Victims of crime in London are disappearing from the justice process in alarming numbers. Despite rising reports of offences,especially violent and sexual crimes,a important proportion of cases collapse because victims withdraw support or disengage before they reach court. The London Victim Attrition Review, commissioned by the Mayor of London and published by City Hall, takes a hard look at why this is happening-and what it means for confidence in policing, prosecution and the wider criminal justice system.
Drawing on data,frontline testimony and victim experiences across the capital,the review examines each stage where victims are lost: from the initial report to police,through investigation and charging decisions,to court proceedings and beyond. Its findings point to systemic delays, inconsistent support, and a lack of clear communication as key drivers of attrition, with particularly stark impacts on women, children and minoritised communities.
As London grapples with questions of trust in public institutions and the effectiveness of its justice system,the London Victim Attrition Review offers a detailed,and at times uncomfortable,account of how and why victims fall through the cracks-and sets out recommendations aimed at keeping them engaged,protected and heard.
Understanding why victims disengage from the criminal justice process in London
For many Londoners, reporting a crime marks the start of a journey they never expected to take, yet countless individuals quietly step away before their case reaches court. Their reasons are rarely simple. Some face repeated delays, confusing paperwork and limited updates, while others feel that their safety and wellbeing are not prioritised once the initial report is made. Survivors of violence and exploitation may fear retaliation, social stigma or the emotional cost of reliving trauma in statements and courtrooms. For migrants, people of color and communities with historic mistrust in institutions, long-standing concerns about fairness, discrimination and credibility in the system can make continued engagement feel risky rather than protective.
Patterns emerging from frontline services and case reviews show that confidence, communication and care are decisive turning points. When contact from police and prosecutors feels inconsistent or overly technical,victims can assume their case is no longer crucial.Where specialist advocacy and practical support are missing – such as help with housing, childcare or work absences – the process itself becomes unsustainable. These experiences intersect with wider inequalities across the capital,shaping who feels able to persist and who steps back. Key themes include:
- Fear of reprisals from perpetrators or within close-knit communities.
- Emotional exhaustion from retelling events and facing cross-examination.
- Lack of clear information about case progress,decisions and rights.
- Practical barriers such as travel costs, time off work and childcare.
- Perceived bias or disbelief linked to race, gender, disability or immigration status.
| Factor | Impact on Victim |
|---|---|
| Court delays | Increases anxiety and loss of trust |
| Poor updates | Creates confusion and disengagement |
| No specialist support | Leaves trauma and safety needs unmet |
| Community pressure | Discourages cooperation with authorities |
Systemic barriers facing victims from first report to court outcome
From the moment a crime is reported, many Londoners encounter a maze of fragmented services, delays and inconsistent communication that steadily erodes confidence in the system.Victims frequently enough interact with multiple agencies that operate in silos, repeating traumatic accounts without clear guidance on what will happen next. Language barriers, digital exclusion and limited access to specialist support mean that those already marginalised are least likely to receive timely updates or understand their rights. The result is a quiet but steady withdrawal: people disengage not because their experience no longer matters, but because the process feels opaque, exhausting and stacked against them.
As cases progress,structural pressures inside the justice system compound this disillusionment. Backlogs, short-notice listings and adjournments place enormous strain on victims juggling work, childcare and health needs. Legal jargon and last-minute case changes leave many feeling like bystanders in proceedings ostensibly carried in their name. For some communities, historic mistrust of authorities magnifies every missed call or cancelled meeting. The cumulative impact can be seen at every stage: fewer victims willing to continue, weaker evidence reaching court and a justice outcome that too often reflects system fatigue rather than the seriousness of the crime.
- Communication gaps lead to confusion about case progress and victim rights.
- Procedural delays increase anxiety, financial pressure and emotional burnout.
- Accessibility issues limit support for disabled, migrant and digitally excluded victims.
- Cultural mistrust reduces reporting and cooperation in some communities.
