Statistics on women and the criminal justice system 2015
Source: data.gov.uk (2018-05-25)

Women and the Criminal Justice System. Statistics produced by a range of agencies relating to the experience of women within the criminal justice system.

/ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Published 24 November 2016 
 
 
Statistics on Women and the Criminal 
Justice System 2015 
A Ministry of Justice publication under Section 95 
of the Criminal Justice Act 1991 
 
 

 
 
2 
 
Contents 
Contents .................................................................................................................... 2 
Table of figures and tables ........................................................................................ 4 
Chapter 1: Executive Summary ............................................................................... 10 
Chapter 2: Introduction ............................................................................................ 13 
Chapter 3: Victims ................................................................................................... 17 
Risks of victimisation .......................................................................................... 17 
Perceptions of crime and victimisation ................................................................ 18 
Personal Crime ................................................................................................... 19 
Violent Crime ...................................................................................................... 21 
Abuse during childhood ...................................................................................... 25 
Intimate violence ................................................................................................. 28 
Homicide ............................................................................................................ 35 
Chapter 4: Police Activity ........................................................................................ 41 
Out of Court Disposals ........................................................................................ 41 
Arrests ................................................................................................................ 47 
Liaison and diversion services ............................................................................ 49 
Chapter 5: Defendants ............................................................................................ 51 
Individuals formally dealt with by the Criminal Justice System ............................ 52 
Prosecutions and Convictions ............................................................................. 55 
Remands ............................................................................................................ 66 
Case Management ............................................................................................. 75 
Pre-sentence reports .......................................................................................... 78 
Sentencing ......................................................................................................... 80 
Appeals .............................................................................................................. 86 
Ethnicity and sex ................................................................................................ 87 
Relative rate index .............................................................................................. 88 
Chapter 6: Offender Characteristics ........................................................................ 93 
Offending histories .............................................................................................. 93 
Proven Reoffending .......................................................................................... 101 
Other characteristics – previous research ......................................................... 107 
Chapter 7: Offenders: under supervision or in custody .......................................... 109 
Prison Population ............................................................................................. 109 
Receptions ....................................................................................................... 113 
Sentences ........................................................................................................ 115 
Releases .......................................................................................................... 119 
HMIP Prisons Inspectorate Survey Report ........................................................ 122 
Accredited programmes .................................................................................... 123 
Offender Learning ............................................................................................. 127 
Discipline in prison establishments ................................................................... 130 
Safety in prison custody .................................................................................... 131 
Probation .......................................................................................................... 135 
Chapter 8: Offence Analysis .................................................................................. 139 
Context ............................................................................................................. 140 
TV licence evasion ............................................................................................ 141 
Common assault ............................................................................................... 143 
Knife possession .............................................................................................. 146 
Actual Bodily Harm and Grievous Bodily Harm ................................................. 148 
Shoplifting ......................................................................................................... 151 
Drug offences ................................................................................................... 153 
Truancy ............................................................................................................ 159 
Cruelty to or neglect of children ........................................................................ 162 
Benefit fraud ..................................................................................................... 164 

 
 
3 
 
Offences with long custodial sentences ............................................................ 166 
Chapter 9: Practitioners ......................................................................................... 167 
Revisions Policy .................................................................................................... 171 
Contacts ................................................................................................................ 172 
 
 
 
 

 
 
4 
 
Table of figures and tables 
Figure 1.01: Proportions of men and women throughout the CJS, 2015 
Figure 3.01: Percentage of adults who worry about crime, by type of crime and sex, 
year ending March 2016 
Figure 3.02: Percentage of adults who were victims of personal crime, by age group 
and sex, year ending March 2016 
Figure 3.03: Percentage of children aged 10-15 who were victims of personal crime, 
by type of crime and sex, year ending March 2016 
Figure 3.04: Percentage of adults who were victims of violence, by type of violence 
and sex, year ending March 2015 
Figure 3.05: Percentage of adults who were victims of violence once or more, by age 
group and sex, year ending March 2015 
Figure 3.06: Percentage of children aged 10 to 15 who experienced violent crime 
victimisation in the last year, by type of victimisation and sex, year ending March 2016 
Table 3.01: Factors tested as being associated with being a victim of violence for men 
and women, year ending March 2015 
Figure 3.07: Percentage who were abused during childhood among adults aged 16 to 
59, by type of abuse and sex, year ending March 2016 
Figure 3.08: Number and percentage of defendants prosecuted for child sexual abuse, 
by sex of child, 2005 to 2015 
Figure 3.09: Percentage of adults who were a victim of intimate violence since the age 
of 16, by type of violence and sex, year ending March 2016 
Figure 3.10: Percentage of adults who were victims of intimate violence in the last year, 
by type of violence and sex, year ending March 2006 to year ending March 2016 
Figure 3.11: Proportion of rape offences by age and sex of the victim, experimental 
statistics from 13 police forces, year ending March 2015 
Figure 3.12: Percentage of adults aged 16 to 59 who were victims of domestic abuse 
in the last year, by marital status and sex, year ending March 2015 
Figure 3.13: Percentage of adults aged 16 to 59 who were victims of domestic abuse 
in the last year, by household income and sex, year ending March 2015 
Figure 3.14: Percentage of violence against the person offences recorded by the police 
that were flagged as domestic abuse related, by sex of victims, experimental statistics 
from 12 police forces, April to September 2015 
Figure 3.15: Number of homicide offences currently recorded by the police, by sex of 
victim, year ending March 2005 to year ending March 2015 

 
 
5 
 
Figure 3.16: Age and sex profile of currently recorded homicide victims compared with 
that of the population, combined data for year ending March 2013 to year ending March 
2015 
Figure 3.17: Proportion of homicide victims, by relationship of victim to principal 
suspect and sex of victim, year ending March 2015 
Figure 3.18: Proportions of homicide victims and suspects, by alcohol and drug status 
and sex of victim, combined data for year ending March 2013 to year ending March 
2015 
Figure 3.19: Percentage of homicide victims, by involvement in drugs and sex of victim, 
combined data for year ending March 2013 to year ending March 2015 
Figure 4.01: Number and percentage of Penalty Notices for Disorder issued, by sex, 
2011-2015 
Figure 4.02: Number of Penalty Notices for Disorder issued, by offence and sex, 2015 
Figure 4.03: Number of cautions issued by offence type and sex, 2011 to 2015  
Figure 4.04: Number of arrests, by age and sex, 2011/12 to 2015/16 
Figure 4.05: Proportion of arrests within each offence group by sex, 2015/16 
Figure 5.01: The journey of males and females through the Criminal Justice System, 
2015 
Figure 5.02: Proportions of individuals dealt with who are dealt with through 
prosecutions and out of court disposals, by sex, 2005, 2010 and 2015 
Figure 5.03: Proportions of individuals dealt with who are dealt with through 
prosecutions, cautions and PNDs, by age group and sex, 2015 
Figure 5.04: Proportions of individuals dealt with for an indictable offence who are dealt 
with through prosecutions, cautions and PNDs, by sex, 2005, 2010 and 2015 
Figure 5.05: Number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates’ courts, by 
offence type and sex, 2005 to 2015 
Figure 5.06: Percentage of defendants who were prosecuted for TV licence evasion or 
speeding offences, by sex, 2005 to 2015 
Figure 5.07: Proportion of the defendants brought to magistrates’ court that are of each 
sex, by prosecuting authority, 2015 
Figure 5.08: Proportion of the defendants brought to magistrates’ courts that are 
brought by each prosecuting authority, by sex, 2015 
Figure 5.09: Proportion of legal aid workload relating to each sex, by legal aid category, 
2015 
Figure 5.10: Proportion of legal aid workload for representation at magistrates’ courts, 
by offence group and sex, 2015 

 
 
6 
 
Figure 5.11: Proportion of legal aid workload for prison law, by type of representation 
and sex, 2015 
Figure 5.12: Percentage of defendants for trial at the Crown Court that pled guilty, by 
sex, 2005 to 2015 
Figure 5.13: Conviction ratio, by age group and sex, 2005 to 2015 
Figure 5.14: Proportion of those remanded by the police, by remand status and sex, 
2011 to 2015 
Figure 5.15: Proportion of those remanded by magistrates’ courts, by remand status 
and sex, 2011 to 2015 
Figure 5.16: Proportion of those remanded by the Crown Court, by remand status and 
sex, 2011 to 2015 
Figure 5.17: Proportion of those remanded in custody and sentenced at the Crown 
Court, by sentencing outcome and sex, 2015 
Figure 5.18: Percentage of those remanded in custody and sentenced at the Crown 
Court, by custodial sentencing outcome and sex, 2011 to 2015 
Figure 5.19: Proportion of those remanded in custody and sentenced to immediate 
custody at the Crown Court, by sentence length and sex, 2015 
Figure 5.20: Median number of days from offence to completion, by offence group and 
sex, 2015 
Figure 5.21: The level of concordance between sentence recommendations and 
outcomes for female and male offenders, by sentence type, 2015 
Figure 5.22: Proportion of offenders sentenced, by sentencing outcome and sex, 2005 
and 2015 
Figure 5.23: Proportion of offenders sentenced for indictable offences at all courts, by 
sentencing outcome and sex, 2005 to 2015 
Figure 5.24: Custody rate, by offence type and sex, 2005 to 2015 
Figure 5.25: Average custodial sentence length for offenders sentenced to immediate 
custody, by sex, 2005 to 2015 
Figure 5.26: Relative rate index of the remand status of females versus males at first 
court contact, 2015 
Figure 5.27: Relative rate index of females versus males following prosecution at the 
magistrates’ court, 2015 
Figure 5.28: Relative rate index for females versus males at sentencing, 2015 
Figure 5.29: Relative rate index for females versus males at sentencing, by offence 
type, 2015 
Figure 6.01: Number of cautioning and sentencing occasions for first time offenders 
and offenders previously cautioned or sentenced, by sex, 2005 to 2015 

 
 
7 
 
Figure 6.02: Proportion of the offences committed by offenders who have 15 or more 
previous cautions or convictions, by offence group and sex, 2015 
Figure 6.03: Proportion of the offenders receiving sentences, by their number of 
previous cautions or convictions, offence type and sex, 2015 
Figure 6.04: Proportion of the offenders sentenced for an indictable offence who have 
no previous sanctions, by their sentencing outcome and sex, 2015 
Figure 6.05: Proportion of the offenders sentenced to immediate custody, by their 
number of previous immediate custodial sentences, sentence length and sex, 2015 
Figure 6.06: Proportion of previous immediate custodial sentences for those who had 
at least one previous immediate custodial sentence and who were given an immediate 
custodial sentence in 2015, by number and sentence length of previous immediate 
custodial sentences and sex 
Figure 6.07: Numbers of proven reoffenders and reoffences, by sex, 2010-2014  
Figure 6.08: Percentage of proven reoffenders who reoffended, by age and sex, 2014 
Figure 6.09: Average number of proven reoffences per reoffender, by sex and age, 
2014 
Figure 6.10: Percentage of proven reoffenders, by index offence group and sex, 2014 
Figure 6.11: Percentage of proven reoffenders by index disposal and sex, 2014 
Figure 7.01: Prison population, by sex, at 30th June 2005 to 30th June 2015 
Figure 7.02: Number of individuals held on remand, by sex, at 30th June 2005 to 30th 
June 2015 
Figure 7.03: Percentage of prisoners who are foreign nationals, by sex, at 30th June 
2005 to 30th June 2015 
Figure 7.04: Number of first prison receptions, by sex, 2005 to 2015 
Figure 7.05: Number of remand admissions into prison, by type of admission and sex, 
2005 to 2015 
Figure 7.06: Percentage of sentenced prisoners with indeterminate sentences, by sex, 
30th June 2005 to 30th June 2015 
Figure 7.07: Proportion of prisoners serving determinate sentences per sentence 
length band, by sex, 30 June 2015 
Figure 7.08: Proportion of sentenced prisoners, by offence group and sex, 30th June 
2015 
Figure 7.09: Number of annual releases, by sex, 2005 to 2015 
Figure 7.10: Percentage of those eligible who receive home detention curfew release, 
by sex, 2005 to 2015 
Figure 7.11: Numbers of ROTL releases, by sex, 2005 to 2015 

 
 
8 
 
Figure 7.12: Number of accredited prison and probation programme starts and 
completions and completion to start ratio, by sex, 2009/10 to 2014/15 
Figure 7.13: Proportion of accredited probation and prison programme starts, by 
programme type and sex, 2009/10 to 2014/15 
Figure 7.14: Proportion of offender learning assessment outcomes by subject, level 
and sex, 2014/15 
Figure 7.15: Number of assaults per 1,000 prisoners, by sex of establishment, 2005 - 
2015 
Figure 7.16: Proportion of those involved in assault incidents, by type of involvement 
and sex of establishment, 2005 – 2015 
Figure 7.17: Number of offenders supervised by the Probation Service under court 
orders, by sex, at end of period 2005 to 2015 
Figure 7.18: Proportion of offenders commencing supervision per number of 
requirements band, by type of order and sex, 2015 
 
Figure 8.01: Proportion of the defendants prosecuted for selected offences of each 
sex, by offence, 2015 
Figure 8.02: Number of defendants prosecuted for TV licence evasion, by sex, 2005 
to 2015 
Figure 8.03: Proportion of defendants who were prosecuted (rather than cautioned) for 
common assault, by sex, 2005 to 2015 
Figure 8.04: Median number of days taken from offence to completion for common 
assault cases, including cases over ten years, by sex, 2011 to 2015 
Figure 8.05: Proportion of offenders sentenced for common assault, by sentencing 
outcome and sex, 2015 
Figure 8.06: Proportion of offenders dealt with for knife possession, by sentencing or 
cautioning outcome and sex, 2015 
Figure 8.07: Number of people dealt with for ABH and GBH, by sex, 2005 to 2015 
Figure 8.08: Proportion of offenders sentenced for ABH and GBH, by sentencing 
outcome, offence and sex, 2015 
Figure 8.09: Proportion of offenders given a PND, caution or conviction for shoplifting 
offences, by sex, 2005 to 2015 
Figure 8.10: Average number of days taken from offence to completion and number of 
defendants whose cases have completed, for indictable drug offences, 2011 to 2015 
Figure 8.11: Custody rate for indictable drug offences, by sex, 2005 to 2015 
Figure 8.12: Custody rate for female sentenced for indictable drug offences, the 
custody rate if sentencing patterns did not change, and the rate if the offence mix did 
not change, 2005 to 2015 

 
 
9 
 
Figure 8.13: Number of female offenders sentenced to immediate custody for selected 
indictable drug offences , by offence, 2005 to 2015 
Figure 8.14: Number of male offenders sentenced to immediate custody for selected 
indictable drug offences, by offence, 2005 to 2015 
Figure 8.15: Number of defendants prosecuted for truancy, by sex, 2005 to 2015 
Figure 8.16: Median number of days taken from offence to completion for truancy 
cases, including cases over ten years, 2011 to 2015 
Figure 8.17: Percentage of offenders sentenced for truancy who had a previous 
caution or conviction for selected offences, by the offence for which they had a 
previous caution or conviction and sex, 2015 
Figure 8.18: Number of offenders cautioned or prosecuted for cruelty to or neglect of 
children, by sex, 2005 to 2015 
Figure 8.19: Number of defendants prosecuted for benefit fraud, by sex, 2005 to 2015 
Figure 8.20: Median number of days taken from offence to completion for benefit fraud 
cases, including cases over ten years, 2011 to 2015 
Figure 8.21: Number of offenders sentenced to immediate custody of over 10 years for 
selected offences , by offence and sex, 2015 
Figure 9.01: Proportion of practitioners in organisations involved in the CJS of each 
sex, by organisation, most recent year available 
Figure 9.02: Proportion of senior practitioners in organisations involved in the CJS of 
each sex, by organisation, most recent year available 
 
 

 
 
10 
 
Chapter 1: Executive Summary 
This publication compiles statistics from data sources across the Criminal Justice 
System (CJS), to provide a combined perspective on the typical experiences of women 
who come into contact with it. It considers how these experiences have changed over 
time and how they contrast to the typical experiences of men. No causative links can 
be drawn from these summary statistics, and no controls have been applied to account 
for differences in circumstances between the males and females coming into contact 
with the CJS (e.g. average income or age); differences observed may indicate areas 
worth further investigation, but should not be taken as evidence of unequal treatment 
or as direct effects of sex. 
In general, females appear to have been substantially under-represented as offenders 
throughout the CJS compared with males. This is particularly true in relation to the 
most serious offence types and sentences, though patterns by sex vary between 
individual offences. Females were also typically underrepresented among practitioners 
in the CJS and among victims of violent crime, although they were more likely than 
males to have been a victim of intimate violence or child abuse. Trends over time for 
each sex often mirror overall trends, though this is not always the case. 
Victimisation  
According to the Crime Survey of England and Wales, there was no statistically 
significant difference in the proportion of women and men that were victims of crime in 
2015/16. Women were less likely than men to think that the CJS is fair and more likely 
to believe that crime is rising. Women were more likely to have been subject to abuse 
as children, particularly sexual assault. They were less likely to be victims of violent 
crime in general, but much more likely to be victims of sexual assault or domestic 
violence – and female homicide victims were far more likely than their male equivalents 
to have a current or former partner be the principal suspect for their death.  
Police Activity 
Less than a quarter of those given a penalty notice for disorder (22%) or caution (24%) 
were female. Women were underrepresented to an even greater extent among those 
arrested (16%), who are typically being dealt with for more serious offences than those 
dealt with out of court. For both out of court disposals and arrests, females were 
particularly likely to have been dealt with for theft offences. 
 
 

 
 
11 
 
Defendants 
Over the last decade, the number of females prosecuted has risen by 6%, driven by 
increases in prosecutions for TV license evasion, while the number of males 
prosecuted has fallen by a third. Nevertheless, in line with police activity, females were 
still substantially underrepresented among those prosecuted, at just over a quarter of 
the total (27%). This is broadly mirrored in convictions, remands and sentencing, 
although women have a slightly higher conviction ratio. Women were more likely to be 
sentenced to fines and conditional discharges and less likely to be sentenced to 
custody, compared with men. They also received shorter immediate custodial 
sentences on average, with the gap increasing over the last decade, driven by 
increases in the number of prosecutions and average custodial sentence length of 
male sexual offenders.  
Figure 1.01: Proportions of men and women throughout the CJS, 20151 
 
 
Offender Characteristics 
 
Females made up a quarter of first time offenders, but only one in seven of those dealt 
with who had a previous caution or conviction. Males were more likely to be sentenced 
to immediate custody and to receive custodial sentences of 6 months or longer than 
females with a similar criminal history. Three-fifths of offences committed by women 
with 15 or more previous cautions or convictions related to theft, compared with only 
two-fifths for men. Although males were more likely to reoffend, females had a higher 
number of proven reoffences on average per reoffender. Females were slightly more 
likely than males to reoffend following a short custodial sentence, but considerably less 
likely to reoffend following longer ones. 
 
 
                                                          
1 Arrests data from 2015/16. Prison population at June 2015. 
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Population
Arrests
Prosecutions
Convictions
Prison population
Proportion
Women
Men

 
 
12 
 
Offenders under supervision or in custody 
Women represented only 5% of the prison population, a proportion that has fallen over 
the last decade. However, in line with sentencing patterns, women were typically 
serving shorter sentences and represented almost 9% of those admitted to custody. 
Female prisoners reported feeling better supported in prison, but less safe, and they 
were more likely to self-harm and self-harm more frequently than men. There were 
lower rates of assault in female prisons, but a slightly higher proportion of disciplinary 
incidents relative to the population. Women typically had shorter periods of probation 
and fewer requirements. They were also more likely than men to participate in 
education in prison, to be granted home detention curfew if eligible, to make a success 
of release on temporary license and to have their probation orders terminated early for 
good progress. 
Offence analysis 
A range of differences between the sexes could be seen when individual offences are 
examined; typical behaviours and outcomes vary between men and women at an 
offence level. For example, while women were more likely than men to have been 
prosecuted for TV license evasion, typical sentencing behaviour was the same for both 
sexes, whereas prosecutions for benefit fraud were close to evenly split between men 
and women, but males typically received more serious sentences. Trends also vary 
over time at an offence level: for example, women were becoming less likely to receive 
an immediate custodial sentence for indictable drug offence, while males were not. In 
line with overall trends, however, the differences that exist at offence level usually 
represent either less involvement or less serious involvement in the CJS for women 
than men. 
Practitioners 
Women were substantially underrepresented among the police and judiciary, at just 
over a quarter of practitioners, but represented more than half of those working in the 
Ministry of Justice, Crown Prosecution Service and female prison estate. In general, 
CJS functions involving direct contact with offenders had fewer females than males 
(and vice versa for those that do not), but the proportions have been slowly getting 
more equal since 2011. Female representation among senior staff was considerably 
lower than in the general workforce for all CJS organisations, but proportions have 
been rising.  
 

 
 
13 
 
Chapter 2: Introduction  
 
Section 95 of the Criminal Justice Act 1991 states that: 
‘The Secretary of State shall in each year publish such information as they consider 
expedient for the purpose... of facilitating the performance of those engaged in the 
administration of justice to avoid discriminating against any persons on the ground of 
race or sex or any other improper ground...’  
Documents fulfilling this requirement have been published since 1992, in the form of 
statistical information. This report, as with previous editions, brings together 
information on the representation of women (and men) among victims, suspects, 
defendants and offenders within the Criminal Justice System. It also provides details 
of practitioners within the Criminal Justice System (CJS).  
The publication aims to help practitioners, policy makers, academics and members of 
the public understand trends in the CJS in England and Wales, and how these vary 
between the sexes and over time. The identification of differences should not be 
equated with unequal treatment, however, as there are many reasons why apparent 
disparities may exist which would require further investigation.  
This is the latest biennial compendium of Statistics on Women and the Criminal Justice 
System and will be followed next year by its sister publication Statistics on Race and 
the Criminal Justice System. Other government papers containing information on the 
representation of different sexes and ethnic groups in the justice system have also 
been or will be published, including the National Offender Management Service 
(NOMS) Equalities report, Home Office statistics on Police Powers and Procedures, 
Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) reports on Violence against Women and Girls, and 
an ONS-led National Statistics report on Domestic Abuse in England and Wales.  
 
 

 
 
14 
 
Limitations on conclusions 
Although we explore differences between sexes, it is important that inferences are not 
made about individuals from group-level data – since we consider averaged outcomes 
that do not take into consideration the unique sub-set of circumstances that are 
pertinent to each case. If we take, for example, defendants: there can be a number of 
points of contact with the CJS, which range from an out of court disposal to standing 
trial in front of a jury. The sentencing outcome that a person receives depends upon 
the crime committed, their offending history and a series of mitigating and aggravating 
factors unique to the person or crime. Because of this, the statistics presented in this 
report do not represent the expected experiences of an individual woman (or a man) 
throughout the Criminal Justice System, but they can highlight areas where further 
investigation or research may be warranted.  
It is important to note that no controls have been applied for other characteristics of 
those in contact with the CJS, such as average income or age, so it is not possible to 
determine what proportion of any differences identified in this report are directly 
attributable to sex. It is also not possible to make any causal links between sex and 
CJS outcomes.  
Recording of sex and ethnicity 
‘Sex’ can be considered to refer to whether someone is male or female based on their 
physiology, with ‘gender’ representing a social construct or sense of self that takes a 
wider range of forms. 
Throughout this report we refer to sex rather than gender, because the binary 
classification better reflects how individuals are generally reported or managed through 
the CJS. For example, prisons are either male or female institutions, with prisoners 
normally placed based on their legally recognised gender. However, given the range 
of recording practises (see technical guide for details) throughout the CJS, it is likely 
that most recording includes a mixture of physiological and personal identity. (Similarly, 
we refer to females / males and women / men interchangeably in this report, as a 
reflection of the binary classification in use.) 
Individuals with an unknown or not stated sex are not included in the analysis, because 
it is impossible to tell where they should be counted. High levels of missing sex data 
would be of concern, both in terms of sample sizes and the risk of systematic bias. To 
allow users to assess the confidence they have in the data we are using, levels of 
missing or unreported sex data are reported throughout2. Ethnicity has been reported 
using self-identification unless specified otherwise, based on the 5+1 summary 
grouping of the 16+1 2001 Census ethnicity categories (or 18+1 2011 Census 
categories) – i.e. as White, Black, Mixed, Asian, Chinese or other, or unknown. 
                                                          
2 With the exception of sections based on the Crime Survey of England and Wales: in these sections, 
differences between groups in CSEW data have been tested for statistical significance. For further 
details about survey responses and calibration weighting, see the published CSEW technical report – 
available via 
http://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/bulletins/crimeinenglandandwale
s/yearendingjune2016 .  

 
 
15 
 
Data 
Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. 
However, these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems 
generated by the courts, police forces and other agencies. As a consequence, care 
should be taken to ensure the limitations of these data are taken into account. 
All results relate to England and Wales unless explicitly stated otherwise. Large figures 
are generally presented rounded to the nearest thousand, and percentages to the 
nearest percentage point in the bulletin text (or however is most appropriate), although 
all calculations have been conducted on unrounded figures (so totals may not sum). 
Unrounded figures are shown in the accompanying tables, except where data 
suppliers have asked us to suppress or round small numbers to protect individuals’ 
privacy. Details of the suppression or rounding can be found alongside the tables in 
question. Differences between groups in survey data have only been discussed where 
they are statistically significant, unless stated otherwise. Those where sex (or other 
relevant information) is not held have generally been excluded from analysis, to reflect 
the lack of knowledge of the true characteristics of the unknown group. 
Data are presented in terms of calendar and financial years, reflecting the reporting 
cycles and data collection of the agencies contributing information for this publication. 
For example, data on arrests are presented in financial years, while data from courts, 
prison and probation are presented in calendar years. Time series’ have been 
presented wherever possible, of whichever length is most appropriate in context. 
Where changes to data systems or data quality issues do not allow for long time 
series’, trends have been presented for the longest periods possible. The most recent 
data available during the compilation of this report has been included (usually the 2015 
calendar year, referred to as the ‘latest year’), though it is important to note that more 
recent data may have since been published. There are few comparisons to the 
population as a whole, but we have considered this to be 51% female, as based on 
Mid-year Population Estimates from the Office for National Statistics. 
The statistics reported in this bulletin are primarily National Statistics, as drawn from 
either other published National Statistics bulletins or the data underpinning them. 
However, as in previous reports, in order to present as full a picture as possible we 
have also included some statistics that do not have this badging where National 
Statistics are not held on important or new topics. These include: 
 
Homicide and police recorded rape and domestic violence statistics from the 
Home Office 
 
Information from the Crown Prosecution Service Violence against Women and 
Girls crime report 2015-2016 
 
National liaison and diversion services pilot data from NHS England 
 
Survey data from Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons Annual Report 
 
Experimental Ministry of Justice statistics on failure to appear in court 
Where a source is not National Statistics, it will be marked as such, and users should 
consider this when making judgements about the weight that can be put on related 
findings. 
 

 
 
16 
 
Information provided 
Supplementary Excel tables accompany the chapters, providing additional data where 
the figures have not previously been published (or not published in that form). Where 
figures have been published, links are provided as part of the text and tables. 
Additionally, a research paper using logistic regression to examine the impact of 
different factors and characteristics, including sex, on the likelihood of receiving a 
custodial sentence, has been released simultaneously. 
A technical document titled A Guide to Statistics on Women and the Criminal Justice 
System is available alongside this report, which provides users with information on the 
concepts and terminology used within the report, as well as information about data 
sources, data quality and references. 
 This report is also accompanied by an infographic summarising key findings. 
Those familiar with previous editions of this publication will find several additions and 
changes in this most recent report. The additions are intended to reflect the needs of 
users of the report, including suggestions from members of the expert advisory group 
for this publication. New components include: 
 
information on court processes – timeliness; case listing; election of Crown 
Court trial; defendant representation at the Crown Court; legal aid; appeals and 
prosecuting authority 
 
prisoner experiences – findings from surveys by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of 
Prisons and data on transfers to hospital for mental health treatment 
 
a sex breakdown of staff in female prisons 
 
information on national liaison and diversion schemes 
 
a ‘relative rate’ analysis, looking at the likelihood of different outcomes for 
women and men in the court system, among those able to receive each 
outcome. 
It has not been possible to update previous sections on mitigating and aggravating 
factors and on employment, income and benefits before and after conviction / caution 
/ release from prison, because more recent data is not available 
The overall style and composition of the report have also been changed to align with 
Statistics on Race and the Criminal Justice System 2014, with the intention of making 
it easier for readers to interpret the relative experiences of males and females 
throughout the CJS. 
The Ministry of Justice would welcome any feedback on the content, presentation or 
on any other aspect of this bulletin – we can be contacted through:  
xxx@xxx.xx 
 
 
 

 
 
17 
 
Chapter 3: Victims 
This chapter explores the nature, extent and risks of victimisation as reported in the 
2015/16 Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW), based on the sex of the victim. 
The chapter will also cover more detailed analysis of victims of violent crime and sexual 
assaults from the Focus on Violent Crime and Sexual Assaults publication, with the 
latest available covering the year to March 20153. It also includes police recorded crime 
statistics on violent crime and homicide by the sex of the victim from the ONS 
publication, Focus on: Violent Crime and Sexual Offences, year ending March 20154 
and the CPS publication, Violence against Women and Girls crime report 2015-20165; 
results from the CSEW on abuse during childhood, as published in the article Abuse 
during childhood: Findings from the Crime Survey for England and Wales, year ending 
March 2016.6; and data on offences prosecuted from the MoJ publication Criminal 
Justice Statistics Quarterly: December 20157. 
Risks of victimisation 
Since not all crimes are reported to the police, the main source of information on the 
incidence and likelihood of victimisation for the different sexes is the Crime Survey for 
England and Wales (CSEW). The CSEW is a large nationally representative survey 
that asks people about their experience of victimisation (including crimes not reported 
to the police) in the previous 12 months. The section below provides a summary of the 
key findings relating to the sexes from the survey. Further data are available in the 
Crime in England and Wales, Year Ending March 2016 release, published by the Office 
for National Statistics8. 
As a survey that asks people whether they have experienced victimisation, only certain 
offences are covered: violence (though murder cannot be included), robbery, theft 
(personal, burglary, vehicle, bicycle, other household) and criminal damage. The 
survey does not cover crimes where there is no direct victim, such as possession of 
drugs or motoring offences. Significance tests were carried out between the latest year 
compared with previous years and between the sexes. All differences commented on 
in this chapter are statistically significant at the 95% level unless otherwise stated. 
In the latest year, there was no statistically significant difference between the sexes in 
the proportion who were victims of CSEW crime: 15% of adult women9 were victims, 
compared with 16% of men. For both sexes, this represents a fall compared with 
                                                          
3 This chapter is based on the CSEW throughout unless otherwise specified, but the year shown 
depends on the subject – generally the most recent data, 2015/16, but further breakdowns of violent 
crime and sexual assaults relate to 2014/15. If not specified in the text, it relates to 2015/16. 
4http://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/compendium/focusonviolentcri
meandsexualoffences/yearendingmarch2015  
5 http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/equality/vaw/. Management information rather than official 
statistics. 
6https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/articles/abuseduringchildhood/
findingsfromtheyearendingmarch2016crimesurveyforenglandandwales  
7 www.gov.uk/government/statistics/criminal-justice-statistics-quarterly-december-2015. 
8http://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/bulletins/crimeinenglandandwal
es/yearendingmar2016  
9 In this chapter, adults are counted as those aged 16 or over, rather than 18 or over as elsewhere – this 
reflects how they are categorised when responding to the CSEW. 

