Protecting the Public in Partnership

Multi-Agency arrangements for managing sexual, violent and other dangerous offenders
Annual Report 2002–2003
I I I

Metropolitan Police Service City of London Police London Probation Area

What does the work involve?
This report contains information about the themes represented as pieces of a jigsaw in the map of London below.

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

Contents
Alternative languages This document, how to contact us, further copies Foreword – Paul Goggins – Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Community and Custodian Provision The National Picture Setting the Scene for London Metropolitan Police Service “Mission Vision & Values” London Probation Area “Pledge to Londoners” London Probation Area Corporate Plan 2001/2004 Metropolitan Police Service Priorities 2002/2003 City of London Police Mission Statement and Priorities Summary Who We Are – Summary of roles and responsibilities What We Do – Outline of the arrangements made Where Are They? – Use of Disclosure Crimestoppers Monitoring Progress – The Strategic Management of MAPPA Working With Victims Victim Support Services Appendix A – Statistical Information Commentary on Statistics 11 12 13 14 15 – 17 18 – 21 22 – 27 27 – 29 29 30 – 31 32 – 33 34 35 36 2–4 5 6 7–8 9 – 10

1

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

Three locally set initiatives are not relevant to To keep crime levels as low as this report. possible we will focus on six priorities during 2002/2003. Three of these are This isMinisterial report of the Metropolitan Police Service national a joint Priorities and are set by the City of London are : (MPS), Home Secretary. They Police (CoLP) and London

Alternative languages

Probation Area (LPA) setting out how we manage to help create safe communities by reducing crime, anti-social sex offenders and other dangerous the risks posed by behaviour and disorder through effective offendersworking, including reducing partnership in London.
I

It to increasesecond such report, covering the period is the the number of offences for which offenders, and particularly April 2002 to March 2003 and has been produced persistent offenders, are caught and inbrought to justice, inwith Section 67(4) of the Criminal Justice accordance partnership with & other criminal justice agencies 2000. Courts Services Act
I I

availability and use of Class A drugs;

These priorities will be addressed specifically by

2

Inour partnership approachdescribing details of the arrangements addition to through our Crime and Disorder Strategy. for reduce the fearit provides some statistical data and London, of crime in all To sections the community contactofpoints. and in
I

particular to increase the trust and

It confidence in policing report because LPA incorporates the is a tripartite amongst minority ethnic communities. Cityaim of London, whilst the MPS and City of London of the City of London Police Diversity The Strategy “ To two ethical high quality Police isare provide andistinct police services.
I

policing service to the whole community of the

A City of London, which treats all people without is available in this sized summary of the report prejudice and respects the right of individuals to type by in their abilities,to either of the addresses on page 4. be different writing culture, values and
beliefs”This is directed at building trust and confidence within minority groups. The Force is driving forward its Diversity Agenda through training and the implementation of Force-Wide initiatives.

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

Alternative languages

3

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

4

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

This document
This is a joint report of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS), City of London Police (CoLP) and London Probation Area (LPA) setting out how we manage the risks posed by sex offenders and other dangerous offenders in London. It is the second such report covering the period April 2002 to March 2003 and has been produced in accordance with s. 67(4) of the Criminal Justice & Courts Services Act 2000. In addition to describing details of the arrangements for London, it provides some statistical data and contact points. It is a tripartite report because the LPA incorporates the City of London whilst the MPS and City of London Police are two distinct police services.

How to contact us
We welcome feedback and if you have any comments to make about the report they should be sent to either of the addresses below. Marketing and Communications, London Probation Area Headquarters, 71-73 Great Peter Street, London, SW1P 2BN Tel: 020 7222 5656 Metropolitan Police Service MAPPPs Co-ordination & Support Unit (Operation Jigsaw), New Scotland Yard, Room 1024, Broadway, London, SW1H 0BG Tel: 020 7230 4919 Alternatively make a request by e-mail to: lpa@london.probation.gsx.gov.uk new.scotland.yard@met.police.uk

5

Further copies
Copies of the report can be obtained from either the MPS or LPA internet site at www.met.police.uk or www.probation-london.org.uk. The report can also be seen at your local main library or main police station. You may also write to us requesting a copy at either of the addresses above.

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

Foreword
By Paul Goggins, Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Community and Custodial provision in the Home Office
As the recently appointed Minister with responsibility for the MAPPA, I am pleased to introduce this, the second, annual MAPPA report. It is clear that in the last year (2002/3) the multi-agency public protection arrangements (the MAPPA) continued to play an important role in what remains one of this government’s highest priorities – the protection of the public from dangerous offenders. As someone with many years experience of working in the field of child protection, I am particularly impressed by the important contribution the MAPPA are making to strengthen collaboration between agencies at a local level where the focus is on the dangerous offender. These improvements must, however, impact on the protection of children. As the tragic death of Victoria Climbie showed, an effective multiagency partnership is crucial and the MAPPA are an important element. To ensure greater consistency in the MAPPA across the 42 Areas of England and Wales, and to prepare for the implementation of measures contained in the Criminal Justice Bill, we published the MAPPA Guidance in April. Building on good practice, that Guidance clarified the structure of the operational arrangements as well

6

as the importance of formal review and monitoring – of which this annual report is a vital part. The Criminal Justice Bill will strengthen the MAPPA in two ways. First, it will make the involvement of other agencies part of the statutory framework. Second, it will introduce the involvement of lay people – those unconnected with day-to-day operation of the MAPPA – in reviewing and monitoring the MAPPA. Annual reports and this new lay involvement show the Government’s commitment to explaining how the often sensitive and complex work of public protection is undertaken. The Government is also strengthening the protection of the public with other measures in the Criminal Justice Bill. They include new sentences for dangerous offenders to prevent their release if they continue to be dangerous. Additionally, the Sexual Offences Bill will tighten up sex offender registration, introduce a new offence of ‘grooming’, and enable sex offender orders to be imposed on violent offenders who pose a risk of causing serious sexual harm – thereby extending sex offender registration to them. I commend this report to you and congratulate all the agencies and individuals who have contributed to the achievement of the MAPPA locally in your local Area. Paul Goggins

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

The National Picture
This section of the report draws attention to the wider context of the operation and development of the Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (the MAPPA).
The most important work undertaken within the MAPPA is done locally, led by the police and probation – who act jointly as the ‘Responsible Authority’ in your Area – and in each of the 42 Areas of England and Wales. The experience and good practice upon which this work is based began in the 1990s – most significantly as a result of the closer working relationship required by the Sex Offender Act (1997). The Criminal Justice and Courts Services Act (2000) formalised that relationship and built on the existing experience by requiring the police and probation services to establish arrangements (the MAPPA) for assessing and managing the risks posed by sexual and violent offenders. The Act also required the Responsible Authority to publish an annual report on the operation of those arrangements. This report, covering April 2002 to March 2003, is the second annual report.

