1. Playing the Weighting Game DAINIS IGNATANS, University of Kent Ken Pease OBE, University College London

2. Sherman et al. (2014)*  Public opinion  Financial cost  Sentences imposed  Sentencing guideline ‘starting points’ Weights *Sherman L. W., Neyroud P.W. & Neyroud E.C. (2014). The Cambridge Crime Harm Index (CHI) Measuring total harm from crime based on sentencing guidelines, Version 2.0. University of Cambridge

3. Cambridge Crime Harms Index

4. Canadian Crime Severity Index

5. The Crime Severity Index versus the traditional crime rate, provinces and territories, 2007

6. Harms as Economic and Social Costs

7. Home Office Economic and Social Costs

9. Harms as Victim Seriousness Assessments

10. Stockport Harms Index

11.  Inclusion of crime which is not officially recorded.  Inclusion of crime which is officially recorded but where no offender is processed.  Centrality of victim judgements of the seriousness of the event unconstrained by legal category. Advantages of Stockport

12.  The exclusion of crime against businesses and children self-evidently distorts the picture.  ‘Victimless’ crime, such as drug use, does not feature in victimisation surveys.  Novel crime types (notably cybercrime) are not yet adequately represented in crime surveys.  Murder victims do not contribute responses. Disadvantages of Stockport

13.  CSEW 1994-2012  Nearly 500,000 respondents  How serious a crime do you think this was? (Give a score from 1 to 20, 1 being least serious.)  Consistently coded within supplementary Victim Forms throughout the 16 sweeps The Data

14.  What does the crime drop look like when one measures harm rather than crime counts?  What does the concentration of crime look like when one measures harm rather than counts?  How has harm concentration changed over time as compared with event concentration? Three Questions

19. Cumulative Proportion of Crimes Harm Scores

20. Cumulative Proportion of Crimes Harm Scores

21. Cumulative Proportion of Crimes Harm Scores

22. Thank you! Playing the Weighting Game DAINIS IGNATANS, LLB (Hons.), MA With thanks to Prof Ken Pease OBE