Lifetime Likelihood of Victimization

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Lifetime Likelihood of Victimization U. S. Department of Justice I Bureau of Justice Statistics I Lifetime Likelihood of Victimization by Herbert Koppel people's perception of the meaning of BJS Analyst March 1987 annual rates with respect to their own The Bureau of Justice Statistics lives. If the Earth revolved around the This report provides estimates of the National Crime Survey provides sun in 180 days, all of our annual crime likelihood that a person will become a annual victimization rates based rates would be halved, but we would not victim of crime during his or her life- on counts of the number of crimes be safer. time, or that a household will be vic- reported and not reported to timized during a 20-year period. This police in the United States. These Calculating lifetime victimization rates contrasts with the conventional use of a rates are based on interviews 1-year period in measuring crime and twice a year with about 101,000 For this report, lifetime likelihoods criminal victimization. Most promi- persons in approximately 49,000 of victimization were calculated from nently, the National Crime Survey nationally representative NCS annual victimization rates and life (NCS) surveys a sample of U.S. house- households. Those annual rates, tables published by the National Center holds and publishes annual victimization while of obvious utility to for Health statistics.% The probability rates, and the FBI's Uniform Crime policymakers, researchers, and that a person will be victimized at a Reports (UCR) provide annual rates of statisticians, do not convey to particular age basically depends upon crimes reported to the police. American citizens the full impact (a) the probability that the person is of crime on them nor do they still alive at that age and (b) the prob- Annual victimization rates answer a critical question for each ability that a person of that age will be individual: What is the possibility victimized. The lifetime likelihood of Annual victimization rates alone do that I will be a crime victim? This personal victimization is derived from not convey the full impact of crime as technical report is designed to the probabilities of being victimized at it affects people. No one would express shed light on this question. the various ages that constitute a life- his or her concern by saying, "I am ter- Steven R. Schlesinger time. A similar method is used for cal- ribly afraid of being mugged between Director culating the long-term likelihood of January and December of this year." crimes against households. People are worried about the possibility that at some tine in their lives they are rape victims annually, the lifetime Because of the assumptions involved will be robbed or raped or assaulted, or chances of suffering a rape are much in the calculations and because the data their homes will be burglarized. greater. derive from a sample survey, the num- bers presented in this report are Annual rates can provide a false Certainly, annual rates are useful. estimates only; they should be inter- sense of security by masking the real A 1-year period is probably optimum preted only as indications of approxi- impact of crime. Upon hearing that the for researchers, statisticians, and plan- mate magnitude, not as exact mea- homicide rate is about 8 to 10 per ners. It encompasses exactly one cycle sures. Essentially they are calculated 100,000 population, one feels safe; of seasonal variation. It is long enough values of lifetime risk rather than des- after all, 1 chance in 10,000 is not very to smooth out the impact of extraordi- criptions of what has been observed. frightening. Actually, however, at nary events (such as a mass murder in a recent homicide rates about 1 of every small city) and to allow time for col- For the purposes of this report, a 133 Americans will become a murder lecting and analyzing data. On the ulifetime'f begins at age 12. This is dic- victim; for black males the propprtion other hand, a 1-year period is short tated by the data available from the is estimated to be 1 of every 30. enough to show changes and trends in NCS, which does not cover persons Similarly, while 16 out of 10,000 women crime rates. The problem lies with younger than 12 years old. Also, "series" victimizations, those repre- no feasible alternative to assuming con- in table 1. Alternatively, the estimate senting three or more similar incidents stant values. can be restricted to the future, by about which the victim could not pro- taking into account only those victimi- vide detail on each event separately, The lifetime likelihood of victirniza- zations that will be incurred in the have been excluded. If series victimi- tion can be interpreted as an estimate remainder of the person's lifetime, zations were included in the calcula- of a person's entire lifetime experience, starting at his or her current age. This - tions as representing one crime inci- starting in years prior to 1975-84 and eliminates errors due to past changes in dent, the total number of annual violent continuing into the future until the per- annual rates. Estimates using the victimizations would increase by ap- son's death. Such an estimate is subject latter option are presented in table 2; proximately 8%. The exclusion of to two sources of error that result from the values in table 1 constitute such series victimizations, then, results in an assuming constant annual rates: (1) the estimates for persons whose current underestimation to some degree of the probable overestimation of victirniza- age is 12. actual probabilities of victimization, tion rates in past years, and (2) the especially with regard to multiple vic- uncertainty regarding future annual timizations. rates. Estimates of this type are shown Assumption of constant annual rates i Table 1. Lifetime likelihood of victimization The estimates of lifetime likelihood Percent of persons who will be victimized by crime starting at 12 years of age of victimization are derived under the Tnt-1 .".UA assumption that, throughout their life- One or more Number of victimizations times, people in the U.S. have incurred, victimizations One Two Three or more and will continue to incur, criminal victimization at the same annual rates Violent crimes, total* Total population as were observed in the years 1975 Male through 1984. Calculations are based Female upon the average annual victimization White rates for 1975-84 (except that data for Male rape are for 1973-82). Annual victimi- Female zation rates for the population, and for Black any group within the population, are Male assumed to remain constant at the Female average levels recorded for those Violent crimes, completed* years. For example, it is assumed that Total population Male the rate at which white females of age Female 34 become victims of assault was the same in the past and will be the same in White the future as it was in 1975-84. To the Black extent that annual rates were different Rape in the past or may change in the future, Total female White the estimates of lifetime victimization Black are inaccurate. Robbery Total population Of course victimization rates actu- Male ally vary from year to year. Victimiza- Female tion data are not available for years White before the mid-1970s (when the NCS Black was started), but crime rates as repor- Assault ted by UCR indicate that annual vic- Total population timization rates probably were lower Male then than in the period 1975-84. The Female UCR data, however, are not suitable White for estimating lifetime victimization Black because they include only crimes repor- Robbery or asseult ted to the police, and because there is resulting in injury no information about the age, sex, or Total population race of the victims. Personal theft Total population Since 1981, annual victimization Male rates reported by NCS have declined. Female If this trend were to continue, the White Male lifetime victimization probabilities Female would decrease. Black Male 99 5 10 84 Because there is very little usable Female 98 7 15 76 information about past variation in annual victimization rates, and because Note: Data are based on average victimization rates measured by the National Crime Survey for 1975-84, except for rape data, which are based on victimization rates for future changes are unpredictable in 1973-82. All crimes include attempts except where noted. See box on page 4 for crime definitions. both direction and magnitude, there is - Less than 0.5%. * Includes rape, robbery, and assault. Personal victimization rates Table 2. Lifetime likelihood of victimization, by age Based on 1975-84 annual victimiza- Percent of persons who will be victimized by crime starting at various ages tion rates, an estimated 5 out of 6 Total people will be victims of violent crimes One or more Number of victimizations (rape, robbery, and assault), either victimizations One Two Three or more completed or attempted, at least once Violent crimes* during their lives (table 1). (For the Current age precise definitions of the crimes dis- 12 years old , cussed in this report see the "Crime 20 definitions" box on page 4.) About half 30 40 the population will be victimized by 50 violent crime more than once. Males 60 are somewhat more likely to become 7 0 victims than females. Robbery or assault resulting in injury The greatest contrast is in multiple Current age 12 years old victimizations. It is estimated that 20 more than 2 in 5 black males will be 30 victimized by a violent crime three or 40 more times. This is almost double the 50 60 likelihood for black females and more 7 0 than triple the likelihood for white Personal theft females.
Recommended publications
  • Have You Been the Victim of Assault, Robbery, Harassment Or Some Other School-Related Crime?
    Have you been the victim of assault, robbery, harassment or some other school-related crime? If you have, are you: Housed at the UFT and staffed by your colleagues who ➤ Feeling vulnerable, anxious, fearful, angry or understand your school environment and both the pressures depressed? and satisfactions of your job, the Victim Support Program is the only one of its kind in the country. Services include: ➤Confused about procedures and forms? ✓ Individual and group counseling conducted by Frustrated by the paperwork involved in securing your ➤ licensed psychologists, specially trained and medical benefits, claiming line-of-duty injury, or dealing with law enforcement or other agencies? experienced in working with people who are suffering trauma. ➤ Apprehensive about returning to work? ✓ Help with forms and procedures. Call the Victim Support Program. Assistance in dealing with the police department and The Victim Support Program was established in 1989 by ✓ the United Federation of Teachers and the New York City other criminal justice agencies. Board of Education to provide comprehensive, practical ✓ Support as we accompany you to court or the Board’s assistance and psychological support to teachers and other Medical Bureau. school personnel following crimes and violent incidents in Visits to schools following violent incidents to deal school. ✓ with “ripple effect” trauma. Our goal is to help you cope with the aftermath of a criminal incident. We will support you as you strive for recovery after what we know is often a professionally and personally traumatic event. Call us. We can help! (212) 598-6853 Monday-Friday, 10 a.m.- 6 p.m.
    [Show full text]
  • Individual Incident Entry (IIE)
    Individual Incident Entry (IIE) To begin entering a Group A or Group B incident into the state repository, click the “Incident / Arrest” button. Choose Incident or Arrest Click the “Incident Report” button to begin entering Group A incidents or click “Arrest Report” to begin enter Group B incidents into the repository. If you choose Group A, Incident …. Start with selecting either New Case or Get Previous Case Group A, New Case …. 1 2 After clicking on “New Case”: 1) enter the incident number in the box and 2) click “OK” – these steps are mandatory. Group A, Previous Case …. 1 2 After clicking “Get Previous Case”: 1) enter the incident number or partial number in the box and 2) click “Search”. Either one incident or a list of incidents with the partial number will display. Click the “Select” button to choose the appropriate case. Incident data elements …. Optional: Use only if incident date is Mandatory (if known): unknown Date incident occurred (MM/DD/YYYY) (MM/DD/YYYY) Mandatory: Use military 24-hour time; if incident occurs exactly at If an incident needs to be midnight, consider it to have removed from the repository, occurred at the beginning of the “delete” it here. following day. Optional: Physical address or Mandatory: Answer “no” or “yes” only for the latitude/longitude contribute to the offenses of: repository crime mapping feature. All Other Larceny Bribery Burglary/Breaking & Entering Credit Card/ATM Fraud Embezzlement Extortion/Blackmail False Pretenses/Swindle/Confidence Game (Fraud) Impersonation (Fraud) Motor Vehicle Theft Theft From A Building Theft from a Motor Vehicle Robbery Wire Fraud Victim data elements ….
    [Show full text]
  • Lifetime Likelihood of Victimization
    .,. u.s, Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics Lifetime Likelihood of Victimization by Het'bert Koppel people's perception of the meaning of BJS Analyst Mat'ch 1987 annual ra tes with respect to their own The Bureau of Justice Statistics lives. If the Earth revolved around the This report provides estimates of the National Crime Survey provides sun in 180 days, all of our annual crime likelihood that a person will become a annual victimization rates based rates would be halved, but we would not victim of crime during his or her life­ on counts of the number of crimes be safer. time, or that a household will be vic­ reported and not reported to timized during a 20-year pel'iod. This police in the United States. These Calculating lifetime victimization fates contrasts with the conventional use of a rates are based on interviews I-year period in measuring crime and twice a year with about lOl,OOO For this report, lifetime likelihoods criminal victimization. Most promi­ persons in approximately 49,000 of victimization were calculated from nently, the National Crime Survey na tionally representative NCS annual victimi.zation rates and life (NCS) surveys a sample of U.S. house­ households. Those annual ra ces, tables published by the National Center 2 holds and publishes annual victimization while of obvious utility to for Health Statistics. The probability rates, and the FBI's Uniform Crime policymakel's, researchers, and that a person will be victimized at a Reports (UCR) provide annual rates of statisticians, do not convey to particular age basically depends upon crimes reported to the police.
    [Show full text]
  • Youth Crime Drop Youth DECEMBER 2000 URBAN INSTITUTE Justice Policy Center
    R E P O R T December 2000 URBAN INSTITUTE Justice Policy Center Jeffrey A. Butts research for safer communities Youth Crime Drop DECEMBER 2000 URBAN INSTITUTE Justice Policy Center Youth Crime Drop Summary Researchers debate why violent crime in the United States suddenly dropped in the 1990s, but one fact all researchers endorse is that the overall decline in violent crime probably had much to do with falling rates of youth crime. This brief report from the Justice Policy Center examines the recent crime drop and asks how much of the decrease seen between 1995 and 1999 can be attributed to juveniles (under age 18) and older youth (ages 18 to 24). Using the most recent data from the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports, the analysis demonstrates that not only did America’s violent crime drop continue through 1999, falling youth crime accounted for most of the overall decline. The Author Jeffrey A. Butts (Ph.D., University of Michigan) is a senior research associate with the Urban Institute’s Justice Policy Center, where he is involved in research and evaluation projects on Published by policies and programs for youthful offenders, including federally funded evaluations of teen Justice Policy Center courts and juvenile drug courts. Prior to joining the Urban Institute in 1997, he was a senior URBAN INSTITUTE research associate at the National Center for Juvenile Justice. 2100 M Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20037 The Urban Institute Copyright Ó 2000 The Urban Institute is a nonprofit policy research organization established in Washington, D.C., in 1968. The Institute's goals are to sharpen thinking about society's problems and efforts to solve them, improve government decisions and their implementation, and increase citizens' Any opinions expressed are awareness about important public choices.
