In 2023, Texas had the highest number of forcible rape cases in the United States, with 15,097 reported rapes. Delaware had the lowest number of reported forcible rape cases at 194. Number vs. rate It is perhaps unsurprising that Texas and California reported the highest number of rapes, as these states have the highest population of states in the U.S. When looking at the rape rate, or the number of rapes per 100,000 of the population, a very different picture is painted: Alaska was the state with the highest rape rate in the country in 2023, with California ranking as 30th in the nation. The prevalence of rape Rape and sexual assault are notorious for being underreported crimes, which means that the prevalence of sex crimes is likely much higher than what is reported. Additionally, more than a third of women worry about being sexually assaulted, and most sexual assaults are perpetrated by someone the victim knew.

This project undertook the systematic collection of first-generation data concerning the nature, extent, and seriousness of child sexual exploitation (CSE) in the United States. The project was organized around the following research objectives: (1) identification of the nature, extent, and underlying causes of CSE and the commercial sexual exploitation of children (CSEC) occurring in the United States, (2) identification of those subgroups of children that were at the greatest risk of being sexually exploited, (3) identification of subgroups of adult perpetrators of sex crimes against children, and (4) identification of the modes of operation and other methods used by organized criminal units to recruit children into sexually exploitative activities. The study involved surveying senior staff members of nongovernment organizations (NGOs) and government organizations (GOs) in the United States known to be dealing with persons involved in the transnational trafficking of children for sexual purposes. Part 1 consists of survey data from nongovernment organizations. These were local child and family agencies serving runaway and homeless youth. Part 2 consists of survey data from government organizations. These organizations were divided into local, state, and federal agencies. Local organizations included municipal law enforcement, county law enforcement, prosecutors, public defenders, and corrections. State organizations included state child welfare directors, prosecutors, and public defenders. Federal organizations included the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Federal Public Defenders, Immigration and Naturalization Service, United States Attorneys, United States Customs, and the United States Postal Service. Variables in Parts 1 and 2 include the organization's city, state, and ZIP code, the type of services provided or type of law enforcement agency, how the agency was funded, the scope of the agency's service area, how much emphasis was placed on CSEC as a policy issue or a service issue, conditions that might influence the number of CSEC cases, how staff were trained to deal with CSEC cases, how victims were identified, the number of children that experienced child abuse, sexual abuse, pornography, or other exploitation in 1999 and 2000 by age and gender, methods of recruitment, family history of victims, gang involvement, and substance abuse history of victims.

Crime in the United States, by Region, Geographic Division, and State, 2015–2016

The FBI collects these data through the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program.

FBI link

Important note about rape data

In 2013, the FBI UCR Program initiated the collection of rape data under a revised definition and removed the term “forcible” from the offense name. The UCR Program now defines rape as follows:

Rape (revised definition): Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim. (This includes the offenses of rape, sodomy, and sexual assault with an object as converted from data submitted via the National Incident-Based Reporting System [NIBRS].)

Rape (legacy definition): The carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will.

General comments

• This table provides the estimated number of offenses and the rate (per 100,000 inhabitants) of crime in each region, geographic division, and state in 2015 and 2016, and the 2-year percent change in each.
• Violent crime includes the offenses of murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, rape (revised definition), robbery, and aggravated assault. Property crime includes the offenses of burglary, larceny-theft, and motor vehicle theft.
• The UCR Program does not have sufficient data to estimate for arson.

Caution against ranking

Any comparisons of crime among different locales should take into consideration relevant factors in addition to the area’s crime statistics. UCR Statistics: Their Proper Use provides more details concerning the proper use of UCR statistics.

Methodology

• The data used in creating this table were from all law enforcement agencies in the UCR Program (including those submitting less than 12 months of data).
• Crime statistics include estimated offense totals (except arson) for agencies submitting less than 12 months of offense reports for each year.
• The FBI derives state totals by estimating for nonreporting and partially reporting agencies within each state. The UCR Program aggregates a state total using the state’s individual agency estimates.

