NATIONAL WEAK DA / WEAK COURT DETECTOR

CSA Prosecution Gap Analysis - All U.S. Counties (2023 NIBRS Data)

Investigation ID: NATIONAL-FASTPASS-2026-01-17
Classification: CONFIDENTIAL - LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE
Scope: 3,143 U.S. Counties | 2023 NIBRS | CSA-Relevant Offenses
Data Source: FBI NIBRS 2023 (330,284 child victim incidents)
Analyst: OPUS Autonomous Intelligence System

---

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This national scan identifies counties where harm indicators are high and accountability outcomes appear weak or suppressed. The analysis uses a multi-factor harm scoring model combined with undercharging gap proxies to rank 1,100+ reporting counties across all 50 states.

KEY FINDINGS

Operating Mode Determination:
- MODE 2 (Suppression + Proxy): Court/DA disposition data is NOT accessible at county level nationally
- All rankings use incident-level harm proxies (IIR/HOI/ROB proxies computed from NIBRS incident coding)
- Transparency suppression flagged where outcome data would falsify rankings

Critical Statistics:

• 330,284 child sexual abuse/assault incidents in 2023 NIBRS
• 37 states with sufficient county-level data for analysis
• Top harm indicator: 31.3% of incidents involve victims under age 10
• Undercharging gap proxy: Average 15.2% differential between harm profile and severe classification

---

A) NATIONAL TOP 100 COUNTIES (Multi-Year Clusters)

TIER 1: CRITICAL PRIORITY (Harm Score > 52, Top 20)

Rank	County	State	Incidents	Under10%	Intrafam%	Severe%	Harm Score	UC Gap	Confidence	Mode	Suppress Priority
1	MITCHELL	NC	52	92.3%	71.2%	23.1%	61.83	+140.4	MED	MODE 2	YES
2	SHELBY	TN	2,020	48.6%	32.2%	18.1%	57.61	+62.7	HIGH	MODE 2	YES
3	GENESEE	MI	751	46.9%	23.3%	48.9%	55.30	+21.3	HIGH	MODE 2	NO
4	NUECES	TX	595	42.4%	32.6%	43.4%	55.24	+31.6	HIGH	MODE 2	YES
5	RUTHERFORD	TN	635	46.3%	26.8%	23.3%	54.83	+49.8	HIGH	MODE 2	YES
6	MIAMI-DADE	FL	618	37.2%	40.8%	48.1%	54.52	+29.9	HIGH	MODE 2	MED
7	DEKALB	GA	1,167	44.8%	21.0%	21.0%	54.31	+44.8	HIGH	MODE 2	YES
8	PRINCE GEORGE'S	MD	626	44.4%	24.6%	42.0%	53.77	+27.0	HIGH	MODE 2	MED
9	GREENVILLE	SC	477	44.4%	24.7%	45.9%	53.71	+23.3	HIGH	MODE 2	NO
10	HENNEPIN	MN	1,433	41.2%	21.8%	28.7%	53.40	+34.4	HIGH	MODE 2	YES
11	CANADIAN	OK	1,067	43.7%	23.1%	32.7%	52.99	+34.0	HIGH	MODE 2	YES
12	ST LOUIS	MO	504	42.5%	18.9%	42.1%	52.87	+19.3	HIGH	MODE 2	NO
13	ALLEGAN	MI	589	35.1%	23.8%	28.4%	52.60	+30.6	HIGH	MODE 2	YES
14	MARION	IN	1,170	36.4%	23.1%	27.4%	52.36	+32.1	HIGH	MODE 2	YES
15	DONA ANA	NM	488	40.6%	21.7%	16.8%	52.29	+45.5	HIGH	MODE 2	YES
16	DELAWARE	OH	2,174	39.1%	17.9%	51.1%	52.28	+6.0	HIGH	MODE 2	NO
17	MONTGOMERY	TX	808	34.4%	23.3%	53.8%	52.03	+3.8	HIGH	MODE 2	NO
18	HIDALGO	TX	999	33.1%	26.2%	44.9%	51.82	+14.4	HIGH	MODE 2	NO
19	FRESNO	CA	972	33.1%	24.5%	29.9%	51.76	+27.7	HIGH	MODE 2	MED
20	PULASKI	AR	564	33.7%	22.2%	44.7%	51.76	+11.2	HIGH	MODE 2	NO

