The Learning the Lessons Committee is a multi-agency committee established to disseminate and promote learning across the police service. Its members are: ACPO, APA, Home Office, IPCC, HMIC and the NPIA.

Learning the Lessons bulletins summarise investigations conducted by the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) or police forces where learning opportunities have been identified.

Police forces facing similar situations to those described can use the experience of other forces to improve their policies and practices.

The bulletin challenges forces to ask "Could it happen here?"

This case is an example of cases referred to in the article published in December 2011 in respect of 'General' matters and is aimed at police officers and staff working in Professional Standards Departments (PSDs). It draws out the fact that communication to the complainant must be in a language easily understood by term and that 'police jargon' and / or abbreviations are not acceptable.

The findings have been presented to draw out lessons for future practice.

Policing A Non-Molestation Order

After her relationship with her ex-partner deteriorated, a woman contacted police and was referred to an organisation to help her to obtain a non-molestation order against the man.

The woman reported a number of other incidents involving the man to the police. In some of these domestic violence forms or risk assessments were not completed or were entered incorrectly onto the system.

When the order was served the man claimed not to understand it, and the case was relisted for an alternative date so that an interpreter could be present. However, the district judge informed the man that the conditions of the order remained in place.

Incorrectly, the order was not recorded in any of the force or national police systems when it was granted.

The man continued to harass the woman, and although the risk was now increasing, risk assessments were not completed and the woman was not referred to a Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conference (MARAC) despite reaching the threshold for referral.

As the harassment continued a decision was made to arrest the man for breach of the order, but officers were unable to locate him.

The next day, the morning the order was due to be reread, the man breached the order again and was arrested. The detective sergeant from the Public Protection Unit was asked to make a case direction decision. The officer reviewed the previous incidents but was not sure a non-molestation order was in place as the computer system did not hold the relevant information. However, he knew the man was due in court to have the order read in his native tongue later that day. As he felt the man may not have understood the order he took the decision to take no further action in relation to the breaches. Once the order was served he received an update but decided not to retrospectively submit a file to the Crown Prosecution

Service (CPS) because he suspected it would not have prosecuted the man based on the question over whether he initially understood the order.

In the early hours of the following morning the police were called to the address where the woman and her young daughter were residing with a friend. The woman was found outside the property with serious injuries from which she later died.

Key questions for policy makers/managers:

• How does your force ensure information is accurately transferred from handwritten to computerised domestic violence forms?
• How does your force ensure non-molestation orders are added to relevant local and national intelligence systems as soon as they are granted?
• In all cases of domestic abuse, what do officers do in your force when they are unable to locate a suspect who is due to be arrested?
• What processes does your force have in place to ensure that appropriate risk assessments are completed and MARAC referrals are made on every occasion when the threshold is reached?
• What oversight do your senior managers have in place to ensure that proportionate, objective decisions are made in relation to submitting files to the CPS and that this is not subject to an individual's subjective view?
• How does your force ensure all policies are refreshed in line with specific review dates?

Click here for a link to the full learning report