college.police.uk

DigestDecember 2016A digest of police law, operational policing practice and criminal justice

BetterEvidenceforBetterPolicing

™

OFFICIALDigest December 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL

© College of Policing Limited 2016

This publication is licensed under the terms of the Non-Commercial College Licence v1.1 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence visit http://www.college.police.uk/Legal/Documents/Non_Commercial_College_Licence.pdf

Where we have identified any third-party copyright information, you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.

This publication is available for download at college.police.uk

Any enquiries regarding this publication or to request copies in accessible formats please contact us at digest@college.pnn.police.uk

The Digest is a primarily legal environmental scanning publication intended to capture and consolidate topical and key issues, both current and future, impacting on all areas of policing.

During the production of the Digest, information is included from governmental bodies, criminal justice organisations and research bodies. As such, the Digest should prove an invaluable guide to those responsible for strategic decision making, operational planning and police training.

The College of Policing is also responsible for Authorised Professional Practice (APP). APP is the official and most up-to-date source of policing practice and covers a range of policing activities such as: police use of firearms, treatment of people in custody, investigation of child abuse and management of intelligence. APP is available online at www.app.college.police.uk

Any enquiries regarding this publication or to request copies in accessible formats please contact us at digest@college.pnn.police.uk

OFFICIALDigest December 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL

Overview 4Legislation 5 Bills before parliament 5 Policing and Crime Bill 5 Investigatory Powers Bill 5 Criminal Finances Bill 6 New legislation 7 TPIMs to continue 7 Investigatory Powers Act 2016 7Case law 9 Evidence and procedure 9 R v Jason Garland [2016] EWCA Crim 1745 9 Road traffic 11 DPP v Vince and Ors [2016] EWHC 3014 (Admin) 11Policing practice 13 Crime 13 National roll out of Project Servator 13 Police 14 Government response to report on PCC’s published 14 HMIC publish latest value for money profiles 14 Inspection of child protection in the MPS 14 IPCC recommends review of Silent Solution system 15 IPCC to investigate officers linked to Operation Midland 15 Police efficiency reports published 16 Policing Vision 2025 16 Revised PACE Codes published 17 Inconsistency in complaints handling across police forces 17 Crimestoppers message 17Criminal justice system 18 Report on the work of the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse published 18 Review of Restorative Justice published 18 Lammy review: emerging findings published 19

3

Contents

OFFICIALDigest December 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 4

This month’s edition of the Digest contains a summary of issues relating to police law, operational policing practice and criminal justice.

There are case reports on:

• an appeal based upon non-disclosure of material by the Crown during the original trial

• the admissibility of evidence after Intoxilyzer machine previously recorded an ‘ambient fail’.

We look in detail at:

• HMIC inspection of child protection in the MPS

• the Policing Vision 2025

• the emerging findings of the Lammy review

• the report on the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse.

We also look at:

• the national roll out of Project Servator

• IPCC to investigate officers linked to Operation Midland

• the Victims’ Commissioner review on restorative justice

• the revised PACE codes.

The progress of proposed new legislation through parliament is examined.

Overview

OFFICIALDigest December 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 5

LegislationBills before parliamentPolicing and Crime Bill

The Home Office has introduced a Policing and Crime Bill to enhance the democratic accountability of police forces and fire and rescue services, improve the efficiency and effectiveness of emergency services through closer collaboration and build public confidence in policing. A summary of the Bill can be found in the March Digest.

Progress

Line by line examination of the Bill took place during the final day of committee stage on 16 November 2016. Report stage was scheduled to begin on 30 November.

The Bill can be accessed in full at services.parliament.uk

Investigatory Powers Bill

The Investigatory Powers Bill, which was introduced on 1 March 2016, provides an updated framework for the use (by the security and intelligence agencies, law enforcement and other public authorities) of investigatory powers to obtain communications and communications data. These powers cover the interception of communications, the retention and acquisition of communications data, equipment interference for obtaining communications and other data. The Bill also makes provision relating to the security and intelligence agencies’ retention and examination of bulk personal datasets. A full summary of the Bill can be found in the April Digest.

