs on page 42
Appendix 1 81

1995 2.6 3.0 1.9 2.5

1994

1993

1992

1991 3.1 3.0 2.6 3.7

1990

1989

1988 3.8 2.1 2.1 1.9

Year United States England United States England

Burglary Auto theft

Figure 81 Figure 82

1995 1.3 1.4 5.7 5.9

1994

1993

1992

1991 1.5 1.1 4.7 3.8

1990

1989

1988 1.9 0.7 5.4 1.9

Year United States England United States England

Robbery Assault

Figure 79 Figure 80

Appendix table 15. Data for graphs on page 48
Appendix 2

82 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

Number of persons arrested 19,190 21,890

Number of months served per offender 46.0 45.0

Number of days served per offender 1401.4 1368.4

Percent of incarceration sentence served 45.4% 44.5%

Time served before being released (in months) 108.9 112.3

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 239.5 252.5

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 422.9 400.4

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.423 0.400

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 93.7% 93.7%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.049 0.045

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 10,024 9,522

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 451 427

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.451 0.427

Number of offenders per conviction 2.2 2.3

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.0520 0.0485

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 205,878 209,661

Number of offenders convicted 10,699 10,164

Offender population 21,827 23,702 23,115 23,782

Number of offenders per offense 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 0.0795 0.0855 0.0826 0.0841

Population (in thousands) 238,740 241,077 243,400 245,807

Number of police-recorded offenses 18,980 20,610 20,100 20,680

U.S. murder 1985 1986 1987 1988

Number of persons arrested 21,590 20,310

Number of months served per offender 30.0 36.6

Number of days served per offender 914.0 1,114.1

Percent of incarceration sentence served 36.9% 42.4%

Time served before being released (in months) 94.0 105.7

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 254.6 249.2

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 319.4 346.2

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.319 0.346

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 94.0% 94.3%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.042 0.038

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 8,272 7,688

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 340 367

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.340 0.367

Number of offenders per conviction 2.9 2.7

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.0448 0.0407

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 196,239 200,354

Number of offenders convicted 8,797 8,150

Offender population 25,898 24,162 22,207 21,494

Number of offenders per offense 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 0.0983 0.0907 0.0825 0.0791

Population (in thousands) 229,146 231,534 233,981 236,158

Number of police-recorded offenses 22,520 21,010 19,310 18,690

U.S. murder 1981 1982 1983 1984

Appendix table 16.
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix 2 83

Number of persons arrested 22,100

Number of months served per offender 59.2

Number of days served per offender 1801.6

Percent of incarceration sentence served 47.6%

Time served before being released (in months) 126.9

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 266.4

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 466.4

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.466

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 95.8%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.056

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 12,513

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 487

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.487

Number of offenders per conviction 2.1

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.0589

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 221,890 226,557

Number of offenders convicted 13,068

Offender population 28,210 26,830 24,840 22,598

Number of offenders per offense 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 0.0951 0.0896 0.0822 0.0741

Population (in thousands) 257,908 260,341 262,755 265,284

Number of police-recorded offenses 24,530 23,330 21,600 19,650

U.S. murder 1993 1994 1995 1996

Number of persons arrested 22,990 22,510

Number of months served per offender 48.1 58.0

Number of days served per offender 1,464.9 1,765.7

Percent of incarceration sentence served 46.0% 48.4%

Time served before being released (in months) 112.8 122.2

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 245.2 252.3

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 426.7 474.8

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.427 0.475

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 93.7% 96.0%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.054 0.060

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 11,501 12,974

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 455 495

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.455 0.495

Number of offenders per conviction 2.2 2.0

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.0579 0.0622

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 211,919 217,291

Number of offenders convicted 12,270 13,522

Offender population 24,725 26,956 28,405 27,324

Number of offenders per offense 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 0.0866 0.0942 0.0979 0.0931

Population (in thousands) 248,239 248,710 252,177 255,082

Number of police-recorded offenses 21,500 23,440 24,700 23,760

U.S. murder 1989 1990 1991 1992

Appendix table 17.
84 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

Number of persons arrested 37,140 38,610

Number of months served per offender 7.1 8.1

Number of days served per offender 216.9 247.5

Percent of incarceration sentence served 42.7% 44.3%

Time served before being released (in months) 53.4 62.4

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 125.2 140.9

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 133.4 130.4

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.133 0.130

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 82.5% 82.4%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 male population ages 10 or older 0.145 0.141

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 14,640 14,476

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 162 158

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.162 0.158

Number of offenders per conviction 6.2 6.3

Number convicted per 1,000 male population ages 10 or older 0.1760 0.1709

Male population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 100,880 102,734

Number of offenders convicted 17,754 17,558

Offender population 106,404 109,752 109,332 110,988

Number of offenders per offense 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 female population 0.7283 0.7439 0.7340 0.7378

Female population (in thousands) 121,757 122,949 124,134 125,362

Number of police-recorded offenses 88,670 91,460 91,110 92,490

U.S. rape 1985 1986 1987 1988

Number of persons arrested 31,710 34,080

Number of months served per offender 4.7 4.0

Number of days served per offender 143.3 121.5

Percent of incarceration sentence served 48.1% 51.0%

Time served before being released (in months) 59.3 46.9

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 123.2 92.1

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 79.4 85.1

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.079 0.085

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 82.2% 82.2%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 male population ages 10 or older 0.082 0.082

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 7,857 8,059

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 97 104

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.097 0.104

Number of offenders per conviction 10.4 9.7

Number convicted per 1,000 male population ages 10 or older 0.0994 0.0999

Male population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 96,157 98,173

Number of offenders convicted 9,559 9,804

Offender population 99,000 94,524 94,704 101,076

Number of offenders per offense 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 female population 0.7059 0.6671 0.6614 0.6993

Female population (in thousands) 116,864 118,082 119,330 120,441

Number of police-recorded offenses 82,500 78,770 78,920 84,230

U.S. rape 1981 1982 1983 1984

Appendix table 18.
Appendix 2 85

Number of persons arrested 36,610

Number of months served per offender 10.5

Number of days served per offender 318.7

Percent of incarceration sentence served 54.9%

Time served before being released (in months) 67.6

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 123.0

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 154.9

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.155

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 82.4%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 male population ages 10 or older 0.175

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 19,000

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 188

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.188

Number of offenders per conviction 5.3

Number convicted per 1,000 male population ages 10 or older 0.2120

Male population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 108,726 111,013

