research paper for violent crimes

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Comparing Individuals Who Engage in Violent Extremism and Similar Acts: What Research Sponsored by the National Institute of Justice Tells Us

Over the years, the National Institute of Justice’s (NIJ) funding for research has provided important opportunities to advance our understanding of topics related to crime and justice within the United States. Drawing from this portfolio, this synthesis paper compares and contrasts the data and findings from NIJ-sponsored research projects on violent extremism, mass shootings, and bias crimes. This comparison focuses both on the content of the data and on the creation and coverage of the data, examining findings from four research projects: The Profiles of Individual Radicalization in the United States (PIRUS) database of 2,226 individuals who demonstrated at least 1 of 5 extremist or radicalized behaviors; The Bias Incidents and Actors Study (BIAS) database of 966 adults arrested or indicted for bias crimes; The National Hate Crime Investigation Study (NHCIS) database of 1,230 hate crime cases; The Violence Project dataset of 172 mass shootings.

Additional Details

Related topics, similar publications.

• Macro-Level Influences on Police Decision-Making and Engagement with Victims of Serious Violent Crime: A Narrative Case Study of Two States
• The Role of the Internet and Social Media on Radicalization: What Research Sponsored by the National Institute of Justice Tells Us
• Cross-Language Validation of the Scale of Economic Self-Efficacy for Spanish-Speaking Survivors of Intimate Partner Violence

Perspectives on the Violent Nature of Crime Victimisation in South Africa

• First Online: 27 August 2021

Cite this chapter

• Johan van Graan 3  

374 Accesses

2 Citations

The topic of crime and violence often dominates discussions about South Africa. Excessive crime rates cause wide-reaching feelings of anxiety and fear of crime and associated violence among citizens. Research on the broad spectrum of crime and violence in South Africa has captured the imagination of many researchers internationally. Crime and violence have become part of daily life for many people living in South Africa. Commentators frequently report on the extreme prevalence of violent crime in South Africa and often label the country as one of the most violent in the world. The nature and the extent of crime and violence in the country not only influence citizens’ well-being but also have an overwhelming effect on the social structure of communities. Empirical evidence shows that the extent of violence and crime in South Africa is greater than the extent of violence and crime generally experienced globally. Why is violent crime so prevalent in South Africa? This chapter provides some insight into the violent characteristics of crime victimisation in South Africa. It provides a brief historical background of and insight into violence and crime in South Africa; describes the nature and the extent of violent crime in South Africa; explains the risk factors of crime victimisation and violence in South Africa; and illustrates South Africans’ perceptions and experiences of crime and violence. Instead of being based on theory alone, this chapter draws on the narratives of victims behind South Africa’s statistics of violent crime victimisation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

A system of decree that defended enforced separation of diverse ethnic groups against non-white inhabitants of SA (History, 2020 ) from 1948 until the early 1990s.

Contact crimes refer to crimes where the victims themselves are the targets of violence or where property is targeted and the victims in the vicinity during the commission of the crimes are subjected to threats of violence or the use of violence. These crimes include murder, attempted murder, sexual offences (including rape and sexual assault), assault with the intent to cause grievous bodily harm, common assault, common robbery and aggravated robbery (including carjacking/truck hijacking, house robbery/home invasion, business robbery, robbery of cash in transit and bank robbery). Robbery with aggravating circumstances occurs when a person uses a gun or a weapon to commit a robbery.

A tsotsi is a young criminal, especially one from an informal South African township area.

Abrahams, N., Jewkes, R., & Mathews, S. (2010). Guns and gender-based violence in South Africa. South African Medical Journal, 100 (9), 586–588. Retrieved from https://journals.co.za/docserver/fulltext/m_samj/100/9/m_samj_v100_n9_a20.pdf?expires=1593264806&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=C2067B9027D348D3372E31DAC4C99306

Article   Google Scholar  

Altbeker, A. (2007). A Country at war with itself: South Africa’s crisis of crime . Jonathan Ball.

Google Scholar  

Brankovic, J. (2019). What drives violence in South Africa? Research brief . Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation.

Butchart, A., & Engstrom, K. (2002). Sex- and age-specific relations between economic development, economic inequality and murder rates in people aged 0–24 years: A cross-sectional analysis. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 80 (10), 797–805. Retrieved from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12471400/

Carroll, R. (2006). Carjacking: The everyday ordeal testing South Africa. Retrieved June 12, 2020, from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2006/mar/02/film.oscars2006

Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation. (2007). The violent nature of crime in South Africa. A concept paper for the Justice, Crime Prevention and Security Cluster . Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation.

Citizen Council for Public Security and Criminal Justice. (2020). Ranking newsletter 2019 of the 50 most violent cities in the world . Citizen Council for Public Security and Criminal Justice.

Foster, D. (2013). Gender, class, ‘race’ and violence. In Youth violence: Sources and solutions in South Africa . University of Cape Town Press.

Gilligan, J. (2000). Violence in public health and preventive medicine. The Lancet, 355 (9217), 1802–1804. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02307-2

Gould, C. (2014). Comment: Why is crime and violence so high in South Africa? Retrieved August 9, 2016, from https://africacheck.org/2014/09/17/comment-why-is-crime-and-violence-so-high-in-south-africa-2/ .

Gumede, W. (2018). SA tormented by violence . Pressreader. Retrieved from https://www.pressreader.com/south-africa/the-star-south-africa-late-edition/20181218/281848644703982

Hirschfield, A., & Bowers, K. J. (1997). The effect of social cohesion on levels of recorded crime in disadvantaged areas. Urban Studies, 34 (8), 1275–1295. https://doi.org/10.1080/0042098975637

History. (2020). Apartheid. History . Retrieved from https://www.history.com/topics/africa/apartheid

Hosken, G. (2017). ‘I survived’: The people behind the crime stats tell their stories. Timeslive . Retrieved from https://www.timeslive.co.za/news/south-africa/2017-10-25-i-survived-the-people-behind-the-crime-stats-tell-their-stories/

Institute for Economics & Peace. (2016). Global Peace Index 2016: Measuring peace in a complex world . Sydney, June 2016. Retrieved from https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/GPI%202016%20Report_2.pdf

Institute for Economics & Peace. (2018). Global Peace Index 2018: Measuring peace in a complex world . Vision of Humanity. Retrieved from http://visionofhumanity.org/reports

Institute for Economics & Peace. (2020). Global Peace Index 2020. Measuring peace in a complex world . Sydney, June 2020. Retrieved from http://visionofhumanity.org/app/uploads/2020/06/GPI_2020_web.pdf

Jewkes, R. (2002). Intimate partner violence: Causes and prevention. The Lancet, 359 (9315), 1423–1429. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(02)08357-5

Jewkes, R., Sikweyiya, Y., Dunkle, K., & Morrell, R. (2015). Relationship between single and multiple perpetrator rape perpetration in South Africa: A comparison of risk factors in a population-based sample. BMC Public Health, 15 (616). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-015-1889-9

Koko, K. (2019). Crime: We are under siege. Pressreader . Retrieved from https://www.pressreader.com/south-africa/the-star-south-africa-late-edition/20190913/281509342885939

Lamb, G., & Warton, G. (2016). Why is crime in South Africa so violent? Updated rapid evidence assessment on violent crime in South Africa . Safety and Violence Initiative, University of Cape Town. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.10212.88969

Book   Google Scholar  

Machisa, M., Jewkes, R., Morna, C. L., & Rama, K. (2011). The war at home: Gender based violence indicators project . Gender Links and South African Medical Research Council.

Masweneng, K. (2020, January 4). Exposure to violent crime is taking its toll on mental health, say experts. Timeslive . Retrieved from https://www.timeslive.co.za/news/south-africa/2020-01-03-exposure-to-violent-crime-is-taking-its-toll-on-sas-mental-health-say-experts/

Mathews, S., Govender, R., Lamb, G., Boonzaier, F., Dawes, A., Ward, C., et al. (2016). Towards a more comprehensive understanding of the direct and indirect determinants of violence against women and children in South Africa with a view to enhancing violence prevention . Safety and Violence Initiative, University of Cape Town.

