Establishing the prevalence of sibling sexual abuse as reported to and recorded by police forces across England and Wales

Abstract

This report outlines research into sibling sexual abuse incidents as recorded by police forces across England and Wales and does not include incidents dealt with by social services, the NHS, or schools where cases were not treated as a crime. This is the first piece of research of its kind and the first to attempt to gain a national picture of sibling sexual abuse as recorded by the police.

The purpose of the research was:
a) to identify whether all police forces were recording specific incidents of sibling sexual abuse and
b) to gain insight into the prevalence of sibling sexual abuse compared with other intrafamilial abuse and c) where possible to analyse the gender and age of the child who was harmed and the child who harmed.

A FOI was submitted to each of the 43 police forces across England and Wales. Data was received from 27 police forces – in various formats, however only data from 21 of the 27 police forces was clear enough to be reliably used; 14 police forces refused to provide the data – for a number of reasons; and 2 police forces did not reply by the time of publication of this report – although some of these did acknowledge the request.

Full text

Page 1 of 18
Establishing the prevalence of sibling
sexual abuse as reported to and recorded
by police forces across England and Wales
Authors: Amy Adams and Eleanor Crosby
RCEW National Sibling Sexual Abuse Project
June 2022

Page 2 of 18
Executive summary
From 2020 to 2022, Rape Crisis England & Wales (RCEW) in partnership with two universities and two
rape crisis centres, is undertaking a ground-breaking project to support victims and survivors of recent
and historic sibling sexual abuse. The two-year project is the largest Government funded project on sibling
sexual abuse to date in the UK. Funded by the Home Ofce and Ministry of Justice, it is also the rst
England and Wales wide project on sibling sexual abuse.
The project considers this Freedom of Information (FOI) request to be the rst national (England and Wales)
piece of research into prevalence rates of sibling sexual abuse.
This report outlines research into sibling sexual abuse incidents as recorded by police forces across
England and Wales and does not include incidents dealt with by social services, the NHS, or schools where
cases were not treated as a crime. This is the rst piece of research of its kind and the rst to attempt to
gain a national picture of sibling sexual abuse as recorded by the police.
The purpose of the research was:
a) to identify whether all police forces were recording specic incidents of sibling sexual abuse and
b) to gain insight into the prevalence of sibling sexual abuse compared with other intrafamilial abuse and
c) where possible to analyse the gender and age of the child who was harmed and the child who harmed.
A FOI was submitted to each of the 43 police forces across England and Wales. Data was received from 27
police forces – in various formats, however only data from 21 of the 27 police forces was clear enough to be
reliably used; 14 police forces refused to provide the data – for a number of reasons; and 2 police forces did
not reply by the time of publication of this report – although some of these did acknowledge the request.

Page 3 of 18
Key findings
24%
40%
36%
Across 21 police forces in England and Wales, between the years
2017-2020 there were 11,840 police recorded incidents of intrafamilial
sexual offences and assaults, where the victim was under 18.
11,840
2,869
4,684
4,287
19%
7%
74%
26%
73%
1%
Of the 11,840 recorded incidents of intrafamilial
sexual offences and assaults:
were other family member
relationship – accounting for 36%
were recorded as a sibling
relationship – accounting for 24%
were parent-child relationship –
accounting for 40%
1,422
31
505
16 police forces were able to provide a breakdown
of sibling sexual abuse by gender. Of the recorded
incidents of siblings who have been harmed:
siblings were recorded as Male –
accounting for 26%
siblings were recorded as Female –
accounting for 73%
siblings were recorded as Other/
Unknown – accounting for 1%
146
368
1,463
Of the recorded incidents of siblings who have harmed:
siblings were recorded as Male,
accounting for 74%
siblings were recorded as Female,
accounting for 7%
siblings were recorded as Other/
Unknown, accounting for 19%

Page 4 of 18
Denition of Sibling Sexual Abuse
A 2020 denition of the abuse states:
‘Sibling1 sexual abuse consists of sexual acts initiated by one sibling toward another without the other’s
consent, by use of force or coercion, or where there is a power differential between the siblings. It may
involve children of similar or different ages; aggression, coercion, or force; harm or potential for harm; occur
frequently or infrequently; and may include minor or advanced sexual behaviours. This includes sexual
behaviour that the harmed child is not developmentally prepared for, is not transitory, and does not reect
age-appropriate curiosity. It may or may not involve physical touching, coercion, or force. Non-contact
sibling sexual abuse may include behaviour that is intended to sexually stimulate the harmed sibling or the
offender. It can include unwanted sexual references in conversation, indecent exposure, forcing a sibling
to observe others’ sexual behaviour, taking pornographic pictures, or forcing a sibling to view pornography.
It also may include sibling sexual contact perceived as non-abusive by both victim and offender, which
nonetheless meets these criteria (Caffaro. 2020. p.7).’
There is no universally accepted denition of sibling sexual abuse. This lack of consistency and clarity
contributes signicantly to the challenges in identifying the abuse with the risk that vague denitions will
provide poor guidance to professionals.
The RCEW National Project on Sibling Sexual Abuse uses, when appropriate, the following summary
denition of sibling sexual abuse:
A form of harmful sexual behaviour or activity involving the misuse of power and victimising intent or
outcome between children who self-identify as siblings.
Project summary
From 2020 to 2022, Rape Crisis England & Wales (RCEW) in partnership with two universities and two
rape crisis centres, is undertaking a ground-breaking project to support victims and survivors of recent
and historic sibling sexual abuse. The two-year project is the largest Government funded project on sibling
sexual abuse to date in the UK. Funded by the Home Ofce and Ministry of Justice, it is also the rst
England and Wales wide project on sibling sexual abuse.
The main aims of the project are to:
• improve the provision of specialist support for both recent and historic victims and survivors of sibling
sexual abuse across England and Wales to enable them to recover, heal and rebuild their lives;
• improve the continuity, consistency, and quality standards of specialist support for recent and historic
victims and survivors of sibling sexual abuse across England and Wales.
The project has worked with:
• two universities who have carried out academic research;
• an advisory group made up of professionals in the eld and those with lived experience of sibling
sexual abuse;
Footnotes
1
The majority of children in the UK grow up with siblings (Ofce for National Statistics, 2012). There are many forms of sibling relationship:
biological brothers and sisters, step-siblings, half-siblings, adoptive siblings, foster siblings and social siblings – children not biologically
or legally related but who have been brought up together or in close proximity and share an enduring bond. In some cultural and social
contexts, extended family relationships exist that share many of the characteristics of what may be conceptualised as that between siblings.

