Youth Out of Court Disposal Scrutiny Panel minutes - September 2023
Feedback report to Learning & Development
Date of document: 11th September 2023
Date panel held: 7th September 2023
Number of cases reviewed: 10
Panel: Caroline Hayes (JP) (Chair), A/Inspector Chris Mulrooney, PS Nick Rogers, Kathryn Bailey (Youth Mag), Victoria Bishop (OPCC), Gavin Happe (CPS), Jude Perez (RG), Phil White (YST),
Apologies: Lynn Teague (Victim Support, non-attendance), Sandra Samuels (non attendance), Jane Cooper (CPS, Gavin attended on behalf of CPS), Hannah Clune (YST, Phil attended on behalf of YST)
Person completing: 252237 Nick Rogers (Children First Police Sergeant)
Report completed for: CJD, Learning & Development, Crime Investigation Department, LPA Superintendents
How cases are reviewed
The panel consists of representatives from a cross section of internal and external stakeholders. Such members normally include the CPS, Police, Probation, Victim Support, Youth Services, the Courts and Magistracy.
Ten cases are selected at random by the chair in advance of the panel meeting. The case file paperwork for each case is researched, redacted and emailed securely to each panel member two weeks prior to the Scrutiny Panel. Each case is discussed in detail and members vote as to how they feel each case was disposed as follows:
- 1 = Appropriate and consistent with policy
- 2 = Appropriate with observations
- 3 = Inappropriate and inconsistent with policy
- 4 = Panel unable to reach a decision
If the panel are unable to reach a conclusion, the chair has the deciding vote.
Youth cases
Disposal: adult conditional caution
Type of case reviewed: criminal damage
Panel Finding: 2
Documents reviewed – crime report - CR/6300/22, MG5, conditional caution forms.
Summary
Suspects have entered onto victim's drive and damaged the ring doorbell camera from the front door. Suspects have then gained access into the back garden and opened the coal store door. They have then gained access to the electric board and switched the power off.
Observations
The knife issue briefly mentioned didn’t seem to go anywhere, and no further mention of it again in the paperwork.
Long delay between offence and disposal outcome, which in part led to an adult disposal being given and not youth. Noted this was part of a series of offences which can take time to investigate. Believed this was more likely an attempt at burglary but no evidence to prove it.
Disposal: community resolution
Type of case reviewed: assault
Panel Finding: 1
Documents reviewed – crime report – CR/1452/23, community resolution forms, MG5, MG6.
Summary
Suspect has kicked the victim to the head whilst the victim was being restrained by police.
Observations
Nil issues/comments raised.
Disposal: community resolution
Type of case reviewed: assault
Panel Finding: 1
Documents reviewed – crime report – CR/4645/23, com res form, MG5, MG6.
Summary
Four youth suspects are known the the victim and attend a different school. Suspects have been 'nasty' to the victim, which has been an ongoing matter. On one occassion between the victim and the group of suspects, suspect one strangled the victim. On a different occassion whilst the victim was walking and the group of suspects were nearby, suspect two threw a rock at the victim which hit him in the head causing injury.
Observations
Nil issues/comments raised.
Disposal: youth diversionary disposal (Children First diversion)
Type of case reviewed: assault
Panel Finding: 1
Documents reviewed – crime report – CR/7734/23, MG5, MG6.
Summary
Suspect is know to the victim. The suspect has beaten up the victim, causing injuried. The suspect has also threatened to 'stab' the victim, having taken an iten out of their pocket. The victim could not see if it was a knife or not.
Observations
Nil issues/comments raised.
Disposal: RJ level 1
Type of case reviewed: harassment/threats to kill
Panel Finding: 1
Documents reviewed – crime report – CR/12397/23, RJ level 1 form.
Summary
The suspect has sent the victim messages threatening to kill her. This has caused alarm and distress.
Observations
Maybe malicious communications instead of threats to kill should have been the headline offence on the RJ form, but happy with the disposal for such a case.
Disposal: community resolution
Type of case reviewed: criminal damage
Panel Finding: 2
Documents reviewed – crime report – CR/18848/23, community resolution form.
Summary
Suspect has smashed the padlock off of the door of the victims shed in order the gain entry, nothing stolen from the shed or moved.
Observations
For low level criminal damage it is an appropriate outcome, but panel thought this sounded more like a burglary/attempt, albeit with the understanding that proving this is more difficult.
Disposal: youth diversionary disposal (Children First diversion)
Type of case reviewed: assault
Panel Finding: 1
Documents reviewed – crime report – CR/21152/23, MG5, MG6.
Summary
Suspect has approached the victim who was sat on a bench. They have kicked and punched them multiple times.
Observations
1 member of the panel had seen the video footage of this incident as 2 of the co-def’s went to court for their part in it, and they felt the video shows it differently and this person was lucky not to go to court too.
Disposal: community resolution
Type of case reviewed: harassment w/o violence
Panel Finding: 1
Documents reviewed – crime report – CR/25188/23, community resolution form.
Summary
Victim and suspect used to be friends. Suspect has been giving the victim unwanted attention resulting in her blocking him. Suspect has then pretended to be someone else on social media and reached out to her. Victim has realised and blocked him again. Suspect has also sent a voicemail to the victim which appears to be a dirty phone call as it sounds as if the suspect is having intimate time. Suspect has sent her another friend request on a different platform.
Observations
Nil issues/comments raised.
Disposal: community resolution
Type of case reviewed: malicious communications
Panel Finding: 3
Documents reviewed – crime report – CR/25489/23, community resolution form.
Summary
Victim received a message from school friend which was a selfie of friend/suspect completely naked exposing his penis. Victim said he didn't want to receive pictures and suspect replied to him calling him a "faggott" and "batty boy".
Observations
For a community resolution regarding a hate crime it requires an Inspector sign off. Panel felt this should have gone to Children First to see if there was anything else going on in the background. From police perspective, victim’s wishes were followed but correct process was not. Malicious communications isn’t one of the 6 offences youths should be given CR’s for unless it has gone through the CF panel first.
Disposal: RJ level 1
Type of case reviewed:
Panel Finding: 3
Documents reviewed – crime report – CR/28972/23.
Summary
The suspects are the victims brothers, one suspect has threatened the victim with a knife. The victim has been chased causing him further fear.
*The above summary is not an accurate reflection of events, this was actually a case of criminal damage from one brother to another brother’s bike tyre*
Observations
Not suitable for RJ level 1 as it was defined as a domestic incident, so should have been a Community Resolution.
Conclusions
From the 10 cases discussed at panel the following results were obtained with approximately 80% of cases receiving a score of 1 or 2:
- 1 = Appropriate and consistent with policy – 6 cases
- 2 = Appropriate with observations – 2 cases
- 3 = Inappropriate and inconsistent with policy – 2 cases
- 4 = Panel unable to reach a decision – 0 cases
All investigating officers and their line managers will be provided with a copy of this report to ensure that they are aware that their case was discussed at panel.
Chief Inspector of CJD will establish contact with individuals for all cases that obtained scores of 3 or 4 to provide specific feedback and guidance.
Next meeting to be held on 7th December 2023 at Police HQ, Leadon Meeting Room.