Hertfordshire Multi Agency Public

Protection Arrangements
Annual Report 2004-2005

What is MAPPA and how does it operate locally?

The national picture
Key achievements in Hertfordshire
 Contents

4 Foreword

5 Ministerial Foreword by Baroness Scotland

6 What is MAPPP?
How MAPPA operates locally
What does MAPPA assess?
Maintaining contact with victims

8 Case study – Mark*

9 The national picture

The involvement of the prison service
Lay adviser recruitment
A changing environment

10 Key achievements in Hertfordshire

The audit
Training and procedures
Lay advisers

12 Case study – Brian*

14 Hertfordshire Multi Agency Public Protection Panel Membership

17 Case study – Andrew*

19 MAPPA Annual Report statistical information

*names have been changed

2
...we are recruiting lay advisers
to bring a community focus to
our work...

3
 Foreword

The management of risk is a critical area for probation, police and prison
services nationally. Not surprisingly, there is an ever increasing national
spotlight on how we deal with high risk individuals in our community and
how we protect the public.

The Multi Agency Public Protection Panels (MAPPP) were put in place to ensure that
we continue to monitor people in the community that we consider to be a risk to others or
a risk to themselves. MAPP Panels meet regularly throughout the county to look at high
risk cases and to put in place arrangements to reduce the chance of these individuals
offending or re-offending.

However, without the procedures in place to support their work it is unlikely that any
arrangements will work effectively. With so many different organisations involved, ranging
from the voluntary sector, local authorities and health as well as the three statutory MAPPA
members (probation, police, prisons), we are in danger of something ‘slipping through the
net’ unless we have robust and regularly audited procedures for how we deal with our cases.

The past year has been devoted to this task. A thorough, independent audit has been carried
out and as a result we have developed an action plan to improve our processes still further.

It's also been a year of achievement. More emphasis has been given to training staff in risk
assessment and management and we have made enormous progress in how we manage the
issue of domestic violence. We are on the verge of appointing two new posts dedicated to
MAPPA and the associated issue of women's safety.

This is also the first year that the prison service has been a statutory partner in MAPPA. We
are fortunate in Hertfordshire that there has long been a close working relationship between
the MAPPP and HMP The Mount. As inevitably some of the individuals on the MAPPP caseload
will have already served time in custody, the prison service input at the most strategic level
has been invaluable.

The forthcoming year will be another challenging one in which we will continue to work
together, and with our other MAPPA partners, to improve safety across Hertfordshire.

Richard Baldwin Frank Whiteley Stephen Rodford

Chief Officer Chief Constable Governor
Hertfordshire Probation Area Hertfordshire Constabulary HMP The Mount

4
Ministerial Foreword by Baroness Scotland

The work being undertaken to improve the safety of communities through the Multi Agency
Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) is vitally important and a priority for government.
The annual reports for 2004/5 provide evidence of that active engagement. Violence and sexual
abuse are unacceptable wherever they occur and it is evident that through MAPPA such
offenders are identified and better managed than ever before. As the number of offenders
within MAPPA continues to grow as expected, there is clear evidence that the Responsible
Authority, that is the local police, probation and the Prison Service, is addressing these
additional demands by strengthening local partnerships, using new statutory powers to
restrict the behaviour of offenders, returning offenders to custody where they breach their
licence or order, and using the findings of research and inspection to strengthen national
guidance and local practice.

Although it is never possible completely to eliminate the risk posed by dangerous offenders,
MAPPA is helping to ensure that fewer people are re-victimised.

The active implementation of the Criminal Justice Act (2003) during the last year has clearly
enhanced the ability of a number of agencies including health, social services and housing to
work collaboratively with the Responsible Authority in assessing and managing those sexual
and violent offenders in our communities who pose the highest risk of serious harm. For the
continued success of MAPPA, this collaboration together with the scrutiny of policy and practice
must become the hallmark of these arrangements. Similarly MAPPA must integrate with other
public protection mechanisms dealing with child abuse, domestic abuse and racial abuse.

For me one of the most exciting developments in this arena in the last 12 months has been
the appointment of lay advisers to assist the Responsible Authority in the oversight of the
arrangements. As ordinary members of the public these lay advisers represent a diverse, able
and committed group of people who are now helping the statutory agencies to oversee the
work being undertaken through MAPPA and communicate with the public more effectively.
Without a growing sense of public knowledge and confidence about this work, much of the
benefits of the public protection arrangements will be lost.