Page 5 of 18
• professionals and practitioners from across England and Wales, 713 of whom participated in a survey
regarding sibling sexual abuse.
From this range of activities involving many individuals it became obvious that there are no national
statistics showing the prevalence of sibling sexual abuse.
Rebecca Pritchard from Avon & Somerset Constabulary forwarded statistics relating to sibling sexual abuse,
recorded by the database for her area. This provided useful data and it was decided to try to access the same
data from other police forces to gain a fuller picture of sibling sexual abuse across England and Wales.
Acknowledgements
Thank you to all the England and Wales police forces who provided the project with the requested FOI data.
And thank you to Avon & Somerset Constabulary who provided the rst FOI dataset and helped the project
formulate subsequent FOI questions used for the remaining police forces.
Data disclaimer
It should be noted that the datasets provided by each police force varied in quality and clarity and some of
police forces did not supply rich metadata. Further, the ndings provided within this report have derived from
secondary data sources; because of this there may be data errors that the project has no control over, for
example a number of police forces stated that the quality and accuracy of the FOI data is subject to police
ofcers correctly recording incidents from the onset. Thus, the ndings provided in this report are only as
accurate as the original police FOI datasets.
Terms of reference
The language used by England and Wales police forces differs from language used by the RCEW National
Project on Sibling Sexual Abuse. When referring to sexual abuse involving siblings who are under the age
of 18 years the project refers to this as ‘harmful sexual behaviour/s’ involving ‘siblings who have harmed’
and ‘siblings who have been harmed’. Whereas police forces adopt legal terminology to refer to sibling
sexual abuse and use terms such as ‘victim’ and ‘offender’ or ‘suspect’. This is why when formulating the
FOI questions legal terminology was adopted, however when discussing the ndings within the report the
terminology used by the project has been implemented.
Aims and objectives of data collection:
Police forces have a signicant role in keeping children safe. They can often be the rst organisation to
identify children who may be at risk from abuse. They have the responsibility to investigate alleged offences
against children and to make enquiries in order to safeguard and secure the welfare of any child within their
area who is suffering or likely to suffer signicant harm.
The aim of this research was to identify how many recorded incidents of sexual offences and assaults
where the relationship was labelled as ‘sibling’ have been recorded by police forces across England and
Wales between 2017- 2020 to establish:
a) whether sibling sexual abuse is being recorded by police forces, and
b) the prevalence of sibling sexual abuse as reported to and recorded by the police.
The Objective: To send a Freedom of Information request (based on the questions and statistics provided
by Avon & Somerset Police Force) to all police forces across England and Wales asking:
For the years 2017, 2018, 2019 and 2020
• How many sexual offences involved a victim under 18?
• How many offences recorded the suspect as a parent?

Page 6 of 18
• How many offences recorded the suspect as a sibling?
• What was the breakdown of gender for victim/suspect?
• What was the breakdown of age for victim/suspect?
Note that recorded offences of parents and other family members has been included only to show the
prevalence of sibling sexual abuse in comparison to other forms of intrafamilial sexual abuse.
The questions asked by the project:
A Freedom of Information request was put into all 43 police forces across England and Wales.
• See Appendix 1: List of police forces from the FOI Directory;
• See Appendix 2: Questions asked as part of the FOI request.
Responses from police forces:
All 43 police forces across England and Wales were asked to provide FOI data outlined in Appendix 2.
Of the 43 police forces, 21 provided sufcient data which has been included within the report; 2 did not
respond to the FOI request; 6 provided FOI data, however the data was insufcient and was not used within
the report, data insufciencies include missing data and data inconsistencies; and 14 responded to the
FOI request but were unable to provide FOI data; response issues include the FOI request exceeded the
appropriate 18 hour time and £450 cost limit and the FOI data requested was not recorded by the police
force or could not easily be retrieved.
Findings in relation to FOI request include:
• there is a list of sexual offences that police forces are required to record, but sibling sexual abuse is not
specically listed;
• recording of sibling sexual abuse is at the discretion of each police force and varies greatly from force
to force;
• recent changes in recording systems used by some forces will allow relationships to be recorded;
• COVID-19 has affected the ability of some FOI Teams to respond within the 20 days.
For more information about reasons for refusal, see Appendix 1.
See bar graph below for a visual summary of this data:
All 43 England and Wales Police Force FOI data outcomes and responses
Sufcient
data Unable to
provide data No
response Insufcient
data
Data outcome/response
Number of police forces
6
2
14
21

