Two New BOCSAR Studies Shed Light on Misidentification in the policing of Intimate Partner Violence

Links to Report Summary: 


Release date: Tuesday 18 November 2025

The Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research (BOCSAR) has released two studies examining misidentification in the policing of intimate partner violence (IPV). These studies provide valuable insights into concerns raised by domestic violence advocates about female victims being wrongly identified and charged as offenders.

Study 1 - Examining gender bias in policing charging decisions

The first study examined whether police apply different thresholds of evidence for men and women when deciding to initiate charges in IPV assault cases. The research tested for gender bias by comparing male and female conviction rates in marginal cases to see whether police lay weaker charges against women. We found no significant difference in conviction rates for men and women charged with IPV. (Actually, marginal female defendants were slightly more likely to be convicted (82%) compared to 67% for men, but this difference was not statistically significant).

Commenting on the findings, Jackie Fitzgerald, Executive Director of BOCSAR, noted that the results suggest “experienced police officers apply consistent standards when deciding whether to charge male and female persons of interest in IPV assault matters.”

Study 2 - The nature and extent of cross-intimate partner violence

The second study examined another area of misidentification concern - cases of IPV where NSW Police take legal action against both partners rather than a single primary aggressor, commonly referred to as cross-IPV.

Cross-IPV remains rare but is increasing: from 0.7% of IPV events with a legal proceeding in 2010–11 to 2.5% in the year to February 2023. Similarly, cross-Apprehended Domestic Violence Orders (ADVOs) have grown from 5.7% in 2016 to 13.7% in 2023.

Analysis of police records found minimal differences between men and women involved in cross-IPV events:

  • In 43% of cross-IPV events both parties were charged with assault (rather than another DFV offence). In an additional 22% of events, only the female was charged with assault, while in 17% only the male was charged with assault.
  • In over three-quarters of cross-IPV events both the male and female partner engaged in aggressive/violent behaviours such as assault or property damage.
  • Physical injury was similar between men and women. 22% of the time both parties were injured, in 20% just the male partner was injured and in 21% just the female partner was injured.
  • Violence by both parties was often described as occurring in self-defence or retaliation, although this was slightly more common for women (47% for women v 42% for men). 
  • Men and women in cross-IPV did, however, differ in their past DFV experience: men were more likely to have a history of perpetration than their female partners (18% vs. 12%), while women were likely to have experienced prior victimisation episodes (35% vs. 12%).  

Commenting on the results, Jackie Fitzgerald, Executive Director at BOCSAR said: “A critical facet of intimate partner violence is not in dispute: women are far more likely to be victims and men far more likely to be offenders. This new research examines those uncommon situations where women are charged with IPV to assess whether these charges are unjustified. Neither study found evidence that women are mischarged in the specific circumstances considered. It is important to note, however, that these studies address misidentification only in areas where data is available, they do not capture every occurrence. Misidentification remains difficult to detect and may still occur. Ongoing monitoring and further research is therefore essential to ensure fair and accurate policing responses."

For comment please contact:

Jackie Fitzgerald, Executive Director, NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics & Research.

Phone: +61 423 139 687
Email: jackie.fitzgerald@dcj.nsw.gov.au
Copies of the report: www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au 

Last updated: