Policing stalking and harassment

Report: 10
Date: 7 April 2011
By: Chief Executive

Summary

The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of stalking and harassment and the MPS response.

A. Recommendation

That

1. Members note the issues in relation to policing stalking

B. Supporting information

1. This report was produced as a result of reviewing data for the joint MPA/MPS Annual Violence against Women report. Much of the content of that report and of the Authority’s work in relation to VAW has been focused on domestic violence as the highest volume area of VAW, and sexual violence as the most severe.

2. In producing the VAW report and researching this one, it became clear that there was a very high volume of harassment cases recorded by the MPS but the response could be different depending on the context of the case. It was also clear that harassment and stalking were not currently viewed as a significant and specialist section of the response to VAW, requiring awareness and understanding of potential risk. Reasons for this are explored below.

Definition of stalking and harassment and the criminal justice context

3. The term ‘stalking’ does not appear in UK legislation, and cases of stalking are dealt with under the Protection from Harassment Act (1997). The Act states:

‘A person must not pursue a course of conduct which amounts to harassment of another, and which he knows or ought to know amounts to harassment of the other’.

4. The legislation requires the presence of two indicators; a ‘course of conduct’ which must be two or more occasions, and the understanding on the part of the perpetrator (‘knows or ought to know’) that their actions amount to harassment. The Protection from Harassment Act (1997) also defines the offence of Putting a Person in Fear of Violence as follows;

‘A person whose course of conduct causes another to fear, on at least two occasions, that violence will be used against him is guilty of an offence if he knows or ought to know that his course of conduct will cause the other so to fear on each of those occasions’

5. There is often confusion about the application of this legislation. Although the law is clear, Officers have to make a decision where to draw the line in labeling a series of incidents which do not individually constitute crimes as the offence of harassment. For example, there is no requirement for the ‘course of conduct’ to be the same two instances of harassment (e.g. letters, texts, or following the victim), but this is not specified in the legislation itself so victims rely on officers having this specialist knowledge.

6. Most notably, it is understood that it is common practice (not just in London but generally) for Officers to inform victims that a warning letter must be sent to the perpetrator in order that they then cannot state they ‘did not know’ their actions caused alarm or distress. This is not the case though it can assist to build an evidence base.

7. It should be noted that experts in the subject of stalking and harassment have opposing views on the efficacy of the existing legislation. Hamish Brown MBE states that the Protection from Harassment Act is the best in the world and simply needs to be interpreted and used effectively. Alexis Bowater from the Network for Surviving Stalking and Ann Mould, founder of 'Action Scotland Against Stalking’ state that using the word stalking helps law enforcement to understand the gravity of the situation and refer to best practice in the US and Scotland where specific anti-stalking legislation has been introduced.

8. Scottish legislation [1] defines stalking as where:

(a) ‘A’ engages in a course of conduct,

(b) subsection (3) or (4) applies, and

(c) ‘A’s course of conduct causes ‘B’ to suffer fear or alarm.

(3) This subsection applies where ‘A’ engages in the course of conduct with the intention of causing ‘B’ to suffer fear or alarm.

(4) This subsection applies where ‘A’ knows, or ought in all the circumstances to have known, that engaging in the course of conduct would be likely to cause ‘B’ to suffer fear or alarm.

9. The CPS produced guidelines in September 2010 which include the term ‘stalking’. The guidelines emphasise the existence and widespread nature of stalking as a particular category of harassment, noting that stalking ‘is a term used to describe a particular kind of harassment. Generally, it is used to describe a long-term pattern of persistent and repeated contact with, or attempts to contact, a particular victim’. The guidance specifies that speech can be included under the course of conduct and also that there is no specification stating that the incidents forming a course of conduct must occur within a certain time frame.

Impact of stalking and harassment

10. These dry legal definitions do not perhaps adequately identify the impact of stalking on victims. Alexis Bowater states that victims ‘have their lives stolen’. Hamish Brown MBE said something similar; that as an investigator he always asks a victim ‘‘has anything changed in your life since this began?’. Invariably victims will then outline how their freedom of movement has been curtailed as they avoid leaving the house, or how contact with family and friends has dwindled as they are afraid to switch on their mobile phone.

11. British Crime Survey data showed that for 24% of respondents who had been stalked, it lasted over a year, for 14% between a year and five years and for 5% it lasted more than 10 years.

12. A survey [2] found that a third of victims said they’d lost their job or relationship or had been forced to move because of the stalking. 98% of victims reported emotional effects due to stalking. These included anxiety, sleep disturbance, anger, depression, paranoia, agoraphobia and post-traumatic stress disorder. Half of the victims participating in the University of Leicester study said they’d lost out financially due to stalking. A third said they’d paid for repairs to damage inflicted by a stalker and a fifth paid for legal advice.