Number of offenders convicted 23,047

Offender population 127,212 122,664 116,952 114,924

Number of offenders per offense 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 female population 0.8060 0.7699 0.7273 0.7079

Female population (in thousands) 131,533 132,774 134,005 135,295

Number of police-recorded offenses 106,010 102,220 97,460 95,770

U.S. rape 1993 1994 1995 1996

Number of persons arrested 39,160 39,100

Number of months served per offender 8.1 10.7

Number of days served per offender 245.7 327.0

Percent of incarceration sentence served 49.1% 56.1%

Time served before being released (in months) 59.9 69.5

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 121.9 124.0

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 134.8 154.5

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.135 0.154

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 81.8% 81.8%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 male population ages 10 or older 0.160 0.190

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 16,586 20,215

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 165 189

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.165 0.189

Number of offenders per conviction 6.1 5.3

Number convicted per 1,000 male population ages 10 or older 0.1953 0.2321

Male population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 103,840 106,473

Number of offenders convicted 20,277 24,711

Offender population 113,400 123,072 127,908 130,872

Number of offenders per offense 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 female population 0.7464 0.8086 0.8288 0.8383

Female population (in thousands) 126,602 126,842 128,610 130,092

Number of police-recorded offenses 94,500 102,560 106,590 109,060

U.S. rape 1989 1990 1991 1992

Appendix table 19.
86 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

Number of persons arrested 145,800 149,100

Number of days served per offender 27.4 19.9

Percent of incarceration sentence served 44.1% 45.4%

Time served before being released (in months) 48.9 41.0

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 110.8 90.4

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 18.4 15.9

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.018 0.016

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 77.3% 80.2%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.212 0.187

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 43,742 39,273

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 24 20

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.024 0.020

Number of offenders per conviction 42.0 50.4

Offender population 2,376,358 2,467,818

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.275 0.234

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 205,878 209,661

Number of offenders convicted 56,563 48,996

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 2.085 2.251 2.127 2.209

Population (in thousands) 238,740 241,077 243,400 245,807

Number of police-recorded offenses 497,870 542,780 517,700 542,970

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 79.4% 78.7% 76.4% 77.1%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.429 0.456 0.420 0.440

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 422,435 460,540 439,260 460,701

Number of offenses reported to police 531,797 585,313 575,278 597,360

Percent of offenses reported to police 54.0% 58.0% 55.0% 57.0%

Number of offenders per offense 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8

Survey crime rate per 1,000 population ages 12 or older 5.07 5.14 5.29 5.26

Population ages 12 or older (in thousands) 194,097 196,160 197,727 199,412

Victim survey offenses 984,810 1,009,160 1,045,960 1,048,000

U.S. robbery 1985 1986 1987 1988

Number of persons arrested 153,890 146,170

Number of days served per offender 16.7 16.4

Percent of incarceration sentence served 50.1% 51.8%

Time served before being released (in months) 41.0 37.9

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 81.9 73.3

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 13.4 14.2

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.013 0.014

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 78.3% 79.5%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.222 0.192

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 43,471 38,412

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 17 18

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.017 0.018

Number of offenders per conviction 58.6 56.0

Offender population 3,251,491 2,706,052

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.283 0.241

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 196,239 200,354

Number of offenders convicted 55,517 48,334

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 2.587 2.389 2.165 2.054

Population (in thousands) 229,146 231,534 233,981 236,158

Number of police-recorded offenses 592,910 553,130 506,570 485,010

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 65.1% 62.8% 70.6% 68.2%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.364 0.352 0.374 0.369

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 503,075 469,322 429,817 411,523

Number of offenses reported to police 773,248 746,872 609,060 603,007

Percent of offenses reported to police 56.0% 56.0% 53.0% 54.0%

Number of offenders per offense 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8

Survey crime rate per 1,000 population ages 12 or older 7.41 7.08 6.03 5.82

Population ages 12 or older (in thousands) 186,336 188,497 190,504 191,962

Victim survey offenses 1,380,800 1,333,700 1,149,170 1,116,680

U.S. robbery 1981 1982 1983 1984

Appendix table 20.
Appendix 2 87

Number of persons arrested 172,290

Number of days served per offender 22.1

Percent of incarceration sentence served 48.2%

Time served before being released (in months) 42.8

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 88.8

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 16.9

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.017

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 78.6%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.233

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 51,734

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 22

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.022

Number of offenders per conviction 46.5

Offender population 3,058,281

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.297

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 221,890 226,557

Number of offenders convicted 65,829

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 2.559 2.377 2.209 2.024

Population (in thousands) 257,908 260,341 262,755 265,284

Number of police-recorded offenses 659,870 618,950 580,550 537,050

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 77.4% 73.5% 78.4%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.434 0.404 0.431

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 559,889 525,169 492,587

Number of offenses reported to police 722,971 714,313 628,001

Percent of offenses reported to police 56.0% 55.0% 55.0%

Number of offenders per offense 1.8 1.8 1.8

Survey crime rate per 1,000 population ages 12 or older 6.10 6.08 5.31 5.22

Population ages 12 or older (in thousands) 211,525 213,747 215,081 217,234

Victim survey offenses 1,291,020 1,298,750 1,141,820 1,134,000

U.S. robbery 1993 1994 1995 1996

Number of persons arrested 167,990 173,310

Number of days served per offender 24.0 24.4

Percent of incarceration sentence served 48.4% 48.0%

Time served before being released (in months) 41.4 42.0

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 85.5 87.6

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 19.0 19.1

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.019 0.019

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 81.5% 80.9%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.243 0.263

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 51,536 57,059

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 23 24

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.023 0.024

Number of offenders per conviction 42.8 42.4

Offender population 2,707,323 2,994,890

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.298 0.325

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 211,919 217,292

Number of offenders convicted 63,230 70,560

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 2.330 2.570 2.727 2.636

Population (in thousands) 248,239 248,710 252,177 255,082

Number of police-recorded offenses 578,330 639,270 687,730 672,480

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 88.1% 94.4% 88.2% 77.4%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.449 0.472 0.485 0.449

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 490,704 542,410 583,528 570,589

Number of offenses reported to police 556,833 574,855 661,661 737,661

Percent of offenses reported to police 51.0% 50.0% 55.0% 58.0%

Number of offenders per offense 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8

Survey crime rate per 1,000 population ages 12 or older 5.42 5.66 5.89 6.08

Population ages 12 or older (in thousands) 201,376 203,274 204,280 209,353

Victim survey offenses 1,091,830 1,149,710 1,203,020 1,271,830

U.S. robbery 1989 1990 1991 1992 Appendix table 21.
88 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

