NCJ Number
206820
Journal
Crime Prevention and Community Safety: An International Journal Volume: 6 Issue: 3 Dated: 2004 Pages: 33-41
Date Published
2004
Length
9 pages
Annotation
This article analyzes the conceptual problems involved in the reporting of alcohol-related crime and specifically explores the strengths and weaknesses of crime data reported by Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships (CDRP) in the United Kingdom.
Abstract
Three times yearly, all CDRP’s in the United Kingdom are required to report local crime and disorder data. Information pertaining to alcohol-related crime tends to be lacking in these reports. The statutory basis on which the description of “alcohol-related” crime is rested is reviewed, along with the “direct” approach to measuring alcohol-related crime, which is based on establishing a connection between offenders who have been drinking and a specific criminal event. Main sources of this direct data are found in police records, criminal justice databases, within local authorities such as the Social Services Department, and other types of incident log databases such as medical databases. An “indirect” approach to analyzing alcohol-related crime involves the collection and analysis of information about incidents/offenses and victimization and correlating this information to spatial, temporal, and contextual data, regardless of whether the incident/offense data mentions alcohol. Main sources of indirect data are found in police incident and recorded crime data, hospital emergency room records, ambulance service records, local authority records, and any licensed premises that maintains an incident log book. Thus, the analysis has uncovered the complexities encountered when attempting to report on alcohol-related crime and disorder; a variety of disparate data sources may be encountered and their quality may vary widely. Key to distinguishing between different types of data are whether they are “direct” or “indirect” measures. “Indirect” data may prove more conclusive and useful than “direct” data on alcohol-related crime because the indirect approach provides a basis for establishing correlations between amounts and types of incidents/offenses and victimization. Also, with the use of “indirect” data, CDRP’s would not be required to prove that specific incidents are linked to specific offenders who had been drinking. Notes, references