Page 7 of 18
Overall ndings:
Below is a summary of England and Wales police recorded incidents of intrafamilial sexual offences and
assaults, where the victim was under 18.
Between the years 2017-2020 there were 11,840 police recorded incidents of intrafamilial sexual offences
and assaults, where the victim was under 18. This data has been collated and grouped using FOI data
provided by 21 police forces across England and Wales.
Of the 11,840 recorded incidents of intrafamilial sexual offences and assaults 2,869 were recorded as a
‘sibling’ relationship (including brother and sister, step/half, adopted and foster siblings). Incidents involving
a ‘sibling’ relationship account for 24% of all police recorded incidents of intrafamilial sexual offences and
assaults, where both the sibling who has harmed and the sibling who has been harmed was under 18.
Of the 11,840 recorded incidents of intrafamilial sexual offences and assaults 4,684 were recorded as ‘a
parent-child’ relationship (including father and mother, step, adopted and foster parents). Incidents involving
a ‘parent-child’ relationship account for 40% of all police recorded incidents of intrafamilial sexual and
offences and assaults, where the victim was under 18.
Of the 11,840 recorded incidents of intrafamilial sexual offences and assaults 4,287 were recorded as
‘other family member’. Incidents involving a ‘other family member’ relationship (including cousins, uncles
and aunts, grandparents, nephews and nieces, other family and unknown) account for 36% of all police
recorded incidents of intrafamilial sexual offences and assaults, where the victim was under 18.
See the pie chart below for a visual summary of the overall data:
Findings from the FOI data
England and Wales Police Forces
recorded incidents of intrafamilal
sexual offences and assaults where
the victim was under 18 (2017-2020)
Sibling
Parent-child
Other family member
Notes - From police forces who provided age related data, 221 of the 2,480 sibling incidents involved a
sibling offender aged 18 and above, and the victim was under 18.
24%
40%
36%

Page 8 of 18
The ndings of this research appear to contradict those of other academic research papers into to overall
prevalence of sibling sexual abuse where the conclusion has been that:
• sibling sexual abuse is considered the most common form of child sexual abuse in our homes (Krienert
& Walsh, 2011; Yates & Allardyce, 2021);
• it is estimated to be three to ve times more likely that a child will be sexually abused by a sibling than a
parent/step-parent (Smith & Israel, 1987).
The project supports these academic ndings for the following reasons:
• sibling sexual abuse has lower disclosure rates than other forms of child sexual abuse (Yates &
Allardyce, 2021);
• intrafamilial abuse carried out by an adult perpetrator is more likely to be reported to the police than
abuse carried out by a child who is a sibling;
• sibling sexual abuse may not be processed through the criminal justice system due to factors including
the age of the children involved and the context of the abuse;
• the gures offered within this research represent only the number of sibling sexual abuse cases that
were reported to police forces in England and Wales between 2017 and 2020.
Thus, the prevalence rate offered within this report holds importance, yet is unlikely to represent the true
extent of sibling sexual abuse cases. However, ndings from this report are the rst time any form of
evidence-based national prevalence of sibling sexual abuse has been collated on such a scale, therefore
the prevalence can be described as signicant.
Findings on gender:
Below is a summary of police recorded incidents of intrafamilial sexual offences and assaults involving a
‘sibling’ relationship, organised by gender.
From the FOI data provided by 21 police forces across England and Wales, 16 police forces provided
information regarding the gender of siblings who have been harmed and siblings who have harmed. Of this
data there were 1,958 police recorded incidents where the gender of siblings who have been harmed could
be identied; and 1,977 police recorded incidents where the gender of siblings who have harmed could be
identied.
Of the 1,958 police recorded incidents where the gender of siblings who have been harmed by a sibling
could be identied
• 505 siblings were recorded as Male, accounting for 26%
• 1,422 siblings were recorded as Female, accounting for 73%
• 31 siblings were recorded as Other/Unknown, accounting for 1%
Of the 1,977 police recorded incidents where the gender of siblings who have harmed a sibling could be
identied
• 1,463 siblings were recorded as Male, accounting for 74%
• 146 siblings were recorded as Female, accounting for 7%
• 368 siblings were recorded as Other/Unknown, accounting for 19%

