Community Resolution Guidance

Transcription

1 Community Resolution Guidance NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED

2 Governance: Policy Owner: Department: Policy Writer: Operations Committee Head of Local Policing Services Local Policing Services Custody Policy Compliance and Support Inspector / Offender Management Inspector Policy Number: 141( v1.0) Version: 1.4 Effective Date: 15/06/2017 Review Date: 15/06/2018 Version No: 1.4 CHANGE HISTORY Author Changes Ratification Inspector John Morgan Put onto corporate template. Contents 1. WHY IS THIS POLICY REQUIRED? WHO SHOULD USE THIS POLICY? WHAT SHOULD I CONSIDER WHEN USING THIS POLICY? ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES THE PROCESS b Background and definition Restorative Justice Things to consider for Community Resolutions (CR s) Domestic abuse Dangerous dogs Other things to consider for CR's and decision making Restorative Justice Prison protocol Community Resolution Ticket Juveniles Recording Re-offending Avoiding arrest Arrest and bail Crown Prosecution Service Joint offending Schools Multiple offences Victims and complainants CR's and NWP staff Non compliance with CR's Scrutiny and QA CR outcome agreements Apology letters DECLARATION & LEGALITIES APPENDICES (v1.0)/1.4 Page 1 of 35

3 1. WHY IS THIS POLICY REQUIRED? 1.1 Community Resolution (CR) is a nationally recognised out of court disposal option within Authorised Professional Practice (APP). For further information please find modules below: Detention and custody Engagement and communication Information management Intelligence management Investigation 1.2 This policy has been developed to provide additional information for North Wales police officers and police staff to assist them in their decision making and, therefore, enhance service delivery for victims. The relevant enabling legislation is the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act WHO SHOULD USE THIS POLICY? 2.1 This policy should be used by all police officers and police staff. 2.2 The purpose of this guidance is to provide clear direction on when a CR can be effectively used as a disposal option for lower level crime and anti-social incidents and allows police officers to use their professional discretion and judgement. 3. WHAT SHOULD I CONSIDER WHEN USING THIS POLICY? 3.1 North Wales Police supports Community Resolution as a tool to enable the police to make decisions about how to deal more proportionately with lower level crime. It is primarily aimed at first time offenders where there is an admission of guilt and genuine remorse has been expressed and where the victim s wishes have been considered. Our objective is to empower victims and place them at the heart of the criminal justice system. 3.2 A Community Resolution allows Police Officers to use their professional judgement to assess an offence, focus the needs and wishes of the victim and consider any previous offending history in order to reach an outcome which best meets the interests of the victim and the public. 3.3 A Community Resolution allows the use of Restorative Justice (RJ) techniques where appropriate and brings victims and offenders together face to face as part of the process. 3.4 A Community Resolution increases victim inclusion in the outcome of the offence, and also assists the offender to understand the impact that the offence has on other individuals. 3.5 A Community Resolution can significantly reduce reoffending amongst those offenders who have been subject to RJ interventions. 4. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 4.1 The Superintendent of Community Safety has overall responsibility for the guidance. 4.2 Divisions have responsibility to operationally implement the guidance through deployment of Community Resolution authorised officers. 141(v1.0)/1.4 Page 2 of 35

4 4.3 Police constables have responsibility for initiating CR disposals. 4.4 Police sergeants have responsibility for ensuring supervision and monitoring of CR disposals. 4.5 Custody sergeants have responsibility for considering this disposal for detainees. 4.6 The Restorative Justice Development Officer is responsible for monitoring the scheme. 5. THE PROCESS 5.1 Community Resolution (CR) is a nationally recognised term for the resolution of a less serious offence or anti-social behaviour incident which forms part of the National Police Chiefs Council (NPCC) Neighbourhood Justice Outcomes Framework. This is available to view in the Authorised Professional Practice (APP) Guidance under the heading of 'Prosecution & Case Management' section - Justice Outcomes Options. 5.2 CR is designed to deal with cases when taking formal criminal justice action is inappropriate. Officers can deal through an informal agreement between the parties involved, as opposed to progression through the traditional criminal justice process. 5.3 A CR may be used with both youth and adult offenders. 5.4 The decision to deal with an offence by CR can be taken by a warranted police officer and special constable. 5.5 A CR is defined as: Community Resolution is the nationally recognised term for the resolution of a less serious offence or anti-social incident, where an offender has been identified through informed agreement between parties involved as opposed to progression through the criminal justice process. It enables the police to deal more proportionately with lower level crime and anti-social behaviour in a timely and transparent manner that takes into account the needs of the victim, perpetrator and wider community outside the formal criminal justice system. It may be used for both adult and youth offenders. 5.6 The Community Remedy actions must be considered when dealing with anti-social behaviour or lower level offences out of court through Community Resolutions and/or Conditional Cautions. The Community Remedy actions may be chosen by the victim for the perpetrator to undertake in consequence of their behaviour or offending. The officer dealing will use their value based decision making skills in order to decide if the victims choice is appropriate. 5.6a The Community Remedy actions are listed as follows: Anti-Social Behaviour Contract (contact your ASB officer for further details) Apology (face to face) Apology (written) Compensation Mediation (view the list of contacts shown in the address group LPS Mediators and contact your local representative) Parenting Contract (contact the Force RJ officer for further details) Repairing Personal Damage 141(v1.0)/1.4 Page 3 of 35

