Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements

Annual Report 2005-06

Gerry Sutcliffe MP Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Criminal Justice and Offender Management

Making our communities safer and reducing re-offending is our highest priority and one of our biggest challenges. That is why the work undertaken through these multi-agency public protection arrangements (MAPPA) is so important. The supervision and management of sexual and violent offenders who pose the highest risk of serious harm, whether in the community or in custody, is complex and challenging; and is an aspect of public service where the public rightly expects all reasonable action to be taken. Although we have made significant progress in the last five years with the development of MAPPA across England and Wales, the review this year of a number of tragic incidents where people have been murdered or seriously injured reminded us of the importance of reviewing performance, improving practice and learning lessons. It is vital that these tasks are undertaken by the probation, police and prison services, as well as by those other agencies that contribute to the assessment and management of offenders. The publication of MAPPA Business Plans by each Area in this year’s annual reports offers a helpful and necessary programme of local development and review and must lead to enhanced practice. It will be essential that this progress is transparent and shared with local communities. In addition to this, however, it is important that no opportunity is missed to consider other measures that will further enhance public safety. That is why we are undertaking the Child Sex Offender Review, to look at how a particular group of offenders, who provoke anxiety for many, are best managed in the community. The review is consulting a wide range of practitioners and key stakeholders including the MAPPA lay advisers, and will report around the end of the year. Finally, in commending this report to you, I want to take the opportunity to thank all those involved locally in working with sexual and violent offenders, or in ensuring that these arrangements are fit for purpose. Where MAPPA is working well it is based on maintaining high professional standards and effective multi-agency collaboration in the delivery of robust risk management plans. While it is not possible to eliminate risk entirely, where all reasonable action is taken the risk of further serious harm can be reduced to a minimum and fewer victims will be exposed to repeat offending. Gerry Sutcliffe MP Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Criminal Justice and Offender Management

Merseyside MAPPA Annual Report 2


John Stafford
Chief Officer – Merseyside Probation Area In 2005/06 the responsible authorities of Probation, Police and Prisons have continued to work together effectively, alongside the Merseyside Criminal Justice Board, to improve arrangements for the protection of the public. Public Protection remains the highest priority for the Probation Service and this year has seen a strengthening of links between the Probation Service on Merseyside and our local prisons to ensure that robust arrangements are in place for those offenders who present the greatest degree of risk. The MAPPA annual report concentrates on that minority of dangerous offenders who pose the greatest risk of repeating offences of violence and sexual abuse. It is an approach based on clear identification, rigorous assessment and intensive interventions and control which has achieved well, ensuring that fewer residents of Merseyside suffer repeat victimisation at the hands of these critical few offenders.

The responsible authorities

Ian Lockwood CBE
Area Manager, HM Prison Service North West This has been a significant year for the Prison Service and its partners, in terms of responding to some high profile offences. I remain convinced that the MAPPA process is an effective strategy in managing the risk presented by sexual and violent offenders. I hope that this report offers assurance that the Prison Service and its key partners are committed to working together, in order to protect the members of the public in Merseyside.

Bernard Hogan-Howe
Chief Constable, Merseyside Police Merseyside Police is a professional and high performing police service. We intend to make it the best in the UK. It will be a service based on quality, and one which, if people had the choice, they would always choose. I am confident that Merseyside Police will, by working with partners and communities, provide the best police service in the UK. We are totally committed to the multi-disciplinary working which is reflected in the now well established MAPPA arrangements with our partners in the Probation and Prison services. We have a newly appointed MAPPA Co-ordinator who is jointly funded by police and probation, which will further enhance the excellent progress made over the past twelve months. The position is co-located within the police Public Protection Unit and has provided a much needed central point of contact between our partners and other agencies to ensure that dangerous individuals continue to be monitored and dealt with effectively under the public protection arrangements. I look forward to a further year of progress towards making Merseyside safer for residents, visitors and investors. Our Total Policing commitment is a Total War on Crime and a Total Care for Victims. MAPPA does both admirably.


3 Merseyside MAPPA Annual Report

What is MAPPA?