 
 
18 
 
2011/12, when 20% and 22% were victims respectively. There was a statistically 
significant difference for children aged under 16: 10% of girls experienced crime, 
compared with 15% of boys.  
Perceptions of crime and victimisation 
Confidence in the Criminal Justice System 
In 2015/16, 68% of adults were confident the Criminal Justice System was fair. Women 
were less likely than men to think it is fair (66% compared with 70%). A smaller 
proportion of adults (54%) thought the Criminal Justice System was effective, and there 
was no significant difference between the sexes (54% of women and 53% of men 
thought this). The perception of fairness has increased for both women and men since 
2011/12, when 61% of women and 64% of men thought the criminal justice system 
was fair. There has also been an increase in the belief that the criminal justice system 
is effective for both women and men, with 45% of women and 43% of men having this 
belief in 2011/12. Women were more likely than men to think crime had gone up in the 
past few years, with 66% and 53% respectively thinking crime had gone up nationally, 
and 34% and 28% respectively thinking it had gone up locally. 
Perceived likelihood of being a victim of crime 
There was no difference between the sexes in the proportions reporting thinking they 
were ‘likely’ or ‘fairly likely’ to be a victim of crime (19%). For women this is an increase 
from the previous year (18%), but for both sexes a decrease from 2011/12 (when it 
was 23% for both sexes). However, there were differences in the likelihood of worrying 
about particular types of crime, with women particularly likely to worry about violent 
crime (Figure 3.01).  
Figure 3.01: Percentage of adults who worry about crime, by type of crime and 
sex, year ending March 2016 
 
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
Worry about burglary
Worry about car crime
Worry about violent crime
Percentage with high levels of worry
Women
Men
All adults

 
 
19 
 
Personal Crime 
Personal crimes relate to all crimes against the individual and only relate to the 
respondent’s own personal experience (not that of other people in the household). An 
example of a personal crime would be an assault or a theft of personal property away 
from the home. 
The likelihood of being a victim of personal crime was less likely for women (3.8%) 
than for men (4.5%) in 2015/16. For both sexes the likelihood of being a victim of crime 
had fallen since 2011/12 (from 5.4% for females and 6.4% for males).  
By age 
For both sexes, the likelihood of being a victim of personal crime was greatest in the 
younger age groups and decreased as age increases (Figure 3.02). Women in the age 
groups 35-44 and 45-54 were less likely than men of the same age groups to be a 
victim of personal crime, while women in the age group 75 and over were slightly more 
likely than men of the corresponding age group to be a victim of personal crime.  
Figure 3.02: Percentage of adults who were victims of personal crime, by age 
group and sex, year ending March 2016 
 
 
 
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
9%
10%
All ages
16-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65-74
75+
Percentage who were victims of personal 
crime
Women
Men

 
 
20 
 
Children 
As with adults, for children in the age group 10 to 15, females were less likely than 
males to have experienced being a victim of personal crime in the latest year (Figure 
3.03)10. This was the case for most forms of personal crime. The exceptions were theft 
from the dwelling or near the dwelling where females in this age group were more likely 
than males to have been a victim of this crime (0.6% of females aged 10 to 15, 
compared with 0.2% of males), and theft from the person (1.3% of females aged 10 to 
15, 1.1% of males).  
Figure 3.03: Percentage of children aged 10-15 who were victims of personal 
crime, by type of crime and sex, year ending March 2016 
 
 
 
                                                          
10 In this instance significance was not tested. 
0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20%
All violence
Robbery
Theft from the person
Other theft of personal property
Theft from the dwelling/ outside the dwelling
Bicycle theft
All personal crime
Proportion of children who were a victim
Girls
Boys

 
 
21 
 
Violent Crime 
Despite being more likely to worry about violent crime, women were less likely than 
men to be the victim of violent crime (2.4% of males compared with 1.3% of females) 
in 2014/15. However, within this they were more likely to be the victim of domestic 
violence11 than men (0.4% of women compared with 0.2% of men). Broadly in line with 
this, 83% of victims in domestic abuse prosecutions were women, in 2015/1612,13. Men 
were more likely than women to be the victim of violence from a stranger (1.4% of men 
compared with 0.4% of women) (Figure 3.04). 
Figure 3.04: Percentage of adults who were victims of violence, by type of 
violence and sex, year ending March 2015 
  
 
 
                                                          
11 A National Statistics report and data tool on Domestic Abuse in England and Wales will be published 
on 8 December 2016. This is being published by the ONS, on behalf of the Domestic Abuse National 
Oversight Group, working in collaboration with the Home Office, Crown Prosecution Service, Her 
Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary, West Midlands Police, College of Policing and National Police 
Chiefs Council. This report will not be released in time to inform this bulletin, but to avoid duplication of 
reporting we have not focused on domestic abuse or domestic violence to the same extent. 
12 Of known sex. Victims with unknown sex accounted for 17% of victims in domestic abuse 
prosecutions in 2015/16. 
13  CPS Violence against Women and Girls crime report 2015-2016. This is based on CPS management 
information rather than official statistics. 
0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
2.0%
2.5%
All violence
Domestic
Acquaintance
Stranger
Percentage who were victims of violence
Women
Men

 
 
22 
 
Within the CSEW, violent crime is categorised into violence with injury and violence 
without injury. Women were less likely than men to be a victim in both of these 
categories in 2014/15.  
They were also less likely to be a victim within all age groups in 2014/15 (Figure 3.05). 
For both men and women, 16 to 24 year olds were more likely to be a victim of violent 
crime than in any other age group. In this age group men were more than twice as 
likely to be a victim of violent crime as women (5.9% and 2.4% respectively), greater 
than the difference between the sexes as a whole.  
Figure 3.05: Percentage of adults who were victims of violence once or more, by 
age group and sex, year ending March 2015 
 
 
 
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
9%
10%
16-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65-74
75+
Percentage who were victims of violence
Women
Men
Overall

 
 
23 
 
Children 
In 2015/16 6% of children were victims of violent crime. As with adults, girls (4%) were 
less likely to be a victim of violent crime than boys (7%), and this is true for violence 
both with and without injury (Figure 3.06). 
Figure 3.06: Percentage of children aged 10 to 15 who experienced violent crime 
victimisation in the last year, by type of victimisation and sex, year ending March 
2016 
 
Risk factors associated with being a victim of violence 
In Statistics on Women and the Criminal Justice System 2013, a logistic regression 
analysis of the 2011/1214 CSEW was conducted by the Office for National Statistics 
(ONS), to identify the risk factors independently associated with being a victim of 
violence for men and women. 
This analysis found that the characteristics most associated with being a victim of 
violence for both women and men were age, disability and marital status. Individuals 
aged 16-24 were more at risk of being a victim of violence compared with older adults; 
individuals with a longstanding illness or disability were more at risk than those without; 
and individuals who were single, separated or divorced were more at risk than 
individuals who were married or cohabiting. For women, the number of evening visits 
to a pub/bar in the last month was also a risk factor. Women who went less than once 
a week or more than once a week were more at risk of being a victim of violence than 
those who had no visits. 
 
 
                                                          
14 https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/women-and-the-criminal-justice-system-2013 
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
9%
10%
All violence
Violence with injury
Violence without injury
Percentage who experienced victimisation in the last year
Girls
Boys

 
 
24 
 
For this bulletin, an Analysis of Variance of the 2014/15 CSEW was conducted by the 
ONS, to test whether the risk factors identified previously could still be considered risk 
factors. The analysis does not test whether there are other risk factors that have not 
previously been identified which could be associated with being a victim of violence for 
men and women.  
Table 3.01 shows that age and marital status were still a risk factor for both sexes. 
Female individuals with a long-standing illness or disability remained more at risk than 
other adults, whereas male individuals were no longer more at risk. Conversely, the 
number of evening visits to a pub/bar in the last month has become a risk factor for 
men, and remains so for women. 
Table 3.01: Factors tested as being associated with being a victim of violence 
for men and women, year ending March 201515,16,17 
 
Risk Factor 
Variable 
Women 
Men 
Age 
 
 
Long-standing illness or disability18 
 
 
Marital Status14 
 
 
Number of evening visits to pub/bar in last 
month14,19 
 
 
Source: Crime Survey for England and Wales 2014/15 
 
                                                          
15 “” indicates a significant association between the variable and violent victimisation. 
16 See Section 7 of the CSEW User Guide to Crime Statistics for England and Wales for definitions of 
personal, household and area characteristics (www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/method-
quality/specific/crime-statistics-methodology/user-guide-to-crime-statistics.pdf).  
17 Only selected variables were tested, based on the results of previous analysis; these are not 
necessarily the biggest risk factors for being a victim of violence. 
18 These variables were run whilst controlling for age. 
19 Number of evening visits to a pub/bar in the last month is typically used as an indicator of a 
respondent’s lifestyle. 

 
 
25 
 
Abuse during childhood20 
In the 2015/16 CSEW, adult respondents were asked whether they had experienced 
a range of abuse while they were a child.21 This covered abuse carried out by an adult, 
including psychological, physical, and sexual abuse and also having witnessed 
domestic violence or abuse in the home. This was the first time questions on abuse 
during childhood were included in the survey. 
9% of adults (aged 16 to 59) had experienced psychological abuse, 7% physical 
abuse, 7% sexual assault22 and 8% had witnessed domestic violence or abuse in the 
home. Women were significantly more likely than men to report suffering any abuse 
and each individual form of abuse during childhood than men, except for physical 
abuse (Figure 3.07). The biggest difference was seen in sexual assault: women were 
almost 4 times as likely as men to have experienced this during childhood (11% 
compared with 3%). 
Figure 3.07: Percentage who were abused during childhood among adults aged 
16 to 59, by type of abuse and sex, year ending March 2016 
 
 
 
                                                          
20 These data come from a self-completion module of the questionnaire, where the respondent is able to 
provide responses directly on the interviewer’s tablet computer. In this instance significance was not 
explicitly tested. 
21 Child being under 16 
22 Any sexual assault being sexual assault by rape or penetration (including attempts) and other sexual 
assault including indecent exposure or unwanted touching. 
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
Psychological abuse
Physical abuse
Any sexual assault
Witnessed domestic violence or abuse
Percentage who were victims once or more
Women
Men

 
 
26 
 
Sexual abuse 
Within this category, women were more likely to have experienced sexual assault by 
rape or penetration (including attempts) during childhood (3% of women, 1% of men). 
This amounts to an estimated 567,000 women, compared with 102,000 men. Over a 
quarter of female survivors (27%) of this type of abuse also experienced it as an adult, 
compared with 4% of men. 
The prevalence of females in child sexual abuse cases is also seen in prosecution 
statistics23; in 2015, 89% of defendants prosecuted against for child sexual abuse were 
prosecuted for an offence involving a female child. This proportion has been consistent 
over the decade (Figure 3.08). 
Figure 3.08: Number and percentage of defendants prosecuted for child sexual 
abuse, by sex of child, 2005 to 2015 
 
For sexual assault by rape or penetration, in terms of the survivor-perpetrator 
relationship, there were few differences between the sexes. However, men were more 
likely to have been abused by someone in a position of trust (such as a teacher, doctor, 
carer or youth worker) than women (15% compared with 4%), and women were more 
likely to have been abused by a partner or previous partner (10% compared with 1%). 
12% of female victims and 25% of males told someone they knew personally about 
childhood sexual assault by rape or penetration (including attempts) at the time, usually 
a family member (18%). Only 10% of female victims told someone in an official 
position, with 8% reporting the abuse to the police. Only 2% of male victims reported 
the abuse to the police. 
                                                          
23 From MoJ Criminal Justice Statistics Quarterly: December 2015. All child sexual assault and rape 
offences recorded by sex of victim, as specified in the offence. 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Proportion which were offences against 
a female
Number of defendants prosecuted
Female child
Male child
Female child %

 
 
27 
 
As with sexual assault by rape or penetration, men who suffered other sexual assaults 
were more likely to have suffered them from a person in a position of trust than women 
(13% compared with 5%). 
Psychological abuse 
Of those who experienced psychological abuse as a child, the perpetrator was most 
likely to have been the victim’s mother (40%) or father (35%). Women were more likely 
to have experienced this form of abuse from their mothers (42%) than fathers (33%), 
whereas men were equally likely to be abused by either parent. 
Physical abuse 
39% of victims of physical abuse were abused by their father. 29% were abused by 
their mother, 12% by a partner or previous partner, 10% by a step-father and 10% by 
another family member. The perpetrator of physical abuse against females was almost 
as equally likely to be the mother as the father (33% and 36% respectively). For males, 
the father was more likely to be the perpetrator of physical abuse, with 41% of victims 
being abused by their father and 24% by their mother. Women were more likely to be 
the victims of physical abuse by a partner or ex-partner than men (19% of women and 
4% of men), and males were more likely to be the victim of physical abuse by a stranger 
than women (5% of women and 13% of men). 
 
 

 
 
28 
 
Intimate violence 
Intimate violence is a collective term used here to refer to a number of different forms 
of physical and non-physical abuse consisting of partner abuse, family abuse, sexual 
assault and stalking. The term reflects the intimate nature either of the victim-offender 
relationship or the abuse itself. 
Intimate violence experienced since the age of 16 
In 2015/16, a quarter (26%) of women reported having experienced some form of 
domestic abuse at some point in their adult life, compared with 14% of men (Figure 
3.09). Women were also about twice as likely to have experienced non-sexual partner 
abuse (women 20%, men 9%), family abuse (women 9% men 6%) and stalking 
(women 21%, men 10%). Women were considerably more likely to have experienced 
sexual assault or an attempted sexual assault as men, with 1 in 5 women (20%) saying 
they had experienced this since the age of 16 compared with only 1 in 25 men (4%)24. 
Figure 3.09: Percentage of adults who were a victim of intimate violence since 
the age of 16, by type of violence and sex, year ending March 2016 
 
Intimate violence experienced in the last year 
In 2015/16, 6% of adults were victims of domestic abuse (8% of women and 4% of 
men), 5% were victims of partner abuse (6% of women and 3% of men), and 2% were 
victims of family abuse (2% of women and 1% of men). The difference between sexes 
for the different types of intimate violence in the last year were generally similar to 
those reported since the age of 16. 
Over the decade, there has been a significant decrease in the number of women and 
men who reported experiencing non-sexual partner abuse or stalking, and among 
                                                          
24 In this instance significance was not explicitly tested, but the difference is substantial. 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Any domestic abuse
Any partner abuse
Any family abuse
Partner abuse - non-sexual
Family abuse - non-sexual
Any sexual assault (including attempts)
Stalking
Percentage who were victims once or more
Women
Men

 
 
29 
 
women in reporting experiencing non-sexual family abuse (Figure 3.10). The decrease 
in the number who reported sexual assault was not significant. 
Figure 3.10: Percentage of adults who were victims of intimate violence in the 
last year, by type of violence and sex, year ending March 2006 to year ending 
March 201625 
Females  
 
Males 
 
                                                          
25 Stalking excludes a data point for 2007/08 due to comparable questions on stalking not being 
included that year. Male family abuse – non-sexual did not have a significant change, but is shown for 
comparison with females. Sexual assault is not shown as the change is not significant for either sex. 
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
9%
10%
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Percentage who were victims once or 
more in the last year
Year ending March
Female: Partner abuse - non-sexual
Female: Family abuse - non-sexual
Female: Stalking
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
9%
10%
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Proportion who were victims once or 
more in the last year
Year ending March
Male: Partner abuse - non-sexual
Male: Family abuse - non-sexual
Male: Stalking

 
 
30 
 
Sexual abuse 
In line with the higher proportion of women reporting having been a victim of sexual 
assault, 94% of defendants prosecuted for sexual assault were prosecuted for an 
assault on a female26. 
Females accounted for 89% of police recorded rape victims in 2014/1527, with females 
aged between 10 and 24 years most likely to be the victims of rape, accounting for 
48% of rape victims. 21% of rape victims were females aged between 15 and 19, 
compared with 1.9% of rape victims being males in this age group. Males were most 
likely to be victims of rape in childhood, with boys aged 5 to 14 years accounting for 
half of male rape victims (Figure 3.11). The high proportion of rape victims that are 
female is mirrored in the offences prosecuted: 92% of defendants proceeded against 
at the magistrates’ court for rape were prosecuted for rape of a female.  
Figure 3.11: Proportion of rape offences by age and sex of the victim, 
experimental statistics from 13 police forces, year ending March 2015 
 
 
 
 
                                                          
26 From MoJ Criminal Justice Statistics Quarterly: December 2015. All sexual assault and rape offences 
recorded by sex of victim, as specified in the offence.  
27 Not designated National Statistics. Statistics on rape by age group are experimental statistics from 13 
police forces that provided accurate data via the Home Office Data Hub. For more information see 
Focus on Violent Crime and Sexual Offences bulletin. 
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Under
1
1-4
5-9
10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69
70
and
over
Proportion of rape offences 
Female
Male

 
 
31 
 
Domestic abuse 
Domestic abuse includes partner or family non-physical abuse, threats, force, sexual 
assault or stalking. Based on the 2014/15 CSEW, 8% of women experienced domestic 
abuse, compared with 4% of men. 
Women of almost all marital statuses were more likely than their male counterparts to 
have been a victim of domestic abuse. The difference was greater for single, separated 
and divorced people than it was for married people (Figure 3.12). For cohabitees the 
difference between women and men was not statistically significant. 
Figure 3.12: Percentage of adults aged 16 to 59 who were victims of domestic 
abuse in the last year, by marital status and sex, year ending March 2015 
 
Both women and men who lived in a household structure of a single adult and 
child(ren) were more likely to have been a victim of domestic abuse in 2014/15 (23% 
and 18%), compared with those who lived in a household with adults and child(ren) 
(6% and 4%), or no children (8% and 4%).  
 
 
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Overall
Married
Cohabiting
Single
Separated Divorced
Widowed
Percentage who were victims once or 
more
Women
Men

 
 
32 
 
Both men and women with a lower household income were more likely to have been 
a victim of domestic abuse in 2014/15 than those with higher household incomes. The 
difference between sexes was largest for household incomes between £10,000 and 
£20,000, at 13% of women and 5% of men (Figure 3.13). 
Figure 3.13: Percentage of adults aged 16 to 59 who were victims of domestic 
abuse in the last year, by household income and sex, year ending March 2015 
 
Domestic abuse by partners 
Women were more likely than men to feel non-physical effects as a result of partner 
abuse in 2014/15, such as mental or emotional problems (47% and 30% respectively). 
There was no significant difference between women and men in stopping trusting 
people/difficulty in other relationships (22% and 19% respectively). A similar proportion 
of women and men tried to kill themselves as a result (4% and 3% respectively). 
In 2014/15, 26% of women and 10% of men told the police about the partner abuse 
experienced in the past 12 months. For women, this proportion has seen a decrease, 
whereas the proportion of men has remained stable. 
 
 
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
Overall
Less than £10,000
£10,000 to less than £20,000
£20,000 to less than £30,000
£30,000 to less than £40,000
£40,000 to less than £50,000
£50,000 or more
Percentage who were victims once or more
Women
Men

 
 
33 
 
Domestic violence flagged by the police28 
Of the violence against the person offences recorded by the police in April to 
September 2015, a higher proportion were flagged as domestic abuse for female 
victims than male.29 This was true across all age bands, although the likelihood of an 
offence being flagged generally fell for females and rose for males as age increased 
(Figure 3.14). 
Figure 3.14: Percentage of violence against the person offences recorded by the 
police that were flagged as domestic abuse related, by sex of victims, 
experimental statistics from 12 police forces, April to September 2015 
 
 
 
                                                          
28 Not designated National Statistics – these are experimental statistics. This is the first time that these 
data have been collected as part of the data that the police forces provide to the Home Office on a 
mandatory basis. 
29 Domestic abuse related offences are defined as any incidence of threatening behaviour, violence or 
abuse (psychological, physical, sexual, financial or emotional) between adults, aged 16 and over, who 
are or have been intimate partners or family members, regardless of gender or sexuality. 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
16-1920-2425-2930-3435-3940-4445-4950-5455-5960-6465-6970-74 75+
Percentage of violence against the 
person offences that were flagged as 
domestic abuse related
Female
Male

 
 
34 
 
Honour based violence 
In 2015/16, there were 216 referrals to the CPS30 from the police of honour based 
violence related offences, a fall from 251 in the previous year. 182 defendants were 
prosecuted, a fall from 225 in the previous year. 76% of victims in honour based 
violence prosecutions were female in 2015/1631. 
Forced marriage 
In 2015/16 there were 90 forced marriage referrals to the CPS32 from the police, 
compared with 82 in the previous year. There were 53 prosecutions, also a rise, up 
from 46 in the previous year. 32 of the victims in forced marriage prosecutions were 
female in 2015/16, compared with 4 males33. On 16 June 2014 a new specific criminal 
offence of forced marriage came into force, whereas previously it had been dealt with 
under existing legislation such as kidnapping, false imprisonment and offences of 
violence. There were 5 prosecutions under this new offence in 2015/16 and 6 for 
breach of a forced marriage protection order. 
 
 
                                                          
30 From the CPS Violence against Women and Girls crime report 2015-2016. This is based on CPS 
management information rather than official statistics 
31Of known sex. Victims with unknown sex accounted for 18% of victims in honour based violence 
prosecutions in 2015/16. 
32 From the CPS Violence against Women and Girls crime report 2015-2016. This is based on CPS 
management information rather than official statistics 
33 Of known sex. There were 12 victims with unknown sex in forced marriage prosecutions in 2015/16. 

 
 
35 
 
Homicide34 
There were 518 homicide victims35 in 2014/15; 331 male and 186 female. The number 
of female victims has remained fairly constant over the last decade, in contrast to the 
overall falling trend for male victims (Figure 3.15). As a result the proportion of 
homicide victims who are female has risen slightly from 30% in 2004/05 to 36% in 
2014/15. 
Figure 3.15: Number of homicide offences currently recorded by the police, by 
sex of victim, year ending March 2005 to year ending March 2015 
 
Age 
Similarly to violent crime in general, women were less likely than men to be a victim of 
homicide, for almost all adult age groups36. Women aged over 75 were the only age 
group more prevalent among victims of homicide than their male counterparts (4.5% 
of all victims compared with 2.4%), but this can be mostly explained by reference to 
the population: 4.7% of the population were females aged over 75, compared with 
3.3% being males over 75. 
The only age group for which females represented a higher proportion of homicide 
victims than they did of the population was those aged under 1 (Figure 3.16). Males in 
this age band also represented a higher proportion of homicide victims than of the 
population, however a considerably higher proportion of homicide victims were males 
aged between 15 and 54 than would be expected based on population statistics alone.  
                                                          
34 From the Home Office Homicide Index, which data are not designated National Statistics 
35 This includes one victim of homicide in 2014/15 with unknown sex. 
36 Based on combined years, year ending March 2013 to year ending March 2015. 
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Number of homicide victims
Year ending March
Female
Male

 
 
36 
 
Figure 3.16: Age and sex profile of currently recorded homicide victims 
compared with that of the population, combined data for year ending March 2013 
to year ending March 2015 
Females 
 
Males 
 
 
 
 
 
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
9%
10%
Under 11-4
5-9
10-1415-1920-2425-2930-3435-3940-4445-4950-5455-5960-6465-6970-74 75+
Proportion of victims and population in 
age group
Victims
Population
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
9%
10%
Under 1
5-9
15-19
25-29
35-39
45-49
55-59
65-69
75+
Proportion of victims and population in 
age group
Victims
Population

 
 
37 
 
Method of killing 
A sharp instrument was the most frequent method of homicide for both male and 
female victims in 2014/15, with over a third of homicides for both sexes committed 
using this method (38% for females and 35% for males). There were differences in the 
second most frequent method of killing of homicide victims between sexes, however. 
Men were far more likely to be killed by hitting or kicking without a weapon than women, 
with 25% of men being killed using this method, compared with only 6% of female 
victims. For female victims the second most prevalent method of being killed was 
asphyxiation or strangulation, with 18% of female victims being killed using this method 
compared with only 6% of male victims. 
Relationship to principal suspect 
The principal suspect for the killing of 44% of female homicide victims was a partner 
or ex-partner, whereas only 6% of male homicide victims had this relationship with the 
principal suspect37 (Figure 3.17). These proportions have been fairly constant over the 
last decade. Male homicide victims were most likely to have been killed by someone 
they knew outside their family (32%) or a stranger (31%). In contrast, only 8% of female 
homicide victims were killed by someone they knew outside their family, and 12% by 
a stranger.  
Figure 3.17: Proportion of homicide victims, by relationship of victim to principal 
suspect and sex of victim, year ending March 2015 
 
 
 
                                                          
37 Where there are multiple suspects in a homicide case they are categorised in the Homicide Index as 
either the principal or a secondary suspect. There is only ever 1 principal suspect per homicide victim. If 
there is any conviction information available then the suspect with the longest sentence or most serious 
conviction is determined to be the principal suspect. In the absence of any court outcome, the principal 
suspect is either the person considered by the police to be the most involved in the homicide or the 
suspect with the closest relationship to the victim. 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Partner/ex-partner
Other family
Other known
Stranger
No suspect
Percentage of victims
Women
Men

 
 
38 
 
The majority of victims aged under 16 had a principal suspect who was known to them 
(65%, 35 homicides), and in all but 4 of these cases the suspect was a parent or step-
parent. No suspect was identified and charged for almost all the remaining victims 
(30%, 16 homicides)38. These proportions were similar for girls and boys. 
Where a principal suspect is known, around 90% of the principal suspects were male 
for both male and female victims – there was no indication of a particular concordance 
between the sex of the victim and principal suspect. 
Location 
The location of the killing for most female victims was in or around a house or dwelling, 
accounting for 82% of female homicide victims recorded by police in 2014/15. Although 
still the most prevalent location, male victims were less likely to be killed in or around 
a house or dwelling (49%) than female victims. Men were more likely to be killed in the 
street than women, with around 25% of male victims being killed in the street compared 
with only 8% of women. (This seems to align with the differing tendencies of women 
and men to be killed by strangers or a known party, as discussed above, assuming 
that those known to the victim are more likely to have access to their home.) 
 
 
                                                          
38 This number is likely to fall as police investigations continue. 

 
 
39 
 
Circumstances 
Homicides involving female victims recorded in the combined years ending March 
2013 to March 2015 were less likely to have victims or suspects under the influence of 
alcohol or illicit drugs, compared with homicides involving male victims (Figure 3.18). 
Figure 3.18: Proportions of homicide victims and suspects, by alcohol and drug 
status and sex of victim, combined data for year ending March 2013 to year 
ending March 2015 
 
 
 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Alcohol Illicit drug
Both
alcohol
and illicit
drug
Neither
alcohol
nor illicit
drug
Alcohol Illicit drug
Both
alcohol
and illicit
drug
Neither
alcohol
nor illicit
drug
Victim under the influence of:
Suspect under the influence of:
Proportions of homicide victims and 
suspects
Female victims
Male victims

 
 
40 
 
Similarly, female homicides were much less likely to involve drug users or dealers or 
to have a motivation involving drugs than those with male victims (Figure 3.19). 29% 
of male homicide victims were known drug users and 13% were known drug dealers, 
compared with 8% and 1% of female homicide victims respectively. (This is consistent 
with the sex breakdown of drug offending: a higher proportion of males than females 
who are dealt with through a caution or prosecution are dealt with for drug offences, 
as discussed in Chapter 4: Police Activity, and Chapter 5: Defendants.) 
Figure 3.19: Percentage of homicide victims, by involvement in drugs and sex of 
victim, combined data for year ending March 2013 to year ending March 2015 
 
There were few differences between the sexes in the circumstances surrounding their 
homicide more generally. Men were slightly more likely than women to have been killed 
in the context of a quarrel, revenge or loss of temper (49% of male victims compared 
with 45%), while women were slightly more likely than men to have been killed as an 
irrational act (9% compared with 6%). 
 
0%
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Victim known drug user
Victim known drug dealer
Suspect known drug user
Suspect known drug dealer
Motive to obtain drugs
Motive to steal drug proceeds
Percentage of homicides
Female victims
Male victims

 
 
41 
 
Chapter 4: Police Activity 
This chapter explores the activity of the police, by the sex of the suspect or offender 
they deal with. It is based on published figures: statistics on arrests come from the 
Home Office publication Police Powers and Procedures England and Wales year 
ending 31 March 201639; and statistics on out of court disposals come from the Ministry 
of Justice publication Criminal Justice Statistics Quarterly: December 2015. 
Additionally, experimental pilot data from national Liaison and Diversion services is 
presented, as supplied by NHS England. 
Out of Court Disposals 
Out of court disposals (OOCDs) are sanctions that are used by the police, with 
reference to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), to address offences without 
recourse to the courts. Out of court disposals have an important role to play in the 
criminal justice system. They allow the police to deal quickly and proportionately with 
low-level, often first-time offending which does not merit prosecution at court, freeing 
them up to spend more time on frontline duties and tackling serious crime. OOCDs can 
also provide reparation and a prompt resolution for victims.  
The out of court disposals available to the police40 and CPS in 2015 included: simple 
and conditional cautions; cannabis and khat warnings41; penalty notices for disorder 
(PNDs); and community resolutions42. 
The use of out of court disposals (excluding community resolutions) has decreased 
steadily since 2007. In 2015, OOCD numbers decreased, with 211,900 individuals 
issued an out of court disposal, a decrease of 61,800 (23%) compared with 2014, and 
of 451,700 (68%) since 2007.  
The observed decrease was driven by a number of factors: the replacement in April 
2008 of a target to increase offences brought to justice (OBTJ) with one placing more 
emphasis on bringing serious crimes to justice, which was subsequently removed in 
May 2010 (it is thought the change in target had a greater impact on OOCDs than on 
convictions); the introduction of community resolutions, a non-statutory disposal 
available to the police since 2008/09; and the restriction of the use of PNDs to adults 
only from 8 April 2013. In addition, there has been a net decrease in police recorded 
crime across England and Wales between 2003 and 2015 (although this has increased 
since 2013) and in police stops and searches since 2010/11. 
                                                          
39 Available here: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/police-powers-and-procedures-england-and-
wales-year-ending-31-march-2016 
40 A pilot scheme was implemented from early November 2014 in Leicestershire and Staffordshire police 
forces and from late November in West Yorkshire to reduce the types of out of court disposals available 
for adult offenders. In the pilot areas, the only out of court disposals available are community resolutions 
and conditional cautions.  
41 Khat warnings were available from 24 June 2014. Ethnicity and sex data is not available for Cannabis 
or Khat warnings. 
42 Community resolutions statistics provided by the Home Office show those community resolutions 
which (with or without formal Restorative Justice) have been applied in accordance with College of 
Policing guidance. Ethnicity and sex data is not available for community resolutions. 

 
 
42 
 
 Penalty Notices for Disorder issued 
Penalty Notices for Disorder (PNDs)43 are commonly known as ‘on the spot fines’ - a 
fixed penalty of £60 for lower tier offence or £90 for higher tier offence (raised from £50 
and £80 respectively from 1 July 2013 onwards).  
PNDs are designed to tackle low-level, anti-social and nuisance offending for offenders 
aged 18 and over (prior to 8 April 2013, PNDs were also available for 16 and 17 year 
olds). Prior to the introduction of PNDs in 2004 and formal warnings for possession of 
cannabis in 2005, the only out of court disposal available to police was a caution. 
Between 2011 and 2015 the total number of PNDs issued has decreased by 63% 
(80,200) to 47,400 (Figure 4.01). PNDs issued to males decreased by 62% (60,500), 
and PNDs issued to females decreased by 65% (19,600) in the same period. In 2015, 
78% of PNDs were issued to males compared with 77% in 2014 and 76% in 2011; 
despite the fall in PNDs issued, the proportions issued to males and females have 
remained broadly stable, with just over three-quarters being issued to men and just 
less than a quarter to women. 
Figure 4.01: Number and percentage of Penalty Notices for Disorder issued, by 
sex, 2011-2015 
 
 
 
 
                                                          
43 There are no PNDs issued for which the sex of the recipient is unknown or not stated. 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Percentage of PNDs issued to females
Number of PNDs issued
Male
Female
Female %

 
 
43 
 
Penalty Notices for Disorder - Offences 
PNDs are broken up into higher and lower tiers. Higher tier offences cover, for 
example, theft and being drunk and disorderly, and lower tier offences include offences 
such as trespassing on a railway and consumption of alcohol in a designated public 
place.  
In 2015, the overwhelming majority of PNDs issued were for higher tier offences: 97% 
(35,500) for males; 98% (10,500) for females. This breakdown has remained 
consistent between 2011 and 2015. 
However, there are differences in the specific offences for which males and females 
typically receive PNDs (Figure 4.02). Males received higher proportions of their PNDs 
for being drunk and disorderly (40% in 2015, compared with 30% for females), 
possession of cannabis (21% versus 5%) and causing harassment, alarm or distress 
(13% versus 8%), while females received higher proportions for theft [retail under 
£100] (47% versus 16%) and wasting police time (4% versus 2%). Since 2011 the 
proportions relating to being drunk and disorderly and possession of cannabis have 
increased, while the proportions relating to theft and harassment have fallen, but these 
trends are similar for both males and females44. 
Figure 4.02: Number of Penalty Notices for Disorder issued, by offence and sex, 
2015 
 
 
 
 
                                                          
44 Some of the legislation regarding PNDs has been slightly revised during this period – please see the 
accompanying technical guide for further details. 
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
Drunk and
disorderly
Theft (retail
under £100)
Possession
of Cannabis
Causing
Harassment,
alarm or
distress
Wasting
police time
Other
Number of PNDs issued
Female
Male

 
 
44 
 
Penalty Notices for Disorder - Payment 
Once a PND has been issued the recipient has 21 days, the Suspended Enforcement 
Period (SEP), in which to either pay the penalty or request a court hearing. No 
admission of guilt is required and by paying the penalty the recipient discharges liability 
for conviction for the offence. Instead of paying the penalty, PND recipients can request 
a court hearing. If a recipient fails to pay a PND or elect a court hearing within the SEP, 
a fine of one and half times the penalty amount is registered by the court. In 2015, 52% 
of PNDs were paid in full, and 32% resulted in a fine for late payment. There was little 
difference in these proportions between men and women. 
Cautions issued 45 
Police cautions are formal warnings which can be given by the police to those who 
have admitted an offence46. A caution can be given when there is sufficient evidence 
to prosecute an offender for an offence for which they admit guilt, but where it is 
decided that a caution would be a more appropriate solution. 
In 2015, the total number of offenders issued cautions was 125,400, compared with 
234,100 in 2011, which represents a 46% decrease. Three quarters of these offenders 
cautioned (76%, 95,800) were males and a quarter (24%, 29,600) females, similar 
proportions to those for PNDs. Despite the fall in the number of offenders issued 
cautions, since 2011 the split between males and females has remained stable.  
 
 
                                                          
45 Figures on cautions exclude cases where sex is not known. 
46 Summary motoring offences are not considered in relation to cautions or cautioning rates, because 
these are typically addressed through Fixed Penalty Notices instead (see Chapter 5: Defendants for 
further details). There is no published data available on Fixed Penalty Notices by sex.  

