Murders down 11.6% in US as crime remains key election issue
Oliver Helbig/Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — Murders in the United States were down 11.6% in 2023, according to statistics released by the FBI Monday morning.
The murder rate went down from 6.2 per 100,000 people in 2022 to 5.7 per 100,000 people in 2023. The steep decline last year comes after a 6.1% drop in 2022 over 2021.
Violent crime, which is one of the top issues for voters in the presidential election, as a whole was down 3% from 2022 to 2023, according to the FBI.
An FBI official said the drop in murders represents the “largest drop” since the agency has been collecting data, the agency said in a call with reporters on Monday.
“An estimated 1,218,467 violent crime offenses were committed in 2023, indicating a rate of 363.8 violent crimes per 100,000 inhabitants, down from the 2022 offense rate of 377.1 violent crimes per 100,000 inhabitants,” the Uniform Crime Reporting Program report released on Monday said.
Other crimes, like rape, decreased by 9.4%, aggravated assault decreased by 2.8%, and robbery decreased by 0.3%, according to the report.
Robberies also behaved differently during the pandemic and, unlike murders, went down during the shutdown and popped back up post-pandemic.
The number of law enforcement agencies who reported their data also increased from last year with 85.% of agencies actively enrolled in the FBI’s UCR Program and cover a combined population of 315,761,680 (94.3%) inhabitants.
All 12 cities that have 1,000,000 or more people reported data, the FBI said.
A crime that increased in 2023 was motor vehicle theft, which increased 12.6%, the FBI said.
Overall, property crime decreased by 2.4%, burglary decreased by 7.6% and larceny theft decreased by 4.4%.
Hate crimes are up in the U.S. from 2022 to 2023, according to the FBI statistics – including the number of incidents, offenses and victims of hate crimes.
The FBI doesn’t specify which group is the most targeted.
(NEW YORK) — In one of the most notable exchanges of the vice presidential debate, Republican candidate JD Vance refused to say former President Donald Trump lost the 2020 election and downplayed the events of Jan. 6, 2021, when a pro-Trump mob stormed the U.S. Capitol to try to stop the ceremonial certification of the results.
The Ohio senator also declined to rule out challenging the outcome of the 2024 race, even if votes were certified by every state leader as legitimate.
Minnesota Democratic Gov. Tim Walz, Vice President Kamala Harris’ running mate, expressed exasperation and disbelief. He said such denialism had to stop because it was “tearing our country apart.”
The topic of democracy, a top issue for many voters this cycle, came up near the end of the 90-minute debate hosted by CBS News in New York City.
Moderator Norah O’Donnell, noting there were no findings of widespread fraud in 2020, asked Vance about his past comment that he would not have certified the election if he had been vice president and instead would have asked states to submit alternate slate of electors.
“That has been called unconstitutional and illegal,” O’Donnell said. “Would you, again, seek to challenge this year’s election results, even if every governor certifies the results?”
Vance first sidestepped the question by saying he was “focused on the future” and criticized Harris, who he later claimed was the real “threat to democracy” as he accused her of censorship.
When he did address the question, he said: “Look, what President Trump has said is that there were problems in 2020, and my own belief is that we should fight about those issues, debate those issues peacefully in the public square.”
“And that’s all I’ve said, and that’s all that Donald Trump has said,” Vance continued, even though Trump is criminally accused of trying to overturn the election. “Remember, he said that on Jan. 6, the protesters ought to protest peacefully, and on Jan. 20 what happened? Joe Biden became the president, Donald Trump left the White House and now, of course, unfortunately, we have all of the negative policies that have come from the Harris-Biden administration.”
Walz called those comments “troubling” and said he was concerned about Trump’s recent threats to jail political opponents and his efforts to cast doubt on this year’s outcome.
“Here we are, four years later, in the same boat,” Walz said. “I will tell you, that when this is over, we need to shake hands, this election, and the winner needs to be the winner. This has got to stop. It’s tearing our country apart.”
The two, in a departure from the civil tone of the night, got into a tense back-and-forth on the issue.
Vance tried to cast election denialism as an issue for both parties, trying to equate Trump’s actions to Hillary Clinton’s complaints about the 2016 election (but only after she conceded).
“Hillary Clinton, in 2016, said that Donald Trump had the election stolen by Vladimir Putin because the Russians bought, like, $500,000 worth of Facebook ads,” Vance said.
“January 6 was not Facebook ads,” Walz said, hammering him for casting Jan. 6 as “peaceful” given the violence and deaths.
That day, which began with a speech by Trump at the Ellipse in which he told attendees to march “peacefully and patriotically” to the Capitol, culminated in approximately 140 law enforcement officers being injured, more than a thousand people being charged and cost millions of dollars damage.
