The areas of focus include: Victimisation, Police Activity, Defendants and Court Outcomes, Offender Management, Offender Characteristics, Offence Analysis, and Practitioners.

This is the latest biennial compendium of Statistics on Race and the Criminal Justice System and follows on from its sister publication Statistics on Women and the Criminal Justice System, 2017.

Introduction

This publication compiles statistics from data sources across the Criminal Justice System (CJS), to provide a combined perspective on the typical experiences of different ethnic groups. No causative links can be drawn from these summary statistics. For the majority of the report no controls have been applied for other characteristics of ethnic groups (such as average income, geography, offence mix or offender history), so it is not possible to determine what proportion of differences identified in this report are directly attributable to ethnicity. Differences observed may indicate areas worth further investigation, but should not be taken as evidence of bias or as direct effects of ethnicity.

In general, minority ethnic groups appear to be over-represented at many stages throughout the CJS compared with the White ethnic group. The greatest disparity appears at the point of stop and search, arrests, custodial sentencing and prison population. Among minority ethnic groups, Black individuals were often the most over-represented. Outcomes for minority ethnic children are often more pronounced at various points of the CJS. Differences in outcomes between ethnic groups over time present a mixed picture, with disparity decreasing in some areas are and widening in others.

Key findings

Victims

• The Asian ethnic group had the lowest proportion of both adults (2%) and children (5%) who had experienced personal crime in the last year. In 2018/19, both adults and children from the Asian ethnic group were half as likely to report victimisation when compared to the White ethnic group.
• A higher proportion of Black homicides were against children, 17% of Black victims were 17 or younger, compared to an average of 11% across all ethnicities. Between 2015/16 and 2017/18, Black children made up 20% of all child victims, while Black victims made up 13% of victims across all age groups.

Police Activity

• The proportion of stop and searches conducted on White suspects decreased from 75% in 2014/15 to 59% in 2018/19 and increased for all minority ethnic groups. The largest increases were from 13% to 22% for Black suspects and from 8% to 13% for Asian suspects.
• In the last five years, the proportion of stop and searches involving Black suspects in London increased from 30% to 37%, now equal to the number of White suspects searched. In 2018/19, 48% of all stop and searches (where ethnicity is known) were conducted in London, and increasingly involving a higher proportion of suspects from minority ethnic groups when compared to the rest of England and Wales.
• Black suspects had the highest proportion of arrests that resulted from stop and searches in the latest year, at 20% which has increased from 15% since 2014/15. This is driven by a higher number of stop and searches in London, where resultant arrests accounted for 22% of all arrests, compared to 5% for the rest of England and Wales. For other groups, between 6% and 13% of arrests resulted from stop and searches.
• In 2018/19, two thirds (67%) of children arrested in London were from minority ethnic groups, compared to 21% of children arrested in the rest of England and Wales. Just over half (52%) of adults arrested in London were from minority ethnic groups, compared to 22% of adults arrested in the rest of England and Wales.

Defendants

• In the latest year, the largest fall in the volume of prosecutions and convictions for indictable offences was seen in the Asian group, down by 22% and 20% respectively. Prosecutions and convictions fell by 18% and 16% for Black defendants, by 13% each for White defendants, by 8% and 10% for defendants from Mixed ethnic groups and by 7% and 14% for defendants from Chinese or Other ethnic groups.
• White defendants consistently had the highest conviction ratio for indictable offences over the last 5 years (with the exception of 2015) and was 85% in 2018. The conviction ratios for White, Asian (83%) and Black (81%) defendants have converged with each other over the last 5 years, remained constant for defendants from Mixed ethnic groups (77%) and fallen for Chinese or Other ethnic groups (75%).
• Compared to White defendants (38%), larger proportions of Asian (40%), Mixed ethnicity (45%), Black (46%) and Chinese or Other (46%) defendants were remanded in custody for indictable

Statistics on race and the criminal justice system 2010

Biennial statistics on the representation of Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic groups as victims, suspects, offenders and employees in the Criminal Justice System.

These reports are released by the Ministry of Justice and produced in accordance with arrangements approved by the UK Statistics Authority.

Introduction

This report provides information about how members of Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BME) Groups in England and Wales were represented in the Criminal Justice System (CJS) in the most recent year for which data were available, and, wherever possible, across the last five years. Section 95 of the Criminal Justice Act 1991 requires the Government to publish statistical data to assess whether any discrimination exists in how the CJS treats people based on their race.

These statistics are used by policy makers, the agencies who comprise the CJS and others to monitor differences between ethnic groups and where practitioners and others may wish to undertake more in-depth analysis. The identification of differences should not be equated with discrimination as there are many reasons why apparent disparities may exist.

Specific findings

Victims

The most recent data on victims showed differences in the risks of crime between ethnic groups and, for homicides, in the relationship between victims and offenders. Overall, the number of racist incidents and racially or religiously aggravated offences recorded by the police had decreased over the last five years. Key Points:

• The 2010/11 British Crime Survey (BCS) showed that the risk of being a victim of personal crime was higher for adults from a Mixed background than for other ethnic groups. It was also higher for members of all BME groups than for the White group.
• Over the five-year period 2006/07 to 2010/11, there was a statistically significant fall in the risk of being a victim of personal crime for members of the White group of 0.8%. The apparent decrease for those from BME groups was not statistically significant.
• Of the 2,007 homicides recorded for the latest three-year period (2007/08 to 2009/10), 75% of victims were White, 12% Black and 8% Asian.
• In the majority of homicide cases, victims were suspected of being killed by someone from the same ethnic group, which is consistent with previous trends (88% of White victims, 78% of Black victims and 60% of Asian victims).

Suspects

Per 1,000 population, higher rates of s1 Stop and Searches were recorded for all BME groups (except for Chinese or Other) than for the White group. While there were decreases across the last five years in the overall number of arrests and in arrests of White people, arrests of those in the Black and Asian group increased.

• Per 1,000 of the population, Black persons were Stopped and Searched 7.0 times more than White people in 2009/10 compared to 6.0 times more in 2006/07.
• When referring to the rate per 1,000 population for England and Wales, it is important to bear in mind that the higher rate than that obtained for the rest of England and Wales(excluding the Metropolitan Police Service) is the product of the aggregation of 42 police force areas (PFAs), each with different distributions of both ethnic population and use of Stop and Search powers. While the area served by the Metropolitan Police Service accounts for 14% of the England and Wales population, 43% of s1 Stop and Searches are carried out by the Metropolitan Police Service.
• Across England and Wales, there was a decrease (just over 3%) in the total number of arrests in 2009/10 (1,386,030) compared to 2005/06 (1,429,785). While the number of arrests for the White group also decreased during this period, arrests of Black persons rose by 5% and arrests of Asian people by 13%.
• Overall, there were more arrests per 1,000 population of each BME group (except for Chinese or Other) than for people of White ethnicity in 2009/10. Black persons were arrested 3.3 times more than White people, and those from the Mixed ethnic group 2.3 times more.
• In 2009/10, just over 9% of s1 Stop and Searches compared with 12%, 4% and 1% respectively in 2006/07.

Defendants

Data on out of court disposals and court proceedings show some differences in the sanctions issued to people of differing ethnicity and also in sentence lengths. These differences are likely to relate to a range of factors including variations in the types of offences committed and the plea entered, and should therefore be treated with caution. Key points:

• Conviction ratios for indictable offences were higher for Wh

The areas of focus include: Victimisation, Police Activity, Defendants and Court Outcomes, Offender Management, Offender Characteristics, Offence Analysis, and Practitioners.

This is the latest biennial compendium of Statistics on Ethnicity and the Criminal Justice System and follows on from its sister publication Statistics on Women and the Criminal Justice System, 2019.

In December 2020 HM Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire and Rescue Services (HMICFRS), the College of Policing (CoP) and the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) published a report in response to the super-complaint submitted by Liberty and Southall Black Sisters about the practice of the police sharing of victims’ information with the Home Office.

