Disposable Victims

A Community Resolution closes a recorded crime without a formal interview under caution, without a caution, and without any finding of guilt. The crime is recorded. The CR is the outcome. It does not result in a criminal record but can appear on an enhanced DBS check at the discretion of a Chief Police Officer. The NPCC's 2022 guidance requires the person to accept responsibility, the victim to be consulted, a gravity matrix to be applied, and supervisor authority in certain circumstances. None of that, VNS's research has found, is being applied with any consistency to stalking and harassment.

CRs for stalking and harassment visible from forces that responded to VNS FOIs

5,000+

Forces in England and Wales, most refused or said they could not retrieve the data

43

IOPC reports, learning outcomes or policy recommendations on CR misuse in stalking/harassment

0

Crimes Merseyside would need to review manually just for 2024 to identify misidentified victims

6,101

On domestic abuse, the direction has been consistent for over a decade. ACPO guidance 2012 specifically excluded DA from CR use. The IPCC stated categorically in 2013 that restorative justice should not be used in cases of domestic abuse or assault. HMIC guidance 2014 said the same. The College APP carries the same position. None of this has been placed on a statutory footing. Forces have used CRs for DA cases anyway. On stalking and harassment specifically, a Devon and Cornwall quick-guide lists them in the category of cases for which a CR should not be issued. Stalking and harassment require a course of conduct by their legal definition, they will in most circumstances score above the gravity-matrix threshold at which a CR is appropriate.

In 2025 VNS submitted FOIs to all 43 forces and to the IOPC, College of Policing, HMICFRS, CPS and Home Office. Cambridgeshire confirmed 1,015 CRs for stalking and 539 for harassment (plus 8 aggravated). West Midlands confirmed 2,330 combined CRs for stalking and harassment 2018–2024, with 675 in 2024 alone, more than double the annual figures recorded between 2018 and 2023. Merseyside confirmed 17 stalking and 38 harassment CRs 2018–2024 and that CRs can be issued without victim consent where a supervisor is consulted and rationale recorded. Sussex confirmed 33 stalking and 204 harassment CRs across the same period. The Metropolitan Police refused the entire request under Section 12. GMP, West Yorkshire, Surrey, North Yorkshire, Cheshire and others refused in full.

Whether consent was actually obtained, whether victims were properly informed, and whether the CR process was accurately represented to everyone involved: none of this is recorded in a retrievable form by the forces that issued the CRs.

• Dorset refused, determining consent would require manual review of approximately 6,618 records
• Cleveland refused, 25–30 minutes per record would exceed the FOI cost limit
• West Midlands, determining whether consent or misleading representations were involved would require individual crime searches for each record
• Cambridgeshire refused, manual review would exceed the cost limit
• Sussex refused, data storage and manual review limitations

Cambridgeshire confirmed that its system does not allow a person to be linked as both victim and suspect on the same crime. Devon and Cornwall confirmed that this information cannot currently be searched, tracked or quantified. Merseyside confirmed there is no central database which would identify if a person arrested as a suspect was found to be the victim. Norfolk and Suffolk confirmed that misidentification cases are not flagged or linked systematically, when misidentification occurs, the original investigation is closed and a new one created, with no link between them apart from the individuals attached.

VNS asked the IOPC for data on wrongful arrests of misidentified victims and complaints about CR misuse in stalking and harassment cases. The IOPC refused under Section 12 and confirmed explicitly that it has not produced any reports, learning outcomes or policy recommendations on the subject. Of 50 investigations and reviews considered under the recent super-complaint investigation into the police handling of stalking, none appeared to have involved a Community Resolution.

In November 2024 Louise Gather visited Bradgate Park in Leicestershire to look for magpie inkcaps, a rare fungus. She did not pick any mushrooms. PC Christopher Vickers attended her home. She was not there. He gave the CR paperwork to her husband, obtained his signature, and then falsely recorded that he had spoken to Mrs Gather directly, that she had admitted the offence, and that she had accepted the CR. None of it was true. The misconduct panel on 29 October 2025 found PC Vickers guilty of gross misconduct. Leicestershire Police acknowledged she could have lost her job had the CR remained on her enhanced DBS checks. It was removed because the case attracted press attention. There is no formal mechanism that identified it. A journalist did.

• Statutory prohibition extending the 2012 DA guidance to stalking and harassment offences and any offence requiring a course of conduct
• Mandatory consent recording in a form retrievable without manual review of individual records
• Case linking as a mandatory check before any investigation of a counter-allegation in a stalking or harassment case
• National data requirement: annual reporting by offence type, including stalking and harassment, with misidentification breakdowns
• IOPC thematic review of CR use in stalking and harassment cases
• Structured recording of protected characteristics in crime reports and custody records, Staffordshire proved it is possible