ghg

POSTNOTE
Number 507 September 2015

Trends in Crime and Criminal Justice

Overview
 Verifying the impact of crime depends on
consideration of changing crime patterns
and the demand crime places on services.
 Prison populations are increasing while
crime is declining; thought in part to reflect
changes to sentencing and policy.
 Key reforms of the criminal justice system
are in progress, such as the introduction of
‘payment by results’ in the probation service.
 Developments driven by recent policy
reforms and external factors include the
Behaviours are criminalised through legislation risks and opportunities posed by
or judicial decision, and this is influenced by
technological advances, increasing
public attitudes. Crime is widely considered to
emphasis on evidence-based approaches,
be falling but the data underpinning this trend
are complex. This POSTnote describes crime more collaboration between agencies, and
patterns, and highlights issues with crime issues of legitimacy, accountability, access
measurement and data. It also identifies key and rights.
developments in the criminal justice system.

Crime Patterns and Measurement Figure 1. Trends in Total Offences in England and Wales
Crime in the UK is reported to be falling; a trend seen since 20
Number of offences (millions)

the 1990s and mirrored across the developed world.1 For 18

instance, property crimes (such as burglary, car theft and 16 Crime Survey for
robbery) have fallen from 15.3m offences recorded in 1995 14 England and Wales
to 6m in 2013/14 in England and Wales,2 which has been 12
linked to increased security measures.3 Although overall 10
levels of recorded and reported crime have declined (see 8
Police Recorded Crime
Figure 1), the trend is slowing and some crime categories 6
present complex challenges, such as cybercrime,4,5,6,7,8 4
sexual offences7 and terrorism.7 Measures of crime 2
statistics9 and criminal justice policy differ across the 0
devolved nations.

Crime Data
Establishing a meaningful and accurate picture of crime
patterns is challenging for several reasons. First, there is a
gap between the number of crimes committed and those
reported.10 Second, crime data come from numerous
sources, each with different strengths and weaknesses (Box
1). No single dataset accurately captures trends across all
offences, regions, or how frequently different groups commit
or are victims of crime. Methodological differences make
combining or comparing data from different sources
challenging. Third, changes to criminal law make it difficult
to compare crime statistics over time. Moreover, the Public
Accounts Select Committee recently found that police
recorded crime (PRC) exaggerated falling crime rates, and
raised concerns over the misreporting of sexual offences.11
In response, the UK Statistics Authority removed the
designation of ‘National Statistics’ from PRC data.11
Changes in police crime recording practices have followed,
which is likely to have affected PRC rates.

The Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology, Westminster, London SW1A 0AA; Tel: 020 7219 2840; email: post@parliament.uk www.parliament.uk/post
POSTnote 507 September 2015 Trends in Crime and Criminal Justice
Box 1. Measuring Crime
 Police Recorded Crime (PRC) is data taken from police forces’
recording systems.12,13
 Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) measures the
extent of crime in England and Wales by asking people whether
they have experienced any crime in the past year, which includes
offences that might not have been reported to the police.14
 National Violence Surveillance Network (NVSN) uses A&E data
on injuries from violent assaults, which may not be reported to the
police.15
 Court Databases (such as LIBRA or CREST) provide statistics
on prosecutions, convictions and sentencing, including offences
where there has been no police involvement, such as prosecutions
instigated by organisations or individuals.
 Commercial Victimisation Survey collects data on crimes against
retail, agriculture and service sector businesses.16
 Action Fraud is the UK’s crime reporting centre for individuals and
businesses to report scams, fraud or cyber crime.17
PRC and CSEW are the two main crime datasets used in England and
Wales. Since they are sensitive to, and measure different types of
crime, they are best used together.14 Additional measures can be
used to fill the gaps for specific crime types, for example the NVSN is
particularly important for understanding violent crime as it does not
rely on individuals reporting offences.18 Variation in reporting rates for
different offences to the police is thought to reflect victims’ perceptions
of crime severity, and also pragmatic factors, such as the need for
crime reference numbers for insurance claims.11 Crime reporting in
the media and shifting public opinion may also influence the likelihood
that people will report a crime to the police. Following the Jimmy
Saville revelations and Operation Yewtree, most police forces in the
UK recorded increased reporting of sexual offences.19 This is likely to
reflect a narrowing of the gap between actual and reported crime.
