I have long suspected that the police widely misuse the Community Resolution scheme – a concern which is shared by many of my colleagues. Community Resolutions were introduced in 2009 as an alternative way of dealing with less serious crime and have been used increasingly year-on-year. In our experience, police often reach for this disposal to achieve a ‘result’, sometimes with little regard to the appropriateness or indeed whether the criteria have been met.
These concerns are well illustrated by a recent news story, which provides a particularly shocking example. It was reported that Ms Gather had received a knock on the door by the police, after the Trust that runs a local park, reported that she had illegally picked mushrooms. The park is a Designated Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), meaning that an offence is committed if any wildlife is removed.
Ms Gather was not at home when the officer attended. Undeterred, the officer asked Ms Gather’s husband to sign a Community Resolution agreement on her behalf, which reportedly included her agreeing not to take items from the park in the future, and that she would ‘look into what an SSSI is’. Incredibly, the officer had not even spoken to Ms Gather prior to this – if he had done so, she would have made it clear that the offence was entirely denied.
Unlawful
It won’t come as a surprise to hear that the Community Resolution was issued unlawfully. In order to meet the criteria for a Community Resolution, the following must apply:
- the offence must be capable of proof
- the offender must be identified
- they must admit guilt
- The terms of the order must be positively agreed
Clearly, the last two of these points were not met and the officer made several fundamental mistakes in how he approached the matter.
The Implications of Community Resolution Misuse
Community Resolutions are low-level disposals – and do not give rise to a criminal record. However, there are still implications when they are imposed. They are recorded locally by the relevant police force and can be accessed for intelligence purposes. More importantly, the details of the Community Resolution can appear on Enhanced DBS certificates, if deemed relevant to a particular job.
The Sentencing Guidelines Council also states that they can be viewed as an aggravating factor if relevant to a subsequent offence. The implications are obvious if a person works in a regulated profession, such as teaching or healthcare. The same issue applies to anyone wishing to renew a shotgun licence – a fact which took one of our recent clients by surprise. Another aspect is that it does not sit well with many people to know that there is a police record about them on the system – especially if there is a feeling that it was unwarranted.
Thankfully, the mistake in Ms Gather’s case was discovered and the order was rescinded. Nevertheless, it raises questions about how the police can sometimes fixate on securing these disposals, at the expense of considering the allegation in a reasonable way.
In another recent example, I represented a 15-year-old youth, whom the police had contacted about an alleged malicious communication, which occurred on Snapchat. The officer proposed to my client’s parents that they would attend the school and issue a Community Resolution. However, once I contacted the officer to request disclosure and scrutinised the allegation – it became clear that the behaviour had not actually constituted an offence. In the end, the officer dropped the investigation, cancelling the proposed voluntary interview.
There is no doubt that Community Resolutions are a valuable alternative to formal sanctions (such as Cautions) and often serve to avoid an unnecessary criminal record for minor errors of judgment. However, not every complaint requires a ‘disposal’ and sometimes old fashioned ‘words of advice’ are all that is needed. If a police officer is proposing a Community Resolution to resolve a complaint, it’s always important to receive legal advice and to make an informed decision about what is best in the overall circumstances.
About the Author
Nathan Seymour-Hyde is a solicitor and Partner within our Private Crime team. He specialises in representing people who want to preserve their clean criminal record. He has a vast amount of experience in representing people in both police station interviews as well as at court.
