Investigation of Criminal Damage Offences

Response

No information is held in relation to your request. Avon and Somerset Police do not have any documented or undocumented arbitrary thresholds, or ‘levels of damage’, in relation to crime investigation. Therefore, no official or unofficial figures are held in relation to such thresholds. 

If you are seeking data on reported offences of criminal damage, we would be able to confirm the number of reports received that have been recorded with a final incident type of Criminal Damage, over a specific timeframe. We would also be able to provide data from our crime recording system, either in relation to all crimes recorded under the offence group of Arson and Criminal Damage, or in relation to those reports initially recorded under the incident type of Criminal Damage that went on to be recorded in our crime recording system within any offence group. Please let us know if you would like us to consider a request for this type of information, specifying the information and timeframe you are interested in.  

To assist further, I am able to provide some additional context in relation to filing decisions generally. Avon and Somerset Police receive more than 1 million calls for service and over 170,000 reports or crimes each year and have finite resources.  Therefore, all matters reported to the Constabulary are subjected to an initial triage process to identify those matters with the greatest Threat, Harm and Risk so resources can be assigned appropriately to ensure those at greatest risk are prioritised.  As part of that “triage” process, crimes are reviewed in accordance with the powers and responsibilities set out in the extracts from the documents below: 

Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 (section 23(1)) Code of Practice Revised in accordance with section 25(4) of the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996: 

3.5 In conducting an investigation, the investigator should pursue all reasonable lines of inquiry, whether these point towards or away from the suspect. What is reasonable in each case will depend on the particular circumstances. It is a matter for the investigator, with the assistance of the prosecutor if required, to decide what constitutes a reasonable line of inquiry in each case.  

Attorney General’s Guidelines on Disclosure 2020 

17. Investigators should ensure that all reasonable lines of inquiry are investigated, whether they point towards or away from the suspect. What is ‘reasonable’ will depend on the context of the case. A fair investigation does not mean an endless investigation. Investigators and disclosure officers must give thought to defining, and articulating the limits of the scope of their investigations. When assessing what is reasonable, thought should be given to what is likely to be obtained as a result of the line of inquiry and how it can be obtained. An investigator may seek the advice of the prosecutor when considering which lines of inquiry should be pursued where appropriate. 

Director’s Guidance on Charging Sixth edition 2020 

3.1 The police are responsible for:  

• pursuing all reasonable lines of inquiry to ensure the evidence and any other material and information required to make a charging decision is obtained as soon as possible; 
• diverting, charging, and referring cases to prosecutors as authorised and directed by this Guidance; 
• recording the rationale for their decisions to deal with a case by way of an out of court disposal or charge; 
• identifying cases that are appropriate for an out of court disposal as early as possible; 
• taking “no further action” in cases that cannot meet the appropriate evidential standard, without referral to a prosecutor; 
• assessing whether cases meet the relevant criteria for referral to the CPS for a charging decision, including whether the Full Code or Threshold Test, as set out in the Code, is met on the available evidence and circumstances of the case;  

4.3 The police are authorised to make a decision:  

• to take no further action in all cases, including those which have been referred for Prosecution Advice/Early Advice, if the evidential stage of the Code Test is not met, and the police conclude that the case cannot be strengthened by further investigation;

Code for Prosecutors 2018 

3.2. The police and other investigators are responsible for conducting inquiries into any alleged crime and for deciding how to deploy their resources. This includes decisions to start or continue an investigation and on the scope of the investigation. Prosecutors should advise the police and other investigators about possible reasonable lines of inquiry, evidential requirements, pre-charge procedures, disclosure management and the overall investigation strategy. This can include decisions to refine or narrow the scope of the criminal conduct and the number of suspects under investigation. Such advice assists the police and other investigators to complete the investigation within a reasonable period of time and to build the most effective prosecution case.  

Full Code Test Evidential Stage (Public interest test can only be applied by the Police in cases where they have authority to charge all other matters must be referred to the CPS once the evidential test is met)  

4.6. Prosecutors must be satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction against each suspect on each charge*. They must consider what the defence case may be, and how it is likely to affect the prospects of conviction. A case which does not pass the evidential stage must not proceed, no matter how serious or sensitive it may be.  

 4.7. The finding that there is a realistic prospect of conviction is based on the prosecutor’s objective assessment of the evidence, including the impact of any defence and any other information that the suspect has put forward or on which they might rely. It means that an objective, impartial and reasonable jury or bench of magistrates or judge hearing a case alone, properly directed and acting in accordance with the law, is more likely than not to convict the defendant of the charge alleged. This is a different test from the one that the criminal courts themselves must apply. A court may only convict if it is sure that the defendant is guilty.   

Sometimes, even with further investigation, cases are unlikely to meet the high threshold for progression through the criminal justice process and therefore decisions can be made to be filed at an early stage.