California Attorney General Kamala Harris released four annual reports on July 1 regarding crime and juvenile justice in the state, the summary for which can be read here. The reports "present statistics for reported crimes, arrests, disposition of adult felony arrests, adults placed on probation, full-time criminal justice personnel, citizens' complaints against peace officers, domestic violence related calls for assistance, and law enforcement officers killed or assaulted."
The four reports, titled Crime in California 2014, Homicide in California 2014, Hate Crime in California 2014, and Juvenile Justice in California 2014, show an overall drop in crime rates in the state. However, AG Harris' reports do not accurately represent crime rates in the state; rather, her reports show her proficiency at cherry picking statistics. Here are some things she decided was not worth including:
First and foremost, Harris compared statistical data from the most recent year for which data is available, 2014, with 2009, a particularly high-crime year for California, allowing her to skew the data to reflect more favorable results. Had Harris chosen to simply compare the previous year, 2013, with 2014, it would be more apparent that the overall downward trend in crime rates that can be observed nationally are not being enjoyed so much by residents of California.
Some of the
information is incomplete, and some are simply misrepresntations. There were many things that required
asterisks, further explanation, or, at the very least, mentioning. Chiefly, the city of Los Angeles, California's
largest city, misclassified nearly 1,200 violent crimes as low level crimes during a one-year span
ending in September 2013, which included stabbings, beatings and
robberies. It is not clear whether corrections were made
to the statistical data in this regard. If
recorded correctly, aggravated assaults would be 14% higher, and violent crime
overall would show an increase of 7%. It
is safe to assume that this might have been a significant factor to include
when producing these kinds of reports, along with everything else that the Attorney General found unnecessary for the public to know.
What the report claims about rape: 9,397 rapes were reported in 2014. In 2013, the FBI revised the definition of rape, and thus, 2014 could not be compared to the previous years.
The whole truth: Though the revised definition of rape
rendered the data between years incomparable, the numbers show that reporting
of rape did increase from 7,459 in 2013 to 9,397 in 2014, much of which could
be attributed to the revised definition, which now includes instances of rape
committed against male victims. However,
even if we were to compare 2014 to 2009, as Harris did throughout the course of
this report, rape still increased from a total of 8,698 in 2009.
What the report claims about aggravated assaults: Aggravated assaults increased by 2.4% in 2014.
The whole truth: Aggravated assaults actually increased by 3.2% from 2013 to 2014, from a total of 88,809 assaults to 91,681. Additionally, when comparing 2013 to 2014, all sub-categories of aggravated assault increase as well, which include assault with a firearm, knife or cutting instrument, other dangerous weapons, and personal weapons (e.g., hands ,feet, etc.). From 2013 to 2014, aggravated assaults involving "personal weapons" increased dramatically by 8.2%.
What the report claims about robbery: Robbery decreased by 10% in 2014 with a total of 48,650 robberies.
The whole truth: Statistically, yes, robbery did decrease. But one particular sub-category of robbery, "other," increased a staggering 13.5% from 2013 to 2014 (and even from 2009 to 2014, at 6.9%). "Other" is defined as robbery from "churches, schools, government building, trains, wooded areas, etc." Harris did not mention this increase in her reports.
What the report claims about larceny-theft: The report's summary includes no information about larceny-theft crimes.
The whole truth: If it had, it would show that shoplifting increased by 4% from 2013 to 2014; theft of motor vehicle accessories increased 3.7%; and theft "from buildings" increased 4.3%.
What the report claims about arson: The report's summary includes no information about arson.
The whole truth: Arson crimes show an overall decrease of 4.2% from 2013 to 2014, however, when looking at the sub-categories individually, there was a 1.6% increase in residential arson from 2013 to 2014, 3.2% increase for storage arson (barns, garages, warehouses), 2.8% for commercial arson, 10.2% for "other" structural property arson (outerbuildings, buildings under construction), and 0.2% for mobile property arson (autos, trucks, buses, trailers, boats, etc.). Community/public arson (churches, jails, schools) decreased by 23.5% from 2013 to 2014, the likely contributor to the report's reflection of an overall drop in arson crimes.
What the report claims about homicide: Homicide decreased by 2.8%.
The whole truth: Actually, homicides decreased by only 2.3% from 2013 to 2014. Not a huge misrepresentation, but still not an accurate number.
What the report claims about hate crimes: Hate crime offenses, hate crime events and hate crime events involving race/ethnicity/national origin bias have all decreased considerably.
The whole truth: The actual statistics for hate crimes are not included in any of the four reports produced by Harris, so verifying their accuracy is not possible with the data provided.
What the report claims about overall arrests: There were a total of 1,212,845 arrests in the state in 2014, the lowest since 1969.
The whole truth: Actually, the arrest rate in 2014 was the highest since 2011, at a total of 1,126,022 adult arrests compared to the 2011 low of 1,117,633 arrests. Also, both 2012 and 2013 reported fewer arrests than in 2014, so last year was a far cry from the lowest arrest rate in four decades. The arrest total Harris cited in her report summary (1,212,845) also includes arrests of juveniles, which have been trending downwards, likely skewing the results to show that adult arrest rates, too, are experiencing a downward trend. They are not.
Sorry, Californians. Crime in California is not as rosy as Attorney General Kamala Harris would like you to believe. What she has presented to you is not the whole story.

As always, reported crime statistics must be taken with a large dose of skepticism. The only regular audit that I am aware of for FBI Uniform Crime Reports (UCR's) is for the timely entry of report data. The actual content is not regularly checked (factually), so agencies are pretty much on the honor system for meeting the UCR guidelines for matching incident data to the appropriate category. As we have seen, departments have become quite adept - such as Chicago and Miami, for instance, notorious would be more accurate - at changing circumstances to make crimes fit into lower categories. So, for instance, robberies become thefts; burglaries become trespasses, murders become unclassified deaths, etc. In this fashion, an agency can make their UCR's look pretty good compared to prior years, and clean up those pesky Part I crimes which are such political issues. Low crime rates make everyone happy, except of course, the victims of the crimes which never get reported accurately.
The move to not actually send police personnel to some "minor" crimes, and instead have citizens call in or go online to report the crime only exacerbate this trend to make crime reportage disappear.
As department heads (and elected officials) realize they can get away with this scam, it's only going to get worse.
JCC
"First and foremost, Harris compared statistical data from the most recent year for which data is available, 2014, with 2009, a particularly high-crime year for California, allowing her to skew the data to reflect more favorable results."
Capturing a 5-year window appears to be a standard practice, not a deliberate attempt to skew data. See the same report in 2010 (http://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/agweb/pdfs/cjsc/publications/candd/cd10/preface.pdf), in 2011 (http://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/agweb/pdfs/cjsc/publications/candd/cd11/cd11.pdf), in 2012 (https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/attachments/press_releases/Crime%20in%20CA%202012.pdf) and in 2013 (https://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/agweb/pdfs/cjsc/publications/candd/cd13/cd13.pdf). All of them compared the most recent year available with five years prior.
It is a shame that my previous comment pointing out a fallacy in this post was not allowed. Are dissenting opinions not authorized on this blog?