5 Reparation to the Community Treatment for offenders (contact the Force RJ officer for further details) 5.6b The officer will make the final decision as to what action is appropriate. 5.7 There are two levels of community resolution that have variants of risk and authority levels attached to each one. Levels of Restorative Justice Level C (Entry Level) - An entry level practitioner: Can facilitate simple cases with significant guidance and support Has limited or no case experience Performs basic casework or restorative practices Most Community Resolutions will be dealt with at entry level provided it is a simple case and it is an alternative to formal criminal justice process. Level B (Intermediate Level) An Intermediate Level Practitioner: Can facilitate simple cases without the need for significant guidance and support Requires some guidance and support to facilitate complex and sensitive cases Performs a variety of casework or restorative processes Level B conferences are arranged where the case is considered to be more complex or sensitive. 5.8 The following considerations should be taken into account when dealing with an incident or crime by way of CR: It is clear that a crime or incident has occurred. The offender accepts responsibility for the offence and shows remorse. They agree to participate in CR and are capable of understanding the situation and process. The victim has been consulted and consent sought. o o In certain cases CR may be appropriate without victim consent, or in the absence of an identifiable victim (e.g. public order). In circumstances where the victim consent is not secured, the officer should gain authority from an Inspector prior to issuing a CR and the rationale for the decision to be recorded on the OEL. The most appropriate offences for CR are likely to be low-level criminal damage, low value theft, minor assaults and antisocial behaviour. A CR may be delivered with or without Restorative Justice, NPCC Guidance states:- Outcomes can:- Be instant an apology (in person or via letter) and/or reparation (repairing or paying for the damage/loss); 141(v1.0)/1.4 Page 4 of 35

6 Be deferred actions agreed between the parties but completed at a later date: and Involve Restorative techniques. It is a less serious offence. 'Less serious' is not defined nationally but should be determined on a case by case basis taking into consideration the following: o o o o o o o The type of offence, including gravity score and any aggravating/mitigating factors The offender's previous record PNC and RMS The circumstances of the offence. Risk to the public and community confidence in the police Likely penalty Whether a CR is appropriate given the circumstances of the offence The offending must also be reviewed to ascertain any course of conduct or other aggravating factors that should influence the decision. 5.9 If an offender has previous convictions or CRs but the officer feels that CR is the most appropriate outcome (due to relevance of previous offending or timescales since last offence), officers should refer the case to a supervisor for a second opinion and that supervisor must record their decision and rationale on the OEL in RMS The officer should ask themselves if they are able to deal with it themselves, or if a Level B (Intermediate Level) conference is required. Officers should record their rationale in the OEL or in their pocket notebook and on the appropriate forms. Ensure the PNB is scanned to RMS Domestic abuse incidents involving intimate partners are excluded from the CR process. Currently it is national police policy that restorative justice should not be used as an alternative to prosecution, in cases of domestic abuse involving intimate partners. (There is currently a consultation process regarding out of court disposals, which is looking at all offences including domestic abuse. This may result in a review of their use) The definition of domestic violence and abuse states; Any incident or pattern of incidents of controlling, coercive or threatening behaviour, violence or abuse between those aged 16 or over who are or have been intimate partners or family members regardless of gender or sexuality. This can encompass, but is not limited to, the following types of abuse: Psychological Physical Sexual financial emotional Controlling behaviour is: a range of acts designed to make a person subordinate and/or dependent by isolating them from sources of support, exploiting their resources and capacities for personal gain, depriving them of the means needed for independence, resistance and escape and regulating their everyday behaviour. Coercive behaviour is: an act or a pattern of acts of assault, threats, humiliation and intimidation or other abuse that is used to harm, punish, or frighten their victim. * 141(v1.0)/1.4 Page 5 of 35

7 *This definition, which is not a legal definition, includes so called 'honour based violence, female genital mutilation (FGM) and forced marriage, and is clear that victims are not confined to one gender or ethnic group. If there is any doubt over whether an incident is classified as domestic abuse, advice should be sought from a supervisor or manager In cases where there is no intimate partner relationship or history of such, and offences do not include violence, stalking, harassment or sexual offences, restorative justice may be considered if certain criteria are met: (Please see attached Appendix A workflow) A restorative justice process should only take place where the victim is fully supportive of its use and the offender has admitted the offence and is showing remorse. It should only be used in exceptional circumstances, where the call is in isolation and there is no previous history or concern. The incident should also be extremely low level, such as minor criminal damage or theft. Restorative Justice should only be considered after cases have been subject of thorough risk assessment by specialist officers, trained and experienced in managing domestic abuse. Once this has been assessed from a DA perspective, a specialist RJ officer will need to carry out a risk assessment as required for this to take place. Where consideration is being given to utilise restorative justice options, cases should be subject to regular retrospective review by specialist officer. In the case of first time perpetrators under eighteen years of age, restorative justice may also be considered for cases of common assault where injuries are very minor. Due to the domestic abuse element of the incident only a Level B (Intermediate Level) RJ trained officer should carry out any non-intimate domestic RJ. In the case of non-intimate domestic related cases the rationale for why RJ may be appropriate, will be placed in the OEL in RMS for review by the relevant PVPU Detective Inspector. In the case of domestic related CR the outcome will never be an on the spot decision by the Reporting Officer (RO). The RO will rationalise as to why they believe this case is suitable for CR and establish an appropriate timescale to update the victim. This will then be forwarded onto the Detective Inspector for the relevant PVPU to authorise or refuse that CR is suitable in that case Offences involving injuries as a result of a dog dangerously out of control are not suitable for a CR. There are situations when a CR can be used for low level offences involving dogs, please consult with the Dog Legislation Officer and/or a supervisor The availability and use of approved educational courses for offenders needs to be considered by whoever decides on a CR A CR is an agreement entered into between offender and victim. This is a voluntary arrangement which may not be directly enforceable by police, if the perpetrator fails to complete the agreed action. This is why the officer administering the CR must consider whether or not CR is an appropriate method of disposal. The NPCC guidance states: - 141(v1.0)/1.4 Page 6 of 35

8 the officer must explain to both parties that this is a voluntary agreement which will not be directly enforceable by the police in all but the most exceptional circumstances An officer should keep an open mind at the outset of the investigation and ensure that information is provided to victims on all potential criminal justice routes. Officers must listen carefully to victims' views and feelings to assess whether their needs will be met by using a CR as a disposal option If CR is likely to be appropriate, the officer should explain the CR process to the victim including whether they consent to the CR disposal. Victims must be made aware that outcomes agreed may not be legally enforceable. If a victim does not consent to the process but the officer is absolutely sure that a CR is the most appropriate disposal, they must consult with their supervisor to confirm that this is the right course of action. The supervisor must record any decision and rationale on the OEL on RMS An officer should confirm the identity of the offender and ensure he/she is eligible for CR following a check of PNC and force intelligence systems RMS An officer should set realistic outcomes and timescales when agreeing on a course of action and be satisfied that the case is suitable for disposal by a CR. If uncertain, discuss and agree the actions with a supervisor An officer should discuss the incident or offence with the offender and ensure they accept responsibility for the offence or incident and understand that a CR may be disclosed as part of an enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) check Once an officer has decided that a CR is appropriate and both parties agree to the disposal, appropriate outcomes should be decided that resolve the harm brought about by the offence. These outcomes should originate from the victim and always be focused on the offender making good the harm caused Outcomes may be agreed either 'on the spot', by the Reporting Officer (RO) shuttling between parties after the incident, or if necessary at a face to face meeting arranged for a later date. If it is recognised a Level B conference is needed refer to a Level B authorised officer or the Force RJ Officer (restorative.justice.officer@nthwales.pnn.police.uk Some outcomes can be completed instantly on agreement - such as a verbal apology - whilst others may be deferred - for example where the offender needs time to get money together to make financial reparation, or in case of a youth, to speak with their parent/carer/guardian prior to agreeing actions Agreed outcomes and activities should be completed and finalised as soon as possible. 'Banning' or 'Exclusion Orders' are a separate civil process and should not be considered part of a CR. Although can be noted on the CR ticket CR agreements may be completed quickly (Level C- Entry Level) and may be observed by the officer. When outcome agreements (e.g. reparation) are to take place at a later time, a proportionate and realistic time frame needs to be agreed between all parties. The officer will follow up all outcomes in order to ensure that they are completed. There must be evidence that the action(s) have been completed and that the matter is resolved. This will mean liaising with the victim, offender and others affected by the harm caused. The CR should remain on the officer s workload until all conditions have been completed Restorative Justice 141(v1.0)/1.4 Page 7 of 35

9 Restorative Justice (RJ) is a methodology that can be used to deliver outcomes as part of a CR. Whilst RJ is not the solution to all societal problems, it does offer the police an opportunity to do the right thing and prevent reoffending in the long term CR can involve RJ techniques and when these are an integral part of the process the NPCC RJ Guidance and Minimum Standards must be considered Level B (Intermediate Level) Restorative Justice Restorative Justice (RJ) is a victim focussed resolution to a crime or a non-crime incident and can be used in parallel with formal criminal justice proceedings. Restorative processes bring those harmed by crime, and those responsible for the harm, into communication, enabling everyone affected by a particular incident to play a part in repairing the harm and finding a positive way forward (Ministry of Justice) Aims and purpose of Restorative Justice The empowerment of victims; the process enables a victim to understand why they were victimised and offers closure enabling them to move on from the experience. The victim is at the centre of the RJ process and this empowerment is likely to increase confidence and satisfaction in the Criminal Justice System. Offenders are more likely to appreciate the effect of their behaviour because of the face to face meeting with a victim and the likelihood of the victim offering honest and emotional comment. To reduce re-offending Which Offenders are suitable for RJ? Any offender may benefit from an RJ intervention because of the learning and impact that RJ provides; however specific criteria must be applied to ensure the intervention is utilised effectively and efficiently. The intervention by nature is resource intensive and requires time and preparation to enhance the impact and long term effect and benefit Recommended Offender Criteria The offender must accept responsibility for the offence. The offender s participation must be voluntary. The offender should have indicated an interest in changing their offending behaviour and is genuinely motivated to embrace change Offences of domestic abuse involving intimate partners and sexual offences will not be considered suitable for RJ Which Victims are suitable for RJ? Any victim may benefit from an RJ intervention. Having identified the offender first and established the corresponding victim; facilitators should consider the following: Vulnerability - can the victim face the offender, if not, it is acceptable for a third party to represent them instead. Where any vulnerability is identified, support will be sought from family, friends or victim support. 141(v1.0)/1.4 Page 8 of 35

10 Consideration will be given for support to the victim. Liaison with the officer in the case prior to initial contact will inform this decision. This liaison with the officer in the case will also consider possible re-victimisation due to passage of time prior to initial contact. Re-victimisation must be considered throughout the process and RJ must not make matters worse for the victim. The prospect of revisiting the crime and meeting the offender can be a daunting prospect hence the victim s interests must be given priority during the RJ process The RJ facilitator and the required skills and knowledge The decision to use RJ should be made by a trained RJ practitioner (Level B). The RJ facilitator must: Understand the need for maintaining continuity of case handling and contact; the same individual should ideally prepare all participants and conduct the RJ conference; Consider the value of co-working which can draw together different skills and strengths of individual practitioners and their agencies. It can be particularly beneficial for serious and complex cases, enabling a safe process and practical assistance. If using a co-worker, then thought should be given as to how roles and tasks will be shared and how information will be communicated before, during and after meetings with participants; Ensure all participants are taking part in the process on a voluntary basis and make a written record of the fact using appendices A and C Preparation for RJ intervention and consideration of risk The broad aims of the preparation phase, with all participants, are to determine: Responsibility is being taken for the harm caused. What value the participants see in the RJ process and their willingness to engage. Identify and manage any risk of emotional harm as a consequence of the RJ process. Access existing information relating to prior offending, mental health and any intelligence considered relevant from police, probation and prison sources. This would include the Police Record Management System (RMS), Probation OASys and DELIUS and Youth Justice Asset Assessment. Any language, physical or learning difficulties. Previous history between the participants and any power imbalance. Managing and balancing the presence/absence of supporters who can influence the emotional and physical risks of the process and its outcome. Put in place measures to manage any risks / concerns. This approach to assessing and managing safety and risk must be ongoing throughout the process 5.34 Meeting the Offender and confirming RJ suitability More than one meeting may be required to prepare the offender for the RJ conference and in summary the following should be confirmed: Responsibility is being taken for the crime and the associated harm caused. Their written agreement to participate in RJ - Level B. This consent should be recorded as per the consent form at Appendix A. 141(v1.0)/1.4 Page 9 of 35

11 Their motivation for undertaking RJ and what they hope to gain from the experience. Their background: the context of the individual, their family history and their offending background will help the facilitator understand who they are dealing with and should ensure that no surprises, will disturb or unsettle the RJ conference. Who if anyone the offender would want to be present as their supporter during the RJ conference Permission to undertake RJ conferences in Prison Restorative Justice is not a new concept and some prison establishments may already be familiar with restorative programmes run inside prisons by charities, equally RJ may have formed part of a sentencing plan for some offenders. Having established that a prisoner is receptive to RJ and before contacting the victim, the prison accommodating the offender should confirm that they support the conference going ahead. See Prison protocol section within this document. Appendices B and D are the risk assessment detailing considerations for facilitators deciding whether an offender and victim are suitable for an RJ conference. The decision to proceed should be a joint decision between the trained facilitator and the prison Meeting the Victim and confirming RJ suitability More than one meeting may be required to prepare the victim for the RJ conference. Consideration should be given in how to approach the victim bearing in mind the time elapsed since the offence and the progress a victim may have already made in moving on. Who should approach the victim? - it may be appropriate to seek the assistance of the original officer in the case (OIC), Victim Support or the Victim Liaison Officer through Probation. These individuals may have already established relations with the victim. It may be helpful, particularly where there is a vulnerable victim to have the first meeting with the original OIC or a member of Victim Support present. Victim meetings should confirm: Their written agreement to participate in RJ. This consent should be recorded as per the consent form at Appendix C; Their motivation for undertaking RJ and what they hope to gain from the experience; Their experience of the incidents and its effects. A wider understanding of the victim and their background may assist the facilitator to comprehend the impact of the crime and allow pertinent issues to be addressed during RJ conference process. This should ensure that no surprises will disrupt or unsettle the RJ conference; Who, if anyone, the victim would want to be present as their supporter during the RJ conference 5.37 Recording intelligence / Information The RJ facilitator will ensure that all necessary written consents, risk assessments and pre/post conference notes are completed. The completed documentation should be retained by the police and relevant lead agency. All forms are to be scanned onto RMS Restorative Justice in the Community 141(v1.0)/1.4 Page 10 of 35

12 Offenders are often unaware of the true impact of their crime, both at the time, following the offence and even post court. Restorative Justice (RJ) provides offenders with an opportunity to hear the human element of their crime and not just the criminal aspect. Victims are often left with unanswered questions following a crime why me? Despite being the most affected by the crime they have the least chance to be involved during the judicial process. RJ seeks to address this by allowing victims the chance to have a face to face discussion with offenders and the offender the opportunity to answer their questions. Programme Objectives Provide offenders with an opportunity to hear the effect of their crime on others and reduce their risk of reoffending Increase victim satisfaction with the Criminal Justice Service (CJS) and offer opportunity for closure Allow partner agencies to further understand offender needs and subsequently provide a support package for offenders post release to reduce the risk of reoffending. Partner Agencies North Wales Police Probation Youth Justice Service Criminal Justice Board Prisons (Altcourse, Risley, Stoke Heath and Hindley YOI) Victim Support North Wales Fire & Rescue Service ARCH initiatives (DIP) The Process Ideally, the same person(s) will meet both the offender and victim and facilitate the conference. Preparation Suitable offenders will be identified either by the Offender Manager or a trained facilitator. Careful preparation is essential to the success of any RJ conference. Firstly, it is necessary for the facilitator to look carefully at the circumstances surrounding events and the nature of the harm that was caused in order to decide whether a restorative approach is appropriate. The preparation period enables the facilitator to get a clear understanding of what has happened, to introduce themselves to the participants and to ensure that appropriate participants have been invited and are willing to attend. It enables the facilitator to consider practical necessities for the logistical organisation of the conference and to ensure that all arrangements and needs are in place. Preparing offenders A conference cannot be organised and conducted without full and voluntary cooperation from the offender. It is vital to the process that the offender admits responsibility for the incident and is willing to meet with the victim(s). 141(v1.0)/1.4 Page 11 of 35

13 He/she should be given full information on what to expect from attendance, what is involved in the process and who else is likely to be there. Preparing victims Victims should never be coerced into attending an RJ conference. Their attendance must be voluntary. It is vital that their needs are placed at the forefront of the process. The facilitator should ensure that all questions are answered and that the victim is fully aware of what involvement might mean for them. The timing of the conference must be dictated by the victims. Emphasise that the offer of conference is there for them to have their say. Risk Assessment Risk assessment is a dynamic process. Facilitators need to carry out risk assessment on participants of any potential restorative meeting in accordance with Best Practice Guidance for Restorative Practitioners (Home Office 2011). Risk assessments reduce the likelihood of negative outcomes and increase the likelihood of positive outcomes. Risk assessment can be described as a 5 stage process: Gather the information Cross reference the likelihood of any risk with the seriousness of any risk Identify any control measures which can be put in place to reduce either the likelihood or seriousness of the risk Is any remaining risk acceptable? If the risks are unacceptable then consider: Ending the process An indirect process Seeking specialist advice / support Logistical Preparations You will need to: arrange a neutral venue; provide a suitable room preferably in a quiet area of a building, free from distractions and not open to view; If necessary, make separate waiting areas for victim and offenders groups available; make sure that toilets, refreshments and tissues are available; set up the room according to the appropriate seating plan; take a copy of the script; bring any other relevant paperwork; If appropriate, advise colleagues that the conference is taking place to ensure support, for example if a participant leaves the room in distress. Check that participants: Have transportation available. Have any child care issues resolved. Are absolutely clear on the time, location and process of the conference. If necessary, are met at different entrances to the building or at different times for their safety and comfort. Debrief A debrief by the facilitator of both victim and offender will be held immediately following the conference. This is to ensure both parties are satisfied with the conference and to 141(v1.0)/1.4 Page 12 of 35

