Chapter 2

Effects of Crime

MEASURING CRIME AND THE COST OF CRIME IN CALIFORNIA

What is it that you should know about measuring crime?Is it calculated by the sheer numbers of crimes that are committed, the number of people arrested, the number of people in jails or prisons, the number of law enforcement and correctional officers hired to manage it? Or is it the total dollar value that is paid out as a result of crimes committed?How do we measure the human cost—the impact of violent crime on victims, and their families, neighbors, and friends?How would you determine the personal loss experienced if you were a victim of a crime?All these issues and many more are addressed by studying and measuring crime and its related costs.Crime must be addressed in its totality when determining the effect or impact it has on society.

Criminal Justice Expenditures

Estimates for total spending for supportof the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) suggest it will be about $8.6billion, which is $394million orabout 4percent less than the 2011–2012 level ofspending. This decrease primarily reflects thereduction of the inmate and parolee populationsoccurring as a result of 2011 policy changesto “realign” certain state offenders to localjurisdictions (per prison realignment mandated by the U.S. Supreme Court).

CDCR operations in the currentyear (2013–2014) will be higher than in 2011–2012, increasingby $737million, or 9percent. Budget projections suggest that General Fund spending oncorrections will decrease to about $8.3billionby 2017–2018, primarily due to additionalreductions in the inmateand parolee populationsdue to realignment.

As a result of these realignment sentencingchanges, the state inmate and paroleepopulations are projected to decline significantly.The total inmatepopulation is projected to decline from 162,400 inmatesprior to realignment to 129,400 at the end ofthe forecast period.

The paroleepopulation is expected to decline from 105,400 parolees priorto realignment to about 32,200 at the end of theforecast period. These projections include theestimated impact of Proposition36, approved byvoters in November 2012. The measure modifiesthe state’s “three strikes”law and is projected toreduce the prison population somewhat.

Federal Court Order to reduce Prison Overcrowding

On May 23, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the ruling of a federal three-judge panelrequiring the state to reduce overcrowding in its prisons to 137.5percent of the system’s overall“design capacity” by June 27, 2013. Currently, the state prison system is operating at roughly150percent of design capacity—or about 10,000 inmates more than the limit established by thethree-judge panel. In August 2012, the plaintiffs in the prison overcrowding case filed a motionarguing that the administration’s plan to reduce the prison population to only 145percent ofdesign capacity was in violation of the court’s orders, and the administration should be orderedto produce a plan to comply with the order to meet a lower population limit. On September7,2012, the three-judge panel issued an order indicating that the court will not entertain any motionfrom the administration to increase the population cap (though the court raised the possibility ofextending the deadline by six months). In a subsequent order, the court required that by January 7,2013 the administration and the plaintiffs submit plans to the court—including specific populationreduction measures that could be implemented—to reduce the population to 137.5percent of designcapacity by June 27, 2013 and December 27, 2013.

Judicial Branch

General Fund spendingfor the support of the judicial branch in thecurrent year will be about $730million, roughly$500million lower than the amount in 2011–2012.This reduction reflects budget actions to reduceGeneral Fund support for the branch andoffset most of the reduction to the trial courtswith the one-time use of funds from a courtconstruction account and trial court reserves.Beginning in the budget year, estimates for theGeneral Fund for the judicialbranch will be about $1.2billion, similar to the2011–2012 level. This reflects (1) the restorationof $419million of the current-year reductions(leaving a net $71million in ongoing unallocatedcuts to the trial courts); (2) additional costs of$35million beginning in 2013–2014, growing toover $50million annually, for service paymentsfor the Long Beach Courthouse currently underconstruction; and (3) over $10million annuallybeginning in 2013–2014 to hold parolee revocationhearings, a responsibility that will be shifted tothe courts from the Board of Parole Hearingspursuant to the 2011 realignment legislation.

California Highway Patrol

Two billion dollars was allocated for the California Highway Patrol (CHP), in FY 2013–2014. This amount is less than 1 percent higher than the current-year estimated level. About 90 percent of all CHP expenditures come from the Motor Vehicle Account (MVA), which generates its revenues primarily from driver license and vehicle registration fees.

NATIONAL CRIME STATISTICS

There are several different ways to view crime and its effects.One is to merely look at the numbers of offenses reported to the police.Another is to consider statistics that survey the victims of crime.Consequently, the two major sources of crime statistics in the United States are the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) uniform crime reports (UCRs) and the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS).

Uniform Crime Reports (UCR)[1]

Since 1930, the FBI, in conjunction with the Bureau of Justice Statistics, has collected crime related data and compiled an annual report, known as the Uniform Crime Reports.It tabulates information provided by 17,000 police agencies that voluntarily submit their local crime statistics on an annual basis.

The crime and arrest data collected gives us a “picture” of what is happening nationally.The FBI and the UCR have created a national crime reporting process that identifies several “index” crimes that are reported by police and sheriff agencies. California has created a crime index as well. According to the California Crime Index, the total numbers of crimes reported statewide in 2010 were751,417.For this reporting period, the total violent crimes reported was 112,723and the total property crimes reported was 368,271 (Department of Justice – California, 2010).