The importance of partnership
Key to the development of the MAPPA in the past year has been the closer involvement of other agencies, such as housing, health and social services, working alongside police and probation. The truly multi-agency nature of the MAPPA and the collaboration which underpins it is to be strengthened further by the Criminal Justice Bill. The Bill will place a ‘duty to co-operate’ on a wide range of organisations including local health authorities and trusts; housing authorities and registered social landlords; social services departments; Jobcentres; Youth Offending Teams; and local education authorities. In addition, the Prison Service will join the police and probation services and become part of the MAPPA ‘Responsible Authority’. Supporting and co-ordinating the development of the MAPPA throughout the 42 Areas of England and Wales, is the National Probation Directorate’s Public Protection Unit (PPU). This Unit acts as a central point for advice and, increasingly, involvement in the management of difficult cases. These include, for example, UK citizens who have committed serious offences abroad and return to this country without anywhere to live. The Unit is also able to provide financial support when the risk management plans make exceptional demands upon local resources.

7

Involving the public
MAPPA developments in the next 18 months will also include the appointment by the Home Secretary of two ‘lay advisers’ to each Area. The eight Areas of England and Wales which have been piloting these

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

arrangements since January (Cumbria, Greater Manchester, Durham, South Wales, Dorset, Hampshire, Surrey and West Midlands) report that they add real value. Lay advisers will contribute to the review and monitoring of the MAPPA which is undertaken by each Area’s Strategic Management Board – the work of which you can read more in this report. The purpose of appointing ‘lay advisers’ is to ensure that communities understand more of what is done to protect them and that those involved professionally with the MAPPA are aware of the views of the community. The lay advisers will not ‘represent’ the community in the way, for example, that local councillors do, nor will they be involved in operational decision-making. And, given the sensitivity of much of what the MAPPA does, especially with the few offenders who pose a very high risk of serious harm to the public, it is not practicable for the general public to be involved. Lay advisers will, however, ensure an appropriate and a practical level of community involvement.

MAPPA Offenders
This year the annual report provides a more detailed breakdown of the number of sexual and violent offenders who are covered by the MAPPA in your Area. As last year, the figures include the number of registered sex offenders. Because sex offender registration is for a minimum of 5 years (and generally for much longer) the figures are cumulative. This is why they have increased – by 16 per cent in England and Wales. Only a very small proportion (about six per cent throughout England and Wales) are considered to pose such a high risk or management difficulty that they are referred to the highest level of the MAPPA – the Multi-Agency

8

Public Protection Panels (the MAPPP). Figures alone do not, of course, tell the whole story. The anonymised case studies illustrate the practical work of the MAPPA, and demonstrate the preventive action which can be taken. Prior to the MAPPA, action of this kind was mainly taken by one agency alone, with the effect that on occasion offenders’ behaviour which might have triggered preventative action went unnoticed. The multi-agency approach of the MAPPA helps ensure that if an offender does breach the condition of the licence under which they were released from prison or a court order prohibiting certain activities, then action to enforce the condition or order and protect the public can be taken more swiftly. If you are interested in reading the reports of other Areas, they will be published on the National Probation Service’s website www.probation.homeoffice.gov.uk (under the public protection section).

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

Setting the London Scene
We are pleased to present this report on behalf of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS), the City of London Police (CoLP) and the London Probation Area (LPA). It is produced in accordance with s.67(4) of the Criminal Justice & Courts Services Act 2000 (CJCSA) and details our work together protecting the public in London and improving our services to victims. This report seeks to represent the range of activity taking place every day across London, whilst focussing on some specific activity and significant areas of development.
This is the second year of the statutory provision of MAPPA nationally. As we laid out in our report last year, we have followed the initial guidance produced by the Home Office for the establishing of these arrangements. As anticipated, police and probation working at the ‘coal face’ of service delivery in the Boroughs have sought to continue to refine their procedures, building on developing good practice and improving working relationships. We are confident that these improvements to public protection are taking place and will continue to develop. But, sadly, horrendous events, beyond the comprehension of most people, are never far away. This year we have suffered the terrible murders in Soham whilst in London there has been the Climbie Inquiry and the convictions for the equally horrific murder of Analee Walker in Newham. Such tragedies serve to remind us of the importance of our role in trying to manage risks and prevent grave crimes. Yet the notorious cases we have referred to (all involving children) represent but a tiny proportion of serious offending which the MAPPA have been established to seek to prevent. We strive to identify the most dangerous offenders and prioritise our resources to deal with them. But there is the inevitable realisation that offenders assessed as ‘low risk’ of reoffending often actually do and sometimes in a serious way. To compound the enormity of the task, recent research has indicated that some 32% of all murders and 36% of serious sexual offences are committed by people who have no criminal record at all. That does not necessarily mean that there has been no previous offending, but perhaps that it has not been identified. This is why we need the help and support of other agencies and of communities in bringing offending behaviour to our notice. Information sharing, not just between agencies, but between communities and relevant agencies, is essential to ensure an appropriate risk assessment is made. Only then can appropriate action be considered. The examples highlighted in the report demonstrate just how effective proper multiagency working can be in protecting the public.

9

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

We are conscious that during 2003/4 the Police and Probation Inspectorates will be examining MAPPA nationally and in some parts of London. This presents an opportunity for us to ensure that we are doing the best we can to ensure that our actions are valid and soundly judged, and that the public in London are getting the best protection possible from these dangerous offenders. We welcome this opportunity to provide you, the public, with an insight and understanding of the public protection arrangements in London. John Yates Commander Metropolitan Police Service John Powls Chief Officer London Probation Area September 2003 James Hart QPM Commissioner City of London Police

10

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

MPS Mission, Vision and Values
Making London safe for all the people we serve
Our Mission To make places safer To cut crime and the fear of crime To uphold the law Our Values To treat everyone fairly To be open and honest To work in partnership To change to improve Our Vision To make London the safest major city in the world

London Probation Area
Our Pledge to Londoners
The protection of the public The reduction of re-offending The proper punishment of offenders The rehabilitation of offenders The proper care of victims

11

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

London Probation Area – Corporate Plan 2001/2004
Probation Priority
To contribute to public protection and the saftey of London communities

Summary of Objectives
This will be achieved by: Reducing reconviction rates by 5% compared to the predicted rate. Ensuring that risk assessments and management plans are completed in all community orders and bail cases and at least 90% of all resettlement cases.

To reduce re-offending

This will be achieved by: Developing with the Metropolitan Police a strategy for targeting and intervention with persistent offenders. Increasing the number of offenders on accredited

12

programmes, particularly those addressing sex offending, domestic violence and aggression increasing the number of hostel places for offenders. To ensure offenders are aware of the effects of crime on victims This will be achieved by: Contacting victims in cases where the offender is sentenced to 12 months imprisonment or more. To tackle youth offending This will be achieved by: Contributing to Youth Offending Teams in London.

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

Metropolitan Police Service – Priorities for 2002/2003
Policing priority
To increase the security of the Capital against terrorism

Summary of objectives
This will be achieved by: Preventing and disrupting terrorist activity. Improving the response to suspected and actual terrorist incidents.

To create safer communities for Londoners

This will be achieved by: Working with partners to reduce crime in the most troubled areas in each neighbourhood. Reducing violent armed criminality. Reducing the fear of crime. Increasing public satisfaction with visible police presence.