Number of persons arrested 351,770 416,300

Number of days served per offender 8.8 7.1

Percent of incarceration sentence served 45.5% 45.7%

Time served before being released (in months) 26.8 24.4

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 58.8 53.3

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 10.8 9.6

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.011 0.010

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 59.8% 61.3%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.158 0.156

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 32,533 32,715

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 18 16

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.018 0.016

Number of offenders per conviction 55.6 63.9

Offender population 3,020,777 3,409,439

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.264 0.254

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 205,878 209,661

Number of offenders convicted 54,374 53,332

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 3.029 3.461 3.513 3.702

Population (in thousands) 238,740 241,077 243,400 245,807

Number of police-recorded offenses 723,250 834,320 855,090 910,090

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 66.4% 78.3% 76.7% 82.7%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.345 0.414 0.413 0.400

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 687,088 792,604 812,336 864,586

Number of offenses reported to police 1,035,055 1,012,034 1,058,929 1,045,446

Percent of offenses reported to police 52.0% 52.9% 53.8% 48.4%

Number of offenders per offense 1.5 1.5

Survey crime rate per 1,000 population ages 12 or older 10.25 9.75 9.96 10.83

Population ages 12 or older (in thousands) 194,097 196,160 197,727 199,412

Victim survey offenses 1,990,411 1,913,159 1,968,450 2,159,311

U.S. assault 1985 1986 1987 1988

Number of persons arrested 283,270 298,830

Number of days served per offender 3.6 5.4

Percent of incarceration sentence served 50.1% 50.9%

Time served before being released (in months) 21.3 22.6

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 42.5 44.4

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 5.6 7.9

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.006 0.008

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 61.6% 62.3%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.100 0.117

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 19,649 23,385

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 9 13

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.009 0.013

Number of offenders per conviction 110.2 79.2

Offender population 3,515,987 2,970,733

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.163 0.187

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 196,239 200,354

Number of offenders convicted 31,907 37,514

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 2.897 2.891 2.792 2.902

Population (in thousands) 229,146 231,534 233,981 236,158

Number of police-recorded offenses 663,900 669,480 653,290 685,350

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 60.6% 56.3% 65.7% 63.6%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.283 0.292 0.330 0.304

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 630,705 636,006 620,626 651,083

Number of offenses reported to police 1,040,193 1,130,356 944,668 1,023,138

Percent of offenses reported to police 46.7% 52.0% 50.2% 47.8%

Number of offenders per offense 1.5 1.5

Survey crime rate per 1,000 population ages 12 or older 11.95 11.54 9.88 11.16

Population ages 12 or older (in thousands) 186,336 188,497 190,504 191,962

Victim survey offenses 2,226,792 2,175,332 1,881,464 2,141,852

U.S. assault 1981 1982 1983 1984

Appendix table 22.
Appendix 2 89

Number of persons arrested 547,760

Number of days served per offender 11.0

Percent of incarceration sentence served 49.3%

Time served before being released (in months) 23.6

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 47.8

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 15.4

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.015

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 62.1%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.271

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 60,225

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 25

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.025

Number of offenders per conviction 40.3

Offender population 3,912,868

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.437

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 221,890 226,557

Number of offenders convicted 97,046

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 4.403 4.276 4.183 3.882

Population (in thousands) 257,908 260,341 262,755 265,284

Number of police-recorded offenses 1,135,610 1,113,180 1,099,180 1,029,810

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 79.4% 82.1% 100.0%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.421 0.427 0.552

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 1,078,830 1,057,521 1,044,221

Number of offenses reported to police 1,358,316 1,288,638 1,021,556

Percent of offenses reported to police 53.0% 52.0% 54.0%

Number of offenders per offense 1.5

Survey crime rate per 1,000 population ages 12 or older 12.12 11.59 8.80 8.79

Population ages 12 or older (in thousands) 211,525 213,747 215,081 217,234

Victim survey offenses 2,562,860 2,478,150 1,891,770 1,910,000

U.S. assault 1993 1994 1995 1996

Number of persons arrested 475,330 507,210

Number of days served per offender 10.5 10.9

Percent of incarceration sentence served 48.2% 48.5%

Time served before being released (in months) 22.9 24.0

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 47.4 49.5

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 15.1 14.8

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.015 0.015

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 61.1% 60.1%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.224 0.250

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 47,438 54,311

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 25 25

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.025 0.025

Number of offenders per conviction 40.4 40.5

Offender population 3,133,943 3,657,932

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.366 0.416

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 211,919 217,292

Number of offenders convicted 77,617 90,318

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 3.834 4.241 4.333 4.418

Population (in thousands) 248,239 248,710 252,177 255,082

Number of police-recorded offenses 951,710 1,054,860 1,092,740 1,126,970

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 93.9% 95.4% 98.5% 84.0%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.438 0.505 0.512 0.462

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 904,125 1,002,117 1,038,103 1,070,622

Number of offenses reported to police 962,400 1,049,948 1,053,898 1,274,180

Percent of offenses reported to police 46.6% 52.9% 52.0% 55.0%

Number of offenders per offense 1.5 1.5

Survey crime rate per 1,000 population ages 12 or older 10.25 9.76 9.92 11.07

Population ages 12 or older (in thousands) 201,376 203,274 204,280 209,353

Victim survey offenses 2,064,240 1,984,831 2,026,644 2,316,690

U.S. assault 1989 1990 1991 1992

Appendix table 23.
90 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

Number of persons arrested 450,600 463,400

Number of days served per offender 4.6 3.8

Percent of incarceration sentence served 44.5% 39.4%

Time served before being released (in months) 21.3 18.9

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 47.8 48.0

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 7.1 6.6

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.007 0.007

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 57.9% 60.2%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.478 0.455

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 98,454 95,447

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 12 11

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.012 0.011

Number of offenders per conviction 82.0 91.3

Offender population 13,932,992 14,485,079

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.826 0.756

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 205,878 209,661

Number of offenders convicted 169,976 158,570

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 12.873 13.445 13.296 13.092

Population (in thousands) 238,740 241,077 243,400 245,807

Number of police-recorded offenses 3,073,300 3,241,400 3,236,200 3,218,100

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 63.9% 65.2% 63.5% 63.5%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.307 0.326 0.317 0.311

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 2,059,111 2,171,738 2,168,254 2,156,127