MAPPA - (Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements) - is the mechanism by which all the relevant Criminal Justice and partner agencies come together to manage high risk offenders - usually those who have committed violent or sexual offences. While many such offenders will be in custody for very long periods (and may never be released) it has to be faced that some high risk offenders will eventually return to the community. Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) were introduced by the Government in 2000 to minimise the risks posed to the public by sexual and violent offenders in the community, thereby maximising public protection. MAPPA enables Police, Probation and the Prisons, with the committed involvement of partner agencies, to work at their most effective in supervising high-risk cases through cooperation with each other. Strategies are developed for managing offenders in a constructive, practical way that also takes into consideration the legitimate concerns of the community. MAPPA constantly assesses and manages the risks posed by the individuals under its responsibility, through positive action and information shared by the agencies concerned. Through the MAPPA, potentially high-risk offenders are being assessed and robustly managed in the community, and agencies are now working more closely than ever to exchange information in order to manage offenders collaboratively. It is recognised that we can never eliminate the risk posed by certain high-risk offenders, but we can do a huge amount to minimise the risk and protect our communities. As a society we cannot bury our heads in the sand – we have to face up to the fact that there are high-risk offenders in all our communities, and manage the risks they pose to the best of our ability. It should be remembered that only a very small proportion of MAPPA offenders pose high risks, and these are the ones who are referred to the Multi-Agency Public Protection Panels. Of these, only a very small proportion – less than 1% – are charged with further serious offences.

A serious sexual or violent offence is defined as one of the following:
Murder Attempted murder Arson (where there is an attempt to endanger life) Manslaughter Rape Kidnap/Abduction or Attempted Kidnap/Abduction Any other very serious violent or very serious sexual offence Armed robbery (defined as robbery involving a firearm) Assault with a deadly weapon or hostage taking Any other violent or sexual offence where the offender/offence is likely to attract significant media interest, or which raises wider issues of national interest

Merseyside MAPPA Annual Report 4


There are three levels of MAPPA cases, and each case is reviewed regularly throughout the year:
Level 1 Where a single agency, i.e. the Probation Service, can safely manage an individual without the active or significant involvement of other agencies. Level 2 Where the combined forces of at least two agencies are required to manage an individual. Level 3 This is the highest level of risk, reserved for the ‘critical few’ who pose a particular risk to the public, requiring input from a range of agencies. The risks posed by offenders at this level may require senior management to allocate significant resources to manage each individual.

What is MAPPA?

In 2005/6 a total of 194 individuals were managed at either Level 2 or Level 3. Each case was reviewed regularly throughout the year, totalling around 800 meetings. Of that number only one was charged with a new serious offence. In addition, 21 were returned to custody for failing to co-operate to the required standard. In the same period Merseyside Police recorded 970 offenders on the Sex Offender Register of whom 53 were cautioned or charged with a failure to register within required timescales etc. The annual figure will increase year on year, as some offenders will remain on the register for the rest of their natural lives. For local interest, please note that the 970 registrations are in the following police areas (which vary in population size): Liverpool North Liverpool South Wirral Sefton Knowsley St Helens The authority for MAPPA activities was formalised (as a statutory duty) in the Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000. That same Act also brought victim issues into the centre of the criminal justice process, and for the first time gave statutory rights to victims of sexual or violent crime where the offender received a prison sentence of one year or more. 243 150 226 172 72 107

The facts


5 Merseyside MAPPA Annual Report

How does it work

The Criminal Justice Agencies deal with offenders who have been sentenced by the courts. Offenders come from all kinds of backgrounds, and can pose a whole range of issues for the wider community. Some offenders may need sensitive and supportive interventions while others will require highly intrusive and controlling sanctions. The filtering of offenders into the appropriate category is reliant on a complete risk assessment process which analyses the offender's total lifestyle, and determines the risk level they pose in relation to re-offending, or causing serious harm to others. The higher the risk an individual poses, the greater the intervention and intrusion by the relevant agencies. Both the Prison and Probation Services now use a national risk assessment process. This approach offers a single, consistent integrated system to manage an offender from the day of the court sentence, right through to the end of their period of supervision.