I hope this annual report will be useful, informative and reassuring to local communities.
The agencies and individuals who have contributed to the achievement of MAPPA locally
are to be commended.

Baroness Patricia Scotland

Minister of State for Criminal Justice and Offender Management

5
 What is MAPPP?
The UK’s criminal justice system works hard to protect the public
and, thankfully, serious crimes are still relatively rare.
However there are few serious offenders that can
be kept in custody indefinitely and at some stage
they will be released into the community. In a
small number of cases there is a concern that they
will re-offend and commit an equally serious or
more serious offence.
In cases where the supervising authorities believe
this to be the case, the individual may be
monitored and managed by a MAPP Panel.
The panel is made up of representatives of the
probation, police and prison services. These are
known as statutory responsible authorities. Each
panel also has representatives from other agencies
whose involvement may assist in monitoring an
offender. These are typically representatives from
social services, health authorities and victim
support organisations.
The panel may also monitor individuals who have
not committed a crime but are also thought to
pose a risk to themselves or to others e.g. people
with mental health problems or drug/alcohol
dependencies. MAPPA is also responsible for
monitoring the sex offenders register. Although
the procedures can never completely eliminate the
risk posed by a dangerous individual, it has a
proven track record of successfully preventing
many individuals from committing serious crimes
and creating further victims.
How MAPPA operates locally
Hertfordshire has three levels of MAPPA.
The third tier deals with offenders that are
considered a risk, but less of a danger than those
monitored by the second tier. This third tier panel
is known as a Local Risk Management Panel
(LRMP). Panel members usually consist of
operational managers from each agency. If it
is felt that the offender poses a high level of
risk, the case will be referred to MAPPP – the
second tier. MAPPP is reserved for the most
dangerous offenders.
6
The panel members, who are usually directors or
senior managers, will share information and work
together to draw up a risk management plan for
each individual.
The top tier is the Strategic Management Board
that sets overall policies and procedures for the
other panels to work to and also oversees cases
that need review.
What does MAPPA assess?
For each case, the risk assessments carried out by
either the LRMP or MAPPP must look at:
• The imminence of the event causing
serious harm
• The degree of harm which the incident is
likely to cause
• Whether individuals or specific groups of
people or communities are likely to be
victims of such an event.
Each offender is screened to assess the
risk that they pose. The screening is based on
the probation and prison service Offender
Assessment System (OASys). Sex offenders are
screened using the police system Risk Matrix
2000. Other agencies have their own risk
assessment methods and may use these to alert
the panel to a person posing a high risk.
Following the assessment, the LRMP has three
options for dealing with a case:
• Referring an offender to MAPPP if it feels
that the case poses a high level of risk to
the public
• Managing the case itself if the offender is
not a high risk to the public
• Referring the case back to the probation
service or other relevant agency if it is felt
that there is no sufficient risk to warrant a
multi-agency approach.
After the cases have been placed with the “The father of the family became
appropriate tier (MAPPP or LRMP), an action plan
quite upset and very angry when he
will be developed for each offender. The panel will
consider the risks that the individual poses to: talked about his son’s murder. I was
very aware that the family were still
• The public
suffering from their loss, and had
• Specific groups of people
lots of question that had never been
• Staff supervising the offender
addressed. All you can do in this
• The individual involved
situation is listen and allow the
The action plans are regularly reviewed and all family to express all their emotions
new information is considered as part of the concerning their loved one and the
decision-making process. Of course risk levels can
circumstances surrounding their
change over time and the agencies will maintain
close contact over the cases. death. They told me about their son
and what sort of boy he was, they
Maintaining contact with victims told me about the offender who
The probation service victim contact unit
was known to the family and had
maintains a link between the criminal justice
process and the victims/families of victims of even visited their home. The father
serious violent offenders or sex offenders. The advised me that he thinks about his
unit will explain the sentence to the victims and son every day. He felt my visit had
what it will mean in terms of how and when they
helped them to discuss openly how
are eventually released into the community.
they were still feeling and also
The victim unit will relay any concerns that the
it addressed the fears that they
victims may have about the release of an
offender, for example about where they may live
all had concerning the offender’s
or are allowed to visit. They will ask the eventual release.”
authorities responsible for the offender’s release
to take these views into account and they will Victim contact officer
liaise with the victim when they know the date of
the eventual release. Although the unit does not
provide counselling, it maintains good links
with other support schemes locally who are also
represented on MAPPP.

