In PART II we learned how the authors of Victim Costs and Consequences: A New Look were able to determine a far more accurate formula to reflect the REAL costs of crime suffered by crime victims. Their results allowed us to apply their formula to the PART I crimes committed in Kentucky during 2012 As reported by the Kentucky State Police.
Their exhaustive 2-year study was completed in 1996, and the dollar figures were based on the value of the dollar in 1996.
When we apply the cost per crime formula to the number of serious crimes committed in Kentucky in 2012, the REAL cost of crime to Kentucky victims when adjusted for inflation and the value of a dollar in 2012 the actual Cost of Crime in 2012 was:
KENTUCKY PART I CRIMES 2012:
Compare the COST OF CRIME in 2012 which victims must somehow pay for of:
$1.5 Billion Dollars
To the COST TO INCARCERATE the people who commit the crimes in 2012.
The COST TO INCARCERATE criminals doesn’t really capture the seriousness of the issue. It focuses on only dollars and cents. And the term itself is so antiseptic; so meaningless.
A better term, in my mind, and in the minds of so many victims is THE COST TO PROTECT CITIZENS FROM CRIME AND CRIMINALS.
So, what did our state spend to Protect our citizens from criminals in 2012?
Think about that – Crime-Fighters.
The cost innocent, law-abiding, tax-paying Kentucky crime victims suffered at the hands of criminals, mostly repeat offenders, in 2012, was almost 4X the amount Kentucky was willing to spend to protect us from them.
YESSIR – The Criminals are winning and it is high time we change that.
Public Safety, after all, is very important to Kentucky citizens and that is what we want our tax money spent on.
Crimes, both violent and non-violent, impose many different kinds of losses on both victims and our tax-payers. The 2-year study conducted by Dr. Ted Miller, Dr. Mark Cohen and Brian Wiersema, the results of which were reported in Victim Costs and Cosequences: A New Look, estimated the realistic costs of crime which are suffered by the victims of crime.
So what did they consider in reaching their conclusions? In their study they reviewed:
Property damage and loss: the value of property damaged and taken and not recovered.
Medical care: includes hospital and physician care as well as medical transport, rehabilitation, prescriptions, etc.
Mental health care: includes payment for services to crime victims by psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers.
Police and Fire services: includes the initial police resonse and follow-up.
Loss of productivity: includes wages, fringe benefits, school days lost by the victims and their families.
Unlike tangible losses such as medical costs or lost wages, intangible losses such as the pain and suffering or the loss of quality of life do not have a market price. Nevertheless these losses are real, and victims would pay dearly to avoid them. And no determination of the REAL cost of crime to victims could possibly be accurate without including them.
The study estimated the value of pain, suffering, fear and the loss of quality of life by analyzing jury awards to crime victims as a result of lawsuits by victims against offenders.
As a result of their 2-year study the authors concluded the estimated costs for most of what are called PART I Crimes as reported annually by the FBI.
They are as follows:
THE COST OF PART I CRIMES
CRIME Cost each Crime
Larceny (theft) $370
Auto Theft $3,700
This study was published in 1996. When the value of a 1996 dollar is adjusted for inflation the costs to victims are actually much higher in 2012 and 2013.
Of course this list does not include the thousands and thousands of PART II crimes which occur in America every year.
Nor does it include the estimated two-thirds of crime that goes unreported by victims in the United States every year.
THE MIND-BOGGLING COSTS & FINANCIAL CONSEQUENCES OF CRIME ON VICTIMS DWARFS THE COST TO INCARCERATE CRIMINALS
The Topic no-one in Frankfort seems to want to talk about:
A far more accurate look at the “cost of crime” to victims:
A 2-year multidisciplinary research effort to more accurately reflect the personal costs of crime for Americans has revealed a far more accurate and mind-boggling look at the REAL costs of crime.
The study, Victim Costs and Consequences: A New Look, was published by the National Institute of Justice, and conducted by Ted R. Miller, Ph.D., Mark A. Cohen, Ph.D., and Brian Wiersema.
Most “cost of crime” studies only count “out-of- pocket” losses to victims: Typically cost of crime estimates only considered tangible losses or “out-of-pocket” losses suffered by victims of crime. Those do not take into account the full impact of crime on victims, because they ignore pain, suffering, crime-induced fear, and the lost and reduced quality of life that must be endured as a result of their victimization.
Determining the REAL costs of crime: How did the research team determine the estimated value of pain, suffering, fear and lost quality of life? They analyzed jury verdicts in lawsuits filed by crime victims against their offenders. The study focused on that portion of the jury’s verdict designed to compensate the victim for pain, suffering and quality of life in order determine a value of the pain, suffering and loss of quality of life suffered by victims of various crimes.
Losses per Criminal Victimization:This research focused on only the victim’s costs . The costs they did consider included: pain/suffering; loss of productivity; medical care; mental health care; police/fire services; victim services; property loss/damage; and loss of quality of life.
PART II – THE COST OF CRIME:
What are the costs of specific crimes?
PART III – THE COST OF CRIME:
The REAL cost of Part I crime in Kentucky for 2012
PART IV –
The REAL cost of Part I crimes in Kentucky for 2013.
Our Citizens Are Entitled To KNOW WHO IS COMMITTING CRIMES IN OUR COMMUNITY!
The public is entitled to know just who is committing crimes in our community, including the young punks we call juveniles.
Juvenile courts were established over 100 years ago. The idea was to protect young folks from having to live with “MINOR” indiscretions. Hell, today they are committing robberies, burglaries, assaults and on and on and on.
Come on law-makers wake up and protect the law-abiding, tax-paying citizens for a change.
Someone suggested that the Public Defenders (DPA) is one of the fastest growing agencies in state government. Their numbers and sources of income seemed, they said, is growing and growing. I wonder, has evaluated the numbers to determine whether it is the fastest growing state agency?
One thing I do know is that DPA attorneys and their ally, the Kentucky Criminal Defense Lawyers, frequently dominate every hearing of the General Assembly’s Judiciary Committees on matters pertaining to criminal law. And why shouldn’t they. There are a number of criminal defense attorneys on the Judiciary Committees in both the house and the Senate who seem to be a willing audience.
The Public Advocate and one or two other DPA attorneys can usually be seen around the Capital Annex whenever Legislative Committees are meeting. Some States have laws that impose express limits on what public defenders may do, especially when it comes to lobbying through their offices, but Kentucky has none.
My experience is that DPA attorneys routinely oppose any attempt to enforce the legal requirement that defendants WHO CAN AFFORD IT be required to pay at least some part of the cost of public defender representation. Guess who is responsible for enforcing that requirement. You guessed it, none other than the DPA. If Public Defenders are representing defendants who are not indigent then the Courts be be more vigilant in determining the ability of defendants to pay.
I wonder how to determine if the suggestion that DPA is the fastest growing agency in government is true?