Supporting Justice are delighted to welcome Amy Sage to the team as a new research associate. Amy is an early career researcher and criminal justice practitioner.

“We’re really excited to have Amy join us as an early career researcher, bringing a fresh, contemporary perspective to the team. Amy has already worked on a Quality Mark assessment for us and we’re looking forward to utilizing her research and analysis expertise in future work.” Becky White, Director

Read more about Amy’s research experience here.

Supporting Justice are delighted to welcome Lisa Waddell to the team as a new research associate. Lisa is an early career quantitative researcher with experience working with large data sets.

Read more about Lisa on her profile here.

“We’re really excited to have Lisa join the team and to make use of her quantitative data expertise across our consultancy and research work. This is a great opportunity for us to support early career researchers to gain experience outside academia as part of our commitment to building capacity within the victim and witness sector” Becky White, Director

 

We’re thrilled to announce a new addition to the SuJu team! International researcher and campaigner Sharon Haywood brings valuable skills and experience in violence against women, body image and gender to the SuJu team. Read more about Sharon’s impressive career, driving forward positive change for women and children here.

“We’re really excited to have Sharon join us and increase our capacity on issues around women and gender. Sharon is an experienced and passionate campaigner for women’s rights. She has successfully influenced legislative change in Argentina which will benefit millions of women. We’re looking forward to both working with her and learning from her.”

Becky White, Director, Supporting Justice CIC

This has been an exciting year for us as we emerged from reduced operations during the years of the pandemic protective measures and increased our activities into new areas and partnerships. We wanted to share with you some of the highlights of the past twelve months before we move forward into 2023, our 10^th anniversary year.

---

Review of the Historical Institutional Abuse Scheme (Northern Ireland) Redress Scheme

Following a motion in the Northern Ireland Assembly in response to victim and survivor concerns over the redress process, we were commissioned by the Northern Ireland Executive to undertake a review of the redress process and make recommendations to improve the experience for victims and survivors.

We heard from victim and survivor groups about the difficulties navigating the process and the impact of engaging in a legalistic procedure in relation to their experience of abuse. We also consulted with a range of stakeholders, including the Historical Institutional Abuse Redress Board, the Commissioner for Survivors of Institutional Childhood Abuse, the Law Society and the Victim and Survivor Service.

Despite the challenges presented by the pandemic and the absence of a government in Stormont, the redress scheme had processed an impressive number of applications. The desire by all parties to improve the experience of engaging with and applying to the Scheme was especially encouraging. We are grateful to all for their assistance.

Our recommendations focused on presenting a clearer and more cohesive process for applicants through improving collaboration between all parties. We were mindful of the time limited nature of the Scheme and the advanced age of some applicants. The Redress Scheme legislation limits the operation of the Scheme to a maximum of five years, with our review taking place roughly halfway through. A priority for us was to avoid any delay which would risk denying victims and survivors the opportunity for redress before the Scheme ends.

All parties are working to take forward those operational recommendations that can be progressed in the absence of Ministers.

---

Road Harm Victim Needs Assessment

Our first piece of research from our partnership with Staffordshire University explored the needs of those affected by road traffic collisions. The Needs Assessment was commissioned by the Office of the Warwickshire Police Crime Commissioner to inform the move from grant funded to commissioned service for their Independent Road Victim Advocate service.

Working with Staffordshire colleagues Dr Leanne Savigar-Shaw and Dr Jo Turner, the research included analysis of Warwickshire Police road collision data from 2017-2021 and police force FOI requests on road victim provision from 40 police forces. We held focus groups with 34 stakeholders and received completed questionnaires from a further eight. Supporting Justice led on victim engagement, undertaking ten in-depth interviews with victims, bereaved families and those otherwise affected by road traffic collisions (RTC).  