Crime statistics do not reflect the scale of demand placed on
the criminal justice system.7 Although reported crime has
been falling, the associated costs have not fallen by as
much as expected.7 The 11% reduction in police numbers in
England and Wales since 2010, and the increasing
proportion of police time spent on more complex crimes is
contributing to the growing demand crime places on the
police and other agencies.7 This discrepancy is thought to
be compounded by an increasing pressure to deal with
incidents involving people with complex needs, such as poor
mental health, which require the police to work with other
services.7 It is also likely that a larger proportion of crime is
committed by a smaller pool of persistent offenders.20
Key Developments in Criminal Justice
The criminal justice system comprises agencies and
processes to prevent crime, hold offenders to account,
rehabilitate and to provide victims with justice.21 It
encompasses early intervention and prevention
programmes, policing, prosecution and the courts, prisons,
probation and rehabilitation services. Key developments are
outlined in the following sections.
Shifts in Approaches to Sentencing
Out of Court Disposals
Since 2003, there has been a growing trend for out-of-court
disposals (such as police cautions, or penalty notices for
public disorder or possession of cannabis22) which are
intended to provide swift and proportionate responses to
Page 2
antisocial behaviour and low-risk offending.23 The proportion
of offences brought to justice outside courts increased from
23% in 2003 to 40% in 2008,23 but has since declined.24 A
review in 2010 suggested that the use of such disposals
may reflect a ‘widening of the net’, where matters that might
have previously resulted in no criminal sanction are being
dealt with formally.23,25 Concerns have been expressed
about their efficiency and a lack of public confidence in their
use.24,26 In response, reforms to improve consistency in the
way which they are applied have recently been proposed.26
Custodial Sentencing: Practice and Guidelines
Despite an overall trend towards falling crime, the prison
population is rising, see Figure 2.27 The factors underlying
this trend are complex, but it is thought that it reflects longer
sentences for some offences, a more serious mix of
offences (violence against the person, drug offences and
sexual offences) coming before the courts and an increasing
likelihood of imprisonment for breaches of non-custodial
sentences or licences.27 The increase in prisoners serving
longer sentences, and in the number of recalls to prison, is
thought to be a significant driver of the rising custodial
population. There is also a trend towards an increasing
number of shorter sentences.27
Figure 2. Growth in the Prison Population
100
number in custody (thousands)
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1945 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 2005 2015
A 2012 survey of Court of Appeal cases found that 95 out of
262 appeals related to unlawful sentences in the Crown
Court.28 Some are concerned that these case are caused by
a lack of clarity in criminal sentencing guidelines (which are
set out across many statutes and frequently updated). To
meet these concerns the Law Commission (an independent
body set up by Parliament to review and recommend law
reform in England and Wales) is conducting a review and
aims to create a single statute with clear instructions, and
which enables straightforward amendments by 2017.29
Electronic Monitoring
Electronic monitoring is currently in several stages of the
criminal justice system: as a bail condition, as a requirement
of a community order, or suspended sentence order and
early release from prison. The use of electronic monitoring
is increasing and is estimated on average to be £70 cheaper
per offender per day than imprisonment.30 A group of
academics and practitioners is examining the benefits and
drawbacks of electronic monitoring and related
POSTnote 507 September 2015 Trends in Crime and Criminal Justice
technologies, including the expected introduction of GPS
tags; the report is expected in April 2016.31 It is thought that
interactions with probation officers during electronic
monitoring may also aid desistance (cessation of offending)
with curfews providing a structure for offenders which helps
them to break patterns of behaviour associated with criminal
activity.32,33 However, researchers have suggested those
released on home detention curfews may struggle to access
education or training, or to get support in finding a job.30
Technological Risks and Opportunities
Some criminal activity is shifting online, such as child
pornography, hate crime and drug dealing.4,5,34 Technology
also gives rise to new crime types such as hacking and
bank and identity fraud.4,5,34 These crime types challenge
police capability, for which specialist digital forensic skills
are needed,7 and the difficulties of policing across
international jurisdictions.35 The Government has responded
