ACROSS the UK, thousands of offenders escaped prosecution last year for offences as serious as child sex abuse, kidnapping, knife crime, and drug trafficking.

Rather than being taken to court and slapped with a criminal record, police forces are in some cases using out-of-court disposals called Community Resolution (CR) orders to settle cases.

A CR will not appear on a criminal record, and does not show up when background checks like the DBS are carried out by employers.

An investigation by the BBC looked at the outcomes of 15 million criminal incidents recorded between 2014/15 and 2017/18, and found that in Wales and England 449,000 were resolved with CRs. This represents 3 per cent of all outcomes in that period.

Here, we look at how CRs work, how they are used by Gwent Police, and why they are sometime a controversial option for police to use.

­— What are CRs and how do they work?

When a crime is recorded, police forces have several options they can pursue: offenders can be charged, summonsed, cautioned, have their case dropped, or be given an out-of-court disposal.

CRs come under the category of 'out-of-court disposal'.

But when do the police decide to pursue this option?

MORE NEWS:

"Community resolutions are considered when there is an admission of guilt by the perpetrator, the victim welcomes this approach, and a prosecution is not deemed to be in the public interest," a Gwent Police spokesman explained.

And detective chief constable Sara Glen added: "Community resolutions help police handle low-level offending proportionately.

"They can involve making amends, apologising or completing education.

"Victims' wishes are central to our decision-making and officers have established tools and guidance to help them to reach the right outcome."

­— How often are they used?

Nationally, the use of CRs is falling – down from 4% of all outcomes in 2014/15 to 2% in 2017/18.

Gwent Police's use of CRs in that time has remained at 2 per cent annually.

CRs are often used for low-level offending, but the BBC investigation found some forces in Wales and England had given CRs to offenders involved in cases of child rape and assault with intent to cause serious harm.

In 2017/18, Gwent Police issued four CRs for sex offences, and 242 for violent offences (no detailed breakdown of each offence was available).

That violent offenders can escape a criminal record is worrying for some independent victim charities.

A spokesman for Victim Support said: “Community resolutions can be effective for dealing with low level offences, as long as the views of the victims have been firmly taken into account.

“They can result in a quick outcome for the victim and give them closure following the crime.

“However, the fact that they are being used in cases where a serious offence has been committed, such as a sexual offence, is seriously concerning.

“It is wholly inappropriate to use them in these cases as it means that victims are denied the justice they deserve, and the public could be put at risk if violent and sexual offenders are not receiving a criminal record.

“Too often victims feel let down by a criminal justice system that fails to take their needs into account, and using CRs in violent and sexual offence cases will leave many victims feeling that the justice system does not work for them.”

­— What are the statistics for CRs in Gwent?

A Gwent Police spokesman said CRs were "not utilised lightly" by the force. Here's how Gwent Police used such orders in the year 2017/18:

  • Criminal damage – 157 CRs (1.8% of all such cases)
  • Drug offences – 39 CRs (3% of all such cases)
  • Miscellaneous crime – 5 CRs (fewer than 1% of all such cases)
  • Weapons possession – 5 CRs (3% of all such cases)
  • Public order offences – 71 CRs (2% of all such cases)
  • Robbery – 0 CRs
  • Sex offences – 4 CRs (fewer than 1% of all such cases)
  • Theft – 209 CRs (1% of all such cases)
  • Violent offences – 242 CRs (2% of all such cases)

­— Are CRs becoming a more common method of resolving crimes?

In general, Gwent Police's use of CRs has not changed much since 2014/15, reflecting the overall trend in Wales and England.

But some police forces continue to use CRs regularly in cases where a serious, violent offence has been committed.

Last year, Durham Constabulary used CRs to resolve 12% of their cases involving violent offences (compared to 2% in Gwent).

And some forces in England issued CRs in 3% of sex cases last year.

Reflecting on the use of CRs in more serious cases nationally, Chris Henley QC, chair of the Criminal Bar Association, said: "It is incredible that someone who admits committing an offence of rape receives what amounts to little more than a warning.

“It is unsurprising that offenders arrested for serious crime leap at the offer of an informal CRO.

“Sadly, this is all about a lack of resources, that the police and CPS are struggling to cope with the consequences of years of savage cuts.

“The number of CROs issued in serious cases has increased significantly as funding has fallen dramatically. This lets down both the current and future victims of serious crime.”

­— How is the use of CRs regulated?

Gwent Police, like all other forces in Wales and England, are given guidelines on the use of CRs.

And, as Gwent's police and crime commissioner Jeff Cuthbert explains, police use of CRs is monitored by special scrutiny committees.

“There is a robust scrutiny process in place to ensure that [CRs] are used appropriately involving organisations such as the police, magistrates, Crown Prosecution Service, HM Courts and Tribunals Service, Youth Offending Service and the Police and Crime Commissioners Office," he said.

But leading members of the justice system still believe CRs cannot be used as a generic solution to criminal justice, especially in more complex cases or when defendants have a history of offending.

John Bache, national chair of the Magistrates Association, said: “When a case comes to court, there are opportunities for all factors to be taken into account including not just the seriousness of the offence, but vulnerabilities of the offender and the impact of the offence on a victim.

“Courts are then able to ensure an appropriate sentence is ordered which reflects all five purposes of sentencing: punishment; reduction of crime, including by deterrence; reform and rehabilitation of offenders; protection of the public; reparation.

“Scrutiny panels should also be used in every area. MA research highlighted good practice in relation to scrutiny panels. They are an effective way of overseeing the use of orders, identifying any inappropriate use and tackling inconsistency."