13

To improve the police response to vulnerable victims

This will be achieved by: Improving child protection procedures. Improving the investigation and victim satisfaction of racist incidents and racist crimes. improving the investigation of homophobic crimes. Improving the investigation of domestic violence. Improving victim care and investigation in cases of rape.

To tackle youth offending

This will be achieved by: Diverting youths away from crime through enhanced multi-agency activity. Reducing re-offending by persistent young offenders.

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

City of London Police – Our Mission Statement
We will provide a high quality police service in the City of London and work with the community, other organisations and agencies, to promote a safe, peaceful and crime-free environment.
Co-operation, consultation and partnership are consistent themes of this mission statement.

Our Priorities 2002/2003
To keep crime levels as low as possible we will focus on six priorities during 2002/2003. Three of these are national Ministerial Priorities and are set by the Home Secretary. They are:
I I

To reduce the fear of crime in all sections of the community and in particular to increase the trust and confidence in policing amongst minority ethnic communities

14

➜ The aim of the City of London Police Diversity
Strategy is “To provide an ethical high quality policing service to the whole community of the City of London, which treats all people without prejudice and respects the right of individuals to be different in their abilities, culture, values and beliefs” This is directed at building trust and confidence within minority groups. The Force is driving forward its Diversity Agenda through training and the implementation of Force-Wide initiatives. Three locally set initiatives are not relevant to this report.

to help create safe communities by reducing crime, anti-social behaviour and disorder through effective partnership working, including reducing availability and use of Class A drugs;

I

to increase the number of offences for which offenders, and particularly persistent offenders, are caught and brought to justice, in partnership with other criminal justice agencies

➜ These priorities will be addressed specifically
by our partnership approach through our Crime and Disorder Strategy.

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

Summary
This report sets out how the Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) operate in London. The origins of MAPPA
Protecting the public is greatly important and various agencies have been working together for a number of years in London to manage the risks posed by violent and sexual offenders. The implementation of the Sex Offenders Act in 1997 was a milestone in inter-agency working, leading to the police and probation services taking responsibility for the assessment and management of registered sex offenders. We have built on those arrangements over the intervening years and each London borough now has multi-agency protocols agreed by police, probation, health, housing and social services (to varying degrees across the boroughs) for the sharing of information, assessment and management of sex offenders and other potentially dangerous offenders. This document will provide further details of how the arrangements operate in London and gives contact points for any additional enquiries. The Criminal Justice and Courts Services Act 2000 (which was implemented on April 1st 2001) introduced a statutory duty on the police and probation to make joint arrangements for the assessment and management of, not only registered sex offenders, but also certain violent, potentially dangerous and other sex offenders. Police and probation became the Responsible Authority (RA), with this responsibility vested jointly in the Chief Officer of the newly established London Probation Area (LPA) and the Commissioners of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) and City of London Police (CoLP). ‘Potentially dangerous offenders’, often referred to as PDOs, are those deemed by the RA to present a risk of causing serious harm, whether physical or psychological, to any person. ‘Serious harm’ is accepted as meaning life threatening or harm from which recovery is unlikely. We cannot possibly hope to manage all those offenders who have committed and may again commit ‘any’ sexual or violent offence. Furthermore, as will become apparent, we cannot possibly hope to eliminate all risk and all offending (however much we would aspire to). Each of the 32 London boroughs subsequently established a Multi-Agency Public Protection Panel (MAPPP) involving the statutory agencies (police and probation) as core members. (The MAPPP for the City of London incorporates the same agency members as Tower Hamlets). The MPS and LPA in each borough have dedicated teams of staff in Public Protection Units (PPUs) and Public Protection Teams who mostly work with these offenders. Increasingly these teams are working more closely together (see LPA restructuring below).

15

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

Principles underpinning public protection
The management of offenders posing a high risk of serious harm to the public is one of the most complex and difficult tasks currently facing agencies within the MAPPA. Once we have identified these offenders a full assessment of their risk is made. The LPA is currently implementing the use of a nationally approved assessment tool, OASys (Offender Assessment System). This forms the basis of a plan of action to manage the identified risks. These plans must include action to monitor the behaviour and attitudes of the offender and to intervene in their life in order to control and minimise the risk of serious harm. This has to be carried out in a lawful manner, according to Human Rights Principles so that an individual’s right to privacy is balanced against the need to intervene in the offender’s life in order to protect potential victims and to prevent re-victimisation. The plans need to relate to the risk situation drawing upon information from all agencies involved. The nature and severity of the risks posed and the factors that may trigger further offending (e.g. drug/alcohol abuse, accommodation or domestic changes) are important in determining which risk management options are appropriate. Examples of effective approaches include offence based programmes such as Sex Offender Treatment Programmes and the Aggression Replacement Training (ART) programme. These programmes also emphasise the offender’s need to develop internal controls over their behaviour. However, many of the ways in which we manage risk involves external controls, e.g. when someone is released from prison there may be a condition in their licence which prohibits them

from a particular activity associated with their offending behaviour. This could include prohibiting unsupervised contact with children, or geographical exclusion zones to protect victims. Any breach of such conditions could result in the offender being returned to prison. In all of these measures collaborative working between agencies is of crucial importance as demonstrated in the case studies later in this report.

Significant operational activity
ViSOR Project
The MPS and LPA have staff working closely with the Police Information and Technology Organisation (PITO) in the development and planned implementation of a national sex and violent offenders database, called ViSOR (Violent and Sex Offenders Register). It is evident that having such a national system for recording and storing data in a standardised way will improve procedures for managing offenders; the database will also be used to assist police in investigating crimes and targeting specific offenders. This database is being piloted in one London borough (Wandsworth) as well as in Durham, where early indications are that an added benefit will be ready access to a far greater amount of information to identify best practice and assist our management processes. So, for example, when a police force is investigating a murder, they will require information about potential suspects. Whilst the sex offender register was used to identify Sarah Payne’s killer, Ray Whiting, this database will inevitably speed up the process of identifying suspects in many investigations. This is a very exciting project because it will undoubtedly enhance public protection.

16

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

Hostels
Some of the offenders who fall under the MAPPA umbrella are housed in probation hostels. It is the nature of London that hostels are often in the heart of residential communities and we understand that communities do have concerns about placing hostels in their neighbourhood. The police and probation services greatly appreciate the value of hostels in managing offenders who need close supervision and monitoring. Last year the LPA reopened a hostel in south London: this hostel has close links with its neighbours and holds regular meetings where local people can voice any concerns they have. Police are closely involved with the hostel management and regularly attend the premises. The hostel continues to operate in this community without any significant difficulties. The LPA are in the process of developing more co-ordinated and balanced services for hostel provision across London.

Training
Over the year a number of events have taken place to help our staff understand the developments in MAPPA, appreciate each other’s different cultures and share good ideas and practice. These include a conference for key personnel in the police, probation and prison services to encourage wider sharing of information. This was organised in preparation for the working as our statutory partners as proposed in the Criminal Justice Bill (see The National Picture).

Central Co-ordination & Support
It is crucial in an area the size of London that efforts are made to ensure consistency and to promote best practice in this field of work. In last year’s report we stated that we would be increasing the central support and co-ordination function. Senior managers have been appointed and other staff have been selected to take up additional posts from April 2003.

LPA restructuring and co-located working practices
At the same time as the statutory duty to jointly manage these offenders was created, the LPA has been restructuring following the bringing together of five former London services. The new design for the LPA prioritises resources according to the risk to the public. The need to jointly undertake public protection has over the year stimulated the groundbreaking concept of co-locating police and probation in the same building. This is happening in an increasing number of boroughs, and has led to greatly improved communication and sharing of information. We expect this drive towards co-location to continue over the following year.

17

National MAPPA Guidance
At the end of the year we commenced a series of seminars for key police and probation staff to introduce the new MAPPA Guidance Manual introduced by the National Probation Directorate on April 1st 2003. Some of our staff assisted in the production of this guidance. This is an important document, as it sets out procedures to be adopted by agencies across the country in delivering this work. Our staff will be adapting their procedures over the coming months to fall in line with this new guidance, and will introduce it to their MAPPA partner agencies locally. You can obtain this guidance from your local PPU or probation contact or on the Internet at www.probation.homeoffice.gov.uk

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

Who we are – Summary of roles and responsibilities
The most effective work to protect the public from these offenders happens when other relevant agencies, with their various functions within the community, also play their part. The MAPPA in London have, to varying degrees, engaged with the following agencies, in addition to the statutory partners of police and probation.
Social Services; Health Services (predominantly Mental Health and Forensic Psychiatric Services); Housing (Local Authority/Voluntary/Independent housing providers); Prisons (through police Prison Intelligence Officers and Prison Probation Dept.); Youth Offender Teams (YOTS); Education and Victim Support Services. We summarise below the roles of some of the agencies performing key functions in MAPPA. following the Sex Offenders Act 1997. The primary role is dealing with the registration of sex offenders who have been convicted of relevant sexual offences and told by the Court they are required to register. They also deal with offenders when they are released from prison for such offences, and increasingly deal with violent offenders and other persons who are referred to them as likely to cause serious harm. Their role is to gather all available intelligence about a person, not just from police files, but by making contact with the other agencies involved in MAPPA to establish what is known about the offender. They work very closely with probation. More of their work can be found in the section What We Do – The Operation of MAPPA.

18

Probation service
The probation service in London deals with offenders from first court appearances to completion of sentences, with the aim of reducing re-offending and protecting the public.
I

LPA work to national standards and are accountable to the Home Office.

Police service
The primary objective of an efficient police service is the prevention and detection of crime. Clearly public protection falls within that remit, and the MPS currently employs a total of about 100 police staff in Public Protection Units across London. These officers work exclusively in managing the offenders under this legislation. They grew out of the initial Sex Offender Registration Units which were formed
I I

LPA work in the courts, in prisons and in the community. In the criminal courts, we provide expert advice on sentencing options. LPA work with prisoners during sentence and after release. In the community, staff supervise offenders sentenced to community punishment, community rehabilitation or community

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

punishment and rehabilitation orders. Within each borough specific teams manage offenders according to the risk that they present. Those assessed as high risk are predominantly dealt with by Public Protection Teams, who have carefully controlled workloads. Staff are specifically skilled in this area of work.
I

their families, older people, disabled people and those with mental health needs. The services promote safety and welfare which balances the needs and wishes of individuals with the safety of the wider community. Social services have wide ranging experience gathered over many years of working together within the Area Child Protection Committees (ACPC) which operate across London. There are clear links between the work of the ACPC and the MAPPA. A social services and/or police Child Protection Unit (CPU) member is involved in local MAPPA and panel meetings. SSD make a significant contribution to risk assessment and monitoring of children in the following ways:
I

Probation staff challenge offenders' behaviour and attitudes to achieve real change in people's lives. The central aim is to protect the general public. We make careful assessments of risk to the public and work closely with other organisations to prevent reoffending.

I I

We liaise with victims of serious crimes. Offenders who do not keep to the terms of their orders, including attending appointments and courses, are returned to the courts and risk being sentenced to prison.

Information sharing within MAPPA over concerns about potential victims or offender’s behaviour.

I

Ensuring that any change of circumstances which increase the likelihood of re-offending are reported by specialist child protection staff.

More information about probation work can be found in the case studies in the section entitled ‘What We Do – The Operation of MAPPA’.
I

19

Managing the child protection register and case conferences, aimed at providing support for children at risk of significant harm.

Social Services Departments
The key role and responsibilities of social services departments (SSD) is to provide services to vulnerable individuals, both adults and children, and to protect them from significant harm. Because of the statutory duty imposed upon SSD by the Children’s Act 1989, they are the lead agency for child protection. Each Local Authority has a Social Services Department (SSD), carrying a wide range of statutory responsibilities, including the provision of services, which sustain and contribute to the quality of life for individuals and communities. This incorporates services to children in need and
I I I

Initiating or assisting with child protection investigations where it is believed that a child in their area is suffering or likely to suffer significant harm. Providing assessment, treatment and therapeutic help to children displaying inappropriate sexual behaviour, as well as support for parents of abusers. Conducting assessment of need and formulating management plans for youth offenders, both to meet their need and manage their risk.

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

Housing
We recognise that the provision of suitable accommodation can be crucial to supporting risk management plans for the most high risk offenders. In relation to housing needs all the London Boroughs have their own objectives and procedures to meet their duties towards the housing of homeless people, the care of existing tenants and staff, and the protection of vulnerable groups. In addition the voluntary sector, including Housing Associations, are increasingly important in assisting in public protection. They are all committed to ensuring that people's housing needs are assessed with the other MAPPP agencies to identify and manage the risks that particular individuals may pose to communities. Many of the local MAPPPs have representation from housing agencies.

There will, of course, be some young people who do become involved in crime. The secondary aims, therefore, are to ensure that, for the victims, we reduce the traumatic impact of those crimes. The development of the strategy has involved lengthy and detailed consultation with the full range of partners; thus, the strategy articulates not just what the MPS itself will aim to do but also what activity we should stimulate amongst our partners – in Government, Local Authorities, the voluntary sector and elsewhere and there are specific commitments from probation concerning treatment programmes.

Health Services
The various Mental Health NHS Trusts in London provide a full range of services to meet the needs of service users, carers and local communities. They are increasingly referring those considered to be particularly dangerous to MAPPPs for multi-agency intervention. In many Boroughs a representative attends all risk management meetings to share information and provide professional consultation. We are convinced that increased and improved involvement of health services in MAPPA across London will enhance the protection of the public which we must deliver together. At the same time we respect the rights of individuals to live their own lives and for other agencies to help them to do this. It is important that we support them in integrating within society without offending against their fellow citizens. As MAPPA plays an increasingly important role in the multi agency management and supervision of offenders in the community, this is likely to become a major avenue for local criminal justice agencies to seek psychiatric advice and consultation from their

20

Youth Offending Teams (YOTs)
YOTS work with young offenders (mainly under 18), their families and victims in respect of all offending behaviour. They also provide pre-sentence reports to Courts and supervise community orders and postcustodial licences. This incorporates intensive supervision and monitoring programmes for selected persistent young offenders. The MPS launched a Youth Justice Strategy for 2003 to 2008 in March 2003. The primary aim of the strategy is to reduce the chances of children and young people becoming involved in crime, either as offenders or victims. If this can be achieved, London will be a safer, better place not just for the young people themselves, but also for the wider community.

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

local Mental Health Trusts on the management of mentally disordered offenders. Requests for the preliminary examination of mentally disordered offenders in the community under the proposed Mental Health legislation are likely to be channelled through MAPPA. It is therefore important to ensure that Trusts are represented by senior clinicians who can provide expert advice, both to divert inappropriate referrals and to ensure that psychiatric opinion is provided wherever necessary. The Strategic Management Board will have a role to play in ensuring that local MAPPA develop effective links with Health agencies.

that all agencies work together in this context to understand and manage risk. As already indicated the Prison Service is due to become a statutory MAPPA partner and further guidance is being developed to set out improved working practices, information sharing and risk assessment. This will include forging the links between prisons and public protection units/teams in relation to the management of the highest risk offenders, not just when they are released but during their time in prison. This way, risk assessments will always be up to date. Not all agencies referred to above are full time MAPPA partners in every borough, but can certainly be called upon, along with others, in specific cases to provide information about offenders and available services where appropriate. We are sure that extensive agency involvement is crucial to improving the sharing of information and providing a full range of services and opportunities to prevent and reduce reoffending. We therefore look forward to the proposals in the Criminal Justice Bill imposing a duty to co-operate on relevant agencies (see The National Picture) being enacted next year and becoming more a widespread reality. For further details of the efforts which are being made at strategic level to secure the engagement of as a wide a range of relevant agencies as possible, please refer to the section entitled Monitoring Progress – The Strategic Management of MAPPA.

Prisons
Whilst there are eight prison establishments in London, London offenders can end up in any prison throughout the country. The prison has an important role in identifying prisoners who present a significant risk on release. During the sentence prisoners are assessed and intelligence is collated. This helps to determine what programmes and treatment the offender should receive both before and after release. For example, sex offenders will be transferred to those prisons where Sex Offender Treatment Programmes are provided so that this offending behaviour is addressed This would then be reinforced when the offender is released. The MPS has a dedicated Prison Intelligence Officer (PIO) for each prison establishment responsible for liaison across agencies and for intelligence gathering. LPA also have probation officers seconded to prisons who are also responsible for keeping risk assessments up to date, treatment programmes and release arrangements. Health services, particularly mental health and psychiatry are also closely involved in prison life, and it is vital

21

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

What we do – The operation of MAPPA
In addition to the day to day work of individual organisations outlined earlier in this report, we have developed multi-agency arrangements within all boroughs for the assessment and management of sexual, violent and other dangerous offenders. These should reflect and be responsive to the diversity of the local community.
The MAPPA structure enables all agencies to work together sharing relevant information about offenders, planning and implementing intervention strategies to effectively protect the public. We recognise the need to provide opportunities for offenders to reintegrate into society without fear of retribution or reprisal. This multi-agency approach reinforces the positive impact that treatment programmes, proactive law enforcement, monitoring and working with offenders can have on reducing crime rates. This translates into fewer victims of violent crime, which is what we are about. Whenever a joint or multi-agency approach would improve public protection, police, probation and any other relevant agency e.g. housing, health, social services etc, will share information and formulate risk management plans. The organisation of this may vary from borough to borough. For example, in some boroughs a probation officer is seconded to the local police PPU for part of the week and in others, police and probation work collaboratively within the same building on a full time basis. As we reported was likely last year, this approach is being developed further. Once a thorough risk assessment has been made, the “critical few” most dangerous offenders are identified and referred to the MAPPP. There are 32 panels within the London area, covering all the boroughs. These meet on a 4-6 week basis. Additionally, emergency meetings are convened when the need arises. In advance of each meeting an agenda, drawn up by either the police or probation service, is sent out confidentially to all MAPPP participants. Each will check for other information held about the subjects of the meeting by their own agency. All MAPPPs will have in attendance staff from the police and probation services as well as representatives from social services, health, local authority housing, young offender teams, employment, prisons, customs and excise and other local agencies e.g. accommodation providers, including close liaison with the victim services. Meetings are chaired by either police or probation. The aim is to of ensure the participation of as many agencies as possible within this confidential setting. Minutes are taken, documenting decisions made on each case, including the allocation of responsibility for key tasks. A review process is identified to monitor progress in each case and a date is set for a MAPPP review unless circumstances demand an earlier meeting.

22

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

Risk management plans vary according to individual circumstances and will reflect a balance between the need to impose conditions and controls on the offender with the provision of treatment through relevant programmes and services to reduce their re-offending. In line with recently published guidance, only the most critical cases will be dealt with at the MAPPP.

The majority of cases can be dealt with by agencies acting alone, after information sharing has been carried out (and maintained at intervals). Other case can be dealt with at a local inter-agency risk management meeting. The following are some examples of how offenders are managed:

‘Dave’ has been harassing his victim, a local resident with whom he had become fixated, over a number of years. This is commonly known as ‘stalking’. His unwelcome behaviour became increasingly erratic and worrying, so the police Community Safety Unit used powers under the Protection from Harassment Act to obtain a restraining order. This effectively prevents him from making any sort of contact with the victim. His behaviour continued and he was eventually sentenced to a year’s imprisonment. Probation Services and Mental Health Services became involved, but he was not assessed as suffering from any treatable mental illness. Probation arranged for Dave to be placed in a hostel upon his release and sophisticated licence arrangements were put in place covering his movements from prison to the hostel. The licence reiterated the victim non-contact conditions in the restraining order which effectively meant that he was not allowed to enter a large part of south London. Probation worked closely with the police public protection unit and arrangements were made for ‘Dave’ to be followed from prison on his release. He entered the area from which he had been excluded and police, obviously concerned as to his intentions, effected an arrest for the breach. Probation then made urgent arrangements for a recall notice to be produced, which resulted in the offender being returned to prison within hours of his release. The victim was constantly updated by police and probation as to progress of the case, including while the offender was in prison. Additional security measures were provided at the victim’s home to give her additional protection and reassurance. These measures can all be used again when ‘Dave’ is released. Further information about ‘stalking’ can be found in a guide entitled: Stalking and other forms of harassment. An investigator’s guide from the MPS address at the front of this report; or from www.met.police.uk/stalking/guide.htm or www.homeoffice.gov.uk Further information about the Victim Liaison Unit can be found in the section of this report entitled ‘Working With Victims’.

23

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

Brian and Richard had both been resident at a probation hostel. Brian was a registered sex offender whilst Richard had convictions for sex offences. They took up accommodation together. Prior to their release prison intelligence had revealed that they had maintained contact with each other during sentence. Prisons also confirmed that they were in contact with a third sex offender and there were plans to sexually assault a child. They were kept under police surveillance. Emergency MAPPP meetings were held to manage the case, which included housing representatives. Initial agreement was that they should be permitted to live together for a period, which would facilitate the surveillance. Thereafter a condition was put in Brian’s licence banning contact with Richard and the pair were split up with encouragement and support from police and probation, including assistance in gaining housing provision.