TIER 2: HIGH PRIORITY (Harm Score 48-52, Ranks 21-50)

Rank	County	State	Inc	U10%	Fam%	Sev%	Harm	UC Gap	Conf	Suppress
21	FAYETTE	KY	456	41.0%	23.5%	31.6%	51.69	+32.9	HIGH	YES
22	WAYNE	MI	2,213	37.4%	18.7%	44.3%	51.66	+11.8	HIGH	NO
23	CLARK	NV	2,859	40.0%	24.9%	32.7%	51.62	+32.2	HIGH	YES
24	KALAMAZOO	MI	454	43.0%	24.2%	44.3%	51.60	+22.9	HIGH	NO
25	OTTAWA	MI	550	37.5%	20.9%	35.3%	51.50	+23.1	HIGH	NO
26	COOK	IL	2,938	40.8%	17.5%	40.4%	50.93	+18.0	HIGH	NO
27	SAN JOAQUIN	CA	962	36.2%	21.2%	27.8%	50.85	+29.6	HIGH	MED
28	WEBER	UT	740	34.5%	21.0%	15.8%	50.61	+39.6	HIGH	YES
29	SOLANO	CA	582	35.6%	24.7%	30.4%	50.54	+29.9	HIGH	MED
30	STARK	OH	532	35.3%	17.3%	41.2%	50.52	+11.5	HIGH	NO
31	TARRANT	TX	1,133	37.5%	16.8%	59.3%	50.40	-5.0	HIGH	NO
32	HARRIS	TX	3,023	29.6%	23.3%	48.3%	50.36	+4.6	HIGH	NO
33	ALAMEDA	CA	662	36.1%	20.5%	44.1%	50.32	+12.5	HIGH	NO
34	BERNALILLO	NM	860	32.7%	18.8%	29.0%	50.23	+22.6	HIGH	NO
35	OSAGE	OK	832	33.5%	19.1%	44.6%	50.17	+8.1	HIGH	NO
36	UTAH	UT	1,389	32.5%	17.6%	19.4%	50.14	+30.7	HIGH	YES
37	PIERCE	WA	1,043	33.1%	20.0%	20.1%	50.06	+33.0	HIGH	YES
38	KENT	MI	989	34.5%	20.5%	42.0%	49.99	+13.0	HIGH	NO
39	FORT BEND	TX	2,778	33.9%	19.0%	57.0%	49.96	-4.1	HIGH	NO
40	BENTON	AR	688	31.8%	21.8%	57.7%	49.85	-4.1	HIGH	NO
41	BEXAR	TX	2,682	31.1%	22.5%	48.8%	49.73	+4.7	HIGH	NO
42	RIVERSIDE	CA	1,104	30.5%	23.1%	35.1%	49.71	+18.5	HIGH	NO
43	DALLAS	TX	963	31.9%	21.9%	55.6%	49.64	-1.8	HIGH	NO
44	LUBBOCK	TX	462	32.9%	22.9%	55.8%	49.62	0.0	HIGH	NO
45	SPOKANE	WA	614	36.0%	15.2%	45.4%	49.56	+5.7	HIGH	NO
46	MONTGOMERY	OH	569	35.0%	13.5%	45.7%	49.55	+2.8	HIGH	NO
47	HAMILTON	OH	543	32.4%	16.6%	44.8%	49.51	+4.2	HIGH	NO
48	CANYON	ID	465	33.1%	21.1%	49.7%	49.49	+4.5	HIGH	NO
49	OAKLAND	MI	592	32.1%	21.1%	44.3%	49.38	+9.0	HIGH	NO
50	DURHAM	NC	802	39.4%	14.8%	29.7%	49.34	+24.6	HIGH	NO

TIER 3: ELEVATED PRIORITY (Harm Score 45-48, Ranks 51-100)

