Man must inform police of any new girlfriends

family law

A London man must inform the Police if he gets a new girlfriend following his history of domestic violence.

He is thought to be the first person in England and Wales to be subject to such an order under the government’s domestic violence disclosure scheme. This means that for the next seven years, he must tell the Police if he is in a relationship for any longer than 14 days. Authorities will also be able to reveal his violent past to any new partners he may have in those years.

DI Jane Topping is a member of the Hackney community safety unit. She said this seven-year order provides “a new way of protecting victims of domestic abuse and prevents other women from suffering at the hands of people like [this man]”.

One of his victims was “subjected to a horrendous ordeal by him following a sustained campaign of domestic violence” Topping explained. She hoped the woman would feel safer now that her abuser is “behind bars and will be subject to closer scrutiny”.

On top of the seven-year criminal behaviour order, the perpetrator is currently serving a three-year prison sentence. He was found guilty of actual bodily harm, perverting the course of justice and witness intimidation. The man had throttled his former partner and banged head against the floor. He continued to intimidate her when he was out on bail. During this time he also attacked another woman he had been in a relationship with, a north London court heard.

Recent figures have revealed that while reports of domestic violence have increased, the number of those which lead to charge has actually fallen. Across 18 police forces in England and Wales, domestic abuse charges fell from 60,700 in 2015 to just 54,800 last year. The biggest local decrease occurred in Manchester where there were 25 per cent fewer charges made in 2016 than the previous year.

Photo by Matty Ring via Flickr under a Creative Commons licence.

Stowe Family Law Web Team

View more from this author

3 comments

Paul - April 5, 2017 at 2:31pm

Though i am cautious about the way police deal with these matters. I do execept that these crimes do take place. If this is the case, this animal is enjoying too much freedom as far as I can see. The measure depends on him being honest and transparent with the police. If this person is impulsive or psycotic it will not protect his potential next victim. It seems we will take all kinds of risks to stop more people going to our pact jail cells. Even when they are clearly not safe to be out.
That said. From my own experience i would not be too quick to beleive this charge. Or indeed the ‘victim’ . Crying wolf is now as wider spread issue as domestic violence. Our police and adveserial courts are not not concerned enough with establishing the TRUTH in these cases.

Andrew - April 5, 2017 at 7:30pm

What is a relationship?
_
If they don’t share a home but have intercourse from time to time are they in one?
_
If they share a home but don’t have intercourse are they in one? It’s all too vague to be the subject of a criminal charge. And if he tells the woman (during the fourteen days of grace) his version of events and then he tells the police. They tell her their version and she doesn’t care, she believes him, he’s all changed now, it was the fault of the previous victims – we’ve all heard about it. Nothing the police can do, is there?
_

And here’s a thought. Suppose he forms a relationship and then marries the woman concerned. Probably the only person who can give evidence of the relationship having been formed is the wife, and if she refuses, she is not compellable, because if I remember rightly breaking one of these orders is not one of those offences in which a spouse is compellable. And quite right too.
_
And while we’re having fun with the law: if somebody who knows about the order sets him up for a date is that somebody inciting him or aiding and abetting him? Come to think of it, if the woman urges him to keep it secret and not tell Plod is she inciting him too?
_
The criminal law is not much use for prevention, is it?

Brian - April 6, 2017 at 11:25am

If the acts of violence actually happened, it is right for incarceration to protect people in society. Having a criminal activity order gives people pause for though and gives an opportunity for the alarm bells to start ringing – doesn’t help much for reform or rehabilitation – but in a case like this prevention is better than picking up the pieces. I think from an idealistic point of view it is a good idea, in practice, it’s only as good as those that adhere to it. From my observations in life, just like in the Hollywood films bad people don’t follow the rules.

Leave a comment