Supplementary written submission from Paladin National Stalking
Advocacy Service (DVA0138)
I will concentrate on the urgent need for serial stalkers and domestic abusers to be included on the Violent and Sexual Offenders Register and concerns regarding police risk identification, assessment and management.
There is some suggestion that the Government might be inclined to use the Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme (DVDS, Clare’s Law) and implement the new stalking orders that Dr Woollaston MP is proposing. Forgive the directness of this briefing, however, this would not deal effectively with the 25,000 serial offenders who commit 80% of the abuse or offer appropriate protection for victims and/or future victims.
The DVDS is reactive and slow. Months go by before victims and their family members receive relevant information, if at all. In this time a victim, their family member and/or member if the public may be further abused and/or killed. Equally, the DVDS is dependent on a victim and/or family member or member of the public asking the police about someone’s “history of violence”. However, there is no duty on the police to identify serial abusers or input the information about serial perpetrators. Additionally, how they define ‘violent’ is a challenge. Coercive control and stalking are patterned psychological crimes. Oftentimes offences are categorised as criminal damage or interfering with a motor car or common assault and not flagged as stalking or domestic abuse and so the pattern is missed.
The DVDS is also dependent upon police staff believing the behaviour is serious and inputting the history on a police system that is shared nationally. Many cases including Zoe Dronfield, who has been spearheading our campaign alongside John Clough, the father of Jane Clough who was stalked and murdered, highlight that police forces do not even make the links of serial offending in their own police region, and give little or no consideration to what a perpetrator may be doing elsewhere.
Rather, oftentimes victims are dismissed and this is exactly the culture we are trying to change ensuring the focus is on the perpetrator, asking the right questions and inputting information about their behaviour. This is not happening and victims are being failed. The register will shift the focus back onto the perpetrator, where it should be – the DVDS and Orders are very limited in what they seek to achieve. Oftentimes stalkers and domestic abusers change their name and/or use false names. They are more akin to sex offenders, and some of them are sex offenders, than any other type of offender, which is why all the information about them should be housed on ViSOR and them managed via the Multi-agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA). The DVDS does not take this into account and in Caroline Finegan’s case Ryan Ingham used a false name and his history would not have been joined up.
Shockingly, when perpetrators are known for abusing multiple people a perpetrator’s history is rarely taken into consideration, which shows exactly why this is needed and it is ‘you must check’ approach, rather than ‘you may’ and consider registration.
Please read the following briefing in full laying out the evidence and costings:
Cases
Kim, Kayleigh and baby Kimberley Buckley, Gwent 2012
Kim, 46, Kayleigh, 17 and baby Kimberley Buckley were murdered in a house fire in September 2012. These murders could have been prevented if Gwent police had checked Carl Mill’s background. There were three separate reviews into the murders, a domestic homicide review (DHR), Serious Case Review (SCR) and Independent Police Complaints Commission Investigation (IPCC) which criticised police and social services. There were at least 45 incidents of violence committed by Mills during his time in Bolton including setting fire to his mother’s bed and threatening her with knives. Three weeks before the murders Mrs Kim Buckley reported Mills for criminal damage and stealing her house keys. This was not acted on by Gwent police. The SCR flagged up issues re serial offending and police officers sharing information, as well as the need for cultural change. Again, the escalating pattern of behaviour was not identified and his behaviour was not seen as serious.
Three murders and three reviews. The human cost is unmeasurable. The financial cost is significant.
Shana Grice, Sussex 2016
19 year old Shana Grice reported to Sussex Police multiple times and was dismissed. She was given a fixed penalty notice for wasting police time despite the fact Michael Lane had stalked and abused 13 previous victims in a three year period prior to Lane letting himself into Shana’s flat and slitting her throat. Why did officers not check his offending history? Why did they dismiss Shana? The disclosure scheme did not work in this case, nor would stalking protection orders. If he was on the register he would have had to disclose a new relationship and his history would be clear. The focus would have been on him- and not Shana.
Alice Ruggles, Northumbria 2016
Alice Ruggles was stalked and murdered in October 2016 by a serial abuser. Alice was advised that he would receive a Police Information Notice (PIN). This was inappropriate given his pattern of behaviour and his implied threat to kill. 1 in 2 domestic stalkers, when they make a threat will act on it. He breached the PIN and nothing happened. Alice was left unprotected. Again the history was not joined up and this was not seen as serious escalating violence.
https://broadly.vice.com/en_us/article/mb4eny/alice-ruggles-murder-family-interview
Molly McLaren, Kent 2017
23 year old Molly McLaren was stalked and murdered by Joshua Timpson. He had abused multiple women before Molly, yet again there was no duty to put this intelligence and information on a police system, there is no duty to share with others and there is no joined up system to facilitate Clare’s Law. A police officer called Timpson up and warned him. This is a risky and dangerous course of action, which escalated the risk. Timpson went out and bought a knife and a pick axe and killed Molly days later.
