No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Purpose Frameworks for understanding victim harm and vulnerability have become central to priority-setting and resource allocation for decision-makers in the police and government in the UK. This paper aims to look at the meaning of vulnerability in the context of fraud. Design/methodology/approach The research took a mixed methods approach, including analysis of national crime data (n = 61,902), qualitative data collected from interviews with practitioners (n = 107) and a survey of strategic lead officers in the police (n = 32). Findings There was a lack of clarity across practitioners and organisations in their understanding of vulnerability and the way it informed the police response to fraud, and a lack of resources and capability for identifying it. Research limitations/implications The authors invite reconsideration of the approach to fraud victims which have for too long been forgotten by response and support agencies. Practical implications We need to standardise and agree the definition of “vulnerability”; rethink eligibility levels; and refocus police on fraud victims taking vulnerability as a meaningful criterion in deciding who to support. Originality/value There is very little research on vulnerability and fraud victims; this paper, based on original research, fills this gap.

This article explores the role of organized crime groups in persistent theft and shop theft. It is based on an analysis of police data using exploratory analytical techniques assessing the extent of connectivity between acquisitive offenders. The research also draws on qualitative data collected from interviews. The findings suggest that shop theft was predominantly committed by UK nationals; although foreign nationals were proportionately more likely to be involved in organized crime, there is some evidence that they may themselves be being exploited. The findings are discussed and suggestions for further research are made.