You are on page 1of 20

Kent

Multi–Agency Public Protection Arrangements


Annual Report 2004-2005
Joint Foreword to Kent Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA)
Annual Report 2004/05

The protection of the public from personal violence remains a critical priority for the probation, police and
prison services in Kent. Through the multi-agency arrangements described in this report we give special
attention to those who are known to pose a particular risk to others because of their previous convictions.
This year, as last, only one of the highest risk offenders managed through MAPPA was charged with a further
serious offence. The fact that the vast majority of potentially dangerous offenders have been monitored and
live within the community without incident reflects the dedication and expertise of all those agencies and
individuals who contribute to the MAPPA process.

During the year there were some significant developments. The Prison Service joined Police and Probation
as members of the Responsible Authority which takes the strategic lead on MAPPA in Kent. Building on
existing excellent relationships between the three services, this has enabled us to refine our well-established
management of the release and subsequent supervision of high risk prisoners. We have appointed two lay
advisers to the Strategic Management Board, bringing a community perspective to its work, and a Consultant
Forensic Psychiatrist is now a member of the Level 3 Multi Agency Public Protection Panel (MAPPP) dealing
with the most serious offenders.

We have continued to give victims advice and information as well as a voice in the decisions we make
about offenders.

This report describes our work over the year. Two points are worth highlighting because they challenge some
of the assumptions about the level and type of serious offenders in the community. Firstly, the number of
offenders posing the highest risk has fallen. Secondly, amongst the most serious offenders more have been
convicted of non-sexual violence than of sexual offences.

This report aims to provide both information and reassurance about the public protection work of criminal
justice agencies in Kent.

Michael Fuller Christine Lawrie Adrian Smith


Chief Constable, Kent Police Chief Officer, Kent Probation Area Kent Area Manager,
HM Prison Service

2 Kent MAPPA Annual Report.


Contents

Joint Foreword to Kent Multi Agency Public Protection


Arrangements (MAPPA) Annual Report 2004/05 Page 2

Ministerial Foreword by Baroness Scotland Page 4

Key improvements in 2004/5 Page 5

How the MAPPA operate locally Page 5

The role of the Prison Service in MAPPA 2004/5 Page 9

Statistical information Page 10

Strategic Management Board Page 11

The focus on victims Page 12

The impact benefits of working with a


Multi-Agency Public Protection Panel Page 13

Association chart of Martin Smith Page 15

Violent and Sex Offender Register (ViSOR) Page 16

Case examples Page 17


Ministerial Foreword by Baroness Scotland

The work being undertaken to improve the safety of communities through the Multi-Agency Public
Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) is vitally important and a priority for government. The annual reports for
2004/5 provide evidence of that active engagement. Violence and sexual abuse are unacceptable wherever
they occur and it is evident that through MAPPA such offenders are identified and better managed than ever
before. As the number of offenders within MAPPA continues to grow as expected there is clear evidence that
the Responsible Authority, that is the local Police, Probation and the Prison Service, is addressing these
additional demands by strengthening local partnerships, using new statutory powers to restrict the behaviour
of offenders, returning offenders to custody where they breach their licence or order, and using the findings
of research and inspection to strengthen national guidance and local practice.

Although it is never possible completely to eliminate the risk posed by dangerous offenders, MAPPA is
helping to ensure that fewer people are re-victimised.

The active implementation of the Criminal Justice Act (2003) during the last year has clearly enhanced
the ability of a number of agencies including health, social services and housing to work collaboratively
with the Responsible Authority in assessing and managing those sexual and violent offenders in our
communities who pose the highest risk of serious harm. For the continued success of MAPPA this
collaboration, together with the scrutiny of policy and practice, must become the hallmark of these
arrangements. Similarly MAPPA must integrate with other public protection mechanisms dealing with
child abuse, domestic abuse and racial abuse.

For me one of the most exciting developments in this arena in the last 12 months has been the appointment
of lay advisers to assist the Responsible Authority in the oversight of the arrangements. As ordinary members
of the public these lay advisers represent a diverse, able and committed group of people who are now
helping the statutory agencies to oversee the work being undertaken through MAPPA and communicate with
the public more effectively. Without a growing sense of public knowledge and confidence about this work
much of the benefits of the public protection arrangements will be lost.

I hope this annual report will be useful, informative and re-assuring to local communities. The agencies and
individuals who have contributed to the achievement of MAPPA locally are to be commended.

Baroness Scotland
Minister of State for Criminal Justice and Offender Management

4 Kent MAPPA Annual Report.


Key improvements in 2004/5

Sexual and violent offences are dreadful crimes that deeply affect the lives of victims and their families
and inspire fear in local communities. Their impact can be profound and long-lasting, leaving victims
feeling unsafe even in their own homes.

