Community Resolutions and Professional Judgement

West Midlands Police

Our vision is to reduce crime and disorder and make our communities feel safer

Community Resolutions and Professional Judgement

Local Policing & Justice Committee Thursday 11 November 2010



Out of Court Disposals

• National Picture:

• ACPO Review – 2009• Local Resolutions - proportionality• Green Paper on Sentencing- imminent• Coalition Government

– Fresh priorities– Power back to citizens– “The Big Society”– “Rehabilitation revolution”– Crime reduction at the core



Out of Court Disposals Available

• Conditional Caution• Simple Caution• Penalty Notice for Disorder• Final Warning• Reprimand• Cannabis Warning• Community Resolution

(NB: Admission, conditionality, criminal record)



Detected & Resolved Crime Comparison 2008 - 2010

How Detected

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

2008/09 40661 19394 2661 2240 1859 1003

2009/2010 33870 12113 2024 2106 991 12624

2010/2011 YTD 17717 4935 760 1075 513 7604

2008/09 60% 29% 4% 3% 3% 1%

2009/2010 53% 19% 3% 3% 2% 20%

2010/2011 YTD 54% 15% 2% 3% 2% 23%

Charge Caution TIC Cannabis PND Comm Res



Detected & Resolved Crime Comparison

Detected & Detected & Resolved

29.4%

24.2%

29.8% 30.2%

24.4%

18.7%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010 - 2011 YTD

% Detected % Det/Resolved



Out of Court Disposals Elsewhere

• Youth Conditional Caution• Large variety of ‘Local’ Resolutions• Youth Restorative Disposals• Restorative Justice and practices



Community Resolutions

“Any action requested by the injured party, which is agreed by the suspect and considered appropriate and proportionate by the officer”.



Principles & Benefits

•Trusting officers to use professional judgement.

• Listening to what victims of crime actually want.

• Proportionate and non-bureaucratic.

• Looking at the overall public interest picture.

• Doing the RIGHT THING.



The Process

• Aimed at suitable ‘lower level’ offences such as criminal damage, theft, minor assaults, subject to all circumstances being assessed.

• More serious and ‘priority’ offences may occasionally be considered, subject to additional checks and balances, and only if authorisation is given by an Inspector.



The Process… continued

• Officer assesses all the circumstances and only if the victim supports a resolution may it be considered.

• Process is voluntary – If offender denies involvement or refuses to take part no resolution may occur.

• Incident is still recorded as a criminal offence.

• A record of the resolution is made so that if the same offender comes to notice again this information is available.



Safeguards

• The victim must give written permission in advance.

• FLINTS and PNC must be checked in advance to ascertain any antecedents or other information is considered.

• If the offender agrees to participate, they must admit the offence and agree to the resolution in writing.

• The officer must complete a written rationale explaining why a resolution is the most appropriate form of action.

•Supervisory sign off.



Progress to date

• 20,000 Community Resolutions since 1st April 2009.

• 5.9% of total recorded crime.

• 23% of detected/resolved crime (YTD)

• Positive feedback from victims of crime.

• Creates capacity, allowing additional focus on serious offending and local priorities.



Risks

• Inappropriate decision-making / cutting corners.

• Risk aversion.

• Over-focus on targets / performance indicators, driving the wrong type of activity.

• It’s not meant to be “a slightly better option that NFA..”



Some examples….

• Common assault

After an argument with a neighbour, the 74-year-old offender pushed past her and walked off. No injury was caused whatsoever. This was reported as an assault but the victim just wanted the offender to be spoken to by police. Officers advised him about his behaviour and he accepted that he should not have pushed the victim.



Another….

• Criminal DamageA 10 year old and his 8 year old friend threw stones at the windows of a health centre, causing damage. Their parents were horrified at their behaviour. Unfortunately neither family had the means to offer financial compensation so the matter was resolved to the satisfaction of the centre manager by the youngsters attending with their parents and reading out letters of apology to members of staff



Another….

• Dog dangerously out of controlOffender's dog ran out of garden and bit a neighbour causing minor injuries and damaging her jeans. The victim did not want the offender to be prosecuted as it was a one-off incident, so the matter was resolved with an apology and the offender paying for a new pair of jeans for the victim.



Victim Impact and Satisfaction

• In 2009, interviews were conducted with 210 victims of crime who had experienced a community resolution. 97% stated they were satisfied with the outcome.



Victim Impact and Satisfaction

“Ultimately, 42.8% of people had a better opinion of the police after the resolution than before.”

Source: NPIA research



So, how are we actually using

Community Resolutions?



