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
Calderdale review
CSP: CalderdalePublished: August 2026Year of death: 2021Extracted: 9 recs
Statutory domestic homicide review under section 9 of the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004. Source: Home Office DHR Library.
The review identified concerns regarding incomplete risk assessments, insufficient information sharing between agencies (especially with GPs), and a lack of multi-agency risk re-assessment and safety planning when the victim retracted allegations or the perpetrator was released from custody. It also highlighted challenges in supporting victims who withdraw consent or face coercion, including via third parties or prison contact.
Home Office classifications
37 tags
Source-supplied classifications used by the Home Office to catalogue this review.
Victim - mental ill health
Victim - anxiety
Victim - depression
Victim - suicidal thoughts
Victim - had been a victim of an abuser before
Victim - referred to marac at any time
Victim - case heard at marac before homicide
Perpetrator - case heard in court
Perpetrator - issued life sentence
Perpetrator - mental ill health
Perpetrator - neurodiverse condition diagnosis
Perpetrator - anxiety
Perpetrator - depression
Perpetrator - known to agencies as a domestic abuse perpetrator
Perpetrator - known to police as a domestic abuse perpetrator
Perpetrator - known to idva or other domestic abuse support service as a domestic abuse perpetrator
Perpetrator - known to probation services as a domestic abuse perpetrator
Perpetrator - known to others as a domestic abuse perpetrator
Perpetrator - known to friends as a domestic abuse perpetrator
Perpetrator - known to family as a domestic abuse perpetrator
Aggravating factors - coercive or controlling behaviour
Aggravating factors - psychological or emotional abuse
Aggravating factors - physical abuse
Aggravating factors - economic abuse
DHR process - family contributed to dhr
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 - community safety partnership recommendations
DHR process - technology systems recommendation themes
DHR process - identification of risk recommendation themes
DHR process - training recommendation themes
DHR process - multi agency working recommendation themes
DHR process - record keeping recommendation themes
DHR process - awareness raising recommendation themes
Extracted recommendations
9 recommendations pulled from the report · 2 matched to organisations in the index
West Yorkshire Police should review training and support to officers to ensure the importance of interpretation of body language and the application of professional judgement inform risk assessments.
The Community Safety Partnership should conduct an audit of MARAC practice to ensure the changes which have been introduced are sufficient to: • ensure all relevant information is provided to inform risk assessment, • appropriate records are kept, • multi-agency risk management plans are developed and clearly set out, • review points and contingency plans are agreed, and the outcome of the meetings circulated to relevant agencies.
MARAC members should ensure that those working with cases of domestic abuse assess the risk of intimidation, including intimidation via third parties and are familiar with options available, including the ‘Unwanted Prisoner Contact’ service, and liaise with the prison service accordingly.
Addressed to
Police | specialist domestic abuse services
Police and specialist domestic abuse services should promote staff awareness of the need to include support to victims regarding the risk of coercion via third parties.
The Community Safety Partnership should review procedures for MARAC and consider the introduction of multi-agency review process where there is reason to believe the risk has increased, including a retraction of a statement in high-risk cases or where a perpetrator is released from custody on remand or at the end of a sentence.
CSP should consider whether the MARAC procedures require amendment to require historical information to be explored in more detail and how this might be done.
The Community Safety Partnership should draw the issue of lack of flagging of perpetrator records to the attention of the Home Office suggesting they should engage with the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) and encourage a review of professional guidance to ensure all possible safeguards within the law are considered when relevant information about perpetration of abuse in involved.
The Community Safety Partnership should share the learning from this review with the West Yorkshire Domestic Abuse Commissioner and should also request that the Home Office consider if the new Multi-Agency Public Protection System interfaces effectively with the MARAC systems.