The Government regards tackling sexual and violent crimes as one of its highest priorities.
Formal collaborative working between Kent Police and Kent Probation Area commenced following the
introduction of the Sex Offender Act 1997. The introduction of MAPPA in 2001 formally cemented the
working relationships between the agencies and since then this relationship has been strengthened and
consolidated. A key change this year has been the inclusion of Her Majesty’s Prison Service as part of the
Responsible Authority.

Police and probation are working even closer with their prison colleagues to identify and manage those
offenders who are being released from prison and who continue to pose a high or very high risk of causing
harm to members of the public.

During the year 2004/05 the work of MAPPA has been further strengthened by:

• The introduction of dedicated Public Protection officers on Police Areas to manage and monitor sex
and violent offenders living in their area
• Introduction of the Violent and Sex Offender Register (ViSOR) and the appointment of a dedicated
supervisor to manage the system
• Appointment of a Public Protection and Victims Manager by Kent Probation Area
• Inclusion of a Consultant Forensic Psychiatrist to the Level 3 Multi-Agency Public Protection Panel
• Appointment of two Lay Advisers to the Strategic Management Board

How the MAPPA operate locally

Across Kent and Medway, sexual and violent offenders are risk managed through a three-tier system that
clearly identifies the level of risk the offender presents. Through this structure resources are deployed to
manage identified risk in the most efficient and effective manner.

MAPPA Level 1 – Single Agency Risk Management


Level 1 is used in cases in which the risks posed by the offender can be managed by one agency without
actively or significantly involving other agencies. Generally, offenders managed at Level 1 have been assessed
as presenting a low or medium risk; and a large proportion of all MAPPA offenders are likely to be managed
at this level.

MAPPA Level 2 – Local Inter-Agency Risk Management


Level 2 is used where the active involvement of more than one agency is required but where either the level
of risk or the complexity of managing the risk is not so great as to require referral to the Level 3 (the full
MAPPP). Cases may be referred to Level 2 after having been managed at Level 3 when, for example, the
seriousness of risk or complexity have diminished.

MAPPA Level 3 – Multi Agency Public Protection Panels (MAPPPs)


This level is used for very high risk and dangerous offenders, also known as the ‘critical few’.

Kent MAPPA Annual Report. 5


Cases are defined by the following criteria:

i) The offender is assessed as posing a high or very high risk of causing serious harm AND presents risks
that can only be managed by a plan which requires close co-operation at a senior level owing to the
complexity of the case and/or because of the unusual resource commitments it requires
OR
ii) Although not assessed as a high or very high risk, the case is exceptional because the likelihood of
media scrutiny and/or public interest in the management of the case is very high and there is a need to
ensure that public confidence in the criminal justice system is maintained

NB: An offender can only be managed at one of the above levels. However they may move between levels
depending on risk factors present at the time of the MAPPA meeting.

During the year April 2004 to March 2005 a total of 208 Level 3 conferences were convened in Kent for a
total of 67 very high risk and dangerous offenders.

A MAPPA level 3 panel meets weekly to assess new referrals and to ensure they meet the criteria.

Panel members are:


Area Manager, Kent Probation Area (KPA) - Public Protection and Victims
KPA Senior Probation Officer – High Risk Offenders
DCI, Kent Police – Special Investigation Unit (SIU)
Special Investigation Unit (SIU) Analysts - Kent Police
Public Protection Co-ordinators – Police and Probation
Prison Intelligence – Police

In the current year there were a total of 56 new referrals of which 39 were accepted as meeting the Level 3
“very high risk of harm” criteria. This reflects an approximate 28% decrease in the numbers of offenders
being assessed as posing the highest risk when compared with the previous year 2003/04.

The breakdown of cases accepted for the Level 3 MAPPP is as follows:


Registered Sex Offenders - 13*
Violent and Others - 20**
Others - 6***

* Represents a 38.1% reduction in Registered Sex Offenders accepted when compared with the previous year
** Figure remains the same when compared with the previous year and includes three young offenders
*** Represents a 54% reduction of cases accepted

The figures above show that by far the biggest group is the Violent and Other offenders. Analysis of the
offending patterns of this group highlights that the majority have perpetrated physical abuse against their
partners and the others have been involved in perpetrating violence against members of the public,
including children.

The public perceives that sex offenders pose the highest risk. The above statistics do not reflect
this perception.

Ongoing analysis of the figures shows that up to this year there had been a steady increase in the numbers
of offenders referred to Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA). The downward trend, this
year, in our view, reflects improved awareness and risk assessment skills of staff working with the offenders
and increased collaborative working between the agencies.