- Support shortages leave many navigating complex processes alone.
| Stage | Typical Barrier | Impact on Victim |
|---|---|---|
| Initial Report | Limited information at first contact | Unclear expectations; early disengagement |
| Investigation | Long gaps with no updates | Loss of trust; reluctance to continue |
| Charging | Complex decisions poorly explained | Perception that the case is not taken seriously |
| Pre-Trial | Frequent adjournments and schedule changes | Stress, financial cost and repeated trauma |
| Court Outcome | Limited support understanding the result | Frustration; sense that justice is incomplete |
How fragmented services undermine victim confidence and case progression
For many Londoners navigating the justice system, support feels less like a pathway and more like a maze. Survivors may be referred to multiple agencies, each with its own assessments, forms and eligibility rules, forcing them to repeat traumatic accounts again and again. When updates about their case arrive late-or not at all-confidence erodes, and the process begins to feel arbitrary rather than protective. This disjointed experience is particularly acute for those facing language barriers, insecure housing or immigration concerns, where the absence of a single, trusted point of contact can turn uncertainty into disengagement. In this context, withdrawal from proceedings is not a sudden decision but the cumulative result of missed calls, conflicting advice and unanswered questions.
Professionals across criminal justice and support services consistently highlight gaps where cases lose momentum. Victims are frequently enough left to join the dots between police, prosecutors, health services and specialist advocates, while no one body retains clear oversight of their journey. This can lead to:
- Inconsistent communication about key case milestones and court dates
- Duplication of evidence-gathering, increasing distress and delay
- Unclear responsibilities when risk escalates or safety plans fail
- Unequal access to specialist services across London boroughs
| System Feature | Impact on Victims | Effect on Cases |
|---|---|---|
| Multiple handovers | Loss of trust | Increased withdrawals |
| Patchy support | Unmet needs | Evidence gaps |
| Poor data sharing | Repeated telling of trauma | Delays and adjournments |
| No single contact | Confusion, isolation | Cases stall or collapse |
Recommendations to rebuild trust streamline support and improve victim retention
Reversing the current pattern of drop‑outs demands visible cultural change as much as procedural reform. Survivors consistently report that they stay engaged when they feel believed, informed and in control of what happens next.This means frontline staff need trauma‑informed training, clear scripts for explaining legal options in plain language and more time for follow‑up conversations rather than box‑ticking. It also requires single, named points of contact so victims are not repeatedly retelling their story to strangers. Alongside this, partners across policing, health and specialist advocacy should share agreed service standards, including maximum response times and regular progress updates, to close the gaps where trust is currently lost.
Support must be redesigned around real-life pressures that often push victims away from the justice process. Practical help with housing, childcare, digital access and employment can remove the everyday barriers that turn appointments into unachievable choices. Co‑locating advocates in hospitals, community hubs and schools ensures help is accessible where people already are, not only in police buildings or courts. To sustain engagement, services should offer:
- Flexible contact options – phone, secure messaging and in‑person meetings
- Proactive check‑ins at key case milestones and court dates
- Independent advocacy to navigate complex legal and welfare systems
- Feedback loops so victims can influence how services evolve
| Priority Area | Key Action | Intended Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Trust | Named liaison officer | Consistent relationship |
| Support | 24/7 multi‑channel helpline | Faster, easier access |
| Retention | Tailored care plans | Fewer withdrawals |
Concluding Remarks
As London grapples with the realities exposed by the Victim Attrition Review, the message is unambiguous: securing justice in this city is not just about catching offenders, but about keeping victims engaged, informed and supported at every stage. The findings lay bare a system that too often loses those it is meant to protect, yet they also chart a route towards meaningful reform.Whether these recommendations translate into lasting change will depend on political will, sustained investment and rigorous scrutiny of the Met, the Crown Prosecution Service and support services across the capital. For victims, the stakes could not be higher. For London’s leaders, the challenge is now to turn a forensic diagnosis into a measurable reduction in the numbers who walk away from the justice process.
City Hall has put victim attrition firmly on the agenda.The test, in the months and years ahead, will be whether London can build a justice system that victims no longer feel they have to abandon.
