ANNEX B

OPTION 1 – RESTORATIVE YOUTH CONFERENCING

An administrative process within the youth justice system covering the full range of alleged crimes by under-18s including those characterised as antisocial behaviour

STAGE 1: POLICE / STAGE 2 : CPS / STAGE 3: DIVERSIONARY CONFERENCE (IF CPS REFERS FOR THIS) / STAGE 4: COURT (IF CPS OPTS TO PROSECUTE) / STAGE 5: COURT-ORDERED CONFERENCE
1. Police retain discretion in minor cases to give informal warning or youth restorative disposal (YRD) or decide on no further action (NFA).
2. Where police consider youth justice system (YJS) caution (reprimand, final warning, youth conditional caution (YCC)) or prosecution or referral to a preventative service may be needed, YOT carries out triage assessment at police station.
3. YOT recommends to police a YJS caution or minor case disposal as above; itself refers to a preventative service; or recommends prosecution to the CPS.
4. YOT consideration based on ASSET assessment tool - a recent one if the child is already known to them or a new one completed within 24 hours (with action on case deferred meanwhile); and local authority CAF assessment if available.
5. If there is no CAF, YOT commence one to inform future action including, potentially, CPS decisions.
6. System of YJS cautions (reprimand, final warning and YCC) to be made more flexible (see main report). / 1. Where YOT recommends prosecution, file passed to CPS. (There is current piloting of police taking back prosecution decisions in summary-only cases. If this becomes permanent, for ‘CPS’ read ‘CPS or police as appropriate’ in this document)
2. CPS’ overall options are to decide NFA (e.g. because prosecution or equivalent not in public interest); refer back to YOT and/or police to consider/ reconsider one or more of their alternative options; or decide the case is in principle prosecutable – i.e. .passes the standard evidential and public interest tests and is not suitable for one of the alternative options
3. If case is ‘in principle prosecutable’, CPS MUST refer it to diversionary RJ conference if:
(a) child has admitted offence and agreed to conference; and
(b) offence not in the ‘most serious’ group ( i.e, murder, manslaughter, terrorism, hijacking, causing explosions, rape, kidnapping, abduction, GBH with intent or attempts to commit these offences.
4. CPS MAY refer to diversionary RJ conference if:
(a) child has admitted offence and agreed to conference; and
(b) offence is in the ‘most serious’ group but with mitigating features eg: minor role in group offence, past victimisation has contributed to current offence or child’s developmental age is well below their chronological age - significantly reducing their capacity to distinguish right from wrong or to understand a court trial.
5. CPS decision takes account of YOT’s ASSET plus existing or newly- prepared CAF.
6. Charge/prosecution to be stayed at point of referral to conference. / 1. Diversionary RJ Conference based on thorough preparation as in N. Ireland. Conference leader studies and asks questions about YOT and CPS reports, ASSET, CAF and PNC record, meets child, parents and victim (strongly encouraging their attendance) and consults community reparation organiser.
2. Conference attended by leader, child, parent/guardian/appropriate adult, victim if willing and YOT officer. Also at leader’s discretion victim’s representative or supporter, child’s or family’s supporter, youth advocate/ interpreter and other agency closely involved with the child e.g. social services or teacher/education service
3. Child entitled to be advised and accompanied by a lawyer at all stages, although the conference leader would encourage the child’s direct participation/communication with them.. Legal aid entitlement decided on ‘interests of justice’ test.
4. Conference aims through engagement to understand crime, its background and impact and child’s social background; identify options for child, family, victim and community; and agree plan of actions/interventions proportionate to the offence, lasting for up to 12 months, to tackle the behaviour, its impact and the child’s relevant social and welfare needs.
5. Options for plan include apology; reparation (to victim or community, can include unpaid work for older children); payment to victim for replacement/repair; adult supervision; education/training; participation in activities/programmes; proportionate restrictions on conduct or whereabouts; and, subject to child, parental and relevant agency agreement: electronic monitoring; treatment for mental health issues and/or drug/alcohol dependency; and parental actions
6. Conference leader or Conference itself can also refer child on voluntary basis for work by preventative services, or refer to children’s social services for them to consider under s47 Children Act 1989 ‘whether they should take any action to safeguard or promote the child’s welfare’.
7. Conference leader highly trained lay person/professional appointed and employed by the local authority independently of the YOT. Plan implementation led by YOT, using its own staff and calling on other relevant agencies to contribute as appropriate through their general statutory duty to co-operate to improve wellbeing (s.10 Children Act 2004).
8. Once agreed, plan returned to CPS for approval. If not approved, conference leader can offer revision with consent of child and where appropriate victim and parents. If, exceptionally, still not approved CPS prosecute.
9. Reflecting administrative status of conferences, an agreed plan is not a criminal sanction and results in no publicly disclosable criminal record (except re enhanced disclosure). Police retain details of offence and plan, which may be used for criminal intelligence purposes and where admissible quoted/cited in any subsequent court or conference proceedings.
10. If plan not being properly carried out YOT supervisor issues warning/ provides extra support. For persistent failures YOT supervisor returns case to CPS, who (subject to any child representations that they had not breached or had reasonable excuse) can prosecute or invite YOT supervisor to consider changing the plan. / 1. CPS can decide to prosecute if child does not admit offence; child admits offence but CPS exercise discretion to prosecute in a most serious case (see stage 2); child has had diversionary conference but it could not agree a plan; conference agreed a plan but CPS do not accept it; or conference agreed a plan but child without reasonable excuse persistently failed to carry it out.
2. All prosecuted children go to court for trial or sentence as appropriate in their case. Normally they go to the youth court. The main report proposes improvements to its standard arrangements to promote participant understanding and engagement.
3. For cases which would currently go to the Crown Court, the main report proposes a strengthened youth court.
4. After guilty plea or conviction, court MUST refer to court-ordered RJ conference if:
(a) child now admits offence and agrees to conference: and
(b) offence not in the ‘most serious’ group as defined in column 2
5. Court MAY order conference for a most serious offence if :
(a) child now admits offence and has agreed to conference; and
(b) court believes case suitable for RJ conference taking account of mitigating features (including but not confined to those in Column 2) and potential value and viability of the RJ process.
6. If court DECLINES to refer a discretionary case to a conference it proceeds to sentence. Sentencing options as now, subject to custody being the genuine last resort, with an appropriate change to the statutory custody threshold.
(b) In appropriate cases, court has ability to order an RJ conference to be held either before it sentences or during the sentence – if custodial sentence, for completion by or after release. / 1. Court-ordered conference proceeds as in stage 3 (diversionary conference) except that agreed conference plan or (exceptional) failure to agree one are returned to court not CPS. Either way, conference report to be accompanied by any relevant YOT pre-sentence report and in serious cases psychological, psychiatric or medical reports.
2. Continuity of bench strongly encouraged.
3. Court can accept, amend (with agreement of child and where relevant victim or parents) or reject conference plan. (Amendment is appropriate response if proposed plan is disproportionate)
4. If conference plan or amended plan is agreed, it becomes the court’s sentence.
5. Conviction and sentence records treated in the same way as in column 3.
6. If, exceptionally, conference itself cannot agree a plan the case is returned to court which sentences for the offence.
7. If plan not being properly carried out YOT supervisor issues warning, provides extra support. For persistent failures YOT supervisor returns case to court. Subject to determination of dispute over whether persistent failure had occurred and whether child had reasonable excuse, the court would consider amending the plan or if it is clear that no amended plan would be completed, resentencing

