By punter99 - 5 Sep 22 11:30 AM
The other day I came across some really interesting details of a plan for reactive management of SO. This idea was first presented in 2017 and it does appear to be operating in some police forces today.
https://news.npcc.police.uk/releases/new-tailored-approach-to-managing-registered-sex-offenders-introduced
The idea is that if an SO has been rated as low risk for 3 years, and has no SHPO, then they no longer need to have any home visits. It was introduced in the year that the number of SO passed 50,000 for the first time and it was obviously intended to reduce the workload of police forces.
The number of SO right now is nearer 70k, so how many are being managed under this scheme? It really depends on the police force. Around 50% of all SO are classified as low risk, but very few are on the scheme. Just 70 out of 593 in one area. One police force uses a polygraph to assess who should be on the scheme, although that is not standard practice. One police force (Durham) sends uniformed officers round to visit SO, in a clear breach of the national policy. Lots of forces send just one PPU, when they should send teams of two. In London, the Met allows SO to be monitored by phone and even to complete their annual registration by phone or email. Many of these policies are in place, because there are too many SO and not enough officers to monitor them all.
There is no consistency of approach across the country. But the most obvious problem with reactive management, is that so many SO have an SHPO. That prevents many low risk people from being managed reactively, and forces the police to visit them. With the numbers set to increase to 100k by 2030, there really ought to be an expansion of the scheme to include SO with an SHPO, so that resources are being used effectively.
|
By JASB - 8 Oct 22 1:01 PM
+x+xHowever one comment I learnt from my early military days (pre mass computers) feed something crap and all you will get in return is crap
From my student days, I seem to remember that the engineering equivalent saying is: Garbage In, Garbage OutSo, if you ever see GIGO anywhere, that's what it means.
Agree there is many forms of stating that; not all are polite 
|
|