Foreword

Arson is a growing problem with a wide variety of causes:vandalism; crime concealment; revenge; fraud and mental illnessto name just a few. In an average week, arsonists are responsiblefor 3,600 fires that result in two deaths, 60 other casualties and acost to society of £40 million.

Despite the rapid growth in arson fires in recent years – doublingover the past decade – the number of arson offences detectedremains low: in only 8 per cent of arson cases recorded by thepolice in 2001/02 was a suspect identified and either cautioned orcharged with an offence.

It was against this background of a rapidly increasing number ofdeliberately started fires but few convictions that the ArsonControl Forum – the government-led body set up to lead thenational drive against arson – commissioned a short review of thetrue extent of the problem.

The report of this review, “Arson: From Reporting to Conviction”,provides a valuable insight into the detection, prosecution andconviction of arson cases. The report discusses some of theForum’s work that is seeking to improve arson investigation anddetection techniques, so that the deliberate firesetter issuccessfully detected and prosecuted, and potential firesettersdeterred. Ongoing projects include the development of specialistFire Investigation Teams and improved information sharingbetween the relevant agencies. I welcome this report.

Arson Control ForumResearch Bulletin no.1Arson: From Reporting to ConvictionMarch 2003

Chris Leslie,Parliamentary under Secretary of StateOffice of the Deputy Prime Minister

Just over 60,000 arson crimes were recorded bythe police in England and Wales in 2001/2,however only 8 per cent of these crimes weredetected, a rate considerably worse than for alloffences (23 per cent). In 2001, 1,500 people werefound guilty of arson in the courts. Even thesestatistics understate the problem since the fireservice attends over 100,000 serious fires per yearwhere deliberate ignition is suspected.

In 2001 the Arson Control Forum (ACF) waslaunched by Central Government under thechairmanship of HM Chief Inspector of FireServices, Sir Graham Meldrum, to bring a strategicapproach to arson reduction in England and Wales.One of its first priorities was to undertake researchinto why arson has a low detection and convictionrate, in order to increase the number of successfulprosecutions in the future.

This report analyses the available statistics toestablish why such a low number of arsonists areconvicted in the courts. Is it the problem thatsuspected arsonists are simply not beingidentified? Or are cases failing during trials inMagistrates’ Courts or the Crown Court as a resultof procedural defects? In fact, the evidence showsthat when an arson case reaches the court, thedropout rate is not significantly different than forother offences, indicating that the focus should beon improving investigation procedures.

The report then goes on to highlight a number ofprojects currently underway, under ACF guidance,that focus on improved training for fireinvestigation professionals and new protocols forinter-agency working. A pilot project supported bythe ACF focussing on fraudulent arson – which isparticularly difficult to prove – is also discussed.

Arson – from reporting to conviction2

1991 60.5 7.7 12.8 35.6 4.4

1992 70.3 8.5 13.5 43.5 4.8

1993 71.3 8.8 14.7 42.5 5.3

1994(3) 75.3 11.6 19.7 36.6 7.3

1995 75.9 11.6 19.2 37.8 7.4

1996 78.0 11.8 18.6 40.1 7.4

1997 72.9 11.4 16.4 38.2 6.9

1998 76.1 11.0 14.9 43.9 6.4

1999 91.1 11.3 15.7 56.9 7.3

2000p 98.0 11.5 15.5 63.8 7.3

2001e 109.8 12.1 17.2 72.1 8.4

Table 1

Malicious(1) primary(2) fires by location of fire,

1991 – 2001, England and Wales

Fires (thousands)

Figures are rounded so may not sum to independentlyrounded totals. Figures for 2000 are provisional andestimated for 2001. (1) Malicious fires are those where deliberate ignition isproven or merely suspected. (2) Primary fires are those involving casualties, rescues orwhere five or more fire appliances are in attendance as well all fires involving non-derelict buildings and vehicles,industrial and agricultural facilities and outdoor structures such as tunnels, bridges and post boxes. (3) From 1994 includes late calls and heat and smoke onlyincidents.

Source: Fire Statistics United Kingdom 2001 EstimatesBulletin (ODPM, 2002).

