Supplementary written submission from the Suzy Lamplugh Trust (DVA0137)

1. Executive summary
1. We are grateful for the opportunity to provide evidence to the Home Affairs Select Committee.
2. The focus of this submission is on domestic abuse and what measures and reforms are needed to address these damaging and prevalent crimes.
3. Suzy Lamplugh Trust’s expertise is within stalking and will therefore approach this question from this perspective.

2. Introduction
1. Suzy Lamplugh Trust’s vision is a society in which people are safer – and feel safer – from violence and aggression; we want people to be able to live life to the full. We work towards this vision through campaigning, education and support.
2. The charity was founded by Diana and Paul Lamplugh following the disappearance of their daughter Suzy, a young estate agent, in 1986. Since then, the Trust has pioneered personal safety as a life skill and a public policy priority. Stalking has been a key issue in our work from the outset, from Diana personally supporting victims (and talking publicly about her realisation that Suzy herself had been stalked) to the Trust successfully campaigning for changes to the law on stalking in both 1997 and 2012 and launching the National Stalking Helpline in 2010. Currently, 8.8% of National Stalking Helpline service users surveyed are living in Scotland.
3. Suzy Lamplugh Trust defines stalking as a pattern of fixated and obsessive behaviour which is intrusive and causes fear of violence or engenders alarm and distress in the victim.

3. Q 120 further written evidence to oral evidence given on 4th September 2018
1. The Chair asked for our opinion on the proposed stalking register.  The focus of the Suzy Lamplugh Trust is on upskilling criminal justice professionals to be able to recognise and respond to stalking more robustly.  Our priority is calling for universal training for all frontline officers, to ensure more victims of stalking are given the support and protection they need.  We are supportive of the principle of a stalking register but would be keen to understand the mechanics of how such a tool would work in practice alongside existing tools such as Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme, Violent and sex offender register, the Police National Database, and Police National Computer, Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements.
2. Suzy Lamplugh has ongoing concerns around the relationship between the civil and family courts and criminal proceedings.   While we are aware anecdotally of problems between the authority of the family court and the police, our more prominent concern is around the use of the court system to continue a stalking fixation. 

We refer the Committee to our response to the government’s ‘Transforming the Response to Domestic Abuse’ consultation, copied out here:

Suzy Lamplugh Trust is concerned about the use of vexatious complaints by stalkers against their victims in the family and civil courts as part of an ongoing pattern of stalking behaviour. The National Stalking Helpline annual report for 2016/17 shows that 7% of stalking victims report their stalker bringing vexatious complaints against them through defamation claims, financial claims, family court proceedings, false accusations, and professional misconduct claims. A survey by Suzy Lamplugh Trust has received responses from over 300 people who have self-identified as having experienced false allegations against them as part of a stalking campaign.  Victims experience an average of three allegations against them ranging from financial claims to family court proceedings.  

These vexatious complaints are part of wider stalking behaviours and affect victims where the stalking both is and is not related to domestic abuse.  When interviewed, victims disclosed psychological trauma of receiving vexatious complaints stating that unlike other stalking behaviours such as phone calls, or online messages, communication from perpetrators via solicitors could not be ignored and therefore creates unwanted, ‘official’ contact between victim and stalker.  Victims reported incurring costs associated with vexatious complaints including £13,000 of solicitor fees.  This often leads to loss of work due to the emotional toll of stalking and the abuse of the court system; victims reported having to sell cars and move in with family members to stay financially stable. 

The high-profile case of Claire Waxman is an example of this behaviour.  Her perpetrator had been issued with a lifetime restraining order following repeated attempts to contact her, including hundreds of late night phone calls, researching her name on Google 40,000 times in one year, breaking into her car and posing as a prospective parent at the nursery her two children attended.  While subject to the restraining order preventing contact, the perpetrator was able to make multiple defamation claims against Ms Waxman in the civil courts.  Charges against the perpetrator for breaching the order were dropped citing his right to bring allegations against Ms Waxman.  The High Court ruled that the CPS was wrong not to prosecute and ordered it to pay damages.  

Another victim, when interviewed by Suzy Lamplugh Trust, disclosed multiple personal injury claims made against her by her ex-partner.  This was combined with loitering, attempts to contact her via family members, and following her. The combination of this left the victim unable to work and needing to move in with her mother for support.  Despite the lack of evidence in these personal injury claims, the repeated and vexatious nature of the claims has not been recognised and the victim continually needs to respond to the claims, causing her further distress.