Progress

Outstanding issues on the Bill were resolved on 16 November. A date for Royal Assent has yet to be set.

The Bill can be accessed in full at services.parliament.uk

OFFICIALDigest December 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 6 Legislation

Criminal Finances Bill

The Criminal Finances Bill, which was introduced in September, amends the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, make provisions in connection with terrorist property and creates corporate offences relating to tax evasion. A summary of the Bill can be found in the September Digest.

Progress

The Public Bill Committee on the Bill has now completed its work and has reported the Bill to the House with amendments.

The Bill will next be considered at Report Stage and Third Reading. A date for these stages has not yet been announced.

Please see services.parliament.uk

Bills before parliament

OFFICIALDigest December 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 7

New legislationTPIMs to continue

A Statutory Instrument has been laid before parliament, extending the use of Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures (TPIMs) for a period of five years. The Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Act 2011 (‘the Act’) provides the Secretary of State with the power to impose certain measures on an individual where satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that the individual is, or has been, involved in terrorism-related activity; and where the Secretary of State reasonably considers that it is necessary to impose the measures on the individual. Such measures are imposed by means of a ‘TPIM notice’.

The Act was due to expire at midnight on 13 December 2016. Following consultation as required by the Act, the Secretary of State has, due to the significant terrorist threat facing this country, decided to provide for the continuation of the Secretary of State’s TPIM powers for a further five year period which is the maximum permitted under the legislation.

Please see legislation.gov.uk

Investigatory Powers Act 2016

The Investigatory Powers Act 2016, which sets out the extent to which certain investigatory powers may be used to interfere with privacy has received royal assent. The Investigatory Powers Bill was introduced in response to the recommendations of three independent reviews and underwent a period of intensive pre-legislative scrutiny before being revised and introduced into the House of Commons in March. Over 1700 proposed amendments were debated by parliament before the Bill concluded its passage and received royal assent on 29 November 2016.

Part 1 imposes certain duties in relation to privacy and contains other protections for privacy, including offences and penalties in relation to the unlawful interception of communications, and the unlawful obtaining of communications data. It abolishes and restricts various general powers to obtain communications data and restricts the circumstances in which equipment interference and certain requests about the interception of communications can take place.

Part 2 and Chapter 1 of Part 6 set out circumstances (including under a warrant) in which the interception of communications is lawful, make further provision about the interception of communications and the treatment of material obtained in connection with it. Part 3 and Chapter 2 of Part 6 set out circumstances in which the obtaining of communications data is lawful in pursuance of an authorisation or under a warrant and make further provision about the obtaining and treatment of such data.

OFFICIALDigest December 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 8 Legislation New legislation

Part 4 makes provision for the retention of certain communications data in pursuance of a notice. Part 5 and Chapter 3 of Part 6 deal with equipment interference warrants, and Part 7 deals with bulk personal dataset warrants. Part 8 deals with oversight arrangements for regimes in this Act and elsewhere, and Part 9 contains miscellaneous and general provisions including amendments to sections 3 and 5 of the Intelligence Services Act 1994 and provisions about national security and combined warrants and authorisations.

The Home Office has stated that some of the provisions will require extensive testing and will not be in place for some time. Plans are being developed for implementing the provisions and a timetable will be set out in due course. This, the Home Office has stated, will be subject to detailed consultation with industry and operational partners. The government will commence the provisions in the Bill required to replace the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014, which will be repealed on 31 December 2016.

The Act can be accessed in full at legislation.gov.uk

Further information can be found at gov.uk

OFFICIALDigest December 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 9

Case lawEvidence and procedureR v Jason Garland [2016] EWCA Crim 1745

The Defendant was convicted of burglary, aggravated burglary and two offences of causing grievous bodily harm with intent on 20 December 2007 and sentenced to a minimum term of 17 years imprisonment for public protection under s225 Criminal Justice Act 2003.

