Youth Justice Team Annual Report 2014-2015 … · Youth Justice Team Annual Report 2014-2015 . Prevention Restoration Integration Foreword The Minister for Home Affairs IoM Youth

Prevention Restoration Integration

Youth Justice Team

Annual Report

2014-2015


Foreword

The Minister for Home Affairs

IoM Youth Justice Team: 2014-2015 Annual Report

In a time when budgets continue to be tight, our focus more than ever should be on outcomes. It is for this reason that I am pleased to put my support behind the Youth Justice Team and the work they have done over the last year in diverting young people away from crime. Importantly, this is not just reducing crime for the future, but re-engaging a section of our nation’s youth who might otherwise be unskilled and potentially unemployed.

This is an intensive way of helping people, but the results speak for themselves, in continued reduction in referrals and in the core group of recidivists, in the number sticking with jobs or employment as well as the first hand accounts of restorative justice. They, as well as our staff deserve credit for turning their lives around. This has been on the back of a difficult year for the staff, including the sudden loss of one of the team.

The fact that almost 60% of young people placed in work or training are still engaged six months later serves to underline our desire to protect and assist the vulnerable. The drop in core recidivism, especially compared to a decade ago show commitment to both the young people and victims. In doing so we provide an opportunity to set them on the road to education or work, diverting from a life of crime to being fully engaged members of society.

Hon. Juan Watterson BA ACA MHK


Contents

INTRODUCTION

THE YOUTH JUSTICE TEAM STAFF FOREWORD FORMAL REFERRALS TO THE YOUTH JUSTICE TEAM

Breakdown of Referrals Type of Offences Referred and Referral Outcomes

LINK PROGRESSIVE FRAMEWORK Early Intervention Reasons for Referrals and Referral Outcomes LOOKED AFTER CHILDREN Referrals received compared to the previous two years RECIDIVISM Number of occasions an individual has been referred Core Recidivism in comparison with previous years MINORITY REPORTS, CAUTIONS AND FINAL WARNINGS Minority Reports Issued in Comparison with Previous Years Minority Reports Issued with Subsequent Re-referral and Outcome Cautions Issued with Subsequent Re-Offending Final Warning Cautions Issued with Subsequent Re-Offending REFERRALS RESULTING IN DIVERSION SCHEMES JARS Referral Age & Gender Breakdown Types of Offences Resulting in a JARS Outcome DARS Referral Age & Gender Breakdown Types of Offences Resulting in a DARS Outcome J-TRAF Referral Age & Gender Breakdown Types of Offences Resulting in a J-TRAF Outcome


Contents (cont) WORK IN THE COURTS Court Sentencing Final Outcomes Breakdown of Probation Orders Issued Pre-Sentence Reports Re-Offending Rate during Court Order SPECIALIST HEALTH ADVISOR

Total Number of Holistic Health Reviews Referrals/ Accompanied Visits made to Specialist Health Care Provision Other Health Advice Sessions CAREERS ADVISOR Young People Interviewed Young People Placed Retention Rates of Young People APPENDIX: QUALITATIVE EXAMPLES


1

IoM Youth Justice Team

2014-2015 Annual Report

INTRODUCTION

The Youth Justice Team is multi agency, led by the police, and works to prevent offending

and reoffending by children and young people.

The team is based within the Department of Health and Social Care (Murray House,

Douglas) and brings together professionals from two Departments of Government: Health &

Social Care and Home Affairs.

The philosophy of the team can be described as: Prevention, Restoration and

Integration.

Prevention: Tackling crime and reoffending through the underlying circumstances and

needs in the children’s and young persons’ lives, by a move to earlier and more effective

interventions when young people first offend. Using structured needs assessment to identify

risk and protective factors associated with offending behavior to inform effective

interventions that tackle each particular factor: personal, family, social, educational, training,

employment or health issues.

Restoration: Ensuring that children and young people responsible for crime face

meaningful consequences that hold them accountable for the harm caused to victims and

the wider community. Punishment should be proportionate to the seriousness and

persistency of the offending behavior and justice should be delivered for all concerned.

Integration: Seeking to retain children and young people who offend within mainstream

society or to reconnect them in ways that enable them to achieve the Government’s desired

outcomes for children.


