U.S.

Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

John J. Wilson, Acting Administrator June 2000

Characteristics From the Administrator

of Crimes Against The FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting
(UCR) system and the Bureau of Jus-

Juveniles tice Statistics’ National Crime Victim-

ization Survey do not collect informa-
tion about crimes committed against
persons under 12 years of age and
thus do not provide a comprehensive
David Finkelhor and Richard Ormrod picture of juvenile crime victimization.
Designed to replace UCR as the na-
The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) is committed to tional database for crimes reported to
improving the justice system’s response to crimes against children. OJJDP recognizes law enforcement, the FBI’s National
that children are at increased risk for crime victimization. Not only are children the vic- Incident-Based Reporting System
(NIBRS) includes detailed data about
tims of many of the same crimes that victimize adults, they are subject to other crimes,
juvenile victims.
like child abuse and neglect, that are specific to childhood. The impact of these crimes
on young victims can be devastating, and the violent or sexual victimization of children This Bulletin reviews data from the
1997 NIBRS data file that pertain to
can often lead to an intergenerational cycle of violence and abuse. The purpose of juvenile victims, revealing that while
OJJDP’s Crimes Against Children Series is to improve and expand the Nation’s efforts juveniles made up 26 percent in the
to better serve child victims by presenting the latest information about child victimization, population of the 12 States participating
including analyses of crime victimization statistics, studies of child victims and their spe- in NIBRS in 1997, they accounted for
only 12 percent of the reported crime
cial needs, and descriptions of programs and approaches that address these needs.
victims. At the same time, however, 71
percent of all sex crime victims and 38
percent of all kidnaping victims reported
Until recently, it has been difficult to ob- crimes that are committed against juve- to NIBRS were juveniles.
tain a national statistical picture of juve- niles (youth ages 17 and younger) has
nile crime victimization. The Uniform been unavailable. Although the data collected from the
Crime Reporting (UCR) system, which has States participating in NIBRS in 1997
served as the Nation’s primary source of The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s were not necessarily representative of
(FBI’s) developing National Incident- the Nation as a whole, they represent
information about crime since 1929, has
never collected information or reported Based Reporting System (NIBRS), how- a considerable number of reported
ever, does provide detailed statistical crimes and thus constitute an invalu-
crimes by age of victim, with the excep-
tion of homicides. The National Crime information about juvenile victims of re- able resource for crime analysis. As
ported crimes. As more jurisdictions be- the Bulletin’s authors conclude, NIBRS
Victimization Survey (NCVS), the victim
self-report survey conducted by the U.S. gin to participate in NIBRS, the outlines should prove a crucial tool in years to
of a national picture of juvenile crime come for researchers and practitioners
Department of Commerce, Bureau of the
Census on behalf of the U.S. Department victims are beginning to emerge. Even seeking to improve public policies
though NIBRS is far from a comprehen- regarding juvenile crime victims.
of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics for
the past 20 years, has collected data only sive national data system, the fact that
only partial data were available previ- John J. Wilson
on crimes occurring to persons 12 years Acting Administrator
of age or older. Consequently, even such a ously makes it particularly useful to see
what information about juvenile victims
basic fact as the percentage of all violent
can be gleaned from this system.
An analysis of 1997 NIBRS data from ju-
risdictions in 12 States reveals some key Figure 1: Juvenile versus Adult Victimization, by Type of Crime and
findings: Victim’s Age Group
◆ Juveniles make up 12 percent of
All Crimes
all crime victims known to police, in-
cluding 71 percent of all sex crime vic- Sex Offenses*
tims and 38 percent of all kidnaping Kidnaping
victims (figure 1). Aggravated Assault
◆ Simple assault is the most commonly Simple Assault
reported crime against juveniles, con- Robbery
stituting 41 percent of all juvenile vic-
timizations reported to police (figure Homicide
2). Sexual offenses make up 12 percent, Larceny
aggravated assaults 11 percent, and Vandalism
kidnapings 1 percent of all the crimes
against juveniles reported to police. Motor Vehicle Theft
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
◆ Girls predominate as victims of sex
offenses and kidnaping, but boys pre- Percentage of All Victims for Each Type of Crime
dominate as victims of all other crimes.
◆ Children under age 12 make up ap- Juvenile Adult
proximately one-quarter of all juvenile
victims known to police and at least * Sex offenses against juveniles include forcible (64 percent) and nonforcible (7 percent)
one-half of the juvenile victims offenses.
of kidnaping and forcible sex offenses. Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation (1997), National Incident-Based Reporting System
(NIBRS), (12 States only), Computer file, Tabulations undertaken by Crimes against Children
◆ Adult offenders are responsible for 55 Research Center, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation.
percent of juvenile victimizations, most
disproportionately for kidnaping, sex
offenses, and the victimizations of chil-
dren younger than 6 and older than 15. Figure 2: Juvenile Victimization, by Type of Crime
◆ Family perpetrators make up 20 per-
cent of the offenders against children, Simple Assault
but they make up a majority of offend- Larceny
ers against children under age 4 and
Sex Offenses*
are disproportionately represented
among kidnapers and sex offenders. Aggravated Assault
Vandalism
NIBRS Data on Robbery
Juvenile Victims Kidnaping
NIBRS is designed to become the national Motor Vehicle Theft
statistical database on crimes coming to Homicide
the attention of law enforcement agencies. All Others
It collects more detailed information about
individual crimes, victims, perpetrators, 0 10 20 30 40 50
and crime characteristics than is available Percentage of All Crimes Against Juveniles
from the Uniform Crime Reporting pro-
gram, the system it is intended to replace.
* Sex offenses against juveniles include forcible (11 percent) and nonforcible (1 percent)
Because NIBRS data include the age of offenses.
juvenile victims (to the nearest year in Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation (1997), National Incident-Based Reporting System
most cases), victim age is one of the im- (NIBRS), (12 States only), Computer file, Tabulations undertaken by Crimes against Children
portant new variables that NIBRS makes Research Center, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation.
available for the profiling of crime. NIBRS
also provides detailed information on
other victim characteristics, crime type, For example, assault can involve aggra- vidual victims, including theft and vandal-
and victimization circumstances. Data vated assault, simple assault, or intimida- ism, and nonforcible sex offenses such as
are collected on numerous categories of tion, while sexual assault encompasses statutory rape and nonforcible incest. Al-
crime, including homicide, assault, kid- forcible rape, forcible sodomy, sexual as- though homicide is the most serious vio-
naping, robbery, and sexual assault, and sault with an object, and forcible fondling. lent crime and NIBRS collects data about
on specific offenses within each category. NIBRS also collects information on non- homicide, it is not analyzed here. Other
violent crimes that can be linked to indi- more complete and detailed national data

2
sets on this crime are available and have known to police. After that, in decreasing crimes against juveniles receive a lion’s
been analyzed elsewhere (Finkelhor, 1997; order of magnitude, are larceny, sex of- share of public attention, they constitute
Finkelhor and Ormrod, in press). fenses, aggravated assault, vandalism, a minority of the offenses against juve-
robbery, kidnaping, motor vehicle theft, niles that are reported.
In addition to information about the vic- and homicide. There is a set of additional
tim and type of offense, NIBRS reports a Gender disparities among juvenile
property crimes, such as burglary, arson,
wealth of details about the circumstances and fraud, with a small number of juvenile crime victims parallel gender differ-
of an incident. Among other particulars, ences for crime victims in general (fig-
victims recorded in NIBRS. These crimes
incident time and location are recorded, are categorized as “all others” in figure 2, ure 3). Girls outnumber boys as victims
facts about perpetrators are listed, use of sex offenses (82 percent and 18 per-
but, along with homicide, are not dis-
of weapons and weapon types are noted, cussed individually in this Bulletin. cent, respectively) and kidnaping (63
and stolen property is cataloged. Thus, percent and 37 percent, respectively),
NIBRS provides information for a fuller Although sexual assault is the crime with while boys outnumber girls as victims
description of juvenile victimizations the highest percentage of juvenile vic- of robbery (81 percent and 19 percent,
coming to the attention of the police, tims, it is the third most common juve- respectively) and larceny (69 percent
both in terms of victim characteristics nile crime reported, behind simple as- and 31 percent, respectively). Overall,
and incident attributes, than was previ- sault and larceny. This is true, even with boys are somewhat more likely to be
ously available in the UCR.1 female victims, for whom sex offenses victimized than girls (55 percent and
constitute 35 percent of all the reported 45 percent, respectively), which is ap-
victimizations. Therefore, while sex proximately the gender ratio for the
Juvenile and Adult
Victims
Juveniles make up 12 percent of all the The National Incident-Based Reporting System
crime victims reported in the police juris-
dictions providing NIBRS data, notably less The U.S. Department of Justice is re- local agencies is voluntary and incre-
than the percentage of juveniles in both placing its long-established Uniform mental. By 1995, jurisdictions in 9
the total U.S. population (26 percent) and Crime Report (UCR) system with a more States had agencies contributing data;
the States currently represented in NIBRS comprehensive National Incident-Based by 1997, the number was 12, and by the
(also 26 percent). Individual crimes vary a Reporting System (NIBRS). While the end of 1999, jurisdictions in 17 States
great deal in their proportion of juvenile UCR monitors only a limited number of submitted reports, providing coverage
victims (figure 1). For two crimes in par- index crimes and, with the exception of for 11 percent of the Nation’s population
ticular, sex offenses and kidnaping, juve- homicides, gathers few details on each and 9 percent of its crime. Only three
niles make up a quite disproportionate crime event, the NIBRS system collects States (Idaho, Iowa, and South Caro-
portion of the victim population. Juveniles a wide range of information on victims, lina) have participation from all local
constitute smaller proportions of the vic- offenders, and circumstances for a jurisdictions, and only one city with a
tims of the following crime categories: ag- greatly increased variety of offenses. population greater than 500,000 (Austin,
gravated assault (19 percent), simple as- Offenses tracked in NIBRS include vio- TX) is reporting. The crime experiences
sault (19 percent), robbery (14 percent), lent crimes (e.g., homicide, assault, of large urban areas are particularly
homicide (12 percent), larceny (8 percent), rape, robbery), property crimes (e.g., underrepresented. The system, there-
vandalism (4 percent), and motor vehicle theft, arson, vandalism, fraud, embezzle- fore, is not yet nationally representative
theft (2 percent). The low percentage for ment), and crimes against society (e.g., nor do findings represent national trends
motor vehicle theft is obviously related to drug offenses, gambling, prostitution). or national statistics. Nevertheless, the
the small number of juveniles who own Moreover, NIBRS collects information on system is assembling large amounts of
motor vehicles. Overall, juveniles make up multiple victims, multiple offenders, and crime information and providing a rich-
22 percent of violent crime victims and 6 multiple crimes that may be part of the ness of detail about juvenile victimiza-
percent of property crime victims (when same episode. tions previously unavailable. The pat-
individuals rather than institutions are terns and associations these data reveal
Under the new system, as with the old,
identified as victims). are real and represent the experiences
local law enforcement personnel compile
of a large number of youth. For 1997,
In addition to the percentage of juvenile information on crimes coming to their
the 12 participating States reported a
victims for various crimes, NIBRS data attention, and this information is aggre-
total of 1,043,719 crimes against indi-
can also provide a perspective on the gated in turn at the State and national
viduals, with 119,852 occurring against
mix of different kinds of crimes being levels. For a crime to be counted in the
juveniles. Nevertheless, patterns may
reported by juveniles (figure 2). Simple system, it simply needs to be reported
change as more jurisdictions join the
assault is by far the most common crime and investigated. It is not necessary that
system.
committed against juveniles, constituting an incident be cleared or an arrest
41 percent of all offenses against juveniles made, although unfounded reports are More information about NIBRS data
deleted from the record. collection can be found at these Web
sites: (1) www.jrsa.org/ibrrc/, (2)
NIBRS holds great promise, but it is
1
Victims or offenders involved in multiple incidents in www.fbi.gov/ucr/nibrs/manuals/v1all.pdf,
a given year will appear in the NIBRS database more still far from a national system. Its
(3) www.fbi.gov/ucr/nibrs.htm, and (4)
than once, counted as separate victims and offenders. implementation by the FBI began in
www.nibrs.search.org/.
Thus, NIBRS data may overrepresent characteristics of 1988, and participation by States and
victims and offenders who appear more frequently.

3
most common juvenile victimization—
simple assault. Figure 3: Juvenile Victimization, by Type of Crime and Victim’s Gender
Comparisons of figure 1 and figure 3 show
sex offenses as the crime with the highest All Crimes
proportion of juvenile victims and also Sex Offenses
the highest proportion of female victims.
Kidnaping
However, an examination of the gender
and age patterns of specific sex crimes Simple Assault
shows some variability (figure 4). For Vandalism
forcible rape, juveniles constitute about
Aggravated Assault
half of the female victims, whereas for
forcible fondling and incest, they repre- Motor Vehicle Theft
sent close to 80 percent or more. (Statu- Larceny
tory rape is by definition a crime against
juveniles.) For male sexual assault vic- Robbery
tims, there is less variability by type of
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
sex offense. Juveniles account for almost
90 percent of male victims in every type Percentage of Juvenile Victims for Each Type of Crime
of sex crime. Thus, in terms of what
comes to the attention of police in NIBRS Male Female
jurisdictions, male sexual victimization
almost entirely involves juveniles. Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation (1997), National Incident-Based Reporting System
(NIBRS), (12 States only), Computer file, Tabulations undertaken by Crimes against Children
Juvenile crime victims are slightly more
Research Center, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation.
likely to be from minority backgrounds
than adult victims (22 percent and 19
percent, respectively). Compared with sented relative to white juveniles as vic- They are underrepresented as victims of
levels reported for “all crimes,” minority tims of violent crimes, especially aggra- the property crimes of larceny, vandal-
juveniles are particularly overrepre- vated assault and robbery (figure 5). ism, and motor vehicle theft.

The Crimes against Children Research Center

The Crimes against Children Research Center (CCRC) violence, child victimization, and related topics since 1975.
helps young victims of crime by providing high quality Initial funding for CCRC was provided by the U.S. Depart-
research, statistics, and education to the public, policy- ment of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of
makers, law enforcement personnel, and various other Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. CCRC also
child welfare practitioners. The crimes of concern to CCRC draws on funding from grants, individual gifts, revenues
include physical and sexual abuse, abduction, homicide, from publications and programs, and State and Federal
rape, assault, property offenses, and the victimization of sources. CCRC staff include internationally recognized
children on the Internet. CCRC activities include: experts who have published numerous books and articles
concerning the incidence and impact of violence against
◆ Preparing policy reports on key current issues.
children.
◆ Analyzing national and local statistics on crimes
The Center’s current projects include the first national study
against children.
of youth victimization experiences on the Internet; a national
◆ Developing assessment tools for practitioners and evaluation of children’s advocacy centers, multidisciplinary
researchers. agencies that are designed to reduce trauma to children
whose crime victimization is being investigated and pros-
◆ Promoting crime reporting and help-seeking by and ecuted; and the development of a screening tool to help
increased services for crime victims. researchers and practitioners better identify child crime
◆ Evaluating state-of-the-art prevention and intervention victims.
programs. A list of CCRC publications is available online at
◆ Sponsoring conferences, workshops, institutes, and www.unh.edu/ccrc/pubs.html. For further information
courses for practitioners and researchers. contact:

◆ Monitoring and interpreting trends. Crimes against Children Research Center

Family Research Laboratory
The Crimes against Children Research Center was created University of New Hampshire
in 1998 at the University of New Hampshire. It grew out of Durham, NH 03824
and expands upon the work of the Family Research 603–862–1888
Laboratory, which has been devoted to the study of family Internet: www.unh.edu/ccrc/

4
 Crime Victimization
Figure 4: Juvenile Sexual Victimization, by Type of Crime, Victim’s and the Stages of
Gender, and Victim’s Age Group
Childhood
Childhood is a period characterized by
All Sex Offenses dramatic developmental changes, so gen-
eralizations about all juvenile victims
must be tempered by a recognition of the
Forcible Rape effects of age differences. Crimes need to
be analyzed as to how they are distrib-
uted across the various stages of child-
Forcible Sodomy
hood, an exercise elsewhere called “devel-
opmental victimology” (Finkelhor, 1995).
Sexual Assault This Bulletin uses the year-by-year age
With Object categories available in NIBRS to capture
these different patterns.
Forcible Fondling Substantially more crime is reported for
teenagers (youth ages 12 to 17) than for
preteens (youth ages 11 and younger) (fig-
Incest
ure 6). Teenagers account for 78 percent of
all juvenile crime victimizations reported
Statutory Rape by NIBRS jurisdictions. However, it is not
certain to what extent teenagers are actu-
ally more victimized than younger chil-
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 dren. Many self-report studies, including
the NCVS, show uniformly high rates of
Percentage of All Male or Female Victims for Each Type of Crime victimization for younger (ages 12–14) and
older (ages 15–17) teenagers, and some
Male (Juvenile/Adult) Female (Juvenile/Adult)
studies show rates nearly as high for chil-
dren ages 10 and 11 (Finkelhor, 1998).
Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation (1997), National Incident-Based Reporting System Thus, the association between victimiza-
(NIBRS), (12 States only), Computer file, Tabulations undertaken by Crimes against Children
Research Center, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation. tion and age shown in figure 6 may be an
effect of the less frequent reporting of
crimes involving younger victims to the
police. NCVS data clearly show that older
teenagers are more likely than younger
teenagers (and presumably preteens) to
Figure 5: Juvenile Victimization, by Type of Crime and Victim’s Race or report crimes to the police (Finkelhor and
Ethnicity Ormrod, 1999). Combining this with the
finding that overall crimes against juve-
All Crimes niles are less likely to be reported to police
than crimes against adults suggests that
Sex Offenses police data in general and NIBRS data in
Simple Assault particular are not good indicators of the
Aggravated Assault
true burden of crime victimization by age
group, but only the relative proportions of
Robbery these victimizations that police are likely
Kidnaping to encounter.
Larceny From this reported-crime vantage point,
some crimes, like kidnaping, have a rela-
Vandalism
tively large number of preteen victims
Motor Vehicle Theft (57 percent). Others, like robbery, have
relatively few (14 percent). Figure 7 sug-
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
gests that there are three broad patterns
Percentage of Juvenile Victims for Each Type of Crime of police-reported juvenile crime victimiza-
tion that emerge when NIBRS data are ex-
White Black Hispanic (any race) amined by the victim’s age group. There
are crimes that are reported almost exclu-
Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation (1997), National Incident-Based Reporting System sively by teenagers and rarely by preteens
(NIBRS), (12 States only), Computer file, Tabulations undertaken by Crimes against Children (less than 10 percent), what might be
Research Center, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation. called the “teen-exclusive” pattern, motor

5
NIBRS Compared to UCR and NCVS
Since the National Incident-Based Re- The correspondencies found in both of nationally representative, they never-
porting System (NIBRS) does not pro- these comparisons suggest that, while theless exhibit important similarities to
vide national coverage, it is reasonable NIBRS data cannot be assumed to be national crime victimization patterns.
to ask whether the patterns found in its
records are consistent with those of true
national data sets. In particular, it is Table 1: Comparison of Crime Patterns in NIBRS and UCR, 1997
worth considering how closely NIBRS
patterns match equivalent patterns de- Percent Distribution
rived from the Uniform Crime Reporting
Crime Index Offense UCR NIBRS
(UCR) system and National Crime Vic-
timization Survey (NCVS), both of which Homicide 0.1 0.1
are nationally representative. The pres-
Forcible Rape 0.7 0.8
ence of parallel data would suggest
the degree to which the NIBRS juris- Robbery 3.8 1.8
dictions are consistent with overall Aggravated Assault 7.8 7.2
national patterns. Burglary 18.7 18.2
UCR tallies only the total number of Larceny 58.6 64.7
crimes known to police, tracking a se- Motor Vehicle Theft 10.3 7.2
lected set of “index” offenses, including
homicide, forcible rape, robbery, aggra- Notes: UCR tabulations contain “estimations” in some circumstances. UCR counts apply a
vated assault, burglary, larceny, and mo- “hierarchy rule” where only the most serious offense is counted in multiple offense, multiple victim
tor vehicle theft. With the exception of incidents; therefore, NIBRS incidents were evaluated for most serious offense. UCR covers 95
homicide, it assembles no information percent of the U.S. population. In UCR, forcible rape only includes female victims; therefore, male
on the details of crime incidents. While rape victims were excluded from NIBRS counts. UCR offense codes and NIBRS offense codes
are identical.
UCR and NIBRS cannot be compared
on specific victim characteristics, their Sources: Federal Bureau of Investigation (1997), National Incident-Based Reporting System
relative counts can be matched, reveal- (NIBRS), (12 States only), Computer file, Tabulations undertaken by the Crimes against Children
Research Center, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation.
ing that the relative numbers of index
Federal Bureau of Investigation (1997), Uniform Crime Reports for the United States, 1997,
crimes reported in 1997 by UCR and Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation.
NIBRS are generally proportionate
(table 1). The relative underreporting
of robbery and motor vehicle theft by
NIBRS compared to UCR may reflect Table 2: Comparison of Victim Ages in NCVS and NIBRS, 1997
the absence of large urban areas among
the NIBRS reporting jurisdictions. The Percent Distribution
greater relative frequency of larceny in
Offense Type Victim Age Group NCVS NIBRS
NIBRS statistically compensates for the
underreporting of these offenses. All Violent Crime
Juvenile 16 17
Crime victimizations reported in NCVS
also share similarities with patterns
Adult 84 83
Robbery
present in the NIBRS data. NCVS col-
lects detailed information on incidents
Juvenile 13 12
Adult 87 88
and victims, allowing more focused
comparisons with NIBRS than are pos-
Assault
Juvenile 16 16
sible with UCR. For example, a com-
parison of the relative number of adult
Adult 84 84
Forcible Sex
and juvenile victims for violent crimes
known to police yields notable parallels
Juvenile 34 53
Adult 66 47
(table 2). “All violent crime,” “robbery,”
and “assault” have quite similar propor- Notes: NCVS only interviews persons 12 years of age and older; therefore, juveniles younger than
tions of adult and juvenile victims in 12 were excluded from NIBRS counts. NIBRS records only incidents known to police; therefore,
both data sets. Only forcible sex of- only such incidents from NCVS are used.
fenses show differences between the Sources: Federal Bureau of Investigation (1997), National Incident-Based Reporting System
two, with the proportions of adult and (NIBRS), (12 States only), Computer file, Tabulations undertaken by the Crimes against Children
juvenile sex victimizations more equal Research Center, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation.
in NIBRS than NCVS. Bureau of Justice Statistics (1999), National Crime Victimization Survey, 1992–1997, Computer file,
seventh edition, Survey conducted by U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Ann
Arbor, MI: Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research.

6
vehicle theft being the classic case. There
are other crimes, such as kidnaping, that Figure 6: Juvenile Victimization (All Crimes), by Victim’s Age and
are reported across all stages of childhood Victim’s Gender
with both teens and preteens, including
many preschoolers, experiencing substan- 30

Percentage of Juvenile Victims

tial levels of victimization, what might be
called a “transchildhood” pattern. Finally, 25
there are crimes that are reported dispro-
portionately among teens but also to some 20
modest degree (more than 10 percent)
among preteens, what might be called a 15
“teen-predominant” pattern, which would
describe the pattern for simple and aggra-
10
vated assault.
Individual sex crimes can also be charac- 5
terized with these patterns (figure 8).
Statutory rape is a teen-exclusive pat- 0
tern crime. Forcible sodomy, sexual as- <1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
saults with objects, forcible fondling, Victim Age
and incest all appear to be transchild-
hood pattern crimes, with substantial
Male Female All
proportions of victims ages 6 to 11 and
even younger. Forcible rape conforms
to the teen-predominant pattern, with Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation (1997), National Incident-Based Reporting System
(NIBRS), (12 States only), Computer file, Tabulations undertaken by Crimes against Children
approximately 24 percent of victims Research Center, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation.
younger than age 12. Of course, these
patterns are not necessarily illustrative
of the true distribution of crime because
they reflect patterns of reporting and
may also be influenced by the way Figure 7: Juvenile Victimization, by Type of Crime and Victim’s Age Group
crimes are defined or classified.
Kidnaping
Forcible Sex
Perpetrators Against
Aggravated Assault
Juveniles
As figure 9 shows, in incidents where Simple Assault
knowledge of perpetrators allows their Nonforcible Sex
identification as family member, acquain- Robbery
tance, or stranger, most offenders against
juveniles (80 percent) are known to the Larceny
victim (i.e., the offender is a family mem- Vandalism
ber or an acquaintance). Only 11 percent
of the child victimizers in violent crimes Motor Vehicle Theft
are strangers, suggesting that while 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
“stranger danger” may be an important
concept in child safety training, it is far Percentage of Juvenile Victims for Each Type of Crime
from sufficient. There are two violent
crimes with relatively higher percentages Under 6 Years 6–11 Years 12–17 Years
of stranger perpetrators—kidnaping (24
percent) and robbery (52 percent). Kid- Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation (1997), National Incident-Based Reporting System
naping, however, also has a relatively high (NIBRS), (12 States only), Computer file, Tabulations undertaken by Crimes against Children
percentage of family offenders (38 per- Research Center, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation.
cent) as do sex offenses (28 percent).
Despite the stereotypes about stranger
molesters and rapists, sex offenses are imagined. Adults are responsible for 55 crimes to be reported to the police, a
the crimes least likely to involve strang- percent of the juvenile victimizations reality reflected in the NCVS self-reported
ers as perpetrators. known to police and constitute 47 per- data (Finkelhor and Ormrod, 1999).
cent of all identified offenders against
Juveniles are more likely than adults to In the NIBRS jurisdictions, the percentage
juveniles. However, NIBRS data may exag-
be victimized by other juveniles, but their of adult perpetrators is highest for kid-
gerate the percentage of adult offenders,
victimization is much less exclusively at naping and sex offenses against juveniles,
because adult-perpetrated crimes are
the hands of juveniles than might be consistent with the stereotype, but there
more likely than juvenile-perpetrated

7
 is no specific crime, not even simple as-
Figure 8: Juvenile Sexual Victimization, by Type of Crime and Victim’s sault, for which the percentage of adult
Age Group perpetrators (among all identified perpe-
trators) falls below 40 percent (figure 10).
Thus, a substantial portion of the crimes
Forcible Sodomy reported to police involving child victims
Sexual Assault are cases that have the potential to be
With Object processed in the criminal (as opposed
to juvenile) court. Conversely, kidnaping
Forcible Fondling and sex crimes against juveniles have a
certain number of juvenile perpetrators
Incest (12 percent and 36 percent, respectively),
something not necessarily reflected in
Forcible Rape the stereotypes of these crimes.
The characteristics of perpetrators
Statutory Rape change quite dramatically, depending on
the age of the victim (figure 11). For ex-
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
ample, family perpetrators commit most
Percentage of Juvenile Victims for Each Type of Crime of the reported crimes against juveniles
younger than age 5, but this percentage
Under 6 Years 6–11 Years 12–17 Years declines steadily until adolescence, when
family members constitute less than 20
Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation (1997), National Incident-Based Reporting System
percent of all perpetrators. In a nearly
(NIBRS), (12 States only), Computer file, Tabulations undertaken by Crimes against Children mirror opposite trend, the percentage of
Research Center, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation. acquaintance perpetrators rises through-
out childhood, reaching a steady level of
approximately 70 percent for victims ages
12 and older. The percentage of perpetra-
tors who are strangers also rises slightly,
Figure 9: Juvenile Victimization, by Type of Crime and Offender’s but not dramatically, as juvenile victims
Relationship to the Victim grow older and spend more time in public
areas.
Violent Crimes*
In NIBRS incident reports, the ratio of adult
perpetrators to juvenile perpetrators also
Kidnaping
changes with the age of the victim (figure
12). Adult perpetrators predominate for
Sex Offenses children younger than age 7, but during
school years juvenile perpetrators pre-
Simple Assault vail, until the late teenage years. Then, as
juvenile victims come closer to maturity
Aggravated Assault and more of their peers reach adulthood
(age 18), the level of adult perpetration
Robbery rises once again. It may also be that as
juvenile offenders reach adult status, they
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 are more likely to be reported to the po-
lice, a pattern suggested by an analysis of
Percentage of All Offenders Against Juveniles for Each Type of Crime
NCVS data on reporting (Finkelhor and
Ormrod, 1999).
Family Acquaintance Stranger Unidentified
Figure 13 combines the offender’s age (ju-
* Includes nonforcible sex offenses. Property crimes other than robbery are excluded here venile or adult) and relationship to the
because most property crime offenders remain unidentified, and therefore, these offender victim (family, acquaintance, or stranger)
patterns are likely to be unreliable. to show some more specific victimization
patterns for juveniles at different stages
Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation (1997), National Incident-Based Reporting System
(NIBRS), (12 States only), Computer file, Tabulations undertaken by Crimes against Children of childhood. Whereas the percentage of
Research Center, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation. adult family perpetrators (dark green solid
line) shows a steady decline as children
grow older (as suggested in figure 11), the

8
percentage of juvenile family perpetrators
(black dashed line) follows a different pat- Figure 10: Juvenile Victimization, by Type of Crime and Offender’s
tern. Incidents involving juvenile family Age Group
offenders (mostly brothers and sisters)
increase a bit after infancy (while incidents All Crimes
of parent perpetration are declining) and
then remain elevated for victims ages 3 to
Kidnaping
8, after which they, too, subside. Adult and
juvenile acquaintance perpetrators also
show different patterns. Juveniles account Sex Offenses
for most of the increase in incidents com-
mitted by acquaintance perpetrators Aggravated Assault
against children 8 and younger (medium
gray dashed line). During that same time, Robbery
adult acquaintance perpetration—which
is quite high for preschoolers—declines Simple Assault
to a slight degree (medium green solid
line). However, starting in adolescence, 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
offenses committed by juvenile acquain-
tances decline dramatically, while crimes Percentage of All Identified Offenders Against
perpetrated by adult acquaintances dra- Juveniles for Each Type of Crime
matically increase. Offenses committed by
strangers also have different patterns for Adult Juvenile
juvenile and adult perpetrators. Adult
strangers (light green solid line) pose the Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation (1997), National Incident-Based Reporting System
biggest risk to infants and youth in their (NIBRS), (12 States only), Computer file, Tabulations undertaken by Crimes against Children
Research Center, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation.
late teens. Juvenile strangers (light gray
dashed line) pose the greatest peril to vic-
tims in the late elementary school years.
In contrast with their levels in official Figure 11: Juvenile Victimization (All Crimes), by Victim’s Age and
child abuse statistics (U.S. Department
of Health and Human Services’ Children’s
Offender’s Relationship to the Victim
Percentage of All Identified Offenders

Bureau, 1999), female offenders are rela- 80

tively scarce in data from NIBRS jurisdic-
Against Juveniles at Each Age

tions on crimes against juveniles. They 70

constitute 24 percent of the offenders in
60
violent crimes against juveniles, only
slightly higher than their proportion of 50
offenders in crimes against adults. Females
constitute 36 percent of offenders in violent 40
crimes against children younger than age 1 30
and a minority of the offenders committing
sex offenses against juvenile male victims. 20
This suggests that female-perpetrated child
10
abuse is less likely than male-perpetrated
child abuse to be reported to the police 0
by child welfare authorities, a conclusion <1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
suggested by early data from the child Victim Age
welfare system itself (Finkelhor, 1983).
Family Acquaintance Stranger
Preteen Victims
Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation (1997), National Incident-Based Reporting System
One of the biggest opportunities data from (NIBRS), (12 States only), Computer file, Tabulations undertaken by Crimes against Children
NIBRS jurisdictions provide is the possibil- Research Center, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation.
ity of looking at crimes against children
under age 12, a segment of the population
that is not covered by the extensive self-
report crime victimization information
that has been available from the NCVS.

9
 Although children younger than age 12
Figure 12: Juvenile Victimization (All Crimes), by Victim’s Age and represent only a small percentage of all
reported victims (3 percent of all crimes
Offender Age Group
and 6 percent of crimes against persons),
100 their crime profile is unusual (table 3).
Percentage of All Identified Offenders

Sexual assault accounts for almost one-

90
third of this preteen victimization, more
Against Juveniles at Each Age

80 than twice the proportion for older juve-

niles, and family offenders make up one-
70
third of the offenders against this group,
60 twice the proportion for older juveniles.
The familial and sexual nature of the crimes
50
underscores some of the challenges this
40 victim group poses for law enforcement.
Victim and family cooperation with law
30
enforcement is often problematic, as is
20 the need to mitigate victim distress and
trauma.
10
0
<1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Conclusion
If patterns of crime against juveniles in
Victim Age the rest of the country parallel the pat-
terns from the jurisdictions now report-
Juvenile Offender Adult Offender ing to NIBRS, it would appear that crimes
Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation (1997), National Incident-Based Reporting System against juveniles constitute about one-
(NIBRS), (12 States only), Computer file, Tabulations undertaken by Crimes against Children eighth of all the crimes currently re-
Research Center, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation. ported to law enforcement officials. How-
ever, these crimes carry special burdens.
More than 70 percent of reported sex
offenses involve juvenile victims. More-
over, crimes against children involve
Figure 13: Juvenile Victimization (All Crimes), by Victim’s Age, Offender’s special investigatory and prosecutorial
Age Group, and Offender’s Relationship to the Victim challenges. Some of these relate to the
young age of victims—approximately one-
70 quarter of juvenile victims are under age
12. Some of these relate to the intimate
Children With Known Offenders

60
Percentage of Crimes Against

character of the perpetrators, 20 percent

of whom are family and 61 percent of
50 whom are acquaintances.

40 The developing NIBRS database offers

some welcome opportunities for analyz-
30 ing and tracking this special category of
crime victims. For example, it allows
20 analysis of changes in crime victimiza-
tion patterns across the stages of child-
10 hood. It also offers opportunities to look
at special offender categories, such as
0 parents and caretakers (Finkelhor and
<1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Ormrod, in press).
Victim Age The system may be able to highlight some
obvious needs for law enforcement atten-
Adult/Family Adult/Acquaintance Adult/Stranger tion or training. For example, in recent
Juvenile/Family Juvenile/Acquaintance Juvenile/Stranger years, sex offenses have been the major
focus of those concerned with juvenile
Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation (1997), National Incident-Based Reporting System victims, but data from NIBRS jurisdictions
(NIBRS), (12 States only), Computer file, Tabulations undertaken by Crimes against Children reveal that aggravated assaults against
Research Center, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation. juveniles are reported at about the same

10
 Finkelhor, D. 1995. The victimization of
Table 3: Preteen and Teenage Crime Victimization Patterns
children in a developmental perspective.
American Journal of Orthopsychiatry
Victim Age Group 65(2):177–193.
Outcome Preteen (<12 years) Teenage (12–17 years)
Finkelhor, D. 1997. The homicide of chil-
Type of Crime n=21,676 offenses n=58,958 offenses dren and youth: A developmental per-
Aggravated assault 15% 17% spective. In Out of the Darkness: Contem-
porary Research Perspectives on Family
Simple assault 50 65
Violence, edited by G.K. Kantor and J.
Forcible sex offenses 30 12 Jasinski. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publi-
Nonforcible sex offenses 1 2 cations, pp. 17–34.
Kidnaping 3 1
Finkelhor, D. 1998. The responses of pre-
Robbery 1 3 adolescents and adolescents in a national
All offenses 100 100 victimization survey. Journal of Interper-
sonal Violence 13(3):362–382.
Relationship to Offender n=21,068 offenders n=61,362 offenders
Finkelhor, D., and Ormrod, R. 1999. Report-
Family 35% 17%
ing Crimes Against Juveniles. Bulletin. Wash-
Acquaintance 56 70 ington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice,
Stranger 9 13 Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juve-
All offenses 100 100 nile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
Finkelhor, D. and Ormrod, R. In press. Child
Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation (1997), National Incident-Based Reporting System Abuse and Neglect Reported to Police: The
(NIBRS), (12 States only), Computer file, Tabulations undertaken by Crimes against Children NIBRS Perspective. Bulletin. Washington,
Research Center, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation. DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of
Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice
and Delinquency Prevention.
frequency. Little is known about the needs References
of such victims and the handling of their U.S. Department of Health and Human Ser-
victimizations by the criminal and juve- Finkelhor, D. 1983. Removing the child— vices’ Children’s Bureau. 1999. Child Mal-
nile justice systems. In years to come, Prosecuting the offender in cases of treatment 1997: Reports From the States to
NIBRS should prove to be a valuable tool sexual abuse: Evidence from the national the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data
for researchers and practitioners inter- reporting system for child abuse and System. Washington, DC: U.S. Government
ested in improving public policies toward neglect. Child Abuse & Neglect 7:195–205. Printing Office.
juvenile victims.

11
U.S. Department of Justice PRESORTED STANDARD
Office of Justice Programs POSTAGE & FEES PAID
DOJ/OJJDP
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention PERMIT NO. G–91

Washington, DC 20531
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300

Bulletin NCJ 179034

This Bulletin was prepared under grant

number 98–JN–FX–0012 from the Office of Acknowledgments
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention,
U.S. Department of Justice. This Bulletin was prepared by David Finkelhor, Ph.D., Professor of Sociology,
and Director, Crimes against Children Research Center, University of New
Points of view or opinions expressed in this Hampshire, david.finkelhor@unh.edu (e-mail); and Richard Ormrod, Ph.D.,
document are those of the authors and do not Research Scientist, Crimes against Children Research Center, University
necessarily represent the official position or of New Hampshire, rormrod@cisunix.unh.edu (e-mail).
policies of OJJDP or the U.S. Department of
Justice.
Share With Your Colleagues
The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delin-
quency Prevention is a component of the Of- Unless otherwise noted, OJJDP publications are not copyright protected. We
fice of Justice Programs, which also includes encourage you to reproduce this document, share it with your colleagues, and
the Bureau of Justice Assistance, the Bureau reprint it in your newsletter or journal. However, if you reprint, please cite OJJDP
of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of and the authors of this Bulletin. We are also interested in your feedback, such as
Justice, and the Office for Victims of Crime. how you received a copy, how you intend to use the information, and how OJJDP
materials meet your individual or agency needs. Please direct your comments and
questions to:
Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse
Publication Reprint/Feedback
P.O. Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849–6000
800–638–8736
301–519–5600 (fax)
E-Mail: askncjrs@ncjrs.org