7
 Mark*

Mark* is a 21 year old male in custody awaiting release on parole licence, having received a
lengthy custodial sentence whilst a juvenile for sexually assaulting two teenage girls. Prior to
his release the MAPPP panel worked together to gain a clear picture of any risks he might
pose to the community once released and steps which could be taken to protect the public.
Prison service personnel from the custodial establishment where he was held attended all
MAPPP meetings, providing up to date information on his behaviour. The prison service also
agreed to fund a forensic psychiatric report which was progressed by colleagues from mental
health agencies.

The report highlighted that Mark posed a very serious risk of harm to young women which
was imminent and could be acted upon after release. He was due for release on parole licence.
Assistance was sought from the Public Protection Unit at the Home Office who provided advice
and funds to enable Mark to be placed in a locked therapeutic environment on release from
custody. The prison service made specific arrangements with the probation service for his
release and he was escorted in a vehicle direct from the prison gate to the locked environment
to allow him no opportunity to offend.

At the therapeutic community he was assigned an officer to be with him 24 hours day. Even
so, Mark attempted to use a computer to obtain the address of a female member of prison
staff over the internet. Immediate action was taken to revoke Mark’s parole licence and he
was immediately returned to custody to serve the full term of his prison sentence. Whilst he
remained in custody, police colleagues applied to a court for a sex offender order which will
place restrictions on his movement and empower police monitoring for the full duration of
his life. He remains in custody and work is ongoing to assess the potential for accessing any
treatment or intervention which could reduce the risk he presents to the public.

*names have been changed

8
case study
The national picture

The involvement of the

prison service
The year 2004/5 has been an exciting one to be
involved in MAPPA. The new Criminal Justice Act
has brought the prison service into the process as
a member of the ‘responsible authority’ which
was previously comprised of the police and
probation services.
The prison service has also taken steps to ensure
that there are dedicated points of contact for
public protection at both area level and in every
prison and that these are published together with
police and probation contacts to ensure better
communication across the responsible authority.

This has been a welcome move given the

Lay adviser recruitment
important role that it plays in protecting the
Nationally there has been a drive to recruit lay
public by keeping offenders in custody, helping
advisers to strategic management boards.
them address the cause of their offending
Recruitment has been open to people within all
behaviour and subsequently in resettlement. The
sectors of the community and the opportunity has
prison service is now represented on all 42
been taken up with enthusiasm in many areas of
MAPPA strategic management boards. The prison
the country.
service establishments are only actually contained
within 12 geographical areas but each prison The drive to recruit such advisers demonstrates
service area manager has entered into an the commitment to be responsive to public
agreement as to how the service will work concerns and underlines the MAPPA aim to be
strategically and operationally with MAPPA. The accountable to the public.
main focus of the prison service contribution will
be at operational level. A number of measures A changing environment
have been put in place to ensure that this will In a changing environment there will be even
result in: greater opportunities for agencies involved in
public protection to work together. The police
• Prompt identification of MAPPA offenders
respond positively to issues of public concern, the
so that their details can be used in
probation and prison services are working closely
sentence planning arrangements, including
together following the creation of the National
interventions to manage and reduce risk
Offender Management Service, and Children’s
• Regular monitoring of the behaviour of those Trusts are being developed to play a key role in
assessed as presenting the highest risk and protecting children from offending.
sharing information with police and
probation colleagues
• All relevant risk management information
being provided to multi-agency meetings
which help plan an offender’s release
• At least three months notification to police
and probation of the expected release dates
of those offenders who have been referred to
the MAPPP and at least six weeks
notification of those being managed at
level 2 risk meetings
• No changes to release dates or arrangements
being made without prior consultation with
police and probation. 9
 Key achievements in Hertfordshire

Hertfordshire has undertaken a considerable amount of work on risk

during 2004/5, particularly in the area of domestic violence and in
training staff throughout the agencies on the MAPPA procedures.

The work has proved very effective and has

resulted in considerable improvements. However
in order to ensure that the process is working
as effectively as possible, an independent audit
of the Local Risk Management Panel and
Multi Agency Public Protection Panel was
undertaken in autumn 2005.
This has resulted in a clear direction for
further improvements over the coming year both
within the MAPPA process as a whole and for
individual agencies to undertake within their
own organisations.
The audit
The audit was carried out by Beverley Cohen, an
expert in risk and in particular, on child
protection. As a result of her report, an action
plan has been developed and the following are
some of the improvements that will be carried out
over the year:
“For me personally, the experience
of reviewing the operation of
MAPPA systems in Hertfordshire
was both rewarding and humbling.
Effective risk management requires
and depends upon the courage and
perseverance of those who deal with
the most dangerous and worrying of
offenders. It is perhaps too easy for
those working with such criminals
to take their own bravery and
perseverance for granted. These are
qualities I found in ample supply at
all levels of the MAPPA structure.

• The recruitment of a Multi Agency Public Clearly reviews in themselves cannot

Protection Manager to act as ‘custodian’ of resolve problems. The Action Plan
the MAPPA database and the quality of
MAPPA work across Hertfordshire
approved by the Hertfordshire
MAPPA Strategic Management
• Consideration of a separate MAPPA style
structure that will deal purely with domestic Board in response to the Review
violence cases. This system, know as a demonstrates their commitment to
MARIC, already operates successfully addressing the issues identified in
in Wales
my report. I wish them every
• A review of all cases to ensure that
success in this endeavour.”
risk management plans are consistent.
A common risk management template will
be used for all panels
• Consideration of a new post for dealing
with victim issues and ensuring that victim Beverley Cohen
views and concerns are communicated to Independent Auditor of
the panels. Hertfordshire MAPPA systems

10
Training and procedures
The MAPPA procedures were revised and Working with the strategic management board
relaunched during summer 2004. A series of will be an extremely interesting experience for
training events for staff across all of the agencies anyone with an interest in public protection and
was carried out to ensure awareness. Staff not community issues. We will require people who are
directly involved in MAPPA process were included happy to bring new ideas and, in some cases,
in the training to raise awareness throughout challenge existing working practices.
the organisations.
Anyone that is interested in applying for a lay
Following the inclusion of the prison service as a adviser post can contact:
responsible authority, a further training session
Lisa Mathews
was undertaken in April 2005 at HMP The Mount.
Director of Operations
Training has also been undertaken with probation National Probation Service (Hertfordshire)
service managers who are responsible for Graham House
managing staff that work with dangerous Yeomans Court
offenders. The training looked at many issues Ware Road
including the new risks posed by the internet, Hertford
the importance of victim impact information and SG13 7HJ
preventing confusion between violent offenders
and domestic violence offenders. tel: 01992 504444

It also looked at defensible decision-making when

managing high risk offenders. Although MAPPA
is extremely successful at reducing the chances
of serious re-offending, it cannot completely
eliminate risk.

Lay advisers
Hertfordshire has been actively attempting to
recruit lay advisers to the strategic management
board as part of the national drive to increase
public awareness and accountability of the
MAPPA process. Despite extensive advertising it
has not been possible to appoint to the two
vacancies so far.

The lay advisers do not need any previous

experience of working within the criminal justice
agencies but will work alongside the MAPPA
Board to look at policies and panel working
practices. The advisers will not work on individual
cases but may, on rare occasions, be asked to
review a panel’s handling of a case.
11
 Brian*

Brian* is a 45 year old man who has previous convictions for harassing women. Six years
previously he attempted to murder his female manager after she had sacked him. He had
stalked her for a prolonged period and eventually called at her house where he stabbed her
in the head and body with a knife that he had brought along for the purpose. There were
indications at the time that he may be subject to an anti-social personality disorder.

MAPPP became involved when he was coming to the end of an 18 month prison sentence
for persistently harassing a 14 year old girl and her mother. He had exhibited bizarre behaviour
in the local community, including putting up posters describing himself as a butcher and going
out at night dressed as a Japanese Ninja. The probation officer correctly identified him as a high
risk to the public.

Before he was released from prison, inter-agency work was done with the prison service,
Victim Support and social services and attempts were made to gain his co-operation in a risk
management plan. This involved placement in approved premises and a psychological testing.
He refused to co-operate and the MAPPP Chair involved the Public Protection Unit. As a result
he received a placement at a special facility in the North of England.

It was not believed that Brian would co-operate with the placement and arrangements were
made through the MAPPP for him to be arrested by the Police quickly if he refused to do so.
He did refuse to co-operate and he was immediately re-arrested. Additional work has taken
place whilst he was in prison to address his offending and he is again to be referred to the
facility and if he fails to co-operate action will be taken to immediately protect the public.

*names have been changed

12
case study
Probation Officers are trained to
recognise when offenders may
commit further crimes...

13
 Hertfordshire Multi Agency Public Protection Panel Membership

Strategic Management Board

ORGANISATION NAME ADDRESS CONTACT NUMBERS

Probation Lisa Mathews Hertfordshire tel:

Director of Operations Probation Area 01992 504444
Graham House fax:
Yeomans Court 01992 504544
Ware Road email:
HERTFORD lisa.mathews@
SG13 7HJ hertfordshire.probation.gsx.gov.uk

Police Acting Detective Hertfordshire tel:

Chief Superintendent Constabulary 01707 638421
Chris Miller Crime Management Dept. fax:
Police HQ 01707 354608
Chief Superintendent Stanborough Road email:
Fiona Gaskill Welwyn Garden City fiona.gaskill@herts.pnn.police.uk
AL8 6XF

Sue Tassell As above tel:

01707 354662
email:
sue.tassell@herts.pnn.police.uk

Adult Care Cathy Kerr Adult Care Services tel:

Services Herts County Council 01992 588820
County Hall email:
Pegs Lane cathy.kerr@hertscc.gov.uk
HERTFORD
SG13 8DP

John Bishop Adult Care Services tel:

Herts County Council 01707 280653
Mount Pleasant email:
Mount Pleasant Lane john.bishop@hertscc.gov.uk
Hatfield
HERTFORD

Hertfordshire Andrew Thiedeman Adult Mental tel:

Partnership Health Services 01462 438151
Centenary House fax:
NHS Trust, Grammar School Walk 01462 438157
Mental Health Hitchin email:
HERTFORD andrew.thiedeman@hertscc.gov.uk
SG5 1JN

Children, Schools Carol Taylor, Child Protection Unit tel:

and Families Head of Child Children, Schools and 01992 556935
Protection Families fax:
and Area Child Herts County Council 01992 556946
Protection Room 17a email:
County Hall carol-taylor@hertscc.gov.uk
Pegs Lane
HERTFORD
SG13 8DF

14
 ORGANISATION NAME ADDRESS CONTACT NUMBERS

Local Authority Darren Welsh Welwyn Hatfield Council tel:

Housing 51 Bridge Road East 01707 357660
Welwyn Garden City email:
HERTFORD d.welsh@wel-hat.gov.uk
AL7 1JR

Prison Service Stephen Rodford HMP The Mount tel:

Governor Molyneaux Avenue 01442 836359
Bovingdon email:
Hemel Hempstead (PA)
HERTFORD christine.mcginty@hmps.gsi.gov.uk
HP3 ONZ

YOT Tom Rees Youth Justice tel:

Assistant Director Herts County Council 01992 556324
County Hall email:
Pegs Lane tom.rees@hertscc.gov.uk
HERTFORD
SG13 8DF

Victim Support David Padgett Victim Support tel:

Chief Executive C/O Hertfordshire 01707 354626/7
Constabulary HQ email:
Stanborough Road david.padgett@uk.uumail.com
Welwyn Garden City
HERTFORD AL8 6XF

Crime Reduction Jim Nicholson Herts County Council tel:

Unit (Domestic County Hall 01992 588737
Pegs Lane mob:
Violence) HERTFORD 07795 120786
SG13 8DE email:
jim.nicholson@hertscc.gov.uk

MAPPA Manager (Vacancy) Hertfordshire tel:

Probation Area 01992 504444
Graham House fax:
Yeomans Court 01992 504544
Ware Road
HERTFORD
SG13 7HJ

15
 Sharing information makes the task
of monitoring offenders easier

16
Andrew*

Andrew* received a 12 month Community Rehabilitation Order on 10 June 2004 for an offence
of Common Assault. When studying the CPS documents and previous convictions his probation
officer was alerted to the fact that the recent charge of common assault indicated a sexual
element and was against an elderly and vulnerable man.

