Archives: Documents

Contact us if you need this publication in another format.

Overview

This report explores the overlap between children’s experience of domestic abuse and children’s offending behaviour and makes recommendations for early intervention and consistent practice.

This review is published in the midst of the Coronavirus pandemic lockdown, with everyone subject to measures designed to contain the spread of the virus. But these measures present an unprecedented risk for victims of domestic abuse, who are compelled to stay within a home shared with an abusive partner.

The findings of this report suggest this should not be regarded as a short-term problem; children who are exposed to domestic abuse are not casual bystanders and the evidence suggests impacts will be huge and far reaching.

Before the coronavirus, the criminal justice system was focused on dealing with another virus, again afflicting all parts of our society: a surge in gang related crime, appalling violence inflicted by children onto other children through knife crime, as well as so called “county lines” dealing in drugs, with children pulled into dangerous criminal activity.

Dame Vera says:

“My review finds there is an overlap between children’s experience of domestic abuse and children’s offending behaviour. A quarter of children who were identified as having socially unacceptable behaviour also have identified concerns about domestic abuse of a parent or carer. Practitioners who support children out of gang related activity tell us the children and young people they work with commonly come from backgrounds of domestic abuse.”

The review finds children who experience domestic abuse may seek alternative relationships outside of the home, leaving them vulnerable to sexual and criminal exploitation. Children in alternative school provision, those in unregulated care homes and children sent far from home are also particularly vulnerable.

The criminal justice response to child criminal exploitation is inconsistent, with different police forces taking different approaches. Children who are victims of criminal exploitation through county lines drug dealing may be seen as offenders rather than victims, depending on which police officer or police force they encounter.

Early intervention to identify and support children and young people who experience domestic abuse is crucial. Thresholds for intervention are currently so high that things have to be “really serious” before children’s services intervene.

“I am calling for children who experience domestic abuse to be recognised in statute as victims of crime. I want to see targeted interventions and support to help these children and young people recover from domestic abuse. Children must not be made more vulnerable to exploitation by sending them far away from their homes and support networks when taken into care.

Therefore, I am calling for all care homes to be regulated, including those for young people aged 16 who can be just as vulnerable and susceptible to exploitation as those under 16. I am also calling for a more comprehensive strategy for children as victims of criminal exploitation, serious violence and organised criminal groups.

The coronavirus pandemic could lead to a substantial rise in the number of children and young people who experience domestic abuse. The domestic abuse they are experiencing today could, act as one of the factors influencing their experience of offending behaviour such as serious youth violence and criminal exploitation in the future.

One social work practitioner told researchers: “By not dealing with things at the outset for children of domestic abuse, you are sowing the seeds for the end result of violence amongst children that we are getting.”

Dame Vera Baird says:

“I hope that instead of sowing the seeds of violence, we can sow the seeds for a brighter future for our children and young people.”

Contact us if you need this publication in another format.

Overview

This bulletin presents trends in victims’ experience of the criminal justice system from the year ending March 2015 to the year ending March 2019.

The bulletin includes statistical data from the Crime Survey for England and Wales about victims’ contact with the police, courts, attitudes to the criminal justice system and the Victims’ Code and Witness Charter.

The bulletin was prepared with ONS Crime Survey for England and Wales microdata accessed through the ONS Secure Research Service.

Contact us if you need this publication in another format.

Overview

This report looks at children’s experiences of domestic abuse and their criminality, including childhood criminal exploitation, serious youth violence and offending behaviour.

This report sets the scene for the Victims’ Commissioner’s in-depth review into children’s experience of domestic abuse and criminality (to be published on 1 April) by gathering academic literature and data to compile an account of the prevalence of children’s experience of domestic abuse and the overlap between this and their offending behaviour. It also reviews literature on interventions to support children and young people who have lived with domestic abuse.

The Victims’ Commissioner says:

“The recent surge in gang related crime has shocked and affected all parts of society. We have seen appalling violence inflicted by children onto other children through knife crime. The so called “county lines” dealing in drugs has seen children pulled into dangerous criminal activity, blighting their lives, as well as the lives of the victims of the drug trade.