After exhausting the usual appeal routes, the case was referred to the Court of Appeal by the Criminal Cases Review Commission on the basis that there had been a material non-disclosure of information available to the Police and the Crown, which may have rendered the appellant’s conviction unsafe.

Jason Garland was only convicted after his co-accused provided his name to the police, shortly after he himself had been convicted of his involvement in the incident. There had been no forensic evidence to link him to the scene, however there had been telephone evidence which showed extensive communication between both men before and after the incident. Garland was also heavily convicted for similar offences and that information was adduced during his trial as bad character evidence.

As a result of a Public Interest Immunity (PII) hearing, the Prosecution disclosed information from two confidential sources. The sources named the perpetrator as a ‘Mark Ellis’, the second source also named a ‘Terence Watts’ as being involved.

The Defence argued that this material should have been disclosed at the original trial and that the jury may have acquitted the appellant if they had been aware of it. Submissions were also made that bad character evidence had been adduced against Garland without the trial Judge being aware of the existence of the undisclosed material.

The Prosecution conceded that the material should have been disclosed at the original trial but they denied its retention arose from ‘bad faith’.

OFFICIALDigest December 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 10

On balance, the Court dismissed Jason Garland’s appeal on the following grounds:

It was held that the overriding question was whether, in light of the fresh evidence, the convictions were unsafe. The Court took the view that regardless of the non-disclosure they had no doubt as to the safety of the conviction on the basis of the following factors:

1. The arguments for the appellant were built on shaky foundations; the statements made by the two sources were unclear, unsatisfactory and their provenance was also uncertain.

2. There was the evidence of the co-accused – although it was accepted that he had gained by assisting the police.

3. The co-accused had accidentally disclosed the name of his co-defendant as ‘Jason’ to his mother shortly after the incident. This was captured in evidential form and the Court were satisfied there could have been no prior planning by the co-accused to do this, nor any collusion. They were satisfied this was a strong piece of evidence against the Garland.

4. There was extensive phone contact between the two men both before and after the incident.

5. The appellant had been convicted previously of very similar offences and this offending behaviour was properly balanced in the comments made to the jury by the trial judge. Even if bad character evidence had not been adduced under propensity to commit similar offences, it would have been adduced under another limb of the legislation in any event because the defendant had made an attack on the character of his co-accused.

The judgment can be accessed in full at bailii.org

Evidence and procedureCase law

OFFICIALDigest December 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 11

Road trafficDPP v Vince and Ors [2016] EWHC 3014 (Admin)

This case involved two appeals concerning the admissibility of evidence of the amount of alcohol in a driver’s breath when a test is carried out on an Intoxilyzer machine after the machine has previously recorded an ‘ambient fail’.

Kang

The appellant was requested to provide a specimen of breath on an approved device. This roadside test produced a result exceeding the prescribed amount and the appellant was arrested and taken to the police station.

At the station, the police officer requested two specimens of breath using the Lion Intoxilyzer 6000UK machine. Before the test could be carried out, the machine recorded an ‘Ambient Fail’ and the test was aborted. The test was carried out for a second time. Two specimens of breath were provided for analysis, the lower producing a reading lower than the roadside reading, but still well over the legal limit. The officer did not require the appellant to provide a sample of blood or urine instead of breath, but he did offer him the opportunity to do so. The appellant was convicted of being in charge of a motor vehicle on a road after consuming so much alcohol that his breath exceeded the prescribed limit, contrary to section 5(1)(b) of the Road Traffic Act 1988.

Two questions were raised for consideration:

1. Was the court entitled to conclude that the lower reading provided in the second part of the station procedure was reliable and admissible notwithstanding the ‘ambient fail’ message and the decision of the officer to re-start the Intoxilyzer rather than offer the choice to provide a sample of blood or urine?

2. Was the court entitled to regard the evidence of the roadside test as evidence which supported the reliability of the station procedure?

