Police recorded hate crime - characteristics: updated study

Characteristics of hate crimes recorded in 2020-21

Methods

Two systems were used to review the characteristics of hate crimes recorded by the police in Scotland – the Interim Vulnerable Persons Database (IVPD) and the Crime Management Systems (CMSs).

The IVPD is an incident based database which was introduced in 2013, and became a national system in 2014. Police Scotland use the IVPD to record information about individuals who are, or are perceived to be, experiencing some form of adversity and/or situational vulnerability which may impact on their current or future wellbeing. This is the only national system that can currently identify the totality of hate crime recorded by the police in Scotland.

In addition to the IVPD, hate crimes will also be recorded on a local CMS. The CMS is used to actively manage the investigation of recorded crime, and like the IVPD, it also holds details of the people involved. As highlighted in the recording practices section the process of recording crimes through a CMS is governed by the Scottish Crime Recording Standard (SCRS).

Given the established governance arrangements for the recording of crime through the CMSs, these were chosen as the basis for this research, rather than a review of records held within the IVPD. However, at present, Police Scotland use a number of local CMSs, which were inherited from the previous legacy police forces. As such the research methodology was designed to use the national coverage of the IVPD to identify all hate crimes recorded in Scotland. From this, a sample of crime records was randomly drawn, with Scottish Government statisticians then using the associated reference numbers to locate each hate crime within a local CMS. These cases were then reviewed, with information recorded about their characteristics.

Using the methodology outlined above, a total of 2,000 hate aggravated crime records were sampled from 2020-21, representing 30% of all cases recorded by the police during this year. The proportion sampled varied across the five hate aggravators, ranging from 21% for Race to 100% (or all records identified within the IVPD) for Transgender identity (Table 1). This variation ensured a sufficiently large number of records were reviewed for those aggravations with relatively fewer cases, so as to allow a robust measure of their characteristics to be produced. The sample was also stratified by Police Scotland division, ensuring the prevalence of hate crime across the 13 geographic areas covered by those divisions was reflected within the research.

Information was recorded about the circumstances of each crime and the characteristics of the people involved. No personal information relating to those involved (such as names, dates of birth and addresses) was collected.

With the exception of the Transgender Identity strand, this research is based on a sample of police records (rather than all records), therefore the percentages (proportions) presented in this report are estimates. The true value may differ slightly from the findings presented below due to sampling error. As such, users should treat the following analysis as a broad indication of the characteristics of hate crime, rather than as an exact measure. Figures are presented at the national level, as sample sizes are insufficient to provide robust estimates at local authority and individual police division level.

There are several methods of calculating an average, in this report the median is used to present the average age of victims and perpetrators (i.e. the age at which half the individuals are older and half are younger). The mean measure of average age can be more influenced by values at the upper end of the distribution (i.e. the older ages) and may not be truly representative of the average age. By taking the middle value of the data, after sorting in ascending order, the median avoids this issue and is consequently considered a better indication of a typical ‘average’ age.

Table 1. Proportion of crimes sampled by hate aggravation, 2020-21.

Aggravation	Sample	Population [notes 1 and 2]	% of population sampled
All hate crimes	2,000	6,698	30%
Disability	300	433	69%
Race	900	4,303	21%
Religion	300	572	52%
Sexual orientation	450	1,675	27%
Transgender identity	113	113	100%

Notes for Table 1.

Note 1. These figures are accurate as of September 2022, when the data was originally extracted from the IVPD. As this is a live operational system these figures will not match those presented in the Tables.

Note 2. The combined total for the individual aggravators exceeds the total of hate aggravated crimes recorded by the police as any individual crime can include the recording of one or more aggravators.

Discussion of relative sample weights for summary analysis

As shown in Table 1, there is some variation in the proportion of records sampled across the five aggravators. As such some aggravators made up a greater proportion of the sample than they do the overall population (for example disability aggravated crimes - which are 15% of the sample and 6% of all hate crimes). Others make up a smaller proportion of the sample than they do the population (with racially aggravated crimes making up 45% of the sample and 64% of all hate crimes).

The majority of the findings presented in this report focus on discussing each of the five hate aggravators in isolation, rather than making any direct comparisons between them. For these findings the variation in the proportion of records sampled by aggravation has no effect on the results. However some sections look at hate crime as a whole (i.e. across all aggravators). This includes the Summary of recorded hate crimes, Summary of hate crimes with a non-police officer victim and Police officer victims of hate crime sections.

Due to the difference between the proportions of each aggravator within the sample and their proportions within the overall population of hate crime, it was necessary to apply a weighted adjustment to the findings in these sections. This was carried out according to the proportion of each respective aggravator within the overall population of hate crime. Continuing with the illustration above, it means that each sampled race aggravated crime was given a greater weight in the analysis looking at hate crime as a whole, and each sampled disability aggravated crime was given a lower weight. This means that when presenting findings on hate crime as a whole it is reflective of the distribution of aggravators within it.

Categorisation of the ethnicity of victims and perpetrators

When reviewing each crime record, the available information on the ethnicity of victims and perpetrators was collected and, where possible, assigned to one of the 20 census codes as defined in Scotland’s Census.

Records excluded from the analysis

Just over one in ten crimes (12%) in the original sample of 2,000 hate crimes has been excluded from the analysis presented below. This includes cases where (i) analysts were unable to locate a hate crime in the CMS due to issues with the crime reference recorded within the IVPD, (ii) a crime did not appear to include a hate element (in some cases this may also have been an issue with the crime reference), and (iii) on further investigation by the police, the hate crime had been re-designated to not constitute a crime or offence.

Further analysis

This report focuses on providing a high level summary of the characteristics of hate crime in Scotland. Further analysis and breakdowns are available at request from: justice_analysts@gov.scot.

Summary of recorded hate crimes

While there are important distinctions across the five hate aggravators in terms of their characteristics, including who was involved, where they happened, and how they were reported to the police, there are some general statements that can be made about hate crime as a whole.

In a majority of hate crimes, the victim was a male or all male group. This was also the case for race, religion and sexual orientation aggravated hate crime, whereas for transgender identity aggravated crimes, the majority of victims were female or an all female group.

In a majority of hate crimes, the perpetrators (where identified) were also male or an all male group, and this was the case for each of the five aggravators.

We estimate from the research that there were 5,790 hate crimes in 2020-21 that had a person-based victim, this is a slight increase (+220) from the previous research conducted in 2018-19, which estimated 5,570 person based victims. Additionally, a relatively smaller number (170) either had no victim or the victim was a business or organisation.

For those 5,790 hate crimes that were estimated to have a person-based victim, one quarter (or 1,450) had a victim who was a police officer in the line of duty. The remaining 4,340 hate crimes had a victim who was not a police officer. Between 2018-19 and 2020-21, the estimated number of crimes with a police victim increased by 34%, from 1,080 to 1,450.

Given the relatively high proportion of hate crimes with a police officer victim, the characteristics of these cases have been detailed separately in the second section below, with the first section focusing on the characteristics of those crimes where the victim was not a police officer.

As noted on page 10, police recorded hate crime only covers those cases that come to the attention of the police. Given it is likely that all (or almost all) hate crime targeted against the police will be included within the measure of recorded hate crime, the estimated one in four cases with a police officer victim will likely be higher than the equivalent measure for all hate crime committed in Scotland (i.e. including those cases that don’t get reported).

Estimated volume of hate crimes recorded by the police in 2020-21

• 1,080 Police Victims in 2018-19
• 1,450 Police Victims in 2020-21 (+34%)
• 4,490 victims who were individuals (non-police victim) in 2018-19
• 4,340 victims who were individuals (non-police victim) in 2020-21

Non-police officer victims of hate crime

The information presented in this section includes only those cases where the victim was not a police officer. Information on the characteristics of cases where the victim was a police officer is provided in the Police officer victims of hate crimes section.

Where information is presented on the characteristics of victims, this only includes those cases that had a person-based victim, and excludes those which either had no victim or the victim was a business or organisation. Such cases are however included in the discussion of all other factors, such as the characteristics of the perpetrator, location of the crime and how it was reported to the police.

All tables referred to throughout the bulletin are available in the Supporting documents Excel workbook.

Summary of hate crimes with a non-police officer victim

What proportion of victims were working at the time of the crime?

Across the five hate aggravators, just under a third (31%) of these crimes involved a victim who experienced the incident at their place of work or whilst undertaking duties as part of their occupation (Table 8). This figure is relatively higher than for all crime committed in Scotland, albeit it only covers hate crimes reported to the police. The Scottish Crime & Justice Survey suggested that 21% of crimes (including both those reported to the police and not reported) happened to people at or near their place of work in 2019-20. Of the 31% of hate crime victims who were working, two thirds (65%) were working in Retail or other service industries, which equates to one in five (20%) victims of hate crimes with a person-based victim.

What was the gender of victims, and how did they know the perpetrator?

The majority of hate crime involved a male or all male group of victims (59%), and over a third involved a female or all female group (36%) (Table 9). Three percent of crimes involved a mixed group.

In 45% of crimes the victim did not know the perpetrator, whilst in a further 38% of cases, the perpetrator was an acquaintance [note 1] of the victim (Table 10).

Where did the crimes happen and how were they reported to the police?

Just under a third of crimes (31%) occurred in an Open space and just over a quarter (26%) in or around a Dwelling. A further 17% of crimes occurred in a retail or hospitality setting (Table 11).

In 14% of crimes the victim and perpetrator were not in the same location (including the use of phone calls and cyber-enabled technologies). Less than one-in-ten hate crimes (9%) specifically involved the use of cyber-enabled technologies (Table 12).

The vast majority of hate crimes were reported to the police by the victim (88%). This includes 7% of cases which were reported by someone on behalf of the victim - including parents, teachers, carers and employers. In 8% of cases, the crime was reported by a witness (Table 13).

What was the gender and age of the perpetrators?

The majority of hate crimes, where an individual was identified, had a male or all male group of perpetrators, representing 72% of such crimes.

Around one quarter of crimes (26%) had a female or all female group of perpetrators, and a further 2% involved a mixed group of perpetrators (Table 14).

The median age of a perpetrator was 33 years old.

What has changed since the previous study into the characteristics of hate crime in 2018-19?

Both of the studies (2018-19 and 2020-21) are based on a sample of hate crime records. In order to determine whether any changes were not due to random chance (as a result of drawing the sample) each result was tested for statistical significance.

It should also be noted that where a statistically significant result was found, there are only two data points available for comparison. As such it cannot be concluded whether any detected changes would be indicative of a longer term trend, or just random year-to-year variations within the data. In addition to this, and as discussed further on page 10, it is also possible that the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and the associated measures put in place to restrict social contact may have had at least a partial impact on the type and volume of hate crime recorded in 2020-21 compared to the earlier study in 2018-19.

For all recorded hate crimes where the victim was not a police officer, the overall picture remains broadly similar to before. However, there have been some changes detected in both the circumstances of the crimes and of the people involved.

Compared to 2018-19, a smaller proportion of victims were working in a retail or other service industry in 2020-21 (dropping from 24% to 20%).