Number of offenses reported to police 3,222,297 3,328,533 3,417,157 3,393,878

Percent of offenses reported to police 48.0% 49.9% 49.9% 49.0%

Number of offenders per offense 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4

Survey crime rate per 1,000 households 75.21 73.76 74.55 74.25

Number of households (in thousands) 89,263 90,395 91,823 93,362

Victim survey offenses 6,713,318 6,667,932 6,845,469 6,932,145

U.S. burglary 1985 1986 1987 1988

Number of persons arrested 518,900 475,800

Number of days served per offender 2.9 3.9

Percent of incarceration sentence served 46.7% 45.7%

Time served before being released (in months) 17.1 17.5

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 36.6 38.3

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 5.5 7.3

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.006 0.007

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 53.7% 55.8%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.522 0.556

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 102,525 111,355

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 10 13

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.010 0.013

Number of offenders per conviction 97.5 76.2

Offender population 18,615,102 15,207,247

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.973 0.997

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 196,239 200,354

Number of offenders convicted 190,846 199,679

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 16.495 14.888 13.377 12.637

Population (in thousands) 229,146 231,534 233,981 236,158

Number of police-recorded offenses 3,779,700 3,447,100 3,129,900 2,984,400

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 58.1% 61.2% 61.3% 62.8%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.284 0.288 0.288 0.295

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 2,532,399 2,309,557 2,097,033 1,999,548

Number of offenses reported to police 4,361,549 3,771,456 3,423,354 3,185,126

Percent of offenses reported to police 49.0% 47.0% 47.0% 47.0%

Number of offenders per offense 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4

Survey crime rate per 1,000 households 105.94 94.09 84.00 76.91

Number of households (in thousands) 84,095 85,211 86,635 88,039

Victim survey offenses 8,908,656 8,017,789 7,277,754 6,771,302

U.S. burglary 1981 1982 1983 1984

Appendix table 24.
Appendix 2 91

Number of persons arrested 396,100

Number of days served per offender 4.6

Percent of incarceration sentence served 41.7%

Time served before being released (in months) 18.0

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 43.1

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 8.4

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.008

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 59.5%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.434

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 96,369

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 14

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.014

Number of offenders per conviction 70.7

Offender population 11,456,430

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.730

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 221,890 226,557

Number of offenders convicted 161,975

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 10.992 10.420 9.876 9.430

Population (in thousands) 257,908 260,341 262,755 265,284

Number of police-recorded offenses 2,834,800 2,712,800 2,595,000 2,501,500

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 64.8% 65.0% 72.1%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.317 0.332 0.360

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 1,899,316 1,817,576 1,738,650

Number of offenses reported to police 2,932,162 2,796,187 2,412,835

Percent of offenses reported to police 49.0% 51.0% 50.0%

Number of offenders per offense 1.4 1.4 1.4

Survey crime rate per 1,000 households 59.88 54.39 47.54 47.18

Number of households (in thousands) 99,926 100,808 101,505 102,697

Victim survey offenses 5,984,004 5,482,720 4,825,670 4,845,000

U.S. burglary 1993 1994 1995 1996

Number of persons arrested 432,600 424,000

Number of days served per offender 5.1 5.5

Percent of incarceration sentence served 40.8% 43.0%

Time served before being released (in months) 21.0 20.2

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 51.5 46.9

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 8.0 9.0

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.008 0.009

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 59.2% 60.2%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.489 0.504

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 103,603 109,536

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 14 15

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.014 0.015

Number of offenders per conviction 73.8 66.6

Offender population 12,907,789 12,125,172

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.825 0.838

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 211,919 217,292

Number of offenders convicted 174,890 181,997

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 12.763 12.359 12.520 11.682

Population (in thousands) 248,239 248,710 252,177 255,082

Number of police-recorded offenses 3,168,200 3,073,900 3,157,200 2,979,900

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 68.9% 68.1% 70.8% 67.5%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.330 0.333 0.340 0.344

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 2,122,694 2,059,513 2,115,324 1,996,533

Number of offenses reported to police 3,082,844 3,024,316 2,987,379 2,959,408

Percent of offenses reported to police 48.0% 49.0% 48.0% 51.0%

Number of offenders per offense 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4

Survey crime rate per 1,000 households 67.68 64.51 64.64 58.59

Number of households (in thousands) 94,899 95,763 96,282 99,046

Victim survey offenses 6,422,782 6,177,299 6,223,891 5,802,761

U.S. burglary 1989 1990 1991 1992

Appendix table 25.
92 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

Number of persons arrested 153,600 208,400

Number of days served per offender 3.6 2.6

Percent of incarceration sentence served 50.3% 41.7%

Time served before being released (in months) 13.5 10.3

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 26.8 24.6

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 8.8 8.3

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.009 0.008

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 49.0% 48.5%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.086 0.096

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 17,619 20,190

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 18 17

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.018 0.017

Number of offenders per conviction 55.4 58.5

Offender population 1,990,910 2,436,345

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.175 0.199

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 205,878 209,661

Number of offenders convicted 35,947 41,623

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 4.620 5.078 5.295 5.829

Population (in thousands) 238,740 241,077 243,400 245,807

Number of police-recorded offenses 1,102,900 1,224,100 1,288,700 1,432,900

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 99.8% 100.0% 97.9% 98.5%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.887 0.922 0.867 0.882

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 732,326 812,802 855,697 951,446

Number of offenses reported to police 733,971 779,959 874,315 966,326

Percent of offenses reported to police 88.9% 88.5% 88.6% 89.6%

Number of offenders per offense 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5

Survey crime rate per 1,000 households 9.25 9.75 10.75 11.55

Number of households (in thousands) 89,263 90,395 91,823 93,362

Victim survey offenses (completed) 825,614 881,310 986,812 1,078,489

U.S. motor vehicle theft 1985 1986 1987 1988

Number of persons arrested 129,200 119,400

Number of days served per offender 1.3 2.3

Percent of incarceration sentence served 46.1% 53.4%

Time served before being released (in months) 12.1 12.5

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 26.2 23.5

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 3.6 6.1

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.004 0.006

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 50.1% 51.6%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.037 0.055

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 7,254 11,073

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 7 12

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.007 0.012

Number of offenders per conviction 139.5 85.1

Offender population 2,021,022 1,826,918

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.074 0.107

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 196,239 200,354

Number of offenders convicted 14,489 21,465

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 4.747 4.589 4.308 4.371

Population (in thousands) 229,146 231,534 233,981 236,158

Number of police-recorded offenses 1,087,800 1,062,400 1,007,900 1,032,200

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 92.8% 83.6% 93.6% 95.9%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.807 0.741 0.828 0.825

