Crime & Disorder & Drugs Audit 2004 - Criminal Damage

Mervyn Middleton, Community Safety Partnership Co-Ordinator

Description

Broadland Crime and Disorderand Drugs Audit 2004Criminal Damage 1.1 ASB – crimes of criminal damage1.1.1 Volume and trendsThe HO banding ‘Criminal damage’ is used. Sub-categories have been identified inaccordance with those suggested on the Home Office website ‘Crime Statistics in Englandand Wales’.Figures for numbers in each sub-category and overall numbers for Broadland in each ofthe 4 years are given in Table 40, together with percentage change year-on-year.Criminal Percentdamage changeCriminal Criminal Otherdamage (Other damage criminal All criminal year-on-Arson (dwellings) buildings) (vehicles) damage damage year2000-1 76 145 154 272 211 8582001-2 77 182 208 317 325 1109 + 29.32002-3 52 200 190 356 378 1176 + 6.02003-4 74 203 250 397 431 1355 + 15.2Table 1 Numbers of criminal damage in Broadland and percentage change year-on-year[Source: NC1]Between the time of the last audit (2000-1) and the current audit (2003-4), there has beenan overall increase in offences of criminal damage of 57.9%. Increases in 2001-2 and2003-4, not 2002-3, were highest, which indicates that NCRS is not responsible for thesignificant uninterrupted increase overall. Numbers of arson have remained stable,whereas numbers in other sub-categories have increased.1.1.2 Comparative incidenceComparative rates for criminal damage, shown in Fig. 46, are given per 1000 population.This measure was not available for CDRP families. CDRP Analyst, Eastern, April 2005 225 23.021 ...

Informations

• Publié par: Musong
• Nombre de lectures: 10
• Langue: English

Extrait

Broadland Crime and Disorder and Drugs Audit 2004

Criminal Damage

1.1 ASB – crimes of criminal damage

1.1.1 Volume and trends The HO banding ‘Criminal damage’ is used. Sub-categories have been identified in accordance with those suggested on the Home Office website ‘Crime Statistics in England and Wales’. Figures for numbers in each sub-category and overall numbers for Broadland in each of the 4 years are given in Table 40, together with percentage change year-on-year.

Criminal Percent Criminal dama e Criminal Other chan e dama e Other dama e criminal All criminal ear-on- Arson (dwellings) buildings) (vehicles) damage damage year 2000-1 76 145 154 272 211 858 2001-2 77 182 208 317 325 1109 + 29.3 2002-3 52 200 190 356 378 1176 6.0 + 2003-4 74 203 250 397 431 1355 + 15.2 Table 1 Numbers of c riminal damage in Broadland and percentage change year-on-year [Source: NC1]

Between the time of the last audit (2000-1) and the current audit (2003-4), there has been an overall increase in offences of criminal damage of 57.9%. Increases in 2001-2 and 2003-4, not 2002-3, were highest, which indicates that NCRS is not responsible for the significant uninterrupted increase overall. Numbers of arson have remained stable, whereas numbers in other sub-categories have increased. 1.1.2 Comparative incidence Comparative rates for criminal damage, shown in Fig. 46, are given per 1000 population. This measure was not available for CDRP families.

CDRP Analyst, Eastern, April 2005

2

25 20

15 10

5

11.7

21.8

20.7

23.0

0 Broadland 2003-4 Norfolk 2003-4 Eastern 2003-4 England & Wales 2003-4 Geographic area

Fig. 1 Comparative incidence (rate) of Criminal Damage per 1000 population [Sources: HO1, iQ, HO4] It is notable that the rate for Norfolk is only 5% below the national average. The rate for Broadland itself, however, in spite of recent increases in absolute terms, is only a little more than half the rate for Norfolk. For incidence of criminal damage in the quarter January – March 2004, Broadland’s ranking within its family of most-similar CDRPs is only available in terms of the 5 sub- categories. The rankings are displayed in Table 41. The CDRP ranked 1 st in the group has the lowest crime rate, the CDRP ranked 15 th the highest. Sub-category Rankin of Broadland (n=15) Arson 5 Damage to dwellings 5 Damage to other buildings 8 Damage to vehicles 1 Other damage 13

Table 2 Position of B roadland CDRP within its family group of most-similar CDRPs for types of criminal damage, Jan-Mar 2004 [Source: iQ]

CDRP Analyst, Eastern, April 2005

3

1.1.3 Cost The total value recorded by the police of all crimes of criminal damage in Broadland in 2003-4 is £9,384. The field has been completed in 96% of these records. However, in only 18 cases is a value higher than zero recorded. Clearly, police records do not reveal the full costs of criminal damage. The total cost to society of criminal damage in Broadland in 2003-4 may be estimated using findings and methodology from Home Office Research Study 217, as shown in Table 42. In line with HORS 217, the cost of criminal damage against individuals and households is calculated separately from criminal damage against the commercial and public sectors, reflecting the higher unit costs of the latter. No. Est. total recorded no. crimes crimes in in Est. unit Est. total Broadland Multiplier Broadland cost cost Criminal dama e a ainst individuals and households  924 6.3 5821 £510 £2,968,812 Criminal dama e a ainst the commercial and public sectors 431 6.3 2715 £890 £2,416,617 Total Criminal Damage 1355 8537 £5,385,429 Table 3 Estimated glo bal cost to society of criminal damage in Broadland in 2003-4 [Sources: NC1, HO7]

The true costs of criminal damage suggested by this analysis, £5.4m, are very substantially greater than costs recorded by the police. 1.1.4 Location (distribution by ward) Map 10 gives a quintile mapping of criminal damage by ward. There is some variation within the borough, though the highest levels per ward are well below levels in certain wards elsewhere in Norfolk. Within Broadland, certain areas on the outskirts of Norwich, plus Aylsham, were most affected.

CDRP Analyst, Eastern, April 2005

4

Map 1 Criminal dam age in Broadland, 2003-4 – distribution by ward [Source: NC1]

Table 43 shows volume and incidence of criminal damage in Broadland in 2003-4, together with deprivation scores.

CDRP Analyst, Eastern, April 2005

5

Incidence District rate er District Deprivation Volume rank Population 1000 rank score District rank Ward (count) (volume) mid-2001 population) (incidence) (IMD 2000) (deprivation) Thorpe St Andrew Northeast 103 1 6,875 15.0 4 8.1 30 Aylsham 91 2 5,840 15.6 3 14.2 13 Taverham 88 3 10,495 8.4 26 5.2 35 Catton 79 4 5,685 13.9 9 7.8 32 Sprowston Central 70 5 5,140 13.6 12 17.1 7 Thor e St Andrew South 66 6 2,605 25.3 1 24.8 1 Drayton 62 7 4,475 13.9 10 9.2 29 Hellesdon Southeast 62  8 3,455 17.9 2 12.2 22 Hellesdon West 59 9 4,160 14.2 7 12.8 19 Thor e St Andrew Northwest 56 10 3,785 14.8 5 10.0 28 Brundall 44 11 4,525 9.7 18 8.0 31 Hellesdon North 44 12 3,405 12.9 13 10.0 27 Spixworth 42 13 4,445 9.4 21 7.4 33 Burlingham 36 14 3,210 11.2 16 16.8 8 Horsford 35 15 3,930 8.9 23 16.3 9 Sprowston South 35 16 2,925 12.0 14 11.1 25 Cawston 34 17 2,430 14.0 8 16.2 10 Buxton 33 18 2,240 14.7 6 13.8 14 Rackheath 32 19 3,175 10.1 17 11.6 23 Hevingham 26 20 2,315 11.2 15 20.8 5 Sprowston East 25 21 4,290 5.8 30 15.6 11 Acle 20 22 2,745 7.3 28 13.1 18 Coltishall 20 23 2,355 8.5 25 11.3 24 Foulsham 20 24 1,465 13.7 11 22.5 3 Reepham 20 25 2,660 7.5 27 13.8 15 Great Witchingham 18 26 1,975 9.1 22 13.7 16 Hainford 18 27 1,870 9.6 19 10.3 26 Blofield 17 28 3,520 4.8 33 7.2 34 Freethorpe 17 29 1,785 9.5 20 18.7 6 Wroxham 13 30 1,530 8.5 24 13.2 17 Reedham 10 31 1,695 5.9 29 22.5 4 St Faiths 10 32 1,730 5.8 31 12.4 21 South Walsham 9 33 1,800 5.0 32 14.4 12 Sprowston West 8 34 1,720 4.7 34 12.7 20 Plumstead 2 35 2,535 0.8 35 23.5 2 Broadland 1324 118,790 11.1 Table 4 Volume and i ncidence of criminal damage in Broadland wards, 2003-4, in rank order by volume, together with deprivation scores [Sources: NC1, IMD2000, NCC] CDRP Analyst, Eastern, April 2005 6

Of the 20% most-affected wards by volume, three (Thorpe St Andrew Northeast, Aylsham and Thorpe St Andrew South) are also among the 20% most-affected wards by incidence. These three wards are thereby identified as priority areas for crime reduction initiatives. Only one of them, Thorpe St Andrew South, is ranked amongst the 20% most-deprived wards in Broadland. Thorpe St Andrew Northeast is actually among the least deprived wards in Broadland. Amongst all wards in Broadland, there is a poor correlation between incidence of criminal damage and deprivation. The crime reduction matrix in Table 44 shows that the 3 wards where high volume and high incidence of criminal damage coincided in 2003-4 accounted for 19.6% of the Broadland total.