    [Show full text]
  • The Truth About Voter Fraud 7 Clerical Or Typographical Errors 7 Bad “Matching” 8 Jumping to Conclusions 9 Voter Mistakes 11 VI
    Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law ABOUT THE BRENNAN CENTER FOR JUSTICE The Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law is a non-partisan public policy and law institute that focuses on fundamental issues of democracy and justice. Our work ranges from voting rights to redistricting reform, from access to the courts to presidential power in the fight against terrorism. A sin- gular institution—part think tank, part public interest law firm, part advocacy group—the Brennan Center combines scholarship, legislative and legal advocacy, and communications to win meaningful, measurable change in the public sector. ABOUT THE BRENNAN CENTER’S VOTING RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS PROJECT The Voting Rights and Elections Project works to expand the franchise, to make it as simple as possible for every eligible American to vote, and to ensure that every vote cast is accurately recorded and counted. The Center’s staff provides top-flight legal and policy assistance on a broad range of election administration issues, including voter registration systems, voting technology, voter identification, statewide voter registration list maintenance, and provisional ballots. © 2007. This paper is covered by the Creative Commons “Attribution-No Derivs-NonCommercial” license (see http://creativecommons.org). It may be reproduced in its entirety as long as the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law is credited, a link to the Center’s web page is provided, and no charge is imposed. The paper may not be reproduced in part or in altered form, or if a fee is charged, without the Center’s permission.
    [Show full text]
  • Virginia Model Jury Instructions – Criminal
    Virginia Model Jury Instructions – Criminal Release 20, September 2019 NOTICE TO USERS: THE FOLLOWING SET OF UNANNOTATED MODEL JURY INSTRUCTIONS ARE BEING MADE AVAILABLE WITH THE PERMISSION OF THE PUBLISHER, MATTHEW BENDER & COMPANY, INC. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE FULL ANNOTATED VERSION OF THESE MODEL JURY INSTRUCTIONS IS AVAILABLE FOR PURCHASE FROM MATTHEW BENDER® BY WAY OF THE FOLLOWING LINK: https://store.lexisnexis.com/categories/area-of-practice/criminal-law-procedure- 161/virginia-model-jury-instructions-criminal-skuusSku6572 Matthew Bender is a registered trademark of Matthew Bender & Company, Inc. Instruction No. 2.050 Preliminary Instructions to Jury Members of the jury, the order of the trial of this case will be in four stages: 1. Opening statements 2. Presentation of the evidence 3. Instructions of law 4. Final argument After the conclusion of final argument, I will instruct you concerning your deliberations. You will then go to your room, select a foreperson, deliberate, and arrive at your verdict. Opening Statements First, the Commonwealth's attorney may make an opening statement outlining his or her case. Then the defendant's attorney also may make an opening statement. Neither side is required to do so. Presentation of the Evidence [Second, following the opening statements, the Commonwealth will introduce evidence, after which the defendant then has the right to introduce evidence (but is not required to do so). Rebuttal evidence may then be introduced if appropriate.] [Second, following the opening statements, the evidence will be presented.] Instructions of Law Third, at the conclusion of all evidence, I will instruct you on the law which is to be applied to this case.
    [Show full text]
  • 2015/16 MIDTERM REPORT Dear Friends
    OFFICE OF THE STATE’S ATTORNEY FOR BALTIMORE CITY 2015/16 MIDTERM REPORT Dear Friends, We have reached the halfway point of my first term as State’s Attorney for Baltimore City. Much has changed in Baltimore since the beginning of my administration—we have a new Mayor, a new City Council, a new Police Commissioner, and most importantly, a new approach to fighting crime. When I took office, I promised to repair the broken relationship between the community and law enforcement. I promised to tackle violent crime. And lastly, I promised to reform our criminal justice system using a holistic approach to prosecution. As I look back at all that we’ve accomplished in just two short years, I’m proud to report that we have made significant strides toward fulfilling those three promises: Driving Down Violent Crime • We convicted 433 felony rapists, child molesters and other sexual offenders including 5-time serial rapist Nelson Clifford. • Our Felony Trial Units secured over 5,400 convictions with an average conviction rate of 93 percent. • We secured major convictions in several high profile homicide cases including multiple Public Enemy #1s designated by the Baltimore Police Department (BPD), Bishop Heather Cook who tragically struck and killed Thomas Palermo in 2014, and all of the shooters responsible for the death of one-year-old Carter Scott. • We created a Gun Violence Enforcement Division staffed by prosecutors and BPD detectives co-located at our headquarters that focuses in on gun violence. • We developed the Arrest Alert System, designed by the new Crime Strategies Unit, to alert prosecutors immediately when a targeted individual is arrested for any reason.
    [Show full text]
  • Police Perjury: a Factorial Survey
    The author(s) shown below used Federal funds provided by the U.S. Department of Justice and prepared the following final report: Document Title: Police Perjury: A Factorial Survey Author(s): Michael Oliver Foley Document No.: 181241 Date Received: 04/14/2000 Award Number: 98-IJ-CX-0032 This report has not been published by the U.S. Department of Justice. To provide better customer service, NCJRS has made this Federally- funded grant final report available electronically in addition to traditional paper copies. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. FINAL-FINAL TO NCJRS Police Perjury: A Factorial Survey h4ichael Oliver Foley A dissertation submitted to the Graduate Faculty in Criminal Justice in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. The City University of New York. 2000 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. I... I... , ii 02000 Michael Oliver Foley All Rights Reserved This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • What Does Intent Mean?
    WHAT DOES INTENT MEAN? David Crump* I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................. 1060 II. PROTOTYPICAL EXAMPLES OF INTENT DEFINITIONS......... 1062 A. Intent as “Purpose” ..................................................... 1062 B. Intent as Knowledge, Awareness, or the Like ............ 1063 C. Imprecise Definitions, Including Those Not Requiring Either Purpose or Knowledge .................. 1066 D. Specific Intent: What Does It Mean?.......................... 1068 III. THE AMBIGUITY OF THE INTENT DEFINITIONS.................. 1071 A. Proof of Intent and Its Implications for Defining Intent: Circumstantial Evidence and the Jury ........... 1071 B. The Situations in Which Intent Is Placed in Controversy, and the Range of Rebuttals that May Oppose It................................................................... 1074 IV. WHICH DEFINITIONS OF INTENT SHOULD BE USED FOR WHAT KINDS OF MISCONDUCT?....................................... 1078 V. CONCLUSION .................................................................... 1081 * A.B. Harvard College; J.D. University of Texas School of Law. John B. Neibel Professor of Law, University of Houston Law Center. 1059 1060 HOFSTRA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 38:1059 I. INTRODUCTION Imagine a case featuring a manufacturing shop boss who sent his employees into a toxic work environment. As happens at many job sites, hazardous chemicals unavoidably were nearby, and safety always was a matter of reducing their concentration. This attempted solution, however, may mean that dangerous levels of chemicals remain. But this time, the level of toxicity was far higher than usual. There is strong evidence that the shop boss knew about the danger, at least well enough to have realized that it probably had reached a deadly level, but the shop boss disputes this evidence. The employees all became ill, and one of them has died. The survivors sue in an attempt to recover damages for wrongful death.
    [Show full text]
  • Group “A” Offenses Group “B” Offenses
    Group “A” Offenses Group “B” Offenses Group B’s MUST have an arrest to be NIBRS Reportable NIBRS NIBRS NIBRS OFFENSES CODES NIBRS OFFENSES CODES NIBRS NIBRS Arson 200 Human Trafficking NIBRS OFFENSES CODES NIBRS OFFENSES CODES -Commercial Sex Acts 64A Assault Offenses -Involuntary Servitude 64B Bad Checks 90A Family Offenses, Non- 90F -Aggravated Assault 13A Violent -Simple Assault 13B Kidnapping/Abduction 100 -Intimidation 13C Curfew/Loitering/Vagrancy 90B Liquor Law Violations 90G Larceny/Theft Offenses Violations Bribery 510 -Pocket Picking 23A -Purse Snatching 23B Disorderly Conduct 90C Peeping Tom 90H Burglary/B&E 220 -Shoplifting 23C -Theft from Building 23D Driving Under the Influence 90D Trespassing 90J Counterfeiting/Forgery 250 -Theft from Coin-Operated Machine 23E or Device Drunkenness 90E All Other Offenses 90Z -Theft from Motor Vehicle 23F Destruction/Damage/Vandalism of 290 -Theft of Motor Vehicle Parts or 23G Property Accessories Source: Association of State Uniform Crime Reporting Programs (ASUCRP). Accessed on June 6, 2014. -All Other Larceny 23H Drug/Narcotic Offenses -Drug/Narcotic Violations 35A Motor Vehicle Theft 240 -Drug/Narcotic Equip. Violations 35B Pornography/Obscene Material 370 Embezzlement 270 Prostitution Offenses Extortion/Blackmail 210 -Prostitution 40A -Assisting or Promoting Prostitution 40B Fraud Offenses -Purchasing Prostitution 40C -False Pretenses/Swindle/ Confidence 26A Games -Credit Card/Automatic Teller Machine 26B Robbery 120 Fraud -Impersonation 26C -Welfare Fraud 26D Sex Offenses (Forcible) -Wire Fraud 26E -Forcible Rape 11A -Forcible Sodomy 11B -Sexual Assault with An Object 11C Gambling Offenses -Forcible Fondling 11D -Betting/Wagering 39A Sex Offenses (Non-Forcible) -Operating/Promoting/ Assisting 39B -Incest 36A Gambling -Gambling Equip.
    [Show full text]
  • Police Crime Statistics 2019
    1 The number of the following offences increased: I. General information on police crime statistics II. Crime trends in 2019 – sexual abuse of children by 10.9 % to 13,670 cases (PCS) 1. In general (2018: 12,321 cases) 1. Importance The total number of recorded criminal offences decreased by – computer fraud (sect. 263a PC) by 12.1 % to 100,814 cases Police crime statistics serve to 2.1 % compared to the previous year (2019: 5.436m cases, 2018: (2018: 89,901 cases) 5.556m cases). The total number of recorded criminal offences – dissemination of writings depicting pornography by 51.6 % to – monitor crime and individual types of offences, the size and excluding offences against foreigners’ law decreased by 2.3 % 17,336 cases (2018: 11,435 cases) composition of the circle of suspects and fluctuations in crime compared to the previous year (2019: 5.271m cases, 2018: 5.392m 6. Offences by type as % of total offences (5,436,401 cases) rates, cases). – gather information for law enforcement purposes, for organisa- 2. Clear-up rate (CR) tional planning and decision-making and to The total clear-up rate is 57.5 %/56.2 % (2018: 57.7 %/56.5 %). The offences against theft without – carry out socio-criminological research, criminal police and other offences life aggravating CR for murder and manslaughter is particularly high at 94.0 %, as 19.7% preventive measures. 0.1% circumstances is the case with regard to crimes related to services, especially fare 18.9% 2. Content evasion 98.9 % and social benefits fraud 99.2 %.
    [Show full text]
  • Personal Injury Exclusion: Is the Slashing of Wrists Necessary? Donald J
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by The University of Akron The University of Akron IdeaExchange@UAkron Akron Tax Journal Akron Law Journals 1997 Personal Injury Exclusion: Is the Slashing of Wrists Necessary? Donald J. Zahn Please take a moment to share how this work helps you through this survey. Your feedback will be important as we plan further development of our repository. Follow this and additional works at: https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akrontaxjournal Part of the Tax Law Commons Recommended Citation Zahn, Donald J. (1997) "Personal Injury Exclusion: Is the Slashing of Wrists Necessary?," Akron Tax Journal: Vol. 13 , Article 5. Available at: https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akrontaxjournal/vol13/iss1/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Akron Law Journals at IdeaExchange@UAkron, the institutional repository of The nivU ersity of Akron in Akron, Ohio, USA. It has been accepted for inclusion in Akron Tax Journal by an authorized administrator of IdeaExchange@UAkron. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Zahn: Personal Injury Exclusion PERSONAL INJURY EXCLUSION: IS THE SLASHING OF WRISTS NECESSARY? by DONALD J. ZAHN * "Capital return... in tax accounting,payments received by taxpayer which rep- resent the individual's cost or capitaland hence not taxable as income.' I. INTRODUCTION What do damage awards really represent? Does a damage award stem- ming from a personal injury lawsuit or settlement compensate the individual for lost capabilities? Does a damage award confer a windfall upon that individual? The predecessor statute of section 104(a)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 19862 and the policy behind that statute equate damage awards to the wronged individual as a return of capital.3 As years passed, the courts, as well as Congress refined the return of capital concept, expanding the concept to include within its boundaries all forms of personal injury recoveries.
    [Show full text]