> then the regions with lots of observed "victimless crimes" would be uncorrelated with the regions with lots of serious crimes That doesn't seem like a stron

> then the regions with lots of observed "victimless crimes" would be uncorrelated with the regions with lots of serious crimes That doesn't seem like a strong hypothesis I would've made from the given scenario. For example, one area that's consistent with the theory is that areas with lots of "serious crime" generate a lot of police activity, which turns up a significant amount of "observed victimless crime". That creates an expectation of a positive correlation between "serious crime" and "observed victimless crime". Then, sure, according to that theory there might also be some areas where policing starts in an area on suspicion rather than serious crime and then we get a lot of "observed victimless crime" without as much "serious crime". That would be a negative correlation that you mentioned. I just don't think the falsifiable hypothesis you've drawn up is one that the theory actually strongly predicts, and I don't think refuting that hypothesis necessarily refutes the theory.