2

The Youth Justice Team Staff:

Inspector Paul Bryan MAPPU Inspector Department of Home Affairs (Multi-Agency Police Protection Unit)

Sergeant Kevin Quirk MAPPU Sergeant/YJT Manager

Department of Home Affairs

Verona Addy Community Volunteer Department of Home Affairs

Peter Christie Social Worker/Court Officer

Department of Health & Social Care

Charlotte Lloyd Youth Justice Officer

Children’s Centre (via DH&SC)

Kevin Newburn Police Constable Department of Home Affairs

Jackie Pate Specialist Health Adviser Department of Health & Social Care

John Robertson Probation Officer Department of Home Affairs

Dave Surgeon Senior Practitioner

Children’s Centre (via DH&SC)

Scott Wilson Youth Justice Officer

Department of Home Affairs


3

The Youth Justice Team in 2013-14

Inspector Paul Bryan

This year has shown a continued reduction in recorded juvenile crime and a reduction in the

number of individual juveniles referred to the team. The number of young people classed as

recidivists (young people referred to the Youth Justice Team on three or more separate

occasions) has remained stable based on this year’s figures with the vast majority of young

people referred responding to interventions.

Restorative approaches have continued to be a positive form of disposal, where appropriate,

with the inclusion of victims being at the very heart of teaching young people about the

impact of their behaviour on others.

Supporting young people in the area of education and employment has been sporadic

during this recording period due to staffing difficulties. The prevailing issue has now been

resolved and it will remain part of the team’s drive to maintain the engagement of young

people in mainstream education and employment to give them the best chance of achieving

their full potential now and in the future

I would like to make special mention of the sad and unexpected loss of Mr Darren Gale;

Darren worked in the Youth Justice Team for seven years and will be remembered for his

genuine and caring approach which undoubtedly supported numerous young people away

from offending over the years.

The team has faced difficult challenges arising from the drive to see efficient use of public

spending; the year ahead will bring additional challenges due to a reduction in staff. Efficient

approaches to tackling offending behaviour will have to continue to be further developed to

maintain an effective and robust service provision.

Paul Bryan


4

FORMAL REFERRALS TO THE YOUTH JUSTICE TEAM

The data presented here includes all children and young persons under the age of eighteen

who have been referred to the Youth Justice Team either by Police for an offence committed

or from other agencies that have decided specialist work or an assessment from the Youth

Justice Team is required. As can be seen below the Youth justice Team’s referrals have

continued to follow the general downward trend.

Breakdown of Referrals from 1st April 2014 until 31st March 2015

compared to the previous 3 years:

2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015

Total Referrals 412 293 270

From Police 405 282 259

Other Agencies 7 11 11

Number of Individuals

Referred

277 193 162

Looked After Children

Referrals

34 (13 individuals) 25 (12 individuals) 35 (10 Individuals)

495

327 293

340

412

293 270

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

2008/2009 2009/2010 2010/2011 2011/2012 2012/2013 2013/2014 2014/2015

Nu

mb

er

of

Re

ferr

als

Year

Total Referrals Comparison 2008-2015


5

Age and Gender Breakdown of Referrals Received 2014-2015

Type of Offences Referred 2014-2015

2 2

18 20

33 35

45 46 2 1

33

7

20

6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

Nu

mb

er

of

Re

ferr

ee

s

Age of Referrees

Female

Male

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

3

3

4

11

11

15

16

20

20

32

54

72

0 20 40 60 80

Possession of Indecent Images

Littering

Wounding with Intent

Handling Stolen Goods

Unlawful Sexual Intercourse

Indecent Assault

Assault: Grievous Bodily Harm

Possession of Offensive Weapon

Arson

Assault: Actual Bodily Harm

Referral

Burglary

Drug Offences

Public Order

Assault

Alcohol Offences

Traffic Offences

Criminal Damage

Theft

Number of referrals


6

Referral Outcomes 2014-2015

DNP - Detected No Proceedings J-Traf - Juvenile traffic (Scheme) JARS - Juvenile Alcohol Referral Scheme DARS - Drugs Arrest Referral Scheme NFA - No Further Action ACHE - Assaults Can Hurt Everyone (Scheme)

11

1

1

2

6

6

6

14

17

20

25

29

48

84

0 20 40 60 80 100

Referral Assessment

Withdrawn

Combined JARS & DARS

ACHE

NFA

Restorative Justice

DARS

JARS

Minority Report

J-TRAF

Caution (Reprimand)

Caution (Final Warning)

DNP

Prosecution

Number of Referrals


7

Link Progressive Framework

EARLY INTERVENTION

Early intervention with children and young people is crucial. One of the main activities in this

regard is the ‘Link’ scheme.