Page 9 of 18
See bar graphs below for a visual summary of the gender data:
England and Wales Police Forces recorded incidents of intrafamilal sexual
offences and assaults where the relationship was recorded as a ‘sibling’.
A summary of siblings who have been harmed organised by gender (2017-2020)
Male Female
0
300
600
900
1,200
1,500
Other/unknown
Gender
Count of police force
recorded incidents
England and Wales Police Forces recorded incidents of intrafamilal sexual
offences and assaults where the relationship was recorded as a ‘sibling’.
A summary of siblings who have harmed organised by gender (2017-2020)
Male Female Other/unknown
Gender
Count of police force
recorded incidents
0
300
600
900
1,200
1,500

Page 10 of 18
Findings on age:
As part of the FOI request the age of siblings who have harmed and siblings who have been harmed was
requested. A small number of police forces did provide this age-related data, however many of the police
forces did not provide this data; therefore it was decided not to include this data within the report.
The main reasons for not including data on age are:
• police forces could not provide the data because of S40 (personal information) and S12 (cost limit
exceeded) of the FOI Act
• There were inconsistencies across the data with regards to how age was recorded therefore it was not
possible to group data relating to age for analysis
Note: Some police forces did not provide age related data and no reason was given.

Page 11 of 18
The aim of this report was to examine, for the rst time, whether police forces across England and Wales
are recording incidents of sibling sexual abuse, and what the prevalence of sibling sexual abuse as reported
and recorded by the police is. This report has demonstrated that sibling sexual abuse as recorded by police
forces is signicantly prevalent, with the data showing that from 21 police forces across England and Wales
there was 2,869 recorded incidents of intrafamilial sexual offences and assaults labelled as a ‘sibling’
relationship, between 2017-2020 - and that this accounts for 24% of recorded incidents.
Additional ndings within the report shows that there is a gender divide between siblings who harm
and sibling who have been harmed, with males more likely to be recorded as having harmed a sibling
– accounting for 74%, and females more likely to be recorded as having been harmed by a sibling –
accounting for 73%. However, it should be noted that males accounted for 26% of siblings who have been
harmed by a sibling, highlighting that both males and females are at risk of being harmed by a sibling.
In coming to a conclusion surrounding whether police forces across England and Wales are recording
incidents of sibling sexual abuse, it is evident from the data that a signicant proportion of police forces are
recording sibling sexual abuse incidents, with more than half of police forces, 27/43 providing the requested
FOI data (data from 6 police forces was not used). However, it has also been claried within this research
that a number of police forces are not capturing data relating to sibling sexual abuse and that there are
several inconsistencies across police forces with regards to how sibling sexual abuse is being captured
and recorded.
Finally, given the evident signicance and prevalence of sibling sexual abuse as recorded by England
and Wales police forces, the project considers that there is an urgent need for a wider statutory and non-
statutory collation of statistics and data on this abuse. An example of this ‘data blackhole’ is the Ofce of
National Statistics (ONS) Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW). The ONS does not categorise
‘sibling sexual abuse’ or ‘sibling’ as a standalone ‘perpetrator’ category making it difcult for sibling sexual
abuse to be adequately recognised or to understand the prevalence of it nationally2.
This report has made steps to provide a prevalence rate of sibling sexual abuse across England and Wales.
However, in coming to an accurate conclusion about the prevalence of sibling sexual abuse, it is difcult to
assume that the 24% of police recorded incidents as suggested within this report is an accurate national
gure for the following reason:
• many cases of sibling sexual abuse are also dealt with by other agencies: such as the NHS, social
services and schools, and not reported to the police as a crime
• sibling sexual abuse has low disclosure rates
Thus, the percentage of sibling sexual abuse police recorded incidents offered within this report is likely
to only be a small reection of the true extent of sibling sexual abuse across England and Wales, further
research taking a multi-agency approach (i.e. police forces, NHS, social services and schools) is needed to
ascertain a more accurate national gure.
Conclusion and recommendations
Footnotes
2
In the CSEW ONS dataset Table 12a: Relationship of perpetrator to adults who experienced abuse before the age of 16, by type of abuse
and sex, year ending March 2019 CSEW siblings are categorised under ‘Other Family Member’.

Page 12 of 18
Recommendations:
• For siblings to be identied as a separate ‘perpetrator’ category in the next ONS Crime Survey England
& Wales on CSA.
• To develop a clear denition and understanding of sibling sexual abuse across England and Wales
police forces and other organisations dealing with sibling sexual abuse.
• For police forces to develop a consistent and standardised recording system for all intrafamilial sexual
abuse including sibling sexual abuse incidents.
Recommendation for future research:
• In order to improve police force recording standards and analysis of prevalence, future research could
be carried out to ascertain whether there is a consistent breakdown of incidents to include ethnicity,
disability, age and gender for both harmed and harming siblings.
References
Caffaro, J. V. (2020) Sibling abuse of other children. In R. Geffner, V. Vieth, V. Vaugh-Eden, A. Rosenbaum
.Hamberger, & J. White (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal violence across the lifespan (pp.1 – 28). Springer
Krienert, J., & Walsh, J. (2011). Sibling Sexual Abuse: An Empirical Analysis of Offender, Victim, and Event
Characteristics in National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) Data, 2000–2007. Journal of Child
Sexual Abuse, 20, 353–372. https://doi.org/10.1080/10538712.2011.588190
Smith, H., & Israel, E. (1987). Sibling incest: A study of the dynamics of 25 cases. Child Abuse and Neglect,
11(1), 101–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/0145-2134(87)90038-X
Yates, P., & Allardyce, S. (2021). Sibling sexual abuse: A knowledge and practice overview. Centre of
Expertise on Child Sexual Abuse., January.

Page 13 of 18
Refusal to provide data
Of the 43 polices forces across England and Wales, 14 sent a refusal to provide data. Police forces use the
phrase ‘refusal to provide data’; this generally means there is an inability to provide the data either because
it would require more than 18 hours of work to retrieve or the data set is so small that an individual could be
identied and this would be a breach of their privacy under GDPR.
Under Section 16: (advice and assistance)
Section 16(1) says that a public authority should provide advice and assistance, ‘so far as it would
be reasonable to expect the public authority to do so’, to anyone who has made or is thinking of making a
request for information.
The responses received provided helpful advice for future FOI requests for example:
‘Further advice & assistance may be available for specied intrafamilial sex offences (e.g. sexual activity
with a child family member). Providing a list of the offences of interest may allow data to be returned within
the time/cost limit.’
The project was able to learn from the refusals because most FOI teams were helpful in explaining the
reasons why they were unable to provide the data. These reasons included:
Under Section 12: (time/cost)
‘The requested data is not already held statistically nor is it held in a format that would allow its
retrieval within the permitted 18 hour threshold.’
Replies gave an indication of the number of records and the time it would take, e.g.:
‘In excess of 9,500 crimes would require a manual review, and this has been estimated as exceeding
475 hours’
The time estimated to check each record varied from 2 to 10 mins per record.
The gures were given to justify the decision not to provide the data and did not indicate the category of
crime, or over what period of time.
Under Section 40 (2): GDPR:
A small number of police forces said the number of cases was so small that to provide a breakdown of
gender and age would potentially allow an individual to be identied.
Recording systems:
Recording systems vary between police forces. One has started using the new Athena recording system
which does have a eld available for ‘victim/suspect’ relationship.
One police force did have a system that recorded ‘relationship’ but ‘the tag is linked to the occurrence rather
than an individual [therefore] it cannot be known whether the tag is in relation to the victim or the offender’.
Another said systems changed in 2019 when ‘further options were added which allowed ofcers to identify
specically the relationship between suspect and victim’.
One police force uses the Connect system which records offender/suspect details i.e. age, gender and
ethnicity.
Appendix 1