Matzopoulos, R., Bowman, B., Mathews, S., & Myers, J. (2010). Applying upstream interventions for interpersonal violence prevention: An uphill struggle in low- to middle-income contexts. Health Policy, 97 (1), 62–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2010.03.003

Matzopoulos, R. G., Truen, S., Bowman, B., & Corrigall, J. (2014). The cost of harmful alcohol use in South Africa. South African Medical Journal, 104 (2), 127–132. https://doi.org/10.7196/SAMJ.7644

Mkhwanazi, S. (2018, September 12). SA has become a war zone. Pretoria News . Retrieved from https://www.iol.co.za/pretoria-news/sa-has-become-a-war-zone-17023199

Mlilo, S., & Misago, J. P. (2019). Xenophobic violence in South Africa: 1994–2018. An overview . African Centre for Migration & Society, University of the Witwatersrand.

Naicker, K. (2017). Hijacking survivor speaks of his ordeal. News24 . Retrieved from https://www.news24.com/news24/southafrica/local/hillcrest-fever/hijacking-survivor-speaks-of-his-ordeal-20170509

Philip, K., Tsedu, M., & Zwane, M. (2014). The impacts of social and economic inequality on economic development in South Africa . New York, NY: United National Development Programme.

Ratele, K. (2008). Masculinity and male mortality in South Africa. African Safety Promotion: A Journal of Injury and Violence Prevention, 6 (2), 19–41. Retrieved from https://0-journals-co-za.oasis.unisa.ac.za/docserver/fulltext/safety/6/2/safety_v6_n2_a2.pdf?expires=1593885571&id=id&accname=58010&checksum=FA79FACCED82D7123251F546A4FEAADA

Saal, P. (2018, April 18). Aussie travel advisory paints bleak picture of crime and violence in SA. Pressreader . Retrieved from https://www.pressreader.com/south-africa/the-herald-south-africa/20180418/281616715960265

SaferSpaces. (2020). What is the situation in South Africa? Safer Spaces . Retrieved from https://www.saferspaces.org.za/understand/entry/what-is-the-situation-in-south-africa

Seedat, M., van Niekerk, A., Jewkes, R., Suffla, S., & Ratele, K. (2009). Health in South Africa 5: Violence and injuries in South Africa: Prioritising an agenda for prevention. The Lancet, 374 (9694), 1011–1022. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60948-X

Silber, G., & Geffen, N. (2009). Race, class and violent crime in South Africa: Dispelling the ‘Huntley thesis’. SA Crime Quarterly, 30 , 35–43. https://doi.org/10.17159/2413-3108/2009/v0i30a897

South Africa. (2017a). Poverty on the rise in South Africa . Department Statistics South Africa. Retrieved from http://www.statssa.gov.za/?p=10334

South Africa. (2017b). Victims of Crime Survey 2016/17 . Statistics South Africa.

South Africa. (2019a). Annual Crime Statistics 2018/2019 . Statistics South Africa. Government Printer.

South Africa. (2019b). Governance, Public Safety and Justice Survey (GPSJS) Victims of Crime Report 2018/2019 . Department Statistics South Africa.

South Africa. (2019c). Unemployment rises slightly in third quarter of 2019 . Department Statistics South Africa.

South African Crime Quotes. (2006). Retrieved from https://www.southafrica.to/people/Quotes/crime.php

Swart, L.-A., Seedat, M., & Nel, J. (2018). The situational context of adolescent murder victimization in Johannesburg, South Africa. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 33 (4). Retrieved from https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A526565638/AONE?u=usa_itw&sid=AONE&xid=b0ded79f

The Global Burden of Disease 2016 Injury Collaborators. (2018). Global mortality from firearms, 1990–2016. JAMA, 320 (8), 792–814. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.10060

Underhill, G., & Rawoot, I. (2011, June 2). Murders ‘leave South Africa cold’. Mail & Guardian . Retrieved from https://mg.co.za/article/2011-05-27-murders-leave-south-africa-cold/

Van Wilsem, J., de Graff, N. D., & Wittebrood, K. (2003). Cross-national differences in victimization: Disentangling the impact of composition and context. European Sociological Review, 19 (2), 125–142. Retrieved from https://0-academic-oup-com.oasis.unisa.ac.za/esr/article/19/2/125/537105

von Holdt, K. (2013). South Africa: The transition to violent democracy. Review of African Political Economy, 40 (138), 589–604. https://doi.org/10.1080/03056244.2013.854040

von Holdt, K., Langa, M., Molapo, S., Mogapi, N., Ngubeni, K., Dlamini, J., et al. (2011). The smoke that calls: Insurgent citizenship, collective violence and the struggle for a place in the new South Africa . Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation (CSVR) and the Society, Work and Development Institute (SWOP), University of Witwatersrand.

Willman, A., Gould, C., Newham, G., & Puerto Gomez, M. (2018). An incomplete transition: Overcoming the legacy of exclusion in South Africa. Systematic country diagnostic . World Bank. Retrieved from https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/29793

World Health Organisation. (2013). Global and regional estimates of violence against women: Prevalence and health effects of intimate partner violence and non-partner sexual violence . World Health Organisation.

World Health Organisation. (2018a). Global health estimates 2016: Deaths by cause, age, sex, by country and by region, 2000–2016 . Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organisation.

World Health Organisation. (2018b). Global status report on alcohol and health 2018 . Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organisation.

World Inequality Database. (2018). South Africa: Wealth inequality, South Africa, 1993–2017. World Inequality Lab . Retrieved from https://wid.world/country/south-africa/

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Police Practice, University of South Africa, Pretoria, South Africa

Johan van Graan

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Johan van Graan .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Teaching Laboratory for Forensics and Criminology, Department of Social and Behavioural Sciences, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong

Heng Choon (Oliver) Chan

Department of Mental Health Nursing School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Ghana, Accra, Ghana

Samuel Adjorlolo

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

van Graan, J. (2021). Perspectives on the Violent Nature of Crime Victimisation in South Africa. In: Chan, H.C.(., Adjorlolo, S. (eds) Crime, Mental Health and the Criminal Justice System in Africa. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71024-8_3

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71024-8_3

Published : 27 August 2021

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-71023-1

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-71024-8

eBook Packages : Law and Criminology Law and Criminology (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

What the data says about crime in the U.S.

A growing share of Americans say reducing crime should be a top priority for the president and Congress to address this year. Around six-in-ten U.S. adults (58%) hold that view today, up from 47% at the beginning of Joe Biden’s presidency in 2021.

We conducted this analysis to learn more about U.S. crime patterns and how those patterns have changed over time.

The analysis relies on statistics published by the FBI, which we accessed through the Crime Data Explorer , and the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), which we accessed through the  National Crime Victimization Survey data analysis tool .

To measure public attitudes about crime in the U.S., we relied on survey data from Pew Research Center and Gallup.

Additional details about each data source, including survey methodologies, are available by following the links in the text of this analysis.

With the issue likely to come up in this year’s presidential election, here’s what we know about crime in the United States, based on the latest available data from the federal government and other sources.

How much crime is there in the U.S.?

It’s difficult to say for certain. The  two primary sources of government crime statistics  – the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) – paint an incomplete picture.

The FBI publishes  annual data  on crimes that have been reported to law enforcement, but not crimes that haven’t been reported. Historically, the FBI has also only published statistics about a handful of specific violent and property crimes, but not many other types of crime, such as drug crime. And while the FBI’s data is based on information from thousands of federal, state, county, city and other police departments, not all law enforcement agencies participate every year. In 2022, the most recent full year with available statistics, the FBI received data from 83% of participating agencies .

BJS, for its part, tracks crime by fielding a  large annual survey of Americans ages 12 and older and asking them whether they were the victim of certain types of crime in the past six months. One advantage of this approach is that it captures both reported and unreported crimes. But the BJS survey has limitations of its own. Like the FBI, it focuses mainly on a handful of violent and property crimes. And since the BJS data is based on after-the-fact interviews with crime victims, it cannot provide information about one especially high-profile type of offense: murder.

All those caveats aside, looking at the FBI and BJS statistics side-by-side  does  give researchers a good picture of U.S. violent and property crime rates and how they have changed over time. In addition, the FBI is transitioning to a new data collection system – known as the National Incident-Based Reporting System – that eventually will provide national information on a much larger set of crimes , as well as details such as the time and place they occur and the types of weapons involved, if applicable.

Which kinds of crime are most and least common?

Property crime in the U.S. is much more common than violent crime. In 2022, the FBI reported a total of 1,954.4 property crimes per 100,000 people, compared with 380.7 violent crimes per 100,000 people.  

By far the most common form of property crime in 2022 was larceny/theft, followed by motor vehicle theft and burglary. Among violent crimes, aggravated assault was the most common offense, followed by robbery, rape, and murder/nonnegligent manslaughter.

BJS tracks a slightly different set of offenses from the FBI, but it finds the same overall patterns, with theft the most common form of property crime in 2022 and assault the most common form of violent crime.

How have crime rates in the U.S. changed over time?

Both the FBI and BJS data show dramatic declines in U.S. violent and property crime rates since the early 1990s, when crime spiked across much of the nation.

Using the FBI data, the violent crime rate fell 49% between 1993 and 2022, with large decreases in the rates of robbery (-74%), aggravated assault (-39%) and murder/nonnegligent manslaughter (-34%). It’s not possible to calculate the change in the rape rate during this period because the FBI  revised its definition of the offense in 2013 .

The FBI data also shows a 59% reduction in the U.S. property crime rate between 1993 and 2022, with big declines in the rates of burglary (-75%), larceny/theft (-54%) and motor vehicle theft (-53%).

Using the BJS statistics, the declines in the violent and property crime rates are even steeper than those captured in the FBI data. Per BJS, the U.S. violent and property crime rates each fell 71% between 1993 and 2022.

While crime rates have fallen sharply over the long term, the decline hasn’t always been steady. There have been notable increases in certain kinds of crime in some years, including recently.

In 2020, for example, the U.S. murder rate saw its largest single-year increase on record – and by 2022, it remained considerably higher than before the coronavirus pandemic. Preliminary data for 2023, however, suggests that the murder rate fell substantially last year .

How do Americans perceive crime in their country?

Americans tend to believe crime is up, even when official data shows it is down.

In 23 of 27 Gallup surveys conducted since 1993 , at least 60% of U.S. adults have said there is more crime nationally than there was the year before, despite the downward trend in crime rates during most of that period.

While perceptions of rising crime at the national level are common, fewer Americans believe crime is up in their own communities. In every Gallup crime survey since the 1990s, Americans have been much less likely to say crime is up in their area than to say the same about crime nationally.

Public attitudes about crime differ widely by Americans’ party affiliation, race and ethnicity, and other factors . For example, Republicans and Republican-leaning independents are much more likely than Democrats and Democratic leaners to say reducing crime should be a top priority for the president and Congress this year (68% vs. 47%), according to a recent Pew Research Center survey.

How does crime in the U.S. differ by demographic characteristics?

Some groups of Americans are more likely than others to be victims of crime. In the  2022 BJS survey , for example, younger people and those with lower incomes were far more likely to report being the victim of a violent crime than older and higher-income people.

There were no major differences in violent crime victimization rates between male and female respondents or between those who identified as White, Black or Hispanic. But the victimization rate among Asian Americans (a category that includes Native Hawaiians and other Pacific Islanders) was substantially lower than among other racial and ethnic groups.

The same BJS survey asks victims about the demographic characteristics of the offenders in the incidents they experienced.

In 2022, those who are male, younger people and those who are Black accounted for considerably larger shares of perceived offenders in violent incidents than their respective shares of the U.S. population. Men, for instance, accounted for 79% of perceived offenders in violent incidents, compared with 49% of the nation’s 12-and-older population that year. Black Americans accounted for 25% of perceived offenders in violent incidents, about twice their share of the 12-and-older population (12%).

As with all surveys, however, there are several potential sources of error, including the possibility that crime victims’ perceptions about offenders are incorrect.

How does crime in the U.S. differ geographically?

There are big geographic differences in violent and property crime rates.

For example, in 2022, there were more than 700 violent crimes per 100,000 residents in New Mexico and Alaska. That compares with fewer than 200 per 100,000 people in Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Hampshire and Maine, according to the FBI.

The FBI notes that various factors might influence an area’s crime rate, including its population density and economic conditions.

What percentage of crimes are reported to police? What percentage are solved?

Most violent and property crimes in the U.S. are not reported to police, and most of the crimes that  are  reported are not solved.

In its annual survey, BJS asks crime victims whether they reported their crime to police. It found that in 2022, only 41.5% of violent crimes and 31.8% of household property crimes were reported to authorities. BJS notes that there are many reasons why crime might not be reported, including fear of reprisal or of “getting the offender in trouble,” a feeling that police “would not or could not do anything to help,” or a belief that the crime is “a personal issue or too trivial to report.”

Most of the crimes that are reported to police, meanwhile,  are not solved , at least based on an FBI measure known as the clearance rate . That’s the share of cases each year that are closed, or “cleared,” through the arrest, charging and referral of a suspect for prosecution, or due to “exceptional” circumstances such as the death of a suspect or a victim’s refusal to cooperate with a prosecution. In 2022, police nationwide cleared 36.7% of violent crimes that were reported to them and 12.1% of the property crimes that came to their attention.

Which crimes are most likely to be reported to police? Which are most likely to be solved?

Around eight-in-ten motor vehicle thefts (80.9%) were reported to police in 2022, making them by far the most commonly reported property crime tracked by BJS. Household burglaries and trespassing offenses were reported to police at much lower rates (44.9% and 41.2%, respectively), while personal theft/larceny and other types of theft were only reported around a quarter of the time.

Among violent crimes – excluding homicide, which BJS doesn’t track – robbery was the most likely to be reported to law enforcement in 2022 (64.0%). It was followed by aggravated assault (49.9%), simple assault (36.8%) and rape/sexual assault (21.4%).

The list of crimes  cleared  by police in 2022 looks different from the list of crimes reported. Law enforcement officers were generally much more likely to solve violent crimes than property crimes, according to the FBI.

The most frequently solved violent crime tends to be homicide. Police cleared around half of murders and nonnegligent manslaughters (52.3%) in 2022. The clearance rates were lower for aggravated assault (41.4%), rape (26.1%) and robbery (23.2%).

When it comes to property crime, law enforcement agencies cleared 13.0% of burglaries, 12.4% of larcenies/thefts and 9.3% of motor vehicle thefts in 2022.

Are police solving more or fewer crimes than they used to?

Nationwide clearance rates for both violent and property crime are at their lowest levels since at least 1993, the FBI data shows.

Police cleared a little over a third (36.7%) of the violent crimes that came to their attention in 2022, down from nearly half (48.1%) as recently as 2013. During the same period, there were decreases for each of the four types of violent crime the FBI tracks:

• Police cleared 52.3% of reported murders and nonnegligent homicides in 2022, down from 64.1% in 2013.
• They cleared 41.4% of aggravated assaults, down from 57.7%.
• They cleared 26.1% of rapes, down from 40.6%.
• They cleared 23.2% of robberies, down from 29.4%.

The pattern is less pronounced for property crime. Overall, law enforcement agencies cleared 12.1% of reported property crimes in 2022, down from 19.7% in 2013. The clearance rate for burglary didn’t change much, but it fell for larceny/theft (to 12.4% in 2022 from 22.4% in 2013) and motor vehicle theft (to 9.3% from 14.2%).

Note: This is an update of a post originally published on Nov. 20, 2020.

• Criminal Justice

John Gramlich is an associate director at Pew Research Center .

Fewer than 1% of federal criminal defendants were acquitted in 2022

Before release of video showing tyre nichols’ beating, public views of police conduct had improved modestly, black americans differ from other u.s. adults over whether individual or structural racism is a bigger problem, violent crime is a key midterm voting issue, but what does the data say, how black americans view the use of face recognition technology by police, most popular.

1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Age & Generations
• Coronavirus (COVID-19)
• Economy & Work
• Family & Relationships
• Gender & LGBTQ
• Immigration & Migration
• International Affairs
• Internet & Technology
• Methodological Research
• News Habits & Media
• Non-U.S. Governments
• Other Topics
• Politics & Policy
• Race & Ethnicity
• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

Copyright 2024 Pew Research Center

Terms & Conditions

Privacy Policy

Cookie Settings

Reprints, Permissions & Use Policy

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

Suggested Results

Informed citizens are our democracy’s best defense..

We respect your privacy .

• Analysis & Opinion

Violent Crime Is Falling Nationwide — Here’s How We Know

Preliminary FBI data, however imperfect, confirms a sharp downward trend in crime, undercutting attempts to blame criminal justice reform for pandemic-era spikes in violence.

• Accurate Crime Data

Misleading statements about crime and public safety are  already proliferating  in this election cycle. As November draws closer, misinformation is likely to intensify. That makes it even more important to take a close look at what the best and most recent crime data tells us. One major trend is becoming clear: violent crime dropped in 2021 and 2022 — and then declined again, significantly, in 2023. We’ll have to wait until the fall for final government data to confirm this trend. Until then, here’s what we know, how we know it, and what it means — drawing on both city data and the most recent information from the FBI.

City-level data shows declines in violent crime

City-level crime reports are the best places to look for up-to-the-minute crime data. Combining enough city-level crime data can, in turn, approximate national trends. Two research teams have used this approach to give a sense of crime in 2023. Both show sharp declines in violent crime.

• Drawing on data from 38 cities across the country, the  Council on Criminal Justice  reported that homicide declined by 10 percent in 2023. It also noted declines in assaults, gun assaults, burglary, and larceny, but a sharp spike in motor vehicle thefts.
• Similarly, Jeff Asher, a  researcher and expert  in data on crime and public safety, studied murder data from 175 cities and found a  7 percent decline in murders  through December 7, 2023, compared to 2022. These cities are from across the country and include jurisdictions led by Republicans and Democrats alike.

A murder decline of this magnitude would be historic; the sharpest one-year drop on record occurred  in 1996  when the number of murders nationwide fell by a little more than 9 percent compared to 1995.

Crime trends in the largest cities tend to grab headlines and help shape our understanding of national developments. That makes careful examination of data from these cities especially important. Broadly, the news about murder trends from 2022 to 2023 is encouraging. There were 100 fewer murders in Philadelphia in 2023 compared to 2022, a decline of roughly 20 percent. In Baltimore, murders also declined by  roughly 20 percent , falling below 300 for  the first time since 2014 . Similarly, New York City saw  nearly 50 fewer homicides , a drop of roughly 11 percent.

Notable on their own, these declines also undercut politicized claims that crime is rising in “blue cities.” On the contrary, the data demonstrates that Democratic-led cities, which also happen to be some of the nation’s most populous, follow and in some cases lead the national trend toward decreasing violence.

Of course, this overall trend is not universal, and causes for concern remain. Just as all available police data points to a decline in murders, those same sources also indicate an increase in motor vehicle thefts. Some cities, like Washington, DC, also saw violence continue to surge in 2023. Last, but of vital importance, even with these declines, murder rates likely remain above 2019 levels nationally and in most cities.

Preliminary national data from the FBI confirms falling violent crime

On March 18, the FBI released  preliminary quarterly crime data  for 2023. Intended to supplement the FBI’s  annual fall report on nationwide crime trends , these quarterly reports offer an early but incomplete look at crime data from a  smaller group of police agencies  than represented in final annual reports. The latest release covers  more than 80 percent  of the population — a very robust sample, even if there are errors in the city-level data that should be corrected before the FBI releases final year-end data in the fall.

The broad trend matches what researchers have observed in collections of city data about crime trends between 2022 and 2023. Specifically, the FBI’s report shows remarkable declines in murder (down 13.2 percent), violent crime (down 5.7 percent), and property crime (down 4.3 percent). Of the seven major offenses tracked by the FBI, the report shows an increase only in motor vehicle theft (up 10.7 percent).

Understanding common criticisms of crime data

The available data indicates that violence, especially lethal violence, dropped in 2023. Skeptics might still point to reasons to question the apparent decline in crime. For one, crime data generally includes only offenses reported to police. Could crime  reporting  have dropped, and crime itself remained static? One problem with this theory is immediately evident. Murder is almost always reported to the police. And it appears to have fallen at a rapid, potentially record-setting pace in 2023.

As for crimes other than murder, we’ll have to wait until fall to test the possibility of underreporting. That’s when the  National Criminal Victimization Survey  (NCVS), an analysis by the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics that studies people’s experiences with nonlethal crime, will release its 2023 data. Unfortunately,  data quality issues  make it difficult to draw firm conclusions from the NCVS’s most recent releases.

Last, skeptics might point to the FBI’s recent transition to a new crime reporting system, which led to relatively few police agencies providing data for  the bureau’s 2021 crime report , as another weak spot in recent crime data. But agency reporting has improved since 2021, and the FBI took other steps to ensure a  more complete report  in 2022. The next report, covering 2023, will likely mark another improvement.

• • •

Crime data is far from perfect. But the FBI’s data is improving in both quality and frequency of reporting, and independent research allows us to double-check the bureau’s work as that process continues. Putting the two pieces together, a clear picture is emerging, one that shows significant decreases in violent crime in recent years.

Rapidly changing crime trends underscore the value of having crime data that is timely and reliable. Policymakers and leaders in civil society should continue to work toward realizing that goal. 

Related Issues:

Why Inclusive Criminal Justice Research Matters

Engaging with impacted community leaders can help contextualize data and drive solutions.

The Hidden Toll of New York City’s Misdemeanor System

Caseloads are shrinking but remain a burden on communities and government resources.

Myth vs. Reality: Trends in Retail Theft

Fact-checking trump’s speech on crime and immigrants, trump misleads about crime and public safety, again, criminal justice reforms aren’t driving rising crime, analyzing the fbi’s national crime data on 2022 — with an eye toward 2023 trends, informed citizens are democracy’s best defense.

Posted 2024-05-11 06:16

Contact Information:

Crime statistics in the US (Center City)

QR Code Link to This Post

post id: 7745830166

posted: 2024-05-11 06:16

updated: 2024-05-11 06:30

♥ best of [ ? ]

refresh the page.

Crime statistics in the US - rants & raves - craigslist

Research for yourself! Don't take my or anyone else's word for it. What you will find: Violent crime in the US was down 6% in 2023 Illegal immigrants commit the least amount of violent crimes of any...

• Share full article

For more audio journalism and storytelling, download New York Times Audio , a new iOS app available for news subscribers.

A Plan to Remake the Middle East

While talks for a cease-fire between israel and hamas continue, another set of negotiations is happening behind the scenes..

This transcript was created using speech recognition software. While it has been reviewed by human transcribers, it may contain errors. Please review the episode audio before quoting from this transcript and email [email protected] with any questions.

From New York Times, I’m Michael Barbaro. This is The Daily.

[MUSIC CONTINUES]

Today, if and when Israel and Hamas reach a deal for a ceasefire fire, the United States will immediately turn to a different set of negotiations over a grand diplomatic bargain that it believes could rebuild Gaza and remake the Middle East. My colleague Michael Crowley has been reporting on that plan and explains why those involved in it believe they have so little time left to get it done.

It’s Wednesday, May 8.

Michael, I want to start with what feels like a pretty dizzying set of developments in this conflict over the past few days. Just walk us through them?

Well, over the weekend, there was an intense round of negotiations in an effort, backed by the United States, to reach a ceasefire in the Gaza war.

The latest ceasefire proposal would reportedly see as many as 33 Israeli hostages released in exchange for potentially hundreds of Palestinian prisoners.

US officials were very eager to get this deal.

Pressure for a ceasefire has been building ahead of a threatened Israeli assault on Rafah.

Because Israel has been threatening a military offensive in the Southern Palestinian city of Rafah, where a huge number of people are crowded.

Fleeing the violence to the North. And now they’re packed into Rafah. Exposed and vulnerable, they need to be protected.

And the US says it would be a humanitarian catastrophe on top of the emergency that’s already underway.

Breaking news this hour — very important breaking news. An official Hamas source has told The BBC that it does accept a proposal for a ceasefire deal in Gaza.

And for a few hours on Monday, it looked like there might have been a major breakthrough when Hamas put out a statement saying that it had accepted a negotiating proposal.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says the ceasefire proposal does not meet his country’s requirements. But Netanyahu says he will send a delegation of mediators to continue those talks. Now, the terms —

But those hopes were dashed pretty quickly when the Israelis took a look at what Hamas was saying and said that it was not a proposal that they had agreed to. It had been modified.

And overnight —

Israeli troops stormed into Rafah. Video showing tanks crashing over a sign at the entrance of the city.

— the Israelis launched a partial invasion of Rafah.

It says Hamas used the area to launch a deadly attack on Israeli troops over the weekend.

And they have now secured a border crossing at the Southern end of Gaza and are conducting targeted strikes. This is not yet the full scale invasion that President Biden has adamantly warned Israel against undertaking, but it is an escalation by Israel.

So while all that drama might suggest that these talks are in big trouble, these talks are very much still alive and ongoing and there is still a possibility of a ceasefire deal.

And the reason that’s so important is not just to stop the fighting in Gaza and relieve the suffering there, but a ceasefire also opens the door to a grand diplomatic bargain, one that involves Israel and its Arab neighbors and the Palestinians, and would have very far-reaching implications.

And what is that grand bargain. Describe what you’re talking about?

Well, it’s incredibly ambitious. It would reshape Israel’s relationship with its Arab neighbors, principally Saudi Arabia. But it’s important to understand that this is a vision that has actually been around since well before October 7. This was a diplomatic project that President Biden had been investing in and negotiating actually in a very real and tangible way long before the Hamas attacks and the Gaza war.

And President Biden was looking to build on something that President Trump had done, which was a series of agreements that the Trump administration struck in which Israel and some of its Arab neighbors agreed to have normal diplomatic relations for the first time.

Right, they’re called the Abraham Accords.

That’s right. And, you know, Biden doesn’t like a lot of things, most things that Trump did. But he actually likes this, because the idea is that they contribute to stability and economic integration in the Middle East, the US likes Israel having friends and likes having a tight-knit alliance against Iran.

President Biden agrees with the Saudis and with the Israelis, that Iran is really the top threat to everybody here. So, how can you build on this? How can you expand it? Well, the next and biggest step would be normalizing relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia.

And the Saudis have made clear that they want to do this and that they’re ready to do this. They weren’t ready to do it in the Trump years. But Mohammed bin Salman, the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, has made clear he wants to do it now.

So this kind of triangular deal began to take shape before October 7, in which the US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia would enter this three way agreement in which everyone would get something that they wanted.

And just walk through what each side gets in this pre-October 7th version of these negotiations?

So for Israel, you get normalized ties with its most important Arab neighbor and really the country that sets the tone for the whole Muslim world, which is Saudi Arabia of course. It makes Israel feel safer and more secure. Again, it helps to build this alliance against Iran, which Israel considers its greatest threat, and it comes with benefits like economic ties and travel and tourism. And Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been very open, at least before October 7th, that this was his highest diplomatic and foreign policy priority.

For the Saudis, the rationale is similar when it comes to Israel. They think that it will bring stability. They like having a more explicitly close ally against Iran. There are economic and cultural benefits. Saudi Arabia is opening itself up in general, encouraging more tourism.

But I think that what’s most important to the Crown Prince, Mohammed bin Salman, is what he can get from the United States. And what he has been asking for are a couple of essential things. One is a security agreement whose details have always been a little bit vague, but I think essentially come down to reliable arms supplies from the United States that are not going to be cut off or paused on a whim, as he felt happened when President Biden stopped arms deliveries in 2021 because of how Saudi was conducting its war in Yemen. The Saudis were furious about that.

Saudi Arabia also wants to start a domestic nuclear power program. They are planning for a very long-term future, possibly a post-oil future. And they need help getting a nuclear program off the ground.

And they want that from the US?

And they want that from the US.

Now, those are big asks from the us. But from the perspective of President Biden, there are some really enticing things about this possible agreement. One is that it will hopefully produce more stability in the region. Again, the US likes having a tight-knit alliance against Iran.

The US also wants to have a strong relationship with Saudi Arabia. You know, despite the anger at Mohammed bin Salman over the murder of the Saudi dissident Jamal Khashoggi, the Biden administration recognizes that given the Saudis control over global oil production and their strategic importance in the Middle East, they need to have a good relationship with them. And the administration has been worried about the influence of China in the region and with the Saudis in particular.

So this is an opportunity for the US to draw the Saudis closer. Whatever our moral qualms might be about bin Salman and the Saudi government, this is an opportunity to bring the Saudis closer, which is something the Biden administration sees as a strategic benefit.

All three of these countries — big, disparate countries that normally don’t see eye-to-eye, this was a win-win-win on a military, economic, and strategic front.

That’s right. But there was one important actor in the region that did not see itself as winning, and that was the Palestinians.

[MUSIC PLAYING]

First, it’s important to understand that the Palestinians have always expected that the Arab countries in the Middle East would insist that Israel recognize a Palestinian state before those countries were willing to essentially make total peace and have normal relations with Israel.

So when the Abraham Accords happened in the Trump administration, the Palestinians felt like they’d been thrown under the bus because the Abraham Accords gave them virtually nothing. But the Palestinians did still hold out hope that Saudi Arabia would be their savior. And for years, Saudi Arabia has said that Israel must give the Palestinians a state if there’s going to be a normal relationship between Israel and Saudi Arabia.

Now the Palestinians see the Saudis in discussions with the US and Israel about a normalization agreement, and there appears to be very little on offer for the Palestinians. And they are feeling like they’re going to be left out in the cold here.

Right. And in the minds of the Palestinians, having already been essentially sold out by all their other Arab neighbors, the prospect that Saudi Arabia, of all countries, the most important Muslim Arab country in the region, would sell them out, had to be extremely painful.

It was a nightmare scenario for them. And in the minds of many analysts and US officials, this was a factor, one of many, in Hamas’s decision to stage the October 7th attacks.

Hamas, like other Palestinian leaders, was seeing the prospect that the Middle East was moving on and essentially, in their view, giving up on the Palestinian cause, and that Israel would be able to have friendly, normal relations with Arab countries around the region, and that it could continue with hardline policies toward the Palestinians and a refusal, as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said publicly, to accept a Palestinian state.

Right. So Michael, once Hamas carries out the October 7th attacks in an effort to destroy a status quo that it thinks is leaving them less and less relevant, more and more hopeless, including potentially this prospect that Saudi Arabia is going to normalize relations with Israel, what happens to these pre-October 7th negotiations between the US, Saudi Arabia, and Israel?

Well, I think there was a snap assumption that these talks were dead and buried. That they couldn’t possibly survive a cataclysm like this.

But then something surprising happened. It became clear that all the parties were still determined to pull-off the normalization.

And most surprisingly of all, perhaps, was the continued eagerness of Saudi Arabia, which publicly was professing outrage over the Israeli response to the Hamas attacks, but privately was still very much engaged in these conversations and trying to move them forward.

And in fact, what has happened is that the scope of this effort has grown substantially. October 7th didn’t kill these talks. It actually made them bigger, more complicated, and some people would argue, more important than ever.

We’ll be right back.

Michael, walk us through what exactly happens to these three-way negotiations after October 7th that ends up making them, as you just said, more complicated and more important than ever?

Well, it’s more important than ever because of the incredible need in Gaza. And it’s going to take a deal like this and the approval of Saudi Arabia to unlock the kind of massive reconstruction project required to essentially rebuild Gaza from the rubble. Saudi Arabia and its Arab friends are also going to be instrumental in figuring out how Gaza is governed, and they might even provide troops to help secure it. None of those things are going to happen without a deal like this.

Fascinating.

But this is all much more complicated now because the price for a deal like this has gone up.

And by price, you mean?

What Israel would have to give up. [MUSIC PLAYING]

From Saudi Arabia’s perspective, you have an Arab population that is furious at Israel. It now feels like a really hard time to do a normalization deal with the Israelis. It was never going to be easy, but this is about as bad a time to do it as there has been in a generation at least. And I think that President Biden and the people around him understand that the status quo between Israel and the Palestinians is intolerable and it is going to lead to chaos and violence indefinitely.

So now you have two of the three parties to this agreement, the Saudis and the Americans, basically asking a new price after October 7th, and saying to the Israelis, if we’re going to do this deal, it has to not only do something for the Palestinians, it has to do something really big. You have to commit to the creation of a Palestinian state. Now, I’ll be specific and say that what you hear the Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, say is that the agreement has to include an irreversible time-bound path to a Palestinian state.

We don’t know exactly what that looks like, but it’s some kind of a firm commitment, the likes of which the world and certainly the Israelis have not made before.

Something that was very much not present in the pre-October 7th vision of this negotiation. So much so that, as we just talked about, the Palestinians were left feeling completely out in the cold and furious at it.

That’s right. There was no sign that people were thinking that ambitiously about the Palestinians in this deal before October 7th. And the Palestinians certainly felt like they weren’t going to get much out of it. And that has completely changed now.

So, Michael, once this big new dimension after October 7th, which is the insistence by Saudi Arabia and the US that there be a Palestinian state or a path to a Palestinian state, what is the reaction specifically from Israel, which is, of course, the third major party to this entire conversation?

Well, Israel, or at least its political leadership, hates it. You know, this is just an extremely tough sell in Israel. It would have been a tough sell before October 7th. It’s even harder now.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is completely unrepentantly open in saying that there’s not going to be a Palestinian state on his watch. He won’t accept it. He says that it’s a strategic risk to his country. He says that it would, in effect, reward Hamas.

His argument is that terrorism has forced a conversation about statehood onto the table that wasn’t there before October 7th. Sure, it’s always in the background. It’s a perennial issue in global affairs, but it was not something certainly that the US and Israel’s Arab neighbors were actively pushing. Netanyahu also has — you know, he governs with the support of very right-wing members of a political coalition that he has cobbled together. And that coalition is quite likely to fall apart if he does embrace a Palestinian state or a path to a Palestinian state.

Now, he might be able to cobble together some sort of alternative, but it creates a political crisis for him.

And finally, you know, I think in any conversation about Israel, it’s worth bearing in mind something you hear from senior US officials these days, which is that although there is often finger pointing at Netanyahu and a desire to blame Netanyahu as this obstructionist who won’t agree to deals, what they say is Netanyahu is largely reflecting his population and the political establishment of his country, not just the right-wingers in his coalition who are clearly extremist.

But actually the prevailing views of the Israeli public. And the Israeli public and their political leaders across the spectrum right now with few exceptions, are not interested in talking about a Palestinian state when there are still dozens and dozens of Israeli hostages in tunnels beneath Gaza.

So it very much looks like this giant agreement that once seemed doable before October 7th might be more important to everyone involved than ever, given that it’s a plan for rebuilding Gaza and potentially preventing future October 7th’s from happening, but because of this higher price that Israel would have to pay, which is the acceptance of a Palestinian state, it seems from everything you’re saying, that this is more and more out of reach than ever before and hard to imagine happening in the immediate future. So if the people negotiating it are being honest, Michael, are they ready to acknowledge that it doesn’t look like this is going to happen?

Well, not quite yet. As time goes by, they certainly say it’s getting harder and harder, but they’re still trying, and they still think there’s a chance. But both the Saudis and the Biden administration understand that there’s very little time left to do this.

Well, what do you mean there’s very little time left? It would seem like time might benefit this negotiation in that it might give Israel distance from October 7th to think potentially differently about a Palestinian state?

Potentially. But Saudi Arabia wants to get this deal done in the Biden administration because Mohammed bin Salman has concluded this has to be done under a Democratic president.

Because Democrats in Congress are going to be very reluctant to approve a security agreement between the United States and Saudi Arabia.

It’s important to understand that if there is a security agreement, that’s something Congress is going to have to approve. And you’re just not going to get enough Democrats in Congress to support a deal with Saudi Arabia, who a lot of Democrats don’t like to begin with, because they see them as human rights abusers.

But if a Democratic president is asking them to do it, they’re much more likely to go along.

Right. So Saudi Arabia fears that if Biden loses and Trump is president, that those same Democrats would balk at this deal in a way that they wouldn’t if it were being negotiated under President Biden?

Exactly. Now, from President Biden’s perspective, politically, think about a president who’s running for re-election, who is presiding right now over chaos in the Middle East, who doesn’t seem to have good answers for the Israeli-Palestinian question, this is an opportunity for President Biden to deliver what could be at least what he would present as a diplomatic masterstroke that does multiple things at once, including creating a new pathway for Israel and the Palestinians to coexist, to break through the logjam, even as he is also improving Israel’s relations with Saudi Arabia.

So Biden and the Crown Prince hope that they can somehow persuade Bibi Netanyahu that in spite of all the reasons that he thinks this is a terrible idea, that this is a bet worth taking on Israel’s and the region’s long-term security and future?

That’s right. Now, no one has explained very clearly exactly how this is going to work, and it’s probably going to require artful diplomacy, possibly even a scenario where the Israelis would agree to something that maybe means one thing to them and means something else to other people. But Biden officials refuse to say that it’s hopeless and they refuse to essentially take Netanyahu’s preliminary no’s for an answer. And they still see some way that they can thread this incredibly narrow needle.

Michael, I’m curious about a constituency that we haven’t been talking about because they’re not at the table in these discussions that we are talking about here. And that would be Hamas. How does Hamas feel about the prospect of such a deal like this ever taking shape. Do they see it as any kind of a victory and vindication for what they did on October 7th?

So it’s hard to know exactly what Hamas’s leadership is thinking. I think they can feel two things. I think they can feel on the one hand, that they have established themselves as the champions of the Palestinian people who struck a blow against Israel and against a diplomatic process that was potentially going to leave the Palestinians out in the cold.

At the same time, Hamas has no interest in the kind of two-state solution that the US is trying to promote. They think Israel should be destroyed. They think the Palestinian state should cover the entire geography of what is now Israel, and they want to lead a state like that. And that’s not something that the US, Saudi Arabia, or anyone else is going to tolerate.

So what Hamas wants is to fight, to be the leader of the Palestinian people, and to destroy Israel. And they’re not interested in any sort of a peace process or statehood process.

It seems very clear from everything you’ve said here that neither Israel nor Hamas is ready to have the conversation about a grand bargain diplomatic program. And I wonder if that inevitably has any bearing on the ceasefire negotiations that are going on right now between the two of them that are supposed to bring this conflict to some sort of an end, even if it’s just temporary?

Because if, as you said, Michael, a ceasefire opens the door to this larger diplomatic solution, and these two players don’t necessarily want that larger diplomatic solution, doesn’t that inevitably impact their enthusiasm for even reaching a ceasefire?

Well, it certainly doesn’t help. You know, this is such a hellish problem. And of course, you first have the question of whether Israel and Hamas can make a deal on these immediate issues, including the hostages, Palestinian prisoners, and what the Israeli military is going to do, how long a ceasefire might last.

But on top of that, you have these much bigger diplomatic questions that are looming over them. And it’s not clear that either side is ready to turn and face those bigger questions.

So while for the Biden administration and for Saudi Arabia, this is a way out of this crisis, these larger diplomatic solutions, it’s not clear that it’s a conversation that the two parties that are actually at war here are prepared to start having.

Well, Michael, thank you very much. We appreciate it.

On Tuesday afternoon, under intense pressure from the US, delegations from Israel and Hamas arrived in Cairo to resume negotiations over a potential ceasefire. But in a statement, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu made clear that even with the talks underway, his government would, quote, “continue to wage war against Hamas.”

Here’s what else you need to know today. In a dramatic day of testimony, Stormy Daniels offered explicit details about an alleged sexual encounter with Donald Trump that ultimately led to the hush money payment at the center of his trial. Daniels testified that Trump answered the door in pajamas, that he told her not to worry that he was married, and that he did not use a condom when they had sex.

That prompted lawyers for Trump to seek a mistrial based on what they called prejudicial testimony. But the judge in the case rejected that request. And,

We’ve seen a ferocious surge of anti-Semitism in America and around the world.

In a speech on Tuesday honoring victims of the Holocaust, President Biden condemned what he said was the alarming rise of anti-Semitism in the United States after the October 7th attacks on Israel. And he expressed worry that too many Americans were already forgetting the horrors of that attack.

The Jewish community, I want you to know I see your fear, your hurt, and your pain. Let me reassure you, as your president, you’re not alone. You belong. You always have and you always will.

Today’s episode was produced by Nina Feldman, Clare Toeniskoetter, and Rikki Novetsky. It was edited by Liz O. Baylen, contains original music by Marion Lozano, Elisheba Ittoop, and Dan Powell, and was engineered by Alyssa Moxley. Our theme music is by Jim Brunberg and Ben Landsverk of Wonderly.

That’s it for The Daily. I’m Michael Barbaro. See you tomorrow.

• May 10, 2024   •   27:42 Stormy Daniels Takes the Stand
• May 9, 2024   •   34:42 One Strongman, One Billion Voters, and the Future of India
• May 8, 2024   •   28:28 A Plan to Remake the Middle East
• May 7, 2024   •   27:43 How Changing Ocean Temperatures Could Upend Life on Earth
• May 6, 2024   •   29:23 R.F.K. Jr.’s Battle to Get on the Ballot
• May 3, 2024   •   25:33 The Protesters and the President
• May 2, 2024   •   29:13 Biden Loosens Up on Weed
• May 1, 2024   •   35:16 The New Abortion Fight Before the Supreme Court
• April 30, 2024   •   27:40 The Secret Push That Could Ban TikTok
• April 29, 2024   •   47:53 Trump 2.0: What a Second Trump Presidency Would Bring
• April 26, 2024   •   21:50 Harvey Weinstein Conviction Thrown Out
• April 25, 2024   •   40:33 The Crackdown on Student Protesters

Hosted by Michael Barbaro

Featuring Michael Crowley

Produced by Nina Feldman ,  Clare Toeniskoetter and Rikki Novetsky

Edited by Liz O. Baylen

Original music by Marion Lozano ,  Elisheba Ittoop and Dan Powell

Engineered by Alyssa Moxley

Listen and follow The Daily Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music | YouTube

If and when Israel and Hamas reach a deal for a cease-fire, the United States will immediately turn to a different set of negotiations over a grand diplomatic bargain that it believes could rebuild Gaza and remake the Middle East.

Michael Crowley, who covers the State Department and U.S. foreign policy for The Times, explains why those involved in this plan believe they have so little time left to get it done.

On today’s episode

Michael Crowley , a reporter covering the State Department and U.S. foreign policy for The New York Times.

Background reading :

Talks on a cease-fire in the Gaza war are once again at an uncertain stage .

Here’s how the push for a deal between Israel and Saudi Arabia looked before Oct. 7 .

From early in the war, President Biden has said that a lasting resolution requires a “real” Palestinian state .

Here’s what Israeli officials are discussing about postwar Gaza.

There are a lot of ways to listen to The Daily. Here’s how.

We aim to make transcripts available the next workday after an episode’s publication. You can find them at the top of the page.

The Daily is made by Rachel Quester, Lynsea Garrison, Clare Toeniskoetter, Paige Cowett, Michael Simon Johnson, Brad Fisher, Chris Wood, Jessica Cheung, Stella Tan, Alexandra Leigh Young, Lisa Chow, Eric Krupke, Marc Georges, Luke Vander Ploeg, M.J. Davis Lin, Dan Powell, Sydney Harper, Mike Benoist, Liz O. Baylen, Asthaa Chaturvedi, Rachelle Bonja, Diana Nguyen, Marion Lozano, Corey Schreppel, Rob Szypko, Elisheba Ittoop, Mooj Zadie, Patricia Willens, Rowan Niemisto, Jody Becker, Rikki Novetsky, John Ketchum, Nina Feldman, Will Reid, Carlos Prieto, Ben Calhoun, Susan Lee, Lexie Diao, Mary Wilson, Alex Stern, Dan Farrell, Sophia Lanman, Shannon Lin, Diane Wong, Devon Taylor, Alyssa Moxley, Summer Thomad, Olivia Natt, Daniel Ramirez and Brendan Klinkenberg.

Our theme music is by Jim Brunberg and Ben Landsverk of Wonderly. Special thanks to Sam Dolnick, Paula Szuchman, Lisa Tobin, Larissa Anderson, Julia Simon, Sofia Milan, Mahima Chablani, Elizabeth Davis-Moorer, Jeffrey Miranda, Renan Borelli, Maddy Masiello, Isabella Anderson and Nina Lassam.

Michael Crowley covers the State Department and U.S. foreign policy for The Times. He has reported from nearly three dozen countries and often travels with the secretary of state. More about Michael Crowley

Advertisement

The many faces of Mitchell Gaff, suspect in 1984 Everett cold case

E VERETT — In 25 years under state supervision for sex crimes, Mitchell Gaff came out as gay, was ordained as a Buddhist priest and claimed he was “not that guy anymore.”

In a 2018 evaluation, a doctor found that despite Gaff’s diagnoses, including “sexual sadism,” his disorders were under control, and he no longer met the definition of a sexually violent predator.

“Without a doubt Mr. Gaff was significantly affected by his sexual thoughts, feelings, and urges when he was actively offending,” wrote the psychologist, Dr. Daniel Yanisch. “Over almost 25 years at the (Special Commitment Center), Mr. Gaff has participated in treatment quite consistently, and has learned many ways to intervene on his sexual and aggressive thoughts and urges.”

Despite his apparent progress, Gaff found himself back in jail last week — facing life in prison in the 1984 killing of Judy Weaver. Police believe Gaff killed Weaver, 42, amid an almost unfathomable spree of random sexual violence in Everett, Edmonds, Seattle and elsewhere.

Prosecutors charged Gaff, 66, with aggravated first-degree murder in Snohomish County Superior Court in the long-unsolved killing of Weaver, who co-owned a cafe in downtown Everett. He remained in the Snohomish County Jail this week on a “no bail” hold.

Judith “Judy” Weaver (provided photo)

Until this month, Gaff was living in Olympia and registered as a Level 3 sex offender. After decades in prison for other crimes, he had legally changed his name to Sam Wise Price.

On the eve of his release in 1995 for a rape conviction, Gaff was committed to the state’s colony of sexual predators on McNeil Island in south Puget Sound.

He remained under some form of state supervision until 2018.

In August 2018, when Gaff was released from civil commitment, psychologists wrote in court documents that his diagnosed mental disorders “do not render him a substantial risk to re-offend in a sexually violent predatory manner.”

Hundreds of pages of health reports in his court record retrace his life, criminal history and reflections on how to leave the horrors of his past behind him.

“I guess I see it as my job to focus on the road and not on the rut. My focus is on how to be more tolerant and compassionate, more loving kindness,” Gaff told a psychologist in 2018. “I see it as looking at where I want to go, and not where I don’t want to go. My choice is to go to treatment rather than a porn shop, to an AA meeting as opposed to a bar, and that I make those decisions rather than something else make the decisions.”

‘If I’d just been able to kill him’

Gaff was born in Victorville, California, in 1958. He moved around a lot because of his mother’s work.

As a child, older teenage boys and girls coerced him into performing sexual acts, he recounted. It made him feel “confused, curious and ashamed,” according to a self-reported history. Around the time he turned 18, he began feeling sexually inadequate, creating turmoil in his personal relationships

When Gaff was a senior in high school, he dropped out and began living with friends. In Everett, he used drugs and alcohol heavily. He became “obsessed with sexual thoughts of strange women,” court documents said. Gaff also had fantasies of rape.

From 1978 to 1984, he stalked and sexually assaulted countless women and teenagers, according to his admissions in court papers. At one point, from 1981 to 1982, Gaff was trying to attack 20 to 30 women a day, knocking some to the ground and putting his hands up their skirts, he later reported. He also described several other rapes he was not arrested for.

Convicted sex offender Mitchell Gaff is escorted into court. This photo originally appeared in The Everett Daily Herald on Aug. 15, 2000. (Justin Best / The Herald file)

In 1979, Gaff was convicted of assault and burglary after following Jackie Brown into her garage, binding her hands and repeatedly hitting her with a pistol. The attack only ended because Brown fought back and escaped, according to court records. At sentencing, Gaff expressed remorse for the crime and was sentenced to probation.

“I often think if I’d just been able to kill him, (other rapes) would never have happened,” Brown told the Daily Herald in 2000.

On the night of June 1, 1984, Weaver walked home from work at the Bell-Ness Cafe. Gaff allegedly broke into her home to sexually assault her, according to the charges. The ligatures used to bind Weaver’s throat ultimately killed her, deputy prosecutor Craig Matheson wrote in the charges last week. Gaff set her bedroom on fire to destroy the evidence, the charges say.

Two months after he allegedly killed Weaver, Gaff broke into the home of two teenage sisters in Everett and raped them. He was convicted and sentenced in 1985.

After the Weaver case went cold, detectives took another look in July 2020, using newly available DNA technology. Three years later, in November 2023, police learned from the Washington State Patrol crime lab that a genetic profile recovered from the wrist ligatures revealed Gaff as an apparent match in the national DNA database CODIS.

After Gaff’s arrest this month, Weaver’s family said they had “never given up hope.”

“We are very happy there will finally be justice for our mom, Judy,” the family said in a statement released by Everett police. “We request our privacy at this time as we navigate the beginnings of this difficult situation.”

A family photo taken of Judy Weaver (far left) during a beauty pageant in the late 1950s. This photo first ran June 3, 2009. (Herald file)

‘Sex is like frosting’

Twice — in 1995 and 2000 — juries unaware of the Weaver case found Gaff to be a sexually violent predator. That meant he could be indefinitely confined to receive treatment.

In December 2000 , state experts testified the time had come to move Gaff into a community-based setting, where he could continue to receive treatment under supervision. Still, Superior Court Judge James Allendoerfer denied the request.

“I’ve not met anybody in 19 years (of prosecuting rapists and murderers) who is more dangerous to this community than Mitchell Gaff,” deputy prosecutor Paul Stern said at the time.

Doctors diagnosed Gaff with numerous mental disorders, including:

• Narcissistic personality disorder;

• Major depressive disorder;

• Sexual sadism;

• Alcohol use disorder;

• Voyeurism disorder; and

• Frotteuristic disorder.

In civil commitment, Gaff was cited for several violations.

In September 2006, Gaff moved to a halfway house in King County after a jury determined he was ready for release from the commitment center. The $550,000-a-year program was designed to ease him back into society over eight years.

But in April of the next year, Gaff was caught in the home with videotapes of TV programs featuring depictions of sex, violence and torture, a violation of his conditions to receive treatment at the home. Gaff had made the tapes personally, using “Girls Gone Wild” infomercials and a cable broadcast of the movie “Saw.” Officials found 44 tapes in Gaff’s room, as well as hundreds of DVDs, CDs and floppy discs.

As a result, Gaff was sent back to the commitment center in 2007. He returned to the King County halfway house that same year. According to court documents, Gaff kept “secret relationships” in his community, engaged in “inappropriate touching” and accessed pornography at a public library while accompanied by an escort in 2013.

Gaff told a psychologist in a 2018 evaluation that he didn’t expect to have sex ever again.

“As far as sex goes,” Gaff said, “in a relationship I would see it as a cake. The important ingredients include trust, intimacy, loyalty. Then you’ve got sex which is like frosting. It is sweet and flavorful, but it is not healthy eating long term … doesn’t mean anything to me anymore.”

In summer 2017, Gaff had often gone to public places without providing advanced notice to his chaperone. Authorities were concerned something was off with Gaff, as behavior changes often signaled “other things were going on in his life,” according to court documents.

Authorities searched his apartment, where they came across condoms and catalogs for guns, knives, handcuffs and law enforcement badges. They also found handwritten lists detailing realistic-looking BB guns he planned to acquire. He had used guns in the past to hold women hostage and sexually assault them.

Department of Corrections staff worried Gaff was, once again, building a “rape kit.”

Gaff denied it. He claimed a former Alcohol Anonymous group member encouraged him to create an emergency survival kit in case of a natural disaster.

His probation officer, who worked with him for years, wondered what good a BB gun would do in an emergency.

“In the city, someone will think you have a gun and could harm you,” she later told Gaff’s psychologist. “His explanation didn’t pan out.”

‘I speak fluent heterosexual’

After his release to Less-Restrictive Alternative housing in 2006, Gaff became interested in Buddhist teachings.

He regularly attended a Buddhist center in Olympia. Gaff was ordained as a Buddhist priest in January 2018. He described it as one of the most important events of his life.

“I don’t desire to become a teacher but to be a better student. No desire to be in charge of anything or anybody,” Gaff said, according to court papers. “In Zen, a man without rank is just a simple monk.”

Gaff also came out as a gay man around 2006, according to court documents. He reported that when his mother died, he was “more willing to express and explore those thoughts and feelings.”

“My fantasy life was not acknowledging that I was the woman in my fantasy,” Gaff said in 2018. “I speak fluent heterosexual, and people don’t see the typical gay male.”

Gaff attended meetings with an LGBTQ+ Alcoholics Anonymous group, court documents said.

His probation officer considered Gaff “superficial” and didn’t believe he truly identified as homosexual.

“He is really negative towards gay people,” the probation officer reported in court documents. “I have always thought that was just a distraction for him.”

Gaff told doctors he no longer had thoughts about sexual assault.

“Now I feel sadness and wish I could do something to stop it,” Gaff said. “The ‘Me Too’ and ‘Time’s Up’ movements. I feel sorry people go through that, for my part in it in the past.”

Under state supervision, Gaff worked in various capacities. He was hired to do maintenance work around his apartment complex in Tacoma and also worked in construction. For the most part, he worked in maintenance or janitor positions, court documents said.

As a creative outlet, while serving as an apprentice to his Buddhist spiritual adviser, Gaff produced steampunk models from the Victorian Era.

Before his release in 2018, Gaff reflected on his numerous sexual offenses. He didn’t know why he’d committed those heinous acts.

“As you know I have been in treatment for 25 years, with my share of missteps. I’ve learned as much from my mistakes as my successes,” he told psychologists. “The young man I was versus the older man I am today, there has been many miles between. I make different decisions today than I made back then.”

In 2018, Tacoma-based manufacturer U.S. Sheepskin hired Gaff as a sewing machine operator. According to court documents, he needed to be prompted to disclose to his coworkers that he had raped two teenage girls. He recalled crying through this, afraid they’d shame or reject him, Gaff told a psychologist.

A 20-year-old female coworker asked if he would get coffee with her because she was interested in his “life experience — how I did it and how I got through it,” according to court papers. Gaff disclosed the interaction to his probation officer, who reported Gaff should know better than even considering a conversation with the young woman, because he “should be at the point of supervising himself.”

Gaff reportedly told his coworkers he “did 10 years for what I did and 15 years for what I might do.”

About 15 times, he repeated to them: “I am not that guy anymore.”

Deputy prosecutor Paul Stern addresses jurors during court proceedings. Mitchell Gaff sits with his back to the camera. This photo originally appeared in The Everett Daily Herald on Aug. 19, 2000. (Justin Best / The Herald file)

Mitchell Gaff timeline:

November 1979: Everett police arrest Mitchell Gaff, then 21, for investigation of attacking Jackie Brown. He is sentenced to probation for five years.

June 1984: Judy Weaver is killed. New charges say Gaff sexually assaulted her and set her Rucker Avenue apartment on fire.

August 1984: Gaff rapes two teenage sisters, 14 and 16, in Everett. A judge later sentences him to 21 years.

January 1995: Gaff admits to a psychologist four more rapes he committed, for which he was never apprehended or convicted.

1995: A jury decides Gaff should be civilly committed to McNeil Island as a sexually violent predator.

June 1999: In sex offender treatment, Gaff admits to a fifth rape from his past.

2006: Authorities transfer Gaff to the King County Secure Community Transition Facility.

2007: Authorities order Gaff back to McNeil Island for having sexual tapes, then back to the King County facility.

2009: Gaff is sent back to McNeil Island again for violating conditions of his stay at the transition facility.

2018: Gaff is granted unconditioned release.

May 1, 2024: With new DNA evidence, Gaff is arrested in the 1984 cold case homicide of Judy Weaver.

Jonathan Tall: 425-339-3486; [email protected] ; Twitter: @snocojon .