Year Total Dwellings Other Road Other

buildings vehicles outdoor

Arson – from reporting to conviction 3

Number of arson offences 31,516 47,273 53,794 52,818 60,472

Of which:

Detected 5,004 4,758 4,755 4,395 4,817

Percentage of total 16% 10% 9% 8% 8%

Table 2

Arson offences recorded by the police, England and Wales

Criminal statistics data obtained from the Home Office. (1) The figures for 1998/99 onwards are not comparable to those for previous years because of changes made in April 1998 to therules under which the police count crimes. Under the previous rules the number of offences in 1998/99 would have been 39,636.

1997 1998/991 1999/00 2000/01 2001/02

How many arsons?

Two agencies collect information on arson fires,the fire service and the police service. Between1991 and 2001 the number of primary fires (i.e.serious fires) attended by brigades wheredeliberate ignition was suspected increased byover 80 per cent to just under 110,000 (table 1),with the biggest increases in road vehicle fires.

Only a proportion of the malicious deliberate firesattended by fire brigades are later classified by thepolice as arson offences as defined by the CriminalDamage Act 1971. Under the 1971 Act to recordan incident as arson the police have to prove thatpersons behaved ‘recklessly’ or ‘intended todamage property’, whereas the brigade merelyhave to suspect ignition is deliberate.1

In 2001/02 there were 60,472 arson offences – a14 per cent increase on the previous year. As table2 shows, over the last four years, while thenumber of arson offences reported rose from47,000 to 60,000 the number of arson offencesdetected dropped from 10 per cent to 8 per cent.This compares unfavourably with the detectionrates for criminal damage and all indictableoffences, 13 per cent and 23 per cent respectivelyin 2001/02.2

Across all criminal offences detection was usuallyby means of a charge or summons (60 per cent)with 16 per cent detected by means of a caution.The remaining offences were either taken intoconsideration with other offences or detected byother means. Arson has a higher cautioning ratethan other offences, with around a quarter of allarson detections by means of a caution. This is

1 The gap between police and fire figures may narrow from April 2002 with the introduction of the National Crime Recording System, under which anincident will be recorded as a crime if, on the balance of probabilities, “the incident [is] more likely than not the result of a criminal act” (Association ofChief Police Officers, 2002).

2 In 2002 the Government published a white paper, “Justice for all” (Home Office, 2002) which includes proposals for increasing the number ofoffences brought to justice (see also “Narrowing the justice gap”, Home Office, 2002a).

largely due to the comparative youth of those whocommit arson compared with other offences.

Regional variations

The 8 per cent detection rate is the average forEngland and Wales. In urban areas, which tend tohave a far greater number of such offences, thedetection rates are often lower. For the metropolitanforces the detection rate is 6 per cent comparedwith 9 per cent for the non-metropolitan forces (seetable 3 in appendix 1). This relationship betweenoffence numbers and detection rate is similar forother offence groups (Home Office, 2002b).

In Court

So far, we have seen that 110,000 arson fires asrecorded by the fire service translate intoapproximately 60,000 arson crimes as recorded bythe police, of which just under 5,000 are detected.

In 2001 proceedings commenced against 2,475individuals in the Magistrates’ Court. Whathappens after these individuals are charged orreceive a summons?

As table 4 shows, of the 2,475 individualsproceeded against, just under one third (31 percent) never reached trial nor entered a guilty plea.Although this proportion was of course too high(representing an unnecessary risk to the public aswell as costs to the criminal justice system) it wasthe same as the average for all other offences.For criminal damage as a whole 37 per cent ofcases failed to reach a conclusion.

because of material irregularity in itscollection. They also include casesdiscontinued on public interestgrounds where the CPS do notproceed because insufficient evidenceexists to provide a realistic prospect ofconviction.” (Home Office, 2001, p.3).

It may be reasonable to assume that thepropensity for witnesses to fail to appear, refuse togive evidence or change their stories is notsignificantly different for arson and other criminaldamage than for other offence groups. If so, thehigher proportion of arson cases discontinued in2001 was likely to be due to the other factorshighlighted: irregularity in evidence collection,and/or insufficient evidence to realistically secure aconviction.

The low conviction rate for arson in 2001 wastherefore likely to be a function of the difficulty incollecting sufficient evidence to proceed with acase against the perpetrators, rather than specificprocedural difficulties within court.

As table 4 shows, there was some variationbetween offence groups as to why cases collapse.

Row (i) shows that the “proceedingsdiscontinued” category was higher for criminaldamage, including arson, than it was for the otheroffences (9 per cent for arson and all criminaldamage compared with an average of 6 per centfor all indictable offences).

On the other hand, fewer arson charges werewithdrawn by the Crown Prosecution Service – 13per cent for arson compared with 21 per cent forall criminal damage and 18 per cent for all offences(Row iii). Charges are more likely to be withdrawnfor offences involving violence against the person.

Due to the seriousness of arson over a third ofdefendants are committed for trial at the CrownCourt.

Exactly what is meant by “proceedingsdiscontinued” and what can we infer from thehigher proportion for arson and criminal damage?

According to the Home Office and the CrownProsecution Service proceedings are usuallydiscontinued,

“where witnesses fail to appear,refuse to give evidence or changetheir story, or evidence is excluded

Arson – from reporting to conviction4

Total number of offenders proceeded 2,475 (100%) 18,316 (100%) 490,206 (100%)

against in Magistrates’ Court

(i). Proceedings discontinued 221 (9%) 1,598 (9%) 28,623 (6%)

(ii). Discharged Section 6 Magistrates’ Court Act 1980 131 (5%) 537 (3%) 21,160 (4%)

(iii). Charge Withdrawn 325 (13%) 3,916 (21%) 87,775 (18%)

(iv). Charge Dismissed 84 (3%) 727 (4%) 11,486 (2%)

Sub-total (i. – iv.) 761 (31%) 6,778 (37%) 149,644 (30%)

Committed for trial at Crown Court 926 (37%) 2,290 (13%) 77,304 (16%)

Total Found Guilty at Magistrates Court 788 (32%) 9,248 (50%) 263,858 (54%)

Table 4

Offenders proceeded against in the Magistrates’ Court 2001

Source: Data obtained from the Home Office.

Arson All Criminal Damage All indictable offences

(excl. motoring)

The difficulties with collecting evidence are partlydue to the nature of the crime itself – fire and waterare recognized as two factors that have the potentialto destroy evidence, both of which are of courseprevalent at arson scenes. However, new trainingand improved fire investigation protocols, discussedbelow, should improve scene preservation and thusincrease detection rates.

In the Crown Court, which handles more seriousarson incidents, the acquittal rate for arson in 2001was considerably lower than for all criminaldamage and also for all indictable offences, 18 percent compared with 29 per cent and 26 per centrespectively (table 5) again indicating that the fewoffences that did reach court did so with sufficientevidence to secure convictions compared withother offences.

Nearly 60 per cent of defendants sentenced forarson in the Crown Court received immediatecustody and just under a third received communitypenalties supervised by probation or youth justiceservices. Seven per cent of defendants receivedHospital Orders under the Mental Health Act 1983,indicating the small but important group ofarsonists that have identifiable mental healthproblems.

In Magistrates’ Courts, which deal with lessserious offences, 11 per cent of defendantssentenced received immediate custody for arsonof up to six months and 60 per cent weresupervised by probation or youth justice workers.The remainder were dealt with by a range ofdisposals including fines and conditionaldischarges.

Arson – from reporting to conviction 5

Total for Trial 899 (100%) 2,049 (100%) 73,279 (100%)

Not tried 26 (3%) 61 (3%) 1,717 (2%)

Acquitted 161 (18%) 585 (29%) 18,919 (26%)

Total Found Guilty 712 (79%) 1,403 (68%) 52,643 (72%)

Table 5

Offenders proceeded against in the Crown Court 2001

Source: Data obtained from the Home Office.

Arson All Criminal Damage All indictable offences

(excl. motoring)

Current work

The Arson Control Forum is taking forward newprotocols for the investigation of suspicious fires,and is supporting a new pilot project focussing onfraudulent arson.

Improving Investigation and Detection

One of the first steps undertaken by the ArsonControl Forum was to issue interim guidance tothe police and fire service regarding theprocedures to be followed when investigating asuspected non-accidental fire (Home OfficeCircular No 44/2000, Fire Service Circular No21/2000) The Forum is building on this byconsidering proposals for new protocols andprocedures to be followed by police and fireofficers for the investigation of fires (Foster, 2002).

