ghg
POSTNOTE Number 507 September 2015
Trends in Crime and Criminal Justice Overview
Behaviours are criminalised through legislation or judicial decision, and this is influenced by public attitudes. Crime is widely considered to be falling but the data underpinning this trend are complex. This POSTnote describes crime patterns, and highlights issues with crime measurement and data. It also identifies key developments in the criminal justice system.
Verifying the impact of crime depends on consideration of changing crime patterns and the demand crime places on services. Prison populations are increasing while crime is declining; thought in part to reflect changes to sentencing and policy. Key reforms of the criminal justice system are in progress, such as the introduction of ‘payment by results’ in the probation service. Developments driven by recent policy reforms and external factors include the risks and opportunities posed by technological advances, increasing emphasis on evidence-based approaches, more collaboration between agencies, and issues of legitimacy, accountability, access and rights.
Figure 1. Trends in Total Offences in England and Wales
Crime in the UK is reported to be falling; a trend seen since the 1990s and mirrored across the developed world.1 For instance, property crimes (such as burglary, car theft and robbery) have fallen from 15.3m offences recorded in 1995 to 6m in 2013/14 in England and Wales,2 which has been linked to increased security measures.3 Although overall levels of recorded and reported crime have declined (see Figure 1), the trend is slowing and some crime categories present complex challenges, such as cybercrime,4,5,6,7,8 sexual offences7 and terrorism.7 Measures of crime statistics9 and criminal justice policy differ across the devolved nations.
20
Number of offences (millions)
Crime Patterns and Measurement
18 16
Crime Survey for England and Wales
14 12 10 8 6
Police Recorded Crime
4 2 0
Crime Data Establishing a meaningful and accurate picture of crime patterns is challenging for several reasons. First, there is a gap between the number of crimes committed and those reported.10 Second, crime data come from numerous sources, each with different strengths and weaknesses (Box 1). No single dataset accurately captures trends across all offences, regions, or how frequently different groups commit or are victims of crime. Methodological differences make combining or comparing data from different sources
challenging. Third, changes to criminal law make it difficult to compare crime statistics over time. Moreover, the Public Accounts Select Committee recently found that police recorded crime (PRC) exaggerated falling crime rates, and raised concerns over the misreporting of sexual offences.11 In response, the UK Statistics Authority removed the designation of ‘National Statistics’ from PRC data.11 Changes in police crime recording practices have followed, which is likely to have affected PRC rates.
The Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology, Westminster, London SW1A 0AA; Tel: 020 7219 2840; email:
[email protected] www.parliament.uk/post
POSTnote 507 September 2015 Trends in Crime and Criminal Justice
PRC and CSEW are the two main crime datasets used in England and Wales. Since they are sensitive to, and measure different types of crime, they are best used together.14 Additional measures can be used to fill the gaps for specific crime types, for example the NVSN is particularly important for understanding violent crime as it does not rely on individuals reporting offences.18 Variation in reporting rates for different offences to the police is thought to reflect victims’ perceptions of crime severity, and also pragmatic factors, such as the need for crime reference numbers for insurance claims.11 Crime reporting in the media and shifting public opinion may also influence the likelihood that people will report a crime to the police. Following the Jimmy Saville revelations and Operation Yewtree, most police forces in the UK recorded increased reporting of sexual offences.19 This is likely to reflect a narrowing of the gap between actual and reported crime. Crime statistics do not reflect the scale of demand placed on the criminal justice system.7 Although reported crime has been falling, the associated costs have not fallen by as much as expected.7 The 11% reduction in police numbers in England and Wales since 2010, and the increasing proportion of police time spent on more complex crimes is contributing to the growing demand crime places on the police and other agencies.7 This discrepancy is thought to be compounded by an increasing pressure to deal with incidents involving people with complex needs, such as poor mental health, which require the police to work with other services.7 It is also likely that a larger proportion of crime is committed by a smaller pool of persistent offenders.20
Key Developments in Criminal Justice The criminal justice system comprises agencies and processes to prevent crime, hold offenders to account, rehabilitate and to provide victims with justice.21 It encompasses early intervention and prevention programmes, policing, prosecution and the courts, prisons, probation and rehabilitation services. Key developments are outlined in the following sections.
