Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS) and Her Majesty’s Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate (HMCPSI) have published a report on the police and CPS response to crimes against older people.
The main findings of the report were:
- There is no national police focus on older victims, many of whom are vulnerable.
Police forces don’t generally treat crimes against older people as a specific category of offending. Older people are not one of the groups of vulnerable people considered by the cross-policing vulnerability and public protection board, and instead are treated as vulnerable only if certain conditions apply or are deemed to be at risk. - The police and the CPS can work better together.
There is little evidence that the CPS’s policy on crimes against older people was being considered and applied by prosecutors. The different national arrangements of the police and the CPS prevent them working together effectively. A good start would be to agree a joint and simple definition of what constitutes a crime against an older person. Police should develop a strategy that accounts for some of the specific problems faced by older people, and should consider whether, nationally, the response to crimes against older people can be organised differently. - It is critical that the police have consistent and effective arrangements to make sure people are kept safe.
HMICFRS found no common approach to how the police work with other organisations that have responsibility for keeping older people safe. Police don’t always identify older people who need safeguarding, and don’t always share information in an effective way. However, they also found some reluctance from partners to become as fully involved with the police in adult safeguarding arrangements as they are in those for children. - The police are usually good in their initial dealings with older victims.
When victims or their representatives called the police, there was mostly an appropriate response. Initial decisions about whether a victim was vulnerable were mainly accurate, and HMICFRS commends this as the result of forces’ investment in training to help officers recognise vulnerability. - Investigations are often not good enough.
Victims’ experiences of the investigation process were frequently characterised by low levels of communication from the police, and police response was inconsistent. - There is little evidence that the police are routinely assessing victims’ needs.
The Code of Practice for Victims of Crime makes it clear that the police should conduct assessments of victims’ needs and whether they need any support. HMICFRS found that vulnerable victims weren’t being treated according to their needs because of omissions and errors within their assessments. They also raise concerns that the referral system does not work as well as it should. - The police and the CPS are often poor at dealing with the complex needs of vulnerable older victims.
Police and the CPS often didn’t consider: different ways for victims to give their best evidence; special measure assessments and meetings; requesting registered intermediaries; and what reasonable adjustments to help victims in court. - Crime allocation policies are often not sophisticated enough.
These allocation policies can make decisions based primarily on crime types, meaning they were not sophisticated enough to produce the right decisions for the particular circumstances of the case. - Systems to refer victims to support services remain patchy.
Echoing the findings of last year’s hate crime review, HMICFRS again found that some victims weren’t being appropriately referred to support services.