- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 24,751
- Reaction score
- 5,326
- Country

If you read the report, you will find the "why" the conclusions of COCAD and VKPP are wrong. They are clearly spelt out. Nosenout will dismiss the rebuttal as irrelevant waffle.Your comment does have a certain logical consistency. Although I would be interested to read a reasoned rebuttal.
The Audit claims:
Presenting the data without the ‘unknowns’ where the identification of ethnicity is at such a low level is misleading. p75
Nosenout knows better:
Uknown is the majority. thats the point.2%
28%
Guess which is the majority...?
Flawed conclusion - can't be clearer than that. Not to mention that its CSE/CSA data, so 96.3% irrelevant anyway.VKPP and COCAD reports on child sexual abuse and exploitation data were not available at the time the Home Office published their paper but, as discussed earlier in this chapter, their data does not include sufficient ethnicity data to conclude that the majority of offenders are White.
4.3.8. Perpetrator Ethnicity
Lots of analysis on data where ethnicity is reliably known and the outcome is vastly different. The Casey report comments on this in several places.
All of which I have posted so wont repeat myself.