The logic of simply summing crimes of all kind into a single total has long been challenged as misleading. All crimes are not created equal. Counting them as if they are fosters distortion of risk assessments, resource allocation, and accountability. To solve this problem, Sherman (2007, 2010, 2011 and 2013) has offered a general proposal to create a weighted 'Crime Harm Index (CHI).' This article provides and explicates a detailed procedure for operationalizing this idea in UK: what we call the 'Cambridge CHI.' The new elements of the Cambridge CHI presented here are (1) the use of the 'starting point' in the national Sentencing Guidelines to define the number of days in prison for each offence type; (2) the exclusion of proactively detected, previously unreported offences, and (3) a comparative analysis of the Cambridge and other approaches to weighting crime harm, judged by a three-pronged test of democracy, reliability, and cost.

This chapter is focused on police-led diversion of offenders from the formal criminal justice process. Over the last 50 years, there has been increasing interest in the potential of diversion programmes, initially for young people, more recently for adults as well. Diversion has become associated with the Community Policing movement in policing. It has also been criticised for being a 'soft' option for offenders. The aim of this chapter is to explore the case for and, where appropriate, against police-led diversion, drawing on the best evidence available. The analysis shows how the evaluation evidence has developed and, with systematic review, becomes more persuasive. Starting from a brief overview of the history of police-led diversion, the chapter reviews that evidence base. It explores how the evidence suggests the most effective ways to use diversion. There is an assessment of the challenges of successful implementation, which has received increasing focus in the most recent research. The chapter concludes with a reflection on the importance of diversion in the reform of the criminal justice system.

Simon Daniels, Eleanor Neyroud UWE Hartpury, and Jane Buchan Baileys Horse Feeds discuss the nutritional requirements of youngstock

No abstract