She also noticed that in the past he had several violent offences against family members and a
schedule one offence against a partner’s 6 month old baby. He was referred to the Local Risk
Management Panel (LRMP following liaison with Children’s Schools and Families (CSF))
who had a list of allegations against his children in which that they thought Andrew had
some involvement.

Andrew was informed about the risk management process and how information could be
shared with other agencies. Due to the amount of agencies involved in supporting him and his
children he was open to such a process and was able to see the benefits. On first hearing at
LRMP he was assessed as imminently high risk. CSF had concerns regarding sexual abuse
towards his daughter and his threatening behaviour towards them, as an agency. The case was
then directed to MAPPP where the risk management plan was discussed in detail. His probation
officer was advised on steps to take to minimise risk of harm to his partner. This involved a
meeting with her and intensive work on domestic violence in supervision. His partner was also
informed to call the office at any time if she was in fear. Andrew was happy for this and a help
line number was passed to his partner after assessing how he might react to such a move.

The MAPPP advised that Andrew receive more than intervention from the Community Drug
and Alcohol Agency and Probation due to the imminent risk of his anger. More intensive
interventions were investigated and Andrew was referred for a Forensic Psychiatric Assessment
with a view to implementing a package of intervention. MAPPP decided that all agencies
receiving referrals should be alerted to the volatility and anger presented by Andrew, especially
when intoxicated through alcohol or drugs. This was adhered to and Andrew was constantly
updated on the need for sharing information with other agencies. This helped him have an
insight into his own behaviour and eventually appeared to motivate him to make changes.
He continued to be very angry towards CSF as they had now stopped any contact with his
children, but he was encouraged to look at the reasons why this happened.

Andrew was offered a detox programme before any intervention could take place, he accepted
and has been alcohol free for 16 weeks. He is having regular counselling. Supervised contact
with his children began last week due to the changes in his attitude and behaviour but MAPPP
is still involved in the case as risk could be increased for some time whilst he initiates further
contact with the children and has increased involvement with CSF towards whom much of his
anger was directed.

*names have been changed

case study 17
 The needs of victims are
important in deciding how to
work with offenders

18
MAPPA Annual Report statistical information

Hertfordshire Probation Area

1. Category 1 MAPPA offenders: Registered Sex Offenders (RSO)

i The number of RSOs living in Hertfordshire on 31st March 2005 328

i.a The number of RSOs per 100,000 head of population 31

ii. The number of sex offenders having a registration requirement who were either 5
cautioned or convicted for breaches of the requirement between 1st April 2004 and
31st March 2005

iii. The number of (a) Sexual Offences Prevention Orders (SOPOs) applied for b) interim a) 3
SOPOs granted and (c) full SOPOs imposed by the courts in Hertfordshire between b) 1
1st May 2004 and 31st March 2005 c) 1

iv. The number of (a) Notification Orders applied for (b) interim Notification Orders a) 0
granted and (c) full Notification Orders imposed by the courts in Hertfordshire between b) 0
1st May 2005 and 31st March 2005 c) 0

v. The number of Foreign Travel Orders (a) applied for and (b) imposed by the courts in 0
Hertfordshire between 1st May 2004 and 31st March 2005

2. Category 2 MAPPA offenders: Violent offenders and Other sexual offenders (V&OS)

vi. The number of violent and other sexual offenders (as defined by Section 327 (3),(4) and 244
(5) of the Criminal Justice Act (2003) and living in Hertfordshire between 1st April 2004
and 31st March 2005)

3. Category 3 MAPPA offenders: Other offenders (OthO)

vii The number of ‘other offenders’ (as defined by Section 325 (2) (b) of the Criminal 317
Justice Act (2003) between 1st April and 31st March 2005)

4. Offenders managed through level 3 (MAPPP)

Level 3 Level 2
and level 2 (local inter-agency management)

viii) Identify how many MAPPA offenders in each of the three categories (1) RSO (2) VSO
and (3) OthO have been managed through MAPPP level 3 and through inter-agency risk
management (level 2) between 1st April 2004 and 31st March 2005

RSO 17 87

VSO 40 234

OthO 55 262

ix) Of the cases managed at level 3 or 2 (ie viii) between 1st April 2004 and 31st March
2005 how many, whilst managed at that level:
a) were returned to custody for breach of a licence 2 10
b) were returned to custody for breach of a restraining order or sexual offences 0 0
prevention order
c) were charged with a serious sexual or violent offence 4 0

19