Shifts in Approaches to Sentencing Out of Court Disposals Since 2003, there has been a growing trend for out-of-court disposals (such as police cautions, or penalty notices for public disorder or possession of cannabis22) which are intended to provide swift and proportionate responses to
antisocial behaviour and low-risk offending.23 The proportion of offences brought to justice outside courts increased from 23% in 2003 to 40% in 2008,23 but has since declined.24 A review in 2010 suggested that the use of such disposals may reflect a ‘widening of the net’, where matters that might have previously resulted in no criminal sanction are being dealt with formally.23,25 Concerns have been expressed about their efficiency and a lack of public confidence in their use.24,26 In response, reforms to improve consistency in the way which they are applied have recently been proposed.26 Custodial Sentencing: Practice and Guidelines Despite an overall trend towards falling crime, the prison population is rising, see Figure 2.27 The factors underlying this trend are complex, but it is thought that it reflects longer sentences for some offences, a more serious mix of offences (violence against the person, drug offences and sexual offences) coming before the courts and an increasing likelihood of imprisonment for breaches of non-custodial sentences or licences.27 The increase in prisoners serving longer sentences, and in the number of recalls to prison, is thought to be a significant driver of the rising custodial population. There is also a trend towards an increasing number of shorter sentences.27 Figure 2. Growth in the Prison Population 100
number in custody (thousands)
Box 1. Measuring Crime Police Recorded Crime (PRC) is data taken from police forces’ recording systems.12,13 Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) measures the extent of crime in England and Wales by asking people whether they have experienced any crime in the past year, which includes offences that might not have been reported to the police.14 National Violence Surveillance Network (NVSN) uses A&E data on injuries from violent assaults, which may not be reported to the police.15 Court Databases (such as LIBRA or CREST) provide statistics on prosecutions, convictions and sentencing, including offences where there has been no police involvement, such as prosecutions instigated by organisations or individuals. Commercial Victimisation Survey collects data on crimes against retail, agriculture and service sector businesses.16 Action Fraud is the UK’s crime reporting centre for individuals and businesses to report scams, fraud or cyber crime.17
Page 2
90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1945
1955
1965
1975
1985
1995
2005
2015
A 2012 survey of Court of Appeal cases found that 95 out of 262 appeals related to unlawful sentences in the Crown Court.28 Some are concerned that these case are caused by a lack of clarity in criminal sentencing guidelines (which are set out across many statutes and frequently updated). To meet these concerns the Law Commission (an independent body set up by Parliament to review and recommend law reform in England and Wales) is conducting a review and aims to create a single statute with clear instructions, and which enables straightforward amendments by 2017.29 Electronic Monitoring Electronic monitoring is currently in several stages of the criminal justice system: as a bail condition, as a requirement of a community order, or suspended sentence order and early release from prison. The use of electronic monitoring is increasing and is estimated on average to be £70 cheaper per offender per day than imprisonment.30 A group of academics and practitioners is examining the benefits and drawbacks of electronic monitoring and related
POSTnote 507 September 2015 Trends in Crime and Criminal Justice
technologies, including the expected introduction of GPS tags; the report is expected in April 2016.31 It is thought that interactions with probation officers during electronic monitoring may also aid desistance (cessation of offending) with curfews providing a structure for offenders which helps them to break patterns of behaviour associated with criminal activity.32,33 However, researchers have suggested those released on home detention curfews may struggle to access education or training, or to get support in finding a job.30