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 722,299 705,434 669,246 685,381

Number of offenses reported to police 778,336 843,856 714,905 714,647

Percent of offenses reported to police 87.0% 88.6% 88.4% 86.0%

Number of offenders per offense 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5

Survey crime rate per 1,000 households 10.64 11.18 9.33 9.44

Number of households (in thousands) 84,095 85,211 86,635 88,039

Victim survey offenses (completed) 894,639 952,433 808,716 830,985

U.S. motor vehicle theft 1981 1982 1983 1984

Appendix table 26.
Appendix 2 93

Number of persons arrested 200,200

Number of days served per offender 3.4

Percent of incarceration sentence served 47.4%

Time served before being released (in months) 11.1

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 23.5

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 9.9

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.010

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 54.9%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.117

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 26,006

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 18

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.18

Number of offenders per conviction 55.5

Offender population 2,629,598

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.214

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 221,890 226,557

Number of offenders convicted 47,377

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 6.061 5.913 5.605 5.259

Population (in thousands) 257,908 260,341 262,755 265,284

Number of police-recorded offenses 1,563,100 1,539,300 1,472,700 1,395,200

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 85.9% 95.0% 100.0%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.802 0.878 0.896

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 1,037,898 1,022,095 977,873

Number of offenses reported to police 1,208,557 1,075,569 969,271

Percent of offenses reported to police 93.4% 92.4% 88.8%

Number of offenders per offense 1.5 1.5 1.5

Survey crime rate per 1,000 households 12.95 11.55 10.75 9.13

Number of households (in thousands) 99,926 100,808 101,505 102,697

Victim survey offenses (completed) 1,293,958 1,164,035 1,091,521 938,000

U.S. motor vehicle theft 1993 1994 1995 1996

Number of persons arrested 211,300 197,600

Number of days served per offender 3.8 4.4

Percent of incarceration sentence served 43.0% 47.9%

Time served before being released (in months) 12.6 13.3

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 29.3 27.9

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 10.0 10.8

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.010 0.011

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 51.6% 54.4%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.131 0.133

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 27,656 28,962

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 19 20

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.19 0.20

Number of offenders per conviction 51.4 50.6

Offender population 2,755,754 2,693,832

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.253 0.245

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 211,919 217,292

Number of offenders convicted 53,575 53,245

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 6.304 6.578 6.589 6.315

Population (in thousands) 248,239 248,710 252,177 255,082

Number of police-recorded offenses 1,564,800 1,635,900 1,661,700 1,610,800

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 94.3% 93.9% 87.3% 97.3%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.878 0.890 0.807 0.897

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 1,039,027 1,086,238 1,103,369 1,069,571

Number of offenses reported to police 1,101,446 1,156,447 1,263,355 1,099,457

Percent of offenses reported to police 93.1% 94.8% 92.4% 92.2%

Number of offenders per offense 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5

Survey crime rate per 1,000 households 12.47 12.74 14.20 12.04

Number of households (in thousands) 94,899 95,763 96,282 99,046

Victim survey offenses (completed) 1,183,078 1,219,880 1,367,268 1,192,470

U.S. motor vehicle theft 1989 1990 1991 1992

Appendix table 27.
94 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

Number of months served per offender 34.8

Number of days served per offender 1,058.6

Percent of incarceration sentence served 45.5%

Time served before being released (in months) 65.8

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 144.7

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 528.5

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.529

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 92.6%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.009

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 400

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 571

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.571

Number of offenders per conviction 1.8

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.0098

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 43,996

Number of offenders convicted 432

Offender population 757

Number of offenders per offense 1.1

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 0.0124 0.0132 0.0137 0.0124

Population (in thousands) 49,991 50,162 50,321 50,487

Number of police-recorded offenses 618 661 688 624

English murder 1985 1986 1987 1988

Number of months served per offender 36.7 35.6

Number of days served per offender 1117.0 1,083.2

Percent of incarceration sentence served 44.5% 42.5%

Time served before being released (in months) 68.8 63.7

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 154.5 149.9

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 533.4 558.7

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.533 0.559

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 84.5% 86.9%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.008 0.008

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 328 338

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 631 643

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.631 0.643

Number of offenders per conviction 1.6 1.6

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.0089 0.0089

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 43,432 43,637

Number of offenders convicted 388 389

Offender population 615 605

Number of offenders per offense 1.1 1.1

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 0.0113 0.0125 0.0111 0.0125

Population (in thousands) 49,634 49,613 49,681 49,810

Number of police-recorded offenses 559 618 550 621

English murder 1981 1982 1983 1984

Appendix table 28.
Appendix 2 95

Number of months served per offender 61.6 52.2

Number of days served per offender 1,875.1 1,590.2

Percent of incarceration sentence served 46.1% 43.4%

Time served before being released (in months) 105.1 99.8

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 228.0 229.9

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 586.2 523.5

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.586 0.523

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 92.7% 94.3%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.010 0.010

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 432 429

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 632 555

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.632 0.555

Number of offenders per conviction 1.6 1.8

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.0104 0.0101

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 44,690 45,031

Number of offenders convicted 466 455

Offender population 737 820 749

Number of offenders per offense 1.1 1.1 1.1

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 0.0130 0.0141 0.0144 0.0131

Population (in thousands) 51,439 51,621 51,820 52,010

Number of police-recorded offenses 670 726 745 681

English murder 1993 1994 1995 1996

Number of months served per offender 47.5

Number of days served per offender 1,446.1

Percent of incarceration sentence served 44.0%

Time served before being released (in months) 95.2

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 216.6

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 499.1

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.499

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 88.8%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.009

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 398

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 562

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.562

Number of offenders per conviction 1.8

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.0101

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 44,446

Number of offenders convicted 448

Offender population 798

Number of offenders per offense 1.1

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 0.0126 0.0132 0.0142 0.0134

Population (in thousands) 50,678 50,870 51,100 51,277

Number of police-recorded offenses 641 669 725 687

English murder 1989 1990 1991 1992

Appendix table 29.
96 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

Number of months served per offender 4.1

Number of days served per offender 124.3

Percent of incarceration sentence served 52.3%

Time served before being released (in months) 27.2

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 52.0

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 150.1

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.150

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 96.0%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 male population ages 10 or older 0.019