 
 
45 
 
Cautions - Offences47 
In 2015, 40% (50,700) of all offenders issued cautions were issued them for summary 
non-motoring offences, a fall of 43% since 2011 (Figure 4.03). For males, the 
proportion of offenders cautioned who were cautioned for these offences was 39% 
(37,800), and for females it was slightly higher, at 44% (12,900). The proportion of 
offenders issued cautions for summary non-motoring offences has increased slowly 
since 2011, by 2 percentage points for men and 4 percentage points for women. 
Figure 4.03: Number of cautions issued by offence type and sex, 2011 to 2015 
 
The total number of persons cautioned for indictable offences in 2015 was 74,700, 
60% of those cautioned. This represents a decrease of 49% since 2011 (from 
145,500); the sharper fall in indictable cautions has increased the proportion given for 
summary non-motoring offences, particularly for women. 
 
There are greater differences in the indictable offence groups for which males and 
females typically receive cautions. A higher proportion of males cautioned for 
indictable offences were cautioned for drug offences (35% in 2015, compared with 
17% for females) and criminal damage and arson (20% versus 15%), while females 
were more commonly cautioned for theft offences (42% versus 23%) and violence 
against the person (14% versus 7%). These differences broadly mirror those in the 
types of PNDs typically issued by sex. Since 2011 the proportion of those cautioned 
who were cautioned for theft has fallen slightly, while the proportion relating to criminal 
damage and arson has increased slightly, but these trends are similar for both males 
and females.  
                                                          
47 Indictable offences are more serious offences that may (if triable-either-way) or must (if indictable 
only) be passed on to the Crown Court; while summary offences are typically less serious and almost 
always dealt with entirely in magistrates’ courts. See accompanying technical guide for further details.  
 
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Number of cautions issued
Male - Indictable
Male - Summary non-motoring
Female - Indictable
Female - Summary non-motoring

 
 
46 
 
 
There are differences between adults and juveniles48 in the offences for which they 
were typically cautioned: a smaller proportion of juveniles were cautioned for summary 
non-motoring offences; and among indictable offence groups, a smaller proportion 
were cautioned for drug offences and a larger proportion for criminal damage and 
arson and theft offences. However, there were similar relative differences in the 
offence groups committed between male and female juveniles as between males and 
females generally. 
Cautioning rates 
Cautioning rates are the proportion of offenders cautioned or convicted that were given 
a caution.  
The cautioning rate for women was lower than for men overall, at 12% compared with 
16% in 2015. However, it was higher for women than for men in respect of indictable 
offences, at 28% and 19% respectively. This difference is likely to result from the high 
numbers of females convicted for the summary non-motoring offence of TV license 
evasion: see Chapter 5: Defendants for further details. Cautioning rates have fallen 
sharply for both women and men since 2011, driven by the larger fall in cautions than 
convictions; for males, by 7 percentage points both overall and for indictable offences, 
and for females, by 9 percentage points overall and by 11 percentage points among 
indictable offences. 
There were differences between the sexes in the cautioning rates for different 
indictable offences. The only49 offence group for which males and females had a very 
similar cautioning rate was fraud offences, at 16% and 15% respectively. In contrast, 
there were greater percentage point gaps between female and male cautioning rates 
for criminal damage and arson (46% versus 32%) and drug offences (44% versus 
32%) than for indictable offences as a whole, and a 30 percentage point gap between 
the female and male cautioning rates for violence against the person, (44% and 14% 
respectively). 
Cautioning rates have fallen for all offence groups since 2011, by differing amounts – 
for example, that for criminal damage and arson has fallen by less than average and 
that for possession of weapons by more – but the fall in each relative to their original 
rate has been broadly similar for males and females. The only exception to this is 
violence against the person, for which the cautioning rate fell by 9 percentage points 
for men (from 23%) but only 6 for women (from 50%), despite the larger overall drop 
in the cautioning rate for indictable offences among women. 
 
 
 
                                                          
48 Simple and conditional cautions became available to those aged 10 to 17 years (juveniles) in England 
and Wales in April 2013, replacing reprimands and warnings. These had only been available to adults 
prior to this, and youth conditional cautions were only available for 16 and 17 year olds in five pilot areas 
from January 2010. 
49 Robbery has not been considered, as the numbers cautioned are too low for a meaningful trend. 

 
 
47 
 
Arrests 
The total number of arrests decreased by 27% between 2011/12 and 2015/16 (from 
1.23 million to just under 0.90 million arrests), with a similar decrease for males (27%) 
and females (26%) during this time. The number of arrests has fallen by 5% since last 
year, to 896,000. This is despite a 4% increase in arrests for sexual offences during 
this time, of which men account for the vast majority. Men continue to account for the 
majority of all arrests (84% in 2015/16)50.  
Age groups  
Both adults and juveniles saw decreases in the number of arrests since 2011/12 
(Figure 4.04). The decrease in arrests for juveniles has been much greater, however, 
with a 48% decrease for juvenile females and 47% decrease for juvenile males over 
this period. Juvenile females made up a slightly greater proportion of all arrests for 
females than juvenile males did among males in 2015/16 (11% for females and 10% 
for males).  
Figure 4.04: Number of arrests, by age group and sex, 2011/12 to 2015/1651 
 
 
 
                                                          
50 No arrests have been published as belonging to a person of unknown sex.  
51 Excludes cases where age is unknown. 
0
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1,200,000
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
Number of arrests
Male juvenile
Male adult
Female juvenile
Female adult

 
 
48 
 
Offence groups52,53 
Violence against the person and theft were consistently the two offence groups with 
the highest number of arrests for both females and males: violence against the person 
accounted for 34% of male arrests and 38% of female arrests, while theft offences 
made up 21% of male arrests and 26% of female arrests. Females were 
overrepresented in theft and fraud offences, accounting for 19% and 24% of all arrests 
for these offence groups respectively (Figure 4.05). Females only made up 3% of all 
arrests for sexual offences, with little variation from this figure across age groups. 
Figure 4.05: Proportion of arrests within each offence group by sex, 2015/16 
 
 
 
                                                          
52 In 2015/16 the 'reason for arrest' offence groups were updated to match the groups used in crime 
statistics. Whilst this should not have an impact on the total number of arrests, or on the number of 
arrests broken down by age and sex, 2015/16 data broken down by offence group are not comparable 
with previous years’ data. Though some offence groups have the same name as in previous years, the 
individual offences that make up that group may have changed, so these are still not comparable. 
53 Four forces (Norfolk, Nottinghamshire, Suffolk, and Wiltshire) could not supply data using the new 
'reason for arrest' groups. These forces supplied data using the old groups, and estimation methods 
were used to recategorise their data in to the new groups. Data broken down by age and sex and total 
numbers of arrests are unaffected by this estimation i.e. actual data provided by the force are used. 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Criminal damage and arson
Drug offences
Fraud offences
Misc crimes against society
Possession of weapons offences
Public order offences
Robbery
Sexual offences
Theft offences
Violence against the person
Proportion of arrests
Female
Male

 
 
49 
 
Liaison and diversion services 
Liaison and Diversion (L&D) services exist to identify offenders who have mental 
health, learning disability or substance misuse vulnerabilities when they first come into 
contact with the criminal justice system. 
These services identify mental health issues and vulnerabilities that offenders may 
have so that they can either be supported through the criminal system pathway or 
diverted into a treatment, social care service or other relevant intervention or support 
service. L&D services aim to improve health outcomes, reduce re-offending and 
identify vulnerabilities earlier, thus reducing the likelihood that offenders will reach 
crisis-point.  
Until 2014, these schemes were all operated locally, with a variety of types and levels 
of provision. In many areas there was no provision at all. From April 2014 a pilot 
national approach, led by NHS England, was trialled in 10 areas of the country54, and 
this has since been rolled to cover 50% of the UK population55. 
Data from this national scheme in 2015/16 suggests that a total of 48,900 offenders 
were engaging with liaison and diversion services. Just over a fifth (22%) of those using 
liaison and diversion services were female, out of those who were classed as male or 
female56, a higher proportion than among those arrested (as discussed in the arrests 
section earlier in the chapter).  
Almost a third (30%) of offenders engaging with liaison and diversion services were 
identified as having issues with alcohol misuse, 28% as being involved in substance 
misuse, and 11% of them were found to misuse both alcohol and substances. Females 
were more likely to have been misusing alcohol (33%, compared to 29% of men) and 
males were more likely to have been misusing substances (30%, compared to 22% of 
women). 
Out of all national liaison and diversion services users, over half of them (59%) were 
assessed as having a mental health need whilst 10% of both women and men had a 
known physical disability or need. Women were more likely to have a mental health 
need than men (64% compared to 59% for men). Of those with a mental health need, 
depressive illness was identified to be the most common mental health need for both 
men and women, with 37% of men and 42% of women being identified with this type 
of need. Over a fifth (21%) of men who were assessed as having a mental health need 
had schizophrenia or another delusional disorder, compared to 10% of assessed 
women.  
 
 
                                                          
54 An evaluation of this pilot can be found at http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1283.html  
55 However, there remained the freedom for local standalone services to be retained, which may affect 
the usage of some pilot services (particularly in relation to substance abuse) in some areas. In addition, 
the partial coverage means the population to who whom the national service was available may not be 
perfectly representative of the population as a whole. This data has been collected for operational and 
evaluative purposes and does not represent Official Statistics. 
56 Only 1% of people identified as intersex or did not disclose this information. They have been excluded 
from all analyses in this chapter. 

 
 
50 
 
There was no difference in the percentage of men and women identified as being in 
financial need (8% for both sexes). However, 18% of women were deemed to have 
been victims of abuse, compared to 6% of men using these liaison and diversion 
services. (This greater tendency for women to have been victims of abuse aligns with 
findings discussed in Chapter 3: Victims.) 
The most common offence group57 for those using these liaison and diversion services 
was violence against the person (26%), followed by theft (11%) and public order - 
nuisance (10%).  Females were more likely to have been being dealt with for violence 
against the person compared to men (29% and 26% respectively). Women offenders 
were also more likely to have been being dealt with for theft (14% compared to 11% 
for men). They were also more likely to have been being dealt with for public order - 
nuisance (14%, compared to 9%). Men were much more likely to have been being 
dealt with for a sexual offence than women (6% compared to 1% for women), in line 
with typical patterns of arrests and prosecutions. 
 
                                                          
57 National liaison and diversion services offence groups are based on those used by the Home Office 
and are not directly comparable to those used in Criminal Justice Statistics Quarterly: December 2015, 
which are used throughout the majority of this bulletin. 

 
 
51 
 
Chapter 5: Defendants 
This chapter explores outcomes for defendants in the Criminal Justice System (CJS)58 
drawing on data from the MoJ publication Criminal Justice Statistics Quarterly: 
December 201559. In addition, analysis is presented based on further breakdowns of 
Criminal Court Statistics (quarterly): October to December 201560 (for prosecuting 
authority, case management, appeals and representation at and election of the Crown 
Court), Offender management statistics quarterly: April to June 201661 (for pre-
sentencing reports) and Legal aid statistics: April to June 201662 (for legal aid).   
Figure 5.01: The journey of males and females through the Criminal Justice 
System63, 2015 
 
                                                          
58 A person can be dealt with separately by the Criminal Justice System on more than one occasion in a 
single year and therefore can be counted more than once. 
59 The Criminal Justice Statistics Quarterly: December 2015 publication can be viewed here: 
www.gov.uk/government/statistics/criminal-justice-statistics-quarterly-december-2015. This is the source 
throughout this chapter unless specified. 
60 Criminal Court Statistics (quarterly): October to December 2015 can be viewed here: 
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/criminal-court-statistics-quarterly-october-to-december-2015 
61 Offender management statistics quarterly can be viewed here: 
www.gov.uk/government/statistics/offender-management-statistics-quarterly-april-to-june-2016 
62Legal Aid Statistics Quarterly can be viewed here: www.gov.uk/government/statistics/legal-aid-
statistics-april-to-june-2016  
63 Where sex is known 
PNDS
47,373
Cautions 
125,425
Females
Males
Females
Males
22%
78%
24%
76%
Proceedings
1,381,083
Convictions 
1,165,807
Sentencing 
1,163,967
Females
Males
Females
Males
Females
Males
27%
73%
27%
73%
27%
73%
Sentenced
Fine
Community 
sentence
Suspended 
sentence
Custody
Other
Females
314,175
82%
6%
3%
2%
7%
Males
849,792
65%
11%
6%
10%
8%
Females
2%
Males
10%
Females
9.5
Males
16.9
Females
Males
Females
Males
25%
75%
11%
89%
First time entrants
15 or more previous 
convictions / cautions 
OUT OF COURT DISPOSALS
COURT PROCEEDINGS AND SENTENCING
Custody rate
Average custodial 
sentence length 
(months)
PREVIOUS CRIMINAL HISTORIES

 
 
52 
 
If there is sufficient evidence against the defendant and none of the out of court 
disposals are appropriate and it is in the public interest to prosecute, the police will 
formally charge the suspect. The law then requires the defendant to be brought before 
a magistrates’ court as soon as possible. The defendant can be summoned to appear 
in court or remanded on bail or custody (Figure 5.01). 
Individuals formally dealt with by the Criminal Justice System64 
This section compares disposals that are issued out of court (PNDs and cautions) with 
court proceedings. (See Chapter 4: Police Activity, for a more detailed analysis on out 
of court disposals, OOCDs.) Over the past five years females have accounted for 
around a quarter (between 24% and 26%) of all individuals dealt with by the CJS 
through either prosecutions or OOCDs65.  
Between 2005 and 2015, the overall number of both OOCDs and prosecutions 
decreased. In contrast to the number of males prosecuted, which fell by 34%, the 
number of females prosecuted rose over this period by 6%, while the number issued 
OOCDs decreased by around 60% for both females and males. As a result, the 
reduction in OOCDs as a proportion of outcomes for individuals dealt with by the 
criminal justice system is larger for females than for males (Figure 5.02). Ten years 
ago, women were more likely than men to have been dealt with through an OOCD 
rather than a prosecution (for females, 24%; for males, 18%) in 2015, this is no longer 
the case (females 10%; males 12%).  
Figure 5.02: Proportions of individuals dealt with who are dealt with through 
prosecutions and out of court disposals, by sex, 2005, 2010 and 2015 
 
                                                          
64 This section looks at persons only and excludes those where sex is not stated. Other defendants such 
as companies and public bodies are also excluded.  
65 Cannabis warnings and community resolutions will not be considered when looking at out of court 
disposals because they are not recorded by sex. 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Proportion
PNDs
Cautions
Prosecutions
PNDs
Cautions
Prosecutions
Males
Females
2005
2015
2010

 
 
53 
 
Over the last decade only the number of females prosecuted for summary66 non-
motoring offences rose, driving the increase in females prosecuted overall. In contrast, 
the number of males prosecuted for summary non-motoring offences fell, as did the 
number prosecuted for other offence types for both males and females (see Figure 
5.06). The rise in female summary non-motoring offences can largely be attributed to 
the increasing number of females dealt with in court for TV licence evasion. The 
number of males proceeded against for TV licence evasion also rose, but not as 
strongly and was offset by a decrease in prosecutions for other offences. 
In the latest year, TV licence evasion accounted for 36% of all prosecutions for female 
defendants, but only 6% for male defendants. TV licence evasion is not dealt with by 
the police, meaning out of court disposals are not available and each individual will be 
proceeded against at the magistrates’ court. In each year from 2005 to 2015, more 
females than males were convicted for this offence. If enforcement officers suspect a 
household of watching or recording live TV without a valid licence and are not able to 
contact anyone at the property by letter or by telephone, they visit the household in 
person. Whichever adult occupant is contacted at the household and provides their 
details is the person that is prosecuted for the offence.  
Overall the proportion of those dealt with in court was larger for adult females (91%) 
than for adult males (89%) in the latest year, but this was reversed for juveniles 
(females 58%, males 71%), who are seldom prosecuted for TV licence evasion (Figure 
5.03).  
Figure 5.03: Proportions of individuals dealt with who are dealt with through 
prosecutions, cautions and PNDs, by age group and sex, 2015 
 
 
 
                                                          
66 Indictable offences are more serious offences that may (if triable-either-way) or must (if indictable 
only) be passed on to the Crown Court; while summary offences are typically less serious and almost 
always dealt with entirely in magistrates’ courts. See accompanying technical guide for further details. 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Proportion
PNDs
Cautions
Prosecutions
PNDs
Cautions
Prosecutions
Males
Females
Juveniles
Adults

 
 
54 
 
Indictable offences  
The number of individuals given OOCDs for indictable offences fell for both females 
and males in the period 2005-2015, with the fall in indictable OOCDs being larger for 
females (68%) than males (59%). The number prosecuted for indictable offences also 
fell for both males (26%) and females (22%).  
Since 2010 the proportion of males dealt with for an indictable offence who were dealt 
with in court increased from three-quarters (73%) of males in 2010 to four-fifths (81%) 
of males in 2015. Similarly in 2010, just over half (54%) of female defendants dealt 
with for an indictable offence were dealt with in court, increasing to 70% of female 
defendants in 2015. Although females remained proportionally more likely to be dealt 
with out of court for indictable offences compared with males, the gap between the 
sexes has narrowed over the decade (Figure 5.04).  
Figure 5.04: Proportions of individuals dealt with for an indictable offence who 
are dealt with through prosecutions, cautions and PNDs, by sex, 2005, 2010 and 
2015 
 
 
 
 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Proportion
PNDs
Cautions
Prosecutions
PNDs
Cautions
Prosecutions
Males
Females
2005
2015
2010

 
 
55 
 
Prosecutions and Convictions67  
Prosecutions 
The number of prosecutions of male defendants declined steadily over the past decade 
(from 1.5 million in 2005 to 1.0 million in 2015, a fall of 34%), while the number of 
female defendants has varied from 340,000 to 370,000 defendants, with a net increase 
of 6% between 2005 and 201568. Nevertheless, females were still underrepresented 
among those dealt with at the criminal courts: in 2015 only 27% of those prosecuted 
were female. 
Since around 2013 the number of prosecutions for summary offences has risen for 
both male and female defendants while the number of indictable offences fell. Although 
the majority of male and female defendants are prosecuted for summary offences, 
these account for a higher proportion of prosecutions for female defendants. Summary 
offences have accounted for an increasing proportion of females prosecuted over the 
past decade, rising from 81% in 2005 to 86% in 2015, while for males the proportion 
has fallen from 74% to 71% over the same period. 
Furthermore, the types of summary offences defendants are typically prosecuted for 
differ by sex. For female defendants the majority of prosecutions were for non-motoring 
offences, whereas for males, the majority were for motoring offences.  
Between 2005 and 2015 the increasing number of female defendants proceeded 
against for summary non-motoring offences was partly offset by a fall in indictable 
offences over the same period and to a lesser extent by falling summary motoring 
prosecutions (Figure 5.05). In the same period, male defendant numbers fell for both 
indictable and summary offence types, and most strongly for summary motoring 
offences (by 300,000 defendants, or 42%). 
 
 
 
                                                          
67 This section looks at persons only and excludes those where sex is not stated. Other defendants such 
as companies and public bodies are also excluded.  
68 Defendants with sex not stated accounted for 7% of all court proceedings. 

 
 
56 
 
Figure 5.05: Number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates’ courts, by 
offence type and sex, 2005 to 2015  
Females 
 
Males 
 
As discussed above, the increase in female summary non-motoring offences, has 
been driven largely by the increase in the number of female defendants proceeded 
against for TV licence evasion over the past ten years. This offence accounted for 20% 
of all females prosecuted in 2005, however this increased to 36% in 2015 (Figure 5.06). 
 
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Number of defendants
Indictable
Summary motoring
Summary non-motoring
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
700,000
800,000
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Number of defendants
Indictable
Summary motoring
Summary non-motoring

 
 
57 
 
In 2015 speed limit offences were the second most common offence for which women 
offenders were proceeded against, while they were the most common offence for male 
defendants. Recently, speeding offence numbers dealt with in court rose for both 
males and females, driving the recent increases in summary motoring offences for both 
sexes. Speeding offences are often dealt with by the police through fixed penalty 
notices (FPN); when the speeding is deemed excessive or the defendant contests the 
FPN the case is referred to magistrates’ courts. FPNs are reported separately69, and 
their numbers have been increasing since around 2013 alongside prosecutions. 
Although speeding was the second most common offence women were proceeded 
against for, only 22% of speeding defendants were female70. 
Figure 5.06: Percentage of defendants who were prosecuted for TV licence 
evasion or speeding offences, by sex, 2005 to 2015 
 
 
Regarding indictable offences in 2015, a larger proportion of male than female 
defendants was prosecuted for each indictable offence group except theft offences 
(47% of females, 32% of males) and fraud (females 10%, males 3%). Males are 
noticeably more likely than females to be prosecuted for drug offences (females 8%, 
males 16%), sexual offences (females <1%, males 4%) and violence against the 
person offences (females 8%, males 11%). 
The proportion of male and female juveniles71 prosecuted for summary offences was 
considerably smaller than for adults, this is mostly due to low levels of juvenile 
prosecutions for motoring offences. The proportion of female juveniles prosecuted for 
summary non-motoring offences was larger than for male juveniles (47% and 26% in 
                                                          
69 https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/police-powers-and-procedures-england-and-wales-year-
ending-31-march-2016. Data on FPNs is not available by sex of the offender. 
70 Where sex is known. 2% of defendants prosecuted had sex unstated. 
71 In this chapter, juveniles are aged under 18, in line with Criminal Justice Statistics Quarterly: 
December 2015. 
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Percentage of defendants prosecuted
Female Television licence evasion
Male Television licence evasion
Female Speed limit offences
Male Speed limit offences

 
 
58 
 
2015 respectively), while the proportion of female juveniles prosecuted was equal or 
lower for all other offence groups except violence against the person (for male 
juveniles, 6%, and female juveniles, 7% of defendants prosecuted in 2015). 
Prosecuting authority 72 
In the latest year there were 1.5 million persons of known73 sex that had a completed 
case, and 26% of those defendants were female. This proportion has increased by 3 
percentage points since 2011 due to an increase in prosecutions of females and 
reduction in prosecutions of males, in line with the trend in the number of females and 
males prosecuted as discussed above. Police prosecutions accounted for 68% and 
the TV Licence Enforcement Office (TVLEO) for 13% of all prosecutions of defendants 
in 2015. DVLA and Local Authority prosecutors accounted for a further 5% and 3% of 
prosecutions respectively. 
Figure 5.07: Proportion of the defendants brought to magistrates’ court that were 
of each sex, by prosecuting authority, 2015 
 
Females were considerably more likely than males to have had their prosecution 
brought by a body other than the police. In 2015 there were 1 million prosecutions 
brought to the criminal courts by the police, of which only 17% were against female 
defendants. The number of police prosecutions have fallen for both male and female 
defendants by 9% and 2% since 2011 (respectively). In contrast, in 2015 there were 
195,000 prosecutions brought to the criminal courts by the TVLEO, of which 68% were 
against female defendants (Figure 5.07). The number of TVLEO prosecutions 
increased by 16% for females and 3% for male defendants since 2011. Females also 
accounted for 32% and 50% of DVLA and Local Authority prosecutions respectively in 
                                                          
72 The data used for this section are sourced from the magistrates’ court administrative database LIBRA. 
They represent experimental statistics and tables on this data are provided in the accompanying 
overview tables.   
73 In 2015, there were a total of 1.6 million defendants, 7% of which had an unknown sex (this may 
include companies). 
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%100%
Police
TV Licence Enforcement Office (TVLEO)
Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority
(DVLA)
Local Authority
Other
Proportion of defendants
Females
Males
Overall

 
 
59 
 
2015. These proportions have increased for both DVLA (by 9 percentage points) and 
Local Authority (by 7 percentage points) prosecutions since 2011. These increases 
were due to an increase in the number of prosecutions of female defendants by both 
the DVLA (58%) and Local Authorities (13%). DVLA prosecutions of males have 
increased by 2% whilst Local Authority prosecutions of male defendants have 
decreased by 14% over the same period. 
These differences in the typical prosecuting authority by sex are related to the different 
types of offences for which men and women were typically prosecuted, with summary 
offences, and in particular TV license evasion, accounting for a greater proportion of 
female defendants prosecuted than male (Figure 5.08), as discussed above.  
Figure 5.08: Proportion of the defendants brought to magistrates’ courts that 
were brought by each prosecuting authority, by sex, 2015 
 
Criminal legal aid74 
Criminal legal aid consists of legal aid carried out in police stations and in courts in 
relation to people accused of or charged with criminal offences. Legal advice and 
representation is provided to people being investigated or charged with a criminal 
offence. Criminal legal aid can be split into two categories, crime higher and crime 
lower. Crime higher concerns legal representation in the Crown Court and above. 
Crime lower work is carried out by legal aid providers at police stations75, in 
magistrates’ courts and prison76. Crime lower work tends to be relatively high volume, 
lower cost units of criminal legal aid work.  
                                                          
74 The source publication ‘Legal aid statistics’ can be found there: 
https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/legal-aid-statistics 
75 Anyone in England and Wales who is interviewed by the police or attends a police station can receive 
advice funded by legal aid either on the telephone or by a solicitor in attendance with the suspect. 
76 For example for advocacy in parole board or parole board hearings, or freestanding prison law advice 
and assistance. 
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Females
Males
Proportion of defendants
Police
TV Licence Enforcement Office (TVLEO)
Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority (DVLA)
Local Authority
Other

 
 
60 
 
In 2015 around 16% of crime lower legal aid workload related to female clients, and 
84% male. These proportions have changed very little over the last 5 year period77. 
The female proportion is known to be even lower for crime higher workload at the 
Crown Court; 10% of this legal aid workload for crime higher was for females in 201578. 
For comparison, in 2015, 27% of prosecutions at the magistrates’ court were of 
females, but only 11% of defendants tried at the Crown Court were women.  
The breakdown of crime lower legal aid across the various categories of crime lower 
workload was similar for males and females: Pre charge work accounted for around 
two-thirds of overall crime lower work for both males and females (both 65%), and 
around one-third was for representation at the magistrates’ court (32% for males, 34% 
for females). Legal aid for charged defendants accounted for a much smaller 
proportion of overall crime lower legal aid workload for both males and females (1%). 
However, prison law workload accounted for a larger proportion of crime lower 
workload for males than females (males 2.3%, females 0.4%) - this may be explained 
by the low number of women in prisons, as discussed in Chapter 7: Offenders under 
supervision or in custody. Only around 3% of those receiving crime lower legal aid in 
prison were female, in comparison to 12% - 16% of those receiving it at other points 
or overall (Figure 5.09). 
Figure 5.09: Proportion of legal aid workload relating to each sex, by legal aid 
category, 2015 
 
 
 
                                                          
77 Where sex is known. 1% of crime lower legal aid clients had an unstated sex. 
78 Where sex is known. 9% of crime higher legal aid clients had an unstated sex. No further breakdowns 
(for example by offence type and sex) are currently available for crime higher. The CSV is available 
here: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/533053/legal-aid-
statistics-england-and-wales-client-diversity-data.csv/preview 
 
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Pre-charge suspects
Charged defendants
Representation at magistrates' court
Prison Law
Proportion of workload
Female
Male

 
 
61 
 
In 2015 17% of the workload for legally-aided representation in the magistrates’ court 
related to females and 83% to males; these proportions have been broadly stable over 
the last five years79.  
With the proportion of prosecutions that are of females having been broadly stable at 
around one quarter of all criminal court prosecutions over the last five years (see the 
Prosecutions section of this chapter) it appears that females were proportionally less 
likely to receive legal aid at the magistrates’ court than males80. One reason for this 
may be that a larger proportion of prosecutions of females were for summary offences 
(86%) compared with males (71%): less serious summary offences often will not meet 
the criteria set out in the Interests of Justice (IOJ) test for legal aid. The IOJ test 
considers the merits of a case (for example a person’s previous convictions, the nature 
of the offence and the risk of custody). The more serious the charge or possible 
consequences for the defendant, the more likely that the case will qualify for legal aid.  
While the number of proceedings against females rose by 1%, legal aid workload for 
representation at the magistrates’ court relating to females declined by 32% between 
2010 and 2015. The number of proceedings against males fell by 18% while legal aid 
workload for representation at the magistrates’ court for males declined by 38% in the 
same period. This indicates an overall decrease in legal aid workload at the 
magistrates’ courts, with a greater decline for females relative to the number 
prosecuted. This may in part be related to the fall in the proportion of prosecutions that 
were for indictable offences between 2010 and 2015 (5 percentage points for females, 
from 19% to 14%; 4 percentage points for males, from 33% to 29%), which are more 
likely to warrant legal aid, and in part to changes in legislation81. 
 
 
                                                          
79 Where sex is known. Less than 1% of legal aid recipients at the magistrates’ court had sex unknown. 
80 Legal aid grants and proceedings data cannot directly be compared since the former relate to the 
period the claim for payment came in, not the time of the court proceedings. 
81 As well as creating the Legal Aid Agency, the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders 
(LASPO) Act also made changes to the scope and eligibility of legal aid and to exceptional case funding. 
These changes came into effect from 1 April 2013. The full details of the LASPO Act can be found here: 
www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/10/enacted 

 
 
62 
 
In 2015, theft offences was the most common offence group82 for which females 
received legally aided representation at the magistrates’ court. For females, 31% of all 
magistrates’ court representation was for theft offences, compared with 23% for males 
(Figure 5.10). Offences against the person accounted for 25% of representation 
workload for females and 24% for males in 2015. Fraud and forgery offences also 
made up a higher proportion of magistrates’ court representation workload for females 
(5%) than males (2%), while drug offences made up a higher proportion for males (7%) 
than females (4%); this mirrors the differences in typical offence groups prosecuted by 
sex. Legal aid representation pre-charge is very similar to legal representation at the 
magistrates’ court and hence is not shown separately here. 
Figure 5.10: Proportion of legal aid workload for representation at magistrates’ 
courts, by offence group and sex, 2015 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                          
82 Offence groups used in the recording of legal aid statistics are not directly comparable to those used 
in the Criminal Justice Statistics Quarterly: December 2015 and throughout the rest of this chapter. 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Anti-social behaviour orders
Burglary
Criminal damage
Driving and motor vehicle offences
Drug offences
Fraud and forgery
Offences against the person & Homicide
Public order offences
Robbery
Sexual offences
Theft
Other offences
Proportion of legal aid workload 
Female
Male

 
 
63 
 
In 2015 3% of the legally aided prison law workload related to females and 97% to 
males83. The majority of prison legal aid workload was for oral representation for parole 
and disciplinary matters (for females, 54% of prison legal aid; for males 56%) and 
written representation to the parole board (for females 38%, for males 36%). Overall 
the differences between the sexes in the relative prevalence of different types of prison 
law representation were small (Figure 5.11), despite their different sentencing and 
behavioural tendencies as discussed in Chapter 7: Offenders under supervision and 
in custody. 
Figure 5.11: Proportion of legal aid workload for prison law, by type of 
representation and sex, 2015 
 
Crown Court committal 
The proportion of male and female defendants prosecuted for indictable offences being 
committed for trial to the Crown Court has increased over the last decade. A smaller 
proportion of females (18% in 2015) than males (26% in 2015) prosecuted for 
indictable offences were sent for trial to the Crown Court. This is partly due to women 
being less likely to be sent for trial at the Crown Court for theft. For example, in 2015 
nearly half (47%) of prosecutions of female offenders for indictable offences were for 
theft, but only 5% were committed for trial, while around one in three (32%) male 
offenders were prosecuted for theft but 13% were committed for trial. (This is discussed 
further in the shoplifting section of Chapter 8: Offence Analysis.) Females were also 
less likely to be committed for trial at the Crown Court for fraud offences (25% of 
females and 33% of males in 2015). The offence mix also plays a role: females were 
less likely to be prosecuted for violence against the person or sexual offences, which 
are often sent for trial at the Crown Court. 
                                                          
83 Where sex is known. 1% of legal aid recipients in prison had sex unknown. Note that data pre-2015 is 
of lower quality and hence has been omitted from the commentary. 
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Disciplinary matters - Written
Representations
Parole Board - Written Representations
Parole and disciplinary matters - Oral
Representations
Prison Law Advice and Assistance Matters
Proportion of legal aid workload 
Female
Male

 
 
64 
 
For both males and females the number of defendants at the Crown Court tried for 
indictable only offences decreased overall (by 5% to around 1,600 for females, and by 
7% to 16,000 for males) over the last decade, while the number of defendants tried for 
triable either way offences also varied but increased overall (by 17% to around 7,600 
for females, and by 26% to 60,000 for males) in the same time period. 
Triable-either-way cases are tried at the Crown Court where magistrates feel the 
offence is sufficiently serious or complex to justify committal. However, it is also 
possible for the defendants or prosecution to elect for the case to be tried at the Crown 
Court, if they feel this mode of trial is preferable to a summary trial by magistrates.  
In the latest year84, the majority of defendants for triable-either-way (TEW) cases that 
were sent to the Crown Court were sent on the direction of the magistrates’ court 
(93%). This proportion was slightly less for females (90%) than for males (93%).  
The guilty plea rate (GPR), i.e. the proportion of defendants who pleaded guilty to all 
offences, varies for male and female defendants with whether they elect to be tried at 
the Crown Court. The GPR for defendants who elect to be tried at the Crown Court is 
much lower than the GPR for those directed by the magistrates’ court. In 2015, of all 
defendants who entered a plea, the GPR for female defendants who elected to be tried 
at the Crown Court was 40%, compared with 67% for those directed. Male defendants 
who elected to be tried at the Crown Court had a GPR of 48%, compared with 74% for 
those directed. However, the difference in GPR between male defendants and female 
defendants is similar for those who elect to be tried at Crown Court (7 percentage 
points) and those who are directed there by the magistrates’ court (8 percentage 
points); there does not appear to be any difference between the sexes in how intention 
to plead is associated with election of trial at the Crown Court.  
Representation at the Crown Court85 
When defendants appear in court, they have the right to either speak for themselves 
or to be represented, i.e. to have someone with legal expertise speak on their behalf. 
In 2015, the proportion of defendants86 that were known to have representation at their 
first hearing was 94% for females and 93% of males dealt with at the Crown Court. 
These proportions have remained relatively stable since 2010, ranging from 93% to 
96% for both male and female defendants; there is no evidence of a gap between the 
sexes in Crown Court representation. 
 