The report made recommendations for the police, the Home Office, the National Police Chiefs’ Council, and police and crime commissioners (or equivalents) to ensure victims of crime are always treated as victims first and foremost, regardless of their immigration status. The report also included actions for HMICFRS and the College of Policing regarding their own work. The details of these recommendations and actions are listed on pages 15 – 20 of https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/945314/safe-to-share-liberty-southall-black-sisters-super-complaint-policing-immigration-status.pdf" class="govuk-link">Safe to Share?

https://www.college.police.uk/" class="govuk-link">College of Policing

The report included two actions for the College of Policing, as well as a role supporting the implementation of one of the recommendations to other bodies.

Recommendation 1.

The College was instructed to “immediately develop guidance”  to support those working in policing to fulfil ‘Recommendation 1’ – i.e. that “pending the outcome of recommendation 2, where officers only have concerns or doubts about a victim’s immigration status, we recommend that they immediately stop sharing information on domestic abuse victims with Immigration Enforcement.”

The guidance has been produced and has been published as an update to existing ‘Authorised Professional Practice’ (APP) for policing. APP is authorised by the College of Policing as the official source of professional practice on policing. Police officers and staff are expected to have regard to APP in discharging their responsibilities.

The revised guidance is in the ‘risk factors and vulnerabilities connected with domestic abuse’ section of the ‘Major Investigation and Public Protection’ APP. It is available to view online https://www.app.college.police.uk/app-content/major-investigation-and-public-protection/domestic-abuse/risk-and-vulnerability/#victims-with-insecure-or-uncertain-immigration-status" class="govuk-link">Risk and vulnerability (college.police.uk)

Action 1.

The action was for the College to “work with interested parties to consider how domestic abuse risk assessment tools used by the police and partner organisations can include immigration status as a risk factor.”

The College has developed a revised risk assessment tool for domestic abuse, ‘DARA’, which focuses on uncovering evidence of coercive and controlling behaviour. There is evidence that the tool is more effective at eliciting disclosures of coercive and controlling behaviour. The potential use of immigration status as a way to manipulate and control would be addressed through use of the tool.

Action 2.

The action was for the College, “when updating knowledge and training products, ensure that the messaging across all relevant guidance is consistent about the need for policing to balance the needs for safeguarding a victim or witness against the national interest in investigating crime.”

This is a continuing piece of work. Every revision of College of Policing training or guidance includes consideration of the balance between the rights of all involved and the necessity to achieve the best outcomes for all.

https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmicfrs/" class="govuk-link">HMICFRS

Action 3.

The action for HMICFRS was ‘ Subject to available funding from the Home Office, HMICFRS will consider whether future inspection activity and/or monitoring could review how the issues raised by this super-complaint are being addressed by forces, once they have had an opportunity to make changes in the light of this investigation’.

Subject to available funding from the Home Office, HMICFRS will review whether inspection activity and/or monitoring should be undertaken (in 2023-24) to see how issues raised in this super-complaint are being addressed by forces.

Home Office update

There are two responses from The Home Office. These responses are available as PDFs at the start of this page.

• <a rel="external" href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1054761/Home_

This release examines the extent and trends in illicit drug use among a nationally representative sample of 16 to 59 year olds resident in households in England and Wales and is based on results from the 2017 to 2018 Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW).

This release is produced to the highest professional standards by statisticians in accordance with the Home Office’s https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/640911/ho-compliance-state-aug17.pdf_.pdf">Statement of Compliance with the Code of Practice for Official Statistics.

Detailed information about the figures included in this release is available in the User guide to drug misuse statistics and in the User Guide to Crime Statistics for England and Wales (published by the Office for National Statistics).

While responsibility for the Crime Survey in England and Wales transferred to the Office for National Statistics on 1 April 2012, the Home Office has retained responsibility for analysis and publication of Drug Misuse figures.

For further information about illicit drug use measures from the Crime Survey for England and Wales, please email: crimeandpolicestats@homeoffice.gov.uk or write to: