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/

I work with this kind of data. I get the appeal, but I don't think this route is going to give what people want. Having the data published from the MoJ is very unlikely to get the true figures people are after.

The collection is vey inconsistent, it's generally self-reported at first and sometimes not updated if further information is found, many times the nationality field is blank and the systems I've used only allows one nationality to be put in. As pp said, while there are continuous pushes to update our systems to the latest and greatest (mostly to be able to cut admin staff, they literally send emails celebrating this), they're not effective for what they're meant to do, nevermind this sort of thing.

Within the MoJ and its subdepartments like HMPPS and HMCTS, IME nationality is really only used if someone needs a translator for a language with a lot of regional variation like Arabic and when data needs to be passed to the Home Office. The Home Office is in charge of checking nationality, not any part of the MoJ. If you're ever in court when a known foreign national is sentenced for more than a year, the judge often openly states that anything to do with their immigration status is done by the Home Office and out of their hands. I've even heard it said to naturalised British citizens of serious crimes 'just in case' (and they won't be counted as foreign nationals in MoJ data).

I can't say anything about the data the Home Office has as I've no experience, but it seems that they have a better chance with serious crimes than the MoJ, particularly if you're after safety and wanting the violent foreign nationals deported - that's a Home Office decision, not an MoJ one.

Why do you need “individual groups” identified? How would it possibly benefit you? And it’s the government, not Labour. I know you hate having a Labour government but that’s what you’ve got.

One of the reasons the government has given for not publishing the data is that it could inadvertently risk identifying individual people. This is usually only an issue with the release of statistics if the numbers involved are low.

I am not sure what you mean by civil war. Civil war between whom?

YABU to wonder why they're blocking the info. Have you seen the appalling stats from other European countries?

It’s not. The ICO rejected both of the reasons given by Labour.

You're asking women why they want to know who they are most at risk from? Freedom of information is an important right, so why is this government trying to take that away?

This is a good question. Do we know what has happened in the countries that have released this type of data? How has it been used to reduce crime?

Exactly and yet they still want to push ahead with depriving citizens of their right to access.

Women are most at risk from men. It makes no difference whether they’re white, black, brown or sky blue pink. Assume you’re at risk from all men, white British don’t present less risk.

We know they don't. They've been around longer than the men we want information about.

Yes for some reason they are rejecting the ICO to avoid this. Still they could lose the appeal and have to publish.

How do you know? Now tell me you’re not xenophobic, you’ve just proved it. Just assume every man is a risk.

@Blossomtoes - do you not value information? Do you look at Tripsdvisor reviews, say, or ones for a vacuum cleaner? Do you consult Checkatrade? Do or did you look at school stats ?

So it’s not an incredible reach to want to know if certain new groups coming to a country in a large volume present a risk to its citizens.

I already KNOW that I am potentially at risk from any known or random male in life, but I would appreciate the statistics on whether the government is failing to protect people by admitting and then failing to contain a wave of not just extra men but ones more likely to offend.

Why would releasing the data increase 'xenophobia'?

Don’t be disingenuous. Why do you want the data?

A lot of words there to disguise what is undoubtedly a racially prejudiced set of attitudes apparently based on some colonialist idea of the "white man's burden". The mystery is why you think that anyone should take you seriously.

No no. I asked you a question first, please answer. Otherwise it seems that you're just vomiting words without any basis.

But don't we already know that? We are most at risk from the men we know rather than the men we don't.

If the data is released and it shows that women are at a certain amount of risk from Muslim asylum seekers. Which it will, because a percentage of men, whatever their religion or ethnicity, pose a threat to women. What then? How do we women use that information to protect ourselves?

Not much 'Freedom' there, is there. Perhaps it needs to be renamed.

German statistics have repeatedly shown over-representation of non-German and some migrant groups among suspects for certain violent and sexual offences

The U.K. would never disclose this information - but we can assume it’s just as bad here.

How would that be useful? Let's say the data is released and it says that French men are the most likely to commit crime. What do we do with that information? Shun French men? Cross the street to avoid them? Tell our daughters not to go near them? Start rioting to try to get them all deported? Deported to where?

Never mind the italics. Spell out what group you're talking about. Go on, I dare you. Let's hear exactly who you think are innately criminal.

I see xenophobia has temporarily stepped into replace racism as the latest liberal gaslighting trick. You don't need the stats. because there's nothing you can do about dangerous men anyway. Put up and shut up mentality.

Ah. I asked you twice about whether/why you think the terms foreign nationals, asylum seekers, migrants and illegal immigrants are interchangeable and mean the same thing. Please answer. Otherwise it seems that you're just vomiting out words without any basis.

From what I've read, the crime rates are exactly the same if you match people for age and gender. Not comparing with the entire population. This kind of thing fuels hatred and rioting. That's why they're not publishing it.