Studies and victimization surveys suggest that many, if not most, crimes are not reported to legal authorities. This is problematic because: (1) legal authorities are unable to address crimes they are unaware of, and victim or bystander reporting is the primary route by which authorities are made aware of crimes; and (2) people’s willingness to report crimes is an indicator of the public’s willingness to cooperate with legal authorities, which has long been noted as necessary for an effective criminal justice system in democratic societies. Academic attention to the role of bystanders was catalyzed largely by the story surrounding the assault and murder of Kitty Genovese in New York City in the 1960s, which elicited the question of why bystanders fail to report crimes. This chapter is about situational and bystander characteristics that relate to bystander decisions to report crime and provide information to legal authorities. It identifies gaps in the literature and proposes directions for future research.

This chapter introduces the book. It expresses as the book’s principal objective the advancement of a normative argument regarding the judicial enforcement of constitutional social rights. This argument is that the courts, when enforcing these rights against government actors, should focus their analysis on public trust in government or ‘political trust’ – with the book’s proposed trust-based framework following on from this argument. As a starting point for this normative argument, and to address the broader question of why we should examine social rights law from the perspective of political trust, the chapter considers the relationship between political trust and public cooperation. Additionally, the chapter covers preliminary matters, defining the book’s scope, delineating the applicability of the trust-based framework, situating the framework in existing frameworks for social rights enforcement and outlining the book’s structure.