LINK is a progressive framework for interaction and engagement with children and young

people who have been identified by the police as being on the periphery of criminal, anti-

social and drink-related behaviour. LINK, which is administered by the Youth Justice Team,

diverts children and young people away from the criminal justice system.

The LINK framework involves parents by informing them of situations their children

encounter, allowing the parents to take ownership and address the issues identified. In the

coming year LINK will include referrals to Manx Sport and Recreation offering options for the

young people identified. Restorative Justice is also now introduced into LINK bringing young

people face to face with the issues they are causing.

Where alcohol is identified as a contributory factor in the child or young person coming into

contact with the Police, they are given education through the Juvenile Alcohol Referral

Scheme (‘JARS’ - detailed later in the report). This education is carried out in group sessions

or on a one to one basis, the sessions being interactive involving the young people and their

experiences. The parents of the young people are also able to have an input into the group

sessions.

The Youth Justice Team also offers tobacco intervention, provided one to one by our

Specialist Health Adviser, who can assist those young people who wish to give up smoking.

Link Progressive Framework

The approach is to escalate the intervention through a series of phases:-

Phase 1 Letter sent to parent/guardian. If alcohol is involved: JARS referral;

Phase 2 Second letter hand delivered, face to face contact established between neighbourhood

police officers and parents/guardians; Referral letter completed for MSR assessment. Phase 3 Restorative Meeting

Phase 4 Acceptable Behaviour Contract issued and explanation of Anti-Social Behaviour Order

(ASBO) Phase 5 Anti-Social Behaviour Order


8

Referral Outcomes from the Link Scheme 2014-2015 (Total Referrals 163)

Reasons for LINK Referral 2014-2015 (Total Referrals 163)

30

61

9 5

1

57 Info Only

Phase 1

Phase 2

Phase 3

Phase 4

Phase 1 (JARS)

1

1

3

4

6

9

13

13

33

34

46

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Harrasment

Vehicle Nuisance

Intimidation

Verbal Abuse

Littering

Damage to Property

Public Drunkeness

Alcohol Possession

Miscellaneous

Alcohol Abuse

General Nuisance

Number of Referrals

Re

aso

ns

for

Re

ferr

al


9

LOOKED AFTER CHILDREN

The YJT has for a long period of time advocated that a large number of looked after children

arrests and subsequent referrals are linked to the concept of ‘criminalisation via

institutionalisation’.

Many looked after children have become engaged with the criminal justice system via

conflict with care staff and minor damage to care establishment property. Many of the

offences disclosed are focussed upon staff assaults, primarily of a minor nature, and

damage to property.

The Youth Justice Team very rarely, if ever, receive referrals from the parent(s) of children

or young people not in care; it is normally the case that parents resolve such matters within

the family without recourse to the criminal justice system. The Youth Justice Team has

therefore continued to support the concept of Corporate Parenting.

The main intention is to reduce the amount of referrals generated through minor damage

and inappropriate behaviour within care establishments by looked after children. This aims

to reduce “criminalisation via institutionalisation”.

The Corporate Parenting approach was introduced in 2008/2009 and resulted in a dramatic

reduction in the amount of referrals, which has remained consistently at a low level.

Referrals received involving Looked After Children compared with

previous years.

37

34

25

35

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015

Nu

mb

er

of

'Lo

oke

d e

fete

r' R

efe

rral

s

Year


10

RECIDIVISM

Recidivism is one of the most fundamental concepts in criminal justice. It refers to a

person's relapse into criminal behaviour, after receiving sanctions or undergoing intervention

for a previous crime. The recorded number of ‘Core Recidivists’ is based on individuals who

have been referred to the Youth Justice Team on three or more separate occasions for

offending during the reporting period. Recidivism has followed much the same profile as in

previous years; young people referred on a multiple basis are very much in the minority

which underlines the value of the Youth Justice Team in diverting young people away from a

life of crime.

Number of occasions an individual has been referred 2014-2015

Core Recidivism 2014-2015 in Comparison with Previous Years

124

20

9 2 3 1 1 1 1

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Nu

mb

er

of

Ind

ivid

ual

s R

efe

rre

d

Number of Occasions Referred

55 57

30

21 21 22

32

19 18

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2006/2007 2007/2008 2008/2009 2009/2010 2010/2011 2011/2012 2012/2013 2013/2014 2014/2015

Nu

mb

er

of

Ind

ivid

ual

s

Year


11

MINORITY REPORTS

Minority reports were developed to reduce the numbers of first time entrants into the

criminal justice system and prevent children and young people obtaining unnecessary formal

cautions that could impact on subsequent employment and educational aspirations. This

approach recognises that children and young people often act childishly and cause problems

that they don’t always interpret as criminal in orientation or intent.

The programme is based around the following broad principles:

A minor offence has been committed.

The child/young person is of previous good character.

There has been low impact on any victim.

There is a restorative element i.e. an apology in person or via letter, compensation or reparation.

A Minority Report is a contract signed up to by the child/young person with the proviso of

no subsequent offending within the 6 month period from date of issue, resulting in there

being no necessity for official recording of the matter other than on YJT databases.

Any breach of the criteria is dealt with via escalation to other disposals.


12

Minority Reports Issued in comparison to previous years

Minority Reports Issued with Subsequent Re-referrals and Outcomes

2014-2015

17

13

3

1

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Nu

mb

er

of

Min

ori

ty R

ep

ort

s

Total Number Issued

No Further Issue

Number of IndividualsSubsequently Cautioned

Number of IndividualsSubsequently Prosecuted

Minority

Reports

Issued

Re-referrals

following issue

Breach of

Minority Report

within specified

period (%)

2007-08 51 14 27.5

2008-09 56 7 12.5

2009-10 48 2 4.2

2010-11 31 4 12.9

2011-12 53 4 7.5

2012-13 21 4 19

2013-14 20 3 15

2014-15 17 4 23.5


13

CAUTIONS

A caution is a formal police warning, delivered by a police officer to deal quickly and simply

with less serious offenders to divert them from unnecessary appearance in the criminal

courts and to reduce the chances of their re-offending.

Cautions Issued with Subsequent Re-Offending 2014-2015

14

9

2

No Further Offence

Higher Level Offence

Lower Level Offence


14

FINAL WARNING CAUTIONS

A Final Warning Caution consists of a number of meetings with a Youth Justice Officer who

risk assesses the likelihood of reoffending. Based on the assessments, a programme of work

with the child or young person is formulated. The work focuses on particular problems

identified and always takes into account the effects on any victims. If the young person

offends again within two years they are considered for prosecution.

Final Warning Cautions Issued with Subsequent Re-Offending 2014-2015

Note: 29 individuals were given final warnings as an outcome for their offending (page 6);

some of the individuals had multiple offences committed over a short period of time grouped into one final warning disposal covering 40 offences

27

2

No Further Offence

Higher Level Offence

Lower Level Offence


15

REFERRALS RESULTING IN DIVERSION SCHEMES

Juvenile Alcohol Referral Scheme (JARS)

‘JARS’ is a scheme aimed at providing a non-punitive approach to alcohol related offending,

for first time offences involving alcohol. It provides an educational approach where the

young person either attends an evening session in company with their parent/guardian,

which is run by the Alcohol Advisory Service/Motiv8 in conjunction with a police officer from

the Youth Justice Team, or they attend a one to one session conducted by a member of the

Youth Justice Team.

Referrals requiring JARS following receipt of a Police file 2014-2015

Note: 14 individuals received JARS as a specific outcome (page 6) the above graph

includes an addition 6 JARS outcomes that were delivered for other offence outcomes

committed where alcohol was a primary causation.

1 1

3

2

4

1

3

4

1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

12 13 14 15 16 17

Nu

mb

er

of

Re

ferr

als

Referral Age

Female

Male


16

Type of Offences resulting in a JARS Outcome 2014-2015

8

3

3

1

1

1

1 1

Drunk & Disorderly

Drunk & Incapable

Criminal Damage

Theft from Shop

Drunk & Indecent

Section 3 POA

Drunk in a Public Place

Possession Clas B


17

Drug Arrest Referral Scheme (DARS)

‘DARS’ is similar in format to JARS, aimed at providing a non-punitive approach to drug

related offending, for first time drug related offences. It provides an educational approach

where the young person attends a session in company with their parent/guardian.