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 408

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 156

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.156

Number of offenders per conviction 6.4

Number convicted per 1,000 male population ages 10 or older 0.0200

Male population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 21,299

Number of offenders convicted 425

Offender population 2,718

Number of offenders per offense 1.1

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 female population 0.0719 0.0890 0.0959 0.1105

Female population (in thousands) 25,621 25,706 25,775 25,846

Number of police-recorded offenses 1,842 2,288 2,471 2,855

English rape 1985 1986 1987 1988

Number of months served per offender 5.0 4.1

Number of days served per offender 151.5 125.9

Percent of incarceration sentence served 50.6% 49.3%

Time served before being released (in months) 20.3 20.5

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 40.1 41.6

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 245.1 201.7

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.245 0.202

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 90.0% 94.9%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 male population ages 10 or older 0.014 0.014

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 288 296

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 272 213

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.272 0.213

Number of offenders per conviction 3.7 4.7

Number convicted per 1,000 male population ages 10 or older 0.0153 0.0148

Male population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 20,976 21,086

Number of offenders convicted 320 312

Offender population 1,175 1,467

Number of offenders per offense 1.1 1.1

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 female population 0.0419 0.0525 0.0523 0.0561

Female population (in thousands) 25,474 25,466 25,491 25,540

Number of police-recorded offenses 1,068 1,336 1,334 1,433

English rape 1981 1982 1983 1984

Appendix table 30.
Appendix 2 97

Number of months served per offender 3.1 4.2

Number of days served per offender 94.1 126.8

Percent of incarceration sentence served 50.9% 57.4%

Time served before being released (in months) 35.7 44.2

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 70.2 77

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 86.6 94.3

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.087 0.094

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 94.2% 94.5%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 male population ages 10 or older 0.020 0.024

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 437 517

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 92 100

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.092 0.100

Number of offenders per conviction 10.9 10.0

Number convicted per 1,000 male population ages 10 or older 0.0213 0.0249

Male population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 21,737 21,952

Number of offenders convicted 464 547

Offender population 5,048 5,485 6,335

Number of offenders per offense 1.1 1.1 1.1

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 female population 0.1749 0.1912 0.1890 0.2177

Female population (in thousands) 26,241 26,317 26,387 26,453

Number of police-recorded offenses 4,589 5,032 4,986 5,759

English rape 1993 1994 1995 1996

Number of months served per offender 3.4

Number of days served per offender 103.1

Percent of incarceration sentence served 50.9%

Time served before being released (in months) 29.5

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 58.0

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 114.8

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.115

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 95.2%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 male population ages 10 or older 0.024

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 511

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 121

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.121

Number of offenders per conviction 8.3

Number convicted per 1,000 male population ages 10 or older 0.0249

Male population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 21,578

Number of offenders convicted 537

Offender population 4,450

Number of offenders per offense 1.1

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 female population 0.1275 0.1304 0.1550 0.1582

Female population (in thousands) 25,928 25,998 26,104 26,178

Number of police-recorded offenses 3,305 3,391 4,045 4,142

English rape 1989 1990 1991 1992

Appendix table 31.
 

98 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

Number of days served per offender 3.8

Percent of incarceration sentence served 48.7%

Time served before being released (in months) 16.6

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 34.1

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 7.5

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.008

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 79.1%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.080

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 3,512

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 10

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.010

Number of offenders per conviction 105.1

Offender population 466,367

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.101

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 43,996

Number of offenders convicted 4,439

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 0.549 0.598 0.648 0.623

Population (in thousands) 49,991 50,162 50,321 50,487

Number of police-recorded offenses 27,463 30,020 32,633 31,437

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 38.3%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.168

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 29,711

Number of offenses reported to police 77,668

Percent of offenses reported to police 43.9%

Number of offenders per offense 2.4

Survey crime rate per 1,000 population ages 16 or older 4.40

Population ages 16 or older (in thousands) 40,209

Victim survey offenses 176,920

English robbery 1985 1986 1987 1988

Number of days served per offender 2.8 2.8

Percent of incarceration sentence served 49.1% 46.5%

Time served before being released (in months) 13.1 11.3

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 26.7 24.3

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 7.0 8.0

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.007 0.008

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 73.5% 77.2%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.070 0.071

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 3,039 3,106

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 10 10

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.010 0.010

Number of offenders per conviction 104.4 96.0

Offender population 431,177 386,161

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.095 0.092

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 43,432 43,637

Number of offenders convicted 4,132 4,024

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 0.409 0.460 0.445 0.500

Population (in thousands) 49,634 49,613 49,681 49,810

Number of police-recorded offenses 20,282 22,837 22,119 24,890

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 24.3% 35.2%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.113 0.137

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 18,361 19,926

Number of offenses reported to police 75,628 56,530

Percent of offenses reported to police 46.5% 39.0%

Number of offenders per offense 2.4 2.4

Survey crime rate per 1,000 population ages 16 or older 4.20 3.70

Population ages 16 or older (in thousands) 38,724 39,175

Victim survey offenses 162,641 144,948

English robbery 1981 1982 1983 1984

Appendix table 32.
Appendix 2 99

Number of days served per offender 3.3 2.6

Percent of incarceration sentence served 47.1% 50.9%

Time served before being released (in months) 19.5 20.5

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 41.4 40.3

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 5.6 4.2

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.006 0.004

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 69.7% 66.8%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.079 0.077

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 3,550 3,452

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders86

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.008 0.006

Number of offenders per conviction 124.3 160.9

Offender population 633,004 831,210

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.114 0.115

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 44,690 45,031

Number of offenders convicted 5,094 5,167

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 1.125 1.162 1.314 1.423

Population (in thousands) 51,439 51,621 51,820 52,010

Number of police-recorded offenses 57,845 60,007 68,074 74,035

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 47.2% 34.7%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.219 0.197

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 52,058 61,496

Number of offenses reported to police 110,375 177,085

Percent of offenses reported to police 46.5% 56.6%

Number of offenders per offense 2.4 2.4

Survey crime rate per 1,000 population ages 16 or older 5.80 7.60

Population ages 16 or older (in thousands) 40,925 41,167

Victim survey offenses 237,365 312,871

English robbery 1993 1994 1995 1996

Number of days served per offender 4.3

Percent of incarceration sentence served 49.9%

Time served before being released (in months) 20.4

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 40.9

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 6.9

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.007

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 69.8%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.076

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 3,381

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 10

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.010

Number of offenders per conviction 100.9

Offender population 488,518

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.109

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 44,446

Number of offenders convicted 4,841

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 0.654 0.712 0.887 1.032

Population (in thousands) 50,678 50,870 51,100 51,277

Number of police-recorded offenses 33,163 36,195 45,323 52,894

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 47.2%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.223