to individual issues via legislation and policy, and has
developed cybercrime and cyber-security strategies to
ensure there is a co-ordinated approach across Government
departments.35,36 There is also concern that the general
public lacks knowledge about the risks associated with
online activity, such as social media, and how to protect
themselves against fraud.36
Big Data Approaches
Police forces are increasingly looking at how to integrate
technology in a drive for more effective and efficient working
practices. For example big data approaches can be used as
tools to inform where and when a crime is likely to occur and
identify likely perpetrators.37 Crime hot-spots are established
by analysing which times and precise locations are
associated with the highest crime volume and most serious
crimes. Police resources can be targeted to these areas,
known as ‘hot-spot policing’. A recent review of the limited
evidence suggests that it is effective in reducing and
preventing crime, and that crime is not displaced elsewhere
but that the benefits extend beyond the hot-spot.37 However,
it concluded that further research is required to fully assess
its effectiveness.38 A pilot has been completed on London
Underground by the British Transport Police, which reduced
crime hotspots by 14% and calls for service by 21%.39 For a
further example of how technology is transforming police
practice see POSTbrief 14, Body Worn Video in UK
Policing.40
ICT and the Courts
Sir Brian Leveson’s recent review of the courts identified the
role of ICT in ensuring cost-effective systems and
processes. Recommendations included paperless online
case-management systems, better use of video hearings
and digital evidence, and recordings of court
proceedings.41,42 The digitisation of the court-room is
particularly challenging as there are concerns that rapid
adoption of such technology might compromise the delivery
of fair justice.43 Research is examining the impact of ‘special
measures’ (for vulnerable and intimidated witnesses, which
includes the use of video-links) in jury trials.44
Page 3
Evidence-based Practice
A trend to integrate research and evidence-based practice
within the police, prison and probation workforces is
growing. Historically practitioners (such as police, prison
and probation officers) have not been involved in developing
evidence to evaluate and support the approaches they use,
unlike some parts of the public sector, such as the NHS.45
Establishing theory-practice links seeks to inform crime
prevention46,47,48, and evaluate different approaches to
reducing re-offending such as psychological treatment,49
drug and alcohol counselling,50 arts-based51 or education
programmes52,53. However, there is debate over how
quantitative research methods developed in other fields can
be applied to criminal justice and incorporated with
qualitative research methods traditionally used in the social
sciences.54,55,56 While harnessing scholarship for more cost-
effective and efficient practice is an emerging trend, there is
a dearth of quality evidence for different approaches, and a
lack of evidence in criminal justice policy and practice. The
Probation Institute57 and The College of Policing were
recently established to develop best practice and
professional standards based on evidence. The College of
Policing hosts the Government’s ‘What Works’ Centre for
Crime Reduction, which identifies where knowledge is
lacking, synthesises existing research into a form that is
easily accessible for practitioners and encourages better
use of evidence.58
Partnerships and Collaborative Working
‘Multi-agency partnerships’ and joint-working are increasing
practice trends. MARAC (Multi-Agency-Risk-Assessment-
Conference) is an example of information sharing on
domestic violence cases. Police, health, child protection and
housing staff work with domestic violence specialists to
protect victims.59,60 ‘Troubled Families’ is a programme with
a similar multi-agency approach for families with complex
needs, with one aim to reduce crime.61,62 63,64 A barrier to
successful collaboration is reticence about sharing data
between agencies, because of concerns about breaching
confidentiality.65 There is also increasing collaboration within
the criminal justice system, partly motivated by competition
for resources owing to reduced funding, and a greater focus
on outcomes.66 Collaboration across sectors, with a whole
system approach to service delivery, underpinned by joint
commissioning, co-locating services and shared aims, is
seen as central to improving the efficiency and effectiveness
of criminal justice.66,67 However, there is tension between
the specific role of each aspect of the criminal justice
system and the need for better cross-agency co-ordination.
Trends in Service Delivery
There is an increasing trend for private and third sector
organisations to be involved in delivering some aspects of
criminal justice, notably in security, prison services and
managing some probation practices.