In the months leading up to Jan. 6, Trump spread falsehoods about the 2020 election being “rigged” and “stolen” by Democrats. At the Ellipse, he continued the incendiary language and proclaimed, “If you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.”
Toward the end of Tuesday’s debate, Walz turned toward Vance and pressed him directly: “Did he lose the 2020 election?”
“Tim, I’m focused on the future,” Vance responded.
“That is a damning non-answer,” Walz shot back.
He also invoked former Vice President Mike Pence, saying the reason he wasn’t on the debate stage was because of his decision to carry out the certification of the 2020 results against Trump’s wishes.
“America, I think you’ve got a really clear choice,” Walz said, “of who’s going to honor that democracy and who’s going to honor Donald Trump.”
Trump also refused to accept that he lost the 2020 election during the ABC News presidential debate on Sept. 10.
When confronted with own recent remarks that he “lost by a whisker,” Trump doubled down. “I said that?” he responded.
“Are you now acknowledging that you lost in 2020?” ABC News moderator David Muir asked.
“No, I don’t acknowledge that at all,” he said. “That was said sarcastically.”
Trump has pleaded not guilty and denies any wrongdoing as he faces federal and state charges for his efforts to overturn his election.
(WASHINGTON) — Forty-two years ago, Lita Rosario-Richardson was the only woman on Howard University’s debate team. She made sure that changed — successfully recruiting Kamala Harris.
“I noticed Kamala’s analytical skills and critical thinking skills and that she had a very cogent way of making arguments,” said Rosario-Richarson.
Rosario-Richardson and Harris’ former debate opponents are some of the people who know her debating style best. Many of them are now expressing for the first time how Harris’ earlier debates could impact her upcoming one on Sept. 10 against former President Donald Trump.
The ABC News presidential debate will take place on Sept. 10 at 9 p.m. ET and air on ABC and stream on ABC News Live, Disney+ and Hulu.
Seizing a moment
When then-San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris took the stage against Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley in the general race for California attorney general in 2010, Harris was trailing in the polls.
A reporter asked Cooley about accepting both his pension as a former LA district attorney and an attorney general salary, which would bring him over $400,000 from taxpayers.
“I definitely earned whatever pension rights I have and I will certainly rely upon that to supplement the very low – incredibly low salary that’s paid to the attorney general,” Cooley responded.
Harris’ campaign turned Cooley’s answer into a campaign ad.
Her former aides tell ABC News that Harris had hoped to focus the race on her accomplishments and vision, but she signed off on the ad regardless.
In an interview with ABC News, Cooley said “I think she had very good consultants who constructed an ad,” but added he thought Harris “was not smart.”
On election night, Cooley was narrowly ahead and initially claimed victory, but Harris emerged as the winner when the votes were fully counted weeks later.
Cooley said he had not watched the debate since it happened, but he predicted that in the upcoming debate against Trump “a lot is going to depend upon the rules of the debate, and if she is there for an hour and a half on generally important issues and the questions are fair, she will not be well in a debate setting. She needs her teleprompter. She needs her notes that are probably written by someone else in order to do well.”
Cooley and Harris’ former aides both said neither had a teleprompter during the AG debate and both had notes on stage.
Former California Assembly Majority Leader Alberto Torrico, who lost to Harris in the primary for the AG race, said it would be a mistake for Trump to assume Harris is “dumb” going into the debate. “She’s not dumb, and she’s going to prosecute him. She’s not going to debate him … She’s going to treat him like one of the defendants that she prosecuted when she was a rank and file DA in Oakland.”
A perceived Achilles’ heel
Just a few months before the 2010 general election debate, Torrico, former Facebook executive Chris Kelly, Congressman Ted Lieu, former LA City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo and former state assembly member Pedro Nava were among Harris’ opponents in the AG primary race.
Congressman Lieu remembered, “She came from a law enforcement background, and that really came out. She didn’t take any crap. I wouldn’t want to debate her.”
Nava was one of the five men who faced Harris in the primary debate held by Los Angeles ABC station KABC. He described her as unfazed, saying, “There’s nothing more scary than a woman who doesn’t fear men.”
Delgadillo, who was next to Harris at the debate, said what stood out to him most was a call she made to him after the race. “She was extraordinarily magnanimous and gracious after defeating all of us,” he said.
Torrico said he knew Harris was the frontrunner going into the race.
He said, “The question that I always had in my mind was, can we trap her? Can we get her to say something? Can we get her to lose her cool?”
Torrico said in one forum they were seeking the Service Employees International Union’s endorsement. Torrico said he reminded the members in attendance that he had represented many of them, and knowing many spoke Spanish, answered part of a question in Spanish. “They went crazy … and I just looked at her and I thought, ‘Okay, bring it now.'”
He said Harris deflected the original question. “She just went after corporate America and the rich,” he said. “She just totally diffused all of the enthusiasm.”
