Miko, no need to repeat what borders on racism in 2 threads, I've replied in the other one.
Toad, I've tracked down the rules for recording crimes in the UK, and the changes that were made.
Current rules at:
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/countrules.html"GENERAL RULE: ONE CRIME FOR EACH PERSON MURDERED
Four bodies are discovered murdered at the same address. Four crimes (class 1).
* Victims injured should be counted in addition to those murdered .
A places a bomb in a public house and warns the police. The bomb explodes
before full evacuation, killing 10 people and wounding a further 15, with the
remaining 4 people escaping unhurt.
Ten crimes of murder (class 1), plus 15 crimes
of wounding (class 5).
* Principal Crime: see also general rules section F & end page of chapter.
A robs a bank and deliberately shoots dead a cashier. One crime of murder (class 1).
A rapes B and causes her death by strangulation. One crime of murder (class 1)."
From the main UK stats I linked to earlier:
"Although Home Office counting rules have brought greater consistency to the recording of crimes in
the 43 police forces of England and Wales, variation still remains. The existence of differences in
recording was illustrated in two recent reports, On the Record (HMIC, 2000) and the Review of
Police Forces Crime Recording Practices (Burrows et al, 2000), and recognised in the Review of
Crime Statistics (Simmons, 2000). As a result of these findings the Association of Chief Police
Officers (ACPO), with the Home Office, developed a new National Crime Recording Standard
(NCRS) which has been adopted across all police forces from 1 April 2002. Copies of the standard
are available on the Home Office web site (at
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/countrules.html)."
All these reports I've already linked to:
On The Record
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/hmic/otr00.htmReview of
Police Forces Crime Recording Practices
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs/hors204.pdfReview of
Crime Statistics
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/crimprev/review.pdfNone of them have anything approaching the "quote" on that site. Reading through them, it is absolutely clear that crimes were recorded according to the police report at the time, with some being dropped later if complaints were withdrawn. It's 100% clear that crimes were not recorded based on trial outcomes, or even based on wether someone was charged.
The last report goes in to details about why some reports were not recorded as crimes:
"1. In the majority of cases it appeared that the police believed there was not sufficient
evidence that a notifiable offence had occurred. This included incidents where the
parties involved were no longer at the scene, neither the victim nor the offender
disclosed offences, where the offences revealed were not notifiable or genuine errors
had been made by the callers. For example:
A gang of youths causing trouble but no sign of the youths on police arrival.
A neighbour reported a domestic argument, neither the man or woman
involved reported offences and there were no visible injuries to either party.
A caller alleged his girlfriend was wrecking his house. The furniture broken
belonged to the alleged offender and therefore ‘no crime occurred’.
‘Indecent exposure’ turned out to be a local vagrant with torn trousers who had
fallen asleep on the pavement"
"2. No complaint was made, or the police found no complainant. Typical examples
here were:
A caller alleged assault – he had a bleeding nose – and on arrival at the scene
he refused to provide details to the police, and sent them away.
A report of assault was not crimed because the officer reported ‘no allegation
was made.’
3. ‘Advice was given’ to the alleged offender or the offence/offender was otherwise
dealt with.
Male customer reported assaulting security guard. When police arrived no
offences were alleged. Police advised both parties.
A woman reported that her ex-boyfriend was harassing her, the officer passed
the incident to the family safety unit.
Reports of a violent domestic incident, the offender was arrested for breach of
the peace.
4. The allegation was subsequently withdrawn by the person who made it.
A woman reported that her ex-boyfriend had made threats to kill her, but
denied the offences when the police arrived"
It gives examples where mistakes were clearly made:
"In a number of cases the police had clearly made an error in not recording a crime,
or the officer dealt with the matter by recording it in his/her pocket book only. In one
quarter of all the queries submitted to one force as to why incidents were not crimed,
the reply was simply the matter was an “oversight”. In one case, an officer
responded to a query about an assault allegation saying that he would pursue the
matter and “record a detected crime when an arrest had been made”!"
The exclamation mark is in the report. That indicates it wasn't common practice in any way to file reports based on charges, court cases, or anything other than the evidence of wether a crime had been commited. A body with injuries is fairly clear evidence.
I also doubt very much that any murders or suspicious deaths would come under the "oversight" category. It's fairly easy to forget broken window, or ignore a row between two neighbours, but not to "forget" to record a bloodstained body.
Incidentally, every suden or suspicious death has to go before a coroners court, with the policemen involved called to give evidence, so they have to be recorded.