Referrals requiring DARS 2014-2015

Type of Offences resulting in a DARS Outcome 2014-2015

During the period 2014-2015 all DARS outcomes were related to the offence of possession of a class B drug.

1

4

2

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

15 16 17

Nu

mb

er

of

Re

ferr

als

Referral age

Female

Male


18

Juvenile Traffic Referral Scheme (J-TRAF)

J-TRAF is an initiative designed to allow young drivers to access additional driving education

for their first driving offence. The aim of the scheme is to prevent further offending and

reduce the prospect of young drivers being involved in incidents on the road as the young

people gain knowledge and skills.

The young person agrees to attend two driving lessons, or in the case of J-TRAF+ for more

serious offences, four driving lessons with a qualified driving instructor of their choice, paid

for by themselves. These lessons concentrate on the possible deficiencies in their driving

skills highlighted by the offence, with a brief report to the YJT being prepared by the

instructor, confirming completion. The lessons are organised by the young person.

A Roads Policing Unit officer also contacts the young person and conducts an input with

them around the offence they committed and road safety as a whole.

The majority of offences recorded during the period involved driving without due care and attention, which includes misjudging distance, clearance, & speed and excessive speed having regard to road conditions.


19

Referrals requiring J-TRAF following receipt of a Police file 2014-2015

Type of Offences resulting in a J-TRAF Outcome 2014-2015

6

10

1

2

1

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

15 16 17

Nu

mb

er

of

Re

ferr

als

Refferal Age

Female

Male

18

2

Driving Without Due Care andAttention

Speeding


20

Work in the Courts Court Sentencing Final Outcomes 2014-2015

The

high number of matters either detected no proceedings (DNP) or withdrawn at court (30)

has been further examined; 1 matter was recorded DNP at court, 11 matters relate to one

incident of multiple damage to vehicles which was withdrawn at court due to identification

issues, 3 were withdrawn as a result of insufficient evidence, 9 were withdrawn as a result

of alternative charges and 6 were withdrawn with alternative outcome offered and accepted,

(caution or final warning as an alternative to prosecution after indicating guilt through the

duty advocate scheme).

Breakdown of Probation Orders Issued 2014-2015

19

1

1

2

3

6

9

13

30

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Outcome Pending

Penalty Points

Custody

Community Service Order

Conditional Discharge

Fine/Costs

Probation Order

Final Warning

Withdrawn/DNP

Number of Referrals

Co

urt

Ou

tco

me

6

3

6 Month Order

12 Month Order


21

Pre-Sentence Reports

Pre-Sentencing Reports (PSR) are requested by Courts on “findings of guilt”, to assist in the

sentencing of juveniles.

Pre-sentence reports are not necessarily requested for every juvenile, but are more likely to

be requested when offences are more serious in nature or the young person has previous

convictions. These reports provide insight into the young person’s life history and the factors

which influence their offending behaviours and are expected to contain a recommendation

for sentencing. In making a recommendation, for any form of formal supervision of a young

person in the community, the PSR will highlight areas of work to be undertaken with the

young person.

The information contained is sourced from the young person, their parents and agencies

which have had involvement with the young person. An assessment is carried out which

identifies the focus for work with the child or young person to reduce their risk of re-

offending.

Pre-Sentence Reports 2014-2015

15

11

0

5

10

15

20

Submitted PSR Advice Followed


22

Specialist Health Advisor (SHA)

The SHA retains responsibility for Looked After Children and Young People that come under

the umbrella of the IOM YJT.

The SHA conducts holistic health reviews on children and young people referred to the

Youth Justice Team and makes necessary interventions.

Collaborative working with other team members has increased fluidity of the SHA’s role

within the YJT; she has taken part in 19 collaborative sessions over the past year.

In close working practice with colleagues the SHA continues to act as a conduit gaining the

confidence of the young person by attending with them to their appointments with the GP,

mental health services, A&E department and sexual health clinic.

There has been an extension to the role that the SHA provides in the introduction of delivery

of JARS 1 to 1. This gives an increased opportunity to develop “in house” support and

education to young people with issues relating to alcohol use. (7 sessions of JARS during the

year, 1-2-1)

The overarching aim is to ensure children and young people, upon leaving the supervision of the Youth Justice Team, are equipped to deal with their own health needs, and know how to access health services appropriately should the need arise.