Where there is continued cause for concern about a person's behaviour in the community, the police are empowered to apply to a Magistrates' Court for a Sex Offender Order. These are reserved for the most serious situations where the police are able to satisfy the Court that a person who already has a conviction for a sexual offence is engaging in

tailored to the specific risks the offender presents. They cannot require an offender to do something, but to refrain from specific activity. They are quite an unusual measure, however in London this year we have trebled the number of applications for these Orders, all but one of which have been granted by the Courts. Sometimes they are not even contested by the offender, and they are seen as a powerful way of managing the most risky cases. Breaching an Order can result in a maximum penalty of five years, and they can last for as long as necessary.

24

recent behaviour giving concerns that he/she could offend causing serious harm. The Orders can restrict offenders from engaging in the behaviour which is causing the concern. Very often this includes not associating with children in any place, whether indoors or out, at places like swimming pools, parks, leisure centres. They can be very specific and are

Michael is a very high risk offender and predatory homosexual paedophile. He was managed by a local PPU where he resided in a probation hostel. Because of his present behaviour and previous convictions, police decided that it was necessary to apply for a Sex Offender Order at the local Magistrates’ Court. On the material presented, the Order was granted. He moved to another Borough where the PPU took over his management. After a short while Michael was seen talking to a young boy at a fairground. Subsequent enquiries with the PPU, discussions with Michael and securing CCTV ensured that there was sufficient evidence to prosecute him for breaching one condition of his order, namely that he should not approach children.
Continued on page 25

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

Continued from page 24

He was sentenced to two years imprisonment. The judge commented that it was a serious breach, occurring only eight weeks after it’s imposition, and not least because Michael understood the seriousness of what he was doing. When he is released from prison, he will be under probation supervision and police will coninue to monitor him with the benefit of the Order still being in place in order to prevent reoffending against children.

Not all the work of the MAPPP concerns sex offenders. Violent and other potentially dangerous

offenders are an important area of responsibility. The following two cases demonstrate this.

Trevor was attending a Domestic Violence Intervention Programme as a condition of his supervision arrangements following release from prison. Programme tutors were concerned about the attitudes expressed in the group, including threatening comments concerning the victim of the offences, his former partner. Following liaison with the Probation victim worker attached to the DVIP, it was established that he had contacted the victim and threatened to harm her. The case was referred to the MAPPP because of the escalating risk; Effective collaboration between Probation, Police and Victims workers ensured that a victim protection plan was put in place, which included non-contact from the offender. He was subsequently charged with criminal offences arising from threats he had made This enforcement action took place before any physical harm could be caused to the victim. Ian had been unable to work following a back injury and was becoming increasingly depressed. He began to drink heavily which contributed to escalating marital discord. He became obsessed by the belief that his wife was being unfaithful with a neighbour. Matters came to a head and he physically assaulted his wife as well as causing extensive damage to both his and the neighbours property. His sentence included a requirement to attend DVIP. A multi-agency meeting was held enabling input to be provided by various agencies including mental health services, alcohol counselling and an Employment Education and Training assessment. Brian has made excellent progress and is now retraining for suitable employment. His alcohol use is under control and there have been no further incidents of domestic violence since he has been successfully reunited with his wife.

25

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

The following case study shows how police and probation, with close co-operation from the prison

service, work together to manage the release off difficult offenders.

‘Alan’, a convicted serial rapist, was due for release on licence having served almost two-thirds of a substantial sentence for rape. He was serving his sentence at a prison in the Midlands, having committed offences in London. The prison service had details of his treatment and behaviour whilst in prison, which gave cause for concern that he still posed a threat towards women. Under current legislation, ‘Alan’ would be eligible for automatic release after serving two-thirds of his actual sentence. It was therefore important to try to manage any risk which he would still pose on release as effectively as possible, to prevent reoffending. However, it is important to recognize that we can never completely eliminate risk. In the words of Hazel Kemshall, an academic researcher in this area; “Risk management should be understood as harm reduction either through the reduction of the likelihood of the risk occurring or the reduction of its impact should it occur”. It was agreed that ‘Alan’ would be accommodated at an Approved Premises (probation) hostel in London, well away from the area where he had committed his crime. Police, working closely

26

with the LPA Victim Liaison Service, contacted his previous victims to consider their needs. They informed them of the situation and, taking into account their views, LPA arranged for exclusion conditions to be put into his release licence. These meant that he could not go anywhere near where his victims lived or worked. Special measures were put in place at the hostel where he would stay, to ensure the safety of female staff, and the National Probation Directorate’s Public Protection Unit helped with the provision. A high level MAPPP, chaired by a police Commander, was convened to oversee ’Alan’s’ release arrangements. This ensured effective co-operation between the different elements of the police, probation and prison services responsible for him. Curfew conditions, reinforced by electronic monitoring (‘tagging’) services were built into his licence. The prison service agreed to transfer ‘Alan’ to a London prison to facilitate his effective release. Staff from the local police PPU enjoyed excellent working relationships with the hostel and visited ‘Alan’ in prison to consider his release arrangements, working closely with probation inside and outside the prison. This ensured that ‘Alan’ was fully involved in his release plans. Following release, he was supported in his rehabilitation into the community by hostel staff, his probation case worker and the police PPU. He was required to submit to regular random drug and alcohol testing, which he failed after a relatively short period of release. His licence was revoked and he was immediately returned to custody.
Continued on page 27

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

Continued from page 26

Whilst services have effectively intervened with ‘Alan’ for a short time, he will ultimately be rereleased. This case indicates the levels of support and intervention which will be necessary to reduce the risks he poses and to successfully reintegrate him into community life. This will undoubtedly include help in gaining employment and suitable accommodation. Under proposed new legislation, offenders who are still considered to be dangerous to any section of the public will not be eligible for release until those risks have been reduced. During the last year there has been ongoing work to explore the new joint statutory responsibility and to promote a consistent approach in the operational arrangements throughout London. As has been mentioned previously, this is a developmental process and we will continue to develop and refine our procedures in line with the national standards, which have just been introduced. MAPPP agencies, particularly probation. Apart from an individual's right to privacy we have to consider the impact of disclosure upon that person and the potential risks to which they may be exposed. In particular we will examine closely the reason for disclosure and the benefits we aim to achieve. We will look at the person's offending history and behaviour, together with all available current information in reaching a decision. We are helped by the case of R-v-Chief Constable North Wales Police (1998) in which it was held that in LIMITED circumstances the police could release factual information about individuals if it was very strongly in the public interest to do so. That strong public interest exists where it is necessary for the prevention or detection of crime, or for the protection of young or other vulnerable people. Additionally, the Association of Chief Police Officers has produced guidelines which are referred to in reaching a decision whether or not to disclose. The new national guidance also spells out the considerations that need to be made before disclosure is used in exceptional circumstances. The foregoing are just a few examples of how limited disclosure to selected sections of the community is used in serious cases to protect those communities. We will continue to use our discretion in exercising disclosure on a case by case basis.