Payment by Results
In 2010, the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) published a five year
re-offending and rehabilitation strategy.68 Probation service
reforms included a ‘payment by results’ approach for
POSTnote 507 September 2015 Trends in Crime and Criminal Justice
rehabilitation providers, and opened the market to the
private, voluntary and community sectors. Thirty-five
individual Probation Trusts have been replaced by a
National Probation Service responsible for high-risk
offenders. Twenty-one Community Rehabilitation
Companies (CRCs) manage low- and medium-risk
offenders69 and supervise those released from short term
sentences (12 months or less) under the new Offender
Rehabilitation Act.70 CRCs must achieve an agreed
reduction in the number of offenders and also offences
committed by their clients. Although the principle of
evaluation on the basis of rehabilitative outcomes has been
welcomed, many see the shift in delivery model as a
challenge.71,72 It may be more complicated to manage, as
offenders may move between risk categories.73 The priority
placed on performance targets for reducing re-offending has
also been critiqued as a short-term solution, at odds with a
longer-term desistance approach of offender behaviour
change and full community re-integration.74
Criminal Justice Providers
Recent MoJ figures show that private corporations, public
sector agencies, charities and social enterprises, have
formed partnerships to deliver prison and probation
services,69 but commentators note that none of the preferred
bid leads are from the voluntary sector.73,75 However, it is
argued that the size of the contracts and the financial risks
involved make it difficult for the voluntary sector to lead
contracts, or to partner large private sector
organisations.75,76 Public sector criminal justice agencies are
under-represented, but by comparison have extensive
experience, offer job stability, provide training and career
progression, resulting in stable and cohesive workforces.77
Some argue that private contracts are associated with
prison disorder, under-staffing or inexperienced
workforces.78 Such challenges have also been attributed to
a larger problem with establishing and running new, large
prisons, and Treasury budget cuts.79 In 2013, the MoJ
identified significant overbilling in its electronic monitoring
contracts with G4S and Serco. A subsequent review partly
attributed this to poor governance and record keeping.80 The
National Audit Office suggests that contracting-out can
improve services and be cost-effective, but that success
depends on government oversight and monitoring.80
Moreover, the divergence between the public and private
sectors may be overestimated, as boundaries between them
blur, because of movement of personnel between them and
subsequent cross-over of policies and practices.77
Access to and Participation in Justice, Equality
and Rights
Legal Aid
In 2013, the MoJ announced legal aid cuts, removing one-
third of the criminal case budget.81 The final proposals
involve fixed legal fees, with cuts of 17.5%.81 The number of
contracts for solicitors providing 24-hour cover at police
stations has also been reduced from 1,600 to 527, which
some argue will leave those in custody without
POST is an office of both Houses of Parliament, charged with providing independent and balanced analysis of policy issues that have a basis in science and technology.
POST is grateful to Leila Jameel for researching this briefing, to the ESRC for funding her parliamentary fellowship, and to all contributors and reviewers. For further
information on this subject, please contact the co-author, Dr Sarah Bunn. Parliamentary Copyright 2015. Image copyright istockphoto.
Page 4
representation.82 The Law Society (an independent
professional body for solicitors) has argued that the cuts will
drive skilled advocates away, and that many criminal legal
aid firms may be at risk. The Joint Committee on Human
Rights has concerns regarding the restriction of legal aid for
the custodial population83 and the MoJ has been urged by
the Law Society to review the impact of the changes.82
Fitness to Plead and Criminal Responsibility
The Law Commission proposes reform of the law on ‘fitness
to plead’, which outlines what should happen when a
defendant who faces prosecution is unable to engage with
the process because of poor mental or physical health.84
The reforms aim to modernise legislation, ensuring the
process of detecting ‘fitness’ is sensitive to a range of
difficulties and subtle impairments. They will also maximise
an individual’s opportunity to have a fair trial by ensuring the
courts are flexible in supporting a defendant’s needs, and
that a broader, more tailored range of criminal justice
outcomes are available. Whilst there are associated costs, it
is also anticipated that there will be long-term savings, via
reduced pressure on health and social care services and a
reduction in further trials or incarcerations.84, 85
Victims’ Rights
There is a trend to give victims a greater role in justice.