Technological Risks and Opportunities Some criminal activity is shifting online, such as child pornography, hate crime and drug dealing.4,5,34 Technology also gives rise to new crime types such as hacking and bank and identity fraud.4,5,34 These crime types challenge police capability, for which specialist digital forensic skills are needed,7 and the difficulties of policing across international jurisdictions.35 The Government has responded to individual issues via legislation and policy, and has developed cybercrime and cyber-security strategies to ensure there is a co-ordinated approach across Government departments.35,36 There is also concern that the general public lacks knowledge about the risks associated with online activity, such as social media, and how to protect themselves against fraud.36 Big Data Approaches Police forces are increasingly looking at how to integrate technology in a drive for more effective and efficient working practices. For example big data approaches can be used as tools to inform where and when a crime is likely to occur and identify likely perpetrators.37 Crime hot-spots are established by analysing which times and precise locations are associated with the highest crime volume and most serious crimes. Police resources can be targeted to these areas, known as ‘hot-spot policing’. A recent review of the limited evidence suggests that it is effective in reducing and preventing crime, and that crime is not displaced elsewhere but that the benefits extend beyond the hot-spot.37 However, it concluded that further research is required to fully assess its effectiveness.38 A pilot has been completed on London Underground by the British Transport Police, which reduced crime hotspots by 14% and calls for service by 21%.39 For a further example of how technology is transforming police practice see POSTbrief 14, Body Worn Video in UK Policing.40 ICT and the Courts Sir Brian Leveson’s recent review of the courts identified the role of ICT in ensuring cost-effective systems and processes. Recommendations included paperless online case-management systems, better use of video hearings and digital evidence, and recordings of court proceedings.41,42 The digitisation of the court-room is particularly challenging as there are concerns that rapid adoption of such technology might compromise the delivery of fair justice.43 Research is examining the impact of ‘special measures’ (for vulnerable and intimidated witnesses, which includes the use of video-links) in jury trials.44
Page 3
Evidence-based Practice A trend to integrate research and evidence-based practice within the police, prison and probation workforces is growing. Historically practitioners (such as police, prison and probation officers) have not been involved in developing evidence to evaluate and support the approaches they use, unlike some parts of the public sector, such as the NHS.45 Establishing theory-practice links seeks to inform crime prevention46,47,48, and evaluate different approaches to reducing re-offending such as psychological treatment,49 drug and alcohol counselling,50 arts-based51 or education programmes52,53. However, there is debate over how quantitative research methods developed in other fields can be applied to criminal justice and incorporated with qualitative research methods traditionally used in the social sciences.54,55,56 While harnessing scholarship for more costeffective and efficient practice is an emerging trend, there is a dearth of quality evidence for different approaches, and a lack of evidence in criminal justice policy and practice. The Probation Institute57 and The College of Policing were recently established to develop best practice and professional standards based on evidence. The College of Policing hosts the Government’s ‘What Works’ Centre for Crime Reduction, which identifies where knowledge is lacking, synthesises existing research into a form that is easily accessible for practitioners and encourages better use of evidence.58
Partnerships and Collaborative Working ‘Multi-agency partnerships’ and joint-working are increasing practice trends. MARAC (Multi-Agency-Risk-AssessmentConference) is an example of information sharing on domestic violence cases. Police, health, child protection and housing staff work with domestic violence specialists to protect victims.59,60 ‘Troubled Families’ is a programme with a similar multi-agency approach for families with complex needs, with one aim to reduce crime.61,62 63,64 A barrier to successful collaboration is reticence about sharing data between agencies, because of concerns about breaching confidentiality.65 There is also increasing collaboration within the criminal justice system, partly motivated by competition for resources owing to reduced funding, and a greater focus on outcomes.66 Collaboration across sectors, with a whole system approach to service delivery, underpinned by joint commissioning, co-locating services and shared aims, is seen as central to improving the efficiency and effectiveness of criminal justice.66,67 However, there is tension between the specific role of each aspect of the criminal justice system and the need for better cross-agency co-ordination.