Volume of criminal damage Low Medium High ward Low (4.2 6 %     w of a   r c d ri s mes)(1.9% 1     of crimes) 0 I o n f  c C id ri e m n i c n e al Medium 2 wards 16 wards 3 wards Damage (2.3% of crimes) (38.2% of crimes) (17.9% of crimes) s High 0 (15.9 4 %     w o a f  r c d r s imes)(19.6 3 %  w  o a f r  c d rimes) Table 5 Crime reduct ion matrix – criminal damage in Broadland wards, 2003-4 [Sources: NC1, HO8]

More detailed analysis for criminal damage focuses on Thorpe St Andrew Northeast Ward. This ward accounted for 7.8% of criminal damage in Broadland in 2003-4. 1.1.5 Thorpe St Andrew Northeast – hotspots Map 11 displays the varying density of criminal damage within the most affected area of Thorpe St Andrew Northeast in 2003-4. Table 45 shows hotspots by street.

CDRP Analyst, Eastern, April 2005

7

Map 2 Contour map showing hotspots of criminal damage within Thorpe St Andrew Northeast in 2003-4 [Source: NC1]

Street Count (4 or more) Laundry Lane 16 Pound Lane 13 Charles Avenue 9 South Hill Road 8 Mary Chapman Close 5 Belmore Road 4 Booty Road 4 Thorpe Avenue 4 Table 6 Hotspots by s treet for criminal damage in Thorpe St Andrew Northeast, 2003-4 [Source: NC1]

The most-affected areas are to the East end of Laundry Lane; at the South end of Pound Lane (a problem area shared with Thorpe St Andrew South); and an area in the vicinity of Thorpe Avenue at the Western boundary of the ward (a problem area which extends into Thorpe St Andrew Northwest). Table 46 shows the location by sub-scene of crimes of criminal damage in Thorpe St Andrew Northeast in 2003-4.

CDRP Analyst, Eastern, April 2005

8

Sub-scene Count (3 or more) Garden 33 Road 12 Driveway 11 House 11 School 10 Public car park 7 Greenhouse 4 Park/ public garden 3 Table 7 Location by s ub-scene of criminal damage in Thorpe St Andrew Northeast, 2003-4 [Source: NC1] The biggest single category is ‘garden’, accounting for 32% of all crimes of criminal damage in Thorpe St Andrew Northeast in 2003-4. It is almost exclusively associated with the offence of ‘criminal damage - other’, which suggests that neither buildings nor vehicles were involved. The next biggest categories of sub-scene, ‘road’ and ‘driveway’, are associated with the offence of criminal damage to vehicles, as is the ‘public car park’ category. These 3 location types where vehicles were damaged accounted for a further 29.1% of the ward total of crimes of criminal damage. 1.1.6 Thorpe St Andrew Northeast – peak time analysis Fig. 47 shows the distribution of criminal damage by month in Thorpe St Andrew Northeast in 2003-4. January was the month when most crimes occurred, followed by April, May and December. The data set is small; therefore a definite pattern should not be inferred.

12 11 10

8 6

4 4

7 7

4

4

2 1 1 1

6

2 1 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month Fig. 2 Peak month f or criminal damage in Thorpe St Andrew Northeast, 2003-4 [Source: NC1]

CDRP Analyst, Eastern, April 2005

9

Fig. 48 shows the distribution by day of the week. More offences occurred on Tuesdays and Saturdays than on other days. As with the peak month analysis above, apparent patterns revealed in the distribution by day for this small data set should be treated with caution. 12 10

8 7 6 4

2

11

5

5

8

3

10

0 Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday Day of week Fig. 3 Peak day of w eek for criminal damage in Thorpe St Andrew Northeast, 2003-4 [Source: NC1] Fig. 49 shows the distribution by time of day. There is a clear pattern: numbers built up through the afternoon and evening to a peak at 10-11pm, remaining high until 9am, then declining to a trough at 1-2pm.

CDRP Analyst, Eastern, April 2005

10

70 60 49 49 50 47 46 47 48 46 44 40 30 20 10

41

32

20

17

13 14 11

18

21

25

36

40

44

0 Time of day Fig. 4 Peak time of day for criminal damage in Thorpe St Andrew Northeast, 2003-4 [Source: NC1]

CDRP Analyst, Eastern, April 2005

50

60

52

11