The Court found that the decision to restart the machine and/or the failure to complete the relevant paragraphs, did not render the results obtained invalid or inadmissible. In respect of the second question, the Court could see no reason why the court was not entitled to rely on the roadside test reading as one piece of evidence among others supporting the reliability of the station procedure. The roadside test was not the basis for the conviction, it was of relevance to confirm the reliability to the results of a test carried out at the police station.

Road trafficCase law

OFFICIALDigest December 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 12

Vince

Ms Vince was taken to the police station following a positive roadside breath test. The machine registered an ‘Ambient Fail’. The breath analysis procedure was recommenced, the first partially completed MG DD/A form was abandoned and a fresh copy completed. The officers did not seek a blood or urine sample, stating this was unnecessary. Ms Vince provided two specimens of breath for analysis, the lower of the two readings obtained being 66 mg of alcohol per 100 ml of breath.

At the conclusion of the prosecution case, after this evidence had been adduced, a submission was made on behalf of Ms Vince that she had no case to answer. The magistrates’ court found the evidence of the police officers to be inconsistent and contradictory, and that both the abortive and final MG DD/A forms demonstrated errors and omissions. They were left with the general overwhelming impression that the evidence obtained could not, and should not, be relied upon. The magistrates’ court also found that the prosecution had failed to satisfy them of an essential element of the alleged offence, namely that the procedure had been conducted in accordance with the procedures required by section 7 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 and thus there was insufficient evidence that the crime had been committed.

Accordingly the court found that there was no case to answer and dismissed the case.

The magistrates stated two questions for the opinion of this court.

• Was the court right to exclude the evidence of the Intoxilyzer reading in light of inconsistencies and contradictions in the evidence of the police officer

• Was the court correct to conclude that the prosecution had failed to prove an essential element of the case, namely the level of alcohol in the defendant’s breath, and therefore that there was no case for the defendant to answer?

As to the first question, the inconsistencies and contradictions to which the magistrates referred were not identified in the case stated. As it was, although the position was unsatisfactory, there was no material in the case stated from which it could be said that this was a conclusion which was not open to them.

As to the second question, the case stated did not explain in what respects the procedure adopted was not in accordance with what was required by section 7 of the 1988 Act. At all events, it does appear that the magistrates concluded that the test reading obtained was not reliable. They said that the evidence could not be relied on, rather than that it was reliable evidence which was rendered inadmissible by some defect in procedure.

Despite unsatisfactory drafting of the case stated and the uncertainty about the magistrates’ reasoning, the Court dismissed the appeal.

The judgement can be accessed in full at bailii.org

Road trafficCase law

OFFICIALDigest December 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 13

Policing practiceCrimeNational roll out of Project Servator

Project Servator involves officers, specifically trained to deter, disrupt and detect crime using tactics developed and tested by security experts in partnership with the City of London Police. The scheme is now set for a national roll out. The Project deploys both highly visible and covert police officers, alongside other resources such as dogs, horses, firearms, ANPR and CCTV in busy areas. These deployments are unpredictable and intelligence-led and include officers trained to spot and resolve suspicious activity.

Project Servator was developed over a five-year period by the Centre for Protection of National Infrastructure (CPNI) and is already ‘business as usual’ for a number of forces, including City of London Police, British Transport Police (BTP) and the Ministry of Defence (MOD). It was used extensively during the Glasgow Commonwealth Games in 2014, and to date BTP has carried out more than 400 deployments since adopting Project Servator in December 2015.

There will now be a national roll out. The Metropolitan Police launched the scheme in some of its boroughs on 28 November, and more forces spread across England and Wales will begin the training needed to adopt the project over the coming months.

Please see news.npcc.police.uk

OFFICIALDigest December 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 14

PoliceGovernment response to report on PCC’s published

The Government has published a response to the Home Affairs Committee report ‘Police and Crime Commissioners: here to stay’, which was published in March. The response addresses the Committee’s specific conclusions and recommendations. These included a reform of the police funding formula, collaboration between PCC’s and an inquiry into the police complaints system.

The response can be accessed in full at publications.parliament.uk

HMIC publish latest value for money profiles

HM Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) has published the latest value for money (VFM) profiles, providing comparative data on a wide range of policing activities.

The profiles can be accessed in full at justiceinspectorates.gov.uk

Inspection of child protection in the MPS

HM Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) has published a report of the findings following the 2016 inspection of child protection services in the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS). It forms part of HMIC’s programme of child protection inspections. The inspection involved examining the effectiveness of the police response at each stage of their interactions with or for children, from initial contact through to investigation of offences against them. It also included scrutiny of the treatment of children in custody, and an assessment of how the force is structured, led and governed in relation to child protection services.

The inspection found examples of officers and staff throughout the MPS who are working with genuine commitment, dedication and empathy to protect and help children and young people. However on reviewing the sample of child protection case files, HMIC judged that almost three-quarters demonstrated policing practice that either needed improvement or was inadequate.

This report makes a series of recommendations aimed at improving practice, building on the effective work observed, strengthening strategic control of child protection and bringing consistently good standards to the service provided. HMIC stated that the MPS’s change programme, Met 2020, could offer an opportunity to address some of these serious concerns.

The report can be accessed in full at justiceinspectorates.gov.uk

PolicePolicing practice

OFFICIALDigest December 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 15

IPCC recommends review of Silent Solution system

The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) has identified concerns with the ‘Silent Solution’ system, as part of its investigation into Devon and Cornwall Police’s contact with a victim, who was murdered by her ex-partner in December 2013. The ‘Silent Solutions’ system is used by police forces across England and Wales to help deal with the large amount of hoax 999 calls that the system receives. It is also intended to help those who are in danger or need assistance, but cannot speak to the operator.

Evidence gathered as part of investigation indicated that the victim may have been advised by a police officer that if she were to make an emergency call from her mobile phone, but did not speak, emergency assistance could still be despatched. The victim made a 999 call when her ex-partner broke into her house, but she did not respond to the operator’s instructions and was transferred to the ‘Silent Solution’ system. As there was no response to the commands from the automated voice system, the call was not transferred to the police.

National recommendations have now been made to ensure that there is better accountability for the system, and that its effectiveness is reviewed.

Please see ipcc.gov.uk

IPCC to investigate officers linked to Operation Midland

The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) is to undertake an investigation into the conduct of officers linked to the Metropolitan Police’s Operation Midland. The allegations were referred to the IPCC following an independent review by Sir Richard Henriques and are as follows:

• A deputy assistant commissioner (DAC), a detective superintendent (DSupt), and a detective chief inspector (DCI) are alleged to have failed to properly investigate allegations made by a complainant ‘Nick’ which lead to an extended investigation causing prolonged and undue stress to those under suspicion

• The DAC, DSupt, DCI, and a detective inspector and detective sergeant are alleged to have failed to present all relevant information to a district judge when applying for search warrants and there are alleged to be irregularities in the seizure of exhibits from searched properties

• The DAC is alleged to have reviewed and reinvestigated allegations against Leon Brittan, which had previously been closed, without new grounds to do so.

Full terms of reference for the investigation are still under consideration.

Please see ipcc.gov.uk

PolicePolicing practice

OFFICIALDigest December 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 16

Police efficiency reports published

HM Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) has published the annual efficiency inspection, assessing how police forces use their resources now and how they plan to do so in the future. Of the police forces in England and Wales, 33 were assessed as ‘good’, two as ‘outstanding’ and eight as ‘requires improvement’. The report is accompanied by separate reports on each force, based on inspections carried out from March to June 2016 and data provided by forces on their spending plans for future years.

The report can be accessed in full at justiceinspectorates.gov.uk

Policing Vision 2025

Policing Vision 2025 sets out the future for policing over the next ten years and will shape decisions about how police forces use their resources to keep people safe. It has been developed by the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners (APCC) and the National Police Chief’s Council (NPCC) in consultation with the College of Policing, National Crime Agency, staff associations and other policing and community partners. All chief constables and PCC’s have signed up to the vision.

What does a police service look like in 2025?

• The link between communities and the police will continue to form the bedrock of British policing. Local policing will be tailored to society’s complex and diverse needs – with the delivery of public protection being informed by community priorities and robust evidence-based demand analysis.

• Specialist capabilities will be better prepared to respond to existing and emerging crime types. Decisions on how capabilities are positioned, structured and deployed will take into account the need to rapidly protect communities and the vulnerable, as well as provide value for money.

• The police service will attract and retain a workforce of confident professionals able to operate with a high degree of autonomy and accountability and will better reflect its communities.

• Digital policing will make it easier for the public to make contact with the police wherever they are in the country, enable us to make better use of digital intelligence and evidence and transfer all material in a digital format to the criminal justice system.

• Policing will be agile and outward focused. Police forces and their partners will work together in a consistent manner to enable joined up business delivery around policing support services and community safety.

• Clear accountability arrangements will support policing at local, cross-force and national levels. This will ensure that there is coherence between the oversight of the police reform programme and local policing and crime plans as well as developing arrangements that recognise the roles of different policing bodies. PCC will continue to be at the heart of engaging communities in the reform plans so that the public understand and have confidence in any change.

Policing Vision 2025 can be accessed in full at npcc.police.uk

PolicePolicing practice

OFFICIALDigest December 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 17

Revised PACE Codes published

Following a consultation on PACE codes C, D and H, revised codes were laid before parliament on 22 November 2016. Following parliamentary approval, the order will bring the code into operation 21 days after it is made. The revised codes are expected to come into force by the end of February 2017. Until the revised codes come into operation, the current Codes C, D and H remain in force.

The revised codes can be accessed in full at gov.uk

Inconsistency in complaints handling across police forces

The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC), through the 2015/16 national complaints statistics, have reported little consistency in the way that police forces handle complaints.

The statistics showed:

• the overall number of complaints has fallen by 8%, but this disguises significant falls in some forces, and considerable increases in others

• some forces choose to handle over 70% of complaints through the informal local resolution process; whereas others choose to use formal investigation

• overall, forces uphold only 19% of appeals against their own local investigations, whereas when such appeals come to the IPCC, 41% are upheld. Again, there are significant variations within those figures, with some forces never upholding an appeal and some upholding over a third.

The statistics can be accessed in full at ipcc.gov.uk

Crimestoppers message

Crimestoppers is an independent charity that provides the means for people to pass information about crime to the police and other agencies with a guarantee of anonymity. This information is often critical and frequently it is used to save life and protect people from immediate harm.

Because this service is anonymous it is of vital importance that anyone dealing with Crimestoppers information takes active steps to protect the source from compromise. Crimestoppers information is always treated as ‘third party sensitive information’ and disclosure of its existence can only be agreed following a risk assessment process.

No person, especially the subject of that information, should ever be told that Crimestoppers was the source of the information.

PolicePolicing practice

OFFICIALDigest December 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 18

Criminal justice systemReport on the work of the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse published

The Home Affairs Select Committee (HASC) has published a report into the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA), stating that the work of the Inquiry is vital but that confidence in the Inquiry’s ability to deliver its objectives has been seriously diminished.

Key findings

• The Committee stated that it is disgraceful that Dame Lowell Goddard has refused to provide oral evidence, adding that should Dame Lowell travel to the UK in the future, they would invoke parliamentary procedures to seek to summon her to give oral evidence.

• On the basis of the evidence seen, HASC did not believe that IICSA has taken seriously enough its responsibility to pursue allegations of bullying or disclosures of sexual assault within the Inquiry. Nor did it believe it has done enough to demonstrate publicly that it has a robust approach to such matters.

• The Truth Project is an important way to enable abuse survivors to share their experiences with the Inquiry. IICSA notes that 500 people have so far been invited to attend an interview, but only 100 have been able to contribute in this way to date.