6 Kent MAPPA Annual Report.


The primary task of the Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) is to:-

• Share information in a multi agency format to enable an accurate assessment as to the level of the risk
of harm posed by the offender
• Identify the nature and imminence of the harm occurring
• Identify potential victims
• Establish a multi-agency risk management plan to reduce the likelihood of harm occurring to identified
victims and the offender
• Increase public protection

The principles underpinning public protection are:

• To gather and share all the relevant information concerning the offender in a multi-agency format and
enable other agencies make a risk assessment
• Kent Probation Area, Kent Police and Her Majesty’s Prison Service to use nationally agreed risk
assessment tools to assess risk of harm (Offender Assessment System [OASys] and Risk Matrix 2000)
• To hear representations made on the behalf of the victim and take these into account
• To consider human rights/civil liberties issues
• To take account of Freedom of Information and Data Protection
• To work with the offender to develop internal controls to reduce the risk of re-offending by including
them in accredited and nationally recognised treatment and relapse prevention programmes
• To implement external controls to manage the risk of harm

You will see from the statistics later in this report that one Level 3 MAPPA offender seriously reoffended
during the year. The man was closely monitored both by police and probation but within days of his
supervision ending he disappeared from Kent. Attempts to trace his whereabouts were unsuccessful. He
subsequently abused and assaulted a woman he was living with and is now serving a long prison sentence.
A second offender, this time a Level 2 case, was charged and convicted of assault and false imprisonment of
his partner. He is also serving a long prison sentence.

Sharing accurate, timely and relevant information in a multi-agency forum is a key ingredient to
the successful assessment and management of risk of harm

A significant development this year has been the implementation of Criminal Justice Act 2003 Section
325 (3) which gives other agencies a duty to co-operate with the Multi Agency Public Protection
Arrangements (MAPPA).

The MAPPA ensure that agencies work together to enable a full and comprehensive risk management plan to
be agreed for those offenders assessed as posing a very high risk of harm to the public.

Examples of the agencies involved are:-

• Local Authority and Registered Social Housing Providers – Local Authorities have a statutory obligation
under the Housing Act 1996, and the Allocation of Housing (England) Regulations Act 2000, to
provide housing for people who find themselves homeless, as long as this has not occurred
intentionally. The role of the Housing Authority in the risk management process is to represent housing
enablers (Local Authorities) and providers (often Housing Associations). They contribute information on
appropriate housing for offenders being considered as part of the MAPPA process and how they can
be housed safely
• Health - Health has a key role in the MAPPA process and can make a significant contribution,
particularly in the field of mental health. We have made successful links with Kent Forensic Psychiatric
Service. We are working towards formal links with local health services across the county
• Social Services and Education Departments – Those responsible for child protection within these
departments ensure that risks to children generally and specifically within their family and social circle
are not overlooked and that plans take account of their needs

Kent MAPPA Annual Report. 7


• Youth Offending Service (YOS) – Although the MAPPA deal primarily with adults, some young offenders
meet the criteria for inclusion in the process. YOSs have a wealth of information to offer and often
have had considerable contact with the offender and their family. They are able to collaborate with
others in developing and delivering plans to manage risk for those offenders for whom they are directly
responsible, often for some time after they become adults
• Victim Support and Women’s Support Service – They aim to improve support and protection for victims
and witnesses. Working with MAPPA to reduce the adverse effects of crime on victims and witnesses,
and preventing secondary victimisation
• Kent and Medway Fire and Rescue Service – They offer an increased awareness of the impact of fire
setting both for victims and the offender

By working together, agencies are now more aware of each others responsibilities. This has
increased confidence and aided information sharing

The fourth year of the Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements has seen improved targeting
of offenders, ongoing development work with other agencies and the strengthening of MAPPA

Timetable Of Improvements

May 2004 Kent Police, Kent Probation Area and Her Majesty’s Prison Service undertook
a joint audit of Level 3 MAPPP cases. (Very High Risk Offenders)

July 2004 Kent MAPPA Annual Report published

September 2004 Multi Agency Conference – Management of Violent and Sex Offenders

September 2004 Multi Agency Training – Sexual Offending Prevention Order


Kent Police College

October 2004 National MAPPA Conference

December 2004 Multi Agency Training – Risk Matrix 2000

February 2005 Recruited Lay Advisers

February 2005 Regional MAPPA Conference

March 2005 Multi Agency Training – Sexual Offences Act 2003.

March 2005 Multi Agency Training – Personality Disorder Conference

8 Kent MAPPA Annual Report.


The role of the Prison Service in MAPPA 2004/5

One of the important ways in which the Criminal Justice Act (2003) strengthened the MAPPA was to make
the Prison Service part of the Responsible Authority with Police and Probation in each of the 42 Areas in
England and Wales. The Prison Service has been given this enhanced role in recognition of the important
part it plays in protecting the public by keeping offenders in custody; helping them to address the causes of
their offending behaviour, and by undertaking other work to assist their successful resettlement.

