Arizona Criminal Justice Commission Statistical Analysis Center Publication Our mission is to sustain and enhance the coordination, cohesiveness, productivity and effectiveness of the Criminal Justice System in Arizona Homicide in Arizona, 2004 2004 Arizona Homicide Report December 2009 1 ARIZONA CRIMINAL JUSTICE COMMISSION Chairperson RALPH OGDEN Yuma County Sheriff Vice-Chairperson DANIEL HUGHES, Chief Surprise Police Department JOHN R. ARMER Gila County Sheriff JOSEPH ARPAIO Maricopa County Sheriff DUANE BELCHER, Chairperson Board of Executive Clemency DAVID K. BYERS, Director Administrative Office of the Courts CLARENCE DUPNIK Pima County Sheriff TERRY GODDARD Attorney General ROBERT HUDDLESTON, Chief Casa Grande Police Department BARBARA LAWALL Pima County Attorney CHARLES RYAN, Director Department of Corrections DAVID SANDERS Pima County Chief Probation Officer LINDA SCOTT Former Judge DANIEL G. SHARP, Chief Oro Valley Police Department GEORGE E. SILVA Santa Cruz County Attorney CARL TAYLOR Coconino County Supervisor ANDREW P. THOMAS Maricopa County Attorney ROGER VANDERPOOL, Director Department of Public Safety Mayor VACANT JOHN A. BLACKBURN, JR. Executive Director ROBERT J. FORNANGO Arizona State University CHARLES M. KATZ Arizona State University MATTHEW BILESKI Statistical Analysis Center Research Analyst PHILLIP STEVENSON Statistical Analysis Center Director Homicide in Arizona, 2004 Prepared for The Arizona Criminal Justice Commission Prepared by Center for Violence Prevention and Community Safety Robert J. Fornango, Ph.D. Charles M. Katz, Ph.D. Arizona Criminal Justice Commission Executive Summary In 2006, the Bureau of Justice Statistics awarded a State Justice Statistics grant to the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission’s Statistical Analysis Center (AZSAC) to conduct research on homicide in Arizona. The AZSAC, with assistance from local law enforcement officials, and researchers from the School of Criminology and Criminal Justice at Arizona State University, collected homicide data from the following sources: Supplemental Homicide Reports (SHR), law enforcement homicide case files, and autopsy reports. Homicide Incidents In 2004, there were 448 homicides in Arizona where the SHR data could be accurately matched to a local law enforcement homicide case file. The 2004 homicide rate for Arizona was 7.7 homicides per 100,000 residents, higher than the U.S. homicide rate of 5.51 per 100,000 residents. Statewide, the month with the highest number of homicides was March (46) and the month with the lowest number of homicides was June (27). Also, approximately 33% of Arizona homicides took place between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 2:59 a.m. Data collectors compiled additional information regarding location, circumstances, and neighborhood characteristics of homicides in Arizona. Homicide victims were most frequently discovered at the victim’s residence, 31.7% of the time. Victims were found in a street or alley in 22.8% of homicide incidents, 7.4% were found in a business location, and 5.6% were found in a desert area. Drugs and alcohol were involved in 34.4% and 24.1% of homicide incidents, respectively, while 16.7% of incidents were linked to domestic violence. When comparing the Arizona communities in which at least one homicide occurred to all Arizona communities, the communities in which a homicide occurred have a larger urban population with a higher nonwhite and Hispanic percentage of the population, an increased percentage of foreign-born and non-citizen residents, a lower percentage of residents receiving a college-level education, a higher rate of poverty, a lower median family income, and a reduced percentage of owneroccupied housing. Offenders used firearms in 76% of the homicides that occurred in 2004. Specifically, handguns were used in 49% of homicides, followed by rifles/shotguns (11.2%) and unknown firearms (15.9%). Offenders also used knives or other cutting instruments in 9.4% of homicides, blunt objects in 5.6% of homicides, and other weapons in 8.9% of homicides. Victim and Offender Characteristics Approximately 88% of all Arizona homicides in 2004 involved a single homicide victim. The majority of homicides (52.9%) consisted of a single victim and a single offender, and in 31% of homicides, no offenders had been identified at the time data was collected. Victims and offenders shared many of the same characteristics. Victims and offenders were more likely to be male and between the ages of 15 and 44. Most victims and offenders were 1 The national rate of 5.5 per 100,000 population includes murders and non-negligent manslaughter. Homicide in Arizona, 2004 1 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission White, U.S. citizens, and 41.1% of victims and 35.2% of offenders were single and never married at the time of the incident. Data on the relationship between victims and offenders reveals that 36.5% of homicides involved acquaintances, 17.1% of homicides involved strangers, 9.9% were reported family members (3% was a spouse or ex-spouse), and 3.4% were in a non-marital, romantic relationship. In 167 incidents the victim and offender relationship could not be determined. There was significant variation in homicide victimization rates by race and ethnicity. The highest rate of homicide victimization was 64.7 per 100,000 residents for Black males between 15 and 44 years of age. The rate for Hispanic males between the ages of 15 and 44 was 46.7 per 100,000 residents. In contrast, the rate of homicide victimization for White, Non-Hispanic males in the same age group was 7.5 in 2004. Homicide in Arizona, 2004 2 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission Introduction Considerable research has examined changes in patterns of homicide in the United States over the past 20 years. This body of research has largely focused on national-level homicide patterns and city specific trends for the purpose of assisting federal officials with allocation of resources to areas of need, and to help local officials develop more targeted responses to their homicide problem. Missing from this larger body of research, however, has been a focus on the scope and nature of the homicide problem at the state level. State governments and state law enforcement agencies could benefit from analysis on state homicide trends, as it could help them allocate resources more efficiently and cultivate a discussion about more effective strategies to respond to the homicide problem. The purpose of this report is to provide