Crime rates
I got sent this chart, and found it interesting. The high level of Maori offending is well known. What I hadn't known previously was the vast difference between Asian and Indian offending. Often these are lumped together, but in this case I presume Asian has been defined to exclude Indian.
The Asian crime rate is under one third of the European crime rate, while the Indian rate is almost twice as high as the European rate, and five times higher than the Asian rate.
Of course the vast majority of all ethnic groups are law abiding. But the differences between Asian and Indian rates are worthy of analysis and explanation. In the category of sexual assaults and related offences, the rates per 100,000 are: Maori 59
Indian 57
Pasifika 44
European 22
Asian 8
I would not have thought, prior to being sent these charts, that the Indian sexual offending rate was almost the same as Maori, and higher than Pasifika. Now again 57 out of 100,000 means 99,943 are not. So the data isn't a reason to stigmatise, but it is worth asking what can be done to lower these rates.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
16 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Mushroom murder-accused denies 'wild goose chase' about grocer
Erin Patterson has been accused of sending health authorities on a "wild goose chase" to track down the shop where she claimed to have bought dried mushrooms used in a deadly lunch. Crown prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC on Wednesday continued her cross-examination of Patterson by asking about the origins of mushrooms contained in the beef Wellingtons she served. The 50-year-old's former in-laws Don and Gail Patterson, both 70, and Gail's sister Heather Wilkinson, 66, died after consuming the meal, while Heather's husband Ian became seriously ill but survived. Patterson has pleaded not guilty to three charges of murder and one attempted murder charge. She denies deliberately poisoning her lunch guests on July 29, 2023 when she served them the death cap mushroom-laced dishes. The mushroom cook agreed the first time she mentioned dried mushrooms being in the meal was in a call with her former brother-in-law Matthew Patterson while she was in hospital, when he asked where the ingredients had come from. "I said possibly the Oakleigh area," she told the court. Patterson was pointed to evidence from doctors and others who suggested she told them she bought the mushrooms in Oakleigh, Clayton or Glen Waverley, all suburbs in east Melbourne. She was also shown texts between her and Department of Health manager Sally Ann Atkinson in which she described the mushroom packaging. Patterson agreed with the prosecutor that the mushroom packaging did not look professional, was in a small snack-sized bag that was not resealable and didn't have a printed label. "You gave detailed (recollection of the) packaging even though you couldn't give details about the store," Dr Rogers said. "Correct," Patterson responded. "You wanted it to sound like they were not commercially produced mushrooms," the prosecutor continued. "Incorrect," the accused replied. Dr Rogers suggested Patterson used the information to make her story about buying death cap mushrooms from an Asian grocer "seem more believable". But the accused killer replied she didn't remember saying she bought death caps from an Asian grocer. "I suggest you were deliberately vague about suburbs when asked about it," Dr Rogers said. "Incorrect," Patterson responded. "Your story kept changing," the prosecutor said. "I don't think it did," Patterson replied. In a police interview, Patterson said she had been "very, very helpful" with the health department during their investigation. But Dr Rogers suggested Patterson wasn't "very, very helpful to the department". "You sent them on a wild goose chase to find this Asian grocer," the prosecutor said. "Incorrect," Patterson replied. Patterson was also asked about leftovers she fed her children a day after the fatal lunch, telling the court: "I was pretty clear it was the meal minus the mushrooms and pastry, so not the same." Dr Rogers queried why she fed her kids the food despite suspecting the meal made Don and Gail sick. "I didn't know or suspect that," Patterson replied. "You told the lie about feeding leftovers to your children because it gave you some distance from a deliberate poisoning," Dr Rogers suggested. "I don't see how it could, but I disagree anyway," Patterson responded. The trial continues.
Kiwiblog
3 days ago
- Kiwiblog
Crime rates
I got sent this chart, and found it interesting. The high level of Maori offending is well known. What I hadn't known previously was the vast difference between Asian and Indian offending. Often these are lumped together, but in this case I presume Asian has been defined to exclude Indian. The Asian crime rate is under one third of the European crime rate, while the Indian rate is almost twice as high as the European rate, and five times higher than the Asian rate. Of course the vast majority of all ethnic groups are law abiding. But the differences between Asian and Indian rates are worthy of analysis and explanation. In the category of sexual assaults and related offences, the rates per 100,000 are: Maori 59 Indian 57 Pasifika 44 European 22 Asian 8 I would not have thought, prior to being sent these charts, that the Indian sexual offending rate was almost the same as Maori, and higher than Pasifika. Now again 57 out of 100,000 means 99,943 are not. So the data isn't a reason to stigmatise, but it is worth asking what can be done to lower these rates.
Scoop
7 days ago
- Scoop
Expert Commentary: NZ Privacy Commissioner Provides Clarity For Retailers On Facial Recognition Technology
Nicholas Dynon is Brand Strategy & Innovation Director at Optic Security Group. He is a certified security risk professional and counter terrorism practitioner. 'The inquiry report found that the live facial recognition technology (FRT) model trialed by Foodstuffs North Island Limited (FSNI) in 25 of its supermarkets complied with New Zealand's Privacy Act. While the Privacy Commissioner assessed the level of privacy intrusion as high due to every shopper's face data being collected, the privacy safeguards in the trial reduced it to an acceptable level. 'The outcome has been met with strong and immediate political support, with Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith lauding the result as 'great news' and stating that he now expects the Ministerial Advisory Group for Victims of Retail Crime to 'continue to look at this technology as an option to be used more widely". 'The outcome also provides some much-needed clarity for retailers – and other organisations – who have held back on considering FRT as a potential solution to their security issues due to the fear of ending up on the wrong side of privacy legislation. But it's not a green light. 'The Privacy Commissioner has highlighted several changes that FSNI needs to make in order to make its trial permanent or to expand it to more stores. The Office of the Privacy Commissioner (OPC) has also set out nine key expectations for organisations that are considering using FRT. 'Compliant FRT deployment is about more than just the technology itself. Factors such as identifying and assessing the specific purpose for which you want to use FRT, maintaining watchlists, protecting the system from misuse and information breach, communications to customers, staffing and training, customer interventions, incident response, managing enquiries and complaints, and maintaining and monitoring the system, are all critical to compliance – and they involve significant research, planning, testing, and careful implementation. "At the same time, retailers should be aware that the results of an OPC survey published just weeks ago demonstrate that many New Zealanders are not supportive of the use of FRT in retail stores. 'The survey of over 1,200 New Zealanders found that 41% of respondents are 'concerned' or 'very concerned' about the use of facial recognition technology (FRT) in retail stores to identify individuals. A total of 25% are neutral on the topic, 31% are either not so concerned or not concerned at all, and 3% are unsure. 49% of Maori respondents indicated concern over FRT in retail. 'For retailers considering FRT, this means not only ensuring all the privacy legislation boxes are ticked but also taking a step back and asking whether FRT is the most appropriate solution to your security problem. 'Inappropriate FRT deployment exposes an organisation not only to legal risk but also to significant reputational risk. Engaging with trusted experts to understand the privacy dimensions and factors influencing social licence to operate this emerging technology are critical."