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 40,877

Number of offenses reported to police 86,651

Percent of offenses reported to police 47.2%

Number of offenders per offense 2.4

Survey crime rate per 1,000 population ages 16 or older 4.50

Population ages 16 or older (in thousands) 40,796

Victim survey offenses 183,582

English robbery 1989 1990 1991 1992 Appendix table 33.
100 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

Number of days served per offender 1.3

Percent of incarceration sentence served 45.6%

Time served before being released (in months) 6.7

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 14.7

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 6.6

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.007

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 19.0%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.198

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 8,694

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 35

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.035

Number of offenders per conviction 28.9

Offender population 1,320,689

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 1.037

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 43,996

Number of offenders convicted 45,640

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 2.376 2.435 2.725 3.040

Population (in thousands) 49,991 50,162 50,321 50,487

Number of police-recorded offenses 118,791 122,139 137,135 153,459

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 48.0%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.208

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 117,739

Number of offenses reported to police 245,488

Percent of offenses reported to police 43.3%

Number of offenders per offense 2

Survey crime rate per 1,000 population ages 16 or older 14.10

Population ages 16 or older (in thousands) 40,209

Victim survey offenses 566,947

English assault 1985 1986 1987 1988

Number of days served per offender 1.0 1.2

Percent of incarceration sentence served 55.6% 52.0%

Time served before being released (in months) 6.0 5.2

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 10.8 10.0

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 5.4 7.4

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.005 0.007

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 13.1% 14.8%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.146 0.168

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 6,352 7,325

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 41 50

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.041 0.050

Number of offenders per conviction 24.3 19.9

Offender population 1,180,156 985,516

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 1.120 1.133

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 43,432 43,637

Number of offenders convicted 48,650 49,459

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 1.975 2.142 2.194 2.241

Population (in thousands) 49,634 49,613 49,681 49,810

Number of police-recorded offenses 98,021 106,279 108,980 111,628

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 41.3% 37.1%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.166 0.221

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 84,268 93,572

Number of offenses reported to police 203,929 252,162

Percent of offenses reported to police 40.2% 59.6%

Number of offenders per offense 2 2

Survey crime rate per 1,000 population ages 16 or older 13.10 10.80

Population ages 16 or older (in thousands) 38,724 39,175

Victim survey offenses 507,286 423,090

English assault 1981 1982 1983 1984

Appendix table 34.
Appendix 2 101

Number of days served per offender 0.9 0.7

Percent of incarceration sentence served 45.9% 44.5%

Time served before being released (in months) 7.3 6.1

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 15.9 13.7

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 4.1 3.8

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.004 0.004

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 17.8% 27.0%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.149 0.165

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 6,677 7,411

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 23 14

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.023 0.014

Number of offenders per conviction 43.3 70.3

Offender population 1,618,281 1,929,569

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.837 0.609

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 44,690 45,031

Number of offenders convicted 37,412 27,446

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 3.839 4.057 3.926 4.396

Population (in thousands) 51,439 51,621 51,820 52,010

Number of police-recorded offenses 197,466 209,416 203,461 228,636

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 45.3% 52.7%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.244 0.211

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 168,789 173,633

Number of offenses reported to police 372,790 329,338

Percent of offenses reported to police 53.9% 40.0%

Number of offenders per offense 2 2

Survey crime rate per 1,000 population ages 16 or older 16.90 20.00

Population ages 16 or older (in thousands) 40,925 41,167

Victim survey offenses 691,633 823,344

English assault 1993 1994 1995 1996

Number of days served per offender 1.2

Percent of incarceration sentence served 46.1%

Time served before being released (in months) 8.2

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 17.8

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 4.7

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.005

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 15.3%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.157

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 6,962

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 31

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.031

Number of offenders per conviction

Offender population 1,468,976

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 1.024

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 44,446

Number of offenders convicted 45,513

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 3.389 3.513 3.594 3.792

Population (in thousands) 50,678 50,870 51,100 51,277

Number of police-recorded offenses 171,769 178,684 183,653 194,458

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 52.4%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.250

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 157,091

Number of offenses reported to police 299,679

Percent of offenses reported to police 47.7%

Number of offenders per offense 2

Survey crime rate per 1,000 population ages 16 or older 15.40

Population ages 16 or older (in thousands) 40,796

Victim survey offenses 628,258

English assault 1989 1990 1991 1992

Appendix table 35.
102 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

Number of days served per offender 1.0

Percent of incarceration sentence served 43.7%

Time served before being released (in months) 6.6

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 15.1

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 4.8

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.005

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 34.8%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.428

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 18,835

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 14

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.014

Number of offenders per conviction 73.4

Offender population 3,977,296

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 1.231

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 43,996

Number of offenders convicted 54,170

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 17.337 18.572 17.887 16.198

Population (in thousands) 49,991 50,162 50,321 50,487

Number of police-recorded offenses 866,697 931,620 900,104 817,792

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 64.9%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.407

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 483,001

Number of offenses reported to police 744,613

Percent of offenses reported to police 62.8%

Number of offenders per offense 1.8

Survey crime rate per 1,000 households 61.20

Number of households (in thousands) 19,374

Victim survey offenses 1,185,689

English burglary 1985 1986 1987 1988

Number of days served per offender 1.5 1.3

Percent of incarceration sentence served 57.8% 51.3%

Time served before being released (in months) 6.3 5.8

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 10.9 11.3

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 7.8 7.6

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.008 0.008

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 29.0% 33.2%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.491 0.531

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 21,309 23,153

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 27 23

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.027 0.023

Number of offenders per conviction 37.7 44.2

Offender population 2,772,825 3,079,771

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 1.692 1.597

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 43,432 43,637

Number of offenders convicted 73,469 69,672

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 14.474 16.233 16.271 17.927

Population (in thousands) 49,634 49,613 49,681 49,810

Number of police-recorded offenses 718,381 805,389 808,341 892,923

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 70.4% 69.7%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.466 0.472

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 349,692 432,039

Number of offenses reported to police 496,408 620,017

Percent of offenses reported to police 66.2% 67.8%

Number of offenders per offense 1.8 1.8

Survey crime rate per 1,000 households 40.90 49.20

Number of households (in thousands) 18,334 18,587

Victim survey offenses 749,861 914,480

English burglary 1981 1982 1983 1984

Appendix table 36.
Appendix 2 103

Number of days served per offender 0.4 0.4

Percent of incarceration sentence served 46.5% 43.6%

Time served before being released (in months) 7.2 6.5

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 15.5 14.9

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 2.00 2.2

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.002 0.002

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 29.5% 38.2%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.266 0.3

