Leave this site
We use some essential cookies to make our website work. We’d like to set additional cookies so we can remember your preferences and understand how you use our site.
You can manage your preferences and cookie settings at any time by clicking on “Customise Cookies” below. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Cookies notice.
Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can update your cookie settings at any time on the cookies page.
Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can update your cookie settings at any time on the cookies page.
Sorry, there was a technical problem. Please try again.
This site is a beta, which means it's a work in progress and we'll be adding more to it over the next few weeks. Your feedback helps us make things better, so please let us know what you think.
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST REFERENCE NO: 142267
I write in connection with your request for information which was received on 29th December 2021. Please find below the response to your request:
Thanks very much for your response to my request (138714).
My understanding is that national standards state that offenders must be at LOW risk for 3 years and have no active orders in place before they can go into reactive management.
1) So, for a new request, can you confirm how many of the 115 convicted sex offenders who were placed on reactive management- where officers stop annual home visits and regular risk assessments- were subject to a live court order at the time they were placed on reactive management (over the requested period i.e. between 01/01/20 and 30/11/21, as opposed to the 'current' figure) ?
2) How many offenders in Q1 were arrested for a crime under the Sexual offences act 2003 while they were on reactive management (over the requested period i.e. between 01/01/20 and 30/11/21). Please can you break this information down into; the month/year they were arrested, the offence they were arrested with, whether or not they were charged with the offence, the gender of the offender, the reason why they did not get charged- if this was the case.
Reply:-
In response to your request, I can confirm that’s West Mercia Police holds some of the information requested.
For Q2 Your request for information has been considered in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (“the Act”), and I am not obliged to provide the information requested.
The following exemption is applicable to the information requested:
S.40(2) is an absolute, class-based exemption and therefore there is no requirement to evidence harm or conduct a public interest test.
This exemption is engaged where disclosure of information relates to personal data of a third party or could lead to the identification of an individual, either from that information alone or combined with other information from within the Police Service or public domain. In this case, the information you are requesting is personal data of a third party.
Such a disclosure would breach an individual’s rights under the Data Protection Act 2018, in particular Article 5(1) of the UK GDPR which states that personal data shall be processed lawfully, fairly and in a transparent manner in relation to the data subject. Such a disclosure would also be likely to breach s.8 Human Rights Act 1998 which states that everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.
In accordance with s.17(1) of the Act, this acts as a Refusal Notice.