INDEX CRIMES

Crimes that are known to the police, then, are referred to as index crimes and are classified as Part I (violent and property crimes) and Part II (other offenses).Crimes that are unreported to the police are referred to as the dark figure of crime.The dark figureof crime simply means those crimes that are never reported to the police. Most researchers estimate that about 50 percent of crimes are not reported to the police.There are two important reasons for this gap.First, most juveniles are able to conceal their illegal acts—shoplifting, truancy, unlawful sexual activities (while under 18), drinking, gambling, vandalism, joyriding, or even burglary.Second, people often fail to report crimes. There are many reasons for this, including that the crime is too insignificant and that the police would not take any action, nor feel the report would serve any purpose.

Historically, the police clear (i.e., solve) only 20 percent of all crimes reported to them.About the same figure is used for the amount of time they actually spend “fighting crime.” The rest of their time is spent dealing with what are today referred to as “social order” or “quality of life” issues and neighborhood problems, not necessarily criminal behavior.

The truth is that no one really knows how many crimes occur each year.Our best estimates are based on police departments volunteering to report the crimes reported to them, and the vagueness of the numbers that are reported to the police by victims themselves.As a result, it is at least a “best guess,” based on an overall picture of what crimes have occurred, but not necessarily done with pinpoint accuracy.

VARIABLES AFFECTING THE ACCURACY OF DATA

Although most police agencies contribute data to the FBI, some are unable to because of their lack of technology, recordkeeping, or personnel.When police agencies report a crime to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports, they only report the most serious offense—despite the fact that there may have been other crimes committed.In addition, local police agencies may distort their crime figures for self-serving political reasons.Also, there are local differences in what constitutes the same type of crime.For example, in different states and jurisdictions, there are different descriptors for different types of crimes.Additionally, states assign varying dollar amounts to crimes to classify if a felony or a misdemeanor has been committed.

COMPARISON OF THEFT STATUTES: CALIFORNIA AND TEXAS

In California, theft is divided into two degrees, the first of which is termed grand theft, and the second, petty theft.Grand theft (a felony) is committed when anything taken is valued at over $400; however, the theft of certain protectedagricultural, aquacultural products, or farm animals can be valued as low as $100 and still be considered a felony, as demonstrated in California Penal Code Section 487:

(1)(A)When domestic fowls, avocados, olives, citrus or deciduous fruits, other fruits, vegetables, nuts, artichokes, or other farm crops are taken of a value exceeding one hundred dollars ($100).

(B)For the purposes of establishing that the value of avocados or citrus fruit under this paragraph exceeds one hundred dollars ($100), that value may be shown by the presentation of credible evidence which establishes that on the day of the theft avocados or citrus fruit of the same variety and weight exceeded one hundred dollars ($100) in wholesale value.

(2)When fish, shellfish, mollusks, crustaceans, kelp, algae, or other aquacultural products are taken from a commercial or research operation which is producing that product, of a value exceeding one hundred dollars ($100).

In cases where “labor” is involved, the $400 amount that constitutes a felony must also include a time frame (which specifies a beginning and an end), as in California Penal Code 487:

(3)Where the money, labor, or real or personal property is taken by a servant, agent, or employee from his or her principal or employer and aggregates four hundred dollars ($400) or more in any 12 consecutive month period.

An exception to the felony rule requiring a minimum $400 value is anytime that property is taken from the “person” of another (such as a purse-snatch) without any real or implied “force,” because it was a “grand theft from the person.”In addition, theft of a firearm (handgun or rifle, working or not), theft of a farm animal (e.g., horse, bovine, or pig), or theft of an automobile, regardless of value, is considered a felony [PC 487(d)(1) & (2)].

It should be noted that to constitute the crime element of “taking and carrying away,” the thief must move the property so that in some degree it occupies a change in location and the conditions must be such that the thief secures dominion (and control) over the property.It is not necessary that the taking is for the sake of gain; just the intention to permanently deprive the owner of the property is necessary.Specific intent (which will be discussed later) must exist at the time of the taking.

By comparison, Texas (§31.03. Theft), has a range of violations for “theft” that includes Class A through C misdemeanors, with a dollar figure from $50 to $1,500, and a felony statute (first to third degrees) if the value is from $1,500 or more, which includes language similar to California’s law, including the theft of a firearm, cattle, and horses.

Why do you think that the law in California (and other states) classifies the theft of certain agriculture produces, aquacultural, and farm animals as a felony? If you think back to when the laws were written, residents were entirely dependent upon such goods for their livelihoods. To give you some perspective on this, the California Penal Code Section 2 states, “This Code takes effect at twelve o'clock, noon, on the first day of January, eighteen hundred and seventy-three” (1873).

