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

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.

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 individuals based on their ethnicity.

These statistics are used by policy makers, the agencies who comprise the CJS and others (e.g. academics, interested bodies) to monitor differences between ethnic groups, and to highlight areas 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. The main findings are:

Victims of crime

The 2012/13 Crime Survey for England and Wales shows that adults from self-identified Mixed, Black and Asian ethnic groups were more at risk of being a victim of personal crime than adults from the White ethnic group. This has been consistent since 2008/09 for adults from a Mixed or Black ethnic group; and since 2010/11 for adults from an Asian ethnic group. Adults from a Mixed ethnic group had the highest risk of being a victim of personal crime in each year between 2008/09 and 2012/13.

Homicide victims

Homicide is a rare event, therefore, homicide victims data are presented aggregated in three-year periods in order to be able to analyse the data by ethnic appearance. The most recent period for which data are available is 2009/10 to 2011/12.

The overall number of homicides has decreased over the past three three-year periods. The number of homicide victims of White and Other ethnic appearance decreased during each of these three-year periods. However the number of victims of Black ethnic appearance increased in 2006/07 to 2008/09 before falling again in 2009/10 to 2011/12.

For those homicides where there is a known suspect, the majority of victims were of the same ethnic group as the principal suspect. However, the relationship between victim and principal suspect varied across ethnic groups. In the three-year period from 2009/10 to 2011/12, for victims of White ethnic appearance the largest proportion of principal suspects were from the victim’s own family; for victims of Black ethnic appearance, the largest proportion of principal suspects were a friend or acquaintance of the victim; while for victims of Asian ethnic appearance, the largest proportion of principal suspects were strangers.

Homicide by sharp instrument was the most common method of killing for victims of White, Black and Asian ethnic appearance in the three most recent three-year periods. However, for homicide victims of White ethnic appearance hitting and kicking represented the second most common method of killing compared with shooting for victims of Black ethnic appearance, and other methods of killing for victims of Asian ethnic appearance.

Suspects

In 2011/12, a person aged ten or older (the age of criminal responsibility), who self-identified as belonging to the Black ethnic group was six times more likely than a White person to be stopped and searched under section 1 (s1) of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 and other legislation in England and Wales; persons from the Asian or Mixed ethnic group were just over two times more likely to be stopped and searched than a White person.

Despite an increase across all ethnic groups in the number of stops and searches conducted under s1 powers between 2007/08 and 2011/12, the number of resultant arrests decreased across most ethnic groups. Just under one in ten stop and searches in 2011/12 under s1 powers resulted in an arrest in the White and Black self-identified ethnic groups, compared with 12% in 2007/08. The proportion of resultant arrests has been consistently lower for the Asian self-identified ethnic group.

In 2011/12, for those aged 10 or older, a Black person was nearly three times more likely to be arrested per 1,000 population than a White person, while a person from the Mixed ethnic group was twice as likely. There was no difference in the rate of arrests between Asian and White persons.

The number of arrests decreased in each year between 2008/09 and 2011/12, consistent with a downward trend in police recorded crime since 2004/05. Overall, the number of arrests decreased for all ethnic groups between 2008/09 and 2011/12, however arrests of suspects from the Black, Asian and Mixed ethnic groups peaked in 2010/11.

Arrests for drug offences and sexual offences increased for suspects in all ethnic groups except the Chinese or Other ethnic group between 2008/09 and 2011/12. In addition, there were increases in arrests for burglary, robbery and the other offences category for suspects from the Black and Asian ethnic groups.

Defendants

The use of out of court disposals (Penalty Notices for Disorder and caution

The publication reports statistical information on the representation of black and minority ethnic groups as suspects, offenders and victims within the criminal justice system and on employees within criminal justice agencies.

This publication fulfils a statutory obligation for the Secretary of State to publish, annually, information relating to the criminal justice system with reference to avoiding discrimination on the ground of race.

The bulletin is produced and handled by the ministry’s analytical professionals and production staff. Pre-release access of up to 24 hours is granted to the following persons:

Ministry of Justice: Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice; Minister of State Criminal Justice; Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice; Permanent Secretary; Press Office; MoJ Policy Director; Head of Race Confidence and Justice Unit; Race Confidence and Justice Unit; Policy lead for Victims; Policy lead for racist offences and racially or religiously aggravated offences; Policy lead for Cautions; Policy lead for sentencing; and NOMs policy lead for probation and prisons.

Home Office: Home Secretary; Press Office; Statistics Head of Profession; Policy lead for Stop and Account and Stop and Search.

Office of the Attorney General: Attorney General.

CPS: Equality and Diversity Unit Officer.

ACPO: Diversity Business Area Policy Manager.

NPIA: Policy lead for Arrests.

Judiciary: Senior Presiding Judge.

This publication provides information on the number of hate crimes from police recorded data in England and Wales from April 2015 to March 2016. The bulletin covers the extent and trends in hate crime for all forces, with additional analysis based upon more detailed data supplied by 24 police forces on the types of offences associated with hate crime.

Hate crime is defined as ‘any criminal offence which is perceived, by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice towards someone based on a personal characteristic.’ There are five centrally monitored strands of hate crime:

• race or ethnicity
• religion or beliefs
• sexual orientation
• disability
• transgender identity

The publication includes information on racist incidents in England and Wales recorded by the police from April 2015 to March 2016. A ‘racist incident’ is any incident, including any crime, which is perceived by the victim or any other person to be motivated by a hostility or prejudice based on a person’s race or perceived race. This release includes an Annex on racially and religiously aggravated offences around the European Union (EU) referendum.

This publication provides information on the number of hate crimes from police recorded data in England and Wales from April 2023 to March 2024. The bulletin covers the extent and trends in hate crime for all forces, with additional analysis based upon more detailed data supplied by 31 police forces on the types of offences associated with hate crime.

Hate crime is defined as “any criminal offence which is perceived, by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice towards someone based on a personal characteristic.”

There are 5 centrally monitored strands of hate crime:

• race or ethnicity
• religion or beliefs
• sexual orientation
• disability
• transgender identity

This is an Official Statistics bulletin produced by statisticians in the Home Office, Ministry of Justice and the Office for National Statistics. It brings together a range of official statistics on hate crime from across the crime and criminal justice system, as well as the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW).

Including data from various sources in a joint publication makes it easier for users to find the information they need without having to compile it from different statistical publications. This publication allows the Government and users to examine the levels of hate crime and reporting and patterns of offending and will help Police and Crime Commissioners, police forces and other criminal justice agencies to focus their resources appropriately.

Hate crime is defined as ‘any criminal offence which is perceived, by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by a hostility or prejudice towards someone based on a personal characteristic’. The five monitored strands are race, religion/faith, sexual orientation, disability, and gender-identity. Crimes based on hostility to age, gender, or appearance, for example, can also be hate crimes, although they are not part of the five centrally monitored strands.

The report provides estimates from the CSEW on the level of hate crime in England and Wales, as well as information on the victims’ experience of hate crime and whether they told the police about the hate crimes.

Information from the police covers the number of crimes which were ‘flagged’ by the police, during the process of recording crime, as being motivated by one or more of the five centrally monitored strands, how the police dealt these offences, and what types of hate crime offences the police recorded.

More detailed information is available for racially or religiously aggravated offences, as defined by statute, which form a subset of total police recorded ‘flagged’ hate crimes. Information is presented from police recording through to court outcomes, including sentences handed out in court. These aggravated offences accounted for over 80 per cent of the racially or religiously motivated ‘flagged’ hate crimes recorded by the police in 2012 to 2013.