“The question we are all asking ourselves is how has this come about? Only by understanding the many causes can we find effective solutions.

“The research challenges the notion that children are merely witnesses to domestic abuse and acknowledges children are directly affected by living in households with domestic abuse. This is something I will examine further in my upcoming review into children’s experience of domestic abuse and criminality”.

This report looks at the overlap between children and young people’s experience of domestic abuse and criminality. However, while some children and young people experience both domestic abuse and offending behaviour, it doesn’t mean that one experience will automatically follow the other. If a child experiences domestic abuse it doesn’t mean they will go on to offend.

There are a number of protective factors which can build resilience in children and there are support programmes and interventions that are known to help children to cope and recover from experiencing domestic abuse. This report collates information about some of those interventions. In the Victims’ Commissioner’s forthcoming in-depth review, she will be asking how well these work in practice and whether children and young people are receiving the care and support they so desperately need to cope and recover from the harrowing experiences of living with abuse.

As one stakeholder in the Victims’ Commissioner’s upcoming in-depth review said: “By not dealing with things at the outset for children of domestic abuse, you are sowing the seeds for the end result of violence amongst children that we are getting.” It is vital that we do all we can for children and young people who live with violence and abuse in their home. Only then can we ensure that those ‘seeds of violence’ do not fall on fertile ground.

Police powers: Pre-charge bail

Dear Home Secretary

I welcome the government consultation on police powers and pre-charge bail (bail). As Victims’ Commissioner, I fully concur with your observation that: “…pre-charge bail is not always being used where appropriate to protect victims, investigations are taking longer to conclude…”.

This review of bail offers an opportunity to identify real safeguards for victims, enhancing victim and witness engagement in the criminal justice system and improving public confidence. These are of critical importance, as evidenced by a range of data, published in recent weeks, showing a sharp drop in public confidence in the criminal justice system.

We have seen the proportion of investigations being closed as a result of victims deciding not to support police investigations growing from 8.7 per cent in the year to March 2015 to 22.9 per cent in the year to September 2019 (for all offences in England and Wales). This comes against falling charging rates, down from 15.5 per cent to 7.3 per cent in the same period.

Only last month, HMICFRS inspectors expressed concern the public had given up on the police solving crimes and the failure of the police to investigate high-volume crimes like car thefts, minor assaults and burglaries was having a “corrosive” effect on the public’s trust in the police.

Therefore, this timely review of bail needs to be seen in a wider context than simply reforming an internal police process. We must not lose sight of the purpose of bail, its ability to curb other criminal behaviour and the reassurance it provides to victims and witnesses.

In the absence of bail and the reassurance of bail conditions, complainants in many types of case have been left feeling exposed to risk by virtue of the fact they have reported a crime. The success of your bail reforms must be judged by the impact on public confidence and whether more victims are willing to support prosecution through to trial.

Criteria for pre-trial bail

Since the current police bail arrangements, as set out in the Police and Crime Act 2017, have come into force, the number of suspects being kept on police bail has fallen sharply. I am concerned when I hear of suspects of sexual and violent offences, including domestic abuse, being released under investigation (RUI) and without any restriction on where they go and who they can contact.

I am aware of cases where alleged perpetrators of domestic abuse have been RUI’d from police stations and back on the doorstep of the victim within minutes. These stories make victims of domestic abuse all the more reluctant to report, fearing they will be left unprotected.

We must remember fear is particularly potent in domestic abuse cases. A victim of coercive control will put themselves in greater danger by taking any step towards change, such as calling the police. This is because the perpetrator, sensing that their grip is being loosened, will forcefully tighten it, often by increasing the level of violence in play. In 2017, 55% of the women killed by an ex-partner were killed within a month of separation and 87% in the first year. Clearly the aftermath of making a report to police will be a dangerous time and officers should surely be using bail with conditions to help manage the risk.

Equally, I am informed that many young victims of criminal exploitation, both sexual and exploitation for criminal activities, live in constant fear of their abusers and are reluctant to cooperate with the police especially so when they are not given any protection.