There were multiple changes found in where the crimes took place. A higher proportion of crimes took place in or around a dwelling (26% in 2020-21 vs 20% in 2018-19), and also more crimes occurred where the perpetrator and victim were not in the same place (14% in 2020-21 vs 11% in 2018-19). The proportion of crimes that made specific use of cyber-enabled technology is unchanged.

A smaller proportion of crimes took place on public transport (1% in 2020-21 vs 3% in 2018-19) and also in a retail or hospitality setting (17% in 2020-21 vs 22% in 2018-19).

How the crime was reported also changed between the two studies. In 2020-21 a higher proportion were reported by the victim, or on behalf of the victim (88% vs 84% in 2018-19), while a smaller proportion were reported by a witness (8% vs 12% in 2018-19).

2020-21 saw an increase in the proportion of victims who were females or part of an all female group (up to 36% from 32% in 2018-19).

Notes for Non-police officer victims of hate crime:

Note 1. Acquaintances include individuals who have a prior relationship with the victim but are not a family member, a partner or ex-partner for example a friend, neighbour, work colleague or classmate.

Disability aggravated crime

This section looks at hate crimes that had a race aggravator attached, including cases where there was more than one aggravator present. It should also be noted that all information presented in this section does not include incidents where the victim was a police officer in the line of duty, details on these cases are available in the section on Police Officer victims.

All tables referred to throughout the bulletin are available in the Supporting documents Excel workbook.

What proportion of victims were working at the time of the crime?

The vast majority of disability aggravated hate crime victims (93%) did not experience the incident whilst at a place of work, or whilst undertaking duties as part of an occupation (Table 8).

What was the age and gender of victims, and how did they know the perpetrator?

Victims of disability aggravated hate crimes were evenly split between male or all male groups (46%) and female or all female groups (48%). A further 5% of victims were part of a mixed group.

The average age of a victim was 32 years old (Table 9).

In over half of these crimes (55%), the victim and perpetrator were acquaintances [note 1], with a further 26% involving a perpetrator not known to the victim (Table 10).

What was the ethnicity of victims?

Where information was available on the ethnicity of victims, just under four fifths (or 78%) of disability aggravated hate crimes had a victim of White Scottish ethnicity (Table 15). The second largest ethnic group was Other White British (10% of victims). This was followed by Other White and Other Asian (4% and 3% respectively). All other ethnic groups accounted for the remaining 5% of victims.

Where did the crimes happen and how were they reported to the police?

The most common locations for disability aggravated hate crimes were in and around a Dwelling, and an Open space (36% and 27% respectively) (Table 11). In 24% of crimes, the victim and the perpetrator were not in the same location. Just under one-in-five disability aggravated hate crimes (18%) specifically involved the use of cyber-enabled technologies (Table 12).

The vast majority of disability aggravated hate crimes were reported to the police by the victim (91%) (Table 13). This breaks down into 79% reported by the victim directly and 12% which were reported by someone on behalf of the victim (including parents, teachers, carers or employers). In 8% of cases, the crime was reported by a witness.

What was the age, gender and ethnicity of perpetrators?

The majority of disability aggravated hate crimes had a male or all male group of perpetrators, representing over two-thirds (70%) of crimes (Table 14). 28% of crimes had a female or all female group of perpetrators.

The average age of a perpetrator was 27 years old.

Where information was available on the ethnicity of perpetrators, over four in five (or 84%) of disability aggravated hate crimes had a perpetrator of White Scottish ethnicity (Table 16). The second largest ethnic group was Other White British (11% of perpetrators). All other ethnic groups accounted for the remaining 5% of perpetrators.

When committing disability aggravated hate crimes, what prejudices were shown by perpetrators?

The information provided below on the prejudice shown by the perpetrator is most often based on the words used or actions taken during the crime. A person does not need to be a member of the social group being targeted by the perpetrator to be the victim of a hate crime and their identity or other characteristics do not need to align with the perpetrator’s perceptions. A perpetrator can also show prejudice against multiple social groups as part of the same crime.

Nearly three quarters (73%) of disability aggravated hate crimes involved the perpetrator showing prejudice towards those with a learning disability, which equates to an estimated 210 crimes (Table 17). A further 15% of crimes involved the perpetrator showing prejudice towards those with a physical disability (around 40 crimes). In just over one in ten crimes (12%), the perpetrator’s actions didn’t include remarks directed at any specific disability, equating to around 30 crimes.

What has changed from the previous deep dive in 2018-19?

Police recorded hate crimes occurring in the year 2018-19 were also previously examined and analysed in the same way. In both cases it was not feasible to gather details on every police recorded hate crime, so a sample of the records was taken. In order to determine that any changes were not due to random chance each result was tested for statistical significance.

It should also be noted that where a statistically significant result was found, there is only a total of two data points available for comparison. It remains unclear whether any detected changes would be indicative of a trend, or just random year to year variations within the data.

For disability aggravated hate crimes, the overall picture remains broadly similar to how it was previously. However, there has been some changes in both the circumstances of these crimes and the people involved.

The proportion of disability aggravated hate crimes that occurred in the public sector [note 2] decreased from 14% of crimes in 2018-19 to 5% in 2020-21.

A higher proportion of crimes were reported by the victim or on behalf of the victim. In 2020-21, 91% of crimes were reported by these means, compared to 79% in 2018-19. Fewer crimes were reported by a witness, 8% in 2020-21 down from 16% in 2018-19.

