RESTRICTED
Independent Scrutiny Panel Meeting Notes 19/05/15
Welcome and Introductions
Supt Wratten welcomed all and introductions of Panel members were made
Notes from Previous Meeting
The Panel werehappy with the notes and conclusions circulated from the meeting held on 17/02/15. All were in agreement to the amendments to the Terms of Reference.
Legal Updates / Community Resolutions Pilot
Nadia Ali provided a brief overview of the new caution guidance that will be shortly be coming into force. Key changes centre on the levels of authorisation required for cautioning certain offence types. A more extensive update will be provided at the next session.
Nadia also provided an update on the one-year Community Resolutions Pilot. At the six months mark, the findings are still overwhelmingly positive. Feedback from Officers utilising the two-tier model are finding it much more comprehensive and easier to follow both in terms of application and when explaining to offenders and victims / the public. It has also allowed them to use their discretion and has provided more scope to provide more meaningful ‘conditions’ bespoke to the offence type, offender and victim where appropriate.
Marion Sandwell (member of the CR pilot steering group) reported that recording mechanisms are still being explored – Pentip / PNC. Community Resolutions primary application is for first-time, low-level offending and therefore by its very nature it has also been raised if there is even a requirement for a national I.T solution. It was again emphasised to the Panel that this pilot was only applicable to the Adult out of court disposal framework. The Youth framework, which contains Community Resolutions, has already undergone simplification as per the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Officers Act (LASPO) 2012.
The Panel briefly discussed Community Resolutions and the ramifications of non-compliance to the conditions, which was agreed by all as difficult to manage. Community Resolutions are only suitable for those who admit the offence, show genuine remorse and are willing to engage, whilst this does not mitigate the risk, non-compliance should not be a regular occurrence. The BTP Standard Operating Procedure (still currently in draft) is seeking to address this and will be presented to the Panel at the next session for comment.
Supt Wratten provided the Panel with an update on BTPs Evidence Review Gateway (ERG), a central decision-making and quality-assurance hub for all out of court disposals and prosecution files which is now fully operational. It hoped the Panel will observe a noticeable uplift in both file quality and consistency of decisions made in the next session.
Performance Update
A performance update for Out of Court Disposals issued from Jan – April was given by Supt Wratten. The Panel observed that a high number of disposals were ‘Not Proceeded With’. An action was passed to Nicola Vallins to further investigate and report back to the Panel detailing the offence types for these cases and reason(s) as to why they were discontinued.
Case File Reviews
Conclusions templates were completed for all cases, including a summary of the surrounding discussion and additional actions and feedback where appropriate. The templates have been included within the minute circulation.
Feedback
It was agreed that cases involving sexual offences and those involving knife crime should heavily feature within the next Panel. Based on the conclusions of the Outraging Public Decency (OPD) cases, the Panel would like and update concerning the revised guidance and subsequent OPD out of court disposal case filessubmitted after guidance circulation.
The Panel agreed that Community Resolutions should not be reviewed until BTP has implemented it as a disposal outcome. Youth cases where Community Resolutions are still to be included but only ones post the new YOT referral Process – Jan 2015.
For the next Panel:
-A small reduction in the number of case files for review to ensure adequate time for considerations and discussion
-Date of birth not to be redacted to ensure age of offender / victim is clear
-In cases involving multiple offenders, first letter of names to remain to distinguish between offenders
-Overall Conclusion – additional box to be added for ‘Panel does not have enough information’
Circulation of the BTP external website address when notes / learning has been uploaded.
AOB / Next Meeting
The next meeting was provisionally agreed for September 2015
Page 1 of 2