In the criminal arena, repeated vexatious complaints are now recognised as evidence of stalking and are referred to in CPS guidance.  However, the same recognition does not appear in the civil or family courts nor is there communication between criminal and civil courts to safeguard victims.  20% of respondents to Suzy Lamplugh Trust’s survey stated that criminal proceedings had begun against their stalker and yet vexatious complaints against them in the civil courts proceeded.  Concerningly, the repeat nature of these vexatious complaints is not recognised by civil courts.  30% of victims stated that the once investigated, the vexatious complaint against them was suspended (40% of those could identify that lack of evidence was the reason for the suspension) and yet most of these victims suffered repeat allegations against them.

While Civil Restraining Orders exist as a tool to prevent repeat vexatious complainants from bringing allegations against the same victim, not a single respondent to the survey cited the use of CROs to prevent further complaints from their stalker.  Given that the CPS accepts breaches of CROs as evidence of fixated and obsessive behaviours that amounts to stalking, Suzy Lamplugh Trust would urge both the family court and civil courts to learn from the criminal court by training court officials to understand the dynamics of stalking and appreciate that repeat abusers of the court system should be issued with a Civil Restraining Order and be obligated to communicate this to criminal justice colleagues.

4. Domestic abuse and stalking
1. 55% of callers to the National Stalking Helpline are stalking by an ex-intimate partner.  79% of callers to the National Stalking Helpline are women.
2. Stalking, as a crime within the Violence Against Women and Girls umbrella covers far more than domestic abuse victims with people being equally obsessed and fixated with strangers, acquaintances, work colleagues, family and friends.
3. Ex-intimate partner stalking is most commonly motivated by rejection and victims are considered to be at the most risk of physical violence and lengthy duration of stalking episode.

5. Stalking behaviours
1. The different stalking experiences reported by clients to the National Stalking Helpline span a broad range of behaviours, reflecting the complexity of this crime. The most common behaviour reported was stalking via social networking sites, closely followed by texts and phone calls.
6. Stalking and risk
1. Research from the University of Gloucester, published by Suzy Lamplugh Trust examined more than 350 cases of criminal homicide and highlighted the following:

1. Stalking behaviours were present in 94% of homicides
2. Surveillance activity, including covert watching, was recorded in 63% of the cases (estimated to be much higher in reality as the victim is unaware)
3. Escalation of concerning behaviours was identified in 79% of the cases
4. Control was recorded in 92% of the cases
5. Isolation of the victim was recorded in 78% of cases
6. Acknowledged high risk action markers were present across the sample. For example: strangulation assault 24%, threats to kill 55%, suicidal threats 23% (estimate the presence of these markers could be much higher due to underreporting).
7. Diverse activities like court actions were not recognised as stalking.
8. Coercive control and stalking were more often simultaneously present where there has been an intimate partner relationship. This type of relationship formed 71% of our sample.
9. Threats to kill occurred in 55% of cases, and in some cases the threat was articulated to third parties as well as the victim.
10. 85% of homicides occurred in the victim’s home. 

7. Early intervention in stalking cases
1. The MASIP initiative, which is the first of its kind worldwide, aims to improve responses to stalking across the criminal justice system and the health sector through rehabilitative treatment for stalkers. Ultimately, it is hoped that working with perpetrators can help to make victims of stalking safer.
2. Suzy Lamplugh Trust has developed and will be testing perpetrator interventions in conjunction with partners including Cheshire Constabulary, Hampshire Constabulary, the Metropolitan Police Service, Barnet, Enfield and Haringey Mental Health Trust, Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust, and North West Boroughs Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust.
3. The pilots intend to use an integrated, multi-agency approach. The initiative will assess risk, gain understanding of psychological drivers, and encourage cessation and desistance of stalking behaviours.
4. The main aim of this project is to evaluate the effectiveness of three new approaches to managing stalking perpetrators’ risk with a view to preventing further stalking behaviours and improving the quality of life of victims, and multi-agency working, in London, Hampshire and Cheshire.
5. A team of expert police officers, alongside mental health specialists and victim advocates, based in London, Hampshire and Cheshire will investigate high risk stalking allegations. They will offer expert advice to officers in relation to stalking allegations, identifying risks, and assisting with management plans to protect the victim and public from the stalker. The teams will also identify perpetrators who may be suitable to undertake a behaviour change programme will be developed in partnership with health colleagues.
6. These individuals may also be referred to other community services, where appropriate, such as local mental health, drug and alcohol or other support services. The National Probation Service will work alongside officers to manage the ongoing risk such offenders pose to the community and to their victim. 

8. Recommendations
1. Suzy Lamplugh Trust recommends comprehensive training across the criminal justice system for stalking and a multi-agency approach to managing perpetrators and safeguarding victims. 
2. Suzy Lamplugh Trust recommends government insist that statutory agencies must publish and report upon a VAWG strategy to hold agencies to account for their performance in supporting all victims of gendered violence.

October 2018