New procedures

Current options include the development of initialscreening procedures for fire incidents, to becarried out by appropriately trained fire officers.Where a fire is deemed accidental, then relevantcommunity fire safety professionals should becontacted, along with private sector investigatorsfrom the Insurance industry. More high profileinvestigations of accidental fires may warrant amulti-agency team.

Fraudulent Arson

A recent study commissioned by the ACF lookedat the reasons why people commit different typesof arson and highlights strategies that can reduceits incidence (Canter and Almond, 2002).

One type of arson that is hard to detect andprosecute is that committed for financial gain,particularly insurance fraud. By its nature, it isdifficult to guage its true extent since in manycases it will either be erroneously classified as anaccidental fire or as arson committed by strangersfor revenge or vandalism reasons, rather thanperpetrated by property/business owners. The useof a third party – a ‘hired torch’ – to set fire alsocomplicates an investigation.

Although not as numerous as other types of arson,fraudulent arson can have a disproportionate cost.One study in Britain indentified 71 suspectedfraudulent arsons with an overall value of £38.5 interms of insurance costs, and average of over£0.5m per fire (Clarke, 1996).

The ACF are currently establishing a pilot schemeto improve the investigation of this type of arson inconjuction with the police and fire brigade inGreater Manchester, foresenic scientists and theinsurance industry. The Greater Manchester ActionAgainst Arson (GMAAA) project will concentrate onall commercial fires with a value over £0.5m andwill pilot information/intelligence-sharing protocolsto ensure all the agencies have access tonecessary data.

Darren Sugg

Darren Sugg is a Senior Research Officer withinthe Office of the Deputy Prime Minister and ismanaging a programme of research on behalf ofthe Arson Control Forum.

The views expressed in this report are those of theauthor, not necessarily those of the Office of theDeputy Prime Minister (nor do they reflectGovernment policy).

Deliberate fires

For fires where deliberate ignition is suspected,the procedures to be invoked are likely to dependon the seriousness of the incident. For secondaryfires, such as those involving rubbish or wastelandwith no risk of injuries, details could be given tothe police as local intelligence that can then beanalyzed to identify trends.

For primary fires, such as those in a domesticdwelling or commercial building or wherecasualties are involved, the officers attendingshould preserve the scene and initiate a furtherinvestigation which, depending on the seriousnessof the fire, may involve police Scenes of Crimesofficers (SOCOs), specialist Fire InvestigationTeams (FIT) or, in more complex cases, a forensicscientist. In some cases insurance investigatorscould work together with police and fireinvestigators as part of a multi-agency jointapproach.

Work in a number of areas including occupationalstandards, procedures and processes for fireinvestigation and training is in progress.

Alongside these more long-term strategicdevelopments, the Forum has invested heavily inlocal arson reduction initiatives that are seeking toimprove arson investigation. With funding from theACF New Projects Initiative, in a number of localareas – for example Cheshire, Lancashire, Tyne &Wear, Greater Manchester and Devon & Cornwall– police and fire staff are working together on thefull range of arson reduction measures, includingimproved fire investigation. Such projects, all ofwhich are subject to evaluation, will be valuable inexploring how arson investigation can be improvedwithin existing resources and arrangements.

Arson – from reporting to conviction6

Arson – from reporting to conviction 7

ReferencesAssociation of Chief Police Officers (2002) NationalCrime Recording Standard.

Department for Transport, Local Government & theRegions (2000) Fire Statistics, United Kingdom,2000 DTLR: London. (note: In June 2002responsibility for fire transferred to the Office ofthe Deputy Prime Minister).

Canter, D., and Almond, L. (2002) The burningissue: research and strategies for reducing arson.ODPM: London www.safety.odpm.gov.uk/fire/rds/index.htm.

Clarke, M. (1996) Fraudulent arson: A war ofposition. Crime, Law & Social Change. 25, 107 –131. Cited in Canter & Almond, 2002.

Foster, C (2002) Forward Thinking. Fire EngineersJournal. March 2002, 39 – 41.

Home Office (2000) Home Office Circular No44/2000, Fire Service Circular No 21/2000.

Home Office (2001) Criminal Statistics Englandand Wales 2000.

Home Office (2002) Justice for all (Home Office,London).

Home Office (2002a) Narrowing the Justice Gap(Home Office, London).

Simmons, J., and colleagues (2002b) Crime inEngland and Wales 2001 – 2002 (Home Office,London).

Home Office (2001) Cautions, Court Proceedingsand Sentencing England and Wales, 2000.

Further InformationFurther details on arson can be found on the ArsonControl Forum’s website atwww.arsoncontrolforum.gov.uk

Information on crime reduction strategies relatedto arson can also be found on the arson toolkit atwww.crimereduction.gov.uk/toolkits/an00.htm

© Crown copyright 2003.Copyright in the typographical arrangement and design restswith the Crown.This publication (excluding the Royal Arms and logos) may bereproduced free of charge in any format or medium providedthat it is reproduced accurately and not used in a misleadingcontext. The material must be acknowledged as Crowncopyright with the title and source of the publication specified.Further copies are available from:

Office of the Deputy Prime MinisterPO Box 236WetherbyWest YorkshireLS23 7NB

Tel: 0870 1226 236Fax: 0870 1226 237Textphone: 0870 1207 405E-mail: odpm@twoten.press.net

Published by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.Printed in the UK, March 2003 on material containing75% post-consumer waste and 25% ECF pulp.Product code 02FPD00879

APPENDIX 18

ENGLAND AND WALES 60,472 114 4,817 8.0

WALES 3,298 386 392 11.9

METROPOLITAN POLICE FORCE AREAS 25,558 1,193 1,604 6.3

NON-METROPOLITAN POLICE FORCE AREAS 34,914 3,587 3,213 9.2

Metropolitan Police Force areas

CITY OF LONDON POLICE 9 141 3 33.3

METROPOLITAN POLICE 6,202 84 369 6.0

WEST YORKSHIRE 5,460 257 235 4.3

WEST MIDLANDS 4,768 182 327 6.9

GREATER MANCHESTER 4,023 156 284 7.1

NORTHUMBRIA 2,478 175 204 8.2

SOUTH YORKSHIRE 1,935 149 130 6.7

MERSEYSIDE 683 49 52 7.6

Non-Metropolitan Police Force areas

SOUTH WALES 1,959 157 171 8.7

NOTTINGHAMSHIRE 1,923 186 124 6.5

LANCASHIRE 1,863 130 179 9.6

AVON AND SOMERSET 1,788 118 95 5.3

KENT 1,733 108 134 7.7

THAMES VALLEY 1,695 80 177 10.4

WEST MERCIA 1,635 143 134 8.2

HUMBERSIDE 1,589 180 100 6.3

SUSSEX 1,531 101 138 9.0

STAFFORDSHIRE 1,506 142 81 5.4

HAMPSHIRE 1,408 79 207 14.7

ESSEX 1,319 81 146 11.1

DEVON AND CORNWALL 1,301 82 136 10.5

CLEVELAND 984 177 30 3.1

DERBYSHIRE 903 92 57 6.3

DURHAM 900 148 68 7.6

CAMBRIDGESHIRE 845 116 64 7.6

NORFOLK 783 97 105 13.4

DORSET 766 110 62 8.1

LEICESTERSHIRE 732 78 90 12.3

SUFFOLK 696 102 94 13.5

SURREY 640 59 47 7.3

NORTHAMPTONSHIRE 638 102 87 13.6

HERTFORDSHIRE 621 59 52 8.4

GWENT 593 106 113 19.1

CUMBRIA 582 119 52 8.9

NORTH WALES 563 85 51 9.1

LINCOLNSHIRE 553 87 59 10.7

BEDFORDSHIRE 498 88 50 10.0

GLOUCESTERSHIRE 492 87 66 13.4

CHESHIRE 480 49 55 11.5

WARWICKSHIRE 477 94 39 8.2

NORTH YORKSHIRE 403 53 48 11.9

WILTSHIRE 332 54 45 13.6

DYFED-POWYS 183 38 57 31.2

Table 3

Arson offences by Police Force area 2001 – 2002

Source: data obtained from Home Office.

All Police Forces Offences Offences per Offences Percentage

Recorded 100,000 pop Detected Detected