Types of stalker

13. A Home Office Research study [3] found that the most common reasons given for stalking are that a perpetrator wished to start a relationship (22%), the offender wanted to annoy or upset the victim (16%) or the offender wished to continue a relationship. Dr Lorraine Sheridan produced the below typologies which are available from the Network for Surviving Stalking; [4]

14. Stalker Typology One: Ex-partner harassment/stalking (50% of cases)

Characteristics:

• bitterness/hate linked to relationship’s history, fixated on the past.
• prior relationship involving domestic violence which turns to more public violence and verbal abuse
• recruitment of friends and family to perpetuate a campaign of hate
• third party abuse (verbal and physical), e.g. family members of and known supporters of the victim
• nature of harassment characterised by: high levels of physical violence, high levels of verbal threat, property damage
• triggers for harassment both spontaneous (e.g. following a chance encounter) and pre-meditated (e.g. sitting in a car outside the victim’s home)
• activity tending towards being anger driven and impulsivity with corresponding lack of concern about coming to Police attention

15. Stalker Typology 2: Infatuation harassment (18% of cases)

Characteristics:

• target is ‘beloved’ rather than ‘victim’ and is all-pervasive in thoughts
• the world and events are interpreted in relation to target
• beloved is focus of fantasy and fantasy is romantic and positive
• particular emphasis on hope of what might be, fixated on the future
• beloved sought out with non-malicious ruses e.g. love letters under windscreen wiper, hanging around and pretending it’s a chance encounter
• low levels of danger
• harassment not characterised by threats, macabre gifts and negative intervention
• perpetrator age typically teenage or mid-life

16. Stalker Typology 3: Delusional fixation stalking (15% of cases)

Characteristics (where dangerous):

• victim tends to be at high risk of physical violence and sexual assault
• perpetrator is likely to have come to the notice of police and mental health e.g. borderline personality disorder, episodic schizophrenia
• perpetrator likely to have a history of sexual problems and offences, including stalking
• incessant bombarding with telephone calls, letters, visits to workplace
• unpredictable behavioural patterns, appearing in diverse places at irregular times
• content of material sent by and conversation of perpetrator is unsubtle, sexual/obscene, and disjointed semantically
• stalkers held belief in relationship even though there has been no prior conversation
• victims are male or female and tend to have some form of elevated/noteworthy status such as a respected professional or celebrity.

Characteristics (where less dangerous):

• activity not characterised by threats – just the stated belief that the victim wants to be with him

17. Stalker Typology 4: Sadistic stalking (13% of cases)

Characteristics:

• victim is an obsessive target of the offender, and whose life is seen as quarry and prey
• initial low level acquaintance
• victim selection criteria is primarily rooted in the victim being someone ‘worthy’ of spoiling, i.e. someone who is perceived by the stalker at the commencement as being happy, ‘good’, and/or stable.
• apparently benign initially but unlike infatuation harassment the means of intervention tend to have negative orientation designed to disconcert, unnerve, and take power away from the victim
  • notes left inside victim’s locked car in order to unsettle target
  • subtle evidence being left of having been in contact with the victim’s personal items e.g. rifled underwear drawer, re-ordering/removal of private papers, cigarette ends left in ash trays, toilet having been used etc.
  • ‘helping’ mend victims car that stalker had previously disabled

Types of victim - domestic violence and stranger/ acquaintance stalking

18. This is a much harder field to categorise. It is well-established that domestic violence affects all people, regardless of race, age, disability and sexuality, and gender though it affects more women than men. The research outlined above and anecdotal information from the MPS indicates that intimate relationship or domestic violence -related stalking accounts for about half of known stalking cases.

19. What should be noted here, however, is that where there is a more severe offence, such as Threats to Kill, Criminal Damage, or Common Assault, the recording of that crime will most likely take precedence in terms of an investigation and the harassment and stalking may go unrecorded as a separate crime. This is not to say that the risk will not be assessed, since a DASH [5] risk assessment should be completed in all domestic violence cases, merely to point out that recording is likely to under-reflect prevalence.

20. It should also be clear that the way victims view themselves may affect the way they seek help. The mother of murdered Clare Bernal stated whilst setting up the anti-stalking hotline ‘Clare would never have seen herself as a victim of domestic abuse. It has to be specific to stalking so that anyone who feels at risk - men, women, teenagers - they know exactly what it is, stalking’. [6] It may be that the absence of abuse whilst the relationship is ongoing may preclude victims from identifying the situation as domestic violence.

