About this page. This page summarises a Domestic Homicide Review published in the Home Office DHR Library. The full report is available at the source link below. Victim and perpetrator names are not included in extracted summaries on this page.
Source · Domestic Homicide Review

Fenland review

CSP: Fenland Published: September 2024 Year of death: 2021 Extracted: 5 recs

Statutory domestic homicide review under section 9 of the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004. Source: Home Office DHR Library.

Original review (PDF) ↗ Source: Home Office DHR Library

Summary AI-generated

Verify against the full report at the source link
The review highlights failures by agencies to identify the perpetrator's coercive control and stalking behaviour towards the victim, particularly during protracted criminal and family court proceedings. Concerns include inadequate risk assessments, inter-agency communication gaps, and the risks associated with disclosing addresses in child arrangement order cases.

Home Office classifications

27 tags

Source-supplied classifications used by the Home Office to catalogue this review.

  • Victim - alcohol misuse
  • Victim - mental ill health
  • Victim - had been a victim of an abuser before
  • Children - under 18 shared parental responsibility (between victims)
  • Children - living with perpetrator (including adult children)
  • Perpetrator - case heard in court
  • Perpetrator - issued life sentence
  • Aggravating factors - separation
  • Aggravating factors - coercive or controlling behaviour
  • Aggravating factors - stalking
  • Aggravating factors - physical stalking
  • Aggravating factors - digital stalking
  • Aggravating factors - forced marriage
  • Aggravating factors - economic abuse
  • DHR process - family contributed to dhr
  • DHR process - family consulted about terms of reference
  • DHR process - family supported by expert specialist advocate
  • DHR process - family received draft report
  • DHR process - police recommendations
  • DHR process - health services recommendations
  • DHR process - idva or other domestic abuse support service recommendations
  • DHR process - probation services recommendations
  • DHR process - community safety partnership recommendations
  • DHR process - identification of risk recommendation themes
  • DHR process - training recommendation themes
  • DHR process - awareness raising recommendation themes
  • DHR process - other recommendation themes

Extracted recommendations

5 recommendations pulled from the report

Recommendation 1

Addressed to Fenland Community Safety Partnership

The Fenland Community Safety Partnership should ensure that an appropriate action plan is put in place for all statutory agencies to review their policy on risk assessments in cases that are re-investigated and where the victim(s) were assessed and managed initially as high-risk. A tag and flag system could be considered in appropriate cases.

Verified wording from the published review · Original review (PDF) ↗

Recommendation 2

Addressed to Fenland Community Safety Partnership

The Fenland Community Safety Partnership should request a meeting with the Local Criminal Justice Board to discuss delays in cases that involve Domestic Abuse to ensure that justice is timely, to safeguard all victims within the case.

Verified wording from the published review · Original review (PDF) ↗

Recommendation 3

Addressed to Fenland Community Safety Partnership | Countywide Domestic Abuse/Sexual Violence partnership

The Fenland Community Safety Partnership in conjunction with the Countywide Domestic Abuse/Sexual Violence partnership should provide a case study briefing to all frontline staff to ensure that they consider the risks where wider family members are exhibiting stalking and coercive and controlling behaviour.

Verified wording from the published review · Original review (PDF) ↗

Recommendation 4

Addressed to Fenland Community Safety Partnership

The Fenland Community Safety Partnership should:
i) Raise awareness of the risks of Domestic Abuse and Domestic Homicide in cases of separation, in particular those cases that involve child arrangement orders in the Family court.
ii) They should meet and provide a briefing in relation to the findings of this report to the Local Family Justice Board.
iii) They should meet and brief the Designated Family Court Judge for Cambridgeshire and Peterborough to highlight this case and raise the issue in relation to the dangers of providing home addresses to all parties in proceedings.

Verified wording from the published review · Original review (PDF) ↗

Recommendation 5

Addressed to Fenland Community Safety Partnership

The Fenland Community Safety Partnership should request that the Countywide Domestic Abuse/Sexual Violence strategic partnership include awareness raising in their training with frontline practitioners of Professor Monckton-Smith’s homicide timeline including how this could be applied to conflict in private law proceedings cases involving child arrangement orders.

Verified wording from the published review · Original review (PDF) ↗