                                                          
84 Figures from this paragraph are sourced from the data underpinning the Criminal Court Statistics 
(quarterly): October to December 2015 bulletin. These figures are calculated differently from those used 
for the Criminal Justice Statistics Quarterly: December 2015 bulletin, which is used as the basis for the 
section on plea at the Crown Court and the remainder of the Crown Court committal section – they are 
not directly comparable to these sections. Please refer to the accompanying technical guide for further 
details. 
85 Figures from this section are sourced from the data underpinning the Criminal Court Statistics 
(quarterly): October to December 2015 bulletin. These figures are calculated differently from those used 
for the Criminal Justice Statistics Quarterly: December 2015 bulletin, which is used as the basis for the 
remainder of this chapter unless specified. Companies and defendants with unknown sex have been 
excluded from this analysis. Please refer to the accompanying technical guide for further details. 
86 These figures exclude companies and persons with unknown sex. In 2015, there were 96,415 
defendants dealt with in the Crown Court less than 1% of which had unknown sex or were a company. 

 
 
65 
 
Plea at the Crown Court 
Over the last decade the proportion of defendants pleading guilty at the Crown Court 
has increased overall for indictable offences, for both males and females (Figure 5.12). 
However, the guilty plea rate was consistently lower for females (64% in 2015) 
compared with males (69% in 2015), and was also lower for females for all offence 
groups except criminal damage and arson (females 85%, males 77%) in 2015. 
Furthermore, for males the proportion of defendants pleading guilty was considerably 
lower for indictable only (50% in 2015) than for triable either way offences (74% in 
2015), while these proportions were more similar for females (60% and 65% 
respectively in 2015).  
Figure 5.12: Percentage of defendants for trial at the Crown Court that pled 
guilty, by sex, 2005 to 2015 
 
 
 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Percentage of defendants  
Female indictable
Male indictable

 
 
66 
 
Convictions 
As with prosecutions, the number of convictions has fallen for male offenders since 
2005 (by 29%), while it has risen overall for female offenders (by 11%)87 mirroring 
prosecutions. In 2015 27% of convictions were of female offenders and 73% of male 
offenders. 
The conviction ratio88 has been between one and three percentage points higher for 
female than male offenders over the past decade. It increased for both male and 
female defendants between 2005 and 2008, after which it remained broadly stable at 
around 84-85% for females and 82-84% for males. The conviction ratios were lowest 
for sexual offences for both females (46%) and males (55%), but were generally similar 
for both sexes. Overall, the conviction ratio was lower for juveniles compared with 
adults (Figure 5.13). 
Figure 5.13: Conviction ratio, by age group and sex, 2005 to 2015 
 
Remands 
Police remand 
Police remands are decisions made by a police officer on whether to detain or bail a 
defendant pending their first appearance in court or send a notice summoning them to 
appear in court. In 2015 there were 1.37 million defendants89 directed to appear at 
magistrates’ courts (including those who failed to appear). 
                                                          
87 Offenders with sex not stated accounted for 6% of all convictions. 
88 The conviction ratio is calculated by dividing the number of defendants convicted by the number of 
defendants prosecuted in the same period  
89 Excluding companies and those of unknown sex, which comprise 7% of the total number of 
defendants. The total number of defendants in 2015 including companies and where gender is unknown 
is 1.56 million. 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Conviction ratio
Adult female
Adult male
Juvenile female
Juvenile male

 
 
67 
 
A lower proportion of female than male defendants were arrested and held in custody 
in each of the last five years. The proportion of females held in custody has remained 
broadly stable; it was 5% in each year since 2011 until it decreased by one percentage 
point to 4% in 2015. 13% of male defendants were held in custody in 2015; whilst this 
has fluctuated since 2011, it has also remained broadly stable.  
Similarly, a lower proportion of female than male defendants have been bailed by the 
police since 2011. In 2015, 31% of male defendants were bailed, compared with 15% 
of females (Figure 5.14). There has been a steady decrease in the proportion of 
defendants given police bail since 2011 for both sexes, by 8 percentage points. 
Since 2011, female defendants have been more likely than males to receive a 
summons and the proportion of males and females summonsed has increased. In 
2011, 72% of females were summonsed compared with 80% in 2015; an increase of 
9 percentage points. Similarly, the proportion of male defendants summonsed 
increased from 48% in 2011 to 56% in 2015. The differences observed in police 
remand decisions are likely to relate in part to the different types of offences for which 
women and men are typically prosecuted and hence the risk they are perceived as 
representing. Similar trends to those for police remand overall are generally seen for 
individual police force areas, although there are exceptions which may be driven by 
local circumstances. 
Figure 5.14: Proportion of those remanded by the police, by remand status and 
sex, 2011 to 2015 
 
 
 

 
 
68 
 
Court remands 
Court remands90 are court decisions on whether a defendant charged with a criminal 
offence should be held in custody or released on bail, during the period of their trial or 
while they are awaiting sentence. The figures are compiled from a combination of the 
defendant's remand status during their trial and whilst awaiting sentence at 
magistrates’ courts and the Crown Court. 
Magistrates’ court remand 
The trends for females remanded by magistrates’ courts followed a similar pattern to 
police remands, with females being less likely than males to be remanded in custody 
or bailed91 (Figure 5.15). In the last five years, 1% of females have been remanded 
into custody by magistrates’ courts. In contrast, the proportion of males remanded into 
custody in 2015 was 5%; this has fluctuated slightly but remained broadly stable since 
2011. The proportions of men and women bailed in 2015 were 24% and 13% 
respectively, both representing a small fall since 2011 (from 26% and 17%). 
A higher proportion of females than males were not remanded by magistrates’ courts 
since 2011; although an increase in defendants not remanded was observed for both 
males and females. In 2011, 80% of females were not remanded, rising to 86% in 
2015. For males, 66% were not remanded by magistrates’ courts in 2011, increasing 
to 70% in 2015. 
Figure 5.15: Proportion of those remanded by magistrates’ courts, by remand 
status and sex, 2011 to 2015 
 
 
 
                                                          
90 The data in this section relates to persons remanded in each completed court case rather than to the 
number of remand decisions (a person may be remanded several times during a case). 
91 Remand status is not known in a small minority of cases in 2011 and 2012, when those bailed and not 
remanded were being estimated – see the accompanying technical guide for further details. 

 
 
69 
 
Offences for which defendants remanded in custody were tried for in magistrates’ 
courts 
Theft offences are the offences for which both females and males have been most 
commonly remanded in custody by magistrates’ courts since 2011. In 2015, one third 
of females (34%) and one quarter of males (24%) who were remanded in custody were 
remanded for theft offences. This trend has fluctuated for both sexes over time, but 
peaked in 2014 for females, when 38% of females who were remanded in custody by 
magistrates’ courts were remanded for theft offences (the trend peaked in 2012 and 
2013 at 29% for males). The percentage of females and males remanded into custody 
by magistrates’ courts who were remanded for summary non-motoring offences has 
risen overall, to 16% in 2015 from 12% in 2011 for females and to 17% in 2015 from 
13% in 2011 for males.  
Males were more likely to be remanded in custody than females for all offence groups. 
In 2015, this was particularly true for defendants being proceeded against for robbery 
offences, where 45% of male and 30% of female defendants were remanded into 
custody by magistrates’ courts; and for violence against the person offences, where 
28% of male defendants were remanded into custody compared with 13% of female 
defendants. 
Outcomes for defendants remanded in custody by magistrates’ courts 
In 2015, females remanded in custody by magistrates’ court were less likely than males 
to be committed for trial or sentence to the Crown Court (47% and 58% respectively in 
2015); and as likely as males to be acquitted (10% of both sexes remanded in custody 
by magistrates’ courts in 2015). The trend for both sexes in terms of acquittals in 
magistrates’ courts for those remanded into custody has remained broadly stable in 
recent years, from a high of 12% acquitted in 2011 and 2012 for males and for females, 
acquittals peaked in 2012 at 13%. 
Sentencing outcomes handed to females and males by magistrates’ courts also 
differed. In 2015, females remanded in custody and sentenced at magistrates’ courts 
were more likely than males to be given a suspended sentence (17% and 14% 
respectively) or non-custodial sentence (37% and 35% respectively); and less likely to 
be handed an immediate custodial sentence (46% and 52% respectively). Since 2011, 
the trend for females being handed a suspended sentence has risen (up from 11%) 
whilst non-custodial outcomes have fallen (down from 44% in 2011). The same trend 
was observed for male defendants remanded in custody at magistrates’ courts since 
2011, when 9% were given a suspended sentence and 43% had a non-custodial 
outcome. 
 
 

 
 
70 
 
Crown Court remand 
The proportion of all defendants remanded in custody92 at the Crown Court rose by 
two percentage points in 2015 compared with 2011, to reach 36%. Of the 11,700 
females and 95,800 males appearing at the Crown Court in 2015, 19% and 38% 
respectively were remanded in custody. These proportions have both been broadly 
similar since 2011 – as for police and magistrates’ courts remand, women are 
consistently less likely than men to be remanded in custody at the Crown Court. 
In contrast to what is seen for police and magistrates’ courts remand, however, women 
were consistently more likely than men to be bailed at the Crown Court – approximately 
two thirds of women were bailed (67% in the latest year) compared with just under half 
of men (47% in the latest year) (Figure 5.16). This difference is likely to be linked to 
the greater seriousness of offences typically dealt with at the Crown Court – most 
women were ‘not remanded’ by police or magistrates, but this is rarely appropriate for 
Crown Court cases. (Only 15% of males and 13% of female defendants were not 
remanded in the Crown Court in 2015, proportions which have remained similar for 
both males and females since 2011.) 
Figure 5.16: Proportion of those remanded by the Crown Court, by remand 
status and sex, 2011 to 2015 
 
 
 
                                                          
92 Defendants remanded in custody might also have been remanded on bail or not remanded at another 
stage in the proceedings. 

 
 
71 
 
Offences for which defendants remanded in custody were tried for in the Crown Court 
Of those of each sex remanded in custody by the Crown Court in 2015, a larger 
percentage of females than males were remanded into custody for miscellaneous 
crimes against society (16% of females and 11% of males remanded in custody), fraud 
offences and criminal damage and arson (each 5% and 2% respectively). Females 
were less likely to have been remanded in custody for sexual offences, with this 
offence group representing 2% of females on custodial remand compared with 8% of 
males. These trends have remained broadly similar since 2011. Females and males 
were both most commonly remanded in custody for violence against the person (23% 
and 22% respectively) and theft offences (19% and 20% respectively). 
Outcomes for defendants remanded in custody at the Crown Court 
In 2015, a higher percentage of females who were remanded in custody at the Crown 
Court were acquitted or not tried (15%) compared with males (12%), as a proportion 
of all sentencing outcomes for each sex. Since 2011, the trend for males has remained 
relatively stable compared with the trend for females; for whom the proportion acquitted 
has increased by four percentage points. 
Typical sentencing outcomes handed by the Crown Court to female and male 
defendants who had been remanded in custody differed in 2015 (Figure 5.17). Female 
defendants who had been remanded in custody and sentenced at the Crown Court 
were less likely to receive a custodial sentence of either immediate custody or 
suspended sentence (86%) than were male defendants (93%). A higher proportion of 
males were given immediate custody (83%) compared with females (68%); however 
more females than males received a suspended sentence (18% and 9% respectively).  
Figure 5.17: Proportion of those remanded in custody and sentenced at the 
Crown Court, by sentencing outcome and sex, 2015 
  
 
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Immediate Custody
Suspended sentence
Community sentence
Otherwise dealt with
Discharge
Compensation
Fine
Proportion of those remanded and sentenced
Males
Females

 
 
72 
 
The percentage of females remanded in custody by the Crown Court who were given 
immediate custodial sentences there has decreased since 2011 (Figure 5.18). In 2011, 
73% of females remanded in custody were sentenced to immediate custody, which 
steadily decreased to 68% in 2015. In contrast, the proportion of females remanded in 
custody who received a suspended sentence at the Crown Court increased steadily 
since 2011; in 2011, 10% of these females were given suspended sentences, which 
rose to 18% in 2015.  There has been a smaller rise for males remanded in custody 
who received suspended sentences over the same period of time; increasing from 6% 
in 2011 to 9% in 2015. Overall, the total proportion of custodial sentences (that is, both 
immediate custodial and suspended sentence order outcomes) for females remanded 
in custody at the Crown Court increased since the introduction of the Legal Aid, 
Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012. 
Figure 5.18: Percentage of those remanded in custody and sentenced at the 
Crown Court, by custodial sentencing outcome and sex, 2011 to 2015 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
73 
 
Sentence lengths handed for immediate custodial outcomes in the Crown Court 
In 2015, 14% of females remanded in custody and sentenced at the Crown Court were 
handed an immediate custodial sentence of less than 6 months in length; compared 
with 10% of males. 
Higher proportions of males than females who were remanded in custody by the Crown 
Court received a sentence length of four or more years; with one quarter (25%) of 
males and 18% of females handed a sentence of this length in 2015. Slightly higher 
percentages of females than males were handed immediate custodial sentence 
lengths of between 6 months and less than 4 years. In 2015, these proportions were 
68% for females and 64% for males. Whilst these proportions have fluctuated over 
time, they have remained broadly stable for both sexes since 2011. The tendency for 
women remanded in custody to receive shorter immediate custodial sentences than 
men mirrors the trend for immediate custodial sentences more generally, as discussed 
later in this chapter. 
Figure 5.19: Proportion of those remanded in custody and sentenced to 
immediate custody at the Crown Court, by sentence length and sex, 2015 
 
 
 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Sentenced to less than 6
months
Sentenced to between 6
months and less than 4
years
Sentenced to 4 years or
more
Proportion of those remanded in custody 
and sentenced to immediate custody
Male
Female

 
 
74 
 
Failure to appear 
Failures to appear (FTA) occur when defendants do not attend court on a specified 
date, having either been summonsed or granted bail at an earlier stage. In 2015, the 
number of defendants who failed to appear was over 70,000. 
Experimental statistics on failure to appear in 2015 by and sex show that women 
represented 18% of those failing to appear93, a smaller proportion than of those 
prosecuted. They represented 19% of FTA at magistrates’ courts and only 11% at the 
Crown Court, in line with their higher proportion of prosecutions for summary offences. 
However, patterns of failure to appear by offence type were generally similar for males 
and females. 
95% of failures to appear by male defendants and 97% for female defendants for 2015 
related to magistrates’ courts. The majority of failures to appear were associated with 
triable-either-way offences. There were around 50,000 defendants failing to appear in 
2015 in association with a triable-either-way offence. Triable-either-way offences 
accounted for similar proportions of failures to appear for both men and women, 72% 
and 74% respectively in magistrates’ courts, 83% for both men and women in the 
Crown Court, and 72% and 75% respectively in all courts.   
The number of failures to appear associated with indictable only offences was much 
smaller, even taking into account that fewer prosecutions relate to indictable only 
offences. Indictable only offences also accounted for similar proportions of failures to 
appear for both men and women, under 1% in the magistrates’ Court, 16% and 14% 
respectively in the Crown Court, and 2% and 1% respectively in all courts.    
The number of failures to appear associated with summary offences (both motoring 
and non-motoring) was also smaller than the number associated with triable-either-
way offences, despite the much larger number of defendants prosecuted that related 
to summary offences. Summary non-motoring offences accounted for a slightly higher 
proportion of failures to appear for women than men (20% compared to 18% 
respectively) and summary motoring accounted for a slightly lower proportion of 
failures to appear for women than men (5% compared to 9% respectively). The higher 
proportion of failures to appear accounted for by summary non-motoring offences 
among women may partly reflect that women were most commonly prosecuted for 
these offences, but in general the greater tendency of females to have been 
prosecuted for summary offences was not seen in the offences for which they failed to 
appear. 
 
 
                                                          
93 Of known sex. 2% of those failing to appear has sex unknown or not stated. 

 
 
75 
 
Case Management 
The majority of cases at the Crown Court will involve a single defendant. However, 
there are some cases which will have more than one defendant. For this analysis cases 
with multiple defendants will be treated as a ‘male’ or ‘female’ case if all defendants in 
the case are of the same sex. Cases with both male and female defendants are defined 
as mixed, cases that have one or more defendants of unknown sex are defined as 
unknown and cases that have one or more defendants recorded as a company are 
defined as a company.  
Case listing94 
When a ‘for trial’ case – a case that has the potential to go for trial by jury – proceeds 
to the point at which a trial by jury is required, the case will be listed for a trial hearing. 
(The majority of cases for trial do not reach the stage at which a trial hearing is listed 
due to the case completing without the need of a jury – e.g. if the prosecution drop the 
case or the defendant pleads guilty.) If the jury are sworn in at the trial hearing, then 
that listing is called an effective trial listing. There are instances in a case why the jury 
will not be sworn in for the trial hearing. Instances where the trial does not go ahead 
but that still require that trial listing to be relisted at later date are called ineffective trial 
listings.9596 Some cases will require multiple trial hearings and therefore can have more 
than one listing.  
In 2015, there were 39,000 trial listings of which 4% (2,000) related to cases that had 
a mix of male and female defendants and 96% (37,000) related to cases which had all 
male or all female defendants.97 Out of these 37,000 trial listings, 8% (3,000) related 
to cases with all female defendants, a proportion that has remained stable since 2010. 
The proportion of trial listings that were ineffective is similar for trials involving either 
all male or all female defendants. In 2015, 15% of listings relating to a male case were 
ineffective whilst 16% of listings were ineffective for female cases. These proportions 
have remained relatively stable from 2010 to 2015, ranging from 14% to 15% for males 
and 13% to 17% for females. 
 
 
                                                          
94 Data in this section is sourced from the Crown Court administrative system CREST. Figures 
discussed here are experimental statistics presented in tables accompanying this publication. For more 
information and statistics on Crown Court cases please refer to the Criminal Court Statistics (quarterly): 
October to December 2015 bulletin - https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/criminal-court-statistics  
95 For example if the defendant or a witness was absent then the trial listing would be categorised as 
ineffective. 
96 Instances where the circumstances of the case change such that neither a trial on that day nor any 
subsequent trials are needed are called a cracked trial listing. These are not discussed in this section 
because the implications of this depend greatly on the specifics of the case.  
97 Less than 1% of trial listings related to cases concerning companies or had defendants of unrecorded 
sex.  

 
 
76 
 
Timeliness98 
In 201599, the median number of days from the offence to the completion of the criminal 
case for both male and female defendants was 150 days – there was no difference 
between the sexes in overall case timeliness. 
This compares to 2011, when female defendants had a median of 141 days whilst 
male defendants had a median of 126 days; whilst the median number of days for 
female defendants has increased since 2011, there has been a larger increase in the 
median number of days for male defendants, which reduced the difference in 
timeliness between female and male defendants almost year on year.  
The time period between the offence and the completion of the criminal case can be 
broken up into three component parts: the time between the offence and the offender 
being charged; the time between the charge and the case first being listed at the 
magistrates’ court; and the time between that first listing and the case being completed, 
in whichever form that completion takes.  
Since 2011, the median number of days from offence to charge has consistently been 
higher for female defendants than for male defendants. In 2015, female defendants 
had a median of 102 days whilst male defendants had a median of 79 days. In 2011, 
both female and male defendants had a smaller median number of days (78 and 56 
days respectively), but the number of days difference between the sexes has remained 
broadly stable over the period. The median number of days from charge to first listing 
has also been consistently higher for female defendants. In 2015, female defendants 
had a median of 33 days whilst male defendants had a median of 27 days, a slight 
increase of 4 and 3 days respectively since 2011. The median number of days from 
first listing to completion is zero for both males and females.100  
Fraud offences take more than a third longer for female defendants as male 
defendants (Figure 5.20). In 2015, fraud offences had the largest median number of 
days (503) from offence to completion for female defendants. Fraud was the second 
longest offence group for male defendants, at 368 days, with sexual offences at 409 
days. As with overall timeliness, the gap between the sexes has narrowed since 2011, 
when female defendants had a median of 535 days and male defendants 300 days for 
fraud. The difference between male and female defendants may well be due to the 
relative volumes of different offences that make up the offence group. In 2015, benefit 
fraud offences accounted for 45% of all female fraud prosecutions and 20% of male 
                                                          
98 The data used for this section matches defendants recorded in magistrates’ courts with defendants 
who completed their case in the Crown Court to measure the length of a case. These are sourced from 
linked magistrates' courts and Crown Court administrative data systems – with a match rate of around 
95%. Figures discussed here are experimental statistics from a new methodology where cases longer 
than 10 years, which were previously excluded, are now included in the data. Experimental tables on 
timeliness by sex are published in the overview tables accompanying this publication. For more 
information and statistics on timeliness please refer to the Criminal Court Statistics (quarterly): October 
to December 2015 bulletin - https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/criminal-court-statistics  
99 In 2015, there were 1.5 million defendants who had completed cases in the criminal courts 7% of 
which had unknown sex. 
100 A median value of 0 indicates that the case had a first listing and completed on the same day. 

 
 
77 
 
prosecutions; the time taken for benefit fraud cases is discussed further in Chapter 8: 
Offence Analysis. 
The second longest offence group for female defendants was sexual offences, with a 
median time of 415 days from offence to completion, similar to males. Again, in 2011, 
female defendants had a larger median (453 days) whilst male defendants had a 
smaller median (326 days). In 2015, female defendants had a longer median time from 
offence to completion for all indictable offence groups apart from theft and possession 
of a weapon. The same trend was seen in 2011, except for public order offences and 
robbery, which also took longer for male defendants. Female defendants with a 
summary offence had a longer median time from offence to completion than males 
from 2011 to 2015, except in the latest year where male defendants had a slightly 
longer median for summary motoring offences (196 days) than female defendants (194 
days). 
Figure 5.20: Median number of days from offence to completion, by offence 
group and sex, 2015 
 
In contrast to the median, in the most recent two years, the mean (‘average’) number 
of days from charge to completion for male defendants has increased whilst remaining 
broadly stable for female defendants. This increase in average number of days for 
male defendants is due to an increase in sexual offence prosecutions.101 
In 2015, the average number of days from offence to completion of a case was 184 
days for male defendants and 166 days for female defendants. In 2011, male 
defendants had an average of 157 days and female defendants had an average of 
162; by 2015, female defendants saw an increase of 4 days whilst male defendants 
                                                          
101 The mean is more susceptible to extreme outliers than the median. Timeliness figures for mean days 
can be skewed to show a shorter or longer average than the median due to a small number of very short 
or long cases (respectively). For example, sexual offences have a high proportion of extremely long 
cases, hence the substantial gap between the median and mean time from offence to completion for this 
group. 
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Violence against the person
Sexual offences
Robbery
Theft Offences
Criminal damage and arson
Drug offences
Possession of weapons
Public order offences
Miscellaneous crimes against society
Fraud Offences
Summary Non-Motoring
Summary motoring
Median number of days
Female
Male

 
 
78 
 
saw an increase of 27 days. This increase for male defendants has occurred in the 
latest 2 years and is primarily due to an increase in the time from offence to charge. 
The average number of days from offence to charge for male defendants was 108 in 
2015 (an increase of 20 days from 2011). Female defendants had an average of 105 
days (an increase of 6 days over the same period). 
This increase for male defendants is driven by an increase in the number of sexual 
offences being prosecuted by the courts in 2013. Sexual offences take by far the 
longest on average of the offence groups, for both male and female defendants (in 
2015 the average number of days from offence to completion was 1,812 and 1,870 
respectively). In 2014, when the average time taken for male defendants started to 
increase, the number of completed sexual offence cases also increased (by 10% for 
male defendants and 40% for female defendants). Although female defendants saw a 
larger relative increase in sexual offence cases, the proportion of female cases that 
related to sexual offences was considerably lower than for male defendants (less than 
0.1% versus 1%). This meant that although female defendants had a larger relative 
increase in sexual offence case completions in 2014, it did not have a large impact on 
overall timeliness for female defendants in the same way as for males.  
Pre-sentence reports 
Pre-sentence reports (PSRs)102 are typically prepared by the Probation Service to 
provide information to the court about the offender and any circumstances surrounding 
the offence, to help decide on a suitable sentence. This section looks at the types of 
PSR given at the courts, and the agreement (concordance) between recommendations 
made in PSRs and sentences issued at court and whether this differs between males 
and females. 
In 2015 a total of 159,000103 court reports were prepared, of which 15% were given for 
females and 85% for males. The total number of court reports has varied over the last 
four years (between 142,000 and 194,000) with the majority (over 70% in 2015) given 
at the magistrates’ courts. 
 About half of PSRs were written, fast delivery PSR’s104 (females 49%, males 52%). 
Oral, fast delivery PSR’s105 were nearly as common, especially for females (females 
41%, males 30%), while the ‘standard’ PSR’s106 which are given for the more serious 
offences were much less common and were given proportionally more often to male 
                                                          
102 Data on PSRs relates to those aged 18 or older and all offence types. All court reports included in 
published PSR statistics relate to offenders of known sex. 
103 The total number of court reports given here is higher than the number of court reports in the 
concordance data since reports include all sentences whether these are unrecorded or recorded as 
“Other”. 
104 Fast Delivery PSR (written) – Normally completed on day of request and must be completed within 5 
days. A fast delivery PSR is only suitable where the case was of 'low seriousness' or 'medium 
seriousness', and where the court indicates that a community sentence is being considered. May in 
certain circumstances also be suitable when the Court is considering custody. These reports may 
include a full risk assessment of the offender. 
105 Fast Delivery PSR (oral) – The Criminal Justice Act 2003 removed the requirement for all PSRs to be 
written. An oral report is usually completed within 24 hours of conviction where a limited amount of 
information is required by the sentencing court.  
106 Standard PSR – A standard delivery (adjourned) Pre-Sentence Report is based on a full risk 
assessment and is suitable for 'medium' and 'high' seriousness cases and/or where a custody is being 
considered.  

 
 
79 
 
(17%) compared with female (9%) offenders. This aligns with the differences in the 
types of offence males and females were typically prosecuted for, as discussed earlier 
in this chapter. Since 2012 the overall proportion of standard PSRs has declined for 
females and males by around 15 percentage points.  
For both female and male offenders oral, fast PSRs were uncommon at the Crown 
Court (male 5%, female 8%), while standard PSRs were more common (male 31%, 
female 20%) owing to the more serious nature of offences typically sentenced here. 
Nevertheless, females still had a lower proportion of standard PSRs than males. 
Overall, females (73%) were slightly more likely than males (67%) to have their 
sentences concur with their PSR. In the latest year, a lower proportion of female 
offenders were recommended for immediate custody (female 4%, male 9%) and a 
higher proportion for community sentences (female 71%, male 65%) compared with 
male offenders. Compared with 2014 the proportion of both females and males 
recommended for a suspended sentence increased by 5 percentage points to 23%-
24% which was compensated by a fall in proportion of community sentence 
recommendations. 
In 2015, the highest level of concordance was for immediate custody (Figure 5.21), 
with 77% of female offenders and 81% of male offenders whose PSR recommended 
a custodial sentence going on to receive one. If immediate custody was not given for 
offenders recommended for it then a suspended sentence was the most likely 
sentence to be given to females (accounting for 13%), but ‘other’ sentences were the 
most prevalent for males (accounting for 9%). Furthermore, in 2015 a higher proportion 
of males (14%) received an immediate custodial sentence than females (8%) when 
another sentence option had been recommended in the PSR (e.g. a suspended 
sentence, community sentence or a fine). 
Figure 5.21: The level of concordance between sentence recommendations and 
outcomes for female and male offenders, by sentence type, 2015 
 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Immediate custody
Suspended
Sentence Order
Community
sentence
  Fine
Concordance
Female
Male

 
 
80 
 
Sentencing107  
The number of males sentenced declined over the past decade (from 1.2 million in 
2005 to 850,000 in 2015, a fall of 29%), while the number of females sentenced has 
varied from 289,000 to 310,000 defendants, with a net increase of 11% between 2005 
and 2015108. This mirrors the trends in numbers prosecuted and convicted. In 2015 
27% of sentences were given to female offenders and 73% to male offenders.  
Fines were the most common sentence given to both male and female offenders 
sentenced at all courts over the last decade (Figure 5.22). Fines were particularly 
prevalent amongst women, accounting for 65% of male and 82% of female offenders 
sentenced in the latest year (2015). The average fine amount given to females was 
£210 in 2015, while it was £260 for males. Fine amounts were consistently lower for 
females compared with males over the last decade.  
The community sentence was the second most common disposal for both female (6%) 
and male (11%) defendants, though its use has declined since 2010. Immediate 
custody (females 2%, males 10% in 2015) and suspended sentences (females 3%, 
males 6% in 2015) were also more common for males than females. While the 
proportion of females receiving immediate custody fell by 1 percentage point over the 
last decade, it rose by 2 percentage points for males. The proportion of suspended 
sentences rose for both females (2 percentage points) and males (5 percentage 
points). 
 
                                                          
107 This section looks at persons only and excludes those where sex is not stated. Other defendants 
such as companies and public bodies are also excluded.  
108 Offenders with unknown sex accounted for 6% of all persons sentenced. 

 
 
81 
 
Figure 5.22: Proportion of offenders sentenced, by sentencing outcome and sex, 
2005 and 2015 
Females 
 
Males 
 
The most common sentence given to both male and female juvenile offenders over the 
last decade was a community sentence; however this was consistently higher for 
juvenile female offenders (75% compared with 68% for males in 2015). In contrast to 
adults the proportion of community sentences given has increased for juveniles since 
2010 (by 5 percentage points for males and 2 percentage points for females), but as 
for adult offenders a higher proportion of juvenile males (7%) than females (2%) were 
sentenced to immediate custody at all courts.  
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2005
2015
Proportion of female offenders sentenced 
Immediate custody
Suspended sentence
Community sentence
Fine
Absolute/Conditional
discharge
Otherwise dealt
with/Compensation
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2005
2015
Proportion of male offenders sentenced 
Immediate custody
Suspended sentence
Community sentence
Fine
Absolute/Conditional
discharge
Otherwise dealt
with/Compensation

 
 
82 
 
 
The proportion of fines given to juvenile offenders was much lower than for adults, and 
a higher proportion of males (8% in 2015) than females (4% in 2015) received fines, 
whereas for adults the reverse was true (males 67%, females 83%). The most common 
offences juvenile males received a fine for were vehicle insurance offences and drug 
possession (specifically cannabis); these represented much lower proportions of 
offences for female than male juveniles In contrast to adult females, juvenile females 
were seldom sentenced for TV licence evasion, for which the typical sentence is a fine 
(see Chapter 8: Offence Analysis). 
Indictable offences 
A smaller proportion of those sentenced for indictable offences were females (15%) 
than males (85%), and this is a lower proportion of females than among those 
sentenced for all offences (27%). Overall 13% of women sentenced were sentenced 
for indictable offences, compared with 29% of men.  
A different distribution of sentences is observed between male and female offenders 
for indictable offences (Figure 5.23). In the latest year, a custodial sentence was the 
most common sentencing outcome given to male offenders for indictable offences 
(given to 28% of male offenders compared with 15% of female offenders), while this 
was a community sentence for female offenders (26%, compared with 22% of male 
offenders). A consistently higher proportion of female offenders received conditional 
discharges (21%) when compared with male offenders (12%). 
The use of community sentences fell as a proportion of all sentences for indictable 
offences between 2009 and 2015, with a decrease of 11 percentage points for males 
and 13 percentage points for females, whilst there was an increase in suspended 
sentences over the same period (by 6 percentage points for males and 7 percentage 
points for females). The observed trend may be due to changes in legislation109 and 
judicial discretion as well as changes in the mix of indictable offences offenders were 
sentenced for. 
 
 
                                                          
109 The LASPO Act, passed on 3rd December 2012 reintroduced the suspended sentence order without 
requirements. Furthermore, it modified the length of the period of imprisonment that can be suspended. 
It is now possible for courts to suspend sentences of up to two years in prison (instead of 12 months). 
The Criminal Justice and Immigration Act (CJIA) in 2008 restricted the use of community sentences to 
imprisonable offences. 
 