A MAPPA comprises four distinct features:
1) 2) 3) 4) the the the the identification of the offenders; sharing of information about them; assessment of the risks the offenders present; and management of those risks.

Contrary to what the media would have us believe, most offenders do not present a risk of serious harm to the public. The MAPPA enables resources and attention to be focused on those who present the highest risks. Information-sharing and joint working between the different agencies is key to its effectiveness. The Level 3 and Level 2 MAPPA meetings may result, for example, in increased police monitoring, special provision for victim protection, the provision of information to employers and schools, and closely supervised and appropriate accommodation.

Merseyside MAPPA Annual Report 6


In addition to senior managers coming together from the various agencies to collectively manage difficult individuals, there is an over-arching group, called the Strategic Management Board (SMB) who meet to ensure best practice is being delivered locally. In 2006/07 each SMB has to work to a Business Plan, which fits within a national Home Office strategy. In Merseyside the SMB has already agreed its Business Plan which will be driven by 9 key targets/activities:

How does it work

1 2 3 4 5 6

To fund, appoint and support a full-time MAPPA Manager/Co-ordinator post. To provide adequate support and training for the 2 Lay Adviser members of the SMB. To prepare and publish an Annual Report, with maximum media coverage. To continue to develop links with other forums which support public protection arrangements. To develop and deliver appropriate training for staff in relevant agencies. To review any MAPPA cases which have been investigated by the Probation Service because they have committed a further serious offence whilst under supervision. To maintain close links with Public Protection Unit Lead Officers; fully utilising the North West Regional Public Protection network. To apply rigorous and relevant monitoring and evaluation methods, to analyse risk thresholds for Level 2 & 3 cases, and monitor agency attendance and delivery on commitments at MAPPA meetings. To review existing protocols to aid the efficient operation of the SMB.

7 8


(The membership of the Merseyside SMB, including the two Lay members, is listed at the end of this report.)


7 Merseyside MAPPA Annual Report

The process of MAPPA what happens next

Imagine the following scenario - you are in a restaurant enjoying a meal with your partner when there is a commotion at the next table. A man is threatening a female and you fear an escalation of violence, which causes you to intervene. At that point the male becomes highly abusive and aggressive which results in a physical assault on you, requiring medical treatment.

What happens next?
The police would attend the incident, take statements etc. and attempt to arrest the offender. Following arrest the offender would be interviewed and the police, together with the Crown Prosecution Service, would then decide whether or not there was sufficient evidence to prosecute. If there was enough evidence, the offender would be charged with an offence (in this case let us imagine it is ‘Wounding’). The offender would then either be bailed to appear at a future court date, or (depending on personal circumstances) be remanded in custody. Eventually the matter would get to court - either Magistrates or Crown. The offender might admit his guilt, or elect for a trial. At the conclusion of the court process, the offender would be either convicted or not. In the event of a conviction the court would, prior to sentence, ask for background reports to be prepared, to build a much fuller picture of the offender. Those reports would look into all the relevant personal details and criminal background of the offender, assess the level of risk that individual poses for the future, and make a recommendation to the court on the most appropriate sentence. The Court however is totally independent, and will pass the sentence seen as most appropriate in the circumstances. For the purposes of this particular scenario, let us assume the individual is sentenced to imprisonment for a two year period. The offender would then be sent to his nearest local prison to start his sentence.

Any prison sentence has (with a few exceptions) two component parts:
the custodial period actually spent in custody, which is half the period of the sentence passed by the court, and


the second half of the sentence which sees the offender released back into the community, but under strict supervision by the Probation Service.


As the victim in this offence, you would be approached by the Probation Service after sentence, to see if you wanted to be kept informed about the prisoner's progress through the terms of imprisonment, and most particularly to comment on potential release arrangements. For example, the prison Licence could contain an additional condition for the offender not to make any contact with you - or to prohibit him from living in a certain geographical location. Once the offender is sent to prison - Prison Service and Probation Service colleagues work together to ensure the offence is addressed in an appropriate way, together with any previous record that is relevant. This could be by way of attending specific programmes or groupwork.
Merseyside MAPPA Annual Report 8