Concerns about the fall in use of bail have been raised across all parts of the country. It is generally thought that, at least for a time, police behaved as though “bail has been abolished” save in the most exceptional circumstances. Of course, I am aware this was never the case, but it raises real issues of concern about how the 2017 provisions were explained to police officers and the wider public. It is imperative that the changes likely to flow from this consultation are fully explained to all the relaxant agencies and to the public.

If we are to tackle this misconception, it is essential the presumption against pre-charge bail is removed from the statute book. This, more than anything, has resulted in police officers applying a much more rigorous threshold than the one intended.

I do not advocate a return of the use of bail in all cases. I agree the consideration of bail should be based upon the actual, potential or intended impact of the offence and the need to safeguard victims and witnesses, taking into account their vulnerability. However, it is so important we send a clear message to victims of the worst sexual and violent crimes that it is safe for them to come forward and report.

I am therefore calling for a presumption in favour of bail in all cases where the suspect is being accused of serious sexual or violent offences and all allegations of domestic abuse, where the relationship between the parties and our understanding of how coercive control survives separation raises both the likelihood and the consequences of risk.

In all other cases, I believe bail should be considered on a case by case basis and based upon the risk factors set out above.

Timescales for pre-charge bail

I do not want to comment on the precisely appropriate timescales and level of sign-off for bail, as those more closely involved in day to day operational policing will be better qualified to know what is practical. However, I recognise bail can provide a framework for investigations, providing deadlines for officers.

It was misconceived to reduce the use of bail on the grounds that it was an undue restraint on freedom to keep someone on bail for a long time. I agree it was poor practice to do so, but it seems to have been the case that officers were using bail return dates as a case management tool, not necessarily advancing an investigation until pressed to do so by the imminence of a return date.

Following the advent of the presumption against bail, there is no return date to operate as a time check on the progress of a case and what we are seeing is people being kept longer under suspicion for want of a case management tool. I suspect there is little practical or emotional difference for the individual concerned between being kept on bail for a long time and being kept under investigation for an equally long time or longer.

In short, the presumption against bail seems likely to have extended the period of being in limbo for suspects and not reduced it as (somehow) the 2017 changes were expected to do.

The steady increase in the length of police investigations is particularly noticeable in sexual assault cases. I believe the delays in conducting investigations, couple with poor communication between police and victims, have contributed to the increase in victims withdrawing their support for prosecutions. Leaving victims of sexual assault in limbo for long periods of time can potentially re-traumatise them by making them feel the system and society does not care about what has happened to them. Victims who feel abandoned by the justice system are less likely to participate in it in any capacity in the future.

Ideally, cases should move on at a good rate without needing to misuse bail as a case management tool. However, I accept that a benefit of increasing the number of cases subject to bail is that the framework of police having to update and review maintains a pressure to keep the investigation moving.

This must be a positive development for all interested parties.

Non-bail investigations

For the reasons set out above, I welcome the suggestion of a new framework for the supervision of RUI cases and that this framework should mirror that in place for bail cases.

Effectiveness of bail conditions

We need to review the effectiveness of bail conditions. At present, I do not believe they afford the protection that victims and witnesses deserve and this fundamental weakness needs to be addressed.

I must reiterate that many victims feel they are potentially exposing themselves to further physical or psychological harm by reporting a crime. This is particularly so when the suspect is known to them.

When victims are contacted by the suspect or see them within an exclusion zone, in breach of bail conditions, and there is no police response, it undermines their sense of safety. It also has a wider and detrimental impact in public confidence in the criminal justice system, as it makes the police look powerless to act.

At present, those on bail know that breaching a no contact condition will not incur a sanction. The only breach of conditions that can result in a criminal prosecution is failure to report to a police station.

The time has come to make breaching a no-contact condition or exclusion zone a criminal offence, that can result in a remand into custody, attract a custodial sentence and be marked by a criminal record. This single measure is imperative if we are to send a clear message to victims that the criminal justice system is there to protect them. It will make clear to alleged perpetrators that they cannot intimidate and undermine the justice process with impunity.

It is also important that such a sanction is not in name only, but real. I want the police and the CPS to be encouraged or required to prosecute those who breach these conditions, in the interests of safeguarding the public and public confidence and so as to send a clear message to others.

Communications

I must reiterate that any new provisions must be communicated clearly and effectively to those on the frontline so that there can be no misconceptions. All police forces must take responsibility for effective delivery of changes and monitoring outcomes.

Conclusion

The criminal justice system cannot afford a “flight” by victims and this may be what we are beginning to see. The increase in the number of victims who decline to support a prosecution is of great concern, especially in rape and domestic abuse cases but also burglary and weapons offences. The confusion that has surrounded bail together with a sense that bail conditions are a toothless tiger and compliance optional must end. I urge you to act.

In line with my usual practice, a copy of this letter will be placed on my website on 11 March.

Yours sincerely, Dame Vera Baird QC, Victims’ Commissioner for England and Wales

Contact us if you need this publication in another format.

Overview

This report looks at the entitlements and experiences of victims’ families who have been bereaved by homicide abroad.

As well as identifying the entitlements, procedures and support that victims should be able to expect from the British authorities when they lose a loved one abroad, the report also examined the real lived experience of 12 such families.

The report finds that families can face an uphill struggle in their battle for justice in another country, whose culture, language and justice system are completely alien. Victims highlight practical difficulties, like getting documents translated, trying to get information about the progress of the criminal investigation or problems getting their loved one’s body released after post-mortem. They often need legal support and some struggle with the costs of accessing such support, as well as covering the cost of interpreters, translations of documents and travelling to and from the country concerned.

Despite the good efforts of agencies and charities working in this area, the report concludes more needs to be done to help them through their ordeal.

The report makes 17 recommendations for UK government and criminal justice agencies, including:

• Bereaved victims of homicide abroad should be eligible to claim Criminal Injuries Compensation.
• The FCO should take responsibility for translating all key documents for the bereaved families, including post mortem reports, initial investigation reports, criminal charges and sentencing details.
• The FCO, MoJ, Homicide Service and the National Police Chief’s Council should work with victim organisations to review the current process and consider how it might be improved.
• Key entitlements for victims of murder abroad should be included in Victims’ Code.
• Only police officers who have been trained to deliver death notifications should be allocated to this role wherever possible and all victims should be referred to the Homicide Service within one working day of agreeing to their details being passed on.
• All consulates should review their lists of local lawyers and translators and quality assure those on the list.
• Arrangements should be put in place to alert victims when the British perpetrator of a homicide abroad is repatriated to a British prison and that the victim is given an opportunity to join the Victim Contact Scheme.

Introduction

The purpose of this document is to set out the Victims’ Commissioner for England and Wales’ (VC) strategy for her first term, between June 2019 and June 2022. The Victims Commissioner is Dame Vera Baird QC.

This plan sets out high level strategic priorities for the VC and should be read in conjunction with the relevant annual VC workplan and stakeholder engagement plan.

The VC’s statutory remit

Pursuant to Section 49 of the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004, the VC must:

• (a) promote the interests of victims and witnesses;
• (b) take such steps as he considers appropriate with a view to encouraging good practice in the treatment of victims and witnesses;
• (c) keep under review the operation of the Code of Practice issued under section 32.

The Commissioner may:

• (a) make proposals to the Secretary of State for amending the Code;
• (b) make a report to the Secretary of State;
• (c) make recommendations to an authority within his remit;
• (d) undertake or arrange for or support (financially or otherwise) the carrying out of research;
• (e) consult any person he thinks appropriate.

If the Commissioner makes a report to the Secretary of State:

• (a) the Commissioner must send a copy of the report to the Attorney General and the Lord Chancellor;
• (b) the Secretary of State must lay a copy of the report before Parliament and arrange for the report to be published.

The Commissioner must provide advice if required to the ministry of the crown.

Strategic aims 2019 to 2022

The VC is committed to ensuring victims are supported in coping and recovering from the impact of crime and are empowered to play a full part in the criminal justice system of England and Wales This means they are able to access victim services that are tailored to their needs, they receive their entitlements as set out in the Victims’ Code, and they are treated with respect and decency by all the agencies who come into contact with them.

She intends to work towards a Victims’ Law, so that these aims become their legal rights and she wants to see the provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998 and the Equality Act 2010 utilised to ensure equality and diversity of provision and support.

She is further committed to championing the cause of victims in all forums where their interests are at stake, including Crown and Magistrates Courts, Coroners inquests, Parole Board hearings and Mental Health Review Tribunals.

She is determined to be a voice for all victims, and intends to inform her message to policy makers and service providers by reference to victims and witnesses’ lived experience.

The VC has five key strategic aims:

• A. Work with criminal justice agencies to ensure victims of crime are treated well, with a focus on the treatment of victims in the court room, so as to aid them to give best evidence as well as the support on offer to enable them to cope and recover from the impact of crime.
• B. Monitor and report on criminal justice agencies’ compliance with the requirements of the Code of Practice for Victims of Crime and the Witness Charter; identify areas that are deficient and make recommendations for change based on evidence of best practice; improve public awareness of entitlements.
• C. Ensure the interests of victims and witnesses are fully considered at all stages in any proposals for development and/or change to the criminal justice system and its constituent agencies, including to victim support services and any related or other agencies whose activities may impact on victims.
• D. Through regular contact with victims and practitioners of victims’ services, articulate a view of the criminal justice system from the perspective of victims; contribute to, review and challenge decisions taken by policy makers and those responsible for developing practice.
• E. Through gaining first-hand knowledge and understanding of victims’ services, identify and actively promote examples of good practice and excellence.

Ethics and behaviours

The VC will work in accordance with the Nolan principles. She and her team will aspire to demonstrate positive and ethical standards of behaviour at all times:

• Human rights: Ensure all victims and witnesses enjoy full respect and support for all of their human rights throughout the processes in which they are present with that status.
• Independent: Taking into account, with equal measure, the views of all victims and stakeholders, making independent and impartial assessments of policy and practice and offering a perspective independent of government.
• Public Interest: In all external relations with victims, the public, with government and the CJS agencies, the VC and the OVC will endeavour to deal fairly, openly and supportively, with the intention of serving the public interest in every interaction
• Equality: VC work will be targeted on all communities, mindful of the nine protected strands within the Equality Act 2010: age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage, pregnancy/maternity, race, religion/belief, sex and sexual orientation.
• International provisions: Utilise international provisions, ratified or adopted by the Government, on the treatment and support of victims and witnesses to argue the lawfulness or appropriateness of aspects of their treatment in England and Wales and to consult with and use comparator criminal justice systems.
• Analytical: Ensure a strategic approach to the use of research and analysis is in operation in accordance with the HM Treasury (2011) Magenta Book: Guidance for Evaluation, including employing a rigorous analytical approach to all aspects of the remit of the VC.
• Collegiate: A collaborative, open and friendly working relationship between the VC and members of the OVC team, as well as with all stakeholders. Willingness to provide and receive both support and challenge.
• Transparent: A presumption of full openness and disclosure about the work of the VC.
• Reflective: Reflective about the work and performance of the VC and her team and how it can be improved. Open to different approaches. Empathetic to the experience of victims and witnesses.
• Fairness: Ensure we deal with each individual fairly and with sensitivity. A commitment at all times to identify where there is inequality in the services provided to victims, potentially according to their demographic characteristics, crime type, geographical area or the services and criminal justice agencies that they encounter.

Objectives

The VC’s strategic aims will be underpinned by a number of objectives. Some of these are underway already, whereas others are in development. Most objectives will contribute to more than one aim, but for simplicity’s sake are grouped
separately.

A. Ensure all victims of crime are properly empowered to cope and recover from the impact of crime, by being treated in a positive, inclusive and respectful way by all agencies, particularly those in the criminal justice system.