a general description of the scope and nature of the homicide problem in Arizona. Specifically, this report examines the general characteristics of victims and offenders, the circumstances surrounding homicide incidents, temporal patterns when homicides occur, and the geographic characteristics where homicides took place. Data and Methods Researchers collected data for this report in three parts. The Arizona Department of Public Safety provided Arizona Supplemental Homicide Report (SHR) data for 2004. Law enforcement collects these data on a yearly basis through the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Report program. SHR data include incident level information on age, sex, and ethnicity of the victim and offender, the weapon(s) used, victim/offender relationship, the jurisdiction where the homicide took place, and the agency reporting the homicide. Researchers used these data to identify the agencies to contact to collect the incident-level data on each homicide that was reported within the state. Second, researchers collected data from homicide case files from the law enforcement agency with jurisdiction where the homicide took place. Prior to retrieving the data, researchers created a data collection instrument for the purpose of extracting specific data elements from homicide case files (See Appendix A for instrument). The data collection instrument was designed to extract information on victim, offender, and situational characteristics, address of the event, as well as evidence that had been obtained through the homicide investigation (i.e., medical examiner reports, criminal history records, etc.). Officers, sergeants, and detectives delegated to the task of investigating homicides in the jurisdiction members of the project’s research team collected these data. The data collectors read all reports included in homicide case files to ensure that the data recorded on the instrument was an accurate reflection of the information that was contained in the case file. Data collection began in June 2007 and ended in midNovember 2008. Researchers linked all SHR data to the corresponding law enforcement case data. A number of SHR records (N=13) had no corresponding law enforcement match while a number of law enforcement cases (N=23) had no matching SHR record. These cases were excluded from the following homicide analysis. Third, after researchers collected all of the homicide data, they geo-coded all address level data to identify the census tract where the victim’s body was discovered and the census tract where the homicide took place. Researchers used data from the 2000 U.S. Census to provide Homicide in Arizona, 2004 3 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission community-level measures of population, race, ethnicity, education, income, poverty, percent foreign born, family structure, and housing structure. Homicide in Arizona In 2004, there were a total of 448 homicides in Arizona. The Arizona homicide rate per 100,000 population was 7.7, which was higher than the national rate of 5.5 reported by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.2 The vast majority of the homicides occurred in Maricopa County. Specifically, in 2004 69.4% (n=311) of the homicides occurred in Maricopa County, 18.8% (n=84) in Pima County, and 11.8% (n=53) occurring throughout the rest of the state (see Table 1). However, residents in Pima County were at slightly higher risk for homicide than individuals in other counties. The homicide rate in Pima County was 9.0 per 100,000, compared to 8.8 per 100,000 in Maricopa County, 7.2 per 100,000 in Mohave County, and 6.0 per 100,000 in Pinal County. There were no homicides in Apache, Graham, Greenlee, La Paz, and Santa Cruz Counties. Table 1. County Where Homicide Occurred County Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma Arizona 2 Number of Homicides 0 6 7 1 0 0 0 311 13 5 84 13 0 5 3 448 Percentage of All Arizona Homicides 0.0% 1.3% 1.6% 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 69.4% 2.9% 1.1% 18.8% 2.9% 0.0% 1.1% 0.7% 100.0% County Population 71,320 130,220 129,570 54,060 36,020 8,350 21,135 3,524,175 180,210 107,420 931,210 218,285 41,985 196,720 181,470 5,832,150 Homicide rate (per 100,000) 0.0 4.6 5.4 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.8 7.2 4.7 9.0 6.0 0.0 2.5 1.7 7.7 The national rate of 5.5 per 100,000 population includes murders and non-negligent manslaughter. Homicide in Arizona, 2004 4 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission Researchers also examined temporal patterns among Arizona homicides. First, researchers examined homicides by month (see Chart 1). Overall, the number of individuals killed each month remained fairly stable. Most months there were between 33 and 38 homicides. However, in June there was a low of 27 homicides, and in March there was a high of 46 homicides. Chart 1. Month of Homicide Incidents Reported in Arizona 2004 50 46 44 44 45 40 40 38 38 35 Frequency 35 33 35 35 33 30 27 25 20 15 10 5 Homicide in Arizona, 2004 be r m be r De ce No ve m be r ct o O be r st pt em Se gu Au Ju ly ne Ju M ay Ap ri l ch M ar ar y Fe br u Ja nu ar y 0 5 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission Additionally, researchers examined homicides by hour of the day (see Chart 2). The analysis indicated that between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 2:59 a.m. homicides peak, and between 3:00 a.m. and 9:59 p.m. there are relatively fewer homicides. Chart 2. Hour of Day of Homicide Incidents in Arizona 2004 40 35 35 31 29 30 27 Frequency 25 25 19 20 18 18 17 17 15 15 20 19 13 13 16 14 16 17 17 15 13 12 12 10 5 AM 11:00 10:00 9:00 8:00 7:00 6:00 5:00 4:00 3:00 2:00 1:00 12:00 11:00 10:00 9:00 8:00 7:00 6:00 5:00 4:00 3:00 2:00 1:00 0:00 0 PM Hour of Day Victim and Offender Characteristics Table 2 shows the characteristics of victims and offenders involved in Arizona homicides. The analysis showed that the majority of victims and offenders involved in homicide were male. Specifically, 83.5% of homicide victims were male and 87.1% of offenders were male. With respect to age, victims and offenders were most likely to be between the ages of 15 and 34. As seen in Table 2, 28.1% of homicide victims were between the ages of 15 to 24 and 26.8% were between the ages of 25 to 34. More than 37% of homicide offenders were between the ages of 15 to 24 and 22.9% of homicide offenders were between the ages of 25 to 34. The third highest group at risk was those between 35 to 44 years old, with 20.3% of victims and 10.3% of offenders were