Trends in Service Delivery There is an increasing trend for private and third sector organisations to be involved in delivering some aspects of criminal justice, notably in security, prison services and managing some probation practices. Payment by Results In 2010, the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) published a five year re-offending and rehabilitation strategy.68 Probation service reforms included a ‘payment by results’ approach for
POSTnote 507 September 2015 Trends in Crime and Criminal Justice
rehabilitation providers, and opened the market to the private, voluntary and community sectors. Thirty-five individual Probation Trusts have been replaced by a National Probation Service responsible for high-risk offenders. Twenty-one Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs) manage low- and medium-risk offenders69 and supervise those released from short term sentences (12 months or less) under the new Offender Rehabilitation Act.70 CRCs must achieve an agreed reduction in the number of offenders and also offences committed by their clients. Although the principle of evaluation on the basis of rehabilitative outcomes has been welcomed, many see the shift in delivery model as a challenge.71,72 It may be more complicated to manage, as offenders may move between risk categories.73 The priority placed on performance targets for reducing re-offending has also been critiqued as a short-term solution, at odds with a longer-term desistance approach of offender behaviour change and full community re-integration.74 Criminal Justice Providers Recent MoJ figures show that private corporations, public sector agencies, charities and social enterprises, have formed partnerships to deliver prison and probation services,69 but commentators note that none of the preferred bid leads are from the voluntary sector.73,75 However, it is argued that the size of the contracts and the financial risks involved make it difficult for the voluntary sector to lead contracts, or to partner large private sector organisations.75,76 Public sector criminal justice agencies are under-represented, but by comparison have extensive experience, offer job stability, provide training and career progression, resulting in stable and cohesive workforces.77 Some argue that private contracts are associated with prison disorder, under-staffing or inexperienced workforces.78 Such challenges have also been attributed to a larger problem with establishing and running new, large prisons, and Treasury budget cuts.79 In 2013, the MoJ identified significant overbilling in its electronic monitoring contracts with G4S and Serco. A subsequent review partly attributed this to poor governance and record keeping.80 The National Audit Office suggests that contracting-out can improve services and be cost-effective, but that success depends on government oversight and monitoring.80 Moreover, the divergence between the public and private sectors may be overestimated, as boundaries between them blur, because of movement of personnel between them and subsequent cross-over of policies and practices.77
Access to and Participation in Justice, Equality and Rights Legal Aid In 2013, the MoJ announced legal aid cuts, removing onethird of the criminal case budget.81 The final proposals involve fixed legal fees, with cuts of 17.5%.81 The number of contracts for solicitors providing 24-hour cover at police stations has also been reduced from 1,600 to 527, which some argue will leave those in custody without
Page 4
representation.82 The Law Society (an independent professional body for solicitors) has argued that the cuts will drive skilled advocates away, and that many criminal legal aid firms may be at risk. The Joint Committee on Human Rights has concerns regarding the restriction of legal aid for the custodial population83 and the MoJ has been urged by the Law Society to review the impact of the changes.82 Fitness to Plead and Criminal Responsibility The Law Commission proposes reform of the law on ‘fitness to plead’, which outlines what should happen when a defendant who faces prosecution is unable to engage with the process because of poor mental or physical health.84 The reforms aim to modernise legislation, ensuring the process of detecting ‘fitness’ is sensitive to a range of difficulties and subtle impairments. They will also maximise an individual’s opportunity to have a fair trial by ensuring the courts are flexible in supporting a defendant’s needs, and that a broader, more tailored range of criminal justice outcomes are available. Whilst there are associated costs, it is also anticipated that there will be long-term savings, via reduced pressure on health and social care services and a reduction in further trials or incarcerations.84, 85 Victims’ Rights There is a trend to give victims a greater role in justice. Judges are instructed to explain in ordinary language the reasons for, and effect of a sentence; the charity Victim Support has recommended that judges should also write to victims after a conviction, setting out what the sentence means and what further involvement to expect, and additional support for child witnesses and victims. 86 A 2015 survey by the Victims’ Commissioner found nearly 75% of victims were unhappy with the criminal justice agency service they received.86 Proposals include enshrining the right to make a Victim Personal Statement in law, providing information on restorative justice and improved complaints processes.87 The Crown Prosecution Service has also conducted a survey and consultation about their services for victims and witness at court; the report is due in 2015.88 Procedural Justice Procedural Justice is a legitimacy-based approach to criminal justice. In policing practice, it advocates police officers to act with fairness and respect when interacting with the public.89 A recent survey found that perceived police legitimacy is an important factor in motivating the public to co-operate with police; people who thought the police were on the ‘same side’ as them were significantly less likely to say they had committed an offence and more likely to say they would help the police.90 A study examining the impact of the 2011 London riots on attitudes towards the police, found that confidence was lowest in areas most affected, before and after the disorder.91 However, recent work examining the public’s attitudes towards the police found that individuals perceived police action very differently, suggesting that legitimacy is a complex concept.92
POST is an office of both Houses of Parliament, charged with providing independent and balanced analysis of policy issues that have a basis in science and technology. POST is grateful to Leila Jameel for researching this briefing, to the ESRC for funding her parliamentary fellowship, and to all contributors and reviewers. For further information on this subject, please contact the co-author, Dr Sarah Bunn. Parliamentary Copyright 2015. Image copyright istockphoto.
