New Bureau of Justice Statistics Study: 9:10 sexual assault victimizations were committed by someone the victim knew

Sources: 8/10/21

A new study put out by the Federal Bureau of Justice Statistics, the United States’ primary source for criminal justice statistics, supports that notion that more than 9 out of 10 sexual assaults are committed by someone known to the victim.

The study aggregates data from law enforcement in 20 states, as reported to the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) in 2019.

Contrary to “stranger danger”, the myth that is the basis for most sex offender registration schemes, the study finds that the overwhelming majority of sexual offenses are committed by someone known to the victim. In case you want to cite to the government’s own latest data on this statistic, you can refer to the citation below.

Click here to read the full article on the FAC website

Click here to read the website article


Related posts

Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...


  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t
  4. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  5. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  6. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  7. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  8. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  9. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  10. Please do not post in all Caps.
  11. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  12. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  13. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  14. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people
  15. Please do not solicit funds
  16. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), or any others, the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  17. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  18. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

At what point does everyone accept this information as fact and stop re doing these wasted studies. This stuff was proven 30 yrs ago. I guess they figure if they do it enough times they will get different results.

Time for these studies to land on Congress member’s laps, state lawmakers craniums, courthouses, and law enforcement. Wake up and smell the coffee your registry is punishment!!

Brandon theirs an old saying you staudy long you study wrong or did you enjoy the movie “One flew over the Kookoo’s nest. And I thought Nickelson was “Here’s Jonny. Talk about idle minds.

Proximity does play a role in all interpersonal interaction, good or bad. Incarceration severely limits proximity and so do sex offender databases. Obviously, that was always the people’s true intent behind each. But something else was afoot making it necessary for the majority to overlook the glaring presence of plain ex post language being applied to those already convicted of well established and enumerated crimes. That something else was “the database” and the infinite uses thereof, and in particular “government use thereof.” The latter being the most relevant with concern of constitutional right.

The problem with trying to use these statistics is that under Rational Basis Review, it doesn’t matter. As long as the government–or judge!–can come up with a single instance, real or imagined, where a registry could work, it’s deemed a valid law. The amount of “bycatch” is irrelevant.

Here is another report with ammunition for every argument. I can’t find the date, but it works anyway.

Efficacy and Constitutionality of Sex Offender Legislation – At What Price Perceived Safety?

Yep it’s all about public opinion if the public new that their fathers, son’s, grandsons, husbands, and nephews were under attack by the federal government SORNA they’d think twice about supporting the registry.
Megan’s Law website is a disgusting evil living creature it’s constantly consuming souls and destroying lives without prejudice.
The public thinks Megan’s law is here to protect them they dont know that their whole entire family is one mistake away from being devoured by it

Good luck

If one adjusts for population of the states listed in the report, the figure is just over 92%. This is in line with what organizations like ACSOL have been reporting for years. When I’ve mentioned such figures to some, the inevitable question was, “Well what about the 70% or unreported assaults.” If anyone knows how it is determined that 70% of assaults are unreported when they are unreported, please inform me and the rest of us.

Professor Ellman has pointed out that there is no evidence to suggest the ratio of known to unknown assailants would change just because assaults went unreported. My intuition (a dangerous thing) tells me that if anything, the ratio would skew toward underreporting of known assailants. This reluctance is precisely because the assailants had some connection with the victim, e.g. family members, teachers, clergy, etc. But even without this speculation, the official 92% figure provides a bit more heft to anti-registration arguments. (Not that anybody will listen.)


When they state it as “9 out of 10,” that makes it 10% of all incidents are by strangers, are stranger abductions. But from another report from this same place, from the late 1990s, it actually is only on average two incidents per state per year of child abduction by a stranger. That average number has not changed (expecially has not increased) since the 1960s.That twoper state will come out to a lot less than 10%, Having presented it as 9 out of 10, meaning 1 in 10 are stranger abductions, is intentional language and would come under the old saying: Liars figure and figures lie.