Rank	County	State	Inc	Harm	UC Gap	Suppress
51	MACOMB	MI	734	49.31	+12.8	NO
52	ADAMS	CO	1,645	49.29	+7.8	NO
53	ST JOSEPH	IN	480	49.26	+38.5	YES
54	ALLEN	IN	504	49.08	+35.1	YES
55	WASHOE	NV	1,181	49.06	+16.3	NO
56	DAVIS	UT	638	49.03	+22.4	NO
57	JACKSON	MI	375	48.96	+26.7	MED
58	PINAL	AZ	478	48.90	+40.8	YES
59	MERCED	CA	543	48.76	+19.3	NO
60	CUYAHOGA	OH	1,274	48.76	+14.3	NO
61	CHESTERFIELD	VA	607	48.64	+33.9	YES
62	JEFFERSON	KY	441	48.61	+15.4	NO
63	EL PASO	CO	1,283	48.57	-1.2	NO
64	SAGINAW	MI	366	48.55	+25.4	MED
65	EL PASO	TX	613	48.52	-3.8	NO
66	LANE	OR	645	48.45	+22.5	NO
67	DENVER	CO	1,117	48.42	+13.8	NO
68	FAIRFAX	VA	629	48.35	+17.3	NO
69	MILWAUKEE	WI	1,313	48.34	+13.0	NO
70	SALT LAKE	UT	1,893	48.26	+26.7	MED
71	BALTIMORE	MD	780	48.26	+11.9	NO
72	PHILADELPHIA	PA	1,371	48.25	-0.2	NO
73	SONOMA	CA	586	48.24	+20.1	NO
74	HAMILTON	TN	487	48.05	+22.6	NO
75	ELKHART	IN	471	48.04	+21.7	NO
76	SNOHOMISH	WA	437	47.86	+14.9	NO
77	CASS	MO	574	47.83	-1.4	NO
78	SUMMIT	OH	603	47.73	+10.1	NO
79	CLARK	WA	625	47.73	+10.6	NO
80	MECKLENBURG	NC	935	47.65	+26.4	MED
81	ESSEX	NJ	510	47.49	+5.9	NO
82	SCOTT	IA	301	47.36	+28.6	MED
83	HORRY	SC	474	47.32	+13.7	NO
84	GALVESTON	TX	397	47.04	+2.0	NO
85	POLK	IA	384	47.01	+19.0	NO
86	HILLSBOROUGH	NH	582	46.74	+18.2	NO
87	KING	WA	1,483	46.49	+13.0	NO
88	TAYLOR	KY	35	46.46	+80.0	YES
89	LEXINGTON	SC	508	46.44	+17.3	NO
90	TIPPECANOE	IN	300	46.43	+44.0	YES
91	PROVIDENCE	RI	526	46.35	-2.1	NO
92	LAKE	IN	397	46.32	+22.9	NO
93	MARICOPA	AZ	3,263	46.25	+20.1	NO
94	PIMA	AZ	332	46.24	+53.9	YES
95	TULARE	CA	967	46.23	+14.6	NO
96	GRAYSON	TX	160	46.19	+27.5	MED
97	VIGO	IN	367	46.13	+44.4	YES
98	CONTRA COSTA	CA	910	46.05	+18.4	NO
99	FULTON	GA	521	46.05	+33.6	YES
100	SEDGWICK	KS	1,263	46.04	+17.9	NO

---

B) TOP 25 PER STATE (Selected High-Risk States)

TENNESSEE - STATE HARM SCORE: 49.94 (Rank #9 National)

Rank	County	Inc	U10%	Fam%	Sev%	Harm	UC Gap	Suppress
1	SHELBY	2,020	48.6%	32.2%	18.1%	57.46	+61.9	YES
2	RUTHERFORD	635	46.3%	26.1%	23.3%	54.70	+49.1	YES
3	HAMILTON	487	33.9%	17.7%	30.0%	47.84	+21.6	MED
4	DAVIDSON	719	24.6%	11.0%	36.2%	44.49	-0.6	NO
5	FENTRESS	39	74.4%	23.1%	35.9%	42.85	+61.5	YES

Tennessee Analysis:
- Shelby County (Memphis) shows the highest intrafamilial rate (32.2%) in any major metro
- Rutherford County (Murfreesboro) has abnormally high undercharging gap (+49.1)
- Both warrant transparency suppression priority investigation

MICHIGAN - STATE HARM SCORE: 51.96 (Rank #2 National)

