Agenda item

The Panel considered a report of the Police and Crime Commissioner which provided an update on work undertaken by the Durham Rape Scrutiny Panel (RSP) (for copy see file of Minutes).

Councillor May asked whether the recommendations from the Panel applied to male victims as well as female.  He also sought clarity on the Criming Process referred to in paragraph 5.1 of the RSP report and what an appropriate rank would be, referred to in Recommendation 8.

The PCC replied that, while all victims in the cases examined by the RSP had all been female, the recommendations of the Panel would apply to all victims of domestic violence, regardless of gender.  The Criming Process was part of the National Crime Reporting Standard and it was important that any allegation which was later scaled down was subject to a rigorous audit trail and transparency.  An appropriate rank officer would vary by situation.

In reply to a question from Councillor Brookes about the number of cases the Panel had scrutinised the PCC replied that this was four, however, it was hoped that more cases would be scrutinised in the future.  Councillor Brookes referred to Recommendation 4 which related to retraction statements, an area of concern to him.  He asked whether, if a victim issued a retraction statement, but the police felt there was sufficient evidence for a prosecution, the force would take a proactive role and seek a prosecution.  The PCC replied that if the strength of evidence was such that the police considered a prosecution was necessary, the victim could be declared as a hostile witness.  The PCC added that he would raise this issue with the force.

Councillor Harker referred to Recommendation 4 and sought clarity around retraction and misinterpretation.  The PCC replied that in the past, the decision to prosecute had been made by the police, Crown Prosecution Service and victim.  This recommendation sought to bring closer scrutiny of this process to ensure it was full and transparent.

Resolved:

That the report be noted.