Home / Sources / IOPC Learning / 2021/151823
Source · IOPC Learning Case

Recommendations - Devon and Cornwall Police - April 2022

Devon and Cornwall Police Ref: 2021/151823 Recommended 19 Apr 2022 Response due 14 Jun 2022
Death and serious injury

View on IOPC website ↗

Case background

Text published by the IOPC.

We identified organisational learning from a death or serious injury review. A man was due to attend his second court appearance, charged with child sexual offences, but had taken his own life the day before.

Recommendations and responses

2 indexed

Recommendation 1

Link to recommendation · Accepted

Addressed to: Devon & Cornwall Police

Linked bodies: Devon and Cornwall Police

IOPC recommendation

The IOPC recommends that Devon & Cornwall Police review their processes when informing a suspect of a charging decision in cases where is an increased risk of suicide (either due to the suspect’s circumstances and/or the alleged offence), to ensure: a)    an assessment is completed regarding whether it is appropriate to send a postal requisition b)    a decision is recorded regarding whether it is appropriate to send a postal requisition; and c)    if it is appropriate to send a postal requisition, relevant safeguarding is completed in relation to the suspect subject to the postal requisition.

This recommendation follows a Death or Serious Injury (DSI) review in which a man, who was sent a postal requisition informing him that he had been charged with Child Sexual Exploitation (CSE) offences, took his own life the day before he was due to attend Court.  The man had been under investigation and had already attended Court on a previous occasion.

Postal requisitions are legal documents notifying the recipient that a decision has been made to prosecute an offence at court.

Although the man did not attempt to harm himself after receiving the postal requisition, we know in some cases, such as Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (CSEA) or Indecent Images of Children (IIOC), there is an increased risk of suicide and that the time of a charging decision is a potential trigger event or flashpoint. In this case there appears to have been no safeguarding considerations at the point the man was informed he was being charged.

Response published by the IOPC

Recommendation accepted:

Devon and Cornwall Police agree with the content of the recommendation.  There are already processes in place within Devon and Cornwall Police to address the points raised.

Devon and Cornwall Police recognise that in any investigation there are several potential points where a suspect is impacted by the moving forward, changing direction, or other event.  The point of charge or postal requisition is one of those and from a process perspective one in Devon and Cornwall Police’s control, i.e. it is a police action.

Devon and Cornwall Police already have policies in place that identify the responsibility of the officer/investigator in the case to engage with the Criminal Justice team and ensure an assessment is made of the suitability of a postal requisition, and the decision is recorded to whether or not to use this process.  Consideration is given to appropriate safeguarding actions during the service of the postal requisition, and identification of those that are better conducted by personal service.

Having considered the existing processes, DCP feel they are sufficient and do not need further review.

Check the original case on the IOPC website

Recommendation 2

Link to recommendation · Not Accepted

Addressed to: Devon and Cornwall Constabulary

Linked bodies: Devon and Cornwall Police

IOPC recommendation

The IOPC recommends that Devon and Cornwall Constabulary ensure that appropriate safeguarding contact is made with those subject to investigation, of serious and high profile cases, before each Court appearance.

This recommendation follows a Death or Serious Injury (DSI) review in which a man, charged with Child Sexual Exploitation (CSE) took his own life the day before he was due to attend Court.  The man had been under investigation and had already attended Court on a previous occasion.

The day after his first Court appearance, he was contacted by the police from a safeguarding perspective.  The police have stated that he would have been contacted again after the next Court appearance.

Given that such cases have a higher risk of suicide, and that the police have accepted that a Court appearance is a known 'trigger point' in a case, it would seem more logical to make contact before each Court appearance.

Response published by the IOPC

Recommendation not accepted:

Devon and Cornwall Police do not accept this recommendation. It is not deemed to be achievable within Devon and Cornwall Police with the resources available. It is not possible to define what is a high-profile case and this does not form part of a national recommendation.

Devon and Cornwall Police recognise their responsibility that safeguarding is an ongoing commitment and we will work with our Safeguarding Hub to remind investigators to be alive to those defendants who are potentially vulnerable and reinforce/remind the need to remain alive to the impact of such events.

Aside of this recommendation for general crime where there is potential risk, Devon and Cornwall Police will review our current practices to identify any areas for improvement in general around risk management. This is not however specifically related to the recommendation around each court appearance, which is not achievable.

Reason for no action –

The recommendation is not part of a national recommendation. There are many events in a case that may have a triggering effect and not all risks can be mitigated against.  Postal requisition is one triggering effect, release from custody another, etc., the case then starts to move into the wider CJ process, which is wide and could include such ‘events’ as a trip to the solicitor’s office by the defendant, CPS providing disclosure packs for self-representing individual up to and including a court appearance.  These processes are wide and not all are seen, felt or influenced by the police directly hence DCP cannot commit to this particular recommendation practically, from a resource perspective etc.  The court dates are supplied and amended by the courts, which can be frequently varied at any stage out of the control of Police.

It is not possible from a Witness Care perspective to ascertain when a suspect has been postal requisitioned and suspect management does not come under the Witness Care Unit provision.

It is not possible to define what constitutes a serious or ‘high-profile’ case within this context and the wider definition of serious crime is too vast to adequately resource.

Public Protection Teams and Police Online Investigation Teams are well averse to dealing with high risk suspects and have tried and tested methods for managing risk built into their working practices, specifically around Child Sexual Offences.

Check the original case on the IOPC website