• As part of that process, to provide clarity and make the work of the Inquiry easier to manage, consideration could be given to dividing the work into two separate elements: one pursuing forensic and legal investigations, to establish the truth about past institutional abuse, and the other looking at thematic and compliance issues around child protection and safeguarding procedures within institutions today.

The report can be accessed in full at publications.parliament.uk

Review of Restorative Justice published

A review by the Victims’ Commissioner on restorative justice has been published, looking at the quality of restorative justice (RJ) services from the victims’ perspective. It found that the reason many victims participated in RJ was to help the offender and aide their rehabilitation. In addition, the Victims Commissioner, Baroness Newlove discovered that victims, while taking part to assist their own recovery, also wanted to find out why they had been targeted by the offender.

OFFICIALDigest December 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 19

The review found that:

• many victims were not initially aware of RJ and were reliant on criminal justice agencies to inform them about it

• almost half of victims were only offered RJ once the victim had been sentenced; and

• some victims felt that more could be done to ensure their emotional needs were being met throughout the RJ process.

The review, entitled ‘A Question of Quality; A review of Restorative Justice Part 2 – Victims’ is the second and final part of the Victims Commissioner’s review into RJ services. The review recommends that:

• Police and Crime Commissioners should consider how they monitor how many victims are offered RJ

• Police or the RJ service providers should develop local procedures to ensure the offer of RJ is consistently applied, throughout the criminal justice process

• RJ service providers should work towards a quality standard or indicator, and work collaboratively with other agencies, where required; and,

• Further analysis from the Ministry of Justice is required in order to establish how to increase public awareness of RJ.

The review is a follow-up to Part 1, which considered what a quality RJ service looked like according to service providers.

A question of quality: A review of Restorative Justice Part 2 – Victims can be accessed here.

A question of quality: A review of Restorative Justice Part 1 – Service Providers can be accessed here.

Lammy review: emerging findings published

The emerging findings of an independent review into race and the criminal justice system have been published. The review commissioned an analysis of disproportionality in the criminal justice system (CJS), to identify stages in the CJS where disproportionality increased or decreased for black and minority ethnic individuals, with a view to identifying where further investigation may be needed. The independent review is led by the Rt Hon David Lammy (MP).

The review considered evidence from the point of arrest onwards and, for the first time, applied data analysis techniques used by the US Department of Justice.

Criminal justice system

OFFICIALDigest December 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 20

Key findings

• For every 100 women handed custodial sentences at Crown Courts for drug offences, 227 black women were sentenced to custody. For black men, this figure is 141 for every 100 white men.

• Of those convicted at Magistrates’ Court for sexual offences, 208 black men and 193 Asian men received custodial sentences for every 100 white men.

• BAME defendants are more likely than their white counterparts to be tried at Crown Court – with young black men around 56% more likely than their white counterparts.

• BAME men were more than 16% more likely than white men to be remanded in custody.

• BAME men were 52% percent more likely than white men to plead ‘not guilty’ at crown court.

• In prisons, BAME males are almost five times more likely to be housed in high security for public order offences than white men; and

• Mixed ethnic men and women were more likely than white men and women to have adjudications for breaching prison discipline brought against them – but less likely to have those adjudications proven when reviewed.

• 51% of the UK-born BAME population agree that ‘the criminal justice system discriminates against particular groups’, compared to 35% of the UK-born white population.

• 41% of youth prisoners are from minorities backgrounds, compared with 25% ten years ago, despite prisoner numbers falling by some 66% in that time.

• The number of Muslim prisoners has almost doubled in the last decade.

The report can be accessed in full at gov.uk

Criminal justice system

C516|1216BetterEvidence

forBetterPolicing™

About the College

We’re the professional body for everyone who works for the police service in England and Wales. Our purpose is to provide those working in policing with the skills and knowledge necessary to prevent crime, protect the public and secure public trust.

college.police.uk