AIBU to think migrant sex crime data should be published? And to wonder why Labour are blocking the release of that data?

[Fabiansrule]

Labour Blocks Release of Migrant Crime Data

'Victims of serious crimes and their families have joined forces to demand that the Labour government publish detailed data on offences committed by foreign nationals, accusing ministers of withholding information that is “clearly and legitimately in the public interest”.

Among the signatories are victims of high-profile sexual offences and families of murder victims. One signatory is a 14-year-old victim of a sexual assault in Epping allegedly committed by an illegal immigrant, in the same Essex town where asylum seekers were housed at the controversial Bell Hotel.
Fiona Goddard, a survivor of rape-gang grooming who has campaigned publicly about her experiences, has also signed the letter.

Eight relatives of Rhiannon Whyte, a hotel worker murdered by a Sudanese national, are also among those backing the demand.'

https://europeanconservative.com/articles/news-corner/labour-blocks-release-of-migrant-crime-data/

The ICO rejected the MoJ's defenses that compiling the dataset was too complex/costly (Section 12) or that it breached GDPR privacy laws (Section 40).

We have data from other countries - lots of data. And we have our own eyes and ears. Extrapolating from other countries is valid in lieu of our dishonest appeasing government not providing us our data.

I know one of the ex-CEOs of it, yes Very well in fact. So what?

They get their data from their limited sample of victims with whom they come into contact. They do not and cannot contextualise this within the population data collected and held by Government departments which enable the calculation of relative risk per capita statistically based on various types of offence and characteristics of offenders. This should be obvious.

I don’t know how we can have accurate data on sexual abuse. So much goes on in families, by trusted adults, in relationships. We can compare data on the nationalities of who has been caught, but understanding prevalence is far more complicated. I’d like to see the data they hold too though.

Why should sex be adjusted ?

• Rape is a 99% a male crime. We know that immigrant populations tend to be more than 50% male. So not adjusting for sex creates the false impression that immigrants are more likely to rape because they are immigrants when in fact they are no different from local men once the numbers of women have been removed from their % share of total country population for locals and immigrants.

Why should age be adjusted ?

• Young men are more likely to rape than older men. Immigrant populations tend to be much younger than local populations. If you don’t adjust for the ages of the men, then that creates the false impression that the immigrant population is more likely to be rapists because they are immigrants when in fact, they are no different from local men the same age.

Why is me saying that the statistical data shows that stranger rapes are only 10% of all rapes means that I’m over looking stranger rapes?

It's actually 15% of rapes according to the rape crisis centre you told us to look at.
NB The data is from the ONS Crime Survey which only captures a very small number of victims in the sub section for sensitive topics such as rape.

If we can rely on our own eyes and ears then I am going to start confidently claiming that all British men who go on holiday abroad are rapists because I was sexually assaulted by one visiting my country 25 years ago. The reason I am not doing that is because I know that this incident is statistically insignificant and can't be extrapolated to a larger population of British holidaying men.
I also can't confidently claim that all British holidaying men aren't rapists because I don't actually have any data to support that either. And I can't make assumptions about British men based on data from German tourists.
It's really not a hard concept to grasp. The only thing we can confidently say at this point is that we don't actually know what the situation is. We only have an opinion.

Except the viral versions of the data from other countries that you are using as references have been debunked by EU fact checkers.

Given how the data from other countries has been abused by agitators intent on sowing racial hatred, I’m not surprised our government is exercising caution.

Indeed. Both of which are spurious/ unacceptable defences.

The first is an enormous failing of Government far worse actually than refusing to release the data, were it to be true. They would be claiming that the MOJ/ CPS/ police have no idea of the profile of offenders for various crimes and are not bothering to track or record this so have no idea who is committing what type of offending and therefore literally zero capability to reduce or tackle crime effectively. That would be a breathtaking admission of failure to the extent that all senior management in all of those organisations should be sacked with immediate effect. It would also mean the UK was incapable of fulfilling its obligations under international law and treaties regarding data sharing internationally on offenders, extraditions, and incapable of enforcing even the basics of our own immigration laws where these interact with judicial procedure etc.

The second is supposed ground for appeal is utter nonsense since all data released under such FOI requests is anonymised anyway with any identifying data/ small numbers per category obscured to prevent identification, and regardless in the case of convictions the data individual data is a matter of public record anyway.

I am not coming out to bat for rapists. How ridiculous.
Have you done posts in the past about male violence against women? You know, the rapists we don't "import"?

Correct. That even sounds like they decided to not even start collecting the data and argued it’s too costly and violates GDPR. I suppose now they will start collecting it moving forward.

Look the data up on the websites of the relevant Governments then. They publish is freely and transparently, as a democracy should.

Do you have anything to say about the large statistically significant differences in offending rates which the official data highlights? Or are you going to continually try to pretend that it’s invented/ irrelevant?

And yet you want the subject of more rapists being imported to be ignored by others, how is that not coming out to bat for rapists that are coming into the country.

Nope. None of that matters in this context. It's just making excuses and trying to cover up reality. Deny it that's ok.

Exaggerate much? None of those tasks requires statistics be collected that include history of migration, nationality, and offence all collated into a single report.

Is the pope catholic?

You are simply highlighting why it is a bad idea to suddenly import large numbers of young men: they are the people most likely to commit violent or sexual crimes in any population.

Why would we want to artificially raise the proportion of the most violent and dangerous demographic of our population?

And that’s before you even consider the fact that these particular young men have come from misogynistic cultures where rape and violence is far more common and frequently normalised or not even considered to be illegal, so quite obviously on average they will pose a higher individual risk than men of the same age who have been raised in the UK.

Well, yes it does matter a great deal. Those are two of the basic confounding factors that must be addressed if you are going to compare rates of rape to demographics in any meaningful way.

It's how statistics work. Without weighting, they're just an interesting description of events. There's no moral basis for weighting, no judgement on what crime is worst.

How would releasing the requested crime data 'sow racial hatred'

Of course these records have to contain the type of offence and the nationality of the offender, by definition. How else could the data ever be reported or searched for the purposes listed?! Your comments are getting more and more absurd.

It seems to be a way for you to deny reality, as shown in that data which is referenced.

so quite obviously on average they will pose a higher individual risk than men of the same age who have been raised in the UK.

No, that’s only obvious to a racist.

Yes I am highlighting that young men are the problem and if an immigrant man is no more likely to be a criminal than a British man, then there is no legal reason to bar them legal entry to the UK for work or study.

As for why do we need immigrants? Look at the birth rates and number of elderly. Without more young people, including men, our country would fail.

What is wanted sounds doable. We’ll see what the verdict is.

Ffs the data you posted doesn’t represent reality. Smirkley has deliberately made sure it doesn’t represent reality.