Use of Community Resolution Across LPUs



Use of Community Resolution Across LPUs

Com Res as a % of Detected & Resolved CrimeApr 2010 - October 2010

24.9%24.4%

23.9%23.5%

23.2%22.5% 22.3% 22.2% 21.9%

21.4%

19.0%

20.0%

21.0%

22.0%

23.0%

24.0%

25.0%

26.0%

Sol

ihul

l (S

H)

Birm

ingh

amN

orth

(B

N)

Cov

entr

y (C

V)

Wol

verh

ampt

on(W

V)

Birm

ingh

amS

outh

(B

S)

San

dwel

l (S

W)

Birm

ingh

amE

ast

(BE

)

Birm

ingh

amW

est

and

Cen

tral

(B

W)

Wal

sall

(WS

)

Dud

ley

(DY

)



Use of Community Resolution Across All Crime Types



Indictable Only Offences – Community Resolution



An Example….

• Indictable only offenceRape - victim 12yrs when first consensual sex act committed with boyfriend of similar age no further acts until age of 14 with boyfriend. Victim became pregnant, child due September 2009. Offender admitted offence and agreed with social services to attend sexual awareness course. Victim was looking forward to child and declined to co-operate further. PPU involvement throughout.



Offences Bought to Justice

• Tier 1 – Most Serious Violence– Serious Sexual Offences

• Tier 2– Serious Acquisitive Crime– Robbery, Burglary Dwelling and Vehicle Crime

• Tier 3– Everything else



Volumes

Community Resolutions -v- All Crime & Tier 3

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Apr-09

May-09

Jun-09

Jul-09

Aug-09

Sep-09

Oct-09

Nov-09

Dec-09

Jan-10

Feb-10

Mar-10

Apr-10

May-10

Jun-10

Jul-10

Aug-10

Sep-10

Oct-10

Tier 3 766 1080 1231 1196 1013 1087 1092 1095 1068 949 849 1007 953 1045 1105 1238 1100 910 983

Comm Res All 771 1090 1250 1210 1031 1105 1115 1111 1078 967 873 1023 967 1065 1129 1254 1119 927 1001

Apr-09

May-09

Jun-09

Jul-09

Aug-09

Sep-09

Oct-09

Nov-09

Dec-09

Jan-10

Feb-10

Mar-10

Apr-10

May-10

Jun-10

Jul-10

Aug-10

Sep-10

Oct-10

Community Resolutions -v- Tier 1 & 2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Apr-09

May-09

Jun-09

Jul-09 Aug-09

Sep-09

Oct-09

Nov-09

Dec-09

Jan-10

Feb-10

Mar-10

Apr-10

May-10

Jun-10

Jul-10 Aug-10

Sep-10

Oct-10

Tier 1 2 3 8 5 6 4 5 2 3 8 9 3 5 8 14 4 4 6 1

Tier 2 3 7 11 9 12 14 18 14 7 10 15 13 9 12 10 12 15 11 17

Apr-09

May-09

Jun-09

Jul-09Aug-09

Sep-09

Oct-09

Nov-09

Dec-09

Jan-10

Feb-10

Mar-10

Apr-10

May-10

Jun-10

Jul-10Aug-10

Sep-10

Oct-10



Tier 1 Crime – How Detected

MSV How Detected - Apr09 - To Date

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

Number 1635 237 74

% 84% 12% 4%

Charge/Summons Caution Com Res

SSO How Detected - Apr09 - To Date

0

200

400

600

800

1000

Number 773 52 27 1

% 91% 6% 3% 0%

Charge/Summons

Caution Com Res TIC

Tier 1 How Detected - Apr09 - To Date

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Number 2470 295 101 1

% 86% 10% 4% 0%

Charge/Summons Caution Com Res TIC



An Example….

• Tier 1 OffenceSexual Assault on 88 year old female by 80 year old male offender in care home environment, offender has pulled the victim towards him and attempted to kiss victim who has not wanted the attention. Matter reported and victim wanted offender to be warned and not arrested



An Example….

• Tier 2 Offence

Attempt Robbery involving schoolboys and a mobile phone. Offender known by victim at same school. Victim + Parent wanted offender to be advised but not arrested, Involvement with School Based officer and school to conclude Community Resolution



Priority Offences – Community Resolution



An Example….

• Racially Aggravated Offence

Public Order offence (s4). Argument between victim and offender when a single comment was made regarding the victims ethnicity: “You can’t f*****g park that there you p**i”. The Victim wanted a written apology from the offender which was provided, and no further action.



Domestic Incidents – Community Resolution

Approx 9% of Community Resolutions

are Domestic related



An Example….

• Domestic Incident

Assault. Brother on sister. Offender pushes sister over causing pain discomfort to shoulder. No visible injuries Victim wanted apology from offender and was not prepared to attend court on the matter No previous DV related incidents recorded for offender.



Audit Findings

Internal Audits conducted in August and October

• Indictable only offences• Most Serious Violence• Serious Sexual Offences• Domestic Abuse• Hate Crime• Young Persons



Key Results

• Overwhelmingly used appropriately

• Suitable and proportionate

• Low numbers of ‘serious’ offences

• Low level of injuries/impact on victim

• High levels of previous victimisation for young offenders



Ongoing Review of…

• Recording of rationale• Supervision and oversight• Co-ordination across all disposals• Use in serious and priority crime• … and open to any new improvements



Thank you

Any Questions?



Documents

Community Resolutions and Professional Judgement