Asked by: Emma Lewell (Labour - South Shields)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many prosecutions for the offence of sexual assault by penetration under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 were made in cases where the victim had experienced county lines exploitation in each year since 2015.
Answered by Alex Chalk
The Government recognises the devastating impact of county lines activity on children and vulnerable people which can include both sexual and criminal exploitation. Prosecutions data involving offences under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 held centrally by the MoJ does not include such detailed information about the victim to indicate whether they had been a victim of county lines exploitation previously. This information may be held on court record, however to identify it would require access to detailed court records and transcripts, which would incur disproportionate cost.
However, the Ministry of Justice has published information on prosecutions, up to December 2019, for the following offences: ‘Sexual assault on a female – penetration’, ‘Sexual assault on a male – penetration’, Sexual assault of a male child under 13 - penetration’, ‘Sexual assault of a female child under 13 – penetration’ and ‘Causing sexual activity without consent – penetration’. These are available in the Outcomes by Offence data tool:
Asked by: Emma Lewell (Labour - South Shields)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what training juries receive on dealing with historical sexual abuse cases; and how regularly that training is provided.
Answered by Alex Chalk
Juries are randomly selected, independent and make decisions purely on the basis of the facts presented to them by the prosecution and defence. Jury members receive no advice or training prior to being called to serve on any case. However, they are guided and supported by the trial judge who advises them on the relevant points of law and reminds them of their role. Judges hearing serious sex offence cases are required to have specialist training.
There is guidance provided to judges in the Crown Court Compendium (a publicly available document) as to what directions may be given to juries in appropriate circumstances. This includes guidance on how to advise juries in serious sexual offence cases.
https://www.judiciary.uk/publications/crown-court-compendium-published/
Asked by: Emma Lewell (Labour - South Shields)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what his Department's policy in on the use of character witnesses during trials for (a) victims and (b) perpetrators of historical sexual abuse.
Answered by Chris Philp - Shadow Home Secretary
In criminal trials, including of offences of historical sexual abuse, rules of evidence do not permit the Crown to call evidence of the good character of a prosecution witness in order to bolster their credibility. The law assumes victims to be truthful and credible, and restricts the ways in which their veracity and credibility can be challenged by the defence; evidence of a victim’s good character is therefore not relevant to what is in issue, and is not admissible.
Defendants also are assumed to be of good character unless there is evidence to the contrary. Where the prosecution does rely on bad character evidence against the defendant (and there are fewer restrictions on the admissibility of evidence of a defendant’s alleged bad character than there are in relation to a witness’ bad character), then character evidence might be relevant to contradict it.
Asked by: Emma Lewell (Labour - South Shields)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 21 January 2020 to Question 4350 on Children: Restraint Techniques, when the Charlie Taylor review on restraint techniques and children will be published; and what the time table is for the publication of the Government's response to that review.
Answered by Lucy Frazer
We are considering Charlie Taylor’s findings and recommendations and will shortly publish the report and the Government’s response together.
Asked by: Emma Lewell (Labour - South Shields)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will take steps to ensure that children who have been subjected to unlawful restraint in Medway Secure Training Centre are informed of their right to seek legal advice and redress.
Answered by Wendy Morton - Shadow Minister (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
The safety and welfare of young people held in custody is our highest priority, and we take seriously any incident of restraint of children in the youth secure estate, including at Medway Secure Training Centre . There are already processes and mechanisms in place at Medway STC to support Children and Young People following incidents of restraint that facilitate them to seek legal advice and redress. Every incident of restraint, including those involving personal safety techniques, is reviewed by the local Minimising and Managing Physical Restraint (MMPR) co-ordinator. Any serious injury or warning sign (SIWS) is also appraised by the national team, with any issue of concern leading to a child protection referral and, potentially, the local authority and police for investigation.
Furthermore, the Independent Children’s Rights and Advocacy Services (ICRAS) at Medway Secure Training Centre is commissioned to follow and adhere to the legal frameworks of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and the European Convention on Human Rights to promote the rights of Children and Young People (CYP). These services support CYP in helping them understand and exercise their rights throughout their time in custody.
ICRAS has local protocols in place so that the establishment notifies them as soon as possible following the first restraint incident. The child will be proactively supported by an advocate, including discussing whether the child or young person has any concerns about how or why they were restrained, and whether they wish to make a complaint or safeguarding referral.
Restraint is only ever to be used in accordance with the Secure Training Centre Rules 1998 and as a last resort, where there is a risk of harm, and no other form of intervention is possible or appropriate.
Charlie Taylor, Chair of the Youth Justice Board but acting in an independent capacity, has reviewed our policy in relation to pain-inducing techniques. The Government will respond to his review in the coming weeks.