I'm not disputing that there is a link between fines and poverty or between poverty and crime. But I can't fathom how 5% of assaults and burglaries are a direct

I'm not disputing that there is a link between fines and poverty or between poverty and crime. But I can't fathom how 5% of assaults and burglaries are a direct result of getting a fine in the last two months. Even in your perfect storm story, it's three or four months before you commit a crime. If you got fined before the slowdown, the fine still applies and still doubles. If you would have been fined during the slowdown but aren't, you would have had a month to pay anyway. You can also set up a payment plan to pay your fine over a period of a couple years. I don't doubt that some small portion of the effect is exactly this. But 5% reduction in a month seems like far too much. I'm not even sure if there was a big reduction in fines- how many fines come out of proactive policing? I don't know, it's not totally impossible. It just seems less likely than the null hypothesis of random variation in the data, while a more direct relationship could compete.