Total number of holistic health reviews 2014/2015 – Total 75

These are the numbers of reviews undertaken with young people referred to the YJT. Not every individual has need of assessment, or will engage with the SHA when a review is offered, hence the disparity of total reviews to YJT referrals. (The 71 planned reviews would incorporate the 6 from the secure unit).

71

4 6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Planned Opportunistic From Secure Unit

Ind

ivid

ual

Re

vie

ws

Holistic Health Review


23

Referrals/Accompanied Visits made to specialist health care provision (Total 31)

This is the number of referrals the SHA has made to other agencies as a result of her reviews undertaken.

Other Health Advice Sessions – 2014/2015

10

5

4

2

10

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Ind

ivid

ual

Re

ferr

als

Liasons &Referrals made to other agencies

Children & Adolescent MentalHealth Services

AAS/Motiv8/Drug & AlcoholTeam

Adult Mental Health

GUM (Sexual Health)

GP

75

40

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Ind

ivid

ual

Re

ferr

als

Advisory Sessions Undertaken

Immunisations Advised

Immunisations Completed


24

Careers Advisor From 1st April 2014 the careers advisor seconded to the Youth Justice Team from the Department of Economic Development (DED) was withdrawn. From the 1st August 2014 the Department of Home Affairs (DHA) employed a full-time careers advisor. The careers advisor provided tailored support to young people who engage with the Youth Justice Team who are not in education, employment or training. The children and young people often demonstrate:

Low levels of literacy and numeracy

Poor attendance at school

Low self esteem

Been excluded or in danger of exclusion from school

Been in care (Looked after Children)

Learning difficulty and/or disability

Health problems, including mental health problems

Disadvantaged or challenging family backgrounds

Complex social and emotional needs

A high risk of offending

Low-income families where there is a tradition of adults not participating in employment, training or further and/or higher education

The aim of the careers advisor placement with the Youth Justice Team is: To engage with young offenders

To establish a realistic pathway from social exclusion to employment or training

To deliver a programme of personal development and support

To remove barriers preventing employment or training.

Education, training and employment are protective factors against involvement in anti-social and offending behaviour. Young people not in education, employment or training (NEET) are five times more likely than their peers to become involved in the criminal justice system and three times more likely to suffer depression, leading to longer term health problems and costs to society. Due to a change in circumstances we are only able to report on the second 6 months of the reporting period.


25

Young Peopled Interviewed (1st September 2014 – 31st March 2015)

Young People Placed (1st September 2014 – 31st March 2015)

Retention Rates of Young People (1st September 2014 – 31st March 2015)

16

12

25

14

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

14 15 16 17

Nu

mb

er

of

Yo

un

g P

eo

ple

In

terv

iew

ed

Age of Young People Interviewed

22

14

21

3

7

0

5

10

15

20

25

Full TimeEmployment

Part TimeEmployment

Education Work TrainingPlacement

Not Placed

Nu

mb

er

of

Yo

un

g P

eo

ple

Pla

ced

Type of Placement

72%

59%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

After 3 Months After 6 Months

Re

ten

tio

n R

ate

s

Retention Timescale

YJT


26

APPENIDX:

Qualitative

Examples

The following case studies provide examples of the range of situations and

circumstances encountered by the Youth Justice Team on a daily basis.


27

John Robertson (Probation Officer) and Charlotte Lloyd (Youth Justice

Officer)

Mike was sentenced to a two year Suspended Sentence Supervision Order (8 month

custodial sentence with a two year supervision element). He was also ordered to pay £500

compensation and £300 costs for an offence of Actual Bodily Harm (ABH) in July 2013.

At the time of sentence Mike believed he would receive a custodial sentence which he

considered to be an easy option. In our work we have explored the detrimental impact of

custody on young people in terms of employment and travel. He now has a completely

different view of things and is thankful to the Deputy High Bailiff that she did not choose

this route. Mike was supervised by the Youth Justice Team for 19 months. His response to

Probation supervision can be accurately described as excellent. He reported for all

appointments over this period of time and engaged well with officers from the Youth Justice

Team. Work has been undertaken with Mike in increasing an understanding of his cycle of

violence which has helped highlight risk factors for him. Victim centred work in general and

specifically the restoratively based “One Punch Can Kill” programme has been undertaken

increasing his understanding of the potential harm of violence. We believe this has slowly

increased Mike’s motivation to change alongside a growing maturity in outlook. The period

of supervision gave Mike the time and opportunity to reflect on himself and his behaviour.