Page 14 of 18
Even when cases are recorded on a database, one suspect may be recorded several times due to multiple
offences, so the data would not be reliable. To obtain accurate data, police forces would ‘have to manually
review all sexual offence crimes to see if it stated and recorded in the free text [whether] family members
were involved and relevant to [the] request.’
Recording error:
In addition, one police force volunteered that ‘to provide details of the familial relationship between the
victim and offender would require a manual read-through of all relevant crimes with a possible family
relationship as this information is down to interpretation of the recording ofcer and therefore can be
recorded incorrectly’.
Interpretation of crime:
One police force explained that crimes are recorded under the Home Ofce Code 23 when both parties
are willing participants. ‘Unfortunately, we are unable to supply the data requested by the applicant due to
inconsistencies and limitations in how some of the relationship crime data has been recorded, as although
there is a Home Ofce code of “23 Incest or Familial Sexual Offences”, this specic offence can only be
recorded where both parties are willing participants. Therefore, for other Familial sexual offences such
as rape offences, Sexual assault & activity, we would need to identify both the Aggrieved and Offender
relationship for every crime.’
Findings from the refusals
• There is a list of sexual offences that police forces are required to record, but sibling sexual abuse is not
specically listed.
• Recording of sibling sexual abuse is at the discretion of each police force and varies greatly from force
to force.
• Every police force records crimes in a different way.
• Recent changes in recording systems used by some forces will allow relationships to be recorded.
• Police forces acknowledge there are a large number of sexual offences where the victim is Under 18,
ranging from 730 (Dyfed-Powys) to 9000 (Northumbria – population approx. 1.5m).
• Time to check each record varies from 2 mins to 10 mins per record.
• Police emphasise that responses are unique and not to be compared with other forces.
• COVID-19 has affected the ability of some FOI Teams to respond within the 20 days

Page 15 of 18
Taken from FOI Directory | Freedom of Information Act guide and help which was set up by Matthew
Burgess, a journalist, in 2012. We veried the list with Avon & Somerset Constabulary who conrmed this
was probably the most up-to-date information to use. The Directory also provided advice and guidance on
submitting an FOI Request.
Appendix 2

Page 16 of 18
Here is a summary of the FOI request as used by Avon & Somerset Constabulary. Followed by the same
request broken down into individual questions.
Breakdown of the request into separate questions:
For each of the years 2017, 2018, 2019 and 2020:
1. How many incidents of intrafamilial sexual offences where the victim was under 18 have been recorded?
Including a breakdown of:
a. The age of both the victim and offender
b. The type of sexual offence (i.e. rape and other sexual offences)
c. The familial relationship between the victim and offender
d. The gender of both the victim and offender
2. How many of these incidents recorded the offender as a parent (where the victim was under 18)?
Including a breakdown of:
a. The age of both the victim and offender
b. The type of sexual offence (i.e. rape and other sexual offences)
c. The familial relationship between the victim and offender (mother/father)
d. The gender of both the victim and offender
3. How many of these incidents recorded the offender as a sibling (where both the victim and offender
were under 18)?
Including a breakdown of:
a. The age of both the victim and offender
b. The type of sexual offence (i.e. rape and other sexual offences)
c. The familial relationship between the victim and offender (sister/brother)
d. The gender of both the victim and offender
Appendix 3
Summary of the FOI request:
For the years 2017, 2018, 2019 and 2020 can I have gures broken down by year regarding sexual
offences where the victim was under 18. And any information on the Familial relationship.
Where recorded can I have I similar breakdown of those offences where the suspect was recorded as
a sibling, and separately for where the suspect was recorded as a parent.

Page 17 of 18
Responses to FOI Request sent out by email on 5/8/2021.
Appendix 4
Police Force Country FOI Email Ref Data
received
Avon and Somerset
Constabulary
England FOIREQUESTS@avonandsomerset.police.uk Yes
Bedfordshire Police England foi@Bedfordshire.pnn.police.uk 2021/04918 02/09/2021
British Transport
Police
E&W katie.hullond@btp.police.uk 21/631 02/09/2021
Cambridgeshire
Constabulary
England foi@cambs.pnn.police.uk 21/04919 02/09/2021
Cheshire
Constabulary
England foi@cheshire.pnn.police.uk 14158 Refused
City of London Police England foi@city-of-london.pnn.police.uk 2021/00916 Refused
Cleveland Police England foi@cleveland.pnn.police.uk 2021/00916 No reply
Cumbria Constabulary England freedomonformation@cumbria.police.uk 693/21 24/08/2021
Derbyshire
Constabulary
England FOI@derbyshire.pnn.police.uk 4238-21 03/09/2021
Devon and Cornwall
Constabulary
England foi@devonandcornwall.pnn.police.uk 3335/21 02/09/2021
Dorset Police England foi@dorset.pnn.police.uk 2021/711 02/09/2021
Durham Constabulary England freedomonformation@durham.pnn.police.uk 671/21 Refused
Dyfed-Powys Police Wales foi@dyfed-powys.pnn.police.uk 665/2021 Refused
Essex Police England info.rights@essex.police.uk 16029 05/04/2022
Gloucestershire
Constabulary
England FOI@gloucestershire.pnn.police.uk 2021/0747 03/09/2021
Greater Manchester
Police
England freedomonformation@gmp.police.uk 20/08/2021
Gwent Police Wales foi@gwent.pnn.police.uk 2021/24379 31/08/2021
Hampshire
Constabulary
England public.access@hampshire.pnn.police.uk HC/2028/21 02/09/2021
Hertfordshire
Constabulary
England foi@herts.pnn.police.uk 2021/04913 03/09/2021
Humberside Police England InformationComplianceUnit@humberside.pnn.
police.uk
002682/2 03/09/2021
Kent Police England freedomonformation@kent.pnn.police.uk 00157/21 Refused
Lancashire
Constabulary
England FOI@Lancashire.pnn.police.uk 271121 17/11/2021
Leicestershire
Constabulary
England Foi@leicestershire.pnn.police.uk 15/09/2021
Lincolnshire Police England FOI@lincs.pnn.police.uk 3724/21 08/09/2021

Page 18 of 18
Merseyside Police England foi@merseyside.police.uk SH-2021-0919 15/09/2021
Metropolitan Police
Service
England foi@met.police.uk 21/020634 13/09/2021
Norfolk Constabulary England freedomonformation@norfolk.pnn.police.uk 2729/21 13/09/2021
North Wales Police Wales FreedomofInformationTeam@nthwales.pnn.
police.uk
31/08/2021
North Yorkshire Police England CivilDisclosure@northyorkshire.pnn.police.uk 0410/2021 Refused
Northamptonshire
Police
England freedomonformation@northants.police.uk 005028/21 16/02/22
Northumbria Police England freedom.info@northumbria.pnn.police.uk 1081/21 Refused
Nottinghamshire
Police
England freedomonformation@Nottinghamshire.pnn.
police.uk
5337/21 No reply
South Wales Police Wales foi@south-wales.pnn.police.uk 926/21 08/09/2021
South Yorkshire England foi@southyorks.pnn.police.uk 20211675 27/09/2021
Staffordshire Police England foi@staffordshire.pnn.police.uk 13517 Refused
Suffolk Constabulary England information@suffolk.pnn.police.uk 2729/21 13/09/2021
Surrey Police England foi@surrey.pnn.police.uk 003468/21 03/09/2021
Sussex Police England foi@sussex.pnn.police.uk 2599/21 Refused
Thames Valley Police England publicaccess@thamesvalley.pnn.police.uk Refused
Warwickshire Police England Freedom.Information@warwickshire.pnn.police.
uk
681-2021 Refused
West Mercia Police England information@westmercia.pnn.police.uk 105113 Refused
West Midlands Police England foi@west-midlands.police.uk 1175A/21 01/09/2021
West Yorkshire Police England foi@westyorkshire.pnn.police.uk 825673/21 Refused
Wiltshire Police England disclosure@wiltshire.pnn.police.uk 2021/652 Refused