OPTION 2 – LAY YOUTH JUSTICE PANEL

An administrative process within the youth justice system covering the full range of alleged crimes by under18s including those characterised as antisocial behaviour

STAGE 1 : POLICE / STAGE 2 : CPS / STAGE 3 : YOUTH JUSTICE PANEL (YJP) / STAGE 4 : COURT (IF CPS OPTS TO PROSECUTE) / STAGE 5 : WHERE COURT REFERS TO YJP
Police retain discretion in minor cases to give informal warning or youth restorative disposal (YRD) or decide on no further action (NFA).
2. Where police consider YJS caution (reprimand, final warning, youth conditional caution (YCC)) or prosecution or referral to a preventative service may be needed, YOT carries out triage assessment at police station.
3. YOT recommends to police a YJS caution or minor case disposal as above; itself refers to a preventative service; or recommends prosecution to the CPS.
4. YOT consideration based on ASSET assessment tool - a recent one if the child is already known to them or a new one completed within 24 hours (with action on case deferred meanwhile); and local authority CAF assessment if available.
5. If there is no CAF, YOT commence one to inform future action including, potentially, CPS decisions.
6. System of YJS cautions (reprimand, final warning and YCC) to be made more flexible (see main report). / 1. Where YOT recommends prosecution, file passed to CPS. (There is current piloting of police taking back prosecution decisions in summary-only cases. If this becomes permanent, for ‘CPS’ read ‘CPS or police as appropriate’ in this document)
2. CPS’ overall options are to decide NFA (e.g. because prosecution or equivalent not in public interest); refer back to YOT and/or police to consider/ reconsider one or more of their alternative options; or decide the case is in principle prosecutable – i.e. passes the standard evidential and public interest tests and not suitable for one of the alternative options.
3. If case is ‘in principle prosecutable’, CPS MUST refer it to youth justice panel if:
(a) child has admitted offence; and
(b) offence not in the ‘most serious’ group ( i.e, murder, manslaughter, terrorism, hijacking, causing explosions, rape, kidnapping, abduction, GBH with intent or attempts to commit these offences.
4. CPS MAY refer to youth justice panel if:
(a) child has admitted offence and agreed to conference; and
(b) offence is in the ‘most serious’ group but with mitigating features e.g: minor role in group offence, past victimisation has contributed to current offence or child’s developmental age is well below their chronological age - significantly reducing their capacity to distinguish right from wrong or to understand a court trial.
5. CPS decision takes account of YOT’s ASSET plus existing or newly- prepared CAF.
6. Charge/prosecution to be stayed at point of referral to panel. / 1. YJP hearing date set. Panel made up of trained volunteers (some of whom may already have relevant expertise). Panels held in existing community buildings at times to encourage lay involvement eg evenings, weekends in school or community centre. Panels to be diverse and drawn from local community.
2. YOT case manager contacts relevant parties to prepare: victim, encouraging attendance with supporter at appropriate part of panel meeting; parent(s)/carer(s), to encourage attendance and establish whether and how they might be able contribute at and after the panel meeting; other agencies as necessary, to establish what services can be provided to meet child’s needs indicated by CAF e.g. drug/mental health treatment/therapy, provision for child not in full-time education.
3. YOT case manager provides panel with dossier: YOT and CPS reports, ASSET, CAF, PNC record, if victim willing their personal statement. Panel reads in advance and can seek factual clarification or additional information from case manager.
4. Meeting attended by lay panel members, child, parent/guardian/appropriate adult, victim if willing and YOT case manager. Also at panel’s discretion victim’s representative or supporter for appropriate part of hearing, youth advocate/ interpreter and other agency closely involved with the child e.g. social services or teacher/education service.
5. Child entitled to be advised and accompanied by a lawyer at all stages, though the panel would encourage the child’s direct participation/communication with them. Legal aid entitlement decided on ‘interests of justice’ test.
6. Panel aims through use of dossier and discussion, particularly encouraging contributions from child and family, to understand crime, its background and impact and child’s social background; identify options for child, family, victim and community; and agree plan of actions/interventions proportionate to the offence, lasting for up to 12 months, to tackle the behaviour, its impact and the child’s relevant social and welfare needs.
7. Panel could include restorative element (eg invite victim to participate in part of the panel where the offence is discussed).
8. Panel aims to agree plan with child, similar to conference plan in Option 1 above and drawing on the same menu. Emphasis on reparation to victim and community and prevention of reoffending by meeting needs and giving support.
9. Panel can also agree with child and parent voluntary family therapy or parenting support. Panel can also refer child on voluntary basis for work by preventative services, or refer to children’s social services for them to consider under s47 Children Act 1989 ‘whether they should take any action to safeguard or promote the child’s welfare’.
10. Reflecting administrative status of panel, an agreed plan is not a criminal sanction and results in no publicly disclosable criminal record (except re enhanced disclosure). Police retain details of offence and plan, which may be used for criminal intelligence purposes and where admissible quoted/cited in any subsequent court or panel proceedings.
11. An agreed plan can be put into effect straightaway; it does not have to be referred back to the CPS. If If plan not being properly carried out YOT supervisor issues warning/ provides extra support. For persistent failures YOT supervisor returns case to CPS, who (subject to any child representations that they had not breached or had reasonable excuse) can prosecute or invite YOT supervisor to consider changing the plan. / 1. CPS can decide to prosecute if child does not admit offence; child admits offence but CPS exercise discretion to prosecute in a most serious case (see stage 2); child has been to panel but it could not agree a plan; or panel agreed a plan but child without reasonable excuse persistently failed to carry it out.
2. All prosecuted children go to court for trial or sentence as appropriate in their case. Normally they go to the youth court. The main report proposes improvements to its standard arrangements to promote participant understanding and engagement.
3. For cases which would currently go to the Crown Court, the main report proposes a strengthened youth court.
4. After guilty plea or conviction, court MUST refer to youth justice panel if:
(a) offence not in the ‘most serious’ group as defined in column 2; and
b) a panel has not previously been held in this case
5. Court MAY order panel for a most serious offence if:
(a) a panel has not previously been held in this case
(b) court believes case now suitable for one taking account of whether the child pleaded guilty to or now admits the offence, mitigating features (including but not confined to those in Column 2) and potential value of panel.
6. If court DECLINES to refer a discretionary case to a panel it proceeds to sentence. Sentencing options as now, subject to custody being the last resort – with appropriate change to the statutory custody threshold / 1. Court-ordered panel proceeds as in stage 3 (CPS–referred panel). An agreed plan can be put into effect straightaway; it does not have to be referred to the court for approval.
2. If agreed conference plan is successfully completed, the court’s final decision is deemed to be referral to the panel and the conviction is not publicly disclosable (except re enhanced disclosure).
3. As in column 3, the completed plan is not a criminal sentence but may be used for police intelligence and where admissible quoted/cited in future court or panel proceedings.
4. If, exceptionally, panel itself cannot agree a plan the case is returned to court which sentences for the offence.
5. If plan not being properly carried out YOT supervisor issues warning, provides extra support. For persistent failures YOT supervisor returns case to court. Subject to determination of dispute over whether persistent failure had occurred and whether child had reasonable excuse, the court would consider amending the plan or if it is clear that no amended plan would be completed, resentencing