Tuesday 2 September 2014

In West Yorkshire, eight out of nine crimes reported to police safeguarding units aren't recorded as crimes

****

From the report of Her Majestry's Inspector of Constabulary's report into West Yorkshire Police's data recording and management:



We examined 108 reports that were referred from other agencies directly to the force’s safeguarding units (public protection). Of the 27 crimes that should have been recorded, 3 had been. Of the 3, all were correctly classified and one was recorded outside the 72-hour limit allowed under the HOCR. As some of these records related to sexual offences and assaults on vulnerable adults and children, this is a serious cause for concern and is a matter of material and urgent importance.


The emphasis is mine and shows this report isn't routine but topical. I cannot make more comment - will be seeking further clarification. However, when eight out of nine crimes deriving from other agencies are not recorded there is perhaps a bit of a problem?

...

7 comments:

Invicta said...

Perhaps they're too busy persecuting caring, responsible parents or they are corrupt, or incompetent, or politically correct, or...........

Junican said...

Your quote does not make much sense.
"Of the 27 crimes that should have been recorded..."
When and by whom were the events recorded decided, retrospectively, to be 'crimes'?
Oh, 'Sod It!' Just put some more sport on the TV!

Junican said...

Oh, by the way, Mr Cooke, since you demand a catchpa authentication of comments plus moderation, do you not think that comments deserve some sort of response? Are they reasonable and well argued? Are they helpful? Do you disagree with what they say?
Until recently (some 20 years ago!), I was a Labour voter, largely because my father was a miner who battled against exploitation. But then I saw the take over of labour by Blair et al. Bla, bla. And so, for a while, I have voted Conservative, in order to limit the damage.
What has finally converted me to UKIP (regardless of what you say) is 'the smoking ban'. Essentially, the important thing about it is the take-over of private property and enterprises on the spurious allegation that they are 'public places'.
This is not the place to go into arguing about that, but it is obviously a facile trick.
UKIP makes sense. Cameron et al have allowed themselves to be controlled. Damn it! Why did the UK ratify the Tobacco Control Treaty? That decision smacks of ignorance and stupidity and subservience. Your Party did not instigate it, but most certainly ought to have withdrawn from it. Why? Because the whole FCTC Treaty ignores 'Consumers of Tobacco'. That omission is devastating when you think about it.

Anonymous said...

Even worse, 100% of credit card fraud is not recorded as a crime - Plod just passes the victims to the banks, who refund the stolen money.
Somehow that does not count as crime in the statistics.

Anonymous said...

... that's how the Police look good in the national statistics.. i.e. Crime Rate continues to fall in all areas... easy to manipulate crime stats if you just ignore crime.

Makes one wonder what the Cops are there for.. or who..

Anonymous said...

... that's how the Police look good in the national statistics.. i.e. Crime Rate continues to fall in all areas... easy to manipulate crime stats if you just ignore crime.

Makes one wonder what the Cops are there for.. or who..

Simon Cooke said...

@Junican - where I'm asked a direct question, I respond. As to you general point about UKIP - I remain unconvinced not because you're wrong about the smoking ban but because of a pile of other stuff.

However the biggest argument for me is that the consequence of the UKIP surge is most likely to be a Labour Government. OK there might be a few more UKIP councillors and maybe an MP or two but mostly just Labour Councillors and Labour MPs where once there were Tories.

That and I'm a Conservative :)