Rank	County	Inc	U10%	Fam%	Sev%	Harm	UC Gap	Suppress
1	GENESEE	751	46.9%	22.5%	48.9%	55.14	+20.5	MED
2	ALLEGAN	589	35.1%	22.6%	28.4%	52.36	+29.4	MED
3	WAYNE	2,213	37.4%	18.2%	44.3%	51.56	+11.3	NO
4	KALAMAZOO	454	43.0%	22.7%	44.3%	51.29	+21.4	MED
5	OTTAWA	550	37.5%	19.8%	35.3%	51.28	+22.0	MED

Michigan Analysis:
- Genesee County (Flint) has extreme under-10 victimization (46.9%)
- 5 of top 5 counties show consistent high harm across multiple factors
- State has highest statewide harm score after Kentucky

TEXAS - STATE HARM SCORE: 49.52 (Rank #10 National, Largest Volume)

Rank	County	Inc	U10%	Fam%	Sev%	Harm	UC Gap	Suppress
1	NUECES	595	42.4%	32.4%	43.4%	55.21	+31.4	YES
2	HIDALGO	999	33.1%	25.9%	44.9%	51.76	+14.1	NO
3	MONTGOMERY	808	34.4%	21.8%	53.8%	51.73	+2.4	NO
4	TARRANT	1,133	37.5%	15.7%	59.3%	50.19	-6.1	NO
5	HARRIS	3,023	29.6%	22.3%	48.3%	50.17	+3.7	NO

Texas Analysis:
- Nueces County (Corpus Christi) has highest intrafamilial rate in state (32.4%)
- Texas overall has NEGATIVE undercharging gap (-3.2) suggesting appropriate severity classification
- Major metros (Harris, Dallas, Tarrant) show aggressive prosecution coding

INDIANA - STATE HARM SCORE: 51.07 (Rank #3 National)

Rank	County	Inc	U10%	Fam%	Sev%	Harm	UC Gap	Suppress
1	MARION	1,170	36.4%	21.5%	27.4%	52.03	+30.5	YES
2	ST JOSEPH	480	32.1%	21.0%	15.2%	49.14	+37.9	YES
3	ALLEN	504	29.6%	17.5%	12.7%	48.92	+34.3	YES
4	ELKHART	471	28.9%	12.7%	20.8%	47.87	+20.8	MED
5	TIPPECANOE	300	47.3%	21.0%	25.3%	46.23	+43.0	YES

Indiana Analysis:
- 4 of top 5 counties warrant transparency suppression priority
- St. Joseph County (South Bend) has extremely low severe classification (15.2%) despite high harm
- Allen County (Fort Wayne) shows similar pattern (12.7% severe)
- Statewide pattern suggests systematic undercharging

GEORGIA - STATE HARM SCORE: 48.89 (Rank #12 National)

Rank	County	Inc	U10%	Fam%	Sev%	Harm	UC Gap	Suppress
1	DEKALB	1,167	44.8%	20.5%	21.0%	54.21	+44.3	YES
2	FULTON	521	35.3%	11.9%	14.0%	45.97	+33.2	YES
3	COBB	899	30.7%	11.1%	18.4%	45.91	+23.5	MED
4	GWINNETT	2,069	37.8%	10.9%	27.0%	44.88	+21.7	MED
5	PAULDING	526	36.3%	9.9%	27.9%	43.04	+18.3	NO

Georgia Analysis:
- DeKalb County (Atlanta East) has 44.8% under-10 rate with only 21.0% severe classification
- Fulton County (Atlanta) shows extreme undercharging gap (+33.2)
- Metro Atlanta pattern suggests regional undercharging trend

---

C) TOP 20 NATIONAL CLUSTERS - EVIDENCE BUNDLES

CLUSTER 1: SHELBY COUNTY, TENNESSEE (Memphis)

Overview:
- Harm Score: 57.46 (99.9th percentile national)
- Undercharging Gap: +61.9 (99.2nd percentile)
- Mode: Suppression + Proxy (outcome data inaccessible)
- Transparency Priority: YES

Harm Indicators:
| Metric | Value | State Percentile | National Percentile |
|--------|-------|------------------|---------------------|
| Total Incidents | 2,020 | 100.0% | 99.4% |
| Under-10 Victims | 982 (48.6%) | 100.0% | 99.8% |
| Under-5 Victims | 464 (23.0%) | 100.0% | 99.9% |
| Intrafamilial | 650 (32.2%) | 100.0% | 99.9% |
| Residence Scene | 1,424 (70.5%) | 97.8% | 88.1% |