POSTnote 507 September 2015 Trends in Crime and Criminal Justice
Endnotes 1 Making Sense of Crime, Sense About Science, 2015 2 Crime Statistics Release 2013/14, Focus on Property Crime, Office for National Statistics, November 2014 3 Farrell, G. (2013). Five Tests for a Theory of the Crime Drop, Crime Science, 2, 5 4 POSTnote number 500, Towards 2020 and Beyond, June 2015 5 Key Issues for the 2015 Parliament, House of Commons Library, June 2015 6 Library Standard Note 5832, Cyber Security - A New National Programme, House of Commons Library, June 2011 7 College of Policing analysis: Estimating demand on the police service, College of Policing, January 2015 8 Cyber Crime: A Review of the Evidence, Home Office, October 2013 9 The House of Commons Library publishes regular briefings on crime and crime statistics 10 Skogan, W.G. (1977). Dimensions of the Dark Figure of Unreported Crime, Crime & Delinquency, 23(1), 41-50 11 Caught Red-Handed: Why we can’t Count on Police Recorded Crime Statistics, House of Commons Public Administration Select Committee, 13th Report of Session 2013-14, April 2014 12 Office for National Statistics, Guidance and Methodology, Police Recorded Crime 13 Statistics of Crime in England and Wales, Produced by the Office for National Statistics, Assessment Report 268, UK Statistics Authority, January 2014. 14 Office for National Statistics, Crime Survey for England and Wales 15 Sivarajasingam, V., Page, N., Morgan, P., Matthews, K., Moore, S., Shepher, J. (2014) Trends in community violence in England and Wales 2005–2009. Injury, 45(3), 592-598 16 Crime against businesses: Headline Findings from the 2013 Commercial Victimisation Survey, Home Office, February 2014 17 Action Fraud www.actionfraud.police.uk/ 18 Florence, C., Shepherd, J., Brennan, I., & Simon, T. (2011). Effectiveness of anonymised information sharing and use in health service, police, and local government partnership for preventing violence related injury: experimental study and time series analysis. British Medical Journal, 342 19 Crime in England and Wales, Year Ending September 2014, Office for National Statistics Statistical Bulletin, January 2015 20 Millie, A., Jacobson, J. & Hough, M. (2003). Understanding the Growth in the Prison Population in England and Wales, Criminal Justice, 3(4), 369-387 21 Compendium of United Nations Standards and Norms in Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice, United Nations, 2011 22 Police Cautions, Warnings and Penalty Notices www.gov.uk/caution-warningpenalty 23 Initial Findings from a Review of the Use of Out-of-Court Disposals, A report by The Office for Criminal Reform, February 2010 24 Out-of-Court Disposals, House of Commons Home Affairs Select Committee 14th Report of Session 2014–15, March 2015 25 For more information, please see POSTnote number 308, Alternatives to Custodial Sentencing 26 Consultation on Out of Court Disposals, Home Office, November, 2014. 27 Story of the Prison Population: 1993-2012 England and Wales, Ministry of Justice, 2013 28 Sentencing Illegalities, Examination of Cases from England and Wales Court of Appeal 2012, Robert Banks, January 2013 29 Sentencing Paper: Issues Paper 1 - Transition, Law Commission, July 2015. 30 The Electronic Monitoring of Adult Offenders, House of Commons Public Accounts Select Committee, 62nd Report of Session 2005-06, July 2006. 31 Probation Institute Press Release on Electronic Monitoring, 23rd April 2015 32 Hucklesby, A. (2008). Vehicles of Desistance? The Impact of Electronically Monitored Curfew Orders. Criminology and Criminal Justice, 8(1), 51-71 33 Hucklesby, A. (2009). Understanding Offenders' Compliance: A Case Study of Electronically Monitored Curfew Orders. Journal of Law and Society, 36(2), 248-271 34 For more information, see POSTnote 488, The Darknet and Online Anonymity 35 Cyber Crime Strategy, Home Office, March 2010 36 The UK Cyber Security Strategy: Protecting and Promoting the UK in a Digital World. Cabinet Office, November 2011 37 For more information see POSTnote 470 Big Data, Crime and Security 38 Braga, A., Papachristos, A., & Hureau, D. (2012). Hot Spots Policing Effects on Crime, Campbell Systematic Reviews, 2012(8) 39 Operation Beck: A Randomised Controlled Trial on Proactive Policing in London Underground Platform Hotspots, Provided by Assistant Chief Constable Mark Newton and Charlotte de Brito, British Transport Police. 40 For a briefing on police body-worn video see POSTbrief 14, Body-Worn Video in UK Policing