Judges are instructed to explain in ordinary language the
reasons for, and effect of a sentence; the charity Victim
Support has recommended that judges should also write to
victims after a conviction, setting out what the sentence
means and what further involvement to expect, and
additional support for child witnesses and victims. 86 A 2015
survey by the Victims’ Commissioner found nearly 75% of
victims were unhappy with the criminal justice agency
service they received.86 Proposals include enshrining the
right to make a Victim Personal Statement in law, providing
information on restorative justice and improved complaints
processes.87 The Crown Prosecution Service has also
conducted a survey and consultation about their services for
victims and witness at court; the report is due in 2015.88
Procedural Justice
Procedural Justice is a legitimacy-based approach to
criminal justice. In policing practice, it advocates police
officers to act with fairness and respect when interacting
with the public.89 A recent survey found that perceived
police legitimacy is an important factor in motivating the
public to co-operate with police; people who thought the
police were on the ‘same side’ as them were significantly
less likely to say they had committed an offence and more
likely to say they would help the police.90 A study examining
the impact of the 2011 London riots on attitudes towards the
police, found that confidence was lowest in areas most
affected, before and after the disorder.91 However, recent
work examining the public’s attitudes towards the police
found that individuals perceived police action very
differently, suggesting that legitimacy is a complex
concept.92
POSTnote 507 September 2015 Trends in Crime and Criminal Justice
Endnotes
1 Making Sense of Crime, Sense About Science, 2015
2 Crime Statistics Release 2013/14, Focus on Property Crime, Office for National
Statistics, November 2014
3 Farrell, G. (2013). Five Tests for a Theory of the Crime Drop, Crime
Science, 2, 5
4 POSTnote number 500, Towards 2020 and Beyond, June 2015
5 Key Issues for the 2015 Parliament, House of Commons Library, June 2015
6 Library Standard Note 5832, Cyber Security - A New National Programme,
House of Commons Library, June 2011
7 College of Policing analysis: Estimating demand on the police service, College
of Policing, January 2015
8 Cyber Crime: A Review of the Evidence, Home Office, October 2013
9 The House of Commons Library publishes regular briefings on crime and crime
statistics
10 Skogan, W.G. (1977). Dimensions of the Dark Figure of Unreported Crime,
Crime & Delinquency, 23(1), 41-50
11 Caught Red-Handed: Why we can’t Count on Police Recorded Crime Statistics,
House of Commons Public Administration Select Committee, 13th Report of
Session 2013-14, April 2014
12 Office for National Statistics, Guidance and Methodology, Police Recorded
Crime
13 Statistics of Crime in England and Wales, Produced by the Office for National
Statistics, Assessment Report 268, UK Statistics Authority, January 2014.
14 Office for National Statistics, Crime Survey for England and Wales
15 Sivarajasingam, V., Page, N., Morgan, P., Matthews, K., Moore, S., Shepher, J.
(2014) Trends in community violence in England and Wales 2005–2009. Injury,
45(3), 592-598
16 Crime against businesses: Headline Findings from the 2013 Commercial
Victimisation Survey, Home Office, February 2014
17 Action Fraud www.actionfraud.police.uk/
18 Florence, C., Shepherd, J., Brennan, I., & Simon, T. (2011). Effectiveness of
anonymised information sharing and use in health service, police, and local
government partnership for preventing violence related injury: experimental
study and time series analysis. British Medical Journal, 342
19 Crime in England and Wales, Year Ending September 2014, Office for National
Statistics Statistical Bulletin, January 2015
20 Millie, A., Jacobson, J. & Hough, M. (2003). Understanding the Growth in the
Prison Population in England and Wales, Criminal Justice, 3(4), 369-387
21 Compendium of United Nations Standards and Norms in Crime Prevention and
Criminal Justice, United Nations, 2011
22 Police Cautions, Warnings and Penalty Notices www.gov.uk/caution-warning-
penalty
23 Initial Findings from a Review of the Use of Out-of-Court Disposals, A report by
The Office for Criminal Reform, February 2010
24 Out-of-Court Disposals, House of Commons Home Affairs Select Committee
14th Report of Session 2014–15, March 2015
25 For more information, please see POSTnote number 308, Alternatives to
Custodial Sentencing
26 Consultation on Out of Court Disposals, Home Office, November, 2014.
27 Story of the Prison Population: 1993-2012 England and Wales, Ministry of
Justice, 2013
28 Sentencing Illegalities, Examination of Cases from England and Wales Court of
Appeal 2012, Robert Banks, January 2013
29 Sentencing Paper: Issues Paper 1 - Transition, Law Commission, July 2015.
30 The Electronic Monitoring of Adult Offenders, House of Commons Public
Accounts Select Committee, 62nd Report of Session 2005-06, July 2006.
