Quickly exit this site by pressing the Escape key Leave this site
We use some essential cookies to make our website work. We’d like to set additional cookies so we can remember your preferences and understand how you use our site.
You can manage your preferences and cookie settings at any time by clicking on “Customise Cookies” below. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Cookies notice.
Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can update your cookie settings at any time on the cookies page.
Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can update your cookie settings at any time on the cookies page.
Sorry, there was a technical problem. Please try again.
This site is a beta, which means it's a work in progress and we'll be adding more to it over the next few weeks. Your feedback helps us make things better, so please let us know what you think.
I am writing to enquire what, if any, changes Gwent Police have made to their policies, procedures or practices since the judgement in the case Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v DSD and Another [2018] UKSC 11. The case, broadly speaking, has set the precedent that police services have a duty to effectively investigate serious offences (i.e., sexual offences and serious violence) committed by a perpetrator under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Where they fail to do so, and these police failings amount to substantial and significant errors, the victim of crime can now sue the police for compensation.
If there have been changes made to policies, procedures or practices, please indicate what these are and attach any relevant and available documentation regarding these changes.
If there have not been any changes, please indicate why this is the case.
Further, I ask if Gwent Police have had any claims launched through this route since the judgment from other victims. Please provide any details possible if so.
Finally, has Gwent Police developed or adapted any training to include discussion of the judgement in the case Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v DSD and Another [2018] UKSC 11 or the implications of said judgement?
If so, how so? If not, why not?
Policies, procedures and practice:
A review of policies, procedures and practices was undertaken following the judgement in the case Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v DSD and Another [2018] UKSC 11. No changes were identified as all Sexual offences /serious violence that are reported are subject to the same approach and investigation. And any rationale to not undertake a full investigation would be as a result of clearly documented evidence (i.e., evidence to disprove an offence had occurred identified through the investigation process) We don’t ‘screen’ offences out.
Training:
As above, all allegations of serious offences should be thoroughly investigated as a matter of course and this is already featured within Police Officer training.
Claims:
No information held.
"Information is defined in section 84 of the Act as 'information recorded in any form'. The Act therefore only extends to requests for recorded information. It does not require public authorities to answer questions generally; only if they already hold the answers in recorded form. The Act does not extend to requests for information about policies or their implementation, or the merits or demerits of any proposal or action - unless, of course, the answer to any such request is already held in recorded form." (Day vs ICO & DWP – EA/2006/0069 Final Decision)