Page 5
Review of Efficiency in Criminal Proceedings, The Rt Hon Sir Brian Leveson, President of the Queen’s Bench Division, Judiciary of England and Wales, January 2015 42 Sir Brian Leveson, Keynote Lecture, ‘Modernising Justice Through Technology’, 24 June 2015. A copy of the speech was provided by the conference organisers. 43 Understanding Tribunal Decision-Making: A Foundational Empirical Study, Preliminary Report, by Professor Cheryl Thomas and Dame Hazel Glen, Nuffield Foundation, 2013 44 Impact of Special Measures on Jury Decision-Making, Nuffield Foundation 45 How to Achieve More Effective Services: the Evidence Ecosystem, Jonathan Shepherd, What Works Network, June 2014 46 Sherman, L. W. (2009) Evidence and Liberty: The Promise of Experimental Criminology. Criminology and Criminal Justice, 9(1), 5-28 47 Welsh, B.C. & Farrington, D.P. (2008). Effects of Closed Circuit Television Surveillance on Crime. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 2008(17) 48 Bennett, T., Holloway, K., Farrington, D.P. (2008). The Effectiveness of Neighbourhood Watch Campbell Systematic Reviews, 2008(18) 49 Tong, L.S.J. & Farrington, D.P. (2006). How Effective is the ‘‘Reasoning and Rehabilitation’’ Programme in Reducing Reoffending? A Meta-analysis of Evaluations in four Countries. Psychology, Crime & Law, 12(1), 3-24 50 Reducing Drug Use, Reducing Reoffending: Are Programmes for Problem Drug-using Offenders in the UK Supported by the Evidence? UK Drug Policy Commission, March 2008 51 Cheliotis, L. K. & Jordanoska, A. (forthcoming). The Arts of Desistance: Assessing the Role of Arts-based Programmes in Reducing Reoffending. Howard Journal of Criminal Justice 52 Duwe, G., & Clark, V. (2014). The Effects of Prison-based Educational Programming on Recidivism and Employment. The Prison Journal, 94(4), 454478 53 Kim, R. H., & Clark, D. (2013). The Effect of Prison-based College Education Programs on Recidivism: Propensity Score Matching approach. Journal of Criminal Justice, 41(3), 196-204 54 Hough, M. (2010). Gold Standard or Fool’s Gold: The Pursuit of Certainty in Experimental Criminology. Criminology Criminal Justice, 10(1),11-22 55 Evidence for Social Policy and Practice. Perspectives on How Research and Evidence Can Influence Decision Making in Public Services. Nesta, April 2011. 56 What Counts as Good Evidence? Provocation Paper for the Alliance for Useful Evidence, by Sandra Nutley, Alison Powell & Huw Davies from the Research Unit for Research Utilisation, School of Management, University of St Andrews, February 2013 57 Probation Institute - http://probation-institute.org/ 58 College of Policing - http://www.college.police.uk 59 Supporting High-risk Victims of Domestic Violence: A Review of Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conferences (MARACs), by Nerissa Steel, Laura Blakeborough & Sian Nicholas, Research Report 55, Home Office, July 2011 60 Research into Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conferences (MARACs), Home Office Violent and Youth Crime Prevention Unit and Research and Analysis Unit, July 2011 61 Listening to Troubled Families, A report by Louise Casey CB, Department for Communities and Local Government, July 2012 62 Working with Troubled Families, A Guide to the Evidence and Good Practice, Department for Communities and Local Government, December 2012 63 Health Related Work in Family Intervention Projects, Final report from the Thomas Coram Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London, by Janet Boddy, June Statham, Ian Warwick, Katie Hollingworth, & Grace Spencer, April 2012 64 Evaluation of the Troubled Families, by National Institute of Economic and Social Research, due end of 2015 65 Domestic Violence, Forced Marriage and “Honour”-Based Violence, House of Commons Home Affairs Select Committee, 6th Report of Session 2007-08, May 2008 66 Joined-up Justice: Integrating the System, Reform, Tuesday 17th April 2012. 