During the custodial sentence (and well before any release), the prisoner may be identified as having a sustained track record of violence, with attitudes that have not improved during the custodial sentence, indicating therefore that a release to the community could cause the public to be at undue risk. If the above occurred, the MAPPA process would be instigated three months prior to release, and all the relevant agencies would meet to discuss the individual concerned. The MAPPA meeting (perhaps Level 2 or Level 3, depending on the risks) would share all relevant information on past history and current circumstances, and complete any gaps of information that might appear. The meeting would then decide on how best to manage the individual once released from prison, to minimise the risk to other parties. The agency representatives coming together under MAPPA may meet on numerous occasions, and would review the progress of the individual throughout the licence period. For offences of sex or violence, the victim would be involved in the total process.

The process of MAPPA what happens next

There are three categories of MAPPA offender:
(i) Registered Sex Offenders (RSOs), that is those sexual offenders required to register under the terms of the Sex Offender Act (1997) and its amendments; (ii) violent offenders and those sexual offenders who are not required to register; and (iii) any other offender who, because of the offences committed by them (wherever they have been committed) are considered to pose a risk of serious harm to the public. All offenders who have served time in prison for sexual or violent offences are automatically subject to MAPPA.

How do you define a MAPPA offender?

Which agencies are involved in the MAPPA?
As a result of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 the Responsible Authority in each of the 42 Areas of England and Wales now comprises the Police, Probation and Prison Services. In addition, a range of other agencies have also been placed under a ‘duty to co-operate’ with the Responsible Authority. These include; • Local Authorities/Social Services • Primary Care Trusts, other NHS Trusts and Strategic Health Authorities • Jobcentre Plus • Youth Offending Teams • Registered Social Landlords who accommodate MAPPA offenders • Local Housing Authorities • Local Children’s Services • Electronic Monitoring providers Such arrangements have helped ensure that the stringent monitoring and management of the individuals in their care is successful.


9 Merseyside MAPPA Annual Report

Case study one, Liam

Liam, aged 27 has a long history of domestic violence offences. He has three children, who were taken into care, and has been living with their mother, Sue (27). His offending history included numerous serious assaults and false imprisonments against Sue, none of which had resulted in a conviction. Liam was risk assessed as Level 2 MAPP, bordering Level 3. The couple were assessed as having moderate learning difficulties.


Sue was a vulnerable woman, whom Liam dominated and controlled. He withdrew money and food for days on end, and punished her with beatings. In September 2005 Sue reported Liam to the police following another serious assault. Agencies were extremely concerned for Sue’s welfare. A MAPPA meeting was held at the local Probation Office, where it was agreed that if he was not located, Liam would be reassessed as a Level 3 case. After liaison with area police, Liam was picked up, charged and remanded in custody. Mental Health officials were alerted, and Liam was assessed under Sec.35 of the Mental Health Act 1983. The assessment concluded that although he was suffering “significant mental impairment”, Liam understood the seriousness of what he had done. Sue disclosed a catalogue of previous offences by Liam to the police. Liam maintained his innocence, and was remanded in custody awaiting trial. Mental Health officials provided support to Sue during this period, as did probation staff and police. The CPS were also regularly consulted throughout the process. Liam was eventually sentenced to 41/2 years imprisonment, with a 10 year licence period, and will be monitored extensively by the agencies on his release.

Case study two, John

John (33) had amassed a number of previous criminal convictions which were escalating in seriousness, due to his addiction to alcohol. He would become violent when under the influence of drink and lash out at his partner, his family or even members of the public. This led John to be convicted of an offence of wounding when he seriously injured someone he started arguing with at a bus stop. Because of his previous convictions and his escalation in violence, a Crown Court Judge sentenced him to 5 years imprisonment.