Offense estimation

These tables contain statistics for the entire United States. Because not all law enforcement agencies provide data for complete reporting periods, the FBI includes estimated crime numbers in these presentations. The FBI computes estimates for participating agencies not providing 12 months of complete data. For agencies supplying 3 to 11 months of data, the national UCR Program estimates for the missing data by following a standard estimation procedure using the data provided by the agency. If an agency has supplied less than 3 months of data, the FBI computes estimates by using the known crime figures of similar areas within a state and assigning the same proportion of crime volumes to nonreporting agencies. The estimation process considers the following: population size covered by the agency; type of jurisdiction, e.g., police department versus sheriff’s office; and geographic location.

In response to various circumstances, the FBI has estimated offense totals for some states. For example, problems at the state level (e.g., noncompliance with UCR guidelines, technological difficulties) have, at times, resulted in data that cannot be used for publication, and estimation was necessary. Also, efforts by an agency to convert to NIBRS have contributed to the need for unique estimation procedures.

A summary of state-specific and offense-specific estimation procedures is available in the “Estimation of state-level data” section of the Methodology.

Rape estimation

This table contains estimates based on both the legacy and revised definitions of rape. Agencies submit data based on only one of these definitions. Within each population group size, the proportion of female rape victims was calculated from all NIBRS reports of rape, sodomy, and sexual assault with an object. For agencies that reported using the revised definition, the actual number of reported rapes was decreased by the calculated proportion to arrive at an estimate for the number of rapes using the legacy definition. Conversely, for agencies that reported using the legacy definition, the actual number of reported rapes was increased by the inverse of the proportion to arrive at an estimate for the number of rapes using the revised definition.

Population estimation

For the 2016 population estimates used in this table, the FBI computed individual rates of growth from one year to the next for every city/town and county using 2010 decennial population counts and 2011 through 2015 population estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau. Each agency’s rates of growth were averaged; that average was then applied and added to its 2015 Census population estimate to derive the agency’s 2016 population estimate.

The SGBV & Dynamics of Conflict dataset is comprised of SGBV reports for seven conflict-affected country cases, allowing the study to meet the following criteria: 1) representation of the five different types of conflict; 2) cases in the top 20 for conflict deaths/attacks during the 2010–2020 period and, 3) inclusion of cases from different global regions (Asia, Latin America, Africa and the Middle East).

Using the codebook on this page, SGBV reports are analysed across three years in each of the following countries: Central African Republic (one-sided [rebel-led] violence), Colombia (state-based violence), Myanmar (one-sided [state-led] violence), Nigeria (terrorism), Philippines (one-sided violence [terrorism]), South Sudan (fragile), and Syria (non-state-based and state-based violence).

Data is collected from the content of open-source reports, both official (government and inter-governmental) and unofficial (non-governmental and media) following guidance of the Office of the ICC Prosecutor (2014: 22) and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR 2014a) on the sources of information that may be taken into account and designated as official (government and international organization reports) versus unofficial (media and civil society or non-government organization reports) when building a profile of SGBV reports.

A report is coded when at least one listed SGBV crime is mentioned. Two sources were used to collect reports: the UN document reference site UNHCR RefWorld; and Factiva, a DowJones news aggregator site. We specifically code a report in RefWorld when any of the words ‘rape raping raped rapes gender sexual’ were mentioned and in Factiva with the code work ‘sex crimes’.

These data provide information on the number of arrests reported to the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program each year by police agencies in the United States. These arrest reports provide data on 43 offenses including violent crime, drug use, gambling, and larceny. The data received by ICPSR were structured as a hierarchical file containing (per reporting police agency) an agency header record, 1 to 12 monthly header records, and 1 to 43 detail offense records containing the counts of arrests by age, sex, and race for a particular offense. ICPSR restructured the original data to a rectangular format. Arrests reported to the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Uniform Crime Reporting program. Smallest Geographic Unit: states, counties, and cities Datasets: DS1: Uniform Crime Reporting Program Data [United States]: Arrests by Age, Sex, and Race, 1980 mail questionnaire; on-site questionnaire