As part of the Responsible Authority the Prison Service is now represented on each of the Strategic
Management Boards (SMBs) in the 42 Areas. The Prison estate is configured differently from Police/Probation
areas in that its establishments are contained within only 12 geographical areas and two functional areas –
the High Security estate, and Contracted Prisons. For this reason arrangements for Prison Service
representation on SMBs vary across the country, but each Prison Service Area Manager has entered into an
agreement with the SMBs on how the service will contribute both strategically and operationally to the
MAPPA. The main focus of the Prison Service contribution is at an operational level. A number of measures
have been put in place across the prison estate to ensure that this will be effective and result in:

• Prompt identification of MAPPA offenders so that their details can be used in sentence planning
arrangements, including interventions to manage and reduce risk
• Regular monitoring of the behaviour of those assessed as presenting the highest risk, and sharing
information with Police and Probation colleagues
• All relevant risk management information being provided to multi agency meetings which help plan an
offender’s release
• At least three months’ notification to Police and Probation of the expected release dates of those
offenders who have been referred to the Multi-Agency Public Protection Panel (MAPPP), and at least six
weeks notification of those being managed at level 2 risk meetings
• No changes to release dates or arrangements being made without prior consultation with Police and
Probation

Playing an effective role in the multi agency risk management of offenders requires good communication
between criminal justice partners. The Prison Service has taken steps to ensure that there are dedicated
points of contact for public protection at both Area level and in every prison establishment, and that these
are published together with Police and Probation contacts to ensure better communication across the
Responsible Authority.

With the ever-increasing MAPPA population and proportion of those received into prison likely to grow with
the introduction of the new public protection sentences, the inclusion of the Prison Service as part of the
Responsible Authority will continue to be vital in protecting the public.

Kent MAPPA Annual Report. 9


STATISTICAL INFORMATION

1st APRIL 2004 - 31st MARCH 2005


Number of
Offenders
1. Category 1 MAPPA offenders: Registered Sex Offenders (RSO)

i) The number of RSOs living in Kent on 31st March 2005 954


ia) The number of RSOs per 100,000 head of population 60
ii) The number of sex offenders having a registration requirement who were
either cautioned or convicted for breaches of the requirement, between 1st April
2004 and 31st March 2005 33
iii) The number of (a) Sexual Offences Prevention Orders (SOPOs) applied for
(b) interim SOPOs granted and (c) full SOPOs imposed by the courts in between
1st May 2004 and 31st March 2005 a) 26
b) 2
c) 21
iv) The number of (a) Notification Orders applied for (b) interim Notification
Orders granted and (c) full Notification Orders imposed by the courts in
Kent between 1st May 2004 & 31st March 2005 a) 0
b) 0
c) 0
v) The number of Foreign Travel Orders (a) applied for and (b) imposed
by the courts in Kent between 1st May 2004 & 31st March 2005 a) 0
b) 0
c) 0

2. Category 2 MAPPA offenders: Violent offenders and Other Sexual offenders (V&OS)
vi) The number of violent and other sexual offenders (as defined by Section 327 (3),
(4) and (5) of the Criminal Justice Act (2003)) living in Kent between 1st April
2004 and 31st March 2005 423

3. Category 3 MAPPA offenders: Other Offenders (OthO)


vii) The number of ‘other offenders’ (as defined by Section 325 (2)(b) of the
Criminal Justice Act (2003)) between 1st April 2004 and 31st March 2005. 39

4. Offenders managed though Level 3 (MAPPP) & Level 2 (local inter-agency management)
Level 3 Level 2
(viii) Identify how many MAPPA offenders in each of the three Categories
(i.e. (1)- RSOs, (2)- V&O and (3)- OthO above) have been managed through
the MAPPP (level 3) and through local inter-agency risk management
(level 2) between 1st April 2004 and 31st March 2005. RSO 13 150
V&O 20 273
OthO 6 36
(ix) Of the cases managed at levels 3 or 2 (i.e. (viii)) between 1st April
2004 and 31st March 2005 how many, whilst managed at that level:
(a) Were returned to custody for a breach of licence? a) 6 43
(b) Were returned to custody for a breach of a restraining order
or sexual offences prevention order? b) 2 0
(c) Were charged with a serious sexual or violent offence? c) 1 1

10 Kent MAPPA Annual Report.


Strategic Management Board

Overseeing and managing MAPPA in Kent is the responsibility of the Strategic Management Board. The
effective working of the Board is key to the success of the Kent MAPPA.

The Strategic Management Board (SMB) is the group which steers and audits the MAPPA process.
The board monitors the effectiveness of MAPPA work. I am Kent Probation Area’s Director of Public
Protection, Performance and Prisons and I chair the board.

The SMB meets quarterly, and consists of representatives at senior level from the Police, Probation,
Prisons, Youth Justice, Social Services (Kent and Medway) and Victim Support.

The strategic vision for the future is complex and will involve further multi agency co-ordination.
The Children’s Act 2004, The Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004 and the Criminal
Justice Act 2003 are currently having a significant impact on MAPPA. The introduction of this new
legislation clearly puts Public Protection and MAPPA centre stage.

The Community Disorder Reduction Partnerships (CDRP) set local strategy for domestic violence
and other crime priorities and the SMB recognises that it is essential to create a coherent and
continuing vision so that we can make connections meaningful in practice.

The SMB is working towards this, but has to work within a multi agency approach, with different
structures, priorities and resources. Work for the coming year and next will concentrate on these
areas and on increasing public confidence in MAPPA.

Rob Verity
Chair, Kent MAPPA Strategic Management Board

Lay Advisers
There is considerable public interest in how police, probation and prisons manage sexual and violent
offenders. By including Lay Advisers as members of the SMB, it is hoped that public confidence in the
process will be improved.

Lay Advisers add an important public voice to the work of the Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements.
They have an opportunity to question what is done and why.

The Lay Adviser scheme has been successfully piloted in eight probation and police areas.

Two Lay Advisers have been appointed to Kent MAPPA .

Kent MAPPA Annual Report. 11


The focus on victims

In addition to the work to manage offenders, the Government has placed much greater emphasis upon
meeting the needs of victims. In Kent we attempt to include the victim’s views in all MAPP cases. These views
significantly influence the risk management decisions of the MAPPP and inform how the offender will be
managed and what actions are required to minimise the risk of further harm to identified people.

The victims of sexual offending are identified as a priority group within the National Victims and Witnesses
Strategy. This strategy, which was published in July 2003, aims to improve support and protection for victims
and witnesses by:

• Reducing the adverse effects of crime on victims and witnesses, and preventing secondary victimisation
• Encouraging more victims and witnesses to come forward
• By offering more options to victims and witnesses, including alternatives to attendance at court

These initiatives will help toward another key Government target, that of improving public confidence in the
Criminal Justice System.

The Government is underpinning this work in its Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act. It will create a
new independent post of Commissioner for Victims and Witnesses to be a champion/voice for all victims of
crime and a new statutory Victims’ Code of Practice which will build on the existing Victims’ Charter and set
out specific responsibilities that each Criminal Justice Service agency and Victim Support Service must provide
to victims.

How MAPPA has impacted on victims

Feedback received from victims of serious sexual, physical and psychological crimes with regard to
MAPPA, has been, in the main, positive. Victims are pleased that such a meeting is undertaken; it
indicates that other professional bodies acknowledge the seriousness of the offences committed
against them and recognises that these are dangerous offenders.

Victims need their views and concerns to be heard in this broader forum and welcome the fact
that they have an advocate in the form of a Victim Liaison Officer. Victims acknowledge that the
purpose of the MAPPA is to set in place strategies to protect not only the individual but the public
in general and often information disclosed by a victim makes a valuable contribution towards
developing plans for the risk management of an offender.

Victims of ‘serious crimes against the person’ (children and adults) would accept that these
arrangements do go some way towards protecting them.

Christine Massey
Victim Liaison Officer

12 Kent MAPPA Annual Report.


The impact benefits of working with a Multi-Agency Public Protection Panel

From the perspective of a Probation Officer, the MAPPA process is a crucial aspect in managing the
risk dangerous offenders pose to the community. It allows for the sharing of information with
other agencies, to identify potential victims and inform risk management plans in a constructive
and productive manner. For example, police information may highlight a particular risk factor
which is reduced by an accommodation provider considering housing for an offender.

The information shared by other agencies is useful in informing our own practice with the
offender. This may be on a specific issue with an offender or with regard to accessing resources
available in the community. The risk management plan and action points generated at each
MAPPP give clear and constructive direction on what work needs to be undertaken to manage the
offender’s risk in the community. This allows for each agency to be clear about their areas of
responsibility and promotes greater accountability amongst the agencies involved.

Mark Collison,
Probation Officer, Tonbridge
April 2005

Report Outlining Involvement of Forensic Services with Level 3 MAPPPs

The Criminal Justice Act 2003 highlighted that Health Authorities, NHS Trusts and Primary Care Trusts were
under a duty to co-operate with MAPPA. The Royal College Of Psychiatrists responded to this by producing
the document “Psychiatrists and MAPPA - Guidelines on Representation, Participation, Confidentiality and
Information Exchange” which outlined the College’s views on psychiatric input to MAPPA and offered
psychiatric services a framework for co-operation.

Following initial teething problems relating to diffulties in attending at MAPPA meetings at short notice, the
Kent Forensic Psychiatry Service reviewed its procedures relating to MAPPA. The service decided that an
identified Consultant Forensic Psychiatrist would take a lead in operational procedures relating to MAPPA and
would regularly sit on all the Level 3 MAPPP meetings that took place in the county. This arrangement was
considered the most appropriate course of action, allowing for a named contact to be readily available,
minimising contact difficulties for other agencies and allowing a contact point within the Forensic Service for
other Kent Forensic Psychiatry staff. In addition to the designated forensic psychiatrist sitting at an
operational level on Level 3 MAPPPs, the Clinical Director of the Kent Forensic Psychiatry Service has taken a
lead at a strategic level.

The forensic psychiatrist has been attending Level 3 MAPPP meetings on a regular basis since October 2004.
Due to the current arrangement of Level 3 MAPPPs, this amounts to a commitment by the psychiatrist of one
full day per week. The role of the forensic psychiatrist at Level 3 MAPPP meetings is still developing.

The forensic psychiatrist has contributed to MAPPA in the following ways:

• Advised on the organisation of psychiatric services available within the region


• Advised on appropriate assessment, treatment and prognosis of specific mental disorders
• Liaised with other psychiatric services e.g. Prison Psychiatric In Reach Teams and local Community
Mental Health Teams, as a direct discussion of patient/offender need, highlighted at MAPPP meetings
• Interpreted the information in psychiatric reports presented at MAPPA meetings
• Assisted in discussions about the risk that offenders pose, being able to advise MAPPP as to whether
specific psychiatric risk assessments are necessary
• Dispelled any mistaken views over what psychiatry can achieve, detailing the limits of psychiatric
services and limits placed on psychiatrists relating to disclosure of information in some instances
• Carried out assessments at the request of the MAPPP and, on one occasion, took part in an urgent
Mental Health Act Assessment, the need for which became apparent during discussion at a MAPPP
meeting

Kent MAPPA Annual Report. 13


• Although the designated forensic psychiatrist has undertaken risk assessments at the request of
MAPPA, it is not expected by the Kent Forensic Psychiatry Service that this psychiatrist alone will
undertake all such assessments. However, because of the presence of the psychiatrist at MAPPPs, this
has facilitated direct liaison with colleagues in the Kent Forensic Psychiatry Service to arrange for risk
assessments to be undertaken by the most appropriate individual and most appropriate discipline - a
process that has allowed the MAPPPs to access quicker assessments and reports, thus providing the
required information more rapidly
• The forensic psychiatrist has also gained more of an insight into the practice and procedures of those
working within the Criminal Justice System

It is hoped that the continuing regular attendance of a forensic psychiatrist at Level 3 MAPPPs will allow the
MAPPPs and the Forensic services to work more productively in the area of public protection and aid the
process of multi-disciplinary working with other agencies. It is also hoped that the forensic psychiatry input
will continue to increase awareness about the importance of the “duty to co-operate” across other health
services and that general community psychiatrists and local mental health teams will begin to have a more
regular involvement in all levels of MAPPA.

Dr Heather O Simmons MB BS Dip Forensic Psych


Locum Consultant Forensic Psychiatrist

Approved Under Section 12(2) MHA 1983

Analyst’s role

The Analyst’s role within the MAPPP arena encompasses the research, review and profiling of the Level 3
MAPPA subject.

When a person is referred and accepted at Level 3 MAPPP, the Analyst will research them on various
databases including Local Police systems and the Police National Computer and any other available sources
such as Probation and Social Services files where appropriate. All of this information is pulled together in
order for the Analyst to complete a full picture of the offender. There are various ways in which this data can
be displayed, such as an Association Chart (see example on Page 15 ), a map showing the location of
offences, a timeline illustrating the chronology of incidents, or a spreadsheet of incidents/offences the subject
is linked to, for example to show similar facts and highlight any intelligence gaps.

During the MAPPP meeting, information is exchanged with other members of the panel and this can help
the Analyst to update their information and to assist in identifying any risk factors posed by the Subject. Any
reports or products completed by the Analysts will be updated as a regular ongoing process, with various
members of the MAPPP being kept informed of any new information and the new Analytical Product being
shared at the next MAPPP.

Why MAPPPs benefit the Domestic Violence Unit

The Domestic Violence Unit on this area has been involved in a few Level 3 MAPPPs, as well as
several at Level 2. They have proved to be an invaluable meeting for the exchange of information.
When dealing with High Risk Offenders this is extremely important. Action plans are made at the
conclusion of every meeting for various personnel to carry out. One such action was for the
forwarding of a solicitor’s Civil Papers to an offender, when neither the solicitor nor their client
was able to be told of the offenders’ current whereabouts. It was essential that these papers were
served as they involved a Non Molestation Order which protected their client and her children and
involved the settlement of a financial/property case.

At another Level 2 meeting our department brought forward information relating to this person’s

14 Kent MAPPA Annual Report.


previous dealings with two previous partners, as well as a better picture of the offences currently
being discussed. If the Prison Service representative had not been present and had relied solely on
their documentation, they would not have been privy to this man’s violent history as he had not
been dealt with by way of criminal proceedings for any of the matters.

Dee Simcox
WPC Tonbridge

Association chart of Martin Smith


Level 3 MAPPA Subject Young children visit
Produced by SIU Analyst regularly to see their
13/04/2005 Grandparents
Sheltered Accomodation
Green Street
Dartford

Reside

Grandparents

Sidney JONES Mable JONES


DoB 07/07/1927 DoB 05/06/1929
Registered Sex Offender

Visits

Brother Ex-Wife

Mark SMITH Martin SMITH


DoB 17/09/1962 DoB 01/12/1964 Has custody of
Level 3 MAPPA Subject
Son Registered Sex Offender
Children

Age 9
No access to Age 7 Age 3
Reside
Reside

Visits in Mondays
and Thursdays

105 Brown Street 76 Brown Street


Herne Bay Herne Bay

Please note: All names, DoBs and


Kent MAPPA Annual Report. 15
addresses on this chart are fictitious.
Violent and Sex Offender Register (ViSOR)

The Violent and Sex Offenders Register (ViSOR) can hold details on any offender who falls into one of the
following categories: -

Registered Sex Offender


Non-Registerable Sex Offender
Violent Offender
Potentially Dangerous Offender
Potentially Dangerous Person

Until now, the Police and Probation Services have relied upon on local intelligence systems to track, monitor
and record details of offenders. This has made it difficult to keep track of offenders moving between Police
areas. ViSOR provides a shared national database to register, risk assess and manage sex offenders, as well as
violent offenders and others who may cause serious harm to the public.

ViSOR holds a wealth of information and intelligence on individuals, including details of foreign travel,
modus operandi, details of risk assessments and any orders i.e. Sexual Offences Prevention Order (SOPO) or
Risk of Sexual Harm Order (RSHO). ViSOR is also linked with the Police National Computer, thus allowing
access to previous convictions, cautions etc.

A photographic library of the individual is held, including distinguishing marks, tattoos or abnormalities,
making it harder for the individual to change appearance and re-locate in other parts of the country.

ViSOR fully supports the Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements by providing relevant, accurate and
specific information and intelligence that is accessible 24 hours a day.

A note from the Public Protection Co-ordinators

Since MAPPA began in Kent, the Public Protection Co-ordinators function has continued to develop
and has taken on a more pro-active approach to the managementof Level 3 MAPPP cases.

There are two Public Protection Co-ordinators performing this role, one representing Kent Probation
Area and the other Kent Police. The Co-ordinators are often the first point of contact for agencies and
this role is key in the sharing of information regarding current Level 3 MAPPP cases. Situations and
circumstances change on a day-to-day basis and if the Co-ordinators are not notified, those changes
cannot be relayed to the appropriate agencies and may result in an increased risk to the public and
victims.

The creation of the Special Investigation Unit at Kent Police Headquarters in November 2004, has
meant that the Public Protection Co-ordinators now work directly with staff that each have their own
area of expertise and can offer advice to the Level 3 MAPPP. The areas of expertise include domestic
violence, child protection and adult protection.

Two Intelligence Analysts also work within the team and their input to the MAPPA process has
provided information with regard to offenders and their associates, which has also aided the risk
management process.

The continuing development of MAPPA has facilitated an improvement in the links with HM Prison
Service. These link have assisted with the movement of prisoners to Kent from outside the County and
contributed to the information sharing process, which informs the risk management plan.

The existing close working relationships with other agencies have continued to flourish and there has
been a greater collaborative approach with regard to information sharing.

16 Kent MAPPA Annual Report.


It is clear all the parties involved in the MAPPA process continue to work together towards the
main aim of protecting the public and victims and that there is always the opportunity for further
improvement.

Tracy Gain and Sara Field


Public Protection Co-ordinators

Case Examples

(A) JAMES

James was serving a sentence of two years imprisonment for vehicle crime. He had a long history
of violent offending and had served a number of different sentences. Although sentenced for
vehicle related crime, James had originally been charged with discharging a firearm in the family
home. This charge was dropped prior to conviction as witnesses refused to give evidence.

Three months after conviction it was reported to Victim Support that James had been physically,
sexually and emotionally abusing his wife and five children, two of whom are adults, for many
years. They were and are terrified of him and were only able to disclose the information as he was
in prison – for the first time in many years they felt able to relax and not be frightened of him.