We discovered very little research in relation to the impact of RTCs and the needs of those affected, especially considering the extent of the issue, with five people killed or seriously injured by RTCs every day in England and Wales. We also discovered an incredibly engaged road safety and victim care sector, working hard to put the issue on to the agenda for government and other policy makers.

The research found a postcode lottery of provision, exacerbated by the gaps between crime and civil provision. We recommended the introduction of national service standards for locally commissioned services, ensuring consistent provision whilst enabling innovation. The full report and executive summary can be found here.

---

New Associates

A major highlight of 2022 for us has been the opportunity to welcome new associates, and we look forward to announcing more in the coming weeks.

We were lucky to have Stephen Chapman, the former Welsh Government Modern Slavery Coordinator join our team at the end of 2022. Steve has an incredible track record within criminal justice and disaster response, and we’re looking forward to utilising his extensive skills in multi-agency and cross-government working.

As part of our Community Interest Company status, Supporting Justice have committed to working with early career researchers in order to support and add capacity to the victim and witness sector more generally. Amy Sage joined us in October 2022 to shadow a Quality Mark assessment and site visit, in preparation for a renewed focus on the Mark in 2023. Amy is currently undertaking PhD research at the University of Bristol, looking at the exclusions to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme for victims with criminal convictions.

---

2023 – SuJu turns 10!

2023 is our 10^th anniversary and we are looking forward to continuing our expansion, building on our track record of supporting justice and improving outcomes for victims and witnesses. We will share more details on how we are going to mark this milestone throughout the year

We’re thrilled to announce a new addition to the SuJu team.

Supporting Justice are proud to welcome Stephen Chapman to the organization as a senior associate. Stephen brings a wealth of knowledge and experience across areas including modern slavery, policing and responses to terrorism.

“Having worked with Stephen in his role as the Welsh Government’s Modern Slavery Coordinator, I’m incredibly excited to have him onboard with us at SuJu. He brings extensive subject matter expertise which will benefit our research and consultancy provision. His collaborative approach and extensive knowledge make working with him both a pleasure and a learning experience for all involved. Stephen’s input will also support the development of our early career researchers as we continue to expand.”

Becky White, Director, Supporting Justice

Stephen is the Program Manager and Lecturer for Emergency Preparedness and Civil Protection at the University Wales Trinity Saint David, Blue Light Academy. He regularly lectures and works with several academic institutions and in other subjects including Policing Terrorism and Strategic Leadership.

Previous career roles include the Welsh Government’s Anti-Slavery Coordinator.

Prior to this appointment he worked for the London Organising Committee for the Olympic and Paralympic Games 2012,

Steven has held numerous senior roles in national and local government and isan experienced Consultant across the UK and overseas.

As Anti-Slavery Coordinator, Stephen led and coordinated the multi-agency response aimed to make Wales hostile to slavery and to provide the best possible support for survivors.

Stephen has:

• Established the Wales Anti-Slavery Leadership Group,
• Is a member of the Home Office Modern Slavery Strategic Implementation Group
• UK Government Officials Modern Slavery Jurisdictional Group
• All Wales Portal Group and Wales Reference Group for the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse.

Welsh Government responsibilities included leading on Serious Organised Crime issues, being part of the cadre for the Emergency Co-ordination Centre for Wales (ECCW).

For the Wales NATO Summit 2014 and UEFA Champions League Cup Final Cardiff 2017, Stephen was the Government Silver Command Liaison Officer.

For the 2020/21 Welsh Government response to COVID-19, D20 (EU Transition) and other concurrent events he was the ECCW Operations Director and Welsh Government Liaison Officer for the Strategic Co-ordination and Recovery Groups; and the Cabinet Office Civil Contingencies Secretariat. This important work was recognized by the First Minister of Wales and Welsh Government Permanent Secretary.

Stephen’s academic qualifications include:

• Master’s degree in Business Administration,
• Master’s Degree in Management,
• Post Graduate Degree in Management Studies,
• Post Graduate Certificate in Leadership with Merit,
• Bachelor’s Degree in Science with Honors in Policing and Police Studies
• ‘PRINCE2’ qualified Project Manager

He regularly lectures and works with several academic institutions including Cardiff Metropolitan University (Forensic Psychology), Cardiff Business School, University of South Wales, and the University of Wales Trinity Saint David. He is a qualified Mentor and Coach.

In 2016, Stephen received the Welsh Government Award for Leadership. Whilst serving in the Police Service, he received several commendations including for leadership and bravery.

Stephen is proud to be an Ambassador for the White Ribbon Campaign, which promotes men taking a stand to end violence against women and girls. He is also an Ambassador for the UK Modern Slavery and Exploitation Helpline, and the National Museum Wales.

When the first reports of the Coronavirus started to come out of China a couple of months ago, no one could predict the enormity of the changes that would take place in our lives as individuals and as a society (a global society). Those changes are now starting to be real and tangible: trips outside limited; pubs, restaurants, cinemas closed; escalating numbers of people having to be confined to home; and, of course, most significantly, more and more people becoming infected and, sadly, dying.

But in so many ways our lives and our society, our community, continues. Our vital and essential workers must continue to do what they do; our streets still need to be cleaned; our shops still need to be stocked; our streets still need to be places where, even though access is much reduced, we can  feel safe and protected. There are many examples of how life is continuing and, to a degree, some things might actually be improving – speaking to old friends, keeping an eye on vulnerable neighbours, helping join the new army of NHS volunteers to assist those less able to look after themselves. All this and more shows how such a crisis can bring out the best in people.

Flip the coin, however, and we see manifestations of selfishness and greed, a wanton disregard for the needs and safety of others – those scenes in the media from supermarkets were ugly and frightening. Internet scammers are already doing their worst.  So it’s crucial we don’t forget the need to look out for people who may not fit readily into one of the current “priority” groups, the elderly and infirm. Especially, when we can see the sad reality that there will be people trying to take advantage of this current crisis, we need to think about how best to support and reassure those who may well fall victim to criminal activity – it hasn’t gone away and nor has the need for support.

How can we make sure that those in need of support will continue to get it? We know that many organisations will continue to offer such support in the best ways that they can throughout all this. But we all need to think more about what can be done to ensure such support in rapidly changing circumstances : supporters, staff and volunteers will not be able to offer face to face support; there will be an increase of domestic abuse incidents, undoubtedly, as people are confined to their homes with all the additional pressures of worrying about rents, mortgages, paying for food; the police may find themselves increasingly (over ) stretched and so not able to respond as they would wish; people will feel increasingly isolated and alone if not abandoned.

We need to think creatively about our approach to maintaining good and effective support for victims during this period and our organisations need to promote the clear message that, whilst it might not be business as usual, we are still very much here to offer support, advice and, if nothing more, a listening ear to help people through this and through other difficulties that do not, sadly, go away in a time of crisis.

As a global society we have been encouraged, over many years now, to work in smarter and more agile ways: teleconferencing, hangouts, video and live links in court etc. Never has this been more important than now. Victims of crime must not be forgotten; we must reach out, be proactive in making sure our message and offer of support is delivered loud and clear, use all the means at our disposal to reassure people that they are still important and that, even if an imperfect way, we will still be here to try and meet their needs.

Following a new piece of legislation which will allow sentencing remarks of High Court and Senior Circuit judges to be aired.

The Crown Court (Recording and Broadcasting) Order 2020 will allow cameras to broadcast from the Crown Court, although filming will be restricted to judges’ sentencing remarks only and no other court user – including victims, witnesses, jurors and court staff – may be filmed.

Though proceedings may already be broadcast from the Court of Appeal under certain conditions, extending this to the Crown Court means the public will be able to hear judges explain the reasons behind their sentences for the most serious offences.

This change to legislation, while partly the result of campaigning efforts by the BBC, ITN and Sky News, is part of the government’s wider court reform and digitalisation programme, which aims to use technology to demystify and improve people’s access to the justice system.

John Ryley, Head of Sky News, said: “The filming of judges sentencing remarks in the Crown Court is a great day for transparency in our courts. This is a further step in helping the public to understand the constraints under which judges work and the complexities of many of the biggest criminal cases.”

A powerful editorial in last Sunday’s Observer newspaper linked the facts that domestic violence killings have hit a five-year high and reported rape cases increased by 9% in the last year.

The domestic violence bill was delayed again as one of the casualties of the prorogation of parliament,

Rape, it seems, is becoming effectively decriminalised, with the vast majority of perpetrators free to continue offending. While reported rapes are on a frightening upward trajectory, all the key statistics for counter measures are tumbling in the other direction: in the past year rape charges fell by 38%, prosecutions by 33% and convictions by 27%.

“Today, a woman reporting rape has just a 3% chance of seeing her alleged rapist convicted”, according to the Observer.

The DPP blames both the police, for trying to second guess DPP prosecution decisions and making fewer referrals, and the welter of evidence available via new technology, particularly smartphones, which needs to be trawled through to gather evidence and build a case.

The apportioning of blame on the police looks more than a little unfair when you consider that CPS prosecution rates for rape have fallen almost twice as fast as police referrals to the CPS. The Observer concludes that the figures indicate ‘a damaging change in approach to prosecuting rape by the CPS’.

Rapists, it seems, continue to benefit from both the myths and stereotypes that have always clouded and challenged rape case evidence and the desire of the CPS to improve its conviction rates, with prosecutors encouraged to ‘take more weak cases out of the system’.  Since prosecutors also advise police on which cases should be referred to the CPS, they consequently have considerable influence over the falling police referral rates blamed by the DPP.

Government austerity measures which have seen a fall of 20,000 in police numbers since 2010 will also have limited police capacity to track down and arrest suspects, as well as investigate and consider the weight of evidence required to bring a successful prosecution.

The case studies in the Observer article demonstrate clearly the shocking experiences victims go though. One victim was told it was a ‘positive’ case. A year later it was dropped, in part because she did not look particularly scared or nervous when seen in CCTV images from earlier that night. The CPS needs to accept greater responsibility for the ineffectiveness of the system for bringing rapists to justice, both to provide justice for the victims and to deter future perpetrators; taking weak cases out of the system is not the answer.

The central point of any accusation and prosecution for the offence of rape is that of consent: did the complainant (victim) give consent to sexual activity or not? On that hinges the case and any possible conviction.

Once again the issue of consent has surfaced in the context of rape and other sexual offences. This time it relates to the issue of asking (some may suggest forcing) complainants (victims) to give consent for the police to trawl through (carefully assimilate) the data contained on the complainants mobile phone and other digital devices. Failure to give this consent may result in the termination of any proceedings. The rationale behind asking for this consent is that important information that relates to the case and upon which crucial decisions (including innocence or guilt) may be determined, could  be on the phone and so make it necessary for the police (and CPS) to have access to said phone data in order to proceed with the case. Victims of domestic abuse and violence may also find themselves in a similar position.

That, I must say, all sounds fairly reasonable. We all want as many relevant facts to be available so that a just and fair decision can be arrived at in any criminal proceedings. If there is information available that will help determine whether someone is guilty or innocent of a serious offence then it is surely reasonable to ask that this may be made available to those responsible for making such decisions;  ultimately a jury in a court trial.

Well, yes, so far so good. But is this suggestion of asking a victim (complainant) to hand over their phone, possibly for many months ( the guidance suggests that the police “may be able” to offer an alternative phone to the victim), fair and proportionate? In defending the new consent form being rolled out in police forces, Assistant Commissioner Ephgrave of the Metropolitan Police has, reassuringly, suggested that this is not the finished article but a useful step along the way. Yet the premise ( and so the foundation) of the form seems to be to help address the recent and highly damaging problems around disclosure in sexual offence trials which have attracted a lot of attention.

It is certainly the case that disclosure issues can and have made a complete hash of cases and that no one, complainant, defendant, the criminal justice system or us, the public, isn’t impacted by them particularly when it comes to confidence in the system. But the new consent form does not look like the right way to help address this. The problems in the past have been about disclosure – this is not the same as not knowing about or ignorance of available information. The material was there, the police and CPS had it; they just didn’t pass it on. I’m not sure how trawling through a mobile phone addresses this, though accept that it will certainly help gather lots more information.

And that’s another issue. If the police are able to keep the phone for an extended period and give it a thorough examination what happens to the information they glean. The guidance suggests it will be kept and states that if there is any evidence of other criminal activity it may be pursued. Does this help build confidence among victims? Consider a complainant (rape victim) who may have contacts who aren’t always absolute sticklers for obeying every law of the land – and, if being honest, I suspect that could apply to just about all of us. Knowing what is on the phone (the odd text, What’sApp, email) am I going to be relaxed about handing the phone over to the police? Am I, perhaps, not more likely to just forget about it and try to get on with my life? Am I more likely to be denied justice (that sounds clinical and not at all reflective of the trauma involved)?

And what about the perception that the desire to have access to all the data on a phone is but another way of building a picture of the victim that, in truth, should have nothing to do with the case. Remember the days when juries were asked to reflect on whether the short skirt the victim (complainant) was wearing contributed to the offence happening. That helped undermine  trust in the criminal justice system and it’s hard to see how this new measure, well intentioned as it is, will help restore said trust.

Asking victims (complainants) to hand over their mobile phones and consent to what some may see as a “fishing trip” isn’t the way to address the problems with disclosure. It is, perhaps, a bit of a sledgehammer approach to what is, obviously, a hugely sensitive area. I’m sure the motives are honourable and that the police and CPS are really trying to help. But it doesn’t look to have got off to a good start. If the criminal justice system is to work it must, as the Director of Public Prosecutions and AC Ephgrave said in their briefing command “trust and confidence”. This approach is, indeed, far from the finished article.

If all this sounds to be but an academic discussion let’s remember what this is really about, indeed, what our criminal justice system is (or should be) about: people. As a rape victim has recently said: “They were the most private details of my life and they were going to be revealed to anyone and everyone involved in the case when all I was trying to do was get justice. Who in their right mind would go ahead with a complaint when this is how they’re being treated?” she said. “People are just going to get away with rape.”

Best intentions are not always enough. We need also to be aware of unintended consequences.

Our collaboration with VSE

We are delighted to have been able to help Victim Support Europe and the Multi Donor Trust Fund for Justice Sector Support in Serbia with the production of their recent report.

Supporting Justice has collaborated on this piece of work and engaged with colleagues in Serbia over the past few years and we hope that this will play a significant part in improving the support offered and delivered to victims of crime in Serbia.

The report also recognises that Supporting Justice is leading the way and pioneering this approach in England and Wales. Our Quality Mark standards has been of real use in the development of ideas and production within the report, highlighting the need for standards, indicators and criteria to assess the effectiveness of victim care.
As the executive summary highlights;

“It is important to be able to verify the quality of aid to victims.”

Our Quality Mark

The development of our Victims Choice standards and the application of our independent and outcome focused approach is one that we think has intrinsic merit in delivering effective victim care.

The recipients of our Quality Mark think so too, recognising that it has helped them deliver even better service to victims.

It is heartening to read that our contribution to the improvement in victim care is recognised beyond these shores.
We look forward to continuing to assist others in their determination to improve victim services wherever they are needed.

 

Contact Us

If you would like to know more about our Quality Mark standards please get in touch.

As well as our Quality Mark assessment, we also offer a touchpoint analysis to help you determine if your organisation is “Quality Mark ready.”

We are happy to provide more information on request.