As we have advanced in technology, so has the law. For example, California’s Penal Code Section 502 addresses the theft (and downloading) of computer intellectual property [e.g., software, data, images (real or simulated), or domains] and the damage wreaked by “hackers” destroying and interrupting computer hardware.As a result of the expansion of computer related crimes, many police agencies, including federal agencies, have created computer crime task forces.

COST OF CRIME – IMPACT ON VICTIMS

As a result of these and many other factors, the “cost of crime” is not only the “loss” to a victim (including emotional trauma or physical trauma), but also the following associated costs of police enforcement and investigations, including crime scene processing, evidence analysis, and data management; the cost of prosecution, including defense, court related costs, collateral costs to the juries, witnesses, and expert witnesses; and, of course, the cost of sentencing, probation reports, incarceration, rehabilitation, and the staffing costs related to probation, jail, prison, and parole personnel.

In addition, many Californians are helped by victim indemnification and recovery, which includes medical or psychological assistance, funeral and burial costs, and lost wages.Unfortunately, crime takes a monetary, physical, and emotional toll on victims’ lives that cannot always be compensated for, despite recovery assistance.

We often get “tunnel vision” when we speak of the cost of crime only in terms of the number of crimes reported.Keep in mind that, for each statistic, there was at least one victim that suffered some loss or trauma.

National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS)
The NCVS is our nation’s primary source of information on criminal victimization. Each year, data is obtained from a nationally representative sample of roughly 50,000 households, comprising nearly 100,000 persons, on the frequency, characteristics, and consequences of criminal victimization in the United States.

The survey enables the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) to estimate the likelihood of victimization by crime index (rape, sexual assault, robbery, assault, theft, household burglary, and motor vehicle theft) for the population as a whole, as well as for segments of the population, such as women, the elderly, members of various racial groups, city dwellers, or other groups. The NCVS provides the largest national forum for victims to describe the impact of crime and characteristics of violent offenders.

BJS, in a joint effort with the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS)[2],also conducted victimization surveys in twelve selected cities in an effort to evaluate the effectiveness of local policing efforts. The standard National Crime Victimization Survey instrument was used with questions about citizen perceptions of community policing and neighborhood issues. All sampled household residents age 12 or older were included in the survey. Participating cities were Chicago, IL, Kansas City, MO, Knoxville, TN, Los Angeles, CA, Madison, WI, New York, NY, San Diego, CA, Savannah, GA, Spokane, WA, Springfield, MA, Tucson, AZ, and Washington, DC.

Another source of data comes fromEmergency Room Statistics on Intentional Violence.[3]This groupcollects data on intentional injuries, such as domestic violence, rape, and child abuse, from a national sample of hospital emergency rooms.Another resource is the Consumer Product Safety Commission’s National Electronic Injury Surveillance System,[4] which tallies valuable information obtained on characteristics of the victim and perpetrator, victim-perpetrator relationship, alcohol/drug involvement in the incident, and the circumstances surrounding the injury.

Other related information is obtained through self-report crime surveys. This information comes mostly from students. They are asked whether or not they have committed crimes and/or used alcohol or drugs. Other methods of data collection are obtained through the National Youth Survey and the National Youth Gang Surveys. [5]

Cost of Crime (California)

Researchers try to estimate the monetary andnonmonetary costs of crime to victims. This isinherently difficult, largely because of the subjectivenature of putting a dollar value on the lost productivity,health consequences, and pain and suffering.

Violent crimes (such as murder, sexual assault, andaggravated assault) have much higher estimated costsfor victims than property crimes. This is because thereare frequently high “intangible” costs associatedwith violent crimes. Intangible costs include pain andsuffering, which are often estimated based on theamount of damages awarded by juries for differenttypes of crime.

For property crimes (such as robbery and theft), mostcosts tend to be “tangible” costs. These costs includethe value of stolen or damaged property and lost wagesor productivity as a result of criminal activity.[6]

Prison Costs

In fiscal year 2010, the California Department of Corrections andRehabilitation (CDCR) had $7 billion in prison expenditures. However, the statealso had $969.7 million in prison-related costs outside the department’s budget.The total cost of California’s prisons—to incarcerate an average daily populationof 167,276—was therefore $7.9 billion, of which 12.2 percent were costs outsidethe corrections budget.

How much would a taxpayer “pay” for their part of theCDCR prison budget? The VERA Institute did such a study. The results were:

  • Prison costs $6,962.7
  • Other state costs
  • Retiree health care contributions $320.1
  • Underfunded retiree health care $607.0
  • Statewide administrative costs $38.0
  • Inmate hospital care NE
  • Inmate education and training $4.5
  • Subtotal: Other state costs $969.7
  • TOTAL TAXPAYER COST $7,932.4[7]

CALIFORNIA CRIME INDEX

Criminal Justice Statistics Center (CJSC)

The California Attorney General (AG) is responsible for the collection and analysis of crime related statistics. The AG’s office delegates that duty to the Criminal Justice Statistics Center (CJSC). [8]