Child rapists, kidnappers and perverts caught with child abuse images have been allowed to walk free by the police – because they said they were sorry.
Hundreds of sex offenders have been let off the hook because they apologised to their victims and the police for their actions, according to figures obtained by MailOnline.
The government is facing calls to halt the use of controversial use of the resolution orders, with MPs demanding to know: ‘How on earth has this happened?’
Hundreds of child abusers have avoided justice by apologising for their actions (pic posed by model)
Figures obtained through Freedom of Information laws reveal people arrested on suspicion of rape, child rape, creating child porn, child abduction and sexually abusing a mental patient escaped prosecution by apologising.
The use of community resolution orders or restorative justice has allowed 256,816 crimes to pass without offenders going to court in the last three-and-a-half years.
The orders were brought in to allow youths and first-time offenders to avoid a criminal record and get their lives back on track.
But there is growing concern that they are now being used for ‘the most perverse and sickening crimes’.
Shocking figures from 38 of England and Wales’ police forces show resolution orders were used in 30 rape cases, including 21 involving children.
20 orders were handed out to people suspected of raping children aged less than 13 (pic posed by model)
THE WORST SEX CRIMES GIVEN COMMUNITY RESOLUTION ORDERS
- Rape of a child aged under 13: 20 orders
- Rape of a child aged under 16: 1 order
- Rape: 9 orders
- Child prostitution or porn: 8 orders
- Possession of extreme porn involving bestiality: 1 order
- Sexual assault on a child aged under 13: 75 orders
- Sexual activity involving a child under 16: 49 order
- Sexual activity involving a child aged 13 and under: 10 orders
- Care worker caused mental patient to engage in sexual activity penetration: 1 order
- Sexual assault: 284 orders
- Cruelty to children: 7 orders
- Kidnapping or abduction: 5 orders
- Sexual activity in front of child aged under 13: 2 orders
Another community resolution order was given to a care worker in the West Midlands who caused a mental patient to engage in a penetrative sex act.
Five other orders involved kidnap or abduction, 75 were for sexually assaulting young children, and 284 sexual assaults were passed off with an apology.
Conservative MP Nick de Bois, who sits on the Commons justice committee, said he would be calling on the Government to review the orders.
He said: ‘It’s shocking that offenders who admit to serious criminal offences are being offered the chance to say sorry and walk away from answering in a court of law for their crimes.’
‘The community resolution order was designed for very low-level offences, not for some of the most perverse and sickening crimes.
‘I know that victims are meant to give their consent to these orders before they can be implemented but this would be at a time when they may be under the most distressing of circumstances.
‘Frankly this is not good enough and just saying “sorry” should not even be on option.
‘I would expect the Government to review these orders and establish why they have been used for suspected sex crimes. I expect the Government to stamp down on this and ask: “How on earth has this happened?”.’
Thousands of suspects of violent crimes also evaded proper justice, as did scores of cases of theft and criminal damage.
At least two cases of bomb hoaxers were let off with an apology.
Community resolution orders were introduced so victims could be involved in the justice process.
The orders are often used when shoplifters are caught in the act, or to punish youths so they do not get a criminal record.
An apology has to be accepted by the victim, and the person who receives the order may have to do some form of community service.
Conservative MP Nick de Bois has called for a Government review of community resolution orders
The figures provided by 38 police forces in England and Wales relate to community resolution orders and restorative justice, both of which involve the victim of the crime accepting an apology.
Adam Pemberton, Assistant Chief Executive for the charity Victim Support said:
‘Community resolutions are not for serious crimes such as rape or child abuse; they are only supposed to be used for minor offences.
‘The priority for victims and witnesses is not only that justice is seen to be done, but that it is seen to work. Victims want to know they will get justice and that a criminal will not commit the same crime again.
‘Victims should be put first and their view must be taken into account before a community remedy is used – and only after it has been properly explained to them. They often lack confidence in the practicality, robustness and delivery of community sentences.
‘Community resolution should never be used to simply cut corners or save money – else victims may feel like the offender has got away with it.’
The Home Office said it was up to Chief Constables to make sure community resolution orders are used in the right circumstances.
A spokesman said: ‘We always expect criminals to be prosecuted and punished in accordance with the law.
‘Serious crimes will continue to be progressed through the courts, where they will be met with tough sentences. In particular, conviction rates for violence against women and girls are at their highest-ever levels and sentences for rapists are longer.
‘However, community resolutions can be used for some crimes where the victim does not want the police to take more formal action. They are also often used in cases of young offenders to help them face up to the impact of their behaviour.
‘Chief Constables are responsible for making sure they are only used in appropriate circumstances.’
Last month Labour’s shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper condemned the use of the community resolutions in domestic violence cases.
Data from 15 police forces showed that 3,305 of the resolutions were used last year – up from 1,337 in 2009.
She said in a speech: ‘Community resolutions can be very effective for things like anti-social behaviour. But they shouldn’t be used for violent offences, and especially not for domestic violence. That is why Labour is committed to banning their use for domestic and sexual violence.’