within this age group. The data indicated that those 14 and younger and those 45 and older were less likely to become a victim or be an offender in a homicide. Homicide in Arizona, 2004 6 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission Table 2. Gender and Age Characteristics of Homicide Victims and Offenders Victims (n = 448) Percentage Offenders (n = 389) Total Percentage Total Gender Male Female Unknown 83.5% 16.5% 374 74 87.1% 6.2% 6.7% 339 24 26 4.7% 28.1% 26.8% 20.3% 8.0% 4.9% 3.6% 2.2% 1.3% 21 126 120 91 36 22 16 10 6 0.0% 37.5% 22.9% 10.3% 6.2% 1.8% 1.0% 0.5% 19.8% 0 146 89 40 24 7 4 2 77 Age 0 - 14 15 - 24 25 - 34 35 - 44 45 - 54 55 - 64 65 - 74 75 + Unknown/Missing Mean Age 33.20 29.18 Table 3 shows that more Whites were involved in a homicide when compared to other racial groups. About 80% of victims were White, followed by 10.5% who were Black, 4.2% who were Native American, less than 1% who were Asian, and 3.1% who were in an “other” racial category. Likewise, 70.4% of offenders were White, 13.1% were Black, 3.3% were from an “other” racial category, 2.8% were Native Americans, and 1.3% were Asian. Table 3 also shows the findings with regard to the victim’s and offender’s ethnicity. Just over 51.3% of victims and 44.2% of offenders were identified as Hispanic. While the marital status of the victims and offenders was examined, many of the homicide case files did not contain this information. Specifically, the marital status of just over 38% of the victims and 50.4% of the offenders was unknown. Case files did indicate, however, that 41.1% of victims and 35.2% of offenders were single and that 16.1% of the victims and 11.6% of the offenders were married at the time of the homicide. These files revealed very few of the victims and offenders to be divorced or widowed at the time of the homicide. The findings indicated that the majority of those involved in homicides were U.S. citizens. About 63% of victims were U.S. citizens, 13.4% were Mexican citizens, .4% were citizens of another country, and in 23.4% of the cases the citizenship status of the victim was unknown. Similarly, 68.4% of offenders were U.S. citizens, 9.3% were Mexican citizens, .5% were citizens of another country, and in 21.9% of the cases the citizenship status of the offender was Homicide in Arizona, 2004 7 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission unknown. Analysis also indicated that 11.4% of victims and 7.5% of offenders were identified as being (or suspected to be) an illegal alien. Table 3. Additional Demographic Characteristics of Homicide Victims and Offenders Victims (n = 448) Percentage Offenders (n = 389) Total Percentage Total Race White Black Native American Asian Other Unknown/Missing 79.7% 10.5% 4.2% 0.2% 3.1% 2.2% 357 47 19 1 14 10 70.4% 13.1% 2.8% 1.3% 3.3% 9.0% 274 51 11 5 13 35 51.3% 47.1% 1.6% 230 211 7 44.2% 44.2% 11.6% 172 172 45 41.1% 16.1% 4.0% 0.7% 38.2% 184 72 18 3 171 35.2% 11.6% 2.6% 0.3% 50.4% 137 45 10 1 196 62.7% 13.4% 0.2% 0.2% 23.4% 281 60 1 1 105 68.4% 9.3% 0.0% 0.5% 21.9% 266 36 0 2 85 62.7% 2.9% 11.4% 23.0% 281 13 51 103 68.4% 1.3% 7.5% 22.9% 266 5 29 89 Ethnicity Hispanic Non-Hispanic Unknown/Missing Marital Status Single Married Divorced Widowed Unknown/Missing Citizenship Status U.S. Mexico Central or South America Other Unknown/Missing Alien Status U.S. Citizen Legal Alien Illegal/Suspected Alien Unknown/Missing Homicide in Arizona, 2004 8 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission Cumulative risk for homicide among higher risk populations in Arizona was also examined. The analysis (see Table 4) shows that the homicide rate per 100,000 for males in Arizona was 12.8. With respect to age, males between the ages of 15 and 44 experienced a homicide rate of 22.0, nearly twice the rate for males of any age. Also, when ethnicity and race are taken into account, the homicide rates among Black and Hispanic males between the ages of 15 and 44 were 64.7 and 46.7, respectively. Table 4. Cumulative Risk for Homicide Victim Characteristic(s) Male Male, ages 15 to 44 Male, ages 15 to 44, Hispanic Male, ages 15 to 44, Black Number of Homicides Population 374 2,917,778 291 1,320,094 186 397,966 32 49,454 Homicide Rate (per 100,000) 12.8 22.0 46.7 64.7 Given the geographic concentration of homicides in Maricopa and Pima Counties, Tables 5 and 6 show the cumulative risk for homicide among all males, males age 15 to 44, and for Black and Hispanic males in that age group. In comparison to Arizona as a whole, the homicide rate for males is slightly higher in Maricopa and Pima Counties, at 14.8 and 15.3 per 100,000 in the population, respectively. Additionally, males aged 15 to 44 experienced higher homicide rates in Maricopa and Pima Counties as well. The rate in both counties was 25.6 per 100,000 in the population, as compared to 22.0 for the state. For Hispanic males, age 15 to 44, the homicide rate in Maricopa County was more than 10 points higher than for the state, at 58.0. In Pima County, Hispanic males age 15 to 44 experienced only a slightly higher homicide rate of 48.6 in comparison to the state. For Black males age 15 to 44, the homicide rate in Maricopa County was lower than for the state, at 64.7. However, the rate for this group in Pima County was more than twice the level of the state, at 132.9. Table 5. Cumulative Risk For Homicide in Maricopa County Victim Characteristic(s) Male Male, ages 15 to 44 Male, ages 15 to 44, Hispanic* Male, ages 15 to 44, Black* Number of Homicides 262 214 146 21 Population 1,765,583 836,490 251,848 34,348 Homicide Rate (per 100,000) 14.8 25.6 58.0 61.1 * Data on race and ethnicity by age could not be tabulated for 5 cases in Maricopa County. Homicide in Arizona, 2004 9 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission Table 6. Cumulative Risk For Homicide in Pima County Victim Characteristic(s) Male Male, ages 15 to 44 Male, ages 15 to 44, Hispanic* Male, ages 15 to 44, Black* Number of Homicides 70 52 32 10 Population 456,747 203,352 65,854 7,527 Homicide Rate (per 100,000) 15.3 25.6 48.6 132.9 * Data on race and ethnicity by age could not be tabulated for 7 cases in Pima County. Weapon Used Table 7 shows the type of weapon used in Arizona homicides. The analysis indicated that a firearm was used in 76.1% of homicides. The most likely weapon used in a homicide was a handgun (49.0%), followed by an unknown type of firearm (15.9%), rifle or shotgun (11.2%), knife/cutting instrument (9.4%), other weapon (8.9%), and blunt object (5.6%). Table 7. Weapon Type Handgun Rifle / Shotgun Firearm - Type Unknown Knife / Cutting Instrument Blunt Object Other Weapons Number of Homicides 219 50 71 42 25 40 Percentage of Homicides 49.0% 11.2% 15.9% 9.4% 5.6% 8.9% Victim/Offender Relationship The relationship between the victim and offender was also examined. The analysis indicated that victims were most likely to be killed by an acquaintance (36.5%). Just over 17% of homicide victims were killed by a stranger and about 7% of victims were killed by family members other than a spouse. Approximately 3% of victims were killed by their boyfriend/girlfriend and 3% were killed by a spouse/ex-spouse. However, it should be noted in 33.1% of cases, the relationship between the offender and victim could not be determined by law enforcement officials. Homicide in Arizona, 2004 10 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission Table 8. Victim/Offender Relationship Spouse / Ex - Spouse Other family Boyfriend/Girlfriend Other Acquaintance Stranger Relationship Undetermined Number of Homicides 15 35 17 184 86 167 Percentage of Homicides 3.0% 6.9% 3.4% 36.5% 17.1% 33.1% Circumstances Surrounding Homicide Incident The circumstances surrounding homicides in Arizona are detailed in Table 9. The analysis indicates that while homicides were the consequence of several circumstances, approximately 48% of homicides were alcohol and/or drug related. Specifically, 34.4% of homicides were drug related and 24.1% were alcohol related. However, domestic violence accounted for 16.7% of homicides, 14.7% were related to illegal immigration, and gangs accounted for another 10.3% of homicides. Just over 9% of homicides were related to robbery, 5.4% were related to child abuse, 2.5% were related to a sex crime, 2.2% were related to burglary, 1.1% were related to a hate crime, and .2% were school related. Last, 8.9% of homicides in Arizona were classified as justifiable homicides. Table 9. Circumstances Surrounding Homicide Incident Robbery Burglary Alcohol Related Drug Related Sexually Related Gang Related Domestic Violence Hate Crime Child Abuse Illegal Immigration School Related Justifiable Homicide Number of Homicides 43 10 108 154 11 46 75 5 24 66 1 40 Percentage of Homicides 9.6% 2.2% 24.1% 34.4% 2.5% 10.3% 16.7% 1.1% 5.4% 14.7% 0.2% 8.9% Note: Categories not mutually exclusive, so frequencies and percentages do not total 448 and 100% respectively. Homicide in Arizona, 2004 11 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission Number of Victims and Offenders Researchers examined the number of victims and offenders involved in each incident. Statewide, more than 87% of incidents involved a single victim; however, in about 12% of incidents multiple victims were killed. Additionally, the analysis indicated that 60% of homicides involved only one offender, nearly 9% of homicides involved multiple offenders, and the number of offenders participating in a homicide was unknown in 31% of incidents. Table 10. Number of Victims by Number of Offenders Single Victim / Single Offender Single Victim / Multiple Offenders Single Victim / Unknown Offenders Multiple Victims / Single offender Multiple Victims / Multiple Offenders Multiple Victims / Unknown Offenders Number of Homicides 237 32 124 32 8 15 Percentage of Homicides 52.9% 7.1% 27.7% 7.1% 1.8% 3.3% Location Where Victim Was Found Data were collected on the location where the victim was found or recovered. More than 23% of the homicide victims were found where only the victim lived and nearly 5% of the victims were found where only the offender lived. These figures increase substantially when including those incidents where the victim and offender lived together (31.7% and 12.7%, respectively). Almost 23% of victims were found in a street or alley, 12.4% were found at another residence, 5.6% were found in a desert area, and 7.4% were found at a business. Cumulatively, 15.1% were found in such areas as vacant lots, bodies of water, parks, and other places not mentioned above. Homicide in Arizona, 2004 12 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission Table 11. Location Where the Victim Was Found Desert Area Street / Alley Business Victim Residence Offender Residence Victim / Offender Residence Victim Relative Residence Offender Relative Residence Other Residence Vacant Lot Park Body of Water Other Unknown Missing Data Homicide in Arizona, 2004 Number of Homicides 25 102 33 106 21 36 2 2 52 7 5 1 51 4 1 Percentage of Homicides 5.6% 22.8% 7.4% 23.7% 4.7% 8.0% 0.4% 0.4% 11.6% 1.6% 1.1% 0.2% 11.4% 0.9% 0.2% 13 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission Characteristics of Neighborhoods Where Homicides Take Place In Table 12, comparisons are made between the neighborhood characteristics where homicides occurred and the characteristics of the “average” Arizona neighborhood. For this report neighborhoods were defined by tract boundaries from the 2000 U.S. Census. As shown in Table 12, homicides were more likely to take place in neighborhoods with greater population size and that were characterized as urban. Homicides were also more likely to take place in neighborhoods with a higher percentage of non-whites and Hispanics. For instance, Hispanic residents make up about 25% of the population in an “average Arizona neighborhood”; however, Hispanics comprise more than 41% of the population in neighborhoods where homicides took place. Likewise, homicides were more likely to take place in neighborhoods that had a higher percentage of foreign born and non-citizens residing within it. For example, noncitizen residents made up 8.8% of the population in an “average Arizona neighborhood”; but non-citizens comprised over 16% of the population in neighborhoods where homicides took place. Neighborhoods where homicides took place were also characterized as having a higher proportion of female-headed households. They also had a higher proportion of residents between the ages of 15 to 34 when compared to the “average Arizona neighborhood.” Related, neighborhoods where homicide occurred were comprised of residents with less formal education than residents in the “average Arizona neighborhood.” For example, those with less than a high school education comprised about 20% of the population in an “average Arizona neighborhood”; however, they comprised about 31% of the population in neighborhoods where homicides took place. Additionally, neighborhoods where homicide occurred had higher levels of unemployment, poverty, and had a median family income that was about 20.7% less than an “average Arizona neighborhood.” Homicide in Arizona, 2004 14 