THE 2000 SCOTTISH CRIME SURVEY: ANALYSIS OF THE ETHNIC MINORITY BOOSTER SAMPLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report analyses the ethnic minority booster sample from The Scottish Crime Survey (SCS) 2000 and draws out some comparisons with the larger white sample. Comparisons must, however, be read with a degree of caution. The ethnic minority sample is relatively small (424) and there were clear differences in responses from, for example, Chinese, Indian and Pakistani respondents.
In addition, while the ethnic minority sample was reasonably representative of the Scottish ethnic minority community, according to the 1991 Census, it differed in a number of important respects from the main white sample. Compared with the white sample, the booster sample was generally younger, lived in larger households, was more likely to live in owner-occupied homes, was more likely to be in employment and was more likely to come from higher socio-economic status households.
Finally, different sampling methods were used for the main white sample and the ethnic minority booster.
Crime against ethnic minorities in Scotland
Ethnic minority respondents had a higher risk of household victimisation (e.g. vandalism, housebreaking, theft of and from vehicles) and a greater risk of experiencing more than one such victimisation than white respondents. White respondents had a slightly greater risk of being victims of personal offences (e.g. assault, robbery and theft from the person).
Twenty-five per cent of incidents against ethnic minorities were considered by the victims to have been racially motivated.
Where victims had some knowledge of the offender, offences against ethnic minority respondents were much more likely to have been perpetrated by groups of 3 or more offenders; typically such groups were of mixed gender and aged under 18.
Ethnic minority victims were less likely than white victims to know at least one of the offenders.
Abusive comments were made towards proportionately more ethnic minority respondents than whites. Amongst such respondents 80% of ethnic minorities believed the abuse was racially motivated compared to 2% of white respondents.
Ethnic minority victims were more inclined to regard household offences committed against them more seriously than white victims, particularly incidents of housebreaking and motor vehicle theft.
The impact of crime
For household incidents, ethnic minority victims were more likely than whites to be affected emotionally. At the time the incident occurred, anger was the emotion most commonly cited by victims. Although emotional reactions typically diminished over time, ethnic minorities reported higher levels of vulnerability at the time of the SCS interview.
For those who had ever suffered a housebreaking or an act of violence, proportionately more ethnic minorities than white victims said that the incident had resulted in lasting emotional effects, that their behaviour had changed and that they had improved their household security after being broken into.
White victims were less inclined than ethnic minority victims to have requested or been offered help. Of those victims who had been in touch with Victim Support, whites generally found the service useful; the very small number of ethnic minorities who had been in touch with Victim Support reported finding the service unhelpful.
Concerns about crime
Ethnic minority respondents were about five times more likely than whites to be concerned about racial attacks, and were also more concerned than whites about theft from vehicles and car vandalism.
Ethnic minorities were less likely than white respondents to worry that their children would suffer a sexual or other kind of assault or that they would get into trouble with the police.
Drug and alcohol abuse, crime and unemployment were thought by respondents from both samples to be the most serious of a list of social issues. Chinese respondents were typically less likely than other respondents to regard each social issue as problematic.
Similar proportions of white and ethnic minority respondents said they went out after dark at least once each week.
Ethnic minorities were considerably more likely than whites to use risk avoidance strategies such as avoiding certain other people, being accompanied when outside, and making special transport arrangements.
Attitudes towards the police and views on sentencing and prisons
Ethnic minority victims were less likely than their white counterparts to report incidents to the police. Ethnic minorities were more likely than white respondents to report vehicle theft and housebreaking but were less likely to report vandalism, assault, robbery and theft from the person.
In relation to household incidents, ethnic minority victims consistently expressed higher levels of satisfaction towards the police than white victims in terms of police interest, effort and politeness.
Both ethnic minority and white respondents considered the sale and use of drugs as the most important offence in terms of attention the police should give it.
Overall, around three quarters of both samples thought the police did a very or fairly good job.
Ethnic minority and white victims had similar views about issues which should be taken into account when sentencing an offender. Both saw injuries to the victim, the impact of the offence on the victim and the severity of the offence as the important issues.
A majority of respondents from both samples considered that the main role of prisons was to punish offenders.
Awareness of and attitudes towards drugs
Among those who returned self-completion questionnaires, white respondents claimed to have a higher level of knowledge about each of the drugs listed than ethnic minorities. Awareness of drugs was highest among social classes A and B and lowest among social classes D and E in both samples.
Ethnic minority respondents were more likely than whites to consider both occasional and regular drug use to be risky.