Most rioters had criminal records? Beware of misleading statistics

This post was written by Reuben on September 15, 2011
Posted Under: Uncategorized

You may have heard the news that most rioters were convicted criminals. According to a ministry of justice report released today 73% of those who have appeared in court over the riots had previous cautions or convictions. This certainly appears to be good news for those who wish to partray last months disorder is merely an intensified outbreak of criminality disconnected from any deeper social issues. “Why weren’t they in prison?” is the blunt question being asked by the Telegraph. Certainly these stats would appear to bolster the view that August’s events were the work of a very specific criminal underclass, rather than a broader outburst of anger.

But how much does this report really tell us about those who were rioting? The key thing is that these stats relate only to those who have been charged and appeared in court. Are this group representative of all rioters. When it comes to their criminal records, their is good reason to think otherwise. The police, remember were able to arrest relatively few people when the riots were actually taking place. They didn’t catch many people red handed. And while they have published pictures of suspects have been published, it seems plausible that not that relatively few people would have come forward to help the cops in their enquiries given the state of police community relations.

As such the police are likely to have relied very heavily on what or who was already known to them. It is, after all, far easier to match up a CCTV image with existing police records, than to wait for a friend or neighbour of the person pictured to come forward and denounce them. In other words rioters who already had criminal records were far more likely to be charged, than rioters who didn’t. Given that only a minority of rioters hve so far been charged – 3000, out of an estimated 30,000 who the police say were involved in criminal activity – the picture could be very skewed indeed.

Like this article? Print it, email it, Stumble, Facebook and Tweet it:
  • Print
  • email
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Mixx
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • Live

To contact Reuben email reuben@thethirdestate.net

Share

Reader Comments

Chris

A genuinely funny piece…no wait…it wasn’t supposed to be was it?
You attack some statistics? How? with phrases such as “their(sic) is good reason to think otherwise” but fail to give any evidence of that being so.
And “it seems plausible that”…it may very well seem plausible to you but so what?
Or “the police are likely to” oh come on!
It’s not that your basic point is necessarly wrong – although I wonder if you are as skewed by your own desire to explain the riots as some outburst of the downtrodden as those who live in Telegraph land desire to lay the blame at the feet of “a very specific criminal underclass”.
To find out, we need some evidence from those that were involved but who haven’t been charged. As you are clearly so keen on non-evidence based speculation, here’s a bit more – they aren’t going to come forward to be counted!

#1 
Written By Chris on September 15th, 2011 @ 10:50 pm

Chris @1: Reuben’s logic is perfectly reasonable (and I just did a strangely similar post myself.

Let’s get this clear. Reuben is not the one using dodgy stats to create knee-jerk policy. Clarke and co are the ones doing this. Reuben is merely pointing out they’re assessment is, at least current, utterly unfounded because they’ve extrapolated the % of those charged with criminal records to the body of rioters as a whole.

#2 
Written By Paul on September 18th, 2011 @ 10:33 am

Add a Comment

required, use real name
required, will not be published
optional, your blog address

Please leave these two fields as-is:

Protected by Invisible Defender. Showed 403 to 449,686 bad guys.