James’s brother Thomas was also a serving prisoner, having been convicted of sexual offences. He
was serving his sentence in the same prison as his brother. Information disclosed to the police
indicated that Thomas was working for James to put pressure on the victims not to disclose the
abuse.

James was applying for early release and the victims were very frightened of him returning home.
He had started contacting them from prison, giving ultimatums and making threats of what he
would do once released.

James and Thomas were assessed as posing a risk of causing imminent harm to identified victims
and that the risk of harm was very high and both were referred to the Kent level 3 MAPPP.

Summary of actions taken to manage the risk:


• Prison staff were informed and contact from and between James and his brother was stopped.
Both then tried to put pressure on other family members to pressurise the victims. They then
started to disclose abusive relationships with their brothers
• Victims were interviewed and each made statements. All victims agreed to give evidence against
James
• Victims were referred to Social Services for counselling
• Victims were linked into Victim Support who worked with them to assist the court process
• Victims were relocated to a new area
• Education Departments and schools worked with two children (victims) to enable them to
continue their education
• Family Liaison Police Officer appointed to support the family
• Kent Probation staff liaise with courts, with Police and with Social Services
• Parole Board informed of disclosures and subsequent prosecutions

Agencies and their representatives involved:


• Kent Probation Offender Manager
Victim Liaison Office
Prison Probation staff

Kent MAPPA Annual Report. 17


• Kent Police Special Investigation Unit
Family Liaison
Witness Protection
• Prison Governor
Wing Officers
Security
Health Care
• Social Services
• Education - Schools
• Victim Support
• Counselling Service
• Employment Service
• Local Authority and Social Housing Agencies
∑• Home Office

Outcomes:
• James sentenced to a very long period of imprisonment
• Thomas eventually released with a comprehensive multi-agency risk management plan in place
• Victims relocated to a safe area
• Positive feedback that the family felt safe and happy for the first time in many years

Multi-agency collaboration was a necessity in managing the risk that these men presented

B) MARTIN

Martin is a serial sex offender with a history of offending stretching back twenty years. He also has
a history of violent offending against both children and women. He badly fractured the arm of his
six-week-old daughter twenty years ago and has shown no remorse.

He has never undertaken any offence focussed work to address his offending and does not believe
that he has ever done anything wrong. He denies his sexual offending and blames it on the victims.

Martin was made subject to a Sex Offender Order in January 2003 with prohibitions that included:
• Not to approach females on their own
• Not to enter identified shopping centres

Martin mainly targets his victims in shopping centres but has also approached them in the street,
in woods and by rivers.

He has always offended within a short period of time after release from prison. Prior to his release
in January 2005 he was assessed as posing a very high and imminent risk of causing harm. Martin
was referred to the Kent Level 3 Multi-Agency Public Protection Panel. Plans were put in place to
manage his return to the community.

He was transferred to a Kent prison so that his release into the Kent community could be closely
monitored in order to reduce his opportunity to reoffend.

He was released in January 2005 and was arrested three days later for breaching his Sex Offender
Order. He is currently serving eighteen months imprisonment.

Agencies involved developing the Risk Management Plan:


• Kent Police Headquarters and Local Area
• Kent Probation Area Head Office, Specialist and Local Area staff

18 Kent MAPPA Annual Report.


• Prison Service
• Forensic Mental Health Service
• Social Services
• Accommodation Provider
• Employment Service
• Victim Liaison Service

Information sharing through the Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements prevented Martin
from committing further very serious offences and creating additional victims.

Kent Probation Area Address Phone

Rob Verity, Chaucer House, 01622 350820


Director, Public Protection, Performance Knightrider Street.
and Prisons. Maidstone
Rob.Verity@kentprobation.gsx.gov.uk

Maurice O’Reilly Chaucer House, 01622 350820


Area Manager, Public Protection and Victims Knightrider Street.
Maurice.O’Reilly@kentprobation.gsx.gov.uk Maidstone

Kent Police
Greg Barry Kent Police Headquarters, 01622 654560
Detective Superintendent Sutton Road,
Special Investigation Unit - Case Review Maidstone

Nora Chandler Kent Police Headquarters, 01622 650453


Detective Chief Inspector Sutton Road,
Special Investigation Unit, Force Headquarters Maidstone
Nora.chandler@kent.pnn.police.uk

Sara Field and Tracy Gain Joint Co-ordinating Team, 01622 650459
Joint Public Protection Co-ordinators Kent Police Headquarters, 01622 650466
public.protection.unit@kent.pnn.polic.uk Sutton Road,
Maidstone

Kent MAPPA Annual Report. 19


Kent
Multi–Agency
Public Protection
Arrangements
Annual Report
2004-2005