31 Probation Institute Press Release on Electronic Monitoring, 23rd April 2015
32 Hucklesby, A. (2008). Vehicles of Desistance? The Impact of Electronically
Monitored Curfew Orders. Criminology and Criminal Justice, 8(1), 51-71
33 Hucklesby, A. (2009). Understanding Offenders' Compliance: A Case Study of
Electronically Monitored Curfew Orders. Journal of Law and Society, 36(2),
248-271
34 For more information, see POSTnote 488, The Darknet and Online Anonymity
35 Cyber Crime Strategy, Home Office, March 2010
36 The UK Cyber Security Strategy: Protecting and Promoting the UK in a Digital
World. Cabinet Office, November 2011
37 For more information see POSTnote 470 Big Data, Crime and Security
38 Braga, A., Papachristos, A., & Hureau, D. (2012). Hot Spots Policing Effects on
Crime, Campbell Systematic Reviews, 2012(8)
39 Operation Beck: A Randomised Controlled Trial on Proactive Policing in
London Underground Platform Hotspots, Provided by Assistant Chief
Constable Mark Newton and Charlotte de Brito, British Transport Police.
40 For a briefing on police body-worn video see POSTbrief 14, Body-Worn Video
in UK Policing
The Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA; Tel: 020 7219 2840; email: post@parliament.uk www.parliament.uk/post
Page 5
41 Review of Efficiency in Criminal Proceedings, The Rt Hon Sir Brian Leveson,
President of the Queen’s Bench Division, Judiciary of England and Wales,
January 2015
42 Sir Brian Leveson, Keynote Lecture, ‘Modernising Justice Through
Technology’, 24 June 2015. A copy of the speech was provided by the
conference organisers.
43 Understanding Tribunal Decision-Making: A Foundational Empirical Study,
Preliminary Report, by Professor Cheryl Thomas and Dame Hazel Glen,
Nuffield Foundation, 2013
44 Impact of Special Measures on Jury Decision-Making, Nuffield Foundation
45 How to Achieve More Effective Services: the Evidence Ecosystem, Jonathan
Shepherd, What Works Network, June 2014
46 Sherman, L. W. (2009) Evidence and Liberty: The Promise of Experimental
Criminology. Criminology and Criminal Justice, 9(1), 5-28
47 Welsh, B.C. & Farrington, D.P. (2008). Effects of Closed Circuit Television
Surveillance on Crime. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 2008(17)
48 Bennett, T., Holloway, K., Farrington, D.P. (2008). The Effectiveness of
Neighbourhood Watch Campbell Systematic Reviews, 2008(18)
49 Tong, L.S.J. & Farrington, D.P. (2006). How Effective is the ‘‘Reasoning and
Rehabilitation’’ Programme in Reducing Reoffending? A Meta-analysis of
Evaluations in four Countries. Psychology, Crime & Law, 12(1), 3-24
50 Reducing Drug Use, Reducing Reoffending: Are Programmes for Problem
Drug-using Offenders in the UK Supported by the Evidence? UK Drug Policy
Commission, March 2008
51 Cheliotis, L. K. & Jordanoska, A. (forthcoming). The Arts of
Desistance: Assessing the Role of Arts-based Programmes in Reducing
Reoffending. Howard Journal of Criminal Justice
52 Duwe, G., & Clark, V. (2014). The Effects of Prison-based Educational
Programming on Recidivism and Employment. The Prison Journal, 94(4), 454-
478
53 Kim, R. H., & Clark, D. (2013). The Effect of Prison-based College Education
Programs on Recidivism: Propensity Score Matching approach. Journal of
Criminal Justice, 41(3), 196-204
54 Hough, M. (2010). Gold Standard or Fool’s Gold: The Pursuit of Certainty in
Experimental Criminology. Criminology Criminal Justice, 10(1),11-22
55 Evidence for Social Policy and Practice. Perspectives on How Research and
Evidence Can Influence Decision Making in Public Services. Nesta, April 2011.
56 What Counts as Good Evidence? Provocation Paper for the Alliance for Useful
Evidence, by Sandra Nutley, Alison Powell & Huw Davies from the Research
Unit for Research Utilisation, School of Management, University of St Andrews,
February 2013
57 Probation Institute - http://probation-institute.org/
58 College of Policing - http://www.college.police.uk
59 Supporting High-risk Victims of Domestic Violence: A Review of
Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conferences (MARACs), by
Nerissa Steel, Laura Blakeborough & Sian Nicholas, Research Report 55,
Home Office, July 2011
60 Research into Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conferences (MARACs), Home
Office Violent and Youth Crime Prevention Unit and Research and Analysis
Unit, July 2011
61 Listening to Troubled Families, A report by Louise Casey CB, Department for
Communities and Local Government, July 2012
62 Working with Troubled Families, A Guide to the Evidence and Good Practice,
Department for Communities and Local Government, December 2012
63 Health Related Work in Family Intervention Projects, Final report
from the Thomas Coram Research Unit, Institute of Education,
University of London, by Janet Boddy, June Statham,
Ian Warwick, Katie Hollingworth, & Grace Spencer, April 2012
64 Evaluation of the Troubled Families, by National Institute of Economic and
Social Research, due end of 2015
65 Domestic Violence, Forced Marriage and “Honour”-Based Violence, House of
Commons Home Affairs Select Committee, 6th Report of Session 2007-08, May
2008
66 Joined-up Justice: Integrating the System, Reform, Tuesday 17th April 2012.
67 For more information on collaboration in criminal justice see the various
publications and projects at Collaborative Justice -
http://www.collaborativejustice.org/home.htm
68 For information on the proposals, responses and final strategy see the MoJ
Consultation page on Transforming Rehabilitation
69 Library Standard Note 6894, Contracting Out of Probation Services - What’s
Happened So Far? House of Commons Library, January 2015
70 Offender Rehabilitation Act 2014
71 Crime Reduction Policies: a Co-ordinated Approach? House of Commons
Justice Select Committee, Interim report on the Government's Transforming
Rehabilitation Programme, 12th Report of Session 2013–14, January 2014
POSTnote 507 September 2015 Trends in Crime and Criminal Justice Page 6

72 Crime Reduction Policies: a Co-ordinated Approach? House of Commons

Justice Select Committee, 1st Report of Session 2014–15, June 2014
73 Bastow, S. (2014). Transforming Rehabilitation: Evolution not Revolution,
Criminal Justice Matters, 97(1), 10-11
74 Frazer, L., Drinkwater, N., Mullen, J., Hayes, C., O’Donoghue, K., Cumbo, E.
(2014). Rehabilitation: What Does ‘Good’ Look Like Anyway? European
Journal of Probation, 6(2), 92-111
75 What Does it Mean? The Preferred Bidders Announced, posted by Nathan
Dick, Clinks Blog, November 2014
76 Library Standard Note 6621, Delivering Public Services: The Growing Use of
Payment by Results, House of Commons Library, April 2013
77 Hucklesby, A. (2011). The Working Life of Electronic Monitoring Officers.
Criminology & Criminal Justice 11(1), 59–76
78 For examples of press coverage of riots at Oakwood Prison -
www.theguardian.com/society/2014/apr/29/tales-from-inside-oakwood-prison or
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25846596
79 HM Chief Inspector of Prisons for England and Wales Annual Report 2013–14,
October 2014
80 Transforming Contract Management, National Audit Office, Session 2014-15,
September 2014
81 For information on the proposals, responses and final strategy please see the
MoJ Consultation page on Transforming Legal Aid
82 For a summary of the key decisions, and responses from a range of
organisations, including the Law Society and the Bar Council, see this House of
Commons Library briefing paper
83 The Implications for Access to Justice of the Government's Proposals to
Reform Legal Aid, Joint Select Committee on Human Rights, 7th Report of
Session 2013–14, December 2013
84 Unfitness to Plead: An Issues Paper, Law Commission, May 2014
85 For information about ‘Liaison and Diversion’ for offenders with mental health,
learning disabilities, substance misuse or other vulnerabilities, and information
about relevant treatment or support services, see the NHS England webpage
86 Library Standard Note 7139, The Victims’ Code, House of Commons Library,
March 2015
87 Commissioner for Victims and Witnesses: Report for the Secretary of State for
Justice 2013-14
88 For details of the consultation see the Crown Prosecution Service Consultation
webpage
89 Bradford, B. (2014). Policing and Social Identity: Procedural Justice, Inclusion
and Cooperation between Police and Public. Policing and Society, 24(1), 22-43
90 It’s a fair cop? Police Legitimacy, Public Cooperation, and Crime Reduction. An
Interpretative Evidence Commentary, by Andy Myhill & Paul Quinton, Research
Analysis and Information, National Policing Improvement Agency, September
2011
91 Hohl, K., Stanko, B., & Newburn, T. (2012). The Effect of the 2011 London
Disorder on Public Opinion of Police and Attitudes Towards Crime, Disorder,
and Sentencing. Policing, 55
92 Waddington, P.A.J, Williams, K., Wright, M., Newburn, T. (2015). Dissension in
Public Evaluations of the Police, Policing and Society, 25(2), 212-235