67 For more information on collaboration in criminal justice see the various publications and projects at Collaborative Justice http://www.collaborativejustice.org/home.htm 68 For information on the proposals, responses and final strategy see the MoJ Consultation page on Transforming Rehabilitation 69 Library Standard Note 6894, Contracting Out of Probation Services - What’s Happened So Far? House of Commons Library, January 2015 70 Offender Rehabilitation Act 2014 71 Crime Reduction Policies: a Co-ordinated Approach? House of Commons Justice Select Committee, Interim report on the Government's Transforming Rehabilitation Programme, 12th Report of Session 2013–14, January 2014 41
The Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA; Tel: 020 7219 2840; email:
[email protected] www.parliament.uk/post
POSTnote 507 September 2015 Trends in Crime and Criminal Justice
72
73 74
75 76 77 78
79 80 81
82
83
84 85
86 87 88 89 90
91
92
Crime Reduction Policies: a Co-ordinated Approach? House of Commons Justice Select Committee, 1st Report of Session 2014–15, June 2014 Bastow, S. (2014). Transforming Rehabilitation: Evolution not Revolution, Criminal Justice Matters, 97(1), 10-11 Frazer, L., Drinkwater, N., Mullen, J., Hayes, C., O’Donoghue, K., Cumbo, E. (2014). Rehabilitation: What Does ‘Good’ Look Like Anyway? European Journal of Probation, 6(2), 92-111 What Does it Mean? The Preferred Bidders Announced, posted by Nathan Dick, Clinks Blog, November 2014 Library Standard Note 6621, Delivering Public Services: The Growing Use of Payment by Results, House of Commons Library, April 2013 Hucklesby, A. (2011). The Working Life of Electronic Monitoring Officers. Criminology & Criminal Justice 11(1), 59–76 For examples of press coverage of riots at Oakwood Prison www.theguardian.com/society/2014/apr/29/tales-from-inside-oakwood-prison or www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25846596 HM Chief Inspector of Prisons for England and Wales Annual Report 2013–14, October 2014 Transforming Contract Management, National Audit Office, Session 2014-15, September 2014 For information on the proposals, responses and final strategy please see the MoJ Consultation page on Transforming Legal Aid For a summary of the key decisions, and responses from a range of organisations, including the Law Society and the Bar Council, see this House of Commons Library briefing paper The Implications for Access to Justice of the Government's Proposals to Reform Legal Aid, Joint Select Committee on Human Rights, 7th Report of Session 2013–14, December 2013 Unfitness to Plead: An Issues Paper, Law Commission, May 2014 For information about ‘Liaison and Diversion’ for offenders with mental health, learning disabilities, substance misuse or other vulnerabilities, and information about relevant treatment or support services, see the NHS England webpage Library Standard Note 7139, The Victims’ Code, House of Commons Library, March 2015 Commissioner for Victims and Witnesses: Report for the Secretary of State for Justice 2013-14 For details of the consultation see the Crown Prosecution Service Consultation webpage Bradford, B. (2014). Policing and Social Identity: Procedural Justice, Inclusion and Cooperation between Police and Public. Policing and Society, 24(1), 22-43 It’s a fair cop? Police Legitimacy, Public Cooperation, and Crime Reduction. An Interpretative Evidence Commentary, by Andy Myhill & Paul Quinton, Research Analysis and Information, National Policing Improvement Agency, September 2011 Hohl, K., Stanko, B., & Newburn, T. (2012). The Effect of the 2011 London Disorder on Public Opinion of Police and Attitudes Towards Crime, Disorder, and Sentencing. Policing, 55 Waddington, P.A.J, Williams, K., Wright, M., Newburn, T. (2015). Dissension in Public Evaluations of the Police, Policing and Society, 25(2), 212-235
Page 6