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

Leicester review

CSP: Leicester Published: August 2026 Year of death: 2019 Extracted: 40 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 identified an extensive history of domestic abuse by the perpetrator and a lack of holistic understanding and professional curiosity by agencies regarding the victim's complex needs, including past abuse, faith, and cultural expectations. This led to an inconsistent multi-agency response, underestimating the perpetrator's risk and hindering the victim's engagement with support.

Home Office classifications

60 tags

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

  • Victim - housing issues
  • Victim - pregnancy
  • Victim - mental ill health
  • Victim - anxiety
  • Victim - depression
  • Victim - self harm
  • Victim - suicidal thoughts
  • Victim - suicide attempts
  • Victim - had been a victim of an abuser before
  • Victim - referred to marac at any time
  • Victim - case heard at marac before homicide
  • Victim - immigration involvement
  • Children - under 18 shared parental responsibility (victim and perpetrator)
  • Children - under 18 shared parental responsibility (between victims)
  • Children - under 18 shared parental responsibility (between perpetrators)
  • Children - living with victim (including adult children)
  • Children - present at homicide (including adult children)
  • Children - subject to child protection or domestic abuse prior to homicide
  • Child - primary address same as victim
  • Perpetrator - case heard in court
  • Perpetrator - issued life sentence
  • Perpetrator - alcohol misuse
  • Perpetrator - substance misuse
  • Perpetrator - housing issues
  • Perpetrator - mental ill health
  • Perpetrator - post traumatic stress disorder (ptsd)
  • Perpetrator - self harm
  • Perpetrator - known to agencies as a domestic abuse perpetrator
  • Perpetrator - known to police as a domestic abuse perpetrator
  • Perpetrator - known to social services as a domestic abuse perpetrator
  • Perpetrator - known to health services as a domestic abuse perpetrator
  • Perpetrator - known to idva or other domestic abuse support service as a domestic abuse perpetrator
  • Perpetrator - known to housing services as a domestic abuse perpetrator
  • Perpetrator - known to school 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
  • Perpetrator - immigration involvement
  • Aggravating factors - separation
  • Aggravating factors - coercive or controlling behaviour
  • Aggravating factors - sexual abuse
  • 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 - social services recommendations
  • DHR process - health services recommendations
  • DHR process - idva or other domestic abuse support service recommendations
  • DHR process - housing services recommendations
  • DHR process - school 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 - policy recommendation themes
  • DHR process - multi agency working recommendation themes
  • DHR process - record keeping recommendation themes
  • DHR process - awareness raising recommendation themes
  • DHR process - other recommendation themes

Extracted recommendations

40 recommendations pulled from the report · 1 matched to organisations in the index

Recommendation 1

Addressed to Community Safety Partnership

The Community Safety Partnership to develop a mechanism to coordinate a partnership response after a domestic homicide, in order to provide opportunities for community re-assurance and information, as well as promote awareness of domestic abuse and create opportunities for disclosure.

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

Recommendation 2

Addressed to Community Safety Partnership

The Community Safety Partnership to satisfy itself that Child A, B and C (as well as their kinship carer) are offered support in relation to the publication of the DHR.

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

Recommendation 3

Addressed to Community Safety Partnership | Leicester City Council Children’s Social Care

After the publication of this DHR, the Community Safety Partnership to work with Leicester City Council Children’s Social Care to ensure that this report is attached to Child A, B and C’s social care records. This is so that, if they wish to read the DHR when they are older, it will be available to them. Information also to be provided for a Later Life Letter.

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

Recommendation 4

Addressed to BPAS

BPAS to review its current guidance and training for staff concerning the real-time management of domestic abuse disclosures.

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

Recommendation 5

Addressed to BPAS

BPAS to review its current guidance to clarify access arrangements to its clinics/units and the management of premises.

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

Recommendation 6

Addressed to ICB

The ICB to review the effectiveness of the current domestic abuse policy guidance and the extent to which this is consistently implemented and has improved practice on the ground.

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

Recommendation 7

Addressed to ICB

The ICB to consider developing a business case for support to GPs based on the IRIS model, including training, pathways, and advocacy support.

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

Recommendation 7.1.4

Addressed to St Peters Health Centre

GPs to review episodes of non-attendance for families/individuals where there are safeguarding concerns.

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

Recommendation 7.1.5

Addressed to Leicester City Council Children’s Social Care

Ensure key messages from IMR are shared across the workforce: including 1) the importance of history in understanding past experiences and responses, 2) a focus on the known risk factors around domestic violence and ensuring that plans address these, 3) the importance of genograms and understanding people’s support networks and 4) curiosity, understanding and empathy as to why victims may not be able to engage in the planning.

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

Recommendation 7.1.6

Addressed to Leicester City Council Children’s Social Care

Ensure all workers within Duty and Advice, Single Assessment and Child in Need Children’s Social Work teams have undertaken domestic violence training (both introductory and working with).

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

Recommendation 7.1.7

Addressed to Leicester City Council Children’s Social Care

Workers undertaking risk assessments around the risk of domestic abuse to have access to expert support and consultation.

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

Recommendation 7.1.8

Addressed to Leicester City Council Children’s Social Care

Workers undertaking domestic violence work to have access to reflective supervision and discussion (which could be across the core group).

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

Recommendation 7.1.9

Addressed to Leicester City Council Children’s Social Care

Further training to be offered to all on effective safety planning (and the detail required) and working with the safety network.

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

Recommendation 7.1.10

Addressed to Leicester City Council Housing

Housing Options to add into procedure manuals a task for homelessness caseworkers to make relevant agencies aware upon closing a case where a) the applicant has disengaged and their whereabouts are unknown, and b) the applicant is known to be a perpetrator of DVA posing an active risk.

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

Recommendation 7.1.11

Addressed to LPT

Public Health Nurse – School Nurses to be reminded to ensure the physical and emotional health needs are met before a case is made inactive to the school nursing service.

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

Recommendation 7.1.12

Addressed to LPT

Whole family safeguarding training to include the need to escalate cases using the LSCPB procedures when a case is drifting.

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

Recommendation 7.1.14

Addressed to LPT

Public Health Nurse – School Nurses and Public Health Nurse – Health Visitors to be reminded to ensure they document that a handover has been undertaken when a new practitioner takes over care of the family.

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

Recommendation 7.1.18

Addressed to UAVA

Review helpline procedures/pathway documents to ensure that risks and needs are reviewed by the Helpline at each contact with victims. Full UAVA staff team to be reminded to complete a review of DASH RIC at point of disclosure of further incidents

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

Recommendation 7.1.19

Addressed to UAVA

To review pathways between all UAVA services to ensure clear and defined responsibilities towards victims during any transition between services/onward referrals.

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

Recommendation 7.1.20

Addressed to UAVA

Within two working days of receiving a referral [to the Jenkins Centre], victim details will be passed on to a partner support worker who will contact the victim within the following working day to complete a full assessment, including a DASH RIC. If at this stage it is assessed that the client requires immediate support, then they will be referred to the relevant service [within UAVA].

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

Recommendation 7.1.21

Addressed to UAVA

To review Partner Support Service case management policies and procedures to ensure responsibilities are clearly defined by the end of April 2021.

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

Recommendation 7.1.22

Addressed to UAVA

Partner Support Service cases to stay on an assessment list until the outcome of an assessment is known, following which the case will either change to an open case or be closed and referred on to other support.

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

Recommendation 7.1.23

Addressed to UAVA

Where contact is not successful with victims, where it is safe to do so letters will be sent out to explaining what assessment will be undertaken with the perpetrator, next steps and what support they can access in the meantime.

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

Recommendation 7.1.24

Addressed to UAVA

The Jenkins Centre to implement timescales for when perpetrators are contacted for assessments (this should be within five working days of receiving an agency referral).

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

Recommendation 8

Addressed to UHL

UHL to work with other health trusts and commissioners to develop a long term, sustainable funding strategy for HIDVA provision.

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

Recommendation 9

Addressed to FreeVA | Children’s Services

FreeVA and Children’s Services to work together to improve joint working relationships by reviewing current pathways and training and by implementing weekly pilot Jenkins Centre surgeries. These surgeries to be available to social workers for professional guidance on work with perpetrators, including around engagement with the Jenkins Centre.

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

Recommendation 10

Addressed to LSCPB

The LSCPB to review local guidance so that, where children on child protection plans move schools, the previous school is invited to attend core group meetings and case child protection conferences.

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

Recommendation 11

Addressed to LSCPB

The LSCPB to review local guidance so that the previous school can send a representative to core group meetings and case child protection conferences.

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

Recommendation 12

Addressed to LSCPB

The LSCPB to ensure that there is a domestic abuse training package available to, and taken up by, local schools (planning to develop this to include Social Care & Early Help and with UAVA).

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

Recommendation 13

Addressed to Respect

Respect to ensure that accredited Domestic Violence Perpetrator Programmes have a consistent understanding of best practice about the timeliness and case management responsibility of Partner Support Services. Respect to ensure that this is clearly expressed in, and assessed for, as part of the Respect Standard 4th Edition when it is published.

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

Recommendation 14

Addressed to Community Safety Partnership

The CSP to work with other local authority departments to understand the demand profile of perpetrator interventions in the city and ensure there is clarity in terms of funding for both one-off translation funding and a broader work force strategy for the Jenkins Centre to meet this need.

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

Recommendation 15

Addressed to Children’s Social Care

Children’s Social Care to undertake spotlight quality assurance activity to review cases open to Children’s Social Care and referrals to UAVA/Jenkins Centre/other services where domestic abuse is an identified issue for families. Recommendations will be shared with UAVA/Jenkins Centre and the LSCPB.

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

Recommendation 16

Addressed to Children’s Social Care | UAVA | FreeVA

Children’s Social Care to work with UAVA/FreeVA to review current pathway, training and to pilot weekly surgeries that will be available to social workers to access for professional guidance on cases and to improve joint working relationships.

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

Recommendation 17

Addressed to Community Safety Partnership

The Community Safety Partnership to facilitate learning and dissemination events with local agencies and professionals to consider the lessons learnt from this case and identify how this learning can be used to improve local practice.

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