Categories
Police

Is Crimestoppers Anonymous ?

Crimestoppers

Crimestoppers is widely promoted as the United Kingdom’s leading provider of anonymous crime reporting. The charity asserts on its website that individuals who submit information, whether online or by telephone, benefit from “100% anonymity”.

Your anonymity is 100% guaranteed. We are not interested in who you are, only what you know, so the more detail you give us the better. 

Your computer and mobile phone IP addresses cannot be tracked or saved. It’s completely anonymous

Crimestoppers – Give information anonymously

However, questions have been raised about whether this assurance is fully justified.

An independent investigator and YouTuber known as Crimebodge has conducted a detailed examination of these claims.

In a video released on the 21st April 2026, titled I Tested Crimestoppers’ ‘100% Anonymity’ – They FAILED, he systematically tests the service’s safeguards and identifies several technical and procedural shortcomings that may leave users of Crimestoppers less protected than they have been led to believe.

I Tested Crimestoppers’ “100% Anonymity” – They FAILED

Crimestoppers Online Reporting System

Approximately 80 percent of reports to Crimestoppers are now submitted via its website. While the platform states that it masks IP addresses and does not retain personal data, the investigation reveals a more complex picture.

Report crime anonymously to Crimestoppers
Online – crimestoppers-uk.org
By phone – 0800 555 111

How to report a crime – Police.uk

Analysis of the site shows that it activates 16 third-party trackers before a report is even submitted. These include services from Google, Meta (Facebook), LinkedIn, Snapchat, YouTube, X (formerly Twitter), Stack Adapt, and Hotjar. Data collected can include:

  • IP addresses
  • Geolocation information
  • Browser fingerprints
  • User interaction patterns (such as mouse movements and keystrokes)

The Hotjar tool, in particular, is capable of recording complete user sessions, including content typed into forms. Social media login options further increase the risk of linking activity to identifiable profiles. Notably, privacy notices and cookie consent mechanisms frequently load after many of these trackers have already activated.

The website is also protected by Imperva, a service whose administrators have potential access to raw server logs, including IP data. As a result, the online portal may not offer the level of anonymity that is publicly advertised.

Crimestoppers Telephone Reporting

Crimestoppers maintains that telephone calls are not recorded and that caller numbers are withheld. Nevertheless, several practical vulnerabilities remain:

  • Telecommunications providers routinely retain call metadata, which can be accessed by law enforcement.
  • The use of 141 to withhold caller ID is widely known and may itself attract attention.
  • The 1471 service can often reveal the last caller on landlines.
  • In cases involving serious allegations or potential misuse, police have confirmed they will not always uphold anonymity.

Report crime anonymously to Crimestoppers
Online – crimestoppers-uk.org
By phone – 0800 555 111

If you’re concerned your call could be traced, dial 141 before 0800 555 111, this will block your phone number. 

How to report a crime – Police.uk

The organisation’s policy also reserves the right to assist police in identifying individuals who submit reports deemed to be malicious which is a definition that allows considerable discretion.

Effectiveness and Value of Crimestoppers

Crimestoppers’ own published figures, referenced in the investigation, indicate limited outcomes:

  • 75 percent of all reports are discarded without any police follow-up.
  • Only one in nine reports passed to police results in a tangible outcome.

These statistics suggest that a significant proportion of individuals who submit information may be exposing themselves to potential identification for little discernible public benefit.

Implications of Crimestoppers Anonymity Claims

The investigation does not oppose the principle of anonymous crime reporting. Instead, it highlights the importance of accurate information regarding the actual protections in place. Members of the public who rely on Crimestoppers’ assurances may inadvertently leave digital traces that could later be traced, particularly in high-profile or contentious cases.

The video concludes by recommending that individuals educate themselves about their rights when interacting with law enforcement, rather than depending solely on official channels.

Crimebodge refers readers to his publication, Copper Stopper: How to Protect Yourself From Law Enforcement, available in both paperback and digital formats.

Conclusion

While Crimestoppers undoubtedly provides a valuable public service, its repeated emphasis on “100% anonymity” appears overly optimistic and potentially misleading.

In an environment of widespread digital surveillance and data collection, genuine anonymity demands robust technical measures, transparent limitations, and clear disclaimers.

Check out our articles on Policing by Consent, Police Professional Standards, Police Misconduct Hearings, Police Impartiality, Police Surveillance, Are the Police for Hire ?, Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC),Police Public Confidence and Engagement, Crime Reporting, What is a Police and Crime Commissioner ?, Sussex Police, Policing, Police News, Two Tiered Policing, Thought Police, Wasting Police Time, Police Community Support Officers (PCSO), Met Police, Chief Constable Jo Shiner, R v Sussex Justices and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

[post_title] was last updated on the 9th June 2026

By Dom Watts

Dom Watts founded the Ministry of Injustice in July 2021. Dom is an IT Professional with 30+ years experience in Tier 1 Banking, Government, Defence, Healthcare and Global Blue Chips. Dom has no legal training and is not a lawyer but has previously consulted for a Magic Circle Law Firm. You can find Dom on X or Google.

Dom Watts publishes the Ministry of Injustice as a citizen journalist. The journalism exemption is detailed in the Data protection and journalism code of practice published by the ICO and Section 124 of the Data Protection Act 2018.

Section 2 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the defence of truth. Section 3 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the defence of honest opinion. Section 4 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the defence of public interest. Section 8 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the single publication rule.

Section 4a of The Limitation Act 1980 defines the time limit for actions for defamation or malicious falsehood as one year from the date on which the cause of action accrued.

Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998 gives the right to freedom of expression. "This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers."

"Free speech encompasses the right to offend, and indeed to abuse another." - Para 43 Scottow v CPS [2020] EWHC 3421 (Admin)

"Free speech is a fundamental common law right" - Para 21 R v Shayler [2002] UKHL 11 [2003] 1 AC 247 per Lord Bingham and Para 42 Phillips -v- Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs [2024] EWHC 32 (Admin)

Dom is a member of The Free Speech Union

“A key issue here is the need to distinguish between conduct which, however objectionable, does not justify invoking the criminal law and conduct which crosses the line and results in criminal liability" - Para 31 R v O’Neill [2016] EWCA Crim 92 [2016]

“Harassment is generally understood to involve improper oppressive and unreasonable conduct that is targeted at an individual and calculated to produce alarm and distress” - Para 38 R v O’Neill [2016] EWCA Crim 92 [2016]

"The behaviour said to amount to harassment must reach a level of seriousness passing beyond irritations, annoyances....The gravity of the misconduct must be of an order which would sustain criminal liability" - Paras [40-44] Hayden v Dickenson [2020] EWHC 3291 (QB)

"If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything"

In 2002 Dom Watts was an unlikely consumer champion. The dad of three from Croydon took on the power and might of Kodak – and won...Dom on BBC Working Lunch

Rule of Law - Open Justice - Policing By Consent