• Engage with police, judiciary and legal profession to build greater awareness and sensitivity towards the needs and interests of victims, with a view to improving their experience in the court room as well as at inquests, parole hearings and mental health review tribunals.
• Continue to work with agencies and third sector organisations to develop training and messages for staff in respect of victim awareness.
• Engage with law schools and colleges to talk to students and future legal practitioners about victim awareness with a view to informing the practice and culture of future prosecutors and judges.
• Continue to include the quality of engagement between practitioners and victims as a part of all future reviews.
• Through engagement with victims and their support organisations, feedback victim experiences to criminal justice agencies, so that it can help to shape policy and practice.
• Raise public awareness of the victim experience of the criminal justice process through media and speaking opportunities

B. Victims and witnesses are given their entitlements in accordance with the requirements of the Victims’ Code and the Witness Charter.

• Undertake regular reviews of areas of the Victims’ Code and publish findings and recommendations.
• Undertake an annual VCOP compliance assessment and report findings to Parliament.
• Follow up and monitor the Government’s response to VC recommendations and seek to evaluate the impact where recommendations have been fully implemented.
• Raise with Ministers, policy makers and Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) persistent non-compliance with the Code and highlight non-compliance through the VC reviews and website.
• Regular engagement with the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners, to support their delivery of victims’ service and to challenge when areas of poor compliance come to light.
• Ensure witnesses to a crime are treated with respect and have support for their consequential needs from all the relevant agencies

C. Feed into strategic changes to provision for victims, including the Victim Strategy, the VAWG Strategy, the Domestic Abuse Bill so that the needs of victims are reflected appropriately. In particular, drive the development of the promised Victims’ Bill.

• Ensure the victims voice is heard and victims’ rights are advocated to government, by continuous engagement through membership of the Criminal Justice Board(CJB), the MoJ Victims Panel, CJB sub-groups other relevant policy making bodies.
• Liaise with the judiciary at all levels to raise victims’ issues, seeking a place to advocate for victims wherever they should be heard.
• Monitor and feed into the implementation of the proposals contained within the Government’s Victim Strategy.
• Develop within the criminal justice system a shared appreciation that victims’ rights and interests are not antipathetic to those of defendants and that public confidence in fair trials requires both the care of victims and the protection of defendants’ rights.
• Feed into the Government consultation on the future of its Violence Against Women and Girls strategy (VAWG).
• Liaise with third sector providers, charities and legislators as well as Ministers and officials in respect of legislation.
• Use media and speaking opportunities to highlight opportunities for change.
• Work collaboratively with the Domestic Abuse Commissioner, setting out the basis for engagement in a joint memorandum of understanding.
• Assess opportunities for evaluating the impact of new strategies and legislation.
• Work closely with the Welsh Assembly Government having regard to their legislation in this area and exchange good practice between England and Wales.

D. Victims are offered and receive high quality victims support services wherever they live, tailored to their needs and negotiated with them. Where appropriate, they are supported in a trauma-informed way by experienced specialist services. At the end of their engagement, they should feel that they have been treated as valued and respected citizens, helped to leave the negative impacts of their victimhood behind and able to go forward positively.

• Organise regular focus groups with victims or victim representatives to receive feedback and first-hand accounts of victim experiences.
• Meet with and challenge ministers and policy leads in respect of victim services, policy and practices.
• Develop systems for regular engagement with third sector service providers and charities campaigning on victim related issues.
• Maintain VC press and social media profile, so that victims and public are aware about VC work and how to contact the OVC.
• Use the VC website to provide a continual update on all the VC’s work and actively seeks victim feedback.
• Increase transparency of meetings between the VC and ministers and heads of agencies so that victims, wider public and media have a greater awareness of her work.
• Issue quarterly VC newsletter updating victims and practitioners on VC activity and current issues.

E. Identify and actively promote examples of best practice and excellence

• Encourage and support the criminal justice agencies in improving practice for victims and witnesses and utilise visits across England and Wales to identify and promote best practice
• Work with policymakers and service providers to develop a clearer understanding of “what good looks like”.
• Continue to develop the VC website so that it offers practitioners new examples of good practice.
• Undertake “good practice reviews”.