More detailed analysis of the prejudices shown by perpetrators for disability aggravated hate crime

Where prejudice was shown towards those with a learning disability

In nearly three quarters of disability aggravated hate crimes, the perpetrator showed a prejudice towards those with a Learning disability (73%). This equates to around 210 crimes recorded by the police in 2020-21.

It was found that victims were split evenly between males and females, and the average age of a victim was 31 years old. The majority of perpetrators (70%) were male or part of an all male group, and the average age of a perpetrator was 27.

In the majority of crimes, the victim and the perpetrator were acquaintances (57%) and in a further quarter of crimes they were strangers.

Only 6% of victims were working at the time of the incident.

Notes for disability aggravated hate crimes:

Note 1. Acquaintances include individuals who have a prior relationship with the victim but are not a family member, a partner or ex-partner for example a friend, neighbour, work colleague or classmate.

Note 2. Public sector includes places such as educational facilities, medical facilities, prisons and care homes.

Race aggravated crime

This section looks at hate crimes that had a race aggravator attached, including cases where there was more than one aggravator present. It should also be noted that all information presented in this section does not include incidents where the victim was a police officer in the line of duty, details on these cases are available in the section on Police Officer victims.

All tables referred to throughout the bulletin are available in the Supporting documents Excel workbook.

What proportion of victims were working at the time of the crime?

Over a third of racially aggravated hate crime victims (36% of cases) experienced the incident at their place of work or whilst undertaking duties as part of their occupation (Table 8). Additionally, 62% were not at their place of work or undertaking work-related duties. For the remaining 2% it is not known if the victim was working at the time of the incident. Where victims were working, most were in Retail and service related industries, representing 70% of victims in work and 25% of all victims.

What was the age and gender of victims, and how did they know the perpetrator?

The majority of racially aggravated hate crimes had a male or all male group of victims, representing three-fifths (60%) of crimes. The average age of a victim was 35 years old (Table 9).

In half of these crimes (50%), the victim did not know the perpetrator, with a further third (33%) involving a perpetrator who was an acquaintance [note 1](Table 10).

What was the ethnicity of victims?

Where information was available on the ethnicity of victims, almost two-thirds (or 64%) of race aggravated hate crimes had a victim from a visible minority ethnic (non-white) group (Table 18). This compares to 4% of Scotland’s population at the time of the last census in 2011.

Table 18 provides a more detailed breakdown of victims by ethnic group and is available in the ‘Supporting files’. Further analysis on those ethnic groups that feature most frequently within the research is also provided below. Table 19 provides the same information but using broader categorisations of ethnicities.

Where did the crimes happen and how were they reported to the police?

A third of racially aggravated hate crimes (33%) occurred in an Open space, followed by in or around a Dwelling (24%) and a Retail or hospitality setting (20%) (Table 11). In just over one in ten crimes (11%) the victim and perpetrator were not in the same location. This category includes cases that involved the use of cyber-enabled technologies, accounting for 7% of racially aggravated hate crimes (Table 12).

The vast majority of racially aggravated hate crimes were reported to the police by the victim (89%) (Table 13). This breaks down into 81% reported by the victim directly and 7% which were reported by someone on behalf of the victim (including parents, teachers, carers or employers). In 9% of cases, the crime was reported by a witness.

What was the age, gender and ethnicity of perpetrators?

The majority of racially aggravated hate crimes had a male or all male group of perpetrators, representing three-quarters (75%) of crimes (Table 14). The average age of a perpetrator was 33 years old.

Where information was available on the ethnicity of perpetrators, around four in five (or 79%) of racially aggravated hate crimes had a perpetrator of White Scottish ethnicity (Table 18). The second largest ethnic group was Other White British (10% of perpetrators). All other ethnic groups accounted for the remaining 11% of perpetrators.

When committing racially aggravated hate crimes, what prejudices were shown by perpetrators?

The information provided below on the prejudice shown by the perpetrator is most often based on the words used or actions taken during the crime. A person does not need to be a member of the social group being targeted by the perpetrator to be the victim of a hate crime and their identity or other characteristics do not need to align with the perpetrator’s perceptions. A perpetrator can also show prejudice against multiple social groups as part of the same crime.

In 36% of race aggravated hate crimes, the words used or actions taken by the perpetrator suggested an anti-Black prejudice. As noted above, in these crimes the victim does not necessarily need to self-identify as black and in some cases they may have been targeted simply because the perpetrator perceived them to be from a visible minority ethnic (non-white) group.

In 27% of hate crimes the prejudice shown was towards the Pakistani community. In 18% of crimes the perpetrator made general xenophobic remarks not directed at any one group. Table 17 provides a more detailed breakdown of the prejudices shown by perpetrators when committing race-aggravated hate crimes and is available in the ‘Supporting files’.

Notes for Race aggravated hate crimes:

Note 1. Acquaintances include individuals who have a prior relationship with the victim but are not a family member, a partner or ex-partner for example a friend, neighbour, work colleague or classmate.

More detailed analysis of victim ethnicity for race aggravated hate crime

African, Caribbean or Black

An estimated 18% of racially aggravated hate crimes had a victim of African, Caribbean or Black ethnicity (compared to 1% of the population in the 2011 census). This equates to around 550 crimes recorded by the police in 2020-21.

61% of victims were male or part of an all male group and the average age of victims was 36 years old. Nearly three quarters (74%) of perpetrators were male, and the their average age was 33 years old.

Just over half (52%) of perpetrators were not known to the victim, while a third (33%) were an acquaintance of the victim. A further 11% of victims had a professional relationship with the perpetrator.

It was found that 27% of crimes occurred in or around an open space, and just under a quarter (23%) occurred in a dwelling. Just over a third (34%) of victims were working at the time of the incident.

The vast majority of crimes showed anti-Black prejudice (89%), and 16% showed general xenophobia not directed at one specific group. Since a perpetrator can exhibit more than one form of prejudice in the course of committing a crime, totals may add up to over 100%.

Polish or Other White

An estimated 17% of racially aggravated hate crimes had a victim of Polish or Other White ethnicity (compared to 3% of the population in the 2011 census) [note 1]. This equates to around 540 crimes recorded by the police in 2020-21.

Victims were split evenly between males and females, while the average age of victims was 37 years old. A majority of perpetrators were male or part of an all male group (60%) and the average age of a perpetrator was 35.

Just over half (53%) of perpetrators were an acquaintance of the victim, while just over a third (36%) were unknown to the victim.

43% of crimes occurred in or around a dwelling, and just over a third (36%) occurred in an open space. A fifth (20%) of victims were working at the time of the crime.

In 52% of these crimes, the prejudice shown by the perpetrator was against those from the Polish community, and in 33% of cases the prejudice took the form of general xenophobia (i.e. without reference to any specific group).

Pakistani, Pakistani Scottish or Pakistani British

An estimated 17% of racially aggravated hate crimes had a victim of Pakistani, Pakistani Scottish or Pakistani British ethnicity (compared to 1% of the population in the 2011 census). This equates to around 530 crimes recorded by the police in 2020-21.

The vast majority of victims were male or part of an all male group (84%) and the average age of a victim was 35 years old. Four out of five perpetrators were male (80%), and the average age was 31.

Just over 42% of crimes occurred in a retail or service industry setting, a further 28% of crimes occurred in an open space. A majority of victims were working at the time of the crime (61%).

In 68% of these crimes, the prejudice shown by the perpetrator was against the Pakistani community, and in 34% of crimes it was against the Black community. Since a perpetrator can exhibit more than one form of prejudice in the course of committing a crime, totals may add up to over 100%.

White Scottish

An estimated 12% of racially aggravated hate crimes had a victim of White Scottish ethnicity (compared to 84% of the population in the 2011 census). This equates to around 360 crimes recorded by the police in 2020-21.

Over half of the victims were female or part of an all female group (59%) and the average age of a victim was 33 years old. The vast majority of perpetrators were male (83%) and the average age was 31.

Just under three in ten crimes took place in a dwelling and an open space each (29% and 28% of crimes respectively). 17% of victims were working at the time of the incident.

In 32% of these crimes, the prejudice shown by the perpetrator was against those who are black. In 24% of cases the prejudice shown by the perpetrator was against those who are Pakistani. Some of these cases related to incidents where the prejudice shown was directed towards a third party who was not present at the time and not the person who was the victim of the crime. In other cases, the victim’s self-identified ethnicity did not align with the prejudice shown by the perpetrator.

In 15% of cases with a White Scottish victim, the prejudice shown by the perpetrator was against those who are white. For the remaining cases with a White Scottish victim (where the prejudice shown wasn’t anti-black, anti-Pakistani or anti-White) a diverse range of racial prejudices were shown.

Notes for More detailed analysis of victim ethnicity for race aggravated hate crime

Note 1. For the purpose of providing this analysis, the ‘Other White’ category excludes those of White Scottish, Other White British or White Irish ethnicities.

Religion aggravated crime

This section looks at hate crimes that had a religion aggravator attached, including cases where there was more than one aggravator present. It should also be noted that all information presented in this section does not include incidents where the victim was a police officer in the line of duty, details on these cases are available in the section on Police Officer victims.

All tables referred to throughout the bulletin are available in the Supporting documents Excel workbook.

What proportion of victims were working at the time of the crime?

Just under a fifth of religion aggravated hate crime victims (19% of cases) experienced the incident at their place of work or whilst undertaking duties as part of their occupation (Table 8). A further 72% were not at their place of work or undertaking work-related duties. For the remaining 9% of victims it is not known if they were working at the time of the crime. Where victims were working, they were generally in either Retail and service industries or Other areas, each of which represented 9% and 11% of all victims respectively.

What was the age and gender of victims, and how did they know the perpetrator?

Most religion aggravated hate crimes had a male or all male group of victims, representing over half (55%) of crimes. The average age of a victim was 40 years old, the oldest for any aggravator (Table 9).

Just over half of these crimes (52%) involved a perpetrator who was an acquaintance [note 1], with a further 26% of crimes where the victim did not know the perpetrator (Table 10).

What was the ethnicity of victims?

Where information was available on the ethnicity of victims, nearly two thirds (or 63%) of religion aggravated hate crimes had a victim of White Scottish ethnicity (Table 15). The second largest ethnic group was Other White British (9% of victims) followed by Pakistani, Pakistani Scottish or Pakistani British (8%) and Mixed or Multiple Ethnic Groups (5%). All other ethnic groups accounted for the remaining 14% of victims.

Where did the crimes happen and how were they reported to the police?

Just under two fifths of religion aggravated hate crimes (39%) occurred in a dwelling, followed by 21% which occurred in an Open space (Table 11). In 16% of crimes, the victim and the perpetrator were not in the same location. One in ten (10%) specifically involved the use of cyber-enabled technologies (Table 12).

The majority of religion aggravated hate crimes were reported to the police by the victim (77%)(Table 13). This splits into 72% which were reported by the victim directly and 4% which were reported on behalf of the victim (including parents, teachers, carers or employers). In a further 14% of cases, the crime was reported by a witness.

What was the age, gender and ethnicity of perpetrators?

The majority of religion aggravated hate crimes had a male or all male group of perpetrators, representing over four fifths (83%) of crimes (Table 14). The average age of a perpetrator was 42 years old, the oldest for any aggravator.

Where information was available on the ethnicity of perpetrators, over four in five (or 82%) of religion aggravated hate crimes had a perpetrator of White Scottish ethnicity (Table 16). The second largest ethnic group was Other White British (8% of perpetrators). All other ethnic groups accounted for the remaining 10% of perpetrators.

When committing religiously aggravated hate crimes, what prejudices were shown by perpetrators?

The information provided below on the prejudice shown by the perpetrator is most often based on the words used or actions taken during the crime. A person does not need to be a member of the social group being targeted by the perpetrator to be the victim of a hate crime and their identity or other characteristics do not need to align with the perpetrator’s perceptions. A perpetrator can also show prejudice against multiple social groups as part of the same crime.

In just under half (47%) of religion aggravated hate crimes, the perpetrator showed prejudice towards the Catholic community, which equates to an estimated 150 crimes (Table 17). A similar proportion of crimes showed prejudice towards the Muslim community and the Protestant community, equating to 16% (or 50 crimes) each.

What has changed from the previous deep dive in 2018-19?

Police recorded hate crimes occurring in the year 2018-19 were also previously examined and analysed in the same way. In both cases it was not feasible to gather details on every police recorded hate crime, so a sample of the records was taken. In order to determine that any changes were not due to random chance each result was tested for statistical significance.

It should also be noted that where a statistically significant result was found, there is only a total of two data points available for comparison. It remains unclear whether any detected changes would be indicative of a trend, or just random year to year variations within the data.

For religion aggravated hate crimes, there were some changes found, more notably around the circumstances of the crimes.

When looking at the relationship between the victim and perpetrator, there was a larger proportion of crimes where the perpetrator was an acquaintance in 2020-21 compared to 2018-19 (52%, up from 29%). There was also a decrease in the proportion where the perpetrator was a stranger (26%, down from 49%).

Some changes were found in the location of the crimes too, in 2020-21 more took place in a dwelling (39% vs. 22%) and fewer took place in an open space (21% vs. 33%).

Additionally, fewer crimes were reported by a witness in 2020-21 compared to 2018-19, 14% compared to 24%.

For the type of prejudice shown, it was found that a smaller proportion of crimes showed anti-Islamic prejudice, 16% of crimes in 2020-21 compared to 26% of crimes in 2018-19.

Notes for religion aggravated hate crimes:

Note 1. Acquaintances include individuals who have a prior relationship with the victim but are not a family member, a partner or ex-partner for example a friend, neighbour, work colleague or classmate.

More detailed analysis of the prejudices shown by perpetrators for religion aggravated hate crime

Where the perpetrator showed prejudice towards the Catholic community

In nearly half of religion aggravated hate crimes the perpetrator showed a prejudice towards the Catholic community (47%). This equates to around 150 crimes recorded by the police in 2020-21.

Victims were evenly split between male and female groups, the average age of a victim was 43 years old. The vast majority (88%) of perpetrators were male or an all male group, the average age of a perpetrator was 38 years old.

In 60% of cases the perpetrator was an acquaintance of the victim and in 22% of cases they were a stranger.

43% of crimes took place in or around a dwelling and in 27% of crimes the location was an open space. Just over one in ten (11%) of victims were working at the time of the incident.

Sexual orientation aggravated crime

This section looks at hate crimes that had a sexual orientation aggravator attached, including cases where there was more than one aggravator present. It should also be noted that all information presented in this section does not include incidents where the victim was a police officer in the line of duty, details on these cases are available in the section on Police Officer victims.

All tables referred to throughout the bulletin are available in the Supporting documents Excel workbook.

What proportion of victims were working at the time of the crime?

A quarter of sexual orientation aggravated hate crime victims experienced the incident at their place of work or whilst undertaking duties as part of their occupation (25% of cases) (Table 8). A further 75% of victims were not at their place of work or undertaking work-related duties. Where victims were working, 43% were in Retail and service related industries, the remaining 57% were working in another type of industry.

What was the age and gender of victims, and how did they know the perpetrator?

Just under two-thirds of sexual orientation aggravated hate crimes had a male or all male group of victims (65%) (Table 9). Crimes with a female or all female group of victims accounted for one third of cases (33%). Further analysis on the characteristics of these crimes by victim gender is provided below. The average age of a victim was 29 years old.

In just under half of these crimes (48%), the victim and perpetrator were acquaintances [note 1]. In a further 35% of cases, the victim did not know the perpetrator (Table 10).

What was the ethnicity of victims?

Where information was available on the ethnicity of victims, four fifths (or 80%) of sexual orientation aggravated hate crimes had a victim of White Scottish ethnicity (Table 15). The second largest ethnic group was Other White British (10% of victims) followed by 3% for Other White. All other ethnic groups accounted for the remaining 7% of victims.

Where did the crimes happen and how were they reported to the police?

30% of sexual orientation aggravated hate crimes occurred in and around a Dwelling, followed by 28% which occurred in an Open space (Table 11). In 19% of crimes, the victim and perpetrator were not in the same location. This category includes cases that involved the use of cyber-enabled technologies, accounting for over one-in-ten (or 13%) of sexual orientation aggravated hate crime.

The vast majority of sexual orientation aggravated hate crimes were reported to the police by the victim (88%) (Table 13). This breaks down into 81% which were reported by the victim directly and 8% which were reported by someone on behalf of the victim (including parents, teachers, carers or employers). In 6% of cases, the crime was reported by a witness.

What was the age, gender and ethnicity of perpetrators?

The majority of sexual orientation aggravated hate crimes had a male or all male group of perpetrators, representing three quarters (75%) of crimes (Table 14). The average age of a perpetrator was 33 years old.

Where information was available on the ethnicity of perpetrators, more than four in five (or 82%) of sexual orientation aggravated hate crimes had a perpetrator of White Scottish ethnicity (Table 16). The second largest ethnic group was Other White British (11% of perpetrators). All other ethnic groups accounted for the remaining 7% of perpetrators.

When committing sexual orientation aggravated hate crimes, what prejudices were shown by perpetrators?

The information provided below on the prejudice shown by the perpetrator is most often based on the words used or actions taken during the crime. A person does not need to be a member of the social group being targeted by the perpetrator, to be the victim of a hate crime and their identity or other characteristics do not need to align with the perpetrator’s perceptions. A perpetrator can also show prejudice against multiple social groups as part of the same crime.

In the vast majority of sexual orientation aggravated hate crimes, the perpetrator showed prejudice towards the gay and lesbian community (Table 17). This includes over three-quarters (77%) of crimes where the words used or actions taken by the perpetrator showed a prejudice towards the gay community, with a further quarter (23%) showing prejudice towards the lesbian community. In the small number of remaining cases, perpetrators either made remarks that targeted other groups, or were not directed at any specific community. A further breakdown of these cases isn’t possible given the infrequency with which they were found within the sample.

Notes for sexual orientation aggravated hate crimes:

Note 1. Acquaintances include individuals who have a prior relationship with the victim but are not a family member, a partner or ex-partner for example a friend, neighbour, work colleague or classmate.

More detailed analysis of sexual orientation aggravated hate crime by gender of victim

Male or all male group

Around two-thirds of sexual orientation aggravated hate crimes had a male or all male group of victims (65%) This equates to around 500 crimes recorded by the police in 2020-21.

In almost all cases (99%), the prejudice shown by the perpetrator was against those from the gay community.

The average age of male victims was 29 years old. The vast majority of perpetrators were male or part of an all male group (81%) and the average age was 33.

In half of these crimes, the perpetrator was an acquaintance of the victim (50%) and in just over a third (36%) of cases they were a stranger.

A third of crimes occurred in an open space (33%) and a further 31% occurred in or around a dwelling. Just over a fifth of victims were working at the time of the incident (22%).

Female or all female Group

33% of sexual orientation aggravated hate crimes had a female or all female group of victims. This equates to around 250 crimes recorded by the police in 2020-21.

In the majority of cases (71%), the prejudice shown by the perpetrator was against those from the lesbian community.

The average age of female victims was 31 years old. Two thirds (or 66%) of perpetrators were male or part of an all male group and the average age was 36. In just under half (46%) of the crimes the perpetrator was an acquaintance of the victim, and 29% were a stranger.

Just under three in ten (or 29%) of crimes occurred in or around a dwelling. In 27% of crimes the victim and perpetrator were not in the same location and occurred remotely (with some making specific use of cyber enabled technology). In just over a quarter of crime (26%) the victim was working at the time of the incident.

Transgender identity aggravated crime

This section looks at hate crimes that had a transgender identity aggravator attached, including cases where there was more than one aggravator present. It should also be noted that all information presented in this section does not include incidents where the victim was a police officer in the line of duty, details on these cases are available in the section on Police Officer victims.

All tables referred to throughout the bulletin are available in the Supporting documents Excel workbook.

What proportion of victims were working at the time of the crime?

Just under 6% of transgender identity aggravated hate crime victims experienced the incident at their place of work or whilst undertaking duties as part of their occupation (Table 8). The vast majority of victims (93%) were not at their place of work or undertaking work-related duties.

What was the age and gender of victims, and how did they know the perpetrator?

Over half of transgender identity aggravated hate crimes had a female or all female group of victims (56%) (Table 9). Crimes with a male or all male group of victims accounted for 43%. The average age of a victim was 28 years old.

Just over half of crimes (53%) with a transgender identity aggravator involved a perpetrator not known to the victim, with a further third (35%) of crimes where the victim and perpetrator were acquaintances [note 1](Table 10).

What was the ethnicity of victims?

Over two thirds of victims (or 70%) were from a White Scottish background. The next largest group was Other White British (20% of victims), followed by Other White (6%). All other ethnicities made up the remaining 4% of victims (Table 15).

Where did the crimes happen and how were they reported to the police?

Over three in ten (31%) transgender identity aggravated hate crimes occurred where the victim and perpetrator were not in the same location (Table 11). 27% of crimes specifically involved the use of cyber-enabled technologies (Table 12). Following this, 28% occurred in an Open space and 23% occurred in or around a Dwelling.

The vast majority of transgender identity aggravated hate crimes were reported to the police by the victim (92%) (Table 13). This breaks down into 88% which were reported by the victim directly and 4% which were reported by someone on behalf of the victim (including parents, teachers, carers or employers). In a further 6% of cases, the crime was reported by a witness.

What was the age, gender and ethnicity of perpetrators?

The majority of transgender identity aggravated hate crimes had a male or all male group of perpetrators, representing around three quarters (74%) of crimes (Table 14). The average age of a perpetrator was 26 years old.

Where information was available on the ethnicity of perpetrators, the vast majority of transgender identity aggravated hate crime had a perpetrator of White Scottish ethnicity (84%) (Table 16). The second largest ethnic group was Other White British (13% of perpetrators). All other ethnic groups accounted for the remaining 4% of perpetrators.

When committing transgender identity aggravated hate crimes, what prejudices were shown by perpetrators?

The information provided below on the prejudice shown by the perpetrator is most often based on the words used or actions taken during the crime. A person does not need to be a member of the social group being targeted by the perpetrator to be the victim of a hate crime and their identity or other characteristics do not need to align with the perpetrator’s perceptions. A perpetrator can also show prejudice against multiple social groups as part of the same crime.

In the vast majority (89%) of transgender identity aggravated hate crimes, the perpetrator showed prejudice towards those from the transgender community (based on the words used, actions taken or perceptions of the victim) (Table 17). In the small number of remaining cases, perpetrators either made remarks that targeted other groups, or were not directed at any specific community. A further breakdown of these cases isn’t possible given the infrequency with which they were found within the sample.

Notes for transgender identity aggravated hate crimes:

Note 1. Acquaintances include individuals who have a prior relationship with the victim but are not a family member, a partner or ex-partner for example a friend, neighbour, work colleague or classmate.

More detailed analysis of transgender identity aggravated hate crime by gender of victim

Female or all female group

Over half of transgender identity aggravated hate crimes had a female or all female group of victims (56%). This equates to around 50 crimes recorded by the police in 2020-21.

In almost all cases (94%), the prejudice shown by the perpetrator was against those from the transgender community.

The average age of female victims was 30 years old. The vast majority of perpetrators (80%) were male or part of an all male group and the average age was 25.

In a majority of cases (59%) the perpetrator was not known to the victim and in just over three in ten cases the perpetrator was an acquaintance of the victim.

A third (or 33%) of crimes occurred in an open space and just over a fifth (or 21%) of crimes occurred where the victim and perpetrator were not in the same location and happened remotely (some of which made specific use of cyber enabled technology).

Male or all male group

Over two-fifths of transgender identity aggravated hate crimes had a male or all male group of victims (43%). This equates to around 40 crimes recorded by the police in 2020-21.

In 82% of those cases, the prejudice shown by the perpetrator was against those from the transgender community.

The average of victims was 22 years old. In nearly two thirds (65%) of crimes the perpetrator was male or part of an all male group and the average age was 26.

In just under half of crimes (or 47%) the perpetrator was an acquaintance of the victim.

Just under a third (or 32%) of crimes occurred in an open space, and a further 32% of crimes occurred where the victim and perpetrator were not in the same location and happened remotely (some of which made specific use of cyber enabled technology).

Police officer victims of hate crime

As outlined in the Summary of recorded hate crimes section, in an estimated one in four (or 1,450) hate crimes recorded in 2020-21, the victim was a police officer in the line of duty.

All tables referred to throughout the bulletin are available in the Supporting documents Excel workbook.

Table 2 below provides an estimate of the volume of hate crime with a police officer victim by hate aggravation. Sexual orientation and religion aggravated hate crimes had the largest proportion of cases where the victim was a police officer (at 45% and 37% respectively).

Table 2. Proportion of crimes with a police officer victim and estimated volume of crimes by hate aggravation, 2020-21.

Aggravation	% of crimes	Estimated volume [note 1]
All hate crimes	24%	1,450
Disability	22%	80
Race	16%	620
Religion	37%	190
Sexual orientation	45%	670
Transgender identity	*	*

Notes for Table 2

Note 1. The estimated volume for each aggravator will not total that for all hate crime as any individual crime could include one or more aggravators.

Where did the crimes happen?

Around two fifths (41%) of these crimes occurred in a Police facility, including police stations and police vehicles (Table 11). A further 24% happened in an Open space and 23% occurred in a Dwelling, less than one in ten (7%) occurred in a Public sector setting [note 2].

What was the age, gender and ethnicity of perpetrators?

Where at least one perpetrator was identified the vast majority were male or an all male group, representing 84% of cases (Table 14). The average age of a perpetrator was 30 years old.

Where information was available on the ethnicity of perpetrators, the vast majority (or 88%) of hate crimes with a police officer victim had a perpetrator of White Scottish ethnicity. The second largest ethnic group was Other White British (6% of perpetrators). All other ethnic groups accounted for the remaining 5% of perpetrators.

What prejudice was experienced by police officers?

The information provided below on the prejudice shown by the perpetrator is most often based on the words used or actions taken during the crime. A person (or in these cases a police officer) does not need to be a member of the social group being targeted by the perpetrator to be the victim of a hate crime and their identity or other characteristics do not need to align with the perpetrator’s perceptions. A perpetrator can also show prejudice against multiple social groups as part of the same crime.

Crimes in which the victim was a police officer were generally aggravated by either sexual orientation (43% of crimes) or race (40%). Around one in ten (12%) were for religion and around one in twenty (5%) were disability aggravated.

Looking at the prejudices shown, in almost half of hate crimes experienced by police officers (46%), the perpetrator showed a prejudice towards the gay and lesbian community, this equates to around 670 crimes.

In almost one in five crimes, the perpetrator showed prejudice toward the Black community (19%), this equates to 270 crimes. Nearly one in ten crimes showed prejudice against those with a learning disability and the Pakistani community, accounting for 9% (or 130 crimes) each.

In less than one in ten crimes, the perpetrator showed prejudice toward the Catholic community (8%), equating to 110 crimes.

Table 3. Proportion and estimated volume of crimes with a police officer by the prejudice shown by the perpetrator, 2020-21

Prejudice shown	% of crimes [note 3]	Estimated volume
Against the Gay and lesbian community	46%	670
Anti-Black	19%	270
Anti-Learning disability	9%	130
Anti-Pakistani	9%	130
Anti-Catholic	8%	110

Notes for Table 3

Note 1. It is important to note that as part of any individual hate crime, the perpetrator can show prejudice towards more than one community.