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 11,899 13,497

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 7 6

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.007 0.006

Number of offenders per conviction 149.5 172.0

Offender population 6,018,977 6,080,100

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.901 0.785

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 44,690 45,031

Number of offenders convicted 40,272 35,346

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 26.625 24.344 23.919 22.392

Population (in thousands) 51,439 51,621 51,820 52,010

Number of police-recorded offenses 1,369,584 1,256,682 1,239,484 1,164,583

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 59.4% 55.3%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.410 0.367

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 727,276 643,645

Number of offenses reported to police 1,225,208 1,162,940

Percent of offenses reported to police 69.0% 66.3%

Number of offenders per offense 1.8 1.8

Survey crime rate per 1,000 households 85.50 82.90

Number of households (in thousands) 20,768 21,159

Victim survey offenses 1,775,664 1,754,057

English burglary 1993 1994 1995 1996

Number of days served per offender 0.6

Percent of incarceration sentence served 45.9%

Time served before being released (in months) 7.9

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 17.2

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 2.7

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.003

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 28.0%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.290

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 12,894

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 10

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.010

Number of offenders per conviction 104.6

Offender population 4,819,435

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 1.037

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 44,446

Number of offenders convicted 46,089

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 16.298 19.792 23.864 26.43

Population (in thousands) 50,678 50,870 51,100 51,277

Number of police-recorded offenses 825,930 1,006,813 1,219,464 1,355,274

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 62.4%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.455

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 624,946

Number of offenses reported to police 1,001,659

Percent of offenses reported to police 73.0%

Number of offenders per offense 1.8

Survey crime rate per 1,000 households 67.80

Number of households (in thousands) 20,238

Victim survey offenses 1,372,136

English burglary 1989 1990 1991 1992

Appendix table 37.
104 Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

Number of days served per offender 0.7

Percent of incarceration sentence served 44.0%

Time served before being released (in months) 4.0

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 9.1

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 5.6

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.006

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 20.4%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.120

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 5,296

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 27

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.027

Number of offenders per conviction 37.3

Offender population 967,933

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.590

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 43,996

Number of offenders convicted 25,946

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 7.350 8.195 7.742 7.264

Population (in thousands) 49,991 50,162 50,321 50,487

Number of police-recorded offenses 367,426 411,060 389,576 366,713

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 89.1%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.845

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 327,503

Number of offenses reported to police 367,719

Percent of offenses reported to police 94.9%

Number of offenders per offense 2.1

Survey crime rate per 1,000 households 20.00

Number of households (in thousands) 19,374

Victim survey offenses (completed) 387,480

English motor vehicle theft 1985 1986 1987 1988

Number of days served per offender 1.9 1.5

Percent of incarceration sentence served 60.0% 56.6%

Time served before being released (in months) 4.8 4.7

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 8.0 8.3

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 13.1 10.5

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.013 0.010

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 24.9% 23.9%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.207 0.161

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 8,971 7,042

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 53 44

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.053 0.044

Number of offenders per conviction 19.4 23.2

Offender population 698,009 684,898

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.829 0.676

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 43,432 43,637

Number of offenders convicted 35,988 29,478

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 6.701 7.079 6.556 6.922

Population (in thousands) 49,634 49,613 49,681 49,810

Number of police-recorded offenses 332,590 351,230 325,699 344,806

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 100.0% 100.0%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 1.000 0.999

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 286,186 283,995

Number of offenses reported to police 271,423 274,143

Percent of offenses reported to police 94.9% 96.4%

Number of offenders per offense 2.1 2.1

Survey crime rate per 1,000 households 15.60 15.30

Number of households (in thousands) 18,334 18,587

Victim survey offenses (completed) 286,010 284,381

English motor vehicle theft 1981 1982 1983 1984

Appendix table 38.
 

 

 

Appendix 2 105

Number of days served per offender 0.3 0.4

Percent of incarceration sentence served 43.1% 39.5%

Time served before being released (in months) 3.1 3.4

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 7.2 8.6

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 2.8 3.5

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.003 0.004

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 22.9% 29.6%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.086 0.102

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 3,854 4,571

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 12 12

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.012 0.012

Number of offenders per conviction 82.6 85.8

Offender population 1,387,109 1,325,351

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.376 0.343

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 44,690 45,031

Number of offenders convicted 16,802 15,454

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 11.616 10.495 9.812 9.488

Population (in thousands) 51,439 51,621 51,820 52,010

Number of police-recorded offenses 597,519 541,749 508,450 493,489

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 93.5% 82.6%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.905 0.806

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 492,217 402,289

Number of offenses reported to police 526,710 486,862

Percent of offenses reported to police 96.8% 97.5%

Number of offenders per offense 2.1 2.1

Survey crime rate per 1,000 households 26.20 23.60

Number of households (in thousands) 20,768 21,159

Victim survey offenses (completed 544,122 499,346

English motor vehicle theft 1993 1994 1995 1996

Number of days served per offender 0.2

Percent of incarceration sentence served 42.4%

Time served before being released (in months) 2.8

Incarceration sentence length (in months) 6.6

Number incarcerated per 1,000 offenders 2.5

Probability of an offender being incarcerated 0.003

Percent of convicted offenders who were incarcerated 14.1%

Number incarcerated per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.073

Number of offenders sentenced to incarceration 3,228

Number of convictions per 1,000 offenders 18

Probability of an offender being convicted 0.018

Number of offenders per conviction 57.6

Offender population 1,314,943

Number convicted per 1,000 population ages 10 or older 0.514

Population ages 10 or older (in thousands) 44,446

Number of offenders convicted 22,837

Police-recorded crime rate per 1,000 population 7.763 9.715 11.387 11.464

Population (in thousands) 50,678 50,870 51,100 51,277

Number of police-recorded offenses 393,399 494,209 581,901 587,856

Percent of reported offenses that were recorded by police 94.3%

Probability of an offense being recorded by police 0.929

Number of comparable offenses recorded by police 483,351

Number of offenses reported to police 512,835

Percent of offenses reported to police 98.6%

Number of offenders per offense 2.1

Survey crime rate per 1,000 households 25.70

Number of households (in thousands) 20,238

Victim survey offenses (completed) 520,117

English motor vehicle theft 1989 1990 1991 1992

Appendix table 39.