Where are they? – USE OF DISCLOSURE
The disclosure of personal information about offenders, in particular registered sex offenders (RSOs), is a sensitive and complex subject. Whilst there is an apparent desire amongst communities to know of the presence and whereabouts of offenders in their locality, we have to balance this against the rights of offenders to privacy, particularly under human rights legislation. There is no blanket provision of such information nor is it envisaged that there will be in the future. ‘Disclosure’ is often referred to as ‘community notification’, but in this context that may be too broad a description. Providing details, such as a photograph, address or convictions of an offender to the community or targeted sections therein is a serious step, usually undertaken by the police in consultation with other

27

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

Robert is a potentially dangerous offender with numerous convictions for gross indecency and a recent offence of indecent assault on a female. He is a user of mental health services in the area he resides. Those services shared information with the multi-agency panel that he had told them that he had fantasies of having sex with children. Robert is currently on probation supervision for his recent offence. He told his probation officer that he had booked to go on holiday to a particular place, and subsequent enquiries revealed that the travel company had banned him previously due to an act of gross indecency. The MAPPP agreed that disclosure of the current information to this company was necessary and his booking was therefore cancelled. Several months later mental health services shared information that he planned to re-book his holiday using a false name. Again the MAPPP ensured that further disclosure was made including the provision of recent photos. Such disclosure, initiated by responsible and appropriate information sharing between agencies, has, thus far ensured that reoffending does not take place.

Steve is a registered sex offender with convictions for, amongst others, indecent assault

28

on a girl, making and possessing indecent photographs of children and outraging public decency. He had been attending a sex offender treatment programme but had failed to successfully complete this. He had been under probation supervision. His employment brought him into contact on a regular basis with children, since his employer’s facilities were used for primary school parties and he had unsupervised access to the areas they used. His employers informed the local police PPU of these facts when they became aware that he had convictions for sex offending. They wanted to know whether he was on the sex offender register and whether he currently presented a risk to children. Police reviewed the matter and established that he had not informed the PPU of his current employment situation nor had he informed his employers of his offending background, which police and probation considered do suggest that he presents a risk to children. After careful deliberation of the pros and cons of disclosure, a senior police officer granted a documented authority for disclosure to take place. The employer was told but police and probation were conscious that appropriately supervised employment is one useful way of managing his risk. There had been no untoward incident during his employment and a joint
Continued on page 29

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

Continued from page 28

decision was taken that he be allowed to continue his voluntary work, which included labouring and gardening, but under close supervision at all times, i.e. that another adult would always be able to see him. Following a more detailed risk assessment, the employers told Steve that he would only be able to work on days when there were only other adults present; they also agreed to provide a reference for him to another employer in an IT post, on the basis of his good work. He has taken up this additional voluntary work, reassembling computers for charity and again these employers are aware of his background with regard to his possession of indecent images. Steve has accepted the situation and, by being gainfully employed, with the employers aware of his position, no further offending has taken place.

29

IF YOU HAVE ANY INFORMATION ABOUT SOMEONE WHO YOU KNOW OR BELIEVE IS INVOLVED IN ANY KIND OF CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR, PARTICULARLY SEXUAL OR VIOLENT CRIME, OR IF YOU HAVE INFORMATION ABOUT A SPECIFIC CRIME, WE URGE YOU TO CONTACT CRIMESTOPPERS ON THE ABOVE FREEFONE TELEPHONE NUMBER. YOU WILL NOT BE ASKED FOR YOUR NAME YOU COULD RECEIVE A CASH REWARD

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

Monitoring progress – The strategic management of MAPPA
The MPS and LPA jointly convene a strategic group that oversees the work of the MAPPA across London. This is a statutory requirement placed upon each Responsible Authority.
This Group (the Strategic Management Board) has met on four occasions over the year. The meetings are chaired by the LPA Director of Public Protection. Membership has remained consistent since the group first met in July 2001, with representatives as set out in the table overleaf. The Board commissioned some work through a sub-group, led by the NSPCC because of their expertise, to examine how we might be able to stimulate community education and awareness, not just of the work under MAPPA, but about sex offending generally and measures which can be taken to protect children. A paper setting out proposals for a project has been produced and the Board will be looking at progressing this by way of a pilot during the next year. At each of the four meetings held, attendance has averaged two thirds of the membership, around fifteen of the twenty possible. The Strategic Management Board will be standardised during 2003/04 as the Responsible Authority extends to the Prison Service and the duty to co-operate is also extended to other agencies. Lastly, the Board will be meeting specifically to establish how it will operate in accordance with the standards and procedures set out in the new national Manual of MAPPA Guidance. We are confident that this guidance will help shape the role of the Board, making it more effective in monitoring and sharing the good efforts of so many MAPPPs in London and promoting changes to improve public protection.

30

The work of the group is to evaluate and audit MAPPA activities and consider issues that may be problematic between participating agencies, with a view to resolving them. The group should model good practice and share information amongst members in the same way that locally, at borough level, risk information is shared and exchanged. Both the MPS and the LPA are continuing to develop more expertise in managing high risk individuals. This task is now a shared one and, increasingly, police and probation colleagues are actively working together to improve practice. Creating effective partnerships with, for example, Housing, Mental Health colleagues, at strategic level as well as locally, Victim Support workers and Social Services is a very important ingredient in striving to achieve a safer community for all Londoners.

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

The Strategic Management Board of MAPPA
Director of Community Protection LPA MPS Lead – Child Protection and MAPPPs MPS Borough Commander Metropolitan Police Authority Chief Exective Penrose Housing Association Forensic Policy Advisor Department of Health Head of Service Delivery, Risk & Victims, LPA MPS MAPPA Support & Co-ordination Unit MPS Consultancy Group Prison Governors Association Chief Executive Victim Support London Senior Consultant Forensic Psychiatrist West London Mental Health NHS Social Services Inspectorate National Probation Directorate, Public Protection Unit Policy Advisor NSPCC Sentence Enforcement Unit HM Prison Service Camden Council - Manager of Supporting People Senior Policy Advisor Youth Justice Board

31

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

Working with victims
Section 69 of the Criminal Justice & Courts Services Act, 2000 places a statutory duty upon the probation service to consult with victims of sexual and violent offences where an offender has been sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment or more. (In the past, probation was required to act in cases of offenders sentenced to 4 years or more.)
This consultation takes place before an offender is released and helps to determine the conditions imposed in referral point for all new cases and undertakes the tracing work in liaison with the police prior to a victim liaison officer being appointed. People do move on, of course, after a period of time and in London the population is particularly transient. It is, therefore, impossible to contact every victim, but the service is working successfully towards meeting the National Probation Service targets for victim contact. It is crucial to link the work of the victim liaison service with local MAPPA arrangements, especially in cases where there is a significant risk of re-victimisation. Here is an example of how this works:

32

the offender’s licence on release. Since April 2001, the LPA has reorganised and expanded its victim contact and liaison services in line with that duty. Taking into account the restructuring required as a result of the amalgamation of the previous five probation services covering London, the LPA has formed the Victim Liaison Service. The estimated number of victims who are eligible for the services in cases sentenced by the London courts per year has risen to 3,500. There is a current staff establishment of 23 victim liaison officers and 7 administrators managed by 3 senior probation officers and a head of service delivery who holds joint responsibility for risk management and victims. Staff are located in 5 offices across London. One office is the central

A probation officer and victim liaison officer referred a case to the local MAPPP where the offender and victim, both female, had lived in close proximity to each other prior to sentence. There had been a history of friction between them. Since the offender had been imprisoned for an offence on the victim of grievous bodily harm with intent, her property had been repossessed and there was a strong likelihood of revictimisation as the offender was holding the victim responsible for this. Following contact with the MAPPP, the offender was referred for a mental
Continued on page 33

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

assessment process, and the development of risk
Continued from page 32

management and victim safety plans. All joint police/probation briefing events on public protection have a victim dimension to them to reinforce its importance. Over the past year in London, we have run a series of dedicated events for police and probation, called “Think Victims”. These have promoted the role of the victim liaison officer in the assessment and management of dangerousness. We will continue to strive to locate victims, consider their fears and needs, and work together to provide appropriate and adequate measures to reduce the risk of revictimisation.

health assessment and alternative housing on release was pursued with the Housing Department. Enquiries were made of Social Services about the welfare of the offender’s child and there was liaison with the Housing Association about the possible risk to the new tenant in the offender’s former property. The victim liaison officer contacted the police about household security for the victim and her family, and there were extra conditions inserted into the offender’s post-release licence to minimise further risk to the victim by restricting the offender’s movements.

Victim liaison service contact points
For individual cases: Tel: 020 7323 7020/020 8262 6927. For information on policy and service development: Tel: 020 7323 7009.

The LPA has produced clear guidelines on the role of the victim liaison officers in ensuring that information about the victim is included in the risk

33

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

Victim support services
Victim Support is the national charity for people affected by crime. It is an independent organisation, offering a free and confidential service, whether or not a crime has been reported. Trained staff and volunteers at local branches offer information and support to victims, witnesses, their families and friends.
Victim Support also provides the Witness Service, based in every criminal court in England & Wales, to offer assistance before, during and after a trial. Further information for victims and details of local

Survivors UK
For male victims of sexual abuse. Tel: 0845 1221201 Website: www.survivorsuk.org.uk

Women’s Aid International
For victims of domestic violence. Tel: 0845 7023468 Website: www.womensaid.org.uk

NSPCC Child Protection Helpline
For anyone concerned about a child at risk of abuse. Tel: 0800 8005000 Website: www.nspcc.org.uk

ChildLine
For children, about any problem, at any time. Tel: 0800 1111 Website: www.childline.org.uk

34

services and other relevant organisations are available as follows:

Victim Support Service Helpline
Tel: 0845 3030900 Website: www.victim-support.com

MIND
For mental health issues. Tel: 0845 7660163 Website: www.mind.org.uk

Rape and Sexual Abuse Centre (RASASC)
Providing a London service for women and girls who have been raped or sexually abused, no matter when it happened. Tel: 0208 683 3300 Website: www.rasasc.org.uk

Southall Black Sisters
Services for black, Asian and other minority women. Tel: 0208 571 9595

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

Appendix A – Statistical information
(i) The number of registered sex offenders (RSOs) in the community on 31 March 2003 This represents 28 offenders per 100,000 population (London population 7,375,065 Census 2001). (ii) The number of RSOs who were either cautioned or convicted for breaches of the requirement, between 1 April 2002 and 31 March 2003 (iii) The number of Sex Offender Orders applied for and gained between 1 April 2002 and 31 March 2003: total applied for granted not granted (iv) The number of Restraining Orders issued by the courts between 1 April 2002 and 31 March 2003 for offenders currently managed within MAPPA (v) The number of violent and other sexual offenders considered under MAPPA during the year 1 April 2002 and 31 March 2003 (as defined by section 68 (3) (4) and (5) of the Act (vi) The number of ‘other offenders’ dealt with under MAPPA during the year 1 April 2002 and 31 March 2003 as being assessed by the Responsible Authority as posing a risk of serious harm to the public (but who did not fall within either of the two categories, as defined by section 67 (2b) (vii) For each of the three categories of offenders covered by the MAPPA (“registered sex offenders”, “violent and other sex offenders” and “other offenders”), the number of offenders that are or have been dealt with by: MAPPP – registered sex offenders MAPPP – violent and other sex offenders MAPPP – other offenders (viii) Of the cases managed by the MAPPP during the reporting year the number of offenders: (a) Returned to custody for breach of licence (b) Returned to custody for breach of a Restraining Order or Sex Offender Order (c) Charged with a serious sexual or violent offence
1

2085

1

97

16 13 1

9

4754

2

35

451

61 40 18

54 1 9

This figure does NOT include: offenders who have failed to register; those with a registration requirement but who have not yet registered as they are currently in custody; nor those who have registered but are in custody for a further offence.a This figure is made up of 2678 offenders in custody, 970 offenders on licence and 1106 new sentences over the period of this report.

2

MAPPA

ANNUAL

R E P O RT 2002–2003

Commentary on statistics
(i) this figure represents an increase of 238 registered sex offenders (or 13%) compared with last year’s total of 1847. This is entirely consistent with the national average increase of 16% and was expected. It is anticipated that the figure will continue to grow annually until 2004 and 2007 when a number of offenders will be eligible for deregistration (provided they have not been reconvicted for a relevant offence). During the last year a number of offenders have been deregistered after five years, the minimum period (except for youths, where the registration period is halved); (ii) The national figure is 40.6 offenders per 100,000 population, this represents a drop of 28 (or 22%) compared with last year’s figure of 125 offenders prosecuted. Likely contributory factors are better offender compliance with registration requirements and more effective use of warnings as an enforcement measure; (iii) this is an increase of ten applications, almost three fold, compared with last year’s total of six applications. This is because of increased understanding of the benefits of such Orders; (iv) this is a rather low number and a greater awareness of this power continues to be promoted amongst police investigators, probation report writers, Crown Prosecution Service and the judiciary;

36

(v) (vi)

this figure represents an expected increase; this is an increase of 42 (or 10%) compared with last year’s figure of 409 and would suggest better identification of relevant offenders by the Responsible Authority and other agencies;

(vii)

these figures were not provided last year, but they represent the most difficult cases, referred to as the ‘critical few’. They amount to about 1.6% of the total number of offenders falling to be managed;

(viii)

(a) whilst 54 out of 119 offenders (45%) have breached their licence conditions, this figure indicates good identification and robust enforcement action; (b) this figure would suggest that the overwhelming majority of offenders have been compliant with the restrictions contained within Orders made against them, preventing reoffending; (c) this figure represents about 13% of the offenders dealt with at MAPPP and whilst it is of course a concern that nine offenders have gone on to commit very serious offences with serious consequences, this is an absolutely miniscule number compared with the total number of offenders. The quote attributed to Kemshall earlier in this report concerning ‘zero risk’ is pertinent in this context.

This report is produced by the directorate of Public Affairs, Metropolitan Police, New Scotland Yard