Measures

The key measures we will need to monitor these aims and objectives are:

• Resource
  • The staff resource that can be applied to undertaking reviews
• Progress
  • The number of reviews completed and published and the quality of the evidence they present
  • Quarterly editions of VC news
  • A programme of engagement with victims
  • Increased press and social media coverage of VC activity
• Outcomes
  • VC recommendations accepted and implemented
  • Policy makers and practitioners taking on board changes advocated by the VC
  • VC influencing policy formation
  • Greater awareness of the VC’s work, as evidenced by high levels of contact with victims through correspondence, more invitations to meet with victims’ groups and practitioners, increased number of Twitter followers, etc.
  • Examples of good practice being implemented more widely

There will be a range of other measures which will need to be looked at different levels and with different frequencies. Progress on key objectives will need to be monitored.

Risks

The VC’s key strategic risks include:

• Budget: Insufficient funds to deliver the strategy;
• Political instability: A change of political direction due to Ministerial appointments;
• Staff recruitment: The VC is unable to recruit the staff she requires, who have the necessary skill set, in timely way, therefore having a detrimental impact on her small team’s output of work; time lags between staff recruitment delaying the work programme.
• IT failures: MoJ IT failing to provide adequate support to deliver the business
• Reputational Damage: Inaccurate information published in VC reviews of statements that cause the VC and Department reputational damage.
• Strategy: The VC is unable to obtain sufficient support for the strategy from internal and external stakeholders.

Implementation

It is important the VC receives buy-in to the strategy from those who will have to implement it, including her team, as well as internal and external stakeholders.

This delivery of this three-year strategy will be supported by annual business plans, a stakeholder engagement plan and a communication plan, all of which will be reviewed on a regular basis. Progress in delivering the strategy will be clearly documented in the VC’s annual reports and website.

This analysis provides insights into the attrition of sexual offences complaints through the criminal justice system. Specifically, the analysis presents findings about victims’ reasons for withdrawing sexual offence complaints from investigation. Our findings are based on analysis of an Essex Rape and Sexual Abuse Partnership administrative dataset shared with the Office of the Victims’ Commissioner for England and Wales.

Contact us if you need this publication in another format.

Overview

Victim personal statements (VPS) are a key entitlement under the Victims’ Code. The VPS enables victims to make a statement expressing how they have been affected by a crime.

This is the fifth review looking at VPS data available from the Crime Survey for England and Wales. It looks at the 12 months ending March 2019, and compares this data to previous years starting from 2013-14.

For the year ending March 2019, few victims report that they were offered the opportunity to make a VPS by police and that their VPS was read aloud in court. Both levels have remained consistent since the question was first introduced to the Crime Survey for England and Wales.

In over half of incidents where victims were given the opportunity to make a VPS, victims decided to do so. There has been a sharp drop in the proportion of victims who feel that their statement has been taken into account by the criminal justice system.

Overview

VC Dame Vera Baird wrote to the Justice Secretary David Gauke on 24 June calling for certain section offences committed against children to be included in the list  of offences for which it is possible to be put on trial a second time following acquittal. On 15 July, Mr Gauke replied to Dame Vera.

Letter

Dear Vera

Thank you for your letter of 24 June about the categories of offence for which it is possible to put on trial for a second time a person who has previously been acquitted. You are concerned, following the recent conviction of Bob Higgins for numerous such offences, that six further offences of which he had long ago been formally acquitted could not be added to the indictment because they were not ‘qualifying offences’ for the purposes of the retrial provisions in Part 10 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. You propose that the list of qualifying offences should be reviewed.