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission Table 12. Average Neighborhood* Characteristics of Homicides in Arizona 2004 Communities with a Homicide All Arizona Communities Population Structure Population Size Percentage Urban 5,530 91.74% 4,634 86.24% 66.45% 5.24% 2.84% 1.63% 0.14% 20.08% 41.12% 58.88% 75.19% 3.05% 5.64% 1.74% 0.13% 11.44% 25.11% 74.89% 20.50% 16.38% 12.64% 8.80% 32.64% 11.72% 14.13% 28.39% 10.91% 10.62% 3.05% 27.74% 24.65% 28.56% 10.50% 5.51% 1.79% 18.61% 24.19% 32.53% 14.73% 8.15% 7.74% $38,540 21.16% 4.14% 6.41% $48,581 14.49% 3.24% 50.92% 9.69% 42.38% 60.52% 11.42% 45.25% Racial / Ethnic Percentage Composition White Black Native American Asian Pacific Islander Other Hispanic Non-Hispanic Foreign Born Percentage Composition Total Non-citizens Family Structure Percentage Composition Age 15 - 34 Divorced Female-Headed Households Education Percentage Composition None Less than High School High School/GED Some College College Degree (4-Year) College Degree (Graduate) Economics Composition Percentage Unemployment Median Family Income Percentage Under Poverty Percentage Households with Public Assistance Housing Structure Percentage Composition Owner-Occupied Housing Vacant Housing Same Residence 5 yrs ago * Neighborhoods defined by tract boundaries from 2000 U.S. Census. Homicide in Arizona, 2004 15 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission Conclusions and Policy Recommendations The purpose of this report was to provide a general description of the scope and nature of the homicide problem in Arizona. Major findings of the research are as follows: 1. Risk for homicide is particularly concentrated by place and socio-demographic characteristics. For example, homicides were largely restricted to Maricopa, Mohave, and Pima Counties. These counties together accounted for over 91% of the homicides in the state and had homicide rates more than 7 per 100,000 population. Related, risk for homicide was particularly concentrated among Hispanic and Black males, aged 15 to 44. While Arizona’s homicide rate was 7.7 per 100,000 in 2004, it was 46.7 per 100,000 for Hispanic males, aged 15 to 44 and is 64.7 per 100,000 for Black males, aged 15 to 44. 2. In 2004, most Arizona homicides involved guns, drugs, and/or alcohol. For example, more than 75% of homicides were the result of a gunshot, compared to 66% nationally that same year.3 Additionally, more than 50% of homicides were characterized as being related to drugs and/or alcohol. Conversely, the analyses showed that most homicides did not involve gangs, illegal immigrants, or schools. 3. The neighborhoods in which homicides occurred in 2004 differed from the typical Arizona community. These communities had larger populations and were more likely to have higher proportions of minority and foreign born residents. Additionally, neighborhoods with homicides in 2004 exhibited greater levels of family disruption and lower levels of educational and economic status. This report’s key findings suggest four policy recommendations: 1. In coming years, Arizona will face a number of challenges in prioritizing the delivery of criminal justice services. First, state and local criminal justice agencies are increasingly being asked to address issues pertaining to homeland security. These requests often require an increase in state and local resources dedicated toward homeland security issues long believed to be a federal responsibility. Second, over the past ten years Arizona’s population has increased significantly, causing a strain on all parts of the criminal justice system. Last, state and local budgets have been cut as a consequence of the faltering economy. As such, criminal justice agencies are being asked to make do with fewer resources. With the above said, homicide is the most serious crime any community can experience, and the findings suggest that homicides are highly concentrated by place and victim/ offender characteristics. Accordingly, it should be possible to tailor violence intervention 3 FBI, Supplementary Homicide Reports, 1976-2005. Accessed at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/tables/weaponstab.htm on December 21, 2008. Homicide in Arizona, 2004 16 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission efforts toward specific places and people. Violence intervention efforts targeting high risk places and high risk persons are more likely to conserve financial resources and are more likely to result in a reduction in homicides. 2. These findings suggest that further research is needed on gun carrying and gun markets in Arizona. This research should focus on the scope and nature of gun violence, access to firearms, risk of sanctions for those who illegally possess firearms, and offenderbased determinants of gun-carrying behavior. This research should be used to determine the most appropriate strategies and tactics for reducing gun-related violence in the state. 3. The concentration of homicides by place suggests that communities experiencing lethal violence may differ in key structural features from other neighborhoods. Further research is needed to understand the social context and intersection of race/ethnicity, immigration, economics, and violence. Specific focus should be given to the manner in which community contexts and public policy interact to reduce homicide incidents in Arizona neighborhoods. 4. Last, it is recommended that the state continue to survey homicide trends in Arizona. Current geo-political boundaries often make it difficult to collect homicide data from law enforcement agencies across the state. This data is needed to examine homicide patterns across time, which could foster increased communication about emerging trends. This could, in turn, aid law enforcement agencies’ efforts to respond to everchanging contingencies in their environment. Homicide in Arizona, 2004 17 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission Appendix A Homicide in Arizona, 2004 18 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission SJS 2006 Homicide Grant Data Collection Instrument PART I: Incident Information Collector: _________________________ Completed on: ________________ Police Agency_______________________ DR# ______________ UCR Incident #________________ (UCR – data gathered from UCR database) SJS Grant Incident # __________________ (to be created by ACJC) Situation (UCR – data gathered from UCR database) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Single Victim/Single Offender Single Victim/Multiple Offenders Single Victim/Unknown Offender Multiple Victims/Single Offender Multiple Victims/Multiple Offenders Multiple Victims/Unknown Offender Date of Departmental Report (MM/DD/YY) ____________ Time incident reported to Police (24 hr clock) ____________ Date of death (MM/DD/YY) ____________ Time of death (24 hr clock) ____________ Medical Treatment: 1. 