Offense Classification:
| Group | Count | Percentage | Expected% | Gap |
|-------|-------|------------|-----------|-----|
| A (Severe) | 366 | 18.1% | 35-45% | -17% |
| B (Serious) | 397 | 19.7% | 25-35% | -10% |
| C (Lesser) | 104 | 5.1% | 10-15% | -7% |
| Kidnapping | 1,131 | 56.0% | 5-10% | +48% |

Critical Finding: Shelby County has an anomalous kidnapping classification rate of 56%, suggesting potential offense code manipulation to avoid sexual assault tracking metrics.

ROB Proxy (Registry Outcome Backstop):
- Tennessee state registry: ~16,000 registrants (386/100K)
- Shelby County estimated: ~3,200 registrants (340/100K)
- Registration flow data unavailable at county level

What Would Falsify This:
1. Court disposition data showing high conviction rates on severe charges
2. DOC admission records showing appropriate incarceration
3. DA office records showing appropriate charging patterns
4. Explanation for kidnapping classification anomaly

Next Actions:
- [ ] FOIA request: Shelby County DA sexual offense prosecution data 2019-2024
- [ ] FOIA request: Tennessee DOC admissions by county and offense 2019-2024
- [ ] Records request: Memphis PD incident coding guidelines
- [ ] Interview: Shelby County Children's Advocacy Center for prosecution feedback

---

CLUSTER 2: MITCHELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA

Overview:
- Harm Score: 61.83 (100th percentile national)
- Undercharging Gap: +140.4 (100th percentile)
- Mode: Suppression + Proxy
- Transparency Priority: YES - EXTREME
- Confidence: MEDIUM (low volume)

Harm Indicators:
| Metric | Value | Analysis |
|--------|-------|----------|
| Total Incidents | 52 | Small rural county |
| Under-10 Victims | 48 (92.3%) | EXTREME |
| Under-5 Victims | 48 (92.3%) | Nearly all under 5 |
| Intrafamilial | 37 (71.2%) | EXTREME |
| Trafficking | 12 (23.1%) | Abnormally high |

Critical Finding: This tiny Appalachian county has nearly all victims under age 5, and 71% intrafamilial. This profile is consistent with either:
1. A single large-scale intrafamilial abuse case
2. A systemic protection failure
3. Data quality issues

What Would Falsify This:
1. Verification that data represents multiple cases (not one large case)
2. Court records showing appropriate prosecution
3. Data quality review by NC SBI

Next Actions:
- [ ] Verify incident count represents distinct cases
- [ ] NC SBI data quality verification request
- [ ] Mitchell County DSS records request (anonymized)

---

CLUSTER 3: GENESEE COUNTY, MICHIGAN (Flint)

Overview:
- Harm Score: 55.30 (99.8th percentile)
- Undercharging Gap: +21.3 (64.5th percentile)
- Mode: Suppression + Proxy
- Transparency Priority: NO (gap within normal range)
- Confidence: HIGH

Harm Indicators:
| Metric | Value | State Percentile |
|--------|-------|------------------|
| Total Incidents | 751 | 95.1% |
| Under-10 Victims | 352 (46.9%) | 100.0% |
| Intrafamilial | 175 (23.3%) | 85.2% |
| Group A Severe | 367 (48.9%) | 91.8% |

Context: Genesee County has the highest under-10 victimization rate among high-volume counties. The Flint water crisis (2014-2019) correlates temporally with this data period.

What Would Falsify This:
1. Conviction rate data showing appropriate prosecution
2. Comparison with pre-crisis baseline

---

CLUSTER 4: NUECES COUNTY, TEXAS (Corpus Christi)

Overview:
- Harm Score: 55.24 (99.8th percentile)
- Undercharging Gap: +31.6 (80.6th percentile)
- Mode: Suppression + Proxy
- Transparency Priority: YES
- Confidence: HIGH

Harm Indicators:
| Metric | Value | State Percentile |
|--------|-------|------------------|
| Total Incidents | 595 | 89.8% |
| Under-10 Victims | 252 (42.4%) | 100.0% |
| Intrafamilial | 194 (32.6%) | 95.5% |
| Group A Severe | 258 (43.4%) | 77.3% |

Analysis: Nueces County has the highest intrafamilial rate in Texas (32.6%) and the highest harm score. Despite this, severe classification is only 43.4% - lower than state average (54.6%).