Introduction and Background. Minorities are less likely to report rapes. The Post Coital DNA Recovery (PCDR) study (2009-14) subjects were white (93%) where expanded collection times were not generalizable to minority populations. Evidence reports health and medical differences between races necessitating duplication of previous research in minority populations. Aims. (1) What is the time period in which it is possible to collect post-coital DNA in minority women using Y-STR laboratory methods? and (2) when compared to the former study sample of minority and non-minority, what are the physiological conditions, factors, or activities in minority couples that influence post-coital DNA recovery? Design. The design includes mixed methods duplication perfected in the first study, embracing descriptive and inferential techniques. Qualitative research used semi-structured interviews. Aim 1 analysis used PCDR-M data only. Aim 2 combined data from both PCDR and PCDR-M studies. Combined, DNA recovery, a binary outcome accounting for repeated methods in population regression analysis, used Generalized Estimating Equation (GEE) methods. Fidelity. The strict criteria for adherence included considerable outreach and support of study personnel. PCDR and PCDR-M data combined and compared the two samples, which had specific homogeneity, including same inclusion and elimination criteria in both studies; fidelity to the validated protocol; laboratory method and interpretation for inclusion; duplicate statistical analysis; and interpretation of data. Any variation in key variables met elimination criteria. Assumptions and Limitations. Assumptions included (1) motivation is altruistic; (2) motivation is incentives and coercion for some; (3) negotiating coitus is difficult and stressful; and (4) similar fidelity and dropout rates. The limitations included (1) a lack of representation for the diverse experiences of rape victims; (2) sample size; (3) self-selection bias; (4) protocol adherence; and (4) advances in laboratory science and DNA kits. Demographics. Demographic variables included gender, race, and age. Major categories in the dataset included participants' reproductive history, data on female participants' reproductive organs, and childhood abuse.

This study of prison rapes used an ethnographic, culturally relativistic methodology and was conducted between April 2004 and September 2005. The study was conducted in 30 correctional institutions, 23 men's and 7 women's, in 10 states. All 23 men's institutions were the highest-security level men's prison available in each state. When women's institutions were multi-security level and housed minimum, medium, and high-security inmates, they were selected from the highest-security level housing units within the institution. A total of 564 (409 male and 155 female) inmates were interviewed. The inmates to be interviewed were selected from the general prison population using a probability sample design. Average interview length was just under an hour. The sole mode of data collection was an open-ended, semistructured inmate interview. To ensure comparability of answers, surveys were designed with each query resting on a particular concept or variable. The same interview instrument was used for both male and female inmates. Questions were asked about inmate prison history, mental health, rape, social process, domestic violence and relationships, staff, institutional factors, and perception of social roles, and demographic information. Also included are lexical responses and free list questions such as "Why do inmates have sex with other inmates?"

Indicators related to the inclusion of VAW health services in policy.

Proportion of countries that include EC, HIV PEP, STI treatment, and all three services, in policy, by SDG region and World Bank income group.

India saw a significant jump in cyber crimes reported in 2022 from the previous year. That year, over ****** cyber crime incidents were registered. Karnataka and Telangana accounted for the highest share during the measured period. Uttar Pradesh leads the wayThe northern state of Uttar Pradesh had the highest number of cyber crimes compared to the rest of the country, with over * thousand cases registered with the authorities in 2018 alone. India’s tech state, Karnataka, followed suite that year. A majority of these cases were registered under the IT Act with the motive to defraud, or sexually exploit victims. It's a numbers game It was estimated that in 2017, consumers in India collectively lost over 18 billion U.S. dollars due to cyber crimes. However, these were estimates based only on reported numbers. In a country like India, it is highly likely that the actual figures could be under-reported due to a lack of cyber crime awareness or the mechanisms to classify them. Recent government initiatives such as a dedicated online portal to report cyber crimes could very well be the main factor behind a sudden spike in online crimes from 2017 onwards.