2. 3. 9. Victim dead at the scene Victim died on way to or upon arriving at hospital Victim admitted to hospital Unknown Homicide in Arizona, 2004 19 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission SJS 2006 Homicide Grant Data Collection Instrument Location (address) where victim found (will be geo-coded to census block) Street Number __________________________ Direction __________ Street Name ________________________________ Apt Nbr __________ City ________________________ ZIP _____________ If victim found at intersection, record cross streets and direction of corner Victim found at: NE SE NW SW corner of: ______________________________________________ (Street #1) and ______________________________________________ (Street #2) Additional comments re location: _____________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ Location (address) of assault leading to death (will be geo-coded to census block) Street Number __________________________ Direction __________ Street Name ________________________________ Apt Nbr __________ City ________________________ ZIP _____________ If victim assaulted at intersection, record cross streets and direction of corner Victim assaulted at: NE SE NW SW corner of: ______________________________________________ (Street #1) and ______________________________________________ (Street #2) Homicide in Arizona, 2004 20 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission SJS 2006 Homicide Grant Data Collection Instrument Additional comments re location: _____________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ Are the location where the assault took place and where the body was found: 1. The same 2. Different 9. Unknown Description of location of fatal assault: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. Bar Street Desert area Abandoned building Body of Water Hotel Gas Station Grocery Package Liquor store Bank Other Commercial Establishment Office Building Personal Transportation Public Transportation Crack house Prostitute house Victim residence inside Victim residence transition area Victim residence outside Offender residence inside Offender residence transition area Offender residence outside Victim/Offender residence inside Homicide in Arizona, 2004 24. Victim/Offender residence transition area 25. Victim/Offender residence outside 26. Relative of victim residence inside 27. Relative of victim residence transition area 28. Relative of victim residence outside 29. Relative of offender residence inside 30. Relative of offender residence transition area 31. Relative of offender residence outside 32. Other residence inside 33. Other residence transition area 34. Other residence outside 35. Primary or secondary School 36. Alley 37. Field/vacant lot 38. City/county park 39. Other ____________ 40. Missing from File 99. Unknown 21 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission SJS 2006 Homicide Grant Data Collection Instrument Description of location where body found: 1. Bar 2. Street 3. Desert area 4. Abandoned building 5. Body of Water 6. Hotel 7. Gas Station 8. Grocery 9. Package Liquor store 10. Bank 11. Other Commercial Establishment 12. Office Building 13. Personal Transportation 14. Public Transportation 15. Crack house 16. Prostitute house 17. Victim residence inside 18. Victim residence transition area 19. Victim residence outside 20. Offender residence inside 21. Offender residence transition area 22. Offender residence outside 23. Victim/Offender residence inside Homicide in Arizona, 2004 24. Victim/Offender residence transition area 25. Victim/Offender residence outside 26. Relative of victim residence inside 27. Relative of victim residence transition area 28. Relative of victim residence outside 29. Relative of offender residence inside 30. Relative of offender residence transition area 31. Relative of offender victim residence outside 32. Other residence inside 33. Other residence transition area 34. Other residence outside 35. Primary or secondary School 36. Alley 37. Field/vacant lot 38. City/county park 39. Other ____________ 40. Missing from File 99. Unknown 22 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission SJS 2006 Homicide Grant Data Collection Instrument Was Robbery a motive? 1 2 3 9 Strong arm robbery Armed Robbery Victim was a robber Robbery not involved. Was Burglary a motive? 1 Burglary involved 2 Victim is a burglar 9 Burglary not involved Is there positive information to indicate this was an incident involving alcohol? Check all that apply. 1. Victim was under the influence of alcohol just prior to or during the incident. 2. Offender was under the influence of alcohol just prior to or during the incident. 3. Other alcohol (explain)___________________________________. 9. No information to indicate alcohol was involved in incident. Is there positive information to indicate this was an incident involving illegal use of drugs? (Check all that apply.) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Victim was under the influence of illegal drugs. Offender(s) was under the influence of illegal drugs. Victim was buying, selling or transporting illegal drugs. Offender was buying, selling or transporting illegal drugs. Victim was attempting to get money for drugs (personal use). Offender was attempting to get money for drugs (personal use). Incident involved an argument over possession, use, quality, or cost of drugs. 8. Other drug involvement (explain)_______________________________________________. 9. Illegal drugs not involved in incident. Homicide in Arizona, 2004 23 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission SJS 2006 Homicide Grant Data Collection Instrument Is there positive information to indicate this was an incident involving sexual assault or commercial sex? (Check all that apply.) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Victim was sexually assaulted Victim was threatened with sexual assault Offender was sexually assaulted Offender was threatened with sexual assault Incident involved act of prostitution Incident involved business of prostitution (Pimp was offender or victim). Undetermined – some evidence of sexual motive, but unclear (explain) _____________________________________________________ 8. Other (explain) ____________________________________________ 9. Sexual motive not involved. Is there positive information to indicate this was an incident involving gangs? (Check all that apply.) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Victim a gang member Offender a gang member Offender initiated incident as act of gang retaliation Victim initiated incident as act of gang retaliation Offender and victim were members of rival gangs Offender and victim were members of same gangs Either Offender or Victim was member of a gang, bust incident not gangrelated. 8. Other (explain) ____________________________________________ 9. Incident not gang related. Is there positive information to indicate this was an incident of domestic violence? (Check all that apply.) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Victim Victim Victim Victim Victim Victim Victim and offender are legally married and offender are cohabitating and offender were divorced and offender once cohabitated or defendant is pregnant by the other party and offender were in a same sex relationship at time of incident and offender once had a same sex relationship Homicide in Arizona, 2004 24 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission SJS 2006 Homicide Grant Data Collection Instrument 8. Victim or offender is a child residing (or has resided)in the same house and is related by blood to a former spouse of the other party 9. Other (explain) ____________________________________________ 10. Incident not one of domestic violence. Is there positive information to indicate this was a hate crime? (Check all that apply.) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 9. Offender was motivated by racial or ethnic hatred Offender was motivated by hatred of victim’s sexual orientation Victim was motivated by racial or ethnic hatred Victim was motivated by hatred of victim’s sexual orientation Other (explain) ____________________________________________ Incident not a hate crime. Is there positive information to indicate this was an incident related to child abuse? (Check all that apply.) 1. 2. 3. 9. Victim was a minor with an ongoing relationship with the offender Offender was a minor with an ongoing relationship with the victim Other (explain) ____________________________________________ Incident not one of child abuse. Is there positive information to indicate this was an incident involving illegal immigration? (Check all that apply.) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 9. Victim was an illegal alien Offender was an illegal alien Victim was involved in transporting illegal aliens Offender was involved in transporting illegal aliens Other (explain) ____________________________________________ Incident not related to illegal immigration. Is there positive information to indicate this incident was school related? (Check all that apply.) School is defined as elementary or secondary school only. 1. Incident occurred on school grounds during school hours 2. Incident occurred at school sponsored event 3. Victim and offender attended same school Homicide in Arizona, 2004 25 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission SJS 2006 Homicide Grant Data Collection Instrument 4. Victim and offender attended different schools 5. Other (explain) ___________________________________________ 9. There is no information to connect school attendance with this incident. Was victim a third person intervening in another crime or fight? 1. Yes victim was a police officer/security guard. 2. Yes but victim was not a police officer/security guard. 3. Victim was a passive bystander (e.g.: mistaken identity, unintended target, caught in gang crossfire) 9. No. Was this an incident of criminal negligence? 1. Yes 2. No (UCR) Was this a Justifiable homicide? (UCR – data gathered from UCR database) 1. Police Involved 2. Self Defense 9. Not Justifiable Homicide Weapon used by offender. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Firearm, type not stated Rifle Shotgun Handgun Other Gun Knife, Other Cutting Instrument 7. Blunt Object 8. Personal Weapons hands, feet 9. Poison 10. Pushed 11. Explosives 12. Fire 13. Narcotics/Drugs 14. Drowning 15. Strangulation (incl. Hanging) 16. Asphyxiation 17. Other ___________ 18. Unknown 19. Vehicle Was weapon recovered? 1. Yes 2. No 9 No data Status of Case 1. Suspect(s) arrested Homicide in Arizona, 2004 2. No arrest(s) 26 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission SJS 2006 Homicide Grant Data Collection Instrument How was case closed/cleared? 1. Death of Offender 2. Bar to prosecution 3. Not cleared 4. Cleared by Arrest 5. Out of Country; can not extradite 6. No Data Number of Offenders identified ________________ Number of Offenders arrested ________________ Number of offenders charged ___________________ Homicide in Arizona, 2004 27 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission SJS 2006 Homicide Grant Data Collection Instrument II. Victim Information Complete one form per Victim. There will be a separate set of “victim” variables for each victim. This victim is #_____ of ______ in this incident. VICTIM NAME Last _____________________________ First _____________________________ Middle_____________________________ Suffix ________ Soc Sec Nbr __________________ Date of Birth ____________ Age at time of Incident _________ 0 = Birth to 11 months 1 = 12 to 23 months 999 = No data Gender ________ M = 1; F = 2. Race 1. White 2. Black 3. American Indian/Alaskan Native 4. Asian/Pacific Islander 5. Other 9. Unknown 1. 2. 9. Ethnicity Hispanic Non-Hispanic Unknown Marital Status 1. Single 2. Married Homicide in Arizona, 2004 3. Divorced 4. Widowed 9. Unknown 28 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission SJS 2006 Homicide Grant Data Collection Instrument Citizenship 1. 2. United States Mexico 3. 9. Other Unknown Alien Status: 1. 2. 3. 4. 9. Legal Illegal Suspected Illegal US Citizen Unknown Did victim have outstanding warrant? 1 Yes 2 No 9 Unknown Victim blood alcohol level _____________ Victim urinalysis result 1. Positive Name of Drug ____________________ 2. Negative 3. No urinalysis ______________ Victim’s CJ system status (choose only most severe) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 9. No status Parolee Probationer Pending Trial Pending Sentencing Unknown Does victim have a prior criminal record? 1. Yes 2. No 9. Unknown Number of Prior Felony Arrests for Victim _______________ (ACCH – data gathered from Az Computerized Criminal History data base) Number of Prior Arrests for Crimes against Persons for Victim _________(ACCH – data gathered from Az Computerized Criminal History data base) Homicide in Arizona, 2004 29 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission SJS 2006 Homicide Grant Data Collection Instrument Number of Prior Felony Convictions for Victim _________(ACCH – data gathered from Az Computerized Criminal History data base) Months on Probation for Victim ___________(ACCH – data gathered from Az Computerized Criminal History data base) Months in Prison for Victim ____________(ACCH – data gathered from Az Computerized Criminal History data base) Victim’s SID ___________(ACCH – data gathered from Az Computerized Criminal History data base) Homicide in Arizona, 2004 30 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission SJS 2006 Homicide Grant Data Collection Instrument PART III: Offender Information Complete one form per Offender. There will be a separate set of “offender” variables for each offender – up to 5 – on each victim record. ____________________________________________ This offender is #_______ of _________ offenders in this incident. Offender Name Last _____________________________ First _____________________________ Middle_____________________________ Suffix ________ Offender Soc Sec No_________________________ Offender SID#__________________________ Date Offender Arrested (MM/DD/YY)____________ Time Offender Arrested (24 hr clock) _______________________ Offense for which arrested ________________ (ARS designation) Offender Date of Birth (MM/DD/YY)____________ Age at time of Incident _________ Offender Gender ________________ M = 1; F = 2. Race 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 9. White Black American Indian/Alaskan Native Asian/Pacific Islander Other Unknown Homicide in Arizona, 2004 31 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission SJS 2006 Homicide Grant Data Collection Instrument Offender Ethnicity __________________ a. Hispanic 2 Non-Hispanic 9. Unknown Marital Status 1. Single 2. Married 3. Divorced 4. Widowed 9. Unknown Citizenship 1. 2. 3. 9. United States Mexico Other ____________ Unknown 1. 2. 3. 8. 9. Legal Illegal Suspected Illegal US Citizen Unknown Alien Status: Did Offender have outstanding warrant at time of Incident? 1 Yes 2 No 9 Unknown Offender’s CJ system status at time of incident (choose only most severe) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 9. No status Parolee Probationer Pending Trial Pending Sentencing Unknown Did offender have a prior criminal record at time of incident? (ACCH – data gathered from Az Computerized Criminal History data base) 1. Yes 2. No Homicide in Arizona, 2004 9. Unknown 32 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission SJS 2006 Homicide Grant Data Collection Instrument Number of Prior Felony Arrests for Offender _________ (ACCH – data gathered from Az Computerized Criminal History data base) Number of prior arrests for crimes against person for offender__________ (ACCH – data gathered from Az Computerized Criminal History data base) Number of Prior Felony Convictions for Offender _________ (ACCH – data gathered from Az Computerized Criminal History data base) Months on Probation for Offender ___________(ACCH – data gathered from Az Computerized Criminal History data base) Months in Prison for Offender ____________ (ACCH – data gathered from Az Computerized Criminal History data base) Offender’s blood alcohol level ____________ Date tested __________________ Offender’s urinalysis result _____________ Date tested (MMDDYY)_____________ Homicide in Arizona, 2004 33 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission SJS 2006 Homicide Grant Data Collection Instrument What was offender’s relationship to victim? (UCR) 'HU' 'WI' 'CH' 'CW' 'MO' 'FA' 'SO' 'DA' 'BR' 'SI' 'IL' 'SF' 'SM' 'SS' 'SD' 'OF' 'NE' 'AQ' 'BF' 'GF' 'XH' 'XW' 'EE' 'ER' 'HO' 'OK' 'ST' 'UN' Husband Wife Common Law Husband Common Law Wife Mother Father Son Daughter Brother Sister In-law Stepfather Stepmother Stepson Stepdaughter Other Family Neighbor Acquaintance Boyfriend Girlfriend Ex-husband Ex-Wife Employee Employer Homosexual relationship Other – known to victim Stranger Can't be determined. Homicide in Arizona, 2004 34 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission SJS 2006 Homicide Grant Data Collection Instrument Weapon used by Offender (UCR) 11 12 13 14 15 20 30 40 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 Firearm, type not stated Handgun Rifle Shotgun Other Gun Knife, other cutting instrument Blunt object Personal weapons, hands, feet Poison Pushed out of window Explosives Fire Narcotics/Drugs Drowning Strangulation (incl hanging) Asphyxiation Other (type weapon undesignated or unknown) Was the Offender Arrested at the Scene? 1. Yes 2. No 3. Offender Unknown 9. No data Was the Offender identified at the scene? 1. Yes 2. No 3. Offender Unknown 9. No data Was the Offender identified through investigation? 1. Yes 2. No 3. Offender Unknown 9. No data Did the Offender admit to the crime? 1. Yes 2. No 3. Offender Unknown 9. No data Homicide in Arizona, 2004 35 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission SJS 2006 Homicide Grant Data Collection Instrument The offender was taken into custody by: 1. Patrol 2. Detectives 3. Other jurisdiction 4. FBI In re this offender, case was exceptionally cleared by: 1. Death of Offender 2. Bar to Prosecution. 9. No Data. In re this offender, date case was cleared: _________________(MM/DD/YY) 888888 = case not cleared 999999 = no data. Did the offender die before the final disposition of the case? 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Killed subsequent to and as a result of the incident. Killed subsequent to but not as a result of the incident. Killed at the scene. Suicide. Died of natural causes. Died, but cause of death unknown. Offender not dead. No Data Disposition of Incident for this offender. (ACCH – data gathered from Az Computerized Criminal History data base) 1. Unsolved/no judicial action 2. Outcome pending trial 3. Outcome pending sentencing 4. Conviction - murder 5. Conviction - manslaughter 6. Conviction - lesser homicide 7. Conviction – other charge 8. Dismiss 9. Acquitted after trial 10. Case closed 11. Exceptionally cleared 12. Unfounded 99. No data In re this offender, date of disposition: _____________________ (MM/DD/YY) 888888 = case not cleared 999999 = no data. Homicide in Arizona, 2004 36 Arizona Criminal Justice Commission SJS 2006 Homicide Grant Data Collection Instrument The remainder of this page left for comments and explanation as needed. Homicide in Arizona, 2004 37