The survey determined the propensity of people to report crime to the police, their views on police service when reporting and reasons why those who did not report a crime failed to do so.

A wide range of factors influence whether or not a crime is reported to the police:

perceived seriousness of the crime;

perceptions about the effectiveness of the criminal justice system;

accessibility of the police;

the need to make an insurance claim;

fear of the consequences of reporting;

desire for goods to be recovered or offender to be arrested; and

access to alternative systems of justice.

In Durban (as in other cities surveyed), levels of reporting varied according to crime type. Serious violent crimes (such as murder and hijacking) and property crimes (such as car theft and burglary) were more likely to be reported than crimes like robbery/mugging (figure 3). Of the crime types covered in the survey, the lowest reporting rate was recorded for assault.

Insurance and reporting

The survey enables some assessment of whether the reporting of property crimes could be linked to insurance coverage. Figure 4 shows how many victims had insurance for the property that was stolen from them. The majority of victims of burglary and robbery did not have insurance, while most victims of car theft and hijacking were covered.

An analysis of the numbers of victims with and without insurance who reported the crime showed that for:

burglary — 90% of victims with insurance and 63% without insurance reported the crime to the police;



robbery — 70% of victims with insurance and 45% without insurance reported the crime to the police; and



car theft — 80% of victims with insurance and 86% without insurance reported the crime to the police.

More victims with insurance cover reported burglary and robbery. However, insurance is clearly not the main reason for reporting these crimes to the police, since two-thirds of burglary victims and 86% of car theft victims who did not have insurance nevertheless reported the crime. Of the crime types covered above, insurance seemed to have the greatest impact on the reporting of robbery.

These findings provide some evidence that reporting is driven by a range of factors of which insurance coverage is merely one. Reporting may be driven more by the perceived seriousness of the crime than by the need to replace the lost property. Reasons why victims would consider a crime ‘serious’ should be examined in order to understand reporting patterns better. The degree of seriousness may be associated with the degree of violence used and injuries sustained during the commission of a crime. It may also be determined (in the case of violent crimes) by whether or not the victim and offender are known to each another.

Violence and reporting

The link between how serious victims believe an incident to be, and the degree of violence is evident (and most obvious) in the reporting rates of murder. More murders were reported to the police than any other crime type covered in the survey (figure 3). An analysis of the link between violence and injury, on the one hand, and reporting rates, on the other, for the other crime categories shows that the occurrence of violence and injuries is one factor that makes reporting more likely:

Burglary: The majority (81%) of victims of burglaries that involved violence reported the crime compared to 69% of victims who experienced non-violent burglaries. Similar percentages applied regarding injuries sustained: 84% of victims who were injured in the burglary reported it compared to 71% who were not hurt.



Robbery: Reporting rates were slightly higher among those victims who were subjected to violence (54%) than among those who reported threats only (41%). Similarly, 54% of victims who were injured reported the robbery to the police compared to 42% who were not injured.



Hijacking: Slightly more victims who experienced violence reported the incident to the police (85%) than did those who experienced threats only (71%). A more significant relationship was found between reporting and injuries: 96% of victims who were injured reported the case compared to 72% who were not hurt during the hijacking.



Assault: More victims who experienced violence (43%) reported the crime to the police than those who did not (33%).16 A stronger correlation was found with regard to injuries sustained during assaults: 58% of victims who were seriously injured (requiring hospitalisation) reported to the police compared to only 32% who sustained light injuries or no injuries at all.

Victim-offender relationship and reporting

An analysis of whether the victim’s relationship to the offender influenced the likelihood of reporting showed the following:

Assault: Slightly more victims who knew the offender by name reported the crime to the police (49%) than did those who knew the offender by sight only (36%) or who did not know the offender at all (37%). This trend applied to both male and female victims of assault.



Sexual harassment: More victims who knew their offender by sight only reported the crime to the police (65%) than did those who did not know the offender at all (50%).

These results — which show a greater inclination to report incidents when the offender is known to the victim — do not follow the common expectation that survivors of domestic violence (which would be included under ‘assault’ as defined in this survey) and sexual offences are reluctant to report the incident to the police. The reason for this is that survivors are more inclined to regard crimes committed by strangers as a criminal matter than crimes perpetrated by family, intimate partners, friends and acquaintances.17

The survey results suggest that victims may be more inclined to report the crime if they know the offender because they believe the police will act, and that their case stands a greater chance of succeeding in court because the suspect can be identified.

Victim support and reporting

Apart from the perceived seriousness of the crime, another variable which was found to influence the reporting tendency was whether people sought help after victimisation or not:

Burglary: The majority of victims who sought help (78%) reported the incident, whereas only 41% who had no form of assistance reported the crime to the police.



Assault: More victims who received help (46%) reported the crime compared to only 13% of those who did not seek any assistance.



Robbery: Nearly half of the victims who sought help reported the crime to the police (49%) compared to only 25% of those who did not receive any sort of assistance.

The data showed that those who had sought some kind of assistance after victimisation were more likely to have reported the offence to the police. It should be noted that many of those who sought help said they turned to the police for assistance. This might explain the strong correlation between help-seeking and reporting. Although the data cannot show whether victims reported the crime before or after seeking ‘help’, it is more likely that victims were referred to the police by family members or support agencies, than vice versa.18

These results suggest that victim support, whether formal or informal, may be an important vehicle for encouraging victims to report crime. This is the crucial first step in ensuring that the crime is ultimately resolved.

Perceptions of the police when reporting

When reporting the crime, most victims (62%) described their experience with the police as negative. Respondents explained that the level of investigation was poor, there was little follow-up to report on the progress of the case and the police were slow and incompetent. A few said they were told by the police not to report the offence, that bail had been set too low, or that the perpetrator had been released too soon (issues which are determined by the courts rather than the police).

Of the 38% who said they were satisfied with the way the police dealt with their report, the most common reason given was that the police were professional and competent. (It should be noted that no distinction was made in the survey between the SAPS and the former Durban City Police). Some victims also gave the police the benefit of the doubt, arguing that poor service was due to a lack of resources and the police being overburdened.

Levels of satisfaction varied somewhat depending on the type of offence being reported (figure 5). Survivors of sexual harassment, sexual assault and car theft were more likely to be satisfied with the police than victims of assault, robbery and burglary. This may give some indication of which crime types the police regard as more serious — and thus provide a better service to victims when these are reported. However, this would not explain why so few people reporting a murder in their immediate household were satisfied (only 38%).

General perceptions of policing in Durban

All respondents (victims and non-victims) were asked whether they thought the police were doing a "good job at controlling crime" and why.

Just over half (54%) said the police were not successful in controlling crime, while 28% believed the police were doing a good job and the remaining 20% were unsure. Those who were dissatisfied with policing said the services were inadequate and slow, that the police treated them badly and that they were corrupt (figure 6). Those who believed the police were doing a good job at controlling crime said the service was professional.

Views of policing, however, were not uniform across the Durban metropolitan area. The survey revealed differences of opinion across race and residential area:

White respondents were more likely to be satisfied with police performance than respondents from other race groups. Asian respondents, followed by African respondents were least likely to be satisfied (figure 7).

Residents of the inner city were most likely to have thought the police were controlling crime. Those living in Durban’s informal settlements were least satisfied (figure 8).

These views provide some indication that the quality of policing is better in the wealthier parts of the city, which are also those areas mainly inhabited by white residents. The more positive opinions recorded among inner city residents could be attributed to the presence of the former Durban City Police in these parts of the city. The large proportion of respondents from the suburbs who said the police were performing poorly (figure 8) is probably due to the fact that most Asians in Durban reside in areas classified as ‘suburbs’ in the survey. Figure 7 shows that a majority of Asians thought the police were doing a poor job at controlling crime.