After a slow slightly nervous beginning he became far less resistant and built a good

working alliance with myself and Charlotte. Whilst the supervision sessions were challenging

in terms of addressing his offending behaviour they were also supportive of the changes he

was making in his life. Mike matured over the period with a growing understanding of the

impact of violence on himself and others. The use of the ACHE programme was helpful in

this respect.

The supervision element of his Order was revoked 5 months early as a result of the positive

progress made by Mike. He very much wanted to be part of this making a court appearance

to thank the judge for giving him the opportunity of Probation supervision which is not

something she hears a lot of!! The Deputy High Bailiff quoted that ‘it’s nice to hear some

good news in this Court, the early discharge is solely down to your good behaviour, I am

more than happy to discharge it from today. We wish you well and are grateful to you for

coming to Court’.

This has been a really satisfying case to co-work where we feel supervision has made a significant difference to this young person’s life and in our work it is uncommon that an Order is revoked for good behaviour.


28

Charlotte Lloyd (Youth Justice Officer) – Education in Schools

The Youth Justice Team (YJT) has introduced a preventive training session which is

delivered to young people aged 14-15 years old, who are in compulsory education. The

training aims to provide an overview of the role and function of the Youth Justice Team and

the consequences of offending. This is to help educate and develop an understanding of the

consequences of offending. We hope that by delivering the training all young people will be

able to define the role and purpose of the Youth Justice team, be able to identify reasons

why young people commit crime and be able to discuss the consequences of offending. This

should encourage the young people to make non- offending decisions, reducing the number

of young people referred to the YJT. This training is a trial, and should it be a success it will

be extended to all year 10 students in all five secondary schools on the Isle of Man.

Below is feedback received from one of the secondary schools.

“The Youth Justice talks follow on from work students have undertaken in the classroom

regarding consequences for actions of teenagers. The talks provide an interesting topic and

the stories and information used relate well to what the students are interested in. It is an

important topic and it engages the students making them understand why they are learning

about it and how it relates to them. The keynote when used is great, the visual resources

had more of an impact on student learning. Perhaps some video clips related to the topic

will enhance the lesson further”.


29

Dave Surgeon (Youth Justice Officer) Mohammed Shah is a 15 year old year schoolboy who has been known to the Youth Justice Team (YJT) since May 2012. He was initially referred by his secondary school as there were concerns about his poor behaviour within the school environment, which had not responded to a range of interventions e.g. 1:1 mentoring sessions, conflict management sessions, school report card and referral to the Police Safer Schools Team. Ms King, Mohammed’s mother met Ali Shah, Mohammed's father, when she was 17. Mr Shah had had a troubled childhood and Mohammed’s parents separated when he was very young because of Mr Shah’s heroin use. The majority of Mohammed’s early years were spent in an industrial town in the North of England. Information from his primary school would indicate that he was a bright and hard-working pupil and he has fond memories of this school. During this period Ms King met and married Dan King, with whom she had two children. The marriage ended as a result of significant domestic violence, which was witnessed by Mohammed, and Ms King moved to the Isle of Man in 2010. Mohammed initially did well in secondary school but before long his poor behaviour led to him receiving sanctions, detentions and bullying interventions. In May 2011 it was agreed that Mohammed would be monitored by the Social, Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties Team and he was placed on the Special Educational Needs Register at School Action Plus. However there were numerous further incidents of poor behaviour. In December 2011 Mohammed’s father came to the Island after being released from prison in the UK. Mr Shah re-established contact with Mohammed and Ms King but shortly afterwards he was arrested and sent to IoM Prison for offences committed on the Island. Mohammed visited his father in prison and was, to some extent, influenced by him. Throughout 2012 numerous concerns were expressed about Mohammed exhibiting threatening, abusive and physically aggressive behaviour both at school and in the community. He was also reported to have started misusing alcohol and illegal drugs. In March 2013, Mr Shah was moved to the UK following a serious assault on prison staff. Mohammed was suspended from school on a further two occasions that month and, following a Governors’ hearing, his place at school was withdrawn. In May 2013 Mohammed was referred to the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service for an assessment. He has been seen by a Chartered Clinical Psychologist, but he made it clear he did not wish to engage. In June 2013 Mr Shah received a life sentence and he was placed in a Category A prison in the UK. The following month Ms King received a six month custodial sentence for a drugs related offence and Mohammed was placed with a family friend in the West of the Island. Initially this proved successful but the family friend found it increasingly difficult to adequately supervise Mohammed and his offending behaviour, including a burglary, precipitated his entry into the care system and a court appearance. Mohammed was placed in a residential care home in August 2013. This offered increased supervision and monitoring opportunities but in the event Mohammed refused to comply