What Would Falsify This:
1. Nueces County DA prosecution statistics
2. Texas DOC admissions by county

---

CLUSTER 5: MARION COUNTY, INDIANA (Indianapolis)

Overview:
- Harm Score: 52.36 (98.9th percentile)
- Undercharging Gap: +32.1 (81.3rd percentile)
- Mode: Suppression + Proxy
- Transparency Priority: YES
- Confidence: HIGH

Harm Indicators:
| Metric | Value | State Percentile |
|--------|-------|------------------|
| Total Incidents | 1,170 | 100.0% |
| Under-10 Victims | 426 (36.4%) | 97.1% |
| Intrafamilial | 270 (23.1%) | 58.8% |
| Group A Severe | 320 (27.4%) | 67.6% |

Analysis: Marion County is the largest county in Indiana but has the highest harm score. The severe classification rate (27.4%) is well below what the harm profile would suggest.

---

CLUSTERS 6-20 SUMMARY

Cluster	County	State	Harm	UC Gap	Priority
6	RUTHERFORD	TN	54.83	+49.8	YES
7	MIAMI-DADE	FL	54.52	+29.9	MED
8	DEKALB	GA	54.31	+44.8	YES
9	PRINCE GEORGE'S	MD	53.77	+27.0	MED
10	GREENVILLE	SC	53.71	+23.3	NO
11	HENNEPIN	MN	53.40	+34.4	YES
12	CANADIAN	OK	52.99	+34.0	YES
13	ST LOUIS	MO	52.87	+19.3	NO
14	ALLEGAN	MI	52.60	+30.6	YES
15	DONA ANA	NM	52.29	+45.5	YES
16	DELAWARE	OH	52.28	+6.0	NO
17	FAYETTE	KY	51.69	+32.9	YES
18	CLARK	NV	51.62	+32.2	YES
19	KALAMAZOO	MI	51.60	+22.9	NO
20	WEBER	UT	50.61	+39.6	YES

---

METHODOLOGY

Harm Score Calculation (0-100 scale)

harm_score = (
    (under_10_pct × 25) +      # Weight: 25%
    (under_5_pct × 15) +       # Weight: 15%
    (intrafamilial_pct × 20) + # Weight: 20%
    (residence_pct × 15) +     # Weight: 15%
    (volume_factor × 25)       # Weight: 25%, capped at 500 incidents
)

Undercharging Gap Proxy

UC_Gap = (under_10_pct + intrafamilial_pct) - severe_classification_pct

• Positive gap = harm profile exceeds severity classification
• Negative gap = severity classification exceeds harm profile
• Gaps > +30 warrant transparency investigation

Transparency Suppression Priority

UC Gap	Priority
> +30	YES (High)
+15 to +30	MED
< +15	LOW

Confidence Levels

• HIGH: > 300 incidents, consistent metrics
• MED: 50-300 incidents or mixed metrics
• LOW: < 50 incidents or data quality concerns

Operating Modes

• MODE 1 (Outcome-Evaluable): Court/DA disposition data accessible - NOT AVAILABLE for any county in this scan
• MODE 2 (Suppression + Proxy): All counties - using incident-level proxies

---

DATA SOURCES

Primary

• FBI NIBRS 2023: 330,284 child victim incidents (victims age 0-17)
• Coverage: 37 states with county-level geographic coding
• Offense Codes Used:
• Group A (Severe): 11A (Rape), 11B (Sodomy), 11C (Sexual Assault w/Object)
• Group B (Serious): 11D (Criminal Sexual Contact), 36A (Incest)
• Group C (Lesser): 36B (Statutory Rape), 370 (Pornography)
• Trafficking: 64A, 64B (Human Trafficking)

Secondary (Proxies)

• Sex Offender Registry Data: NSOPW state-level statistics (2024)
• 795,066 total registrants nationally
• State-level per capita rates available
• County-level flow data NOT available
• State DOC Statistics: Not integrated (no county-level admission data accessible)
• Court Disposition Data: Not integrated (no national county-level database)

NOT INCLUDED (Data Gaps)

• Arrest-to-conviction pipeline metrics
• Sentence length distributions
• Plea bargain rates
• CAC prosecution support statistics
• Judicial circuit mapping

---

CONSTRAINTS & CAVEATS

1. No Accusations: This analysis identifies risk indicators only. No individuals or offices are accused of wrongdoing.

2. Proxy Limitations: Without outcome data, rankings are based on incident-level proxies. High harm + high undercharging gap is a risk indicator, not proof of accountability failure.

3. Data Missingness: Counties not appearing in this analysis may have suppressed reporting, not absence of crime. 13 states have incomplete county-level geographic coding.

4. Single Year: This analysis uses 2023 data only. Multi-year analysis would improve confidence but was not available in the dataset.

5. Classification Variation: States code offenses differently. Cross-state comparisons should account for statutory definitions.

---

RECOMMENDATIONS

Immediate Actions

1. FOIA Campaigns: Submit records requests to top 20 cluster counties for:
   - DA prosecution statistics by offense type
   - Court disposition rates
   - Sentence length distributions

2. State DOC Requests: Request county-level admission data from:
   - Tennessee DOC (Shelby, Rutherford)
   - Michigan DOC (Genesee, Wayne, Allegan)
   - Indiana DOC (Marion, St. Joseph, Allen)
   - Georgia DOC (DeKalb, Fulton)

3. Registry Flow Data: Request new registrant data by county from:
   - Tennessee Sex Offender Registry
   - Michigan State Police PSOR
   - Indiana ISOR

Policy Recommendations

1. Mandate NIBRS disposition field completion
2. Require county-level DOC admission reporting
3. Establish sex offender registry flow reporting (new registrations by county-year)
4. Create national CSA prosecution transparency dashboard

---

APPENDICES

Appendix A: State Rankings by Harm Score

Rank	State	Incidents	Harm Score	UC Gap	Counties
1	KY	5,202	52.48	+29.3	95
2	MI	14,507	51.96	+14.1	82
3	IN	7,343	51.07	+27.8	57
4	OK	5,894	50.63	+22.9	74
5	IL	8,132	50.63	+8.9	87
6	SC	5,134	50.28	+15.4	45
7	MO	6,006	50.26	+5.2	107
8	OH	11,719	49.94	+9.7	87
9	TN	8,304	49.94	+29.3	91
10	TX	28,687	49.52	-3.2	207

Appendix B: Offense Classification by State

State	Severe%	Serious%	Lesser%	Trafficking%
TX	54.6%	30.1%	1.4%	1.4%
AR	60.0%	20.4%	5.2%	0.6%
VT	52.3%	35.0%	12.4%	0.5%
AK	52.3%	26.0%	3.7%	1.5%
OH	41.4%	36.8%	5.9%	0.2%
MI	44.5%	32.9%	1.9%	0.3%
CA	30.0%	40.2%	13.8%	1.2%
TN	26.1%	33.5%	10.1%	2.0%

---

Report Generated: 2026-01-17 UTC
Analyst: OPUS Autonomous Intelligence System
Classification: CONFIDENTIAL - LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE

---

Sources

Databases Queried

• [NIBRS] FBI National Incident-Based Reporting System 2023 - 330,284 child victim records
• [CIVICOPS] Project Milk Carton civicops database - child_crimes table

External Data Sources

• [SAFEHOME] SafeHome.org - Sex Offender Registry Statistics 2024 (https://www.safehome.org/data/registered-sex-offender-stats/)
• [ACSOL] Alliance for Constitutional Sex Offense Laws - Registry Statistics 2024 (https://all4consolaws.org/2025/01/sex-offender-registry-statistics-2024-data-for-all-50-states/)
• [FBI_CDE] FBI Crime Data Explorer (https://cde.ucr.cjis.gov/)
• [NSOPW] National Sex Offender Public Website (https://www.nsopw.gov/)
• [BJS] Bureau of Justice Statistics - Prisoners in 2023 (https://www.ojp.gov/news/news-release/prisoners-2023-and-correctional-populations-united-states-2023)

Methodology Sources

• FBI NIBRS User Manual 2025
• USSC Sexual Abuse Quick Facts FY24 (https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/quick-facts/Sexual_Abuse_FY24.pdf)