From the moment John arrived in prison, the Prison and Probation Services immediately began addressing his reasons for offending, and introduced the required interventions. Within the prison setting John had sufficient insight to see how his lifestyle was deteriorating, and was keen (within that controlled environment) to cooperate with the relevant agencies. For the first time he recognised that he had a drink problem. During his prison sentence John's elderly mother died and he was not allowed to attend the funeral. This was traumatic for him, as his elderly mother was his only remaining family member - his own marriage had collapsed many years previously due to his alcohol abuse. At first John would blame everybody but himself for his problems, and saw drink as a safe haven where he could retreat from the realities of life. He was challenged about his irresponsible behaviour, and eventually completed an alcohol awareness course which offered him various strategies to avoid binge drinking. Prior to his release from prison, John's case triggered a MAPPP Level 2 meeting to be called - the main concern being John's repeated violence towards his family and strangers. While his progress in prison had been encouraging in many ways, living in the community would provide easy access to alcohol. The concern was that further serious violence could occur as a result. John was released on a prison licence, with extra conditions for him to reside at a Probation Hostel on a curfew, and be tested for any alcohol intake on a daily basis. Initially John found the Hostel regime very restrictive and intrusive, but after a few warnings he did settle down and to date has made good, steady progress.

Merseyside MAPPA Annual Report 10


John has now been out of prison for almost 12 months, and has not reoffended during that time. Plans have now been drawn up for him to move on from the Probation Hostel to semi-supervised accommodation in the community. He is also keen to gain employment in garden landscaping. John has fulfilled the conditions of his licence, keeps his appointments with his probation officer, and attends in-depth oneto-one sessions with an alcohol counsellor. John has found his transition from being a dangerous alcoholic to a useful member of the community a difficult journey. On occasions he has stumbled - although with the appropriate support and oversight he has now started to establish a completely different lifestyle. John will always remain vulnerable, and knows that if he receives a further conviction for a serious violent offence the sentence passed by the Court will be extremely severe. John has already spent 10 years of his life in custody, and has no wish to add to this, but all the Criminal Justice professionals remain alert, as nothing is taken for granted.

A 12 year old girl was raped by a man she had befriended. The family were offered the support of the Victim Information Service, which they accepted. The following are comments made by the victim’s mother: “I feel I have benefited greatly from the Victim Information Service (VIS). I felt I was kept in the dark about events, and what was happening with the offender. It gave me an insight into the perpetrator and the sentencing he received. I was feeling very isolated and didn’t know where to go to get this information. I was told by the VIS everything about the sentencing, which beforehand I know nothing of (ie. Schedule One Offender, Sex Offender Register etc.) and knowing that my daughter and I can have an input into the process of his release (Licence Conditions) and be kept informed of this has been a relief and welcoming. “Having someone there to turn to, and a contact person I knew I could speak to, as and when needed has been a huge support to me and my family. “Licence conditions for me has meant I finally felt I had a say in the whole process, and that I was able to offer my daughter some protection (exclusion zone from the area). I also felt I was being listened to, and what happened to my daughter and my family as a whole did matter!”


A victim’s perspective

A young woman was working in an off-licence, when she was the victim of a robbery by a man claiming to be armed with a gun. The man subsequently pleaded guilty to the offence, and was sentenced to five years custody. The Victim Information Service made contact, and the woman commented: “Now I know that he pleaded guilty and is in prison, I am really relieved. I can begin to try and carry on life as normal now. I have since given up my job, as I am not ready to face the general public yet, but hope I will get my confidence back again. I think your service is vital, I felt I was in ‘limbo’, not knowing anything. I was beginning to think that no-one cared, but now I know that there is someone who thinks I do matter – I can’t thank you enough.”



11 Merseyside MAPPA Annual Report

A lay member’s perspective

My first year as a Lay Advisor has been illuminating, and the training I have received in preparation for becoming a Lay Advisor was excellent, as is my ongoing local training. I have found all MAPPA members I have met to be welcoming and open about their roles and organisations. The most important point I have taken from my first year was the other side of the story regarding Public Protection. The ordinary man in the street relies on the media for information, and therefore may not be receiving a balanced view. Michael Nickson MAPPA Lay Member

If MAPPA is to forge ahead in a positive light and continue to flourish in its environment, then the Government needs to ‘listen effectively’ to MAPPA and have a sustainable, ongoing, financial budget to enable the professional bodies that comprise it to do their jobs respectively, without fear of financial strangleholds, thus stifling the good work they are trying to maintain. Communication, with evaluation and feedback and accountability are crucial, and needs to be ongoing. Jean Harrison MAPPA Lay Member


The management of high risk offenders is not an exact science, but one that on a day-to-day basis helps ensure a safe and secure environment in which to live. The introduction of MAPPA to our society has meant that we can now monitor and manage high risk offenders as never before, in identified locations, placing stringent demands on their activities and liberty. This annual report has attempted to explain current arrangements that are in place to bring all the relevant agencies/organisations together to jointly manage such offenders. These are the ones that tend to hit the headlines and can quickly come to seem the norm, when in fact this is far from the case. This report includes all the latest statistical information, and gives actual examples of high risk offenders who have been safely managed within the community. We hope this report has reassured you, whilst recognising there will always be concerns and worries, especially by individuals who feel particularly vulnerable. The SMB members (see page 14) would welcome any comments or queries concerning the content of this report.

Should you wish to make contact please do so via:Terry Eastham - SMB Co-Chair National Probation Service (Merseyside Area HQ) 4th Floor, South Wing, Burlington House Crosby Road North Waterloo Liverpool L22 0PJ Tel: 0151-920 9201 Ext 261

Merseyside MAPPA Annual Report 12


Category 1 – MAPPA Offenders: Registered Sex Offenders (RSOs)
i. ia. ii. The number of registered sex offenders in Merseyside on 31 March 2006: The number of registered sex offenders per 100,000 head of population: The number of sex offenders having a registration requirement who were either cautioned or convicted for breaches of the requirement, between 1 April 2005 and 31 March 2006: The number of a) Sexual Offences Prevention Orders (SOPOs) applied for: b) Interim Sexual Offences Prevention Orders granted: c) Full Sexual Offences Prevention Orders imposed: between 1 April 2005 and 31 March 2006 The number of a) Notification Orders applied for: b) Interim Notification Orders granted: c) Full Notification Orders imposed: between 1 April 2005 and 31 March 2006 The number of Foreign Travel Orders a) Applied for: b) Imposed: between 1 April 2005 and 31 March 2006 970 67

Statistical information



27 14 21


1 0 1


0 0

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 the Merseyside area between 1 April 2005 and 31 March 2006:


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)) living in the Merseyside area between 1 April 2005 and 31 March 2006:


Category 4 – Offenders managed through Level 3 (MAPPP) and Level 2 (Local Inter-Agency Management)
viii. The number of MAPPA offenders in each of the three categories who have been managed through MAPPP (Level 3) and through Local Inter-Agency Management (Level 2) between 1 April 2005 and 31 March 2006: a) b) c) Registered Sex Offenders Violent and Other Offenders Other Offenders Level 2 Level 3

65 70 14 149

15 22 8 45 Level 2&3 21 0 1

Total viiii. The number of MAPPA offenders between 1 April 2005 and 31 March 2006, managed at Levels 2 or 3 that were a) b) c) Returned to custody for breach of Licence Returned to custody for beach of a restraining order or sexual offences prevention order Charged with a serious sexual or violent offence


13 Merseyside MAPPA Annual Report

Strategic management board (SMB)

Responsible Authorities
Terry Eastham Assistant Chief Officer National Probation Service, Merseyside Patricia Gallan Assistant Chief Constable Merseyside Police Tony Doherty Chief Superintendent Merseyside Police Mark Livingston Risk Management Co-ordinator NW Prison Service

Agencies with a duty to co-operate
Charlie Barker Director of Social Services Sefton Social Services Howard Cooper Director of Children’s Services Wirral Authority Steve Pimblett Area Manager Wirral Youth Offending Team Dr Stephen Noblett Head of Services Mersey Forensic Psychiatry Services Marian Bullivant Deputy Director of Nursing Mersey Care Trust Gaynor Bell Chair Person SAMM (Merseyside) John Sandwell Chief Executive SAMM (Merseyside) Marjorie Webster Clinical Management South Knowsley Community Mental Health Team Martin Decker Crown Prosecutor Crown Prosecution Service Carol Chalmers Chief Executive Victim Support & Witness Services Merseyside

Lay members
Jean Harrison Lay Advisor Michael Nickson Lay Advisor

Merseyside MAPPA Annual Report 14