30

with the regime. His mother’s release from prison in late October 2013 was soon followed by Mohammed’s return home, following which he started to attend the Education Support Centre on a regular basis. The YJT are very mindful that figures from Barnardo’s reveal that children with a parent in prison are twice as likely to experience conduct and mental health problems, and are less likely to do well at school. They are also three times more likely to be involved in offending, with 65% of boys with a convicted father going on to offend themselves. Mohammed received a 12 month Probation Order in November 2013 and a further 12 Month Probation Order for shoplifting in November 2014. He has been seen on a regular and consistent basis throughout this period and he has been encouraged and helped to behave in a positive and pro-social manner. Over time, there has been a gradual improvement in his presenting behaviours and his involvement and contact with the police has reduced considerably. Mohammed’s use of alcohol and illegal substances has also reduced over time and he has recently agreed to work with the Drug and Alcohol Team in relation to these issues. “Probation (managed by the YJT) has helped me understand that there is more to life than offending, and it has helped me realise that continuous offending would severely affect my future prospects. It would also harm my chances of seeing the world, as well as limiting my future job opportunities. There are better and more legal ways to do things in the long run than offending and ruining my chances of doing great things.” – Mohammed Shah (May 2015) Mohammed has, through his own efforts, successfully reintegrated back into education. He acts as an informal mentor at his school and he respected by many of the younger pupils. Mohammed is soon to take a number of GCSE’s and he plans to attend IoM College later this year. In the longer term he is keen to move into his own accommodation at some point and he would like to own his own bar/club when he is older.


31

Charlotte Lloyd (Youth Justice Officer) Michelle was given a Final Warning for an offence of theft of mobile phone, in 2014. It was

her first offence. She was remorseful for her behaviour, and embarrassed by her actions.

She reports that she committed the offence as there was information on the mobile phone

that her friend wanted deleting. When working with Michelle, to understand why she

committed the offence, we focused on the risks attached to social networking sites, i.e. -

Facebook, twitter, WhatsApp. Etc. We also discussed internet security and safeguarding

herself. She stated that she had not realised how information on the internet can be

misunderstood, and distributed in a short period of time.

Michelle was in her final year of compulsory education, and she describes school ‘as not for

her’. She struggled with her attendance and academic work, partly due to dyslexia. Michelle

stated that she could not read information on white paper and would dis-engage; she

explained that she needed yellow paper. To remove this engagement barrier the YJT utilised

yellow paper in the work we conducted with Michelle, this greatly improved her

concentration. Michelle was uncertain of her plans when she left school. She stated that her

dream was to become a veterinary nurse however she did not know how to achieve her

career goal. The YJT worked closely with Michelle and the Department of Economic

Development (DED) to set up a 12 week work placement at the MSPCA, which Michelle fully

enjoyed. This has developed her confidence, and self-belief and she received positive

feedback from the employer. Alongside this Michelle contacted all veterinary surgeons on

island about undertaking an apprenticeship to train as a veterinary nurse. She has been

successful as a local vet has advised her they will be in a position to take her on.

Michelle has turned her life around and has a more positive future with career opportunities.

I believe her involvement with YJT has provided her with the support to pursue her

veterinary nurse training. She tells me that she ‘could not have done this by herself’.

Furthermore by understanding and addressing the barriers to engagement by simply

changing the colour of paper to yellow for example, enhanced her ability to participate in

the sessions. Michelle stated that the sessions have ‘helped her a lot’, and although at times

the topics made her feel uncomfortable, she enjoyed them as it made her think and reflect

on her own decision making. I assess that Michelle will not re-offend in the future, as she

states ‘I now have too much to lose’.

Documents

Youth Justice Team Annual Report 2014-2015 … · Youth Justice Team Annual Report 2014-2015 . Prevention Restoration Integration Foreword The Minister for Home Affairs IoM Youth