New Orders
Any form of “protective order”, including the new one currently being discussed under Dr Wollaston’s Private Member’s Bill, offers no real protection to victims. Orders should only be given if there is no history of abuse and to people who play by the rules. Given that victims suffer on average 100 times before calling the police, the new orders that talk to early intervention will miss that opportunity in the majority of cases. Secondly PINS were used and abused and became the ‘go-to’ tactic used by police to get them out of conducting an effective investigation – history will repeat.
Thirdly, HMICFRCS and HMICPSI (2017) inspected six police and CPS regions and reported a 100% failure rate. HMIC (2014) reported on domestic abuse highlighting similar failings, particularly regarding not taking victims seriously, lack of risk assessment and risk management and not identifying, assessing and managing serial perpetrators. Little has changed.
Fourth, 80% of stalkers are never charged. Bringing in these orders alone will compound this problem and we run the risk that this may well push it up to 100% of stalkers never facing a charge. Paladin has grave reservations about the new orders as they will deliver neither safety nor justice and victims will continue to be left unprotected and at risk.
Orders are reactive and make the professional feel like they are doing something. However, pieces of paper do not protect the current victim or future potential victims. Our experience is that restraining orders and non-molestation orders are routinely breached and are not enforced. Why would the new proposed Stalking Protection Orders be any different? The police already have limited resources and look for every reason not to investigate.
In 2003 the Metropolitan Police Service recommended serial perpetrators should be included on the Violent and Sexual Offenders Register and managed via the Multi-agency Public Protection Units https://www.dashriskchecklist.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Getting-Away-with-It.pdf
ACPO/NPCC been talking about managing serial perpetrators since 2004.
In 2009 they made the recommendation to Government that serial perpetrators should be included on the register (Tackling Perpetrators of Violence against Women. London: ACPO.)
HMIC (2014). Everyone’s Business: Improving the police response to Domestic Abuse. London: HMIC also recommended serial perpetrators should be tackled – identified and managed. Yet in this time nothing has changed. There is no duty on the police to identify serial offenders, they do not see it as a priority and too often victims are told to change their name, home address and phone number, loaded up with actions from Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conferences (MARACs) and safeguarding risk panels as if their behaviour will stop the stalking.
This is ridiculous and has to stop. The focus should be on the perpetrator and their behaviour. A radical cultural shift is needed and placing offenders on ViSOR.
Positive obligations must be placed on the perpetrator – and the perpetrator placed on a system so that when they move their history follows them. We track victims via MARACs, yet we do nothing with the person who is the problem – the perpetrator.
What we propose and recommend
A proactive Intelligence-led approach and system is urgently needed to identify, assess and manage serial stalkers and domestic abusers. It is the sum of all the learning from DHRs, SCRs and IPCC investigations. Vi SOR was brought in to ensure Violent and Sexual Offenders are on a register and MAPPA is the statutory public protection arrangement that should be used to problem solve and risk manage perpetrators.
Currently, sex offenders are focused on much more than violent offenders. Violence should include psychological harm. In the Metropolitan Police Service we created a system of Potentially Dangerous Perpetrators (PDPs) to try and plug the gap and yet routinely stalkers and domestic abusers are not seen as dangerous and are screened out. This is an attitude, aptitude, leadership and priorities issues. These are the most dangerous of cases and yet they are not taken seriously or resourced. Two women are murdered a week and this number has remained static since 2001. Most of these cases are stalking related cases which escalate at the point of separation. Coercive control happens prior, the separation and escalation and then stalking.
If a threat to kill is made 1 in 2 domestic stalkers will act on that threat and 1 in 10 if there is no previous relationship. In 2003 I found that 76% of murders happened on separation https://www.dashriskchecklist.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Findings-from-the-Domestic-Homicide-Reviews.pdf
The Femicide Census (2016) found the same 13 years later, with 34% of murders happening within the first month. I believe that 80% happen in the first four months. The same patterns repeat over that over again.
Rachel Williams, Zoe Dronfield, Jane Clough, Clare Bernal, Hollie Gazzard, Alice Ruggles, Molly McLaren, Justene Reece, Shana Grice – when will we learn the lessons? How many more women have to be seriously harmed or murdered? Are women’s lives worth so little?
The human cost is significant, so too is the financial cost.
When I was the Head of Homicide Prevention at New Scotland Yard 2005 we costed that to investigate an average murder at around £1.54m. Present day it would be closer to £2m. This does not include the trial, nor does it include all the reviews that may subsequently take place. In a recent case in Gwent, 11 separate and independent reviews were conducted. To attend a call out of domestic abuse, the MPS costed it at £1000 in 2005. This would no doubt be around £1500. Victims call the police multiple times as this is a pattern psychological crime. It is one of few crimes the police can make worse.
Suicides must also be considered too. The ‘drip drip drip’ insidious nature of stalking and the war of attrition has a serious impact on victim’s mental health. When they report and are not take seriously this causes secondary victimisation and further trauma. Victims’ self-harm, cannot sleep, eat and feel suicidal. Some attempt suicide and some like Justene Reece and succeed. The Judge said “you made her life a living hell”. He bombarded her, her friends and her family and desecrated her mother’s grave. She left a note saying that she had no fight life and had run out of steam. The war of attrition is so great for victims, battling the perpetrator, attempting to stay alive and battling the system. It’s estimated that at least 10 women a week commit suicide due to domestic abuse and stalking. This is unacceptable and just like in Justene’s case, they are serial perpetrators. Why should victims be driven to take their own lives and perpetrators be allowed to offend with impunity? Why are suicides not counted or collected?
Recommendation: There should be a duty on Coroner’s and Police to record cases of forced suicide due to stalking, domestic abuse and so-called honour based abuse.
In 2008 the Home Affairs Select Committee estimated the cost to victims as being £3.4billion. Professor Walby estimated it as being £19.5billion in 2009 and prior to that in 2004 it being £23billion. Stalking has yet to be costed in a similar way but given the long term nature of stalking, that it is about fixation and obsession, the costs are substantial. It is hard to estimate the cost to all services including statutory and voluntary as well as the legal costs, medical costs and psychological cost on victims, their children and family.
Recommendation: a piece of research should be commissioned on the costs of stalking and a ‘what works’ approach.
If perpetrators get away with offending, they continue and escalate. Therefore there are multiple victims, including children. This cost has yet to be counted. I believe in Pareto’s principle that 80% of the crime is committed by the 20%.
Recommendation: the police should focus on the 20% of serial perpetrators who commit 80% of the crime. An intelligence –led, proactive approach using covert and overt tactics and close down the prolific offenders and offending will be reduced and the amount of victims. ViSOR should be used as the database as it allows for detailed information including information about offending behaviour, modus operandi, history and home visits to be included. PND does not allow for this detailed level of information.
Expanding ViSOR to include serial stalkers and domestic abusers will save lives and money. The Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangement (MAPPA) is the right forum to problem solve risk management of the perpetrators. No stalker will want to go on the register. This will also act as a strong deterrent, as they will fear the consequence.
It’s estimated that there are 25, 000 serial perpetrators in England and Wales. 20% of them would go on the register. It would cost £1.4 million for the first three years, which would be offset by reducing offending and preventing murders. If one murder were prevented, the money would be recouped immediately. It would break even in the first year if you prevent 119 victims being victimised in the first year, 238 in Year 2, 357 Year 3.
Family Courts
There is often little or no join up between the criminal and family courts. Many cases have highlighted this chasm including the murders of Christine and Shania Chambers and thousands of Paladin’s cases. Stalkers continue to abuse victims and Family Court professionals may collude in this abuse. Many professionals are still not trained to understand coercive control and stalking. Children are often used as leverage to continue the abuse and render both the woman and the child more vulnerable.
Snapchat and Snap Map
As part of our joint Paladin and Vice #UnFollowMe Campaign we surveyed for the first time 12, 000 13-24 year olds on Snapchat. A third of them had been stalked https://broadly.vice.com/en_us/article/5949vx/over-third-people-stalked-snapchat-yougov-survey
Snapchat should use their own data to inform new features. The Snap Map feature is dangerous and unnecessary. It allows predatory stalkers and sex offenders access to information about where young people are in real time. Currently there is no age verification barrier and little education and awareness about the ghost mode.
85% of those surveyed said they support police identifying, tracking and managing serial perpetrators.
In Conclusion
There are few crimes the police can make worse but stalking and domestic abuse are two of them, which is why the register and a radical cultural shift is needed as current police practice is dire and not working. Two women are killed each week and 10 more attempt suicide due to abuse. Significantly, this figure has remained static for more than a decade. The register will save lives and money.
Please click the link below for more information and evidence from our joint Paladin and Vice #UnFollowMe Campaign https://broadly.vice.com/en_us/topic/stalking
Thank you for taking this issue so seriously.
October 2018