14 determine if any other support is necessary. A written record/ report of the debriefs should be made by the RJ facilitator on the respective report forms. Case Management Records The RJ facilitators will be responsible for completing RJ Appendices A - J inclusive and scanning them on to RMS. If the offender is subject to Probation or YJS supervision then the relevant Probation / YJS department should be informed. Post Conference Support for the Victim The victim should be offered support following the restorative process ideally by Victim Support, Victim Liaison Officer or alternatively a trained RJ facilitator should ensure a follow up contact is made with the victim Prison protocol Preparation Suitable offenders will be identified either by an Offender Manager, trained facilitator or potentially by staff at the prison. The restorative facilitator will meet with the offender to discuss a range of issues to establish initial suitability for an RJ conference. The offender will be requested to provide written consent to undertake the process (Appendix A). The Police RJ lead will retain a written record/report of the meeting on the respective form. The prison will provide the trained facilitator with recent offender intelligence reports to aid in the overall offender risk assessment. The Offender Risk Assessment (Appendix B) will be completed by the RJ facilitator following the pre-conference meeting. The trained facilitator and the prison representatives will ultimately decide upon offender suitability. If the RJ conference is deemed unsuitable, the offender will be informed of the reason/s why by the facilitator. The offender will be offered other support as appropriate. If the RJ conference is deemed suitable the facilitator will begin to establish victim suitability through examination of the offence and relevant case notes. A restorative facilitator will arrange a pre-meeting with the victim to establish initial suitability for an RJ conference and to offer appropriate support. The RJ facilitator will complete the Victim Risk Assessment (Appendix D) and record the victim s motivation for undertaking a restorative conference on this form. Pre conference prison visit This pre conference visit would be under escort with either a trained facilitator, Victim Liaison Officer or a Victim Support representative and accommodated at prison service convenience. The visit will allow the victim to familiarise themselves with the prison environment and to develop confidence in the process. All visitors must be advised that: they need to clear security; They will be searched and told that certain items are not permitted to be brought in; Photo ID is required; Logistics for Prison RJ Conferences 141(v1.0)/1.4 Page 13 of 35

15 The prison should provide an appropriate room for the conference together with appropriate refreshments for both prisoner and other conference attendees when practical. The room should be in a private area with a break out room in case the prisoner or the victim becomes distressed and needs to recompose themselves. A dedicated prison employee will be present at the conference to support the prisoner during and after the conference and to act as an observer. There should be no time constraints imposed on the conference process. The prisoner should be released from his daily timetable to participate in the conference. Debrief A debrief by the facilitator of both victim and offender will be held immediately following the conference. This is to ensure both parties are satisfied with the conference and to determine if any other support is necessary. A written record/report of the debriefs should be made by the RJ facilitator on the respective form Case Management Records The Offender Supervisor will be responsible for recording within the offender management records the time and date of the conference, those present and relevant outcomes to inform the sentence plan and pre-release planning meeting. The RJ facilitators will be responsible for completing RJ reports and forwarding them to the Offender Manager and relevant Victim Liaison Officer for all offenders subject to Probation supervision, and for those not subject to Probation a record would be entered onto the police RMS system. Post Conference Support for the Offender The dedicated prison employee present at the conference will offer support to the prisoner post conference as appropriate. Managers and Officers on the prisoner s Unit should be made aware that the prisoner has been through a restorative process to ensure support and monitoring is provided as appropriate. It is essential that pre and post release, offenders are supported to achieve their outcomes agreed in their conference, whether this is accessing drug and alcohol addiction support or seeking training opportunities in the community close liaison between IOM facilitator and Offender Manager will ensure that support is offered and discussed with the offender. Post Conference Support for the Victim The victim should be offered support following the restorative process ideally by victim support, victim liaison officer or alternatively a trained RJ facilitator should ensure a follow up contact is made with the victim Community Resolution Ticket CR will be recorded using a Community Resolution Ticket When considering a CR it is important to confirm agreement from both the victim and the offender and to explain the process accurately as well as recording the incident. Separate 141(v1.0)/1.4 Page 14 of 35

16 declarations must be read and signed by the offender, victim and if appropriate, parent/carer/guardian. The declarations are particularly relevant in cases of noncompliance of the outcomes agreed, as a formal Criminal Justice (CJ) disposal may be considered. All parties must appreciate that CR is an informal process, however if agreed outcomes are not completed by the offender, what they have said under caution may be used in evidence The declarations are contained as part of the CR Ticket and must be completed under caution and responses recorded. This also makes it clear to the offender that a CR can be disclosed under an enhanced DBS check A copy of the ticket is to be given to the offender Juveniles In addition to issuing a CR, officers are encouraged to take appropriate action relating to the care of the individual if dealing with a child or young person in situations where the young person has welfare issues. Officers are not absolved of their duties in respect of the welfare of the child and young person A CR disposal need not be delayed for parents, guardians or carers to be present, BUT in cases where outcomes include any material reparation or activity, the parent, guardian or carer should agree in person, or by telephone prior to agreement. In all cases, the officer giving the Resolution must inform, or cause to be informed, any parents, guardians or carers of the disposal taken and the effect of that disposal and get the ticket counter-signed by an appropriate adult The officer should use their professional judgment to decide on the capacity of the individual to understand the process without an adult present, if there is any doubt in that capacity, the matter should be postponed When a young person is subject to the CR process a notification must be sent to the relevant Youth Justice Service (YJS) via a YOF 8. In all cases involving juveniles, the officer dealing with the case must inform, or cause to be informed, any additional agency or person with caring responsibilities of the disposal and outcomes or agreements originating from it When a Level B (Intermediate Level) conference is co-ordinated involving a juvenile or youth then the YJS should also be informed by the CR authorised officer Recording When a CR is used to resolve a criminal offence it will be classified as a Community Resolution Supported/Unsupported - outcome. This will allow offences to be recorded and audited Manual of Guidance (MG) forms, including statements, are not normally required for a CR unless taken as part of an investigation when they may be stored with other records. It is envisaged that a large proportion of CR cases will be dealt with outside of custody and voluntary attendance suites When a CR disposal is being administered, the officer will complete the CR ticket. In cases of multiple offenders, a separate CR form is required to be completed for each offender 141(v1.0)/1.4 Page 15 of 35

17 and attached to the main copy. Only authorised Level C officers can use this disposal method and if in any doubt should consult a supervisor. The CR Ticket is designed for instant or street incidents (Level C), where a full (Level B) conference is neither practical nor necessary. Where a Level C CR is unable to be completed and the officer decides a full Level B conference is necessary, the CR Ticket should be completed with as much detail as possible including a clear 'rationale', why a Level B CR conference is necessary The CR Ticket can be used for Crime & Non-Crime incidents and upon completion a copy must be forwarded to the Force Records Management, F.H.Q. Colwyn Bay The CR Ticket must be completed using block capitals and completed as fully as possible. If a referral is being made for a Level B conference, the facilitator will need as much information as possible to arrange the conference. Send the referral to the Force RJ Officer for co-ordinating The following actions must be completed; The Community Resolution ticket MUST be scanned onto RMS. The ticket needs to be signed by offender and victim (for juveniles, the signature of parent/guardian is also required). A copy of the ticket is to be given to the offender. Apology letters are to be scanned onto RMS. Completed CR tickets are to be sent to Force Records Management, FHQ, Colwyn Bay. When completing the occurrence on RMS, a clear rationale should be included to show why the use of a CR is appropriate Re-offending If the offender has previous convictions, cautions or has previously been subject to a Youth or Adult out of court disposal, the officer must refer the case to a supervisor to determine whether it is appropriate to deal with the matter by way of a CR. In these circumstances if it is decided to deal with the case by CR as it is the 'right thing to do', a full rationale for the decision must be recorded on the OEL on RMS. An officer must also refer to a supervisor in the same manner, if the offender is currently subject to a conditional caution There are occasions when a CR is inappropriate for example, when an offender is subject to an existing court order, on bail for other offences, or is wanted on warrant, etc. The circumstances of the case may therefore require an alternative course of action, such as Conditional Caution, Adult Caution or appropriate youth disposal. CR should not be used to divert suitable cases from court Avoiding Arrest All efforts should be made to verify identification of potential offenders and wrong doers by way of enquiries to avoid arrest of those involved. This disposal option is intended primarily for low level offending and adds another level of disposal prior to the consideration of a Youth Cautions for juveniles and Simple Caution for adults Arrest and bail When it is necessary to make an arrest and take an offender into custody, a CR can be considered as a possible criminal justice disposal along with all other options. In these 141(v1.0)/1.4 Page 16 of 35

18 circumstances bail may be used where further enquiries are needed before deciding an appropriate response in any particular case. CR is available as a low level summary disposal in the community and arrests / bail should not be a regular part of its use Crown Prosecution Service The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) may decide that a CR is an appropriate disposal for a case referred to them and refer the case back to the police. NB: When referring cases to CPS, officers must carry out full intelligence checks and include details of any previous CRs the person has received as part of the defendants' antecedents. The complete offending history must be referred to the CPS in order that they can take this into account when formulating their decision. (Note: CRs do not normally appear on PNC) 5.60 Joint Offending In cases where two or more offenders are being dealt with for offences, it is not necessary for all offenders to be dealt with identically. Each person should be dealt with according to his or her own circumstances, previous offending history and level of involvement. Just because the incident or offence committed includes multiple offenders, this does not necessarily mean it should be automatically escalated to a Level B (Intermediate Level) conference. In simple cases involving more than one offender it may be appropriate and feasible to be dealt with in the community at Level C (Entry Level) Schools Schools, colleges and educational premises regularly use restorative approaches to deal with low level nuisance and offending behaviour without referral to the police or statutory organisations. When an incident that has taken place in educational premises is reported to police and it is appropriate for police involvement, a CR Level C or B can be used by officers on school premises with the school s consent Multiple offences In cases where an offender commits one or more offences on a single occasion, the officer should consider the merits of the case and decide whether the cumulative effect of the offences warrants a formal prosecution. It would be inappropriate to dispose of one offence by way of a CR and a different CJ disposal for another Victims and complainants A CR is designed to deal with matters where there is usually an identifiable victim. However, in some circumstances, particularly public order offences, this will not always be possible and consideration can be given to using community representatives as part of the process. These representatives cannot be Police Officers or Police Community Support Officers (PCSO's) Community resolutions and North Wales Police staff When a police officer or PCSO has been a victim of crime, the CR process can be considered and used provided it is run by another trained officer not associated with the incident or crime. 141(v1.0)/1.4 Page 17 of 35

19 5.65 If an officer deals with a case where the offender is a police employee or a police officer, the officer dealing with the case cannot make the disposal decision without appropriate consultation and authority being obtained. In the first instance, the matter must be brought to the attention of an Inspector, who in turn must consult with the Professional Standards Department (PSD). A CR is simply another disposal option, but the decision in these rare cases will always require careful and appropriate consideration after full consultation and the written authority of an Inspector and prior written agreement from PSD Non-compliance/failure to complete an outcome When an offender fails to comply with the agreed outcome, officers can revert to dealing with the incident through the normal criminal justice process. The fact the offender has failed to complete the outcome can be disclosed as part of any subsequent court case. Any comments by the offender during the CR process made under caution can be used in the prosecution case The vast majority of CR cases will be conducted without arrest. However, there may well be occasions when an individual is arrested but is in no fit state to be dealt with although it later transpires that their case is suitable for a CR disposal and that all other background checks support this decision. Once the individual is fit to be dealt with and if the resolution is something that can be finalised there and then, (e.g. a letter of apology or reparation made on the spot), then the Custody record created on arrest, Crime Report and PNC record will be closed and be marked up 'NFA' - No Further Action If the agreed resolution involves the offender performing the resolution after they are released from custody (e.g. repairing a fence or a Level B conference), then they should be released under investigation (RUI) In the event that the offender subsequently fails to comply with the agreement and it is felt he/she should be prosecuted, the OIC can then obtain a statement of complaint (and witness evidence if applicable) and proceed with another criminal justice disposal upon the offender's return from bail. An alternative option open to officers is to proceed with the matter by way of postal requisition (or fixed penalty), if appropriate Scrutiny and quality assurance CR is now formally recognised in the NPCC Neighbourhood Justice Outcomes Framework, within Authorised Professional Practice (APP) and has become a considerable part of our business. CR has been instrumental in allowing officers wider discretion and provides a victim led proportionate response in appropriate circumstances. Alongside this comes responsibility and greater accountability to ensure our actions stand up to public scrutiny Scrutiny Panel North Wales Police hold a regular scrutiny panel reviewing out of court disposals. The Scrutiny Panels are intended to bring greater transparency and consistency in the use of Out of Court Disposals, so as to increase public understanding, confidence and trust, but is sufficiently high-level to give scope for localised approaches and to allow for the exercise of professional discretion by individual officers. The purpose of the panel is to independently assess, scrutinise and quality control the use of Out of court disposals in North Wales Police. The panel can make recommendations, 141(v1.0)/1.4 Page 18 of 35

20 feedback on individual cases to officers, communicate findings, promote best practice and identify potential policy development or training needs for consideration by the force or other agency involved. Membership consists of:- Magistrate Bench Chair x 2; Youth Justice Team Officer; North Wales Probation Trust- Chair; Crown Prosecution Service; Criminal Justice x 2 - North Wales Police; LPS rep; Victim Support; PCC rep The restorative justice officer will check CR tickets for suitability and compliance with policy and will highlight any issues to the Offender Management Inspector. The offender management inspector will be responsible for raising any issues with the manager of the issuing officer The restorative justice officer will conduct follow-up with victims by dip-sampling using the survey below (see Appendix J). Completed surveys will be scrutinised by the Offender Management Sergeant with a view to improving practices. They will also be shared with the management of the officer who conducted the initial process Community resolution outcome agreements The purpose of the guidance is to enable officers to consider Outcome Agreements arising from a CR that are meaningful for those affected by crime; this includes offenders as well as the victims. To be purely restorative, the outcome agreement must belong to the participants and not the officer facilitating the process or others personally unaffected by the incident Importantly, 'restore' in the context of CR & RJ does not mean restore items to the victim (even though this may happen) nor does it mean to restore relationships (even though this may happen too); it is to restore the balance of power to those involved in the offence, so it can be resolved to their mutual satisfaction. Therefore for the process to have the maximum benefit there should be two parts. Firstly a restorative element where the impact of the offence is discussed and the consequences identified i.e. an apology. The second reparative element is then dealt with, where options are considered for repairing the harm caused Outcome Agreements arising from a CR are essentially personal commitments that in several research projects have had a high compliance level when compared to court orders. Outcomes could be declined even though participants are satisfied with the meeting. Outcomes could include, but are not limited to, an apology (often missing from more formal processes) or the payment of money amounting to the approximate damage or harm caused, if agreed by the parties involved In cases of shoplifting when stolen property has been recovered and returned to the store, it is unlikely that any other additional financial reparation could be supported or indeed justified. If retail stores demand additional financial compensation, then officers should consider an unsupported CR. If that is not appropriate, then a more appropriate solution or disposal should be pursued. The principle of CR is that the offender carries out some action to repair the harm to understand the consequences of their offending behaviour and impact it has in the community. If additional money is sought by stores from offenders this could be interpreted as a fine and therefore not in the spirit of a CR. 141(v1.0)/1.4 Page 19 of 35