“I was just sitting there fuming and saying, ‘She’s not answering the question at all. I just answered the question. I hit a home run … and everyone’s clapping for you.'”
Torrico said, “I always thought it was an Achilles’ heel for her … she’s very good at saying a lot of things without answering the actual question.”
He said once at a forum, when he didn’t know she was in attendance, he initially felt he had a great response on stage to a question about criminal justice. “I said something like, whoever the next attorney general is, he would have to do such and such.” Torrico said Harris “just popped out of nowhere, threw her finger in the air and declared, ‘or she will have to!'”
“I was like, ‘Oh God, what are you doing here? Where’d you come from?'” said Torrico.
“The room loved it,” he said.
Torrico said he grew reflective at the DNC. “I’m among the many people she vanquished on the path to where she is now,” he said.
Changing a moment
During her first public office debate for San Francisco district attorney, Harris had been in single digits in the polls, but her former campaign manager says that would change during one of the forums.
Someone in the audience asked Harris how she’d lead independently of the current mayor of San Francisco, Willie Brown. Harris had dated Brown about a decade before when he was the Speaker of California’s State Assembly. Harris responded by walking over to her opponents, Bill Fazio and the current DA, Terrance Hallinan, and mentioned the scandals that had been highlighting about each other.
Then she said, “I want to make a commitment to you that my campaign is not going to be about negative attacks.”
Former Harris aides say moments like that helped her beat Fazio, and got her to the runoff.
Fazio said he doesn’t recall that specific moment, but told ABC News that he had more experience as a trial attorney than Harris. But “she certainly was a much more accomplished and natural politician than I ever was. It’s probably the reason I lost.”
“She didn’t back down”
As the only woman at the time on Howard’s debate team, Rosaro-Richardson noticed how Harris challenged men.
“Oftentimes men use their physical prowess and the strength of their voices to win an argument. But I noticed that she didn’t allow that to deter her,” she said.
She remembers one specific moment when Harris was debating a man during her time on the Howard team.
“She was in cross examination, and [the opponent] hit her hand … I don’t know if it was intentional,” she said.
She said Harris stated out loud, “He hit my hand.” But Harris, according to Rosario-Richardson, did a “good job of it at the time … it didn’t throw her off. She was able to gather herself back after a few seconds and get back to the point.”
Rosario-Richardson said she will be watching Tuesday’s debate with other Howard alums and believes Donald Trump will be her most unpredictable opponent yet.
“I would say this is a unique situation because of the unpredictability of how Donald Trump will approach this debate and whether or not she can focus on substantive issues or focus on personal attacks,” Rosario-Richardson said.
She added that regardless of having known Harris’ debate style for over four decades, she has little idea of what to expect like everyone else. “I’m going to be excited. I’m going to feel some of the anticipation,” she said.
(NEW YORK) — More than a dozen 911 calls from the assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump on July 13 in Butler County, Pennsylvania, were released on Wednesday, reflecting moments of fear and confusion after a gunman opened fire at the outdoor rally.
“They just tried to kill President Trump,” a 911 caller reported.
“We have an emergency. We’re at the Trump rally,” another caller said.
The 15 recordings, some of which capture the sounds of chaos in the background, were released by Butler County.
The first call came in at 6:12 p.m., about a minute after shots rang out. Trump was eight minutes into his speech when the shooting began, according to officials.
“We’re at the Trump rally — gunshots,” a woman shouts above loud crowds.
“Yep, the police are on their way,” the dispatcher responds.
“You better get over here quick!” the woman says.
The gunfire killed Corey Comperatore, 50, and critically injured two other attendees, Jim Copenhaver and David Dutch.
“I have a woman on the line, her husband was shot at the Trump rally,” a dispatcher from neighboring Allegheny County reported.
Another call came from a woman who was trying to locate her husband, who, she told the call taker, had been shot and taken by paramedics.
Trump was left with a bloodied ear before a Secret Service sharpshooter killed the suspected gunman, 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks.
The bipartisan House task force investigating the assassination attempt outlined the security failures of the U.S. Secret Service and lack of coordination with local law enforcement in an interim report released earlier this week.
The report revealed that there was “inadequate planning and coordination by the Secret Service with state and local law enforcement before and during the July 13 rally.”
The preliminary findings are based on 23 transcribed interviews with local law enforcement officials, thousands of pages of documents from local, state and federal authorities as well as testimony from a public hearing on Sept. 26, according to the task force.
The task force concluded that the attempt on Trump’s life was “preventable.”
Trump returned to the Butler site earlier this month for a rally marked by enhanced security measures around the fairground, during which he thanked the first responders and the community that rallied behind him in the wake of the assassination attempt.
ABC News’ Lauren Peller contributed to this report.