 
 
83 
 
Figure 5.23: Proportion of offenders sentenced for indictable offences at all 
courts, by sentencing outcome and sex, 2005 to 2015 
Females 
 
Males 
 
 
 
 
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Proportion of offenders sentenced (%)
Female Immediate custody
Female Suspended sentence
Female Community sentence
Female Fine
Female Other disposals
LASPO act
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Proportion of offenders sentenced (%)
Male Immediate custody
Male Suspended sentence
Male Community sentence
Male Fine
Male Other disposals
LASPO act

 
 
84 
 
Offence Groups  
The different distribution of sentences for indictable offences between male and female 
offenders can partly be attributed to the type of offences they commit.  
Although theft offences were the most common type of indictable offence for which 
both male and female offenders were sentenced, they accounted for a far higher 
proportion of females sentenced, one third (34%) of males compared with one half 
(51%) of females in the latest year. The proportion of female offenders sentenced for 
a theft offence has increased over the last decade while remaining broadly stable for 
male offenders over the same period. Male offenders were more likely than female 
offenders to be sentenced for violence against the person, sexual and drug offences 
while female offenders were proportionally more likely to be sentenced for fraud 
offences. A smaller proportion of females received an immediate custodial sentence 
compared with males for all offence groups. For further discussion of how different 
specific offences have different profiles by sex, see Chapter 8: Offence Analysis. 
Immediate Custody  
The custody rate (proportion of offenders sentenced to immediate custody) has been 
higher for male offenders in each year between 2005 and 2015, for both summary and 
indictable offences (Figure 5.24). In the latest year, the custody rate for male offenders 
sentenced for an indictable offence was almost double that of female offenders (male 
28%, female 15%), and for summary offences it was 7 times higher (male 2.2%, female 
0.3%). (A similar result could be seen when the odds of imprisonment for males and 
females under similar criminal circumstances were compared in the accompanying 
paper: Associations between being male or female and being sentenced to prison in 
England and Wales in 2015.) 
Figure 5.24: Custody rate, by offence type and sex, 2005 to 2015 
 
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Custody rate
Indictable female
Indictable male
Summary female
Summary male

 
 
85 
 
Over the past ten years, both male and female offenders have more commonly been 
given short sentences - determinate custodial sentences of less than 12 months; 
however the proportion of offenders given these shorter sentences has been higher 
for female offenders. In 2015, short sentences accounted for around three quarters 
(76%) of all female offenders given custodial sentences, compared with around 3 in 5 
(63%) for male offenders. 
The higher proportion of short sentences for female offenders means that by 
comparison, sentences of 12 months and over account for a greater share of 
sentences for male offenders compared with females. This is also reflected in a higher 
average custodial sentence length (ACSL) for male offenders (male 16.9 months, 
female 9.5 months in 2015). The proportion of male offenders receiving a sentence of 
12 months or over has increased over the past ten years (from 32% to 37%) while 
remaining broadly stable for female offenders over the same period (fluctuating around 
25%). 
In each year between 2005 and 2015, male offenders had a higher ACSL than female 
offenders (Figure 5.25). Over this period the ACSL for male offenders has increased, 
while the ACSL for female offenders remained broadly stable. In 2015, male offenders 
had a higher ACSL than female offenders across the vast majority of indictable and 
summary offence groups. The exceptions were violence against the person offences 
(males 22.8 months, females 24.9 months) and criminal damage and arson (males 8.3 
months, females 17.2 months) – and the ACSL for criminal damage and arson has 
been consistently higher for females compared with males over the last decade. The 
differences are likely to be a consequence of the type of offences that were committed 
by male and female offenders, as well as the mitigating and aggravating factors that 
affect each case.  
Figure 5.25: Average custodial sentence length for offenders sentenced to 
immediate custody, by sex, 2005 to 2015 
 
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
ACSL (months)
Female
Male

 
 
86 
 
The overall increase in male ACSL is in part caused by changes in legislation110 and 
in part by the impact of sexual offences. More male offenders are being sentenced for 
sexual offences, and these sentences are getting longer (with the ACSL increasing by 
20 months), which is driving up the overall average. The largest increase in ACSL 
within this offence group was for rape of a female child under 13 by a male, for which 
ACSL has more than doubled and the number sentenced to immediate custody is four 
times higher than in 2005.  
The total number of males sentenced to immediate custody for sexual offences in 2015 
was around 4,000, up from 2,700 in 2005; this change could be related to improved 
reporting and recording of sexual offences, as well as an increased public focus. The 
number of females sentenced to immediate custody for sexual offences was much 
smaller - 57 in 2015, up from 23 in 2005. 
Appeals111 
Where offenders feel they have not received justice, they are able to appeal to a higher 
court: for magistrates’ courts, the Crown Court; for the Crown Court, the Court of 
Appeal Criminal Division. There were 11,000 appeal cases112, brought by persons 
challenging magistrates’ court decisions, dealt with by the Crown Court in 2015. Out 
of these appeal cases, 84% related to cases with male appellants, a proportion that 
has remained broadly stable over the past five years. The number of cases appealed 
to the Crown Court increased by 2% in the latest year. This increase is driven by an 
increase in male appeal cases of 4%, while female appeal cases reduced by 6% - this 
slightly reduced the proportion of female appeal cases by 1 percentage point in the 
latest year. Over the past five years the number of appeals has reduced by 19%, driven 
by a decrease in both male and female cases (by 20% and 14% respectively).  
The proportion of appeals that were allowed, dismissed or had a different result113 have 
remained stable over the past five years for both male and female appeals. Over the 
past five years the proportion of allowed appeals for female cases has remained 
between 45% and 47%, 3 to 5 percentage points higher than the proportion of allowed 
appeals for male cases. The proportion of dismissed appeals has been 3 to 5 
percentage points lower for female cases (between 26% and 29%) relative to male 
                                                          
110 The LASPO Act, passed on 3rd December 2012, which abolished IPPs and Extended Sentences for 
Public Protection (EPPs) and replaced them with new Extended Determinate Sentences (EDSs). EDSs 
are included within the ACSL calculation, whilst IPPs and EPPs were previously excluded.  
The introduction of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act (CJIA) in 2008 restricted the use of 
indeterminate sentences for Public Protection (IPPs), which as mentioned are excluded from ASCL. 
Following this, there has been an increase in long determinate sentences (defined as for 10 years or 
more). Further legislative changes have made sentence lengths longer for certain offences – for 
example, the powers to sentence offenders convicted of a third domestic burglary offence to a 
mandatory minimum sentence of three years custody, as introduced by the Crime (Sentences) Act 1997 
for offences committed after 30th November 1999, have been used increasingly in the last decade.  
111 This section has been produced from the same data source as Case Management – see that section 
for further details. 
112 This analysis on appeals only include appeals relating to person and also excludes appeal cases 
with mixed defendants due to the low number of mixed case appeals over the past five years. In 2015, 
there were 130 appeals relating to companies, cases with unknown sex of the defendant(s) and cases 
with a mix of male and female defendants – this accounted for 1% of the total number of appeals 
(113,000). 
113 These include cases abandoned in court or before court appearance as well as cases remitted back 
to the magistrates’ courts. 

 
 
87 
 
cases (between 31% and 32%). It should be noted that appeals can be made against 
a variety of decisions. The difference in proportions between allowed and dismissed 
appeals could be driven by differences in the offence mix between male and female 
defendants. 
Although the number of appeals have reduced over the last five years for both male 
and female cases, the number of convictions114 at the magistrates’ court has shown 
different trends. Male convictions at the magistrates’ court have reduced by 16% whilst 
female convictions have increased by 4%. In 2015, females accounted for 28% of all 
known person115 convictions at the magistrates’ court, a slight increase of 4 percentage 
points since 2010, as discussed in the convictions section above. Caution should be 
taken when directly comparing appeals with magistrate court convictions116, however; 
although there has been an increase in female magistrates’ court convictions, this is 
mainly due to an increase in those for TV licence evasion. Some offences will have a 
higher probability of being appealed than others meaning an increase in magistrates’ 
convictions should not directly result in an increase in appeals. 
Ethnicity and sex 
The most recent Statistics on Race and the Criminal Justice System 2014 report117 
found that Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) groups appeared to be over-
represented at most stages throughout the CJS relative to the population, compared 
with the White ethnic group. Similar trends tend to be seen in 2015, for both male and 
female offenders; the associations between sex and ethnicity and outcomes remain 
when both factors are considered simultaneously, as discussed in the accompanying 
paper: Associations between being male or female and being sentenced to prison in 
England and Wales in 2015118. 
In 2015 87% of females prosecuted for indictable offences119 were white and 13% 
BAME. The proportion of BAME males was higher at 20% of all males prosecuted. 
Overall, in 2015 female BAME offenders had a lower conviction ratio (BAME 78%, 
White 83%) but higher custody rate (BAME 18% White 16%) for indictable offences 
than white female offenders. However, the same trends were observed for male BAME 
offenders (conviction ratio BAME 79%, White 84%; custody rate BAME 31% White 
                                                          
114 Figures on convictions are counted on a defendant basis and are taken from the magistrates’ court 
data tool -https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/criminal-justice-system-statistics-quarterly-
december-2015 
115 Defendants with an unknown sex accounted for 7% of all person convictions at the magistrates’ court 
in 2015. 
116 Appeals are counted on a case basis whilst convictions at magistrates’ court are counted on a 
defendant basis. Data on magistrates’ court convictions and appeals at the Crown Court are sourced 
from difference administrative databases and therefore will have discrepancies in recording between the 
two systems.  
117 Statistics on Race and the Criminal Justice System 2014 can be found here: 
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/race-and-the-criminal-justice-system-2014 
118 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/479874/analysis-of-
ethnicity-and-custodial-sentences.pdf  
119 Summary offences are excluded as the ethnicity data is of insufficient quality and completeness  

 
 
88 
 
28%). Earlier research120,121 demonstrated that there was an association between 
being from a BAME background and being sentenced to custody.  
While proportionally more female, white offenders received a conditional or absolute 
discharge (white 22%, BAME 19%), proportionally more female BAME offenders 
received a suspended sentence (white 16%, BAME 19%) or immediate custody (white 
16%, BAME 18%). Male, white offenders also received a conditional or absolute 
discharge proportionally more often (white 14%, BAME 10%), however, white males 
were also more likely to receive a suspended sentence (white 15%, BAME 13%) while 
males from BAME backgrounds were more likely to receive immediate custody (white 
28%, BAME 31%) or a fine (white 17%, BAME 20%). 
The average custodial sentence length was 5 months longer for BAME females (14.7 
months) than for White female offenders (9.6 months), and 6 months longer for BAME 
males (24.2 months) than for White males (18.1 months). These differences have 
changed very little since 2010, although the ACSL rose for both White and BAME 
males. (It remained relatively stable for white females and was more volatile for BAME 
females.) This is in agreement with Statistics on Race and the Criminal Justice System 
2014, which found that since 2010, average custodial sentence lengths have risen for 
all ethnic groups, but remained consistently higher for all BAME groups compared with 
White offenders. Furthermore, over the last five years the ACSL for most offence 
groups was higher for male and female BAME offenders than their White counterparts, 
with the largest difference being ACSLs for violence against the person offences being 
around 12 months higher for BAME offenders of both sexes. Two exceptions were 
sexual offences, where the ACSL was longer for White male offenders (White 63.0 
months, BAME 58.8 months), and criminal damage and arson, where the ACSL was 
around 2 months shorter for male and 4 months shorter for female BAME offenders.  
Relative rate index 
In order to better consider where any difference in the CJS process by sex arises, from 
prosecution through to sentencing, we have constructed a simple relative rate index 
model. A relative rate index (RRI) calculation122123 allows for the identification of 
specific stages, decision points or junctures in the CJS where disproportionality 
emerges. Simply put, the RRI is a means of comparing the rates of CJS contact 
experienced by different groups. A rate is defined as the count of persons experiencing 
an event or outcome out of the total number of people who were ‘at-risk’ for 
                                                          
120 Associations between police-recorded ethnic background and being sentenced to prison in England 
and Wales, as published in Statistics on Race and the Criminal Justice System 2014. Available here: 
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/479874/analysis-of-
ethnicity-and-custodial-sentences.pdf 
121 Also see the recent publication ‘Associations between ethnic background and being sentenced to 
prison in the Crown Court in England and Wales in 2015’, available from 
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/associations-between-ethnic-background-and-being-
sentenced-to-prison-in-the-crown-court-in-england-and-wales-in-2015 for disproportionality in the CJS 
with emphasis on ethnicity. 
122 See technical documentation for details on how the relative rate index and its statistical significance 
is calculated. 
123 Also see the recent publication ‘Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic disproportionality in the Criminal 
Justice System in England and Wales’ (see https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/black-asian-
and-minority-ethnic-disproportionality-in-the-criminal-justice-system-in-england-and-wales ) for 
disproportionality in the CJS with emphasis on ethnicity  

 
 
89 
 
experiencing the event or outcome. Determining groups ‘at-risk’ is pivotal for 
comparison: for example not all the population is ‘at-risk’ of a custodial sentence, only 
persons who were sentenced at a criminal court. By using an RRI calculation we can 
see the changes in proportions at each stage in the process separately. 
Rates experienced by females relative to males were compared with determine 
whether they were significantly different from one another. A RRI value of one indicates 
no disproportionality. A value over one indicated females have a higher likelihood than 
males of receiving a certain outcome, a value below one indicates a lower likelihood. 
Defendants can either be summonsed to court, or they can be arrested by the police 
and remanded in custody or bailed, depending on the type and seriousness of the 
offence. Females were more likely to be summonsed than males (by the equivalent of 
141 females to 100 males, an index of 1.41), while males were more likely to be 
arrested and bailed or held in custody (by the equivalent of 30 females to 100 males 
being arrested and held in custody, an index of 0.3) (Figure 5.26). This may partly be 
due to the lower proportion of more serious, indictable offences committed by females 
compared with males, which would warrant an arrest and potentially custodial 
supervision. Furthermore, analysis124 showed that females were significantly less likely 
to be arrested and held in custody for any offence type (RRI between 0.16 and 0.79). 
Figure 5.26: Relative rate index of the remand status of females versus males at 
first court contact, 2015  
 
 
 
                                                          
124 Please refer to the tables published alongside this bulletin for results not shown in the figures. 
1.41
0.49
0.30
Summonsed
Arrested and bailed
Arrested and held in custody

 
 
90 
 
Defendants are then proceeded against at the magistrates’ court. Prosecutions of 
females were slightly more likely to be terminated early, while males were more likely 
to be dismissed or discharged (Figure 5.27). While females were more likely to be 
found guilty at the magistrates’ court, a greater proportion of males were committed for 
trial to the Crown Court. This may in part be a result of women committing 
proportionally more summary offences which are tried at the magistrates’ court (in the 
latest year 87% of females and 71% of males were prosecuted for summary offences). 
Furthermore, while indictable only offences are tried at the Crown Court, it lies within 
the magistrates’ discretion to decide if a triable either way case can be tried at the 
magistrates’ court, and will depend on the seriousness of the offence committed and 
the complexity surrounding the offence. Further analysis showed that females were 
significantly less likely to be committed for trial to the Crown Court compared with 
males for triable either way offences (RRI of 0.7). 
Figure 5.27: Relative rate index of females versus males following prosecution 
at the magistrates’ court, 2015 
 
 
 
 
1.04
0.33
0.57
0.32
1.07
Proceedings
terminated early
Discharged at
committal
proceedings
Dismissed (found
not guilty after
summary trial
Committed for trial
Found guilty at
magistrates' court

 
 
91 
 
After being convicted the offender is sentenced. Females were more likely than males 
to receive fines, but males were more likely to receive custodial or community 
sentences, among those sentenced (Figure 5.28).  
Figure 5.28: Relative rate index for females versus males at sentencing, 2015 
 
 
 
 
1.01
1.00
1.26
0.54
0.51
0.24
Convictions
Sentences
Fine
Community
sentence
Suspended
sentence
Immediate
custody

 
 
92 
 
A slightly different picture emerges when controlling for the specific offence type. 
Women were more likely than men to receive a suspended sentence for indictable only 
and triable either way offences, but were less likely to receive immediate custody 
regardless of offence type (Figure 5.29). The large disproportionality in indictable 
suspended sentences stems largely from the high proportion of women convicted for 
indictable miscellaneous crimes against society (42% of indictable only convictions) 
compared with men (14%), for which women were more likely to receive a suspended 
sentence (50% of sentencing outcomes) compared with men (24%)125.  
Females were more likely to receive fines for summary non-motoring offences, which 
may be explained by the large proportion of women prosecuted and sentenced for TV 
licence evasion within this offence group. There is slight disproportionality in the 
likelihood of fines being given to males and females for summary motoring offences. 
Figure 5.29: Relative rate index for females versus males at sentencing, by 
offence type, 2015126 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                          
125 Drawn from the Criminal Justice Statistics Quarterly: December 2015 bulletin. 
126 Due to small numbers the relative rate index for indictable only fines is omitted. 
 
0.66
0.56
0.10
0.13
3.37
1.13
0.19
0.59
1.17
1.16
0.27
0.76
0.85
1.32
1.02
Indictable only
Triable either way
Summary non-
motoring
Summary motoring
Immediate custody
Suspended sentence
Community sentence
Fine

 
 
93 
 
Chapter 6: Offender Characteristics 
This chapter explores the characteristics of offenders; for this bulletin, specifically their 
offending histories and patterns of reoffending. Information on offending history has 
been derived from the data underlying the Ministry of Justice publication Criminal 
Justice Statistics: Quarterly: December 2015. The statistics on proven reoffending 
represent further breakdowns of the Ministry of Justice publication Proven reoffending 
statistics January 2013 to December 2014127. 
Offending histories 
First Time Offenders  
Having a criminal history can influence the type of sanction and sentence an offender 
receives. A first time offender128 is an offender who has been arrested by police in 
England or Wales; and who has received a first conviction, caution or youth caution for 
any offence129 recorded on the Police National Computer. 
First time offenders comprised 24% of the total number of offenders convicted or 
cautioned in 2015. This compares with 34% in 2005, and the proportion has decreased 
steadily over this ten year period. Of all female offenders cautioned or convicted in 
2005, half were first time offenders (51%) – this decreased to just over a third (35%) 
in 2015. Of all male offenders cautioned or convicted in 2005, 3 in 10 (30%) were first 
time offenders. This decreased to around 1 in 5 (21%) in 2015. 
In 2015, females130 made up 1 in 4 (25%) first time offenders into the criminal justice 
system and around 1 in 7 (14%) offenders cautioned or sentenced for a further offence. 
There has been little change in this trend in the ten years since 2005 (Figure 6.01).  
 
 
 
 
 
                                                          
127 Proven reoffending, 2014: 
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/proven-reoffending-statistics-quarterly-january-to-december-
2014 
128 The definition of “first time offender” is different from “first time entrant”. A first time entrant (FTE) to 
the criminal justice system is an offender residing in England and Wales at the time of the offence, who 
has been recorded on the Police National Computer (PNC) by an English or Welsh police force as 
having received their first conviction, caution or youth caution. Published figures for first time entrants 
exclude any offenders who, at the time of their first conviction or caution, were resident outside England 
or Wales. Offenders who had a conviction or caution outside England and Wales and who were arrested 
by a police force in England and Wales would be counted as a First Time Offenders (FTO). 
129 Where there were multiple offences on the same occasion, only the primary offence as recorded on 
the Police National Computer would be counted. 
130 Offenders whose sex was unknown were excluded from all analyses in this section, which might lead 
to very small inconsistencies with other published statistics on offenders. Between 2005 and 2015, 
offenders of unknown sex comprised less than 1% of offenders. 

 
 
94 
 
Figure 6.01: Number of cautioning and sentencing occasions for first time 
offenders and offenders previously cautioned or sentenced, by sex, 2005 to 2015 
 
 
More than half (58%) of offences for which female first time offenders were cautioned 
or convicted in 2015 were summary offences (including summary motoring). This was 
slightly higher than for males (55%). This proportion was broadly stable for males from 
2005 (52%) up to the current year, whereas for females it has steadily increased, from 
43% in 2005.  
A higher proportion of female first time offenders have been cautioned or convicted for 
theft offences compared with males over the past decade, although the proportion for 
both sexes has declined. In 2015, 19% of females were cautioned or convicted as first 
time offenders for theft offences, compared with 11% of males. This represents a 14 
percentage point decrease for females since 2005, compared with a 5 percentage 
point decrease for males. In contrast, a higher proportion of male than female first time 
offenders were cautioned or convicted for drug offences over the last decade (11% 
and 5% respectively in 2015). The greater tendency for female first time offenders to 
be cautioned or convicted for theft aligns with trends for offenders more generally, as 
discussed in Chapter 4: Police Activity and Chapter 5: Defendants. 
 
 
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
700,000
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Number of cautioning and sentencing 
occasions
Male First time offenders
Males with previous sanctions
Female First time offenders
Females with previous sanctions

 
 
95 
 
Offenders with 15 or more previous cautions or convictions 
The proportion of offenders with 15 or more previous cautions or convictions has 
increased to 23% in 2015, up from 13% in 2005. 
In 2015, female offenders comprised 11% of the total number of offenders previously 
cautioned or convicted 15 or more times; an increase of two percentage points 
compared with 2005. Three in five (59%) of the offences committed by females with 
15 or more previous cautions or convictions in 2015 were theft offences, a proportion 
which has been slowly increasing since 2005, when 47% of offences committed were 
theft offences. This compares with two in five (39%) offences being theft for male 
offenders with 15 or more previous cautions or convictions (Figure 6.02).  
Figure 6.02: Proportion of the offences committed by offenders who have 15 or 
more previous cautions or convictions, by offence group and sex, 2015 
 
 
 
 
 
0%
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Violence against the person
Sexual offences
Robbery
Theft offences
Criminal damage and arson
Drug offences
Possession of weapons
Public order offences
Miscellaneous crimes against society
Fraud offences
Summary offences excluding motoring
Summary motoring offences
Proportion of offenders
Female
Male

 
 
96 
 
Offenders receiving cautions 
The proportion of all female first time offenders receiving cautions has declined over 
the last ten years, from 76% in 2003 to 59% in 2015. Over the last ten years, there has 
also been a decline in the proportion of all male first time offenders receiving cautions 
from around 61% to 49%. (See Chapter 4: Police Activity for consideration of the 
factors underpinning the decline in out of court disposals.) Juvenile offenders were 
more likely than adult offenders to receive a caution rather than a conviction for their 
first offence, with females (75%) more likely to receive a youth caution than males 
(64%) in 2015.  
Looking more closely at male and female offenders cautioned in 2015 for an indictable 
offence, 39% of all females had one or more previous caution or conviction compared 
with 51% of all males. This difference could be due to the differences between the 
types of offences that males and females commit.  
Offenders receiving sentences 
Of all female offenders receiving a sentence in 2015 for an indictable offence, 84% 
had at least one previous caution or conviction. For males this was slightly higher, at 
89%.  
One reason for this is that a larger proportion of male offenders sentenced for an 
indictable offence had 15 or more previous sanctions (37%, compared with 31% of 
female offenders). The proportion of females and males sentenced for an indictable 
offence who had 15 or more previous cautions or convictions has increased over time: 
in 2005, 16% of females and 26% of males sentenced had 15 or more previous 
sanctions. Even though a higher proportion of males than females who were sentenced 
for indictable offences had 15 or more previous cautions or convictions in each year of 
the last decade, the proportion of females has risen to a greater extent (14 percentage 
points compared with 11). 
Over the last decade, the proportion of males and females sentenced for indictable 
offences who had between 1 and 14 previous sanctions also decreased. In 2005, two-
thirds (67%) of females sentenced had between 1 and 14 previous sanctions 
compared with 64% of males. This decreased to 53% and 52% respectively in 2015. 
During the same period, the proportion of offenders sentenced for indictable offences 
who were first time offenders remained broadly stable for both females and males; with 
16% and 11% respectively in this category. 
As with indictable offences, females sentenced for summary offences were less likely 
than males to have been sanctioned previously. Of all female offenders receiving a 
sentence in 2015 for a summary offence, 64% had at least one previous caution or 
conviction, compared with 80% of males.  
 
 

 
 
97 
 
The percentage of female and male offenders sentenced for summary offences who 
had 15 or more previous convictions or cautions has fluctuated, but rose between 2005 
and 2015. In 2005, 7% of females and 14% of males sentenced for summary offences 
had 15 or more previous sanctions; which rose to 10% and 20% respectively in 2015 
(Figure 6.03). In contrast, the proportion of female and male offenders sentenced for 
summary offences who had between 1 and 14 previous convictions or cautions 
fluctuated but decreased over the last decade: for female offenders, falling by 2 
percentage points to 55% in 2015, and for male offenders, falling by 5 percentage 
points to 60%. (The proportion of those sentenced for summary offences who were 
first time offenders fluctuated over the decade, but with no meaningful net change.) 
Figure 6.03: Proportion of the offenders receiving sentences, by their number of 
previous cautions or convictions, offence type and sex, 2015 
 
 
 
 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Male
Female
Male
Female
Indictable
Summary
2015
Proportion of offenders

 
 
98 
 
In 2015, the most common disposal for offenders convicted of an indictable offence 
with no previous sanctions was a community sentence for both males (33%) and 
females (29%). However, males were much more likely to receive an immediate 
custodial sentence (25%) than females (14%). In comparison, a higher proportion of 
females received suspended sentences and conditional discharges compared with 
males (Figure 6.04).  
Figure 6.04: Proportion of the offenders sentenced for an indictable offence who 
have no previous sanctions, by their sentencing outcome and sex, 2015 
 
In 2015, the most common disposal for offenders convicted of an indictable offence 
with 15 or more previous sanctions was immediate custody for both males and 
females, reflecting that repeat offenders are more likely to get an immediate custodial 
sentence. A higher proportion of males (42%) with 15 or more previous sanctions 
received an immediate custodial sentence compared with females (33%). In general, 
females were relatively more likely to receive conditional discharges and males to 
receive immediate custody, compared with members of the other sex with similar 
numbers of previous sanctions. The difference in sentencing between males and 
females is most likely due to the different nature and seriousness of the offences being 
committed, as discussed in Chapter 5: Defendants. 
 
 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Community
sentence
Immediate
custody
Fully
suspended
Fine
Conditional
discharge
Other
Proportion of offenders
Males
Females

 
 
99 
 
Sentence length and number of previous custodial sentences for offenders sentenced 
to immediate custody 
Of those sentenced to immediate custody, one third (31%) of females were handed 
their first immediate custodial sentence, compared with 27% of males in 2015. 
Offenders with between one and 14 previous immediate custodial sentences 
represented higher proportions of males than females given an immediate custodial 
sentence (59% and 55% respectively). Those with 15 or more previous immediate 
custodial sentences represented the same proportion of females as males (each 15%) 
who were given an immediate custodial sentence in 2015. 
In 2015, female offenders who were sentenced to immediate custody were more likely 
to be handed a custodial sentence of fewer than 6 months compared with males, 
regardless of whether or not the sentence given was a first custodial outcome (Figure 
6.05). This was particularly true for female offenders who had 1 to 14 previous 
custodial sentences, with 80% receiving a sentence of fewer than 6 months compared 
with 56% of male offenders; a 24 percentage point difference. For offenders who had 
15 or more previous custodial sentences, 92% of female offenders received sentences 
fewer than 6 months compared with 77% of male offenders.  
Half of female offenders who were sentenced to immediate custody for the first time 
(51%) were handed a sentence of between 6 months and less than 4 years. A similar 
proportion was observed for male offenders (52%). A lower proportion of female first 
time offenders (9%) than males (17%) were given sentences of more than 4 years; 
whereas 41% of female offenders were given sentences of six months or less 
compared with 31% of male offenders. 
Figure 6.05: Proportion of the offenders sentenced to immediate custody, by 
their number of previous immediate custodial sentences, sentence length and 
sex, 2015 
 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Males
Females
Males
Females
Males
Females
First custodial sentence
1 to 14 previous custodial
sentences
15 or more previous
custodial sentences
Proportion of offenders

 
 
100 
 
The majority of previous immediate custodial sentences for male and female offenders 
were less than 6 months, irrespective of the number of previous custodial sentences 
they held. This was particularly the case for female offenders who had 15 or more 
previous custodial sentences, where 91% of their previous sentences were of less than 
6 months; compared with 79% of male offenders with 15 or more previous custodial 
sentences. The previous sentences of female offenders were more likely than those of 
male offenders with similar numbers of prior custodial sentences to be to 6 months or 
less, and less likely to have been either between 6 months and 4 years or to 4 years 
or more. 
A higher proportion of previous immediate custodial sentences for female offenders 
who had 1 to 14 previous custodial sentences were of between 6 months and less than 
4 years than for females who had 15 or more previous custodial sentences (15% and 
9% respectively). The same pattern was true for male offenders, with 32% of 
immediate custodial sentences for those who had 1 to 14 previous custodial sentences 
having been between 6 months and less than 4 years; compared with 20% for male 
offenders with 15 or more previous custodial sentences. 
Figure 6.06: Proportion of previous immediate custodial sentences for those 
who had at least one previous immediate custodial sentence and who were given 
an immediate custodial sentence in 2015, by number and sentence length of 
previous immediate custodial sentences and sex 
 
 
 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Males
Females
Males
Females
1 to 14 previous custodial sentences
15 or more previous custodial sentences
Proportion of offenders

 
 
101 
 
Proven Reoffending 
This section looks at proven reoffending figures for offenders in England and Wales 
who were released from custody, received a non-custodial conviction at court or 
received a caution, reprimand or warning between January and December 2014. A 
proven reoffence is any offence committed in a one year follow-up period that resulted 
in a court conviction, caution, reprimand or warning within the one year follow-up or 
within a further six month waiting period to allow the offence to be proven in court. This 
section looks at proven reoffending figures for adult offenders.  
In the 2014 cohort131,132, 26% of male offenders reoffended within the follow-up period 
compared with 18% of females. This difference has been relatively stable, decreasing 
by 1 percentage point for both sexes since 2010. The average number of reoffences 
per reoffender, however, increased by 10% for males and 14% for females since 2010. 
This resulted in a shift to females having a higher number of reoffences in 2014 than 
males (3.24 versus 3.18).  
Despite increases in average numbers of reoffences per reoffender since 2010, the 
overall volumes of reoffences and reoffenders have declined for both males and 
females. There has been a decline of 12% (to 304,000) and 21% (to 95,000) 
respectively in males, and 4% (to 49,000) and 16% (to 15,000) respectively in females 
(Figure 6.07). 
Figure 6.07: Numbers of proven reoffenders and reoffences, by sex, 2010-2014  
 
 
 
                                                          
125 Referred to as ‘the 2014 cohort’ within the text. More recent data are not available because proven 
reoffending is measured in a follow-up period. 
132 Offenders with missing sex information are excluded from the proven reoffending cohort. 
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Number of proven reoffenders or 
reoffences
Female reoffences
Male reoffences
Female reoffenders
Male reoffenders

 
 
102 
 
Proven reoffending by age 
Among adult males, the proportion of reoffenders who reoffended within the 2014 
cohort was highest for those aged 18-20 (31%). It was lower for those aged 21-24 
(28%) and remained broadly similar to this for those aged 25-39, following which 
reoffending proportions fell with age, reaching 14% at age 50+.  
Among adult females, however, the proportion of reoffenders among those aged 18-
20 was only 17%, and peaked at 22% among those aged 30-34. Following the male 
trend, the reoffending proportion then fell with age, to 10% at age 50+ (Figure 6.08). 
Figure 6.08: Percentage of proven reoffenders who reoffended, by age and sex, 
2014 
 
 
 
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
18 to 20
years
21 to 24
years
25 to 29
years
30 to 34
years
35 to 39
years
40 to 44
years
45 to 49
years
50+ years
Percentage of proven reoffenders who 
reoffended (%)
Female
Male

 
 
103 
 
Despite the age 18-20 group having the largest proportion of reoffenders among 
males, the age 30-34 group had the greatest average number of reoffences per male 
reoffender in 2014 (3.58) (Figure 6.09). This was also seen among female reoffenders, 
with an average of 3.65 reoffences per offender aged 30-34 years. Male reoffenders 
had higher average numbers of proven reoffences than females in the older age 
ranges (e.g. 2.99 versus 2.60 respectively for those aged 50+).  
Figure 6.09: Average number of proven reoffences per reoffender, by sex and 
age, 2014  
 
 
 
 
0
1
2
3
4
18 to 20
years
21 to 24
years
25 to 29
years
30 to 34
years
35 to 39
years
40 to 44
years
45 to 49
years
50+ years
Average number of proven reoffences 
per reoffender
Female
Male

 
 
104 
 
Proven reoffending by index offence group  
The original offence that leads to an offender being included in the offender cohort 
is called the index offence. From 2010 to 2014, theft and robbery were the two index 
offence groups with the highest proportions of adult offenders who reoffended, for both 
sexes. Over the five year period, theft was consistently the index offence group with 
the highest proportion of reoffenders among males, with 46% of offenders from this 
index offence group reoffending in 2014 (Figure 6.10). This is also true for females, 
with a lower reoffending rate than for males (33% in 2014); apart from in 2010 when 
the rate of reoffending among females was higher for robbery.  
There was a higher proportion of male than female offenders who reoffended in 2014 
for all index offence groups. However, for some index offence groups, this difference 
was considerably greater than others. For example, the proportion of reoffenders 
among males with an index offence of violence against the person was more than 
double the female proportion, with 23% of male offenders and only 10% of female 
offenders reoffending within this group. The equivalent proportions for fraud and 
summary motoring offences among males were also more than double those for 
females, at 13% of males and 6% of females reoffending for both offences. 
Figure 6.10: Percentage of proven reoffenders, by index offence group and sex, 
2014  
 
 
In general, the more previous known offences that an offender had, the more likely 
they were to reoffend. In 2014, of those with 11 or more previous offences, nearly half 
of both male and female adults reoffended (45% male; 47% female). In comparison, 
only 8% of adult males with no previous offences went on to reoffend, and only 6% of 
adult females.  
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Criminal damage and
arson
Drug
Fraud
Miscellaneous crimes
against society
Other
Possession of
weapons
Public order
Robbery
Sexual
Summary motoring
Summary non-
motoring
Theft
Violence against the
person
Proportion of proven reoffenders (%)
Female
Male

 
 
105 
 
There was a similar trend for the number of previous custodial sentences; the more 
custodial sentences an offender had had, the more likely they were to have reoffended 
(in both sexes). In 2014, of those with 11 or more previous custodial sentences, 78% 
of males and 68% of females reoffended, versus 17% of males and 13% of females 
who had no previous custodial sentences.  
In 2014, for all types of index disposal (i.e. the sentencing outcome for the offence 
resulting in their inclusion in the offender cohort), excluding custody, a higher 
proportion of male adults than female adults reoffended. For absolute and conditional 
discharges, the proportion of male offenders that went on to reoffend was 10 
percentage points higher than the corresponding proportion for females (33% versus 
23%), and for fine disposals it was 8 percentage points higher (29% versus 21%). For 
custodial sentences however, males were less likely to reoffend than females (45% 
versus 48% respectively). 
Figure 6.11: Percentage of proven reoffenders by index disposal and sex, 2014 
 
 
 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Absolute/Conditional Discharge
Caution
Court Order
Custody
Fine
Other
Proportion of offenders who reoffend
Female
Male

 
 
106 
 
When continuing to look more closely at an index disposal breakdown by custodial 
sentence length, females were slightly more likely to reoffend than males following 
sentences of less than 12 months (61% versus 60%), whereas males were more likely 
than females to reoffend when given longer sentences than this. There was a wider 
gap between male and female reoffending proportions following long custodial 
sentences; and notably no female reoffenders following sentences of over 4 years133, 
compared with 16% among male offenders with equivalent sentence lengths. 
For serious reoffending (indictable only offences), the volume of reoffences and 
offenders decreased between 2010 and 2014 for both males (22% and 18% 
respectively) and females (16% and 18% respectively). Within the 2014 cohort, 0.9% 
of males and 0.3% of females reoffended seriously, which has remained stable for both 
sexes since 2010. The number of serious reoffences per reoffender has also remained 
stable at 0.04 reoffences for males, and 0.02 reoffences for females. 
 
 
                                                          
133 The ’12 months or more’ group excludes indeterminate sentences for public protection and life 
sentence prisoners.  

 
 
107 
 
Other characteristics – previous research 
Statistics on Women and the Criminal Justice System 2013 
In Statistics on Women and the Criminal Justice System 2013, we presented analysis 
on the prevalence of particular mitigating and aggravating factors by sex, and on their 
association with sentencing outcomes, for specific offence groups. This analysis was 
based on the 2013 Crown Court Sentencing Survey, which was a survey given to all 
judges (or other sentencers) sitting in the Crown Court, for them to complete every 
time a sentence is passed. 
Key findings from this analysis included that, for the two offence categories of ‘theft, 
dishonesty and fraud’, and ‘assault and public order offences’, female offenders were 
generally more likely than males to have mitigating factors applied to their sentence 
and males were generally more likely than females to have aggravating factors applied. 
For female offenders, the predominant mitigating factors included the appearance of 
genuine remorse, the age of the offender, the offender having caring responsibilities 
and a lack of previous relevant convictions. Male offenders were less likely to have any 
of these taken into account, especially in relation to having caring responsibilities. The 
aggravating factors that appeared for male offenders included the presence of 
previous relevant convictions, the location of the offence, being a member of a group 
or gang and evidence of some degree of pre-planning or pre-meditation. All of these 
were less likely to appear for females, although threatened or actual use of weapons 
(or equivalent) appeared for a similar proportion of both genders. The differing use of 
mitigating and aggravating factors by sex contributed to differing custody rates, with 
males being far more likely to be given an immediate custodial sentence than females, 
although this could also partly be explained by the specific offences committed by 
males and females. 
We also included analysis of employment, income and benefits before and after 
conviction / caution / release from prison. This was based on an administrative data 
share between the Ministry of Justice (MoJ), the Department for Work and Pensions 
(DWP) and Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC), which took place in 2013, 
linking offender data to P45 employment data and benefit data for 4.3 million offenders 
who received at least one caution or conviction for a recordable offence in England 
and Wales between 2000 and February 2013. 
In 2010/11, female offenders were more likely than male offenders to be on benefits 
before and after their caution, conviction or prison sentence, whereas in the general 
population, males were more likely than females to be on benefits. P45 employment 
levels were very similar for both male and female offenders at the time of 
conviction/caution or release from custody, but males had a higher average income 
than females. 

 
 
108 
 
We have not been able to update these analyses for this publication, because more 
recent data is not available for either source. However, additional details are reported 
in the original bulletin134. 
Other research 
There is a range of other past governmental research around the characteristics of 
women in the criminal justice system. Items which may be of interest include findings 
from the 2005-06 Surveying Prisoner Crime Reduction survey135, which show that 
women who do commit crime often face complex circumstances: 
 
Female prisoners reported poorer mental health than male prisoners, 
with higher levels of suicide attempts, psychosis, and anxiety and 
depression.  
 
Female offenders were twice as likely as male offenders to report 
needing help for mental health problems.  
 
Female prisoners were more likely than male prisoners to have been 
taken into care, experienced abuse, and witnessed violence in the 
home as a child.  
 
Almost half (48%) of female prisoners said they committed their offence 
to support the drug use of someone else compared with 22% of male 
prisoners.  
 
A higher proportion of female prisoners who had dependent children 
were living with them prior to custody (around 60% compared with about 
45% of male prisoners with children). 
 
Of offenders with dependent children, only around 25% of imprisoned 
mothers reported that their children lived with their partner during their 
imprisonment, compared with around 90% of children of imprisoned 
fathers. 
 
Also, in 2015, further use of the data link between MoJ, DWP and HMRC enabled a 
better estimate of the proportion of women sentenced for criminal offences in 2012 
with child dependents136:  
• 
Between 24% and 31% of all female offenders were estimated to have one 
or more child dependents.  
• 
On average, those with child dependents had 2 children.  
• 
Female offenders aged 25 to 44 were most likely to have child dependents.  
• 
Among the different disposal types, women receiving immediate custody 
were significantly less likely to have child dependents (between 13% and 
19%). 
 
 
                                                          
134 Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/women-and-the-criminal-justice-system-
2013  
135 The SPCR survey is a longitudinal cohort study of 1,435 adult prisoners sentenced to between one 
month and four years in prison in 2005 and 2006. https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/surveying-
prisoner-crime-reduction-spcr  Updated data is also not available. 
136 A child dependent is defined as a child under 18, living in the care of an adult. 
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/female-offenders-and-child-dependents 

 
 
109 
 
Chapter 7: Offenders: under supervision or in 
custody 
This chapter provides statistics relating to offenders in custody or under supervision in 
the community. Much of this information has previously been published in Offender 
Management Statistics Quarterly137, Safety in Custody Statistics138 and Accredited 
Programmes Annual Bulletin139. In addition, further breakdowns are presented of 
offender learning, as published by the Department for Education, and survey results 
from Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons140 annual report. 
Prison Population 
The total prison population at 30 June 2015 was 86,000, which increased by 680 
prisoners compared with the previous year. Despite this, the proportion of women 
remained stable, representing 5% of the population in 2015.  
The total prison population included sentenced prisoners (84%), those on remand 
(14%) and non-criminal141 prisoners (2%). Compared with the previous year, the 
volume of sentenced prisoners increased by 2% whereas the volume of those on 
remand decreased by 3%. For both men and women, there was an increase in 
sentenced prisoners (2% and 1% respectively) and a decrease in the number on 
remand (3% and 10%)  
Over the last ten years, the number of male prisoners has increased by 15% to 82,000, 
whilst the number of female prisoners has decreased by 14% to 4,000 (Figure 7.01).  
Across this period, the number of adult males increased by 24%, whereas the number 
of males aged 15 – 20 years old decreased by 43%. This considerable reduction in 
juveniles was seen even more strongly for females; there was a decline in females of 
all age groups, but by 8% in adults and 63% in 15 – 20 year olds. This has led to a 
decrease in the proportion of females within the total prison population from 6% in 
2005 to 5% in 2015. 
There have also been increases in the volume of both White and BAME male prisoners 
over the past decade, by 13% and 20% respectively. For females, however, there has 
been a 3% decrease in White prisoners and 42% decrease in BAME prisoners. 
                                                          
137 Offender Management Statistics Bulletin annual 2015 (includes quarterly publication, October to 
December 2015): https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/offender-management-statistics-quarterly-
october-to-december-2015 
138 Safety in Custody Statistics update to December 2015 (covers deaths, self-harm and assaults in 
prison custody in England and Wales): https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/safety-in-custody-
quarterly-update-to-december-2015 
139 Accredited Programmes Bulletin: 2014 to 2015 (starts and completions across prison and probation 
in each financial year between 2009 to 2010 and 2014 to 2015): 
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/accredited-programmes-bulletin-2014-to-2015 
140 HMIP annual report: 
 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/538854/hmip-annual-
report.pdf 
141 Persons being held under the Immigration Act, plus those sentenced for civil offences (such as 
contempt of court and failure to pay child maintenance) 

 
 
110 
 
Figure 7.01: Prison population, by sex, at 30th June 2005 to 30th June 2015142 
 
The proportions of age groups within each sex have changed over the last decade. 
For both men and women, the proportion of adult prisoners increased in the last 
decade by 7 percentage points to 93% in males, and by 6 percentage points to 96% 
in females, whereas the proportions aged 15 – 20 years declined. Notably, in 2015, 
there were no women aged 15 – 17 years in the prison population143, but 680 (1%) 
male defendants. 
There have also been prominent changes in ethnicity proportions between men and 
women since 2005. Despite an overall decline in female prisoner volumes by 2015, 
the proportion of female prisoners who were White increased by 9 percentage points 
to 80%. In males, although the number of prisoners increased, the proportion of White 
male prisoners decreased by 1 percentage point to 73%. As male prisoners drive the 
trend, the overall proportion of White prisoners declined by 1 percentage point to 74% 
(63,000 individuals). 
 
 
                                                          
142 Data from 2009 to 2015 has been extracted from the new prison IT system. 
143 There are no female Young Offender Institutions 
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Prison population
Females
Males

 
 
111 
 
Remand 
Within the prison population, for both males and females the number held on remand 
has decreased overall, by 6% and 37% respectively over the last decade, to 11,000 
males and 630 females (Figure 7.02) In parallel, there was an upward trend in the 
overall volume of sentenced population, due to the direct impact of prisoners moving 
from one category to the other. See Chapter 5 for further information on remands, 
including by type. 
Figure 7.02: Number of individuals held on remand, by sex, at 30th June 2005 to 
30th June 2015144 
 
 
 
 
                                                          
144 Data from 2009 to 2015 has been extracted from the new prison IT system 
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Number held on remand
Females
Males

 
 
112 
 
Foreign nationals 
Over the last decade, the proportion of foreign nationals in the female prison population 
peaked at 22% in 2007 and has since decreased to 12% at 2015. This was associated 
with the implementation of removal schemes to reduce the number of foreign nationals 
in prisons. The proportion of foreign nationals in the male prison population has 
remained stable, fluctuating between 12% and 14% across the decade. At 2015, the 
proportion of foreign nationals was almost equal for the male and female populations 
for the first time across the decade (Figure 7.03). 
Figure 7.03: Percentage of prisoners who were foreign nationals, by sex, at 30th 
June 2005 to 30th June 2015145 
 
 
 
                                                          
145 Data from 2009 to 2015 has been extracted from the new prison IT system.  
 

 
 
113 
 
Receptions 
First receptions  
A ‘First reception’ describes the movement of unique individuals that are first received 
into prison custody following a court hearing for a particular set of offences committed, 
which gives the best indication of the number of new prisoners. This excludes those 
on remand in custody, who are then convicted and sentenced into custody.146 
There were 98,000 offenders received into custody as first receptions in 2015, of whom 
91% were male and 9% were female. The higher proportion of female first receptions 
compared with the prison population is a result of the tendency for female offenders to 
have shorter average custodial sentence lengths, as discussed in Chapter 5: 
Defendants. Between 2005 and 2015, there has been a decline in the number of first 
prison receptions of males and females by 25% and 29% respectively (Figure 7.04). 
Figure 7.04: Number of first prison receptions, by sex, 2005 to xx-xxxx-xxxx 
 
 
                                                          
146 A first reception is a measure which counts a prisoners first movement into custody following a court 
hearing for a particular set of offences committed, and therefore gives the best indication of the number 
of new prisoners in the reporting period. A first reception has three categories: 
i. 
remand first reception: this describes a prisoner’s first movement into custody where the 
prisoner spends at least one day on remand. 
ii. 
sentenced first reception: this describes a prisoner’s first movement into custody where the 
prisoner has been sentenced at court, and thus spends no time on remand. 
iii. 
civil non-criminal first reception: this describes a prisoner’s first movement into custody 
where the prisoner has only been committed to custody for a civil offence (e.g. contempt of 
court). 
147 Volumes of first receptions for 2014 have been estimated with an imputation method due to data 
quality concerns. 
148 Data for 2015 have been published based on an improved prison IT system and alternative 
production method. However, 2015 data reported on in this section have been taken from published 
figures produced using a comparable method to previous years. 
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Number of first receptions
Females
Males

 
 
114 
 
Remand admissions 
‘Remand admissions’ refer to the number of individuals who enter custody or have 
their custody status changed while on remand. There are two types of admission; 
untried admissions and convicted unsentenced admissions. Untried admissions are 
the number of prisoners that are received into custody following a court hearing as 
untried (i.e. awaiting commencement or continuation of trial prior to verdict), and 
convicted unsentenced admissions are the number of prisoners that are classified as 
convicted unsentenced (i.e. awaiting sentence) following a court hearing. 
In 2015 there were 46,000 untried admissions and 30,000 convicted unsentenced 
admissions, both declined by 5% from 2014. There was a decline for both males (5% 
and 4%) and females (10% and 17%) in each category. Untried admissions and 
convicted unsentenced admissions at 2015 were 7% and 6% females (respectively).  
Over the last decade, for males the number of untried admissions remained stable 
between 2005 and 2011, but declined between 2011 and 2015, resulting in an overall 
decline of 15% since 2005. For females, untried admissions rose between 2005 and 
2008, but subsequently decreased, resulting in an overall decline of 40% between 
2005 and 2015 (Figure 7.05).  
The number of convicted unsentenced admissions showed a decline for males 
between 2005 and 2009. This was followed with a 6% increase from 2009 to 2011, but 
then continued to decline. Overall, there was a 36% decline across the decade. There 
was a similar trend for females, with a slight increase in these admissions between 
2009 and 2011, despite the overall decline of 59% between 2005 and 2015. For both 
males and females, at 2015 the volumes of both untried and convicted unsentenced 
admissions were the lowest of the decade. 
 
 

 
 
115 
 
Figure 7.05: Number of remand admissions into prison, by type of admission 
and sex, 2005 to xx-xxxx-xxxx 
 
 
Sentences 
Population under immediate custodial sentence151 
The prison population under immediate custodial sentence is a reflection of sentencing 
outcomes at court and is impacted by both the number of offenders given immediate 
custodial sentences and sentence lengths. 
Prison sentences can be divided into two broad groups: determinate sentences which 
are for a fixed period, and indeterminate sentences (these include life sentences and 
indeterminate sentences for public protection – IPPs). These have a minimum fixed 
period, known as a tariff, which must be served before release is considered by the 
Parole Board. At 30 June 2015, there was a higher proportion of males serving 
indeterminate sentences compared with females, 14% and 9% respectively. 
 
 
                                                          
149 Volumes of first receptions for 2014 have been estimated with an imputation method due to data 
quality concerns. 
150 Data for 2015 have been published based on an improved prison IT system and alternative 
production method. However, 2015 data reported on in this section have been taken from published 
figures produced using a comparable method to previous years. 
151 Does not include fine defaulters 
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Number of admissions
Female untried admissions
Males untried admissions
Female convicted unsentenced admissions
Males convicted unsentenced admissions

 
 
116 
 
The proportion of males and females held under indeterminate sentences followed a 
similar trend, increasing over the last decade, but having shown an overall decline 
since 2012 for males and 2013 for females. This trend reflects changes in legislation 
under the LASPO Act 2012 impacting Indeterminate Sentence for Public Protection 
(IPPs) (Figure 7.06). This Act abolished the IPP and introduced the new Extended 
Determinate Sentence (EDS), which is available for offenders who would previously 
have received an IPP.  
At 30 June 2015, EDS accounted for 3% of all sentenced male prisoners compared 
with 1% of female prisoners. For both indeterminate sentences and EDS, the higher 
proportions of males likely reflects the greater tendency of males to be convicted for 
the most serious offences. 
Figure 7.06: Percentage of sentenced prisoners with indeterminate sentences, 
by sex, 30th June 2005 to 30th June 2015152 
 
 
 
 
                                                          
152 Data from 2009 to 2015 has been extracted from the new prison IT system. 
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
20%
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Percentage with intederminate sentences
Females
Males

 
 
117 
 
The sentence length profile of males and females under a determinate sentence 
differs, with a higher proportion of females than males sentenced to less than 12 
months in 2015 (21% versus 14% respectively), and a lower proportion of females than 
males sentenced to over 4 years (40% versus 47% respectively). This reflects 
sentencing data (discussed in Chapter 5: Defendants) which shows that on average, 
male offenders receive longer custodial sentences than female offenders, which is 
partly due to the different types of offences that males and females commit (Figure 
7.07). 
Over the last decade, the proportions of determinate sentence lengths have changed 
for men and women. At 2015, 95% of determinate sentences were given to male 
offenders and 5% to female, reflecting the overall prison population proportions. For 
men, the proportion of longer sentences (4 years or more) has increased by 7 
percentage points to 55% (28,000), whereas for women there has been a 5% reduction 
in the proportion of longer sentences to 35% (910), and hence an increase in shorter 
sentences.  
Figure 7.07: Proportion of prisoners serving determinate sentences per 
sentence length band, by sex, 30 June 2015 
 
Males released from determinate sentences had served 62% of their sentenced time 
in prison in 2015, including time spent on remand, whereas females who were released 
had served 50% of their sentences.153 
 
 
                                                          
153 Figures cannot be compared with previous years due to the introduction of a new data source 
following improvements to IT systems. For prisoners subsequently recalled to custody, the proportion 
counted as having been spent in prison includes the time they spent on licence. 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Males
Females
Proportion of prisoners
Less than or equal to 6 months
Greater than 6 months to less than 12 months
12 months to less than 4 years
4 years or more (excluding indeterminate sentences)

 
 
118 
 
Sentence by offence type 
For both male and female prisoners, the most common offence group for which they 
were convicted at 30 June 2015 was violence against the person (25% and 27% 
respectively), however the offence profile overall differed by sex (Figure 7.08). For 
male prisoners, the second most common offence groups for which they received a 
custodial sentence was theft (16%). This was followed by sexual offences (16%), which 
were much less common for female offenders. For female prisoners the second most 
common offence was theft (23%), followed by drug offences (13%) in line with typical 
patterns of female offending (as discussed in Chapter 5: Defendants). 
Figure 7.08: Proportion of sentenced prisoners, by offence group and sex, 30th 
June 2015 
 
For male prisoners, over the last ten years there has been an increase of 97%154in the 
number of prisoners under an immediate custodial sentence for sexual offences (to 
12,000 prisoners at 2015). For female prisoners, there has been a notable drop of 66% 
in the number convicted of drug offences (430 prisoners at 2015). This reflects 
changes in the volumes sentenced for these offences, the custody rates and average 
custodial sentence length. (For further information on trends in these offences, see 
Chapter 5: Defendants and Chapter 8: Offence Analysis.) 
 
 
                                                          
154 On 30 June 2015 the classifications used to report the prison population by offence group 
transitioned over to the offence groups that the Office for National Statistics (ONS) introduced in 2013. 
Annual figures reported in this bulletin retain the old offence groups so cross-year comparisons can be 
made.  
 
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
Violence against the person
Sexual offences
Robbery
Theft Offences
Criminal damage and arson
Drug offences
Possession of weapons
Public order offences
Miscellaneous crimes
against society
Fraud Offences
Summary Non-Motoring
Summary motoring
Offence not recorded
Proportion of prisoners
Females
Males

 
 
119 
 
Releases 
Of the 70,000 offenders released from custody in 2015, 91% were male and 9% 
female. These proportions differ from the proportions within the prison population, 
which were 95% and 5% respectively. This difference is driven by women being more 
likely to have a shorter sentence length than men, and hence being released from the 
prison population more frequently.  
Between 2005 and 2008, the number of releases increased for both sexes but declined 
overall by 17% for males and 15% for females between 2005 and 2015 (Figure 7.09). 
Figure 7.09: Number of annual releases, by sex, 2005 to 2015155 
 
 
Home Detention Curfew 
Home Detention Curfew (HDC) allows for the early release of suitable, low risk 
offenders subject to an electronically monitored curfew. To be considered for release 
under HDC an offender must be serving a sentence between 12 weeks and less than 
4 years.  
Offenders who are released onto HDC spend up to the last 135 days of the custodial 
part of their sentence outside of prison providing they do not breach the rules of their 
curfew. In 2015, of those eligible for release156, 18% of males (7,000) were released 
                                                          
155 Data for 2015 have been published based on an improved prison IT system and alternative 
production method. However, 2015 data reported on in this section have been taken from published 
figures produced using a comparable method to previous years. 
156 This is the number of offenders serving sentences of between 3 months and 4 years potentially 
eligible for release on Home Detention Curfew (HDC) in the relevant period. In practice offenders are 
subject to a risk assessment before being considered for release on HDC, so some of these offenders 
will turn out not to be eligible for release on HDC. 
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Percentage released
Females
Males

 
 
120 
 
compared with 31% of females (1,000). Over the last decade, a higher proportion of 
females eligible for HDC have been released compared with males (Figure 7.10).  
Figure 7.10: Percentage of those eligible who receive home detention curfew 
release, by sex, 2005 to 2015157 
 
 
Release on temporary license (ROTL) 
Release on temporary license (ROTL) is a mechanism that enables prisoners to 
participate in necessary activities, outside of the prison establishment, that directly 
contribute to their resettlement into the community and their development of a 
purposeful, law-abiding life. Following a small number of serious failures of the ROTL 
process in 2012 and 2013, the ROTL rules were subsequently tightened. It has now 
become a complex process that can involve regular psychological assessments and 
constant risk management, particularly when it concerns prisoners who are considered 
to present a high risk of harm should they reoffend. 
There is no automatic right of entitlement for ROTL to be granted. A prisoner will only 
be released on temporary licence if they are eligible for release and once they have 
satisfied a stringent risk assessment carried out by a designated ROTL Board at the 
prison.  
In 2015, there were 333,000 releases on temporary licence; 92% from male 
establishments and 8% from female establishments. These releases related to 7,000 
individuals who had at least one instance of ROTL; 6,000 males (91%) and 610 
females (10%). In 2015, there were only 155 failures of temporary release, although 
                                                          
157 Data for 2015 have been published based on an improved prison IT system and alternative 
production method. However, 2015 data reported on in this section have been taken from published 
figures produced using a comparable method to previous years. 
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Percentage released
Females
Males

 
 
121 
 
the failure rate of males was double the failure rate of females (0.051% and 0.026% 
respectively). 
Over the last decade, the number of male ROTL releases rose by 35% between 2005 
and 2013158 and then decreased by 38% to the lowest point of the decade at 2015, 
reflecting the tightening of the ROTL process in 2013. This resulted in a 17% decrease 
overall since 2005. For female releases, there was a large decline following 2008, 
specifically by 17% between 2013 and 2015, following ROTL tightening. Female ROTL 
releases have shown a 29% decline overall since 2005 (Figure 7.11). 
Figure 7.11: Numbers of ROTL releases, by sex, 2005 to xx-xxxx-xxxx 
 
Restricted patients 
A mentally disordered offender may be diverted from the criminal justice system to 
hospital for treatment by a court under the Mental Health Act 1983. Prisoners may 
similarly be transferred from prison to hospital or ordered to receive treatment before 
completing a custodial sentence. 
At 31 December 2015, there were 5,000 restricted patients detained in hospital; 87% 
of these were male and 13% female. Compared with 2005, there was a 37% increase 
in overall numbers of restricted patients. The numbers of patients have risen for both 
males and females, by 36% and 42% respectively across the decade to 4,000 males 
and 580 females. The age proportions of those detained have remained similar across 
the decade for men, with the 21-39 year age group being most likely to be detained 
(49% of the male total at 2015). For females, however, there has been a shift from 21-
                                                          
158 Excluding missing data between 2009 and 2010 
159Data for 2015 have been published based on an improved prison IT system and alternative 
production method. However, 2015 data reported on in this section have been taken from published 
figures produced using a comparable method to previous years. 
160 Data is unavailable for 2009 and 2010 
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Number of ROTL releases
Females
Males

 
 
122 
 
39 year olds being the most likely group to be detained in 2005 (53% of the female 
total), to 40-59 year olds being the most likely group at 2015 (49% of the female total). 
Of the restricted patients admitted to hospital in 2015, 8% of males were admitted to a 
high security hospital, versus 3% of females. This proportion has decreased for both 
sexes since 2005, when 9% of males and 6% of females were sent to a high security 
hospital. 
HMIP Prisons Inspectorate Survey Report161 
Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons for England & Wales aims to ensure independent 
inspection of places of detention, report on conditions and treatment, and promote 
positive outcomes for those detained and the public. The HMIP Annual Report 2015-
16 identifies differences in reported prison experiences between male and female 
prisoners162.  
From self-reporting, females were significantly more likely than males to be victimised 
by staff for their sexual orientation (3% versus 1%), to be victimised by other prisoners 
(38% versus 30%) and to have felt unsafe (49% versus 42%). Males, however, were 
more likely to report being assaulted by staff (5% versus 3%). 
The survey also indicated that female prisoners received better support than males. 
Females were more likely to say that they had a member of staff to turn to for help 
(80% versus 70%), had a personal officer (64% versus 51%), or were easily able to 
make a complaint (62% versus 54%) or application (84% versus 76%). Similarly, 
female prisoners were more likely than male prisoners to report having their religious 
beliefs respected (58% versus 52%). 
Females were more likely to state that they were treated fairly in the incentives and 
earned privileges (IEP) scheme than were males (51% versus 44%), and felt that 
different levels of the scheme encouraged behavioural change (51% versus 43%). 
Despite this, on 31 March 2015 there were a higher percentage of male prisoners on 
Enhanced IEP Status (39%) than female prisoners (35%), with similar percentage of 
males and females on a basic status163. (However, as discussed further in the IEP 
section below, this may relate to differences in typical sentence lengths rather than 
behaviour.) 
 
 
                                                          
161 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/538854/hmip-annual-
report.pdf 
 
162 343 women and 6,362 men completed the questionnaires from all establishments. 
163 This information is not from the HMIP survey. It can be found within NOMS Annual Offender 
Equalities Report, 2014-2015: 
 https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/noms-annual-offender-equalities-report-2014-to-2015 
 

 
 
123 
 
The HMIP survey results also suggested that females were more likely to take part in 
work or training. They were more likely than males to report that they went to the library 
once a week (41% versus 35%), or took part in education (35% versus 24%), skills 
training (16% versus 11%) or an offending behaviour programme (14% versus 9%). 
(This aligns with patterns of offender learning and completions of accredited 
programmes, as discussed below.) However they were less likely than males to report 
going to the gym (20% versus 30%) or exercising outside for multiple times a week 
(32% versus 47%). 
Accredited programmes164 
A range of accredited programmes can be offered to offenders, varying in length, 
complexity and mode of delivery. Programmes have been developed to target the 
particular risks and needs for different types of offending behaviour, with the aim of 
reducing reoffending. Programme starts and completions are recorded by measuring 
attendance on the first and last day of the programme.165  
There were 23,000 starts and 18,000 completions of accredited programmes in 
2014/15. Female offenders have accounted for 4% of starts and 5% of completions. 
Similar proportions were seen for starts and completions of probation (4% and 5% 
female respectively) and prison (both 5%) programmes separately. Female offenders 
have a higher ratio of completions to starts than males do, following a substantial rise 
over the last five years (Figure 7.12). 
 
 
                                                          
164From 2009/10 to 2014/15 there have been 11 persons whose sex was not known on recording of the 
start or completion of the accredited programmes. These persons have been excluded from the 
analysis. Time periods in this section refer to financial years. 
165 For more information around data provided in this section please refer to Accredited Programmes 
Publication https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/accredited-programmes-bulletin-2014-to-2015 

 
 
124 
 
Figure 7.12: Number of accredited prison and probation programme starts and 
completions and completions to starts ratio, by sex, 2009/10 to 2014/15 
Females 
 
Males 
 
 
 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0
350
700
1,050
1,400
1,750
2,100
2,450
2,800
3,150
3,500
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
Completions to starts ratio
Number of starts or completions
Completions to starts ratio
Starts
Completions
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0
4,500
9,000
13,500
18,000
22,500
27,000
31,500
36,000
40,500
45,000
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
Completions to starts ratio
Number of starts or completions
Completions to starts ratio
Starts
Completions

 
 
125 
 
Accredited programme starts and completions fell overall between 2009/10 and 
2014/15 (by 49% and 48% respectively). Starts and completions for females fell by 
69% and 61% respectively, while for males the decreases in starts and completions 
were less, at 48% and 47% respectively. The reduction in probation programme starts 
over this period has been larger for female offenders (71%) than male offenders (42%). 
This is also true for prison programme starts, but with a smaller gap between the 
reduction for female (66%) and male (56%) offenders. Probation and prison 
programmes both have similar relative differences between the trends for female and 
male offenders for completions as they do for starts. 
Over the past five years, the completion to start ratio166 for female offenders has 
increased, by 17 percentage points, from 70% to 87%. This is due to a larger reduction 
in starts than completions in both prison and probation programmes. This same ratio 
for males remained broadly stable ranging between 75% and 77%. The completion to 
start ratio is higher for prison programmes for both sexes (for prison, 100% for males, 
102% for females; for probation, 77% and 87% in the latest year).  
Similarly to female prison programmes, male prison programmes have seen a larger 
reduction of starts relative to completions, increasing this ratio. However, unlike female 
probation programmes, the completion to start ratio for male probation programmes 
has remained broadly stable over the 5 year period. The prison completion to start 
ratios for both male and female offenders have increased since 2009/10, by 17 and 26 
percentage points respectively. The ratios for probation programmes alone in 2014/15 
have reached 64% for male and 76% for female offenders, an increase of 9 percentage 
points for female offenders but a decrease of 7 percentage points for male offenders 
since 2009/10. 
 
 
                                                          
166 This measure is used to show the relative difference in completion and start volumes for each year – 
it is calculated by dividing the number of completions by the number of starts. It should not be used for 
the purposes of attempting to calculate completion rates. Starts from one year may complete in a 
subsequent year, and completions in one year may have started in a previous year.  

 
 
126 
 
Figure 7.13: Proportion of accredited probation and prison programme starts, 
by programme type and sex, 2009/10 to 2014/15167 
Females 
 
Males 
 
 
 
                                                          
167 Domestic Violence and Sex Offending programmes are not available to female offenders.  
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
Proportion of all programme starts
General Offending
Substance Misuse
Other
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
Proportion of all programme starts
General Offending
Domestic Violence
Sex Offending
Violence
Substance Misuse

 
 
127 
 
Three types of programmes were available to female offenders: general offending, 
substance misuse and violence. Two more programmes were available to male 
offenders: domestic violence and sex offending. In the latest year female offenders 
accounted for 12% of substance misuse, 7% of general offending and 2% of violence 
programme starts and completions. These proportions have remained broadly stable 
since 2009/10. 
In 2009/10, substance misuse had the highest proportion of starts for both male and 
female offenders. This proportion has reduced year on year for both male and females 
and in 2014/15 general offending had the highest proportion of programme starts. The 
substantial decrease in the number of programme starts for substance misuse over 
the five year period is partly due to changes in the way that substance misuse 
interventions are funded and commissioned. As of 1st April 2011, drug and alcohol 
treatment services became the responsibility of the Department of Health (DH), 
devolving the choice of programmes commissioned and funded to local partnerships, 
a number of which opted to deliver non-accredited programmes instead. 
Offender Learning 
Offender learning is available to prisoners in England aged 18 and above through the 
Offender Learning and Skills Service (OLASS)168,169. These courses largely focus on 
English and maths at the start of a sentence, with attention shifting to vocational and 
other employability skills later on during a prisoner’s sentence. 
There were 101,600 participating learners during the academic year 2014/15, of whom 
94,300 (93%) were male and 7,300 were female (7%). Women accounted for 4% of 
the prison population to whom OLASS offender learning is available170, so they were 
over-represented among those participating in offender learning. 
Offender learning assessments171 
All offenders are assessed for their levels of English and maths on reception into 
custody. A similar proportion of those whose English and maths were assessed were 
female as among those participating in offender learning overall (both 7%). Maths 
assessments for women were, on average, higher than for men. For English 
assessments, outcomes were broadly similar for both men and women, albeit with a 
slight tendency for women to be assessed at a higher level (Figure 7.14). 
 
 
                                                          
168 In eight contracted estate prisons, education delivery remains part of the price-per-place contract. 
169 All offenders included in published offender learning statistics are of known sex 
170 OLASS is not the provider in all institutions – only those that have access to it have been considered 
here. OLASS does not provide degree-level qualifications. 
171 Learners may undertake each assessment more than once over an academic year, so participation 
cannot be compared with achievement in a single year. Learners are counted once for each distinct 
level of outcome they are assessed at in English or maths and once in the totals. Not all learners are 
assessed. 

 
 
128 
 
Figure 7.14: Proportion of offender learning assessment outcomes by subject, 
level and sex, 2014/15 
Maths 
 
English 
 
 
 

 
 
129 
 
Level of learning 
Offenders are offered the opportunity to participate in a range of qualifications at 
different levels. There was little difference in the levels at which men and women learn. 
The most notable difference between the sexes was that women made up 13% of 
(small numbers of) offenders participating in a level 3 qualification, although women 
also make up a larger than representative proportion of learners at lower levels. 
There were broadly similar proportions of women among those participating in English 
(6%) and maths (7%) learning as among those participating overall. Despite women 
typically being assessed at higher levels for maths than men, women make up a higher 
proportion of those participating in entry level maths (10%) than overall, with few other 
differences by sex in the level of participation for English and maths. 
Patterns of achievements by sex and level of learning closely mirrored those of 
participation; there is no evidence of a difference in the likelihood of men and women 
achieving their learning outcomes. 
Offender learner enrolments by sector subject area 
Each learning aim a learner has can be classified by ‘sector subject area’, which is 
effectively a high-level description of the topic being worked on. In 2013/14, sector 
subject area breakdowns were generally similar between the sexes, both for 
enrolments and achievements.  
Preparation for Life and Work was the most common aim for both men and women 
(45% and 42% of all aims for each sex, respectively). When comparing the percentage 
of subjects enrolled on within each sex, the largest difference was in retail, which was 
more popular for women than men (making up 20% of all aims for women and 10% for 
men). Construction was more popular for men than for women (8% of aims for men 
and 1% for women). Information and Communication Technology was the third most 
popular aim for both sexes, making up 14% of all aims for each.  
Offender learning by disability172  
Of all offender learners in 2014/15, 26% of them declared they had a disability. This 
figure was a quarter for men (25%) and 37% for women. A quarter of male learners 
(25%) and a third of female learners (33%) who stated that they had a disability had a 
mental health difficulty (which aligns with the higher rate of hospitalisation discussed 
earlier in this chapter). Women learners were also more likely than men to have 
multiple disabilities (22% and 12% respectively of all learners with a disability). It is 
worth noting that these figures for learners with a disability or learning difficulty may 
not be representative of the prison population as they are only for prisoners 
participating in offender learning. 
 
 
                                                          
172 Learners with learning difficulties and/or disabilities are based upon self-declaration by the learner. 

 
 
130 
 
Discipline in prison establishments 
Adjudications 
In 2015 there were a total of 148,000 adjudications recorded in prison establishments, 
of which female establishments accounted for 5%; unrounded this represents a slightly 
higher proportion than they contain of the population.  
Over the past five years the total number of adjudications in male establishments fell 
by 15% whilst the prison population increased by 2% over the same period. 
Conversely, adjudications in female establishments increased by 20% whilst the 
female prison population fell by 9%. The number of adjudications per prisoner in female 
establishments has increased from 1.6 in 2010 to 2.1 in 2015. Adjudications per male 
prisoner fell from 2.1 to 1.7 over the same period.173 
Adjudications increased in the latest year for both male and female establishments by 
16% and 12% respectively. For male establishments, adjudications relating to white 
and BAME prisoners increased by 16% and 11% respectively. However in female 
establishments, adjudications for white prisoners increased by 18% whilst those for 
BAME prisoners remained stable.  
In the latest year, there were 103,000 adjudications recorded for proven174 offences of 
which female establishments accounted for 6% (6,000). Over the past five years the 
total number of proven adjudications has fallen in male establishments by 20%, with 
proven adjudications against White prisoners reducing by 15% and those against 
BAME prisoners reducing to a greater degree, by 29%. Conversely, proven 
adjudications have increased in female establishments by 11%, with proven 
adjudications against White prisoners increasing by 22% and those against BAME 
prisoners reducing by 25% over the same period. (This may be partly due to the 
change in female prison population over the last decade, when the number of BAME 
prisoners reduced by a greater proportion than White prisoners.) This has increased 
the overall proportion of proven adjudications relating to females by 2 percentage 
points from 4% in 2010 to 6% in 2015. 
In 2015, the proportion of proven adjudications relating to disobedience/disrespect in 
female establishments was 44%, this was 6 percentage points higher than what was 
recorded in male establishments for the same year. Offences relating to unauthorised 
transactions were 4 percentage points lower in female establishments (20%) when 
compared with male establishments. Over the last five years, the proportion of 
adjudications relating to unauthorised transactions has reduced by 5 percentage points 
in male establishments and has fallen by 1 percentage point in female establishments. 
The proportion of adjudications for other offences has increased for male (from 8% to 
14%) and female (from 12% to 16%) establishments.  
In 2015, the average number of punishments per proven offence in female 
establishments was 1.86, slightly higher than is observed in male establishments 
                                                          
173 Number of adjudications per prisoner is calculated using prison populations from each year on the 
30th June 
174 Proven adjudications are those where an adjudicator is satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that a 
charge has been proved. 

 
 
131 
 
(1.78). In 2010 there was a larger difference between the two averages, with male 
establishments recording a higher average of 2.57 punishments compared with female 
establishments, which recorded an average of 2.03 punishments per offence; although 
punishments per offence were falling for both sexes, the decline has been much 
greater for men. 
Incentives and Earned Privileges 
Incentives and Earned Privileges (IEP) 175 is a system where privileges, in addition to 
minimum entitlements, can be granted to prisoners or young offenders subject to their 
reaching and maintaining specified standards of conduct and performance. All new 
prisoners who enter custody were given the Entry IEP176 level (apart from those aged 
15-17). (The analysis below excludes those on the Entry IEP level as any differences 
are a direct reflection of differences in adult receptions into custody.) If a prisoner 
passes the Entry IEP level after their first two weeks in custody they will be put onto 
the Standard IEP level. Prisoners on the Basic IEP level are those who fail their period 
on the Entry IEP level, have been downgraded from Standard IEP level, or in rare 
cases downgraded from the Enhanced IEP level. A prisoner has to be on the Standard 
IEP level whilst demonstrating they meet the criteria for the Enhanced IEP level for a 
minimum of 3 months before they can be put on the Enhanced IEP level.  
On 31 March 2015177, 61% of females were on the Standard IEP level whilst 56% of 
males had the same status. Males had a larger proportion of Enhanced level IEPs 
(39%) relative to females (35%), and males and females had similar proportions of 
prisoners on the Basic level (5% and 4% respectively). However, this may be a 
reflection of the tendency for female prisoners to have shorter custodial sentences 
rather than differences in prisoner behavior; they therefore may not spend enough time 
in custody to be eligible for an enhanced IEP. 
Safety in prison custody178 
Assaults 
There were 21,000 assault incidents in 2015, a 27% increase since the previous year 
and a 42% increase since 2005. In 2015, male establishments accounted for 96% of 
assault incidents, a higher proportion than males represent of the prison population 
and an increase of 4 percentage points since 2005. This is due to a reduction of female 
assault incidents by 30% and increase of male assault incidents of 48% over this 
period. 
                                                          
175Statistics on IEPs have been calculated from the proportions and prisoner population figures 
published in this bulletin: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/noms-annual-offender-equalities-
report-2014-to-2015  
176 on 31 March 2015, 14% of female prisoners and 8% of male prisoners were on Entry IEP 
177 A prisoner’s IEP status is dynamic and therefore numbers seen here may not reflect their status over 
a year 
178 This section does not cover deaths in prison custody as the total number of deaths in female 
establishments are too low to provide any comparison between male and female cohorts (4 to 12 deaths 
each year in female establishments over the past 10 years). Data on deaths in prison custody can be 
found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/safety-in-custody-quarterly-update-to-december-
2015  

 
 
132 
 
In the latest year, female establishments had a rate of 195 assault incidents per 1,000 
prisoners. Male establishments had a higher rate of 242 assault incidents per 1,000 
prisoners. The number of assaults in female establishments increased in the latest 
year by 17%, a trend that was mirrored by male establishments but at a higher rate 
(27%). Since 2009 the rate of assaults per 1,000 prisoners has been lower for female 
establishments compared with rates at male establishments, reversing the trend seen 
in earlier years (Figure 7.15). The rate of serious assaults per 1,000 prisoners179 for 
female establishments has also been consistently lower over the past decade. In the 
latest year the rate of serious assaults per 1,000 prisoners was 34 for male and 14 for 
female establishments, with 98% of all serious assaults occurring in male 
establishments; a proportion that has increased by 3 percentage points since 2005.  
Figure 7.15: Number of assaults per 1,000 prisoners, by sex of establishment, 
2005 - 2015 
 
Those involved in assaults can be categorised as assailants, victims or fighters; the 
former types relate to an assault where there is a clear aggressor and victim, the latter 
to one where there is not180. In the latest year, 42% of those involved in assaults were 
assailants in female establishments, compared with only 36% in male establishments. 
The proportion of assailants in female establishments has been consistently higher 
than male establishments over the past decade. Fighters accounted for 33% of 
females involved in assaults and 35% of males. The difference in the proportion of 
fighters between male and female establishments was larger in 2005 (15 percentage 
points) but has closed over the past decade. Victims also represented a slightly higher 
proportion of those involved in assaults in male institutions in the latest year, 26% 
compared with 24% for female establishments (Figure 7.16). 
                                                          
179 This is calculated by multiplying the rate of assaults per 1,000 prisoner by proportion of assaults that 
were serious. 
180 Further categories include suspected assailant. The proportions of participants that are suspected 
assailants are low for both male and female institutions. 
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Number of assualts per 1,000 prisoners
Female
Male

 
 
133 
 
Figure 7.16: Proportion of those involved in assault incidents, by type of 
involvement and sex of establishment, 2005 – 2015 
Female 
 
 
Males 
 
Female establishments account for a smaller proportion of assaults compared with 
2005. Over the past decade both prisoner on prisoner and prisoner on officer assaults 
decreased for female establishments (by 21% and 42% respectively). The number of 
both prisoner on prisoner and prisoner on officer assaults in male establishments 
increased over the same period (by 46% and 56% respectively). 
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Proportion of those involved in assaults
Assailant
Fighter
Suspected assailant
Victim
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Proportion of those involved in assaults
Assailant
Fighter
Suspected assailant
Victim

 
 
134 
 
In the latest year there were 16,000 prisoner on prisoner assaults and 4,000 prisoner 
on officer assaults, with female establishments accounting for 3% (500) and 5% (200) 
of these respectively. A decade ago, the number of assaults on officers was 3,000, but 
female establishments accounted for 13% (400) of these assaults. In 2005 female 
establishments also accounted for 6% (600) of the total number of prisoner on prisoner 
assaults (11,000). 
In 2015, prisoner on prisoner assaults accounted for 67% of all female assault 
incidents compared with 76% of male assault incidents. Prisoner on officer assault 
incidents accounted for 30% of female assault incidents and 21% of male assault 
incidents.181 In female establishments, the proportion of prisoner on officer assault 
incidents has reduced by 6 percentage points since 2005 whilst the proportion of 
prisoner on prisoner assault incidents increased by 8 percentage points over the same 
period. This is due to prisoner on officer assaults reducing to a greater extent than 
prisoner on prisoner assaults. The proportions of prisoner on officer and prisoner on 
prisoner assaults have remained unchanged for male establishments. 
Self-harm 
In 2015, there were 32,000 self-harm incidents, and just under a quarter of these 
occurred in female prisons – compared with the prison population, levels of self-harm 
were disproportionately high among female prisoners. Both male and female 
establishments have seen an increase in the number of self-harm incidents since the 
previous year (31% and 8% respectively). However, over the past decade the number 
of incidents in female establishments had decreased by 45% (from 13,000 to 7,000 
incidents). Conversely, male establishments have seen an increase of self-harm 
incidents by 140% (from 10,000 to 25,000 incidents).  
Female establishments have a much larger number of self-harming individuals per 
1,000 prisoners relative to male establishments. In the latest year female 
establishments had 297 in 1,000 prisoners that self-harmed compared with 102 in male 
establishments. Female establishments also see a higher rate of self-harm incidents 
per individual. In 2015, there were 6.4 incidents per individual that self-harmed in 
female establishments and 3 incidents per individual in male establishments. 
Whilst more female prisoners self-harm and self-harm more frequently than men, the 
data suggests that acts of self-harm incidents by male prisoners may be more serious. 
In 2015, the proportion of self-harm incidents that resulted in hospital attendance was 
8.4% for male establishments and 2.2% for female self-harm incidents. 
 In 2015, the majority of self-harm incidents were due to cutting or scratching for both 
male (67%) and female (60%) establishments. Self-strangulation accounted for a 
much larger proportion of self-harm instances in female establishments (26%) 
compared with male establishments (6%). In male establishments the proportion of 
incidents related to hanging (8%) and overdose, self-poisoning or swallowing (9%) 
were higher than female establishments, which had proportions of 1% and 2% 
respectively. 
 
                                                          
181 The remaining proportions relate to prisoner on other or other type of assault incidents. 

 
 
135 
 
Probation182  
This section looks at offenders under supervision as a result of a court order. This 
includes those under supervision as a result of a community sentence or a suspended 
sentence order (SSO). 
Probation caseload under supervision 
In 2015, a total of 22,000 women (17%) and 112,000 men (83%) were under 
supervision as result of a court order. Although there has been a decline in volumes of 
6% for males and 3% for females (Figure 7.17), these proportions have remained 
stable since 2005. 
Between 2009 and 2015, the number of offenders under supervision as a result of a 
community order fell by 26%, reflecting observed sentencing trends. This decrease 
was greater for men (27%) than women (20%). The number under supervision for 
SSOs decreased overall by 1% over the decade, however there were differences in 
trends across sex, with a 1% decrease for males and a 3% increase for females across 
the period.  
Figure 7.17: Number of offenders supervised by the Probation Service under 
court orders, by sex, at end of period 2005 to 2015  
 
 
 
                                                          
182 This section includes offences dealt with by the Probation Service, who generally deal with those 
aged 18 years and over. Those under 18 are mostly dealt with by Youth Offending Teams, answering 
the Youth Justice Board and are not included within these statistics. All offenders included in published 
probation statistics are of known sex. 
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
160,000
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Number under supervision
Females
Males

 
 
136 
 
 The average length of a community order continued to be shorter for females in 2015 
(12.4 months) than males (15.1 months). This was similar for SSOs, with an average 
length of 17.7 months for females and 18.5 months for males. For community orders 
in particular, this gap has widened since 2005 due to female average lengths 
continuing to decrease whilst those for males have been increasing. 
Requirements 
Women commencing supervision as a result of a community order or SSO generally 
had fewer requirements to comply with than men (Figure 7.18). 
Figure 7.18: Proportion of offenders commencing supervision per number of 
requirements band, by type of order and sex, 2015  
 
Unpaid work was the most common requirement applied to males for both community 
requirements (33%) and SSOs (29%), whereas it was the second most common 
requirement for females (23% and 22% respectively). Although unpaid work made up 
a greater proportion of requirements in males, females had a greater proportion of 
rehabilitation requirements in community orders (21% males; 25% females) and a 
greater proportion of supervision orders for SSOs (18% males; 23% females).  
 
 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Female
Male
Female
Male
Proportion of offenders
Community orders                                     Suspended Sentence Orders 
1 requirement
2 requirements
3+ requirements

 
 
137 
 
Timing 
The number of male offenders under pre-release supervision has increased by 23% in 
the last decade, whereas for females it has decreased by 0.2%. However, between 
2014 and 2015, there was a 25% rise from 3,000 to 4,000 women offenders under pre-
release supervision.  
For both sexes, post-release supervision has increased by 122% and 178% 
respectively, with a large proportion of this change occurring between 2014 and 2015. 
This rise is largely due to statutory supervision on release from prison for all offenders 
given custodial sentences: the Offender Rehabilitation Act (ORA) 2014 expanded 
licence supervision so that anyone sentenced to more than a day in prison will receive 
at least 12 months supervision on release. 
In 2015, males were more likely to have their Community Order terminated early than 
women (51% versus 47%), but a slightly greater proportion of women had an order 
terminated early for good progress (20% versus 19%) rather than for other reasons 
such as conviction of an offence and failure to comply with requirements. This pattern 
was similar for terminations of SSOs, with male early terminations standing at 50% 
compared with 44% for females and a slightly larger percentage of women having early 
terminations for good progress than men (20% versus 19%). 
 
 

 
 
138 
 
Licence recalls  
In 2015, there were 20,000 men and 1,000 women recalled from licence (95% and 5% 
of the total, respectively). In men, 51% of these recalls were through the National 
Probation Service (NPS) and 49% were through Community Rehabilitation Companies 
(CRCs). In women, only 36% of the total were through NPS, and 64% through CRCs. 
This is likely to reflect differences in the composition of the NPS and CRC caseloads. 
Reasons for recall differed between males and females in 2015183. For males, the most 
common recall reason was ‘further charge’ (43% of recalls for males; 29% for females), 
whereas for females ‘failure to keep in touch’ was the most common reason (32% of 
recalls for males; 46% for females). ‘Non-compliance’ was the second most common 
reason for both sexes (42% for males; 40% for females). 
In 2015, recalled females were more likely to have multiple recalls (13%) than males 
(11%), following a sentence of less than 12 months. However, the equivalent group of 
recalled men were more likely to have received at least one standard recall at some 
point during the year (40% of recalled men; 26% of recalled women). It is believed that 
this indicates that recalled women each received more, but shorter recalls over the 
year while recalled men received fewer but longer recalls on average. This difference 
was only evident in those recalled by CRCs. Among offenders supervised by the NPS 
there was no difference between men and women in either the proportion with multiple 
recalls or the proportion with standard recalls. This is likely to be due to a broader mix 
of female offenders within CRCs, giving greater scope for the use of fixed-term recalls. 
For recalls in 2015, 70% of men and 65% of women were returned to custody within 
their target time184.  
 
 
                                                          
183 More than one recall reason can be recorded against each recall.  
184 Offenders are returned in target time if the end-to-end process takes less than 74 hours for 
emergency process recalls and less than 144 hours (6 days) for standard process recalls. 

 
 
139 
 
Chapter 8: Offence Analysis 
This section looks at individual offences that are of interest, in terms of the differences 
between females and males in the Criminal Justice System, and whether this picture 
has changed over time. It is based on published figures: statistics on out of court 
disposals and court prosecutions come from the Ministry of Justice publication Criminal 
Justice System Quarterly: December 2015. The statistics on timeliness represent 
further breakdowns of the Ministry of Justice publication Criminal Court Statistics 
(quarterly): October to December 2015. The offences included in this chapter are: 
 
TV license evasion: More females were convicted of this offence in 2015 than 
any other. 
 
Common assault (summary offence): A high number of both females and 
males were convicted for this offence in 2015. 
 
Knife possession: Women were less likely than men to be sentenced for this 
offence in 2015. 
 
Actual Bodily Harm and Grievous Bodily Harm: Women were less likely 
than men to be convicted for this offence in 2015. 
 
Shoplifting: Theft offences accounted for a high proportion of all convictions 
across both sexes, the majority of which were for shoplifting (80% of female 
theft convictions in 2015 were for shoplifting). 
 
Drug offences (indictable): The proportion of females sentenced to custody for 
these offences has been falling, while the proportion of males has remained 
stable. 
 
Truancy (parent failing to secure attendance of child): In 2015, this was 
one of the few offences for which more females were convicted than males. 
 
Cruelty to or neglect of children: In 2015, this was also one of the few 
offences for which more females were convicted than males. 
 
Benefit fraud: This is also one of the few offences for which more females 
were convicted in 2015 than males. 
 
Offences with long custodial sentences: The most common offence for 
which women received a long sentence was manslaughter, whereas for men it 
was rape of a female aged under 16. 
 
 

 
 
140 
 
Context : Overall, about a quarter of defendants prosecuted were female 
As discussed in Chapter 5, in 2015, 27% of defendants185 prosecuted in England and 
Wales were female186. 
This varies by offence (Figure 8.01); some offences for which females were 
disproportionately more likely to be prosecuted were: cruelty to or neglect of children, 
benefit fraud, TV licence evasion, and truancy (parent failing to secure attendance of 
a child). 
Figure 8.01: Proportion of the defendants prosecuted for selected offences of 
each sex, by offence, 2015 
 
There is also variation by offence in the outcomes, including by sex. Investigating these 
differences at offence level makes it possible to understand overall trends. For 
example, 36% of females prosecuted were prosecuted for TV licence evasion and 
almost all offenders receive a fine, which contributes to the overall fine prevalence for 
female offenders. This variation between the sexes at an offence level also means that 
differences for particular offence groups can result from differences in the specific 
offences underlying them. 
  
 
 
                                                          
185 With known sex. Defendants with unknown or not stated sex accounted for 7% of all prosecutions in 
2015. 
186 See ‘Criminal justice statistics outcomes by offence data tool’ in Criminal Justice Statistics Quarterly: 
December 2015 to obtain all statistics on prosecutions, convictions and sentencing quoted in this 
chapter. 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90% 100%
TV licence evasion
Common assault
Actual bodily harm
Grievous bodily harm
Shoplifting
Drug offences (indictable)
Truancy
Benefit fraud
Proportion of defendants
Female
Male
Overall

 
 
141 
 
TV licence evasion : Females were disproportionately more likely to be prosecuted for 
TV license evasion than males, but sentencing behaviours were similar 
The highest volume offence in 2015 was TV licence evasion, and 70% of the 189,349 
defendants187 prosecuted188 for this offence were female. If enforcement officers 
suspect a household of watching or recording live TV without a valid licence and are 
not able to contact anyone at the property by letter or by telephone, they visit the 
household in person. The disproportionate likelihood of women being prosecuted for 
TV licence evasion may be because they are more likely to be at home, when 
enforcement officers call. 
The overall number of defendants prosecuted for TV licence evasion has generally 
been increasing over the past ten years (Figure 8.02), and the proportion of defendants 
who are female has gradually increased from 62% to 70%. 
Figure 8.02: Number of defendants prosecuted for TV licence evasion, by sex, 
2005 to 2015 
 
 
 
                                                          
187 Where sex was known. Defendants with unknown or not stated sex accounted for 1% of 
prosecutions for TV licence evasion in 2015. 
188 TV licence evasion is not dealt with by the police, meaning out of court disposals are not available 
and each individual will be proceeded against at the magistrates’ court. 
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Number of defendants prosecuted
Female
Male

 
 
142 
 
The conviction ratio in 2015 was 88% for females, and 86% for males. This has been 
fairly stable for both sexes, over the decade. 
For both sexes the average number of days from offence to completion for TV licence 
evasion has remained fairly stable since 2011, and the median was 144 days for 
women and 155 days for men in 2015189. The longest portion of this was the time from 
offence to charge, with a median of 106 days for women and 114 for men in 2015. The 
charge to listing time has been decreasing, from 49 days for both sexes in 2011 to 39 
in 2015. For both sexes, the median number of days from first listing to completion was 
0 in 2015, indicating that the case had a first listing and was completed on the same 
day. 
Almost all female and male offenders received a fine for TV licence evasion. The 
average fine for TV licence evasion saw a sharp increase between 2005 and 2009 for 
both sexes. Since then, it has decreased in real terms190. The average fine for both 
females and males was about £170 in 2015. No females or males were sentenced to 
immediate custody, a suspended sentence or community sentence for TV licence 
evasion in 2015.  
                                                          
189 The means were similar: 139 for women and 154 for men. The similarity of the mean and median 
indicates there are not many extremely long cases for TV licence evasion. 
190 Calculated using the Bank of England inflation calculator. 

 
 
143 
 
Common assault : One of the most common non-motoring offences for which males 
and females are dealt with, but males were more likely to be prosecuted and to get a 
custodial sentence 
In 2015, common assault was the second most common non-motoring offence that 
defendants were prosecuted for, overall, and the most common non-motoring offence 
for males. It was the third most common for females. 15% of defendants191 prosecuted 
for this offence were female. The overall number of offenders prosecuted has 
increased by 14% over the decade, but the proportion who were female has been 
consistent. 
The overall number of cautions192 and prosecutions for common assault has remained 
fairly stable over the decade, because the fall in cautions has offset the increase in 
prosecutions. Just over half of females charged with common assault were prosecuted 
in 2015 (the rest received cautions), while three quarters of males were prosecuted. 
Both of these proportions have fluctuated over the decade (Figure 8.03), but the gap 
between women and men remains consistent. 
Figure 8.03: Proportion of defendants who were prosecuted (rather than 
cautioned) for common assault, by sex, 2005 to 2015 
 
 
 
                                                          
191 With known sex. Defendants with unknown or not stated sex accounted for 1% of offenders 
prosecuted for common assault in 2015. 
192 See ‘Out of court disposals data tool’ in Criminal Justice Statistics Quarterly: December 2015 to 
obtain all statistics on cautions and Penalty Notices for Disorder quoted in this chapter. 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Proportion dealt with in court
Female
Male

 
 
144 
 
Females were less likely to be remanded in custody (3%) than males (9%) at the 
magistrates’ court for common assault in 2015193. The same is true for those dealt with 
for common assault at the Crown Court: 15% of females and 34% of males were 
remanded in custody. At the Crown Court, females were more likely to be remanded 
on bail (67%) than males (40%). 
The conviction ratio for both females and males for common assault in 2015 was 67%. 
This peaked in 2008 (74% for women and 72% for men), and has declined since then. 
Common assault cases with female defendants took longer on average than those with 
male defendants, with medians of 114 and 95 days respectively in 2015194. This has 
been increasing since 2012, when the medians were 97 and 79 days respectively. For 
males this increase has come from the time taken from charge to listing and listing to 
completion; the median number of days taken from offence to charge has remained 
relatively low at 1 day. For female defendants, similar increases were seen in time 
taken from charge to listing and listing to completion. However, the median number of 
days taken from offence to charge fell until 2013 and then rose, to a median of 17 days 
in 2015, which is considerably longer than for men (Figure 8.04). 
Figure 8.04: Median number of days taken from offence to completion for 
common assault cases, including cases over ten years, by sex, 2011 to 2015 
 
 
 
                                                          
193 See ‘Prosecutions, convictions and remands data tool’ in Criminal Justice Statistics Quarterly: 
December 2015 to obtain all statistics on remands quoted in this chapter. 
194 The mean was also higher for women: 139 compared with 121 days for men. The mean is higher 
than median, as it is more susceptible to extreme outliers. 
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Median number of days
Female (offence to charge)
Female (charge to listing)
Female (listing to completion)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Median number of days
Male (offence to charge)
Male (charge to listing)
Male (listing to completion)

 
 
145 
 
About half of offenders sentenced of both sexes had a previous caution or conviction 
for common assault (47% of females and 49% of males)195. 
A community sentence was the most common sentence for common assault overall 
(42%), and conditional discharge, fine, immediate custody or a suspended sentence 
were also fairly common (12-15%). The sentences which males received were of a 
similar distribution to the overall, which is to be expected as they account for most 
offenders (Figure 8.05). For females, the proportion who received a community 
sentence was similar to males (42% for both). Females were more likely to receive a 
conditional discharge (25%) than males (13%), and less likely to receive a suspended 
sentence (9% compared with 13%) or immediate custody (5% compared with 14%). 
This mirrors overall sentencing differences. 
Figure 8.05: Proportion of offenders sentenced for common assault, by 
sentencing outcome and sex, 2015 
 
 
 
                                                          
195 See Table 8.02 for all statistics on previous cautions and convictions stated in this chapter. 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Absolute discharge
Conditional discharge
Fine
Community sentence
Suspended sentence
Immediate custody
Compensation
Otherwise dealt with
Proportion of offenders sentenced
Female
Male

 
 
146 
 
Knife possession: an atypical crime for women196 
Data on cautions and sentencing for knife possession was taken from the Police 
National Computer (PNC). There are three types of knife and offensive weapon 
possession offences197: 
 
Possession offences of having an article with a blade or point in a public place 
or on school premises198, 
 
Possession of offensive weapon without lawful authority or reasonable excuse 
in a public place or on school premises199, 
 
Offences involving threatening with a knife or offensive weapon in a public 
place or on school premises200  
For the purpose of this analysis, all three offences are included. In 2015 there were 
around 17,000201 knife possession offences which resulted in a caution or a court 
sentence, of which 8% were committed by women. Knife possession offences were 
atypical offences for women: in 2015 the proportion of females among those sentenced 
for indictable offences was 15% but the proportion of females among those sentenced 
for a knife possession offence was only 7%202.  
Over the last four years women were most likely to receive a community sentence for 
a knife possession offence (28% of those sentenced or cautioned in 2015) while men 
were most likely to receive immediate custody (29% in 2015) (Figure 8.06). The 
custody rate for knife possession offences is higher than for all indictable offences (for 
females, 21% compared with 15%; for males, 34% compared with 28% in 2015). It is 
also lower for females than for males. Relatively more women than men received a 
caution (18% and 13% in 2015 respectively): females were more likely to be dealt with 
out of court for knife possession offences, similarly to indictable offences in general, 
as discussed in Chapter 5: Defendants. (PNDs cannot be given for knife possession 
offences.) 
                                                          
196 This section draws data from the following publication: 
https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/knife-possession-sentencing-quarterly . The data presented here 
is not published elsewhere. Data on knife possession is included in Criminal Justice Statistics Quarterly: 
December 2015, but is not directly comparable to that in the above publication, which reports on an all 
offence basis and is how the MoJ reports on knife possession offences. 
197 Section 139A of the Criminal Justice Act 1988, which was inserted by the Offensive Weapons Act 
1996, created two new offences which may be committed by any person who has with him on school 
premises: The offence of being in possession, on school premises, of a bladed or pointed article is 
punishable by up to two years' imprisonment and a fine. Possession of an offensive weapon on school 
premises is punishable by up to four years' imprisonment and a fine. 
198 Under section 139 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 it is an offence, for a person to have with him in a 
public place any article which has a blade or is sharply pointed, except a folding pocket knife with a 
cutting edge of three inches or less. The offence is punishable by up to six months’ imprisonment and/or 
a fine following summary conviction, or up to four years’ imprisonment and/or a fine following conviction 
on indictment (i.e. in the Crown Court). 
199 This offence is punishable by up to six months' imprisonment and a £5,000 fine following conviction 
in the magistrates’ court, or up to four years' imprisonment and an unlimited fine following conviction in 
the Crown Court. (section 1 of the Prevention of Crime Act 1953) 
200 Low numbers of female offenders prevent meaningful analysis of this offence. 
201 Where sex is known. In 2015 0.3% of offenders had an unstated sex. 
202 Note that knife possession offence figures from the Police National Computer are on an all offence 
basis while figures from the MoJ Court Outcomes Database are on a principal offence basis – this 
comparison is not exact. Please refer to the technical guide for more information. 

 
 
147 
 
Figure 8.06: Proportion of offenders dealt with for knife possession, by 
sentencing or cautioning outcome and sex, 2015 
 
Women were more likely to be cautioned or sentenced for possession of an article with 
a blade or point (9% of all offenders were female in 2015) than for possession of an 
offensive weapon (6% of all offenders were female).  
In 2015 females received an ACSL of 5.6 months for possession of an article with a 
blade or point and an ACSL of 7.1 months for possession of an offensive weapon. The 
ACSL was consistently 1-2 months shorter for females then males for both offences. 
In the latest year both females and males were most likely to receive a sentence up to 
and including 3 months for possession of an article with a blade or point, and most 
likely to receive a sentence over 6 months for possession of an offensive weapon. 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Caution
Absolute / Conditional discharge
Fine
Community sentence
Suspended sentence
Immediate custody
Other disposal
Proportion of offenders dealt with
Females
Males

 
 
148 
 
Actual Bodily Harm and Grievous Bodily Harm203 : Fewer people were dealt with for 
these offences than in 2005, and women were less likely to be dealt with in court 
The total number of people dealt with for Actual Bodily Harm (ABH) has fallen over the 
decade by 82% for women and 75% for men, to 2,600 and 12,800 respectively in the 
latest year. The number of women and men dealt with for Grievous Bodily Harm (GBH) 
has also fallen, by 42% and 33% respectively, to 670 and 6,800 in the latest year 
(Figure 8.07). 
Figure 8.07: Number of people dealt with for ABH and GBH, by sex, 2005 to 2015 
 
The proportion of defendants who were dealt with in court for ABH increased for both 
women and men over the decade, from 24% to 54% for women and 47% to 76% for 
women. The same was true for women dealt with for GBH: 86% were dealt with in 
court in 2005 compared with 96% in 2015. The proportion of men dealt with in court 
for GBH increased from 95% in 2005 to 98% in 2015. 
Of those prosecuted, the conviction ratio for ABH has varied but risen overall for both 
women and men, and was 66% and 80% respectively in the latest year. The same was 
true for GBH, with a conviction ratio of 65% for women in the latest year, and 72% for 
men204. Over the decade, men have usually had a higher conviction ratio for each 
offence.  
                                                          
203 Includes GBH with intent, and GBH without intent. 
204 GBH without intent is unusual in that there are more convictions than prosecutions (giving an 
apparent conviction ratio greater than 100%). A partial explanation for this may be that some offenders 
are originally prosecuted for GBH with intent, but this offence is downgraded to a GBH without intent, for 
example because of the difficulty of providing sufficient evidence to demonstrate a defendant’s intent. In 
this report, the offences have been grouped together to give an overall conviction ratio. 
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Number of people dealt with
ABH (male)
ABH (female)
GBH (male)
GBH (female)

 
 
149 
 
The proportion of defendants who were remanded at the magistrates’ court for ABH 
increased between 2011 and 2013, and has remained stable since then for both sexes, 
with women being less likely to be remanded in custody and more likely to be 
remanded on bail compared with men. In 2015, 81% of females were remanded on 
bail and 6% in custody, compared with 71% of males remanded on bail and 20% in 
custody. The rest were not remanded.  
Similarly, the proportion of defendants who were remanded at the magistrates’ court 
for GBH increased for both sexes between 2011 and 2013, and has remained fairly 
stable since then. In 2015, 74% of female defendants were remanded on bail and 23% 
in custody, compared with 36% on bail and 60% in custody for men; as with ABH, 
women were more likely than men to be remanded in bail and less likely to be 
remanded in custody. (The higher levels of custodial remand for GBH reflect the 
greater seriousness of the offence.) 
The proportion of defendants who were remanded at the Crown Court for ABH has 
remained fairly stable since 2011 for both sexes. Within this, the proportion who were 
remanded on bail (73% of women and 55% of men in 2015) has decreased and the 
proportion who were remanded in custody (17% of women and 35% of men in 2015) 
has increased. Similarly, the proportion of defendants who were remanded at the 
Crown Court for GBH has remained fairly stable since 2011 for both sexes. This is also 
true for the subgroups of those remanded on bail or in custody. In 2015, 66% of women 
were remanded on bail and 31% in custody, compared with 51% of men on bail and 
45% in custody. The same differences between the sexes in patterns of remand for 
these offences, i.e. that male defendants were more likely to be remanded in custody 
than females, can be seen at the Crown Court as at magistrates’ courts. This aligns 
with the overall patterns of remand by sex, as discussed in Chapter 5: Defendants. 
Both female and male offenders were more likely to receive a community sentence or 
suspended sentence for ABH than GBH, for which immediate custody was more likely. 
Female offenders were more likely to receive a community sentence for ABH than 
males (37% compared with 21%). The proportion who received a suspended sentence 
was similar, at 41% of females and 37% of males. Similar proportions of females and 
males received a community sentence for GBH (9% and 7% respectively), but women 
were more likely to receive a suspended sentence (47%) than men (26%) (Figure 
8.08). There has been an increase in the use of suspended sentences over the decade 
for both ABH and GBH, for both sexes, which mirrors overall trends. Similarly, the use 
of community sentences has decreased for both offences and sexes.  
The immediate custody rate for ABH was fairly stable from 2005 to 2010 for females 
and males, then increased to 17% and 40% in 2014 respectively. It then slightly fell to 
15% for females and 39% for males in 2015. For GBH, the rate has remained similar 
since 2005, and was 39% for women in 2015 and 63% for men. For both offences, 
men have consistently had a higher immediate custody rate. 
 
 

 
 
150 
 
Figure 8.08: Proportion of offenders sentenced for ABH and GBH, by sentencing 
outcome, offence and sex, 2015 
Females 
 
Males 
 
 
 
 
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
ABH
GBH
Proportion of female offenders sentenced
Fine
Community sentence
Suspended sentence
Immediate custody
Other
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
ABH
GBH
Proportion of male offenders sentenced
Fine
Community sentence
Suspended sentence
Immediate custody
Other

 
 
151 
 
Shoplifting : Although women were less likely to be dealt with in court than men for this 
offence, three quarters of female theft prosecutions were for shoplifting in 2015 
Shoplifting is another common offence, particularly so for females. In 2015, it 
accounted for about three quarters of females prosecuted for theft offences (77%), and 
about half (54%) against males. The total number of people dealt with for shoplifting 
has fallen by 43% over the decade for females, and by 25% for males. For both sexes, 
this fall has come almost entirely from the number given out of court disposals, which 
mirrors overall trends. 
In 2015, shoplifting was most commonly dealt with in court (as opposed to with an out 
of court disposal), especially for male offenders (Figure 8.09). The difference between 
sexes may be because females and males commit different types of shoplifting 
offences; for example, a higher proportion of females receive a Penalty Notice for 
Disorder (PND) for the less serious offence of retail theft (under £100), than males. 
Figure 8.09: Proportion of offenders given a PND, caution or conviction for 
shoplifting offences, by sex, 2005 to 2015 
 
However, the use of out of court disposals for shoplifting has been falling since 2007 
for cautions and 2009 for PNDs, for both sexes. This may be due to a combination of 
many factors, as described in Chapter 4. This fall has had a greater impact on females 
than males, because historically they were more likely to be dealt with out of court. 
4% of females were remanded in custody at the magistrates’ court for shoplifting in 
2015, compared with 6% of males. 51% of those females who were remanded in 
custody and sentenced at the magistrates’ court received immediate custody, 
compared with 56% of males. At the Crown Court, again a lower proportion of females 
were remanded in custody (18%) than males (26%). 
 
 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Proportion of offenders
PNDs
Cautions
Prosecutions
PNDs
Cautions
Prosecutions
Males
Females
2005
2010
2015

 
 
152 
 
A similar proportion of women and men were sent for trial at the Crown Court for 
shoplifting in 2015 (1%) and this has been consistent over the decade. Due to the high 
proportion of shoplifting offences within the indictable theft offence group for females, 
the committal rate for this offence group is lower for females (5%) than males (13%). 
This in turn is a driver of the overall committal rate for females being lower, as 
discussed in Chapter 5: Defendants.  
The conviction ratio for shoplifting in 2015 for females was 92%, and similarly for males 
it was 93%. This has been fairly constant over the decade. 
For both sexes, 89% of offenders sentenced had a previous caution or conviction for 
shoplifting, with other common previous offences being indictable drug offences and 
common assault. 
In 2015, the average time from offence to completion was slightly higher for women 
(median of 42 days) than men (35 days)205. These times have both been increasing 
over the past five years. The increase is due to the average time from charge to listing 
increasing, for both sexes. The median time from offence to charge has remained very 
low for both sexes (1 day), as has the average time from first listing to completion 
(median of 1 day for women and 0 days206 for men in 2015). 
The custody rate in 2015 for females sentenced for shoplifting was 15%, and for males 
was 22%. The overall custody rate for females, for indictable offences, was also 15%. 
This is to be expected, as shoplifting was by far the most prevalent indictable offence 
for females. The shoplifting custody rate for both women and men has been increasing 
since 2009.  
The ACSL for shoplifting has decreased overall since 2005, for both sexes. In 2015, 
the ACSL for both sexes was 1.7 months. The average fine has fluctuated for both 
sexes. In 2015 it was £86 for women and £91 for men. 
 
 
                                                          
205 The mean was also higher for women: 77 compared with 70 days for men. The mean is higher than 
median, as it is more susceptible to extreme outliers. 
206 A median value of 0 indicates that the case had a first listing and completed on the same day. 

 
 
153 
 
Drug offences : Women have become less likely to be sentenced to immediate custody 
for indictable drug offences 
In 2015, females accounted for 8% of defendants207 prosecuted for indictable drug 
offences. The conviction ratio for females was 87%, and for males was 93%. These 
figures are similar to those a decade ago. 
20% of females sentenced for indictable drug offences in 2015 were first time 
offenders, compared with 11% of males. 52% of females sentenced had a previous 
conviction or caution for an indictable drug offence, compared with 71% of males. 
However, females were more likely to have a previous caution or conviction for 
shoplifting (47%) than males (32%). 
6% of females were remanded in custody at the magistrates’ court for indictable drug 
offences, compared with 11% of males. Most defendants of both sexes who were 
remanded on bail or in custody were committed for trial at the Crown Court. At the 
Crown Court, about three quarters of females were granted bail, compared with half of 
males. Of those who were remanded in custody, 60% of females were sentenced to 
immediate custody, compared with 82% of males. The remainder of these females 
were mostly either acquitted (14% of those remanded in custody) or given a suspended 
sentence (13% of those remanded in custody). The proportion remanded in custody at 
the Crown Court for indictable drug offences has fluctuated but fallen overall from 21% 
in 2011 to 17% in 2015. 
 
 
                                                          
207 With known sex. Defendants with unknown or not stated sex accounted for 1% of defendants 
prosecuted for indictable drug offences. 

 
 
154 
 
Indictable drug offence cases with female defendants took longer than those with 
males, on average, in 2015, with a median of 122 and 84 days respectively from 
offence to completion208. This has been increasing since 2011, despite the number of 
defendants with completed cases falling (especially for males) (Figure 8.10). 
Figure 8.10: Average number of days taken from offence to completion and 
number of defendants whose cases have completed, for indictable drug 
offences, 2011 to 2015 
 
The increase for both females and males in time taken is due to the average number 
of days from offence to charge increasing, from 41 days in 2011 to 48 days in 2015 for 
women, and from 1 day in 2011 to 15 days in 2015 for men.  
 
 
                                                          
208 The mean was also higher for women: 183 compared with 145 days for men. The mean is higher 
than median, as it is more susceptible to extreme outliers. 
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Number of defendants whose 
cases have completed
Median offence to completion time 
(days)
Female (offence to completion time)
Male (offence to completion time)
Female (number of defendants whose cases have completed)
Male (number of defendants whose cases have completed)

 
 
155 
 
The custody rate for women, for indictable drug offences, has fallen by 9 percentage 
points over the past decade (Figure 8.11). This does not mirror overall trends: the 
custody rate for women, for all indictable offences, has remained stable.  
Figure 8.11: Custody rate for indictable drug offences, by sex, 2005 to 2015 
 
The ACSL for indictable drug offences was generally falling for both sexes until 2012, 
and has increased since then. In 2015, it was 29 months for women and 34 months for 
men. 
 
 
 
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Custody rate
Female
Male

 
 
156 
 
The change in sentencing outcomes may be due to a focus on diverting female 
offenders from custody209or another change in sentencing behaviours, or it could be 
due to a change in the case mix (or a combination of factors). Figure 8.12 shows that 
if sentencing behaviour had not changed, more female offenders would have been 
sentenced to immediate custody in recent years. However, this difference is only small 
and later in the decade. A larger effect seems to come from the offence mix; if the 
offence mix had not changed, the custody rate would have remained relatively high. 
Therefore the fall in custody rate seems to be mostly due to changes in the types of 
indictable drug offences women have been sentenced for. 
Figure 8.12: Custody rate for female sentenced for indictable drug offences, the 
custody rate if sentencing patterns did not change, and the rate if the offence 
mix did not change, 2005 to 2015210 
 
 
 
                                                          
209 For example, see page 9 of http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/docs/corston-report-march-
2007.pdf  
210 Projected by first holding constant (for each offence) the proportion of offenders receiving each 
disposal, but allowing the volumes of each offence to vary as they did. Secondly, then holding constant 
(for each sentencing disposal) the offence mix, and allowing volumes of each sentencing disposal to 
vary as they did. These were both aggregated for each year to obtain the projections. 
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Custody rate
Actual
Sentencing held constant
Offence mix held constant

 
 
157 
 
Figure 8.13 shows the offences for which the number of women sentenced to 
immediate custody has fallen. Most noticeably, fewer women have been sentenced to 
immediate custody for intent to supply a class A drug. 
Figure 8.13: Number of female offenders sentenced to immediate custody for 
selected indictable drug offences211, by offence, 2005 to 2015 
 
 
 
                                                          
211 Only high volume offences are shown. 
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Number of female offenders sentenced 
to custody
Importation - Class A
Importation - Class C
Intent to supply - Class A
Intent to supply - Class B
Intent to supply - Class C
Possession - Class A

 
 
158 
 
Figure 8.14 shows that the same offences did not necessarily follow the same trend 
for male offenders, except for intent to supply (class C). While the number sentenced 
to immediate custody for intent to supply (class A) declined for women, it has remained 
high for men. These differences in offence mix may help to explain the differences in 
outcomes discussed above. 
Figure 8.14: Number of male offenders sentenced to immediate custody for 
selected indictable drug offences, by offence, 2005 to 2015 
 
 
 
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
5,000
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Number of male offenders sentenced to 
immediate custody
Importation - Class A
Importation - Class C
Intent to supply - Class A
Intent to supply - Class B
Intent to supply - Class C
Possession - Class A

 
 
159 
 
Truancy (parent failing to secure attendance of child): females were disproportionately 
likely to be prosecuted for this offence, but they have similar outcomes to males and 
were less likely to have a previous caution or conviction 
In 2015, 16,850 defendants212 were prosecuted for truancy. Of these, 70% were 
female. This may be partly because lone parents with dependent children represented 
25% of all families with dependent children in 2015, and females accounted for 90% 
of these lone parents213. Assuming the number of families with two female parents is 
about the same as the number with two male parents, this means females were more 
likely than males to be responsible for a child. 
The total number of defendants prosecuted for truancy has been rising (Figure 8.15), 
particularly since 2013. This follows an increased focus on truancy, including new rules 
on term-time holidays. 
Figure 8.15: Number of defendants prosecuted for truancy, by sex, 2005 to 2015 
 
No females were remanded in custody at the magistrates’ court for truancy in 2015; 
95% were not remanded. The custodial remand rate was similar for males. However, 
the conviction ratio was higher for women (79%) than men (70%). 
 
 
                                                          
212 Of known sex. Defendants with unknown or not stated sex accounted for 19% of offenders 
prosecuted for truancy in 2015. 
213 See 
http://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/families/bulletins/famil
iesandhouseholds/2015-01-28#lone-parents  
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Number of defendants prosecuted
Female
Male

 
 
160 
 
The average time from offence to completion has been increasing for both female and 
male defendants since 2011, and the number of defendants whose cases have 
completed has been increasing since 2013. In 2015, the median number of days from 
offence to completion was 144 for women and 151 for men214. The increase in overall 
time, over the decade, has been due to an increase in the average number of days 
from offence to charge (with a median of 91 for women and 101 for men in 2015). For 
both sexes, the median number of days from first listing to completion was 0 in 2015, 
indicating that the case had a first listing and was completed on the same day (Figure 
8.16). 
Figure 8.16: Median number of days taken from offence to completion for 
truancy cases, including cases over ten years, 2011 to 2015 
 
 
 
                                                          
214 The mean was also slightly lower for women: 149 days compared with 155 for men. The mean is 
higher than median, as it is more susceptible to extreme outliers. 
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Median number of days
Female (offence to charge)
Female (charge to listing)
Female (listing to completion)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Median nunber of days
Male (offence to charge)
Male (charge to listing)
Male (listing to completion)

 
 
161 
 
Sentencing outcomes for truancy were similar for both sexes in 2015. About three 
quarters of both female and male offenders were given a fine in 2015, of on average 
£180. Due to a sharp rise from 2007 to 2009, and 2011 to 2012, the average fine for 
truancy has increased by approximately £20 in real terms for both women and men215. 
The second most common outcome was a conditional discharge; about one seventh 
of offenders received them. 8 offenders were sentenced to immediate custody for 
truancy in 2015; all of these offenders were female. 
Males sentenced were more likely to have a previous caution or conviction for common 
assault, and females were more likely to have a previous caution or conviction for 
truancy (Figure 8.17). 
Figure 8.17: Percentage of offenders sentenced for truancy who had a previous 
caution or conviction for selected offences, by the offence for which they had a 
previous caution or conviction and sex, 2015216 
 
 
 
                                                          
215 Calculated using the Bank of England inflation calculator. 
216 An offender may be counted more than once if he or she has been convicted different offences 
previously so that the sum of offenders with the previous convictions or cautions may be greater than 
the number of index offenders. 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Shoplifting
Cruelty to or
neglect of
children
Common
assault
Drug Offences
(indictable)
Truancy (parent
failing to secure
attendance of
child)
Proportion of offenders sentenced
Female
Male

 
 
162 
 
Cruelty to or neglect of children : female offenders were relatively more likely to be 
cautioned, although males were less likely to be dealt with for this offence 
In 2015, 1,300 offenders received a caution for cruelty to or neglect of children, and 
979 offenders were prosecuted217. Female offenders were less likely to go to court than 
males: 62% were cautioned rather than prosecuted, compared with 46% of males. 
Overall, more females were dealt with than males, and this has been consistent over 
the decade (Figure 8.18). The likely reason for this is similar to that for truancy: females 
were more likely than males to be responsible for a child. 
Figure 8.18: Number of offenders cautioned or prosecuted for cruelty to or 
neglect of children, by sex, 2005 to 2015 
 
Most females and males were granted bail at the magistrates’ court (91% and 83% 
respectively in 2015) and Crown Court (80% and 75% respectively in 2015) for cruelty 
to or neglect of children in 2015.  
 
 
                                                          
217 Of known sex. Defendants with unknown or not stated sex accounted for 1% of offenders cautioned 
and 1% of offenders prosecuted for cruelty to or neglect of children in 2015. 
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Number of offenders
Female cautions
Male cautions
Female prosecutions
Male prosecutions

 
 
163 
 
The median number of days from offence to completion for cruelty to or neglect of 
children cases was slightly lower for female defendants than males in 2015, at 257 and 
280 days respectively. This has fluctuated over the past five years. The mean also 
fluctuated over the past five years, and in 2015 was slightly higher for females (504 
days) than males (486). The difference between median and mean indicates that there 
are a small number of long cases for women, which will have driven up the mean far 
more than the median. 
The conviction ratio in 2015 was slightly higher for females (79%) than for males (73%). 
Male offenders were more likely to receive an immediate custodial sentence (29%) 
than female offenders (13%). Community sentences were more prevalent for female 
offenders (35%) than male (23%). The most common sentencing outcome for both 
sexes was a suspended sentence, at 46% of females and 41% of males sentenced.  
The ACSL for cruelty to or neglect of children has fluctuated for both sexes over the 
decade, due to the relatively low (<200) numbers of people sentenced to immediate 
custody each year. The ACSL in 2015 was 21 months for women and 19 months for 
men. 
Females sentenced for cruelty to or neglect of children in 2015 were more likely to 
have a previous caution or conviction for a similar offence (11%) than males (4%). 
 
 
 

 
 
164 
 
Benefit fraud: just over half of offenders prosecuted in 2015 were female and 
sentencing outcomes were similar for both sexes 
Offenders who have committed benefit fraud may be convicted for an offence that 
specifically mentions benefit fraud, or for a more general offence such as an offence 
related to fraud, forgery, identity or serious organised crime. It is not possible to 
specifically identify benefit fraud within these more general offences and so the only 
offences included in this section are those that explicitly mention benefit fraud. 
Two specific offences make up the vast majority of benefit fraud offences for which 
defendants are prosecuted and convicted at court: the triable either way offence of 
dishonest representation for obtaining benefits and the summary offence of false 
representation for obtaining benefits, contravention of regulations, etc. The main 
difference between these is that dishonesty needs to be proven in order to convict 
someone of dishonest representation, which is not the case for false representation. 
There was not a significant difference in the types of offences between sexes, with 
about three quarters of both female and male offenders of benefit fraud sentenced for 
dishonest representation, and about a quarter for false representation. 
The total number of defendants prosecuted for benefit fraud has been volatile over the 
decade (Figure 8.19). 5,400 defendants were prosecuted for benefit fraud in 2015, and 
just over half of these were female218. This proportion has increased overall from 48 to 
56%, since 2005. 
Figure 8.19: Number of defendants prosecuted for benefit fraud, by sex, 2005 to 
2015 
 
Just under half of both females and males were granted bail at the magistrates’ court 
for benefit fraud in 2015 – most of the rest were not remanded. At the Crown Court, 
                                                          
218 Of known sex. Defendants with unknown or not stated sex accounted for 18% of offenders 
prosecuted for benefit fraud in 2015. 
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Number of defendants prosecuted
Female
Male

 
 
165 
 
about three quarters of females were granted bail (77%) and most of the rest were not 
remanded (21%). 2% were remanded in custody. Males were more likely to not be 
remanded (27%) and a lower proportion were granted bail than women (69%). 4% 
were remanded in custody. 
Benefit fraud cases with female defendants took less time on average than those with 
male defendants, with medians of 593 and 687 days respectively in 2015219. For both 
sexes, most of the time (87% for females and 86% for males) was spent in the offence 
to charge stage, on average. Despite a fall since 2011 in the number of defendants 
whose cases have been completed, the median number of days from offence to 
completion has been increasing for both sexes since 2013, for benefit fraud. This is 
due to an increase in the average number of days from offence to charge, rather than 
time taken in court (Figure 8.20). 
Figure 8.20: Median number of days taken from offence to completion for benefit 
fraud cases, including cases over ten years, 2011 to 2015 
 
The conviction ratio in 2015 was 92% for females, and 90% for males. For both sexes, 
this has increased by 8 percentage points over the decade. Sentencing outcomes were 
similar for females and males, with just under half of offenders receiving community 
sentences (43% and 42% respectively in 2015), and about a quarter receiving a 
suspended sentence (26% and 23% respectively). The remainder mostly received 
fines or a conditional discharge.  
51 females and 91 males were sentenced to immediate custody, with an ACSL of 7.7 
and 8.3 months respectively. The average fine was £225 for females and £264 for 
males. It is not possible to comment on reasons for the difference in ACSL and average 
fine, without knowledge of the unique mitigating and aggravating factors surrounding 
each case. 
 
                                                          
219 The mean was also lower for women: 841 days compared with 967 days for men. The mean is 
higher than median, as it is more susceptible to extreme outliers. 
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Median number of days
Female (offence to charge)
Female (charge to listing)
Female (listing to completion)
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Median number of days
Male (offence to charge)
Male (charge to listing)
Male (listing to completion)

 
 
166 
 
Offences with long custodial sentences 
In 2015, 17 women and 352 men received a life sentence. Of these, 14 (82%) and 252 
(72%) were for murder, respectively. Offences for which multiple men and no women 
received life sentences include rape, attempted murder, GBH, robbery, and 
kidnapping. 
24 women and 1,093 men received long determinate custodial sentences (over ten 
years) in 2015. For both, these included rape, drug supply, and violent offences (Figure 
8.21). The most common offence for which women received a long sentence was 
manslaughter, whereas for men it was rape of a female aged under 16. 
Figure 8.21: Number of offenders sentenced to immediate custody of over 10 
years for selected offences220, by offence and sex, 2015 
 
In 2015, 133 offenders were sentenced to immediate custody for manslaughter221. Of 
these, 16% were female. This is higher than the overall rate; 8% of all offenders 
sentenced to immediate custody were female in 2015222. However, the custody rate 
for manslaughter in 2015 was 75% for females and 91% for males. In addition, the 
average custodial sentence length (ACSL) for manslaughter, for females, was 113.2 
months, whereas for males it was 85.3 months223 in 2015. This was the offence with 
the highest ACSL for female offenders, and was about double the length of their 
second longest ACSL (61.7 months, for causing death of a child or vulnerable person). 
It was also the only offence for which the ACSL was so noticeably higher for females. 
It is not possible to comment on reasons for this, without knowledge of the unique 
mitigating and aggravating factors surrounding each case. 
                                                          
220 Only the most common offences receiving long custodial sentences are shown. 
221 There were no defendants with unknown or not stated sex sentenced to immediate custody for 
manslaughter in 2015. 
222 Of known sex. Defendants with unknown or not stated sex accounted for 1% offenders sentenced to 
immediate custody in 2015. 
223 Note that this calculation does not include life or indeterminate sentences. 
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Rape of a female aged under 16
Intent to supply a controlled drug - Class A
Rape of a female aged 16 or over
Wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm
Rape of a female child under 13 by a male
Robbery
Attempted Murder
Unlawful importation - Class A
Aggravated Burglary in a Dwelling
Kidnapping, etc.
Manslaughter
Other Endangering life - indictable only
Number of offenders
Female
Male

 
 
167 
 
Chapter 9: Practitioners  
This chapter reports on the trends in the composition of staff and practitioners 
throughout the criminal justice system (CJS) by sex. It draws upon a mixture of 
published and previously unpublished extracts of human resources records for 
different CJS organisations (see footnotes below for details). As in previous versions 
of this report, we will be including information on the makeup of the police, Ministry of 
Justice (MoJ), Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), magistracy and judiciary. 
Information on the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) will continue to be 
included, although data limitations will restrict what we are able to say about probation 
services. To allow for variable changes in headcount throughout the period considered, 
the sexes are best considered in terms of proportions of staff rather than absolute 
numbers. 
Trends in CJS organisations 
The proportions of female practitioners varies among the various organisations 
involved in the CJS224. Only slightly more than a quarter of judges and police officers 
(28% 
and 
29% 
respectively) 
were 
female; 
females 
were 
considerably 
underrepresented in these organisations compared with the population as a whole. In 
contrast, two thirds of staff in the MoJ and CPS (67% and 65% respectively) were 
female. In general, CJS organisations dealing directly with offenders (e.g. the police or 
prison officers) were predominantly male, while back-office support functions such as 
civil servants were predominantly female (Figure 9.01). 
Figure 9.01: Proportion of practitioners in organisations involved in the CJS of 
each sex, by organisation, most recent year available225 
 
                                                          
224 Information about sex was provided for all individuals in this chapter; there are no unknown or not 
stated cases for any of the CJS organisations discussed. 
225 Latest data available for each – see footnotes below.  
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Police
officers
CPS
Magistrates
Judges
NOMS
(excluding
probation)
MoJ
Percentage of practitioners
Female
Male

 
 
168 
 
Across all organisations except the magistracy, there has been a slight trend for the 
makeup to become closer to an even split between the sexes since 2011226. 
The largest increase in the proportion of females over this period has been amongst 
judges227, who have seen a 6 percentage point rise, from 22% to 28%. There has also 
been a 2 percentage point increase in the proportion of female magistrates228, although 
the magistracy is close to being equally split between men and women (having 
increased from 51% to 53%). 
NOMS staff229 (excluding probation)230 have also seen increases in the proportion who 
are women over this period, from 36% to 39%. Within NOMS, there were clear 
differences in the sex breakdowns of different functions. There is a smaller proportion 
of females among the prison service than NOMS as a whole – 37%, having risen from 
35%. However, 60% of those working in women’s prisons were female, a proportion 
that has been broadly consistent over the period and is similarly consistent across the 
whole of the female estate in 2015. In contrast to the prison service, three quarters 
(75%) of those working in the National Probation Service were female. The largest rise 
in the female proportion has been among NOMS headquarters staff, who have seen a 
17 percentage point increase, from 41% to 58%. 
There has been a smaller increase in the proportion of female police officers231, which 
rose from 27% to 29% over this period. Over this period, the proportion of females 
among those joining the police force fluctuated, but had a net increase of 3 percentage 
points, from 28% to 31%. The proportion of joiners exceeded the proportion of leavers 
throughout this period, driving the overall increase, but the proportion of leavers who 
were female has been increasing much more quickly (from 14% to 23%). 
As is seen in NOMS, there were differences in the sex breakdowns of different police 
support functions. Both special constables (31% female) and police community 
support officers (45% female) were more likely to be men than women, whereas police 
staff were mostly women (61%). All three of these police support functions have seen 
a consistent sex breakdown over this period. 
                                                          
226 Or the equivalent, for snapshot financial year rather than calendar year data. 
227 Self-declared from HR records, for judges in courts only, as at 1 April 2012 – 2016. Reported in the 
2016 Judicial Diversity Statistics: https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/publications/judicial-statistics-2016/ 
228 Self-declared from HR records, for serving magistrates, as at 1 April 2012 – 2016. Reported in the 
2016 Judicial Diversity Statistics: https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/publications/judicial-statistics-2016/ 
229 Self-declared from HR records, as at 31 March 2012 – 2016. The 2014/15 MoJ Diversity Report is 
available from https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/diversity-report-2014-to-2015, but numbers 
will not match as this includes NOMS and only includes ‘on strength’ (i.e. paid) staff. Excludes probation, 
for consistency across years – probation officers in the NPS became part of NOMS when it was set up, 
having previously been part of the Probation Service. 
230 Following the Transforming Rehabilitation reforms to probation and creation and subsequent transfer 
of the NPS into NOMS on 1 June 2014, it is not possible to make a direct comparison to previous years 
for probation staff. Data is not available for Community Rehabilitation Companies. 
231 Self-declared from HO records, as at 31 March 2012 – 2016. Police workforce statistics are available 
from https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/police-workforce-england-and-wales. 

 
 
169 
 
Very similar trends have been seen for MoJ232 and CPS233 staff; both have seen their 
proportion of female staff fall by 1 percentage point over this period, to 67% and 65% 
respectively.  
Trends in senior staff 
The proportion of senior staff who were female was lower than for staff generally 
across all CJS organisations considered (Figure 9.02)234. This is a pattern commonly 
seen beyond the CJS, which is believed to be underpinned by a variety of factors, 
including the tendency of senior staff to be older (given changes in patterns of 
employment by sex over time), the impact of child-rearing on career trajectories, and 
sociocultural norms. Nevertheless, those organisations with higher proportions of 
female staff generally also tended to have higher proportions of their senior staff be 
female. 
Across all these CJS organisations, there is a general trend for the proportion of senior 
staff who were female to have increased since 2011235, and to a greater extent than 
their proportion of female staff generally. 
Figure 9.02: Proportion of senior practitioners in organisations involved in the 
CJS of each sex, by organisation, most recent year available 
 
 
 
                                                          
232 Self-declared from HR records, as at 31 March 2012 – 2016. The 2014/15 MoJ Diversity Report is 
available from https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/diversity-report-2014-to-2015, but numbers 
will not match as this encompasses NOMS and only includes ‘on strength’ (i.e. paid) staff. 
233 Self-declared from HR records, as at 31 December 2011 – 2015. CPS workforce diversity data can 
be found through: https://www.cps.gov.uk/data/equality_and_diversity/index.html, but numbers may not 
match where headcount specifications differ from those used by the ONS. 
234 Caution should be taken when comparing figures for senior staff, however, because the numbers of 
individuals represented are small - changing a single case could have a noticeable effect. 
235 Or the equivalent, for snapshot financial year rather than calendar year data. 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Police officers
CPS
Judges
NOMS
(excluding
probation)
MoJ
Percentage of senior staff
Female
Male

 
 
170 
 
The CPS has seen a 12 percentage point increase over this period in this proportion 
of senior women, mostly in the first two years of the period. In contrast, the MoJ saw 
its proportion remain broadly stable at around 40% for the first four years, before 
increasing to 45% in the latest year. 
The CPS (53%) and MoJ (45%) have the highest proportions of senior staff who were 
female, with the CPS the only organisation considered to have women as a majority of 
its senior staff. However, these proportions were considerably lower than for their staff 
generally, and of the CJS organisations considered, the MoJ has the largest gap 
between the proportion of its male (1.5%) and female (0.6%) staff who were considered 
senior. 
The police (23%) and judiciary (20%) have considerably lower proportions of senior 
staff who were female. However, this has increased steadily for the both organisations 
over this period, by 7 and 6 percentage points respectively. 
35% of NOMS senior staff (excluding probation) were female, which is the closest to 
their proportion of female staff generally among the CJS organisations considered. 
This represents an 17 percentage point increase over this period. This is the largest 
increase among the CJS organisations considered. 
 
 

 
 
171 
 
Revisions Policy 
In accordance with Principle 2 of the Code of Practice for Official Statistics, the Ministry 
of Justice is required to publish transparent guidance on its policy for revisions. A copy 
of this statement can be found at:  
http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/statistics/mojstats/statistics-revisions-policy.pdf 
The Ministry of Justice aims to avoid the need for revisions to publications unless they 
are absolutely necessary and put systems and processes in place to minimise the 
number of revisions.  
Within the Ministry of Justice’s statistical publications there can be three main reasons 
for statistics to be revised:  
 
Changes in how either source administrative systems collect information or a 
change in statistical methodology to improve accuracy and measurement. 
 
Receipt of subsequent information which alters our understanding of previous 
periods (for example – late recording on one of the administrative IT systems 
used operationally). 
 
Errors in our statistical systems and processes.  
Our policy in handling revisions is to be transparent with users about:  
 
The need for revisions.  
 
How and when to expect revisions as part of our standard processes. 
 
The processes by which other revisions will be communicated and published.  
To meet these commitments, all of our statistical publications will:  
 
Ensure that the need for major revisions for any series are pre-announced on 
the Ministry of Justice website. 
 
Include a detailed revisions policy within every release.  
 
Detail how users will be informed of the need for revisions.  
 
Give detailed and full explanations as to why the revisions were necessary.  
In addition, the annual report from the Head of Profession to the National Statistician 
will: 
 
Provide information on how many revisions were required to our publications 
and the reasons for these.  
 
Publish a time-series of revisions due to errors in our statistical processes and 
procedures so we can monitor the quality of our outputs.  
 

 
 
172 
 
Contacts 
Press enquiries should be directed to the Ministry of Justice press office:  
Tel: xx-xxxx-xxxx  
Email: xxx@xxx.xx 
Other enquiries about these statistics should be directed to the Justice Statistics 
Analytical Services division of the Ministry of Justice:  
David Dawson, Head of Criminal Justice Outcomes and Equalities Statistics 
Ministry of Justice, 7th Floor, 102 Petty France, London, SW1H 9AJ  
Email: xxx@xxx.xx 
 
General enquiries about the statistical work of the Ministry of Justice can be e-mailed 
to: xxx@xxx.xx 
General information about the official statistics system of the UK is available from: 
http://statisticsauthority.gov.uk/about-the-authority/uk-statistical-system 
Feedback  
The structure and content of this report is continually being reviewed to reflect user 
requirements. If you have any feedback about the changes referred to in the 
introduction, or the report more generally, please contact the production team through 
the Justice Statistics Analytical Services division of the Ministry of Justice:  
Email: xxx@xxx.xx 
 
 
© Crown copyright 
Produced by the Ministry of Justice 
Alternative formats are available on request from 
xxx@xxx.xx