As you rightly acknowledge, those provisions were restricted to the most serious of offences. The provisions in the 2003 Bill drew on a report from the Law Commission which recognised that it would be a major and contentious step to depart from the principle of finality by allowing exceptions to the double jeopardy rule. They considered that the exception should be limited to ‘those types of case where the damage to the credibility of the criminal justice system by an apparently illegitimate acquittal is manifest, and so serious that it overrides the values implicit int he rule against double jeopardy’. The Law Commissioner concluded that it should be restricted to murder alone. The then government proposed a less restrictive approach, and (as you will recall) there was considerable, and vigorous, debate in Parliament about which offencces should qualify.

Extending the list of qualifying offences in Schedule 5 to the 2003 Act is there fore not something we would undertake lightly; any amendment would be certain to prompt requests for other offences of arguably equal seriousness to be added as well. but the list cannot be regarded as being set in stone. When you met Edward Argar on 4 July, you agreed to come back with proposals for particular offences that you consider should qualify for retrial where the other statutory criteria are met.

Yours ever,

Rt Hon David Gauke MP

Overview

The VC was approached on behalf of victims worried about making a claim for criminal injuries compensation and whether it might affect their entitlement to means tested benefits. The VC asked the Department for Works and Pensions for clarification on how compensation would be taken into account in assessing whether the capital threshold for claiming means tested benefits has been exceeded. Attached is the response.

Letter

Dear Dame Vera Baird

Thank you for your letter of 24 June to the Secretary of State about income-related benefits and criminal injuries compensation. I am replying as the Minister for Disabled People, Health and Work.

I am sorry if my reply to your predecessor, Baroness Newlove, was not clear.

Guidance is available on GOV.UK website at: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/criminal-injuries-compensation-a-guide#what-is-the-criminal-injuries-compensation-scheme.

As set out in the guidance, criminal injury compensation is a payment made to a victim who has suffered a physical or mental injury as a result of a violent crime.

Such payments could therefore fall broadly into the ambit of ‘Personal Injuries Compensation’ for which means-tested benefits (Universal Credit, Income Support and Jobseeker’s Allowance) have provisions to be disregarded.

Universal Credit

The Universal Credit Regulations 2013 provide for a disregard for payments received by claimants as a ‘Personal Injuries Compensation’. Compensation payments for personal injury can be paid as either capital or regular payments.

Where a sum has been awarded as a consequence of a personal injury to a claimant and been used to purchase an annuity, the value of the annuity is disregarded.

If the sum is held in trust, any capital of the trust derived from that sum is disregarded.

If the sum is administered by the court, or can only be disposed of by direction of the court, it is disregarded.

If the sum has been paid within the past 12 months, and is not held in trust or has not been used to purchase an annuity [or otherwise disposed of], that sum is to be disregarded from the calculation of the claimant’s capital. That is, personal injury payments can only be disregarded for 12 months if they are not placed in a trust etc.

Jobseeker’s Allowance

Jobseeker’s Allowance Regulations 1996 also provide for payments which qualify as ‘Personal injury Compensation’ to be disregarded.

Sums paid into a personal injury trust qualify to be disregarded in the calculation of income other than earnings.

Payments can be disregarded if they are ‘received by virtue of any agreement or court order to make payments to the claimant in consequence of any personal injury to the claimant’.

Lump sum capital payments paid directly can also be disregarded, but this disregard applies only for a period of 52 weeks beginning with the day on which the claimant first receives any payment in consequence of that personal injury. The disregard for capital payments also only applies for the first payment and will not apply to a second payment in consequence of the same injury.

Income support

Income Support (General) regulations 1987 provide for disregards for payments that qualify as ‘Personal Injury Compensation’.

A payment made to a claimant or their partner in consequence of any personal injury to the claimant or their partner can be disregarded for 52 weeks from when the claimant or their partner first receives any payment. The disregard does not apply to a subsequent payment made for the same injury to the claimant or their partner.

The disregard does not apply to any payment from a trust fund where the funds derive from a payment made in consequence of any personal injury.

If administered through a trust fund, the value of a trust fund and right to receive payment under that fund will be disregarded, when the fund has been set up using payments made in consequence of a personal injury.

I hope you will find this reply helpful.

Kind regards

Justin Tomlinson MP, Minister for Disabled People, Health and Work