Quickly exit this site by pressing the Escape key 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.
Enquiry Reference: 585 - 24
I write in connection with regards to your Freedom of Information request. Below is your request and our response.
1) How many female domestic homicides were there where a woman was killed by a partner /ex- partner or relative between the years.
2020- 2021, 2021-2022, 2022-2023, 2023-2204 (to date)
The below table shows the volume of 001/01 - Murder of Person aged 1year or over from 2018 and the victim/offender relationship recorded.
MO_Victim_Offender_Relationship |
2018 |
2019 |
2020 |
2023 |
Grand Total |
Boyfriend/girlfriend |
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
Ex partner |
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
Parent of offender |
|
1 |
1 |
|
2 |
Sibling of offender |
|
|
|
1 |
1 |
Spouse/common-law |
3 |
|
1 |
|
4 |
Grand Total |
5 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
9 |
(2) Please supply the numbers of women who were killed by a partner/ ex-partner /relative who had previous contact with your police force in the 12 months prior to their death. Please give an annual breakdown from 2018 to 2024 or the last available data.
Previous contact with the police could be for any reason. The analyst has read through the person records they include victims contacting the police to report theft from a business, suspicious activity in a nearby shop, reporting a person missing, abandoned calls and also to thank the police for their response to something completely unrelated. However, 3 victims were recorded as the reporting person of calls to the police in the 12 months before.
(3) Please provide figures of female domestic violence survivors who your force ranked as high risk. Please provide the figure as an annual breakdown from 2018 to 2024 or the latest available data.
Below are Number of high-risk DA crimes (not including 2018) as PPNs were not embedded until mid-year)
|
2019 |
2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
Number of high-risk DA crimes |
820 |
1146 |
1508 |
1429 |
1196 |
Number of individual victims of high risk DA crimes |
564 |
767 |
925 |
947 |
852 |
Having made enquires within the Force above is all the information we can provide, and we would also rely on the following:
Section 1 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 places two duties on public authorities. Unless exemptions apply, the first duty at Section 1(1) (a) is to confirm or deny whether the information specified in a request is held. The second duty at Section 1(1) (b) is to disclose information that has been confirmed as being held. Where exemptions are relied upon, Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act requires that I provide the applicant with a notice which: a) states that fact b) specifies the exemption(s) in question and c) state (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the exemption applies.
The Cleveland Police Service can neither confirm nor deny that it holds any other information relevant to your request as the duty in s1(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 does not apply, by virtue of the following exemptions:
Section 30(3) Investigations & Proceedings conducted by Public Authorities
Section 30 is a qualified class-based exemption and there is a requirement to conduct a public interest test.
Information exempt by virtue of Section 30 (1) (a) (b) & (c) is exempt information if it has been held by the authority for the purposes of (a) any investigation which the public authority has a duty to conduct with a view to it being ascertained (i) whether a person should be charged with an offence, or (ii) whether any person charged with an offence is guilty of it, (b) any investigation which is conducted by the authority and in the circumstances may lead to a decision by the authority to institute criminal proceedings which the authority has the power to conduct or (c) any criminal proceedings which the authority has the power to conduct.
Public Interest test - Considerations favouring disclosure.
Accountability: Disclosure could provide the investigating officers with additional information.
Public awareness: Disclosure of the information in relation to an on-going investigation may enhance the ability and professionalism of the force and individual officers.
Considerations favouring non-disclosure.
Exemption provisions
Public safety: By the inappropriate release of information, which could undermine an on-going investigation.
Balancing Test: whilst the public interest considerations favouring disclosure are noted in considering the arguments for and against release of the information requested, the balance in the public interest favours non-disclosure. Disclosure, at this moment in time other law enforcement may either be compromised or significantly weaken any on-going investigations and any future investigations.
Please note that all statistical data supplied in relation to Freedom of Information requests is a snapshot of data held at the time the request was received by the Freedom of Information office and is subject to constant change/updates.
The Cleveland Police response to your request is unique and it should be noted that Police Forces do not use generic systems or identical procedures to capture and record data therefore responses from Cleveland Police should not be used as a comparison with any other force response you receive.
If you are not satisfied with this response or any actions taken in dealing with your request, you have the right to request an independent internal review of your case under our review procedure. The Freedom of Information Code of Practice (see below link) states that a request for internal review should be made within 20 working days of the date on this response or 40 working days if extenuating circumstances to account for the delay can be evidenced. Public authorities are not obliged to accept internal reviews after this date.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/freedom-of-information-code-of-practice
Yours sincerely
Information Rights Decision Maker