ANG-3

Fundamental review of masturbatory indecent exposure treatment

Angiolini Inquiry · Angiolini Inquiry Part 1 Report · Issued 29 February 2024 · Addressed to: Home Office

Government responseHome Office: Accepted (Mar 2024)

DeliveryCabinet Office says in progress (Oct 2026)Home Office says in progress (Dec 2024)

Recommendation, verbatim from the inquiry

●Inquiry recommendation, Recommendation 3

With immediate effect, the Home Office, Ministry of Justice, College of Policing and National Police Chiefs' Council should work together to conduct a fundamental review of the way masturbatory indecent exposure is treated within the criminal justice system. The review should focus on: recognising the seriousness of the offence; identifying it as an indicator of disinhibition by perpetrators; and understanding and addressing the wider issue of sexual precursor conduct so as to prevent victimisation, improve the response to victims when it occurs and bring more offenders to justice.

Angiolini Inquiry, Angiolini Inquiry Part 1 Report · 29 Feb 2024 Source PDF →

Published evidence summary

AI-generated evidence summary

The Inquiry asked the Home Office to review criminal justice responses to masturbatory indecent exposure. In October 2026, the Cabinet Office reported that the government had completed a review of police responses to non-contact sexual offences, including masturbatory indecent exposure, but did not mention the wider criminal justice system, adding that an update would be provided in due course (Cabinet Office, Oct 2026). In December 2025, the inquiry found that draft findings from Home Office engagement with 13 police forces had been shared with it in September 2025 and were being reviewed by ministers (Rt Hon. Lady Elish Angiolini LT DBE PC KC, Dec 2025). In December 2024, Jess Phillips, Minister for Safeguarding and Violence Against Women and Girls, stated that research focused first on policing before examining other criminal justice agencies (Jess Phillips MP, Dec 2024).

AI-generated summary of the record on this page, checked by a second model and automatic checks, 16 Oct 2026.

Government response

●Home Office · Accepted · 25 Mar 2024

Words of: James Cleverly, Secretary of State for the Home Department, written statement to the House of Commons, 25 March 2024 (HCWS378)

Today I can confirm acceptance of all three of the recommendations made to the Government, which the Home Office will now work to deliver at pace. These recommendations are that the Home Office, in collaboration with partners, should conduct a fundamental review of the way masturbatory indecent exposure is treated within the criminal justice system; commission research to establish if there is an evidence-based link between masturbatory indecent exposure and subsequent offending; and launch a campaign to raise awareness that indecent exposure and sending unsolicited photographs of genitals amounts to criminality and boost victims' confidence to report such crimes.

Response document: Home Office Update

Earlier statement from Home Office (1)

●Home Office · Under consideration · 29 Feb 2024

Words of: Home Office, Angiolini Inquiry Part 1, news story, 29 February 2024

However, the report today highlights the need for further action and the government, in tandem with policing partners, will thoroughly consider the recommendations made by Lady Elish and respond in full in due course.

Response document: Angiolini Inquiry Part 1

Delivery

●Cabinet Office says in progress · 5 Oct 2026

The Government has completed a review of the police responses to non-contact sexual offences, including masturbatory indecent exposure. An update on this work will be provided in due course.

From: Angiolini Inquiry Recommendations Dashboard, October 2026 (data file)

●Home Office says in progress · 2 Dec 2024

I can confirm that this review is being taken forward in response to recommendation 3 of the Angiolini Inquiry Part 1 Report and we agreed it was important for our work to consider a range of non-contact sexual offending.

As the Committee will be aware, the majority of non-contact sexual offences which are reported to the police do not progress beyond the early stages of the justice system because no suspect is identified or there are evidential difficulties. We will therefore focus first on how the police seek to identify, disrupt, investigate, and prevent these offences. The objective of our research is to explore different approaches and highlight challenges and opportunities to improve police processes and practices, including understanding where innovative practice is taking place.

We are interviewing officers involved in all parts of the response to non-contact sexual offences, including frontline officers, senior officers, intelligence analysts and contact centre staff from a diverse range of police forces – in urban and rural areas, and covering large and small populations.

The findings from this work will be available next year, and we will use them to examine where further is work is needed, including with other Government departments and criminal justice agencies.

From: Government response to the Home Affairs Select Committee's inquiry on non-contact sexual offences (letter), Jess Phillips MP, Minister for Safeguarding and Violence Against Women and Girls

What other bodies have found

In their own words. These do not change the delivery statement above.

●Angiolini Inquiry · 2 Dec 2025

1.15 Summary of progress: The Home Office has initiated a review into how forces identify, disrupt and manage non-contact sexual offences, engaging with 13 forces and utilising the e-learning developed in response to Recommendation 2. In September 2025, the findings from this work were shared in draft with the Inquiry and had not yet been published. This report is being reviewed by ministers, who will agree next steps.

From: The Angiolini Inquiry Part 2 First Report: Prevention of sexually motivated crimes against women in public

How this page is built

The recommendation and the government responses are verbatim from primary documents. Delivery statements and other bodies' findings are shown in their own words, each with its source. The summary is written by this site and labelled as such. The Index does not paraphrase sources or characterise intent; it records what has been published.