21. The same is likely to be the case in situations of stranger/ acquaintance stalking. Part of the reason for this is that research [7] has shown that on average victims experience 100 incidents before reporting to the police. The type of crime that offences get recorded under may mean there isn’t a true picture of the crime as if someone is damaging your car daily it would rightly get recorded as Criminal Damage, but may not get picked up as stalking as well.

Volume in London and UK

22. British Crime Survey data shows that every year in the UK 1.2 million women and 900,000 men are victims of harassment. [8] The MPS data in Figure 1 below shows the extent of incidents of Harassment and Putting a Person in Fear of Violence; these two offences combined amount to 46,850 crimes.

23. The volume of cases indicated below is difficult on its own to draw conclusions from. It should be noted that these figures include cases of domestic violence-related harassment, neighbour disputes, hate crime offences and even public order-related cases. Therefore the level of risk demonstrated here ranges from very low to potentially very high. However as noted above, where there are cases in which there are other substantive criminal offences (such as common assault or criminal damage), harassment is less likely to be recorded in addition to these offences so whilst the volume may not necessarily be cause for alarm, it should be noted that some of the higher risk level cases of stalking and harassment are less likely to be reflected in these figures because of the presence of those other offences in the case.

Figure 1 - MPS data on Harassment

MPS response

24. It must be noted that because stalking is incremental, and psychological, and does not require physical contact between the perpetrator and the victim, it can be very difficult to prove; the MPS 36% Sanction Detection rate for Harassment and 31% for Putting a Person Fear of Violence should be commended, though it should be noted that it is likely that the majority of these Sanction Detections are cautions. This may be particularly relevant following the release of the CPS guidance which states to secure a conviction in court an incident for which a perpetrator had been cautioned may not be applicable as part of one or more examples of a course of conduct [9] as this may constitute an abuse of process.

25. Additionally, the MPS has been at the forefront of creatively interpreting the law and brought the first successful prosecution of psychological GBH in 1996 in an acquaintance stalker case (which would fit into the sadistic stalking typology above) which preceded and prompted the Protection from Harassment Act in 1997.

26. Domestic violence cases remain where highest proportion of stalking cases present and arguably also where the highest volume of risk remains, since a prior intimate relationship is the strongest predictor of violence in stalking cases. [10] In this field, the MPS response has doubtless improved with the roll out of the DASH (Domestic Abuse, Stalking and Harassment and Honour based Violence) risk assessment. [11] This process ensures that all victims are asked about stalking and harassment as part of the risk assessment and that appropriate action should be taken on the basis of the risk identified. Ian Donaldson of TP Emerald was keen to support the view that the ‘homicide prevention’ approach to stalking and harassment was relevant only to domestic violence cases and that significant risk to victims in stranger cases was very rare, though not unheard of.

27. Other types of stalking cases will be investigated by borough units, and which units investigates these offences will be different borough to borough. Outside of the specialist domestic violence response provided by CSU officers, Borough Officers tend to view cases as discrete entities instead of linking reports, so a victim may report dozens of calls or texts; these will most often be recorded as a single offence and investigated as such.

28. Stalking and harassment is included in foundation training at Hendon. Officers find the way stalking is dealt with is confusing because through it’s a crime that is seemingly low level, they do a risk assessment, yet you could have an apparently more serious crime like burglary where they wouldn’t do a risk assessment.

29. As with domestic violence, victims often want it to stop, rather than prosecute. Officers will send a warning letter and for less severe cases this can have an impact and they can say they’ve taken action. Officers can sometimes behave as if this is a case disposal yet it has no legal basis, and there’s no sanction detection as a result. Also as with domestic violence, this lack of case outcomes means that the work Officers undertake on a case isn’t always reflected in performance figures.

30. In high profile cases, such as those of Clare Bernal, Tania Moore and Arsema Dawit subsequent inquests, enquiries or IPCC investigations tend to find that initial reports to police were not taken seriously enough, recorded appropriately, or risk assessments were not completed.

MPS Stalking and Harassment Problem Profile

31. The ACPO lead for Stalking and Harassment, Garry Shewan, has asked all force areas for a Problem Profile on the subject, and the MPS Problem Profile is currently in draft form. However some early findings are available for note.

32. The Problem Profile focused primarily on non-domestic violence related harassment offences, on the basis that stalking is an accepted risk factor within the context of domestic abuse, and is reflected in the standardised DASH risk assessment. Domestic violence related harassment is subject to more rigorous checks and central monitoring.

33. Excluding offences related to public order, there were 19,503 offences recorded, of which two thirds were non-domestic violence related. However, it should be noted that 4% of these were ‘partner or ex-partner cases which fell outside of the domestic violence definition. As the current definition of domestic violence only refers to over-18s [12] it is likely to be harassment where the victim or perpetrator is under18 and related to teenage relationships in which stalking or harassment has taken place.

34. There was disproportionality in relation to gender, even with the non domestic violence related stalking and harassment cases, where 64% victims were female and 36% of victims were male. For the non domestic violence related stalking and harassment cases; 31% of cases were male perpetrators and female victims. One quarter of the victims were recorded as being vulnerable or intimidated, and a quarter were flagged as repeat victims. There are a range of positive measures in place which should assist the MPS corporately to best respond to these vulnerable of repeat victims. One tool is the MPS Early Warning System by which the TP Violent Crime Directorate reviews all offences against disabled people and highlights any additional risk to the borough Community Safety Unit. The MPS has now begun to measure repeat victimisation on a daily basis within the Borough Intelligence units and this allows those who are repeat victims to be identified and referred to the local Safer Neighbourhood Team or other appropriate resource.

35. Though the majority of cases were not domestic violence related; the suspect was known to the victim in 62% of cases, and the majority of these were ‘acquaintance’ (32%), followed by neighbours (24%). The majority (31%) of non-domestic violence related cases were male perpetrators against female victims. 10% of the non-domestic violence related were repeat victims of harassment and 7% experienced an escalation of activity in the case. In only 7% of the non-domestic violence related cases was a risk assessment completed. The majority of cases were reported to front counters or via the telephone.

36. The sanction detection rate overall has increased from 16% in 05/06 to 29% in 09/10, though when looking only at non domestic violence related stalking and harassment cases the sanction detection rate in 09/10 was 8%.

Areas for Development

37. Recommendations from the MPS Problem Profile have not been formally accepted but it is likely they will include;

• Improvements to the number and quality of risk assessments conducted in non domestic violence related stalking and harassment cases.
• Inclusion of all relationships (e.g. including those under the age of 18, and those who conduct relationships online) under the definition of domestic violence
• Raising awareness and knowledge, especially with front counter staff and call handlers.
• The creation of a specific flag for high risk stalking cases and the capacity to record or store harassment warning letters and court orders electronically for officers to access more easily.
• Officers should avoid calling victims from the automatic police ‘withheld number’. For obvious reasons, victims are reluctant to pick up withheld numbers and this leads to a breakdown of communication about the case moving forward.

38. As the Problem Profile has not formally been reviewed and the recommendations accepted, discussions are ongoing as to how this work will be taken forward. It is possible that it will become the responsibility of the newly formed MPS Violence against Women and Girls Working Group.

39. Awareness. All those interviewed for this paper stated that across the country, the police response of ‘come back when he’s done something’ is a problem. Hamish Brown MBE stated that victims can sometimes minimise the offence because they have no injuries, or will blame themselves because they think ‘they are going mad’ because objects are moving round inside their homes and they have no recollection of moving them. Instead of inferring that such cases are not serious, officers should understand the significance of such statements.

40. Victims may not therefore be seen as credible, since they seem to be frightened of minor incidents which singularly do not constitute a crime. Experts stress that if someone is coming to the police for assistance they must be taken seriously. One possible way of doing this is providing short seminars for station reception staff and investigating officers outside CSU units. Supervisors on boroughs could also receive this to ensure they can advise officers most appropriately.

41. Cyber-stalking. This was raised as a particular challenge since the expansion of sites such as facebook and Twitter create an online environment in which personal information is more accessible and can be utilised by a stalker. The use of internet sites to groom children has already been highlighted as an area of risk. [13] Identity can be masked and messages anonymised. Cyber-stalking would be categorised as an offence under the Malicious Communications Act (1998). Hamish Brown MBE states this is simply a more recent method of enacting similar stalking behaviour. However there is a significant challenge in cases where such behaviour is undertaken from outside England and Wales, or via websites hosted outside UK jurisdiction.

C. Other organisational and community implications

Equality and Diversity Impact

1. It is notable that stalking often forms part of relationships characterised by domestic violence and as noted above some types of stalking affect women more than men. Further data and analysis would provide more detail on other potential equality and diversity issues.

Consideration of MET Forward

2. This area of work forms part of the Violence against Women section of the Met Partners strand.

Financial Implications

3. There are no financial implications

Legal Implications

4. There are no legal implications as this report

Environmental Implications

5. There are no environmental implications as this report is focused on

Risk Implications

6. There are no risk implications as this report is focused on performance

D. Background papers

None

D. Contact details

Report author: Lynne Abrams, Public Protection Policy Officer

For information contact:

MPA general: 020 7202 0202
Media enquiries: 020 7202 0217/18

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback