Gwent Police - Crime Data Integrity inspection 2018

Overall judgment

Gwent Police has made a concerted effort to record crime more accurately since HMICFRS’s 2014 crime data integrity inspection report. We found a commitment to ethical crime recording that is victim-focused and free from performance pressures of any kind.

We found the force has:

• developed and provided crime-recording training for all police officers and staff who are responsible for making crime-recording decisions;
• good crime-recording arrangements around sexual offences, vulnerable victims and modern slavery crimes;
• fully implemented all the recommendations set out in our 2014 report; and
• made good progress against a national action plan developed to improve crime recording by police forces.

Despite these advances, the force is still failing some victims of crime. We examined crime reports from 1 November 2017 to 30 April 2018. Based on this, we estimate that the force fails to record over 5,100 reported crimes each year. This is a recording rate of 90.5 percent (with a confidence interval of +/- 1.64 percent). The 9.5 percent of reported crimes that go unrecorded include violence offences and those that result from domestic abuse.

Incorrect recording decisions are often caused by officers and staff not understanding the crime-recording rules. The force has provided additional training. But we found that some staff and officers still don’t properly understand the crime-recording requirements for:

• common assault;
• harassment;
• malicious communications; and
• public order offences.

These errors are further compounded by limited supervision of crime-recording decisions.

Summary of inspection findings

The force has improved its crime-recording processes since our 2014 report. In particular, we found it has:

• reformed its communications suite processes;
• increased its ability to record certain crimes at first point of contact, where enough information exists to do so;
• set up a quality assurance framework in its communications suite to improve standards, service and crime-recording compliance;
• introduced a team in its communications suite that is responsible for making sure identified crime reports are recorded within 24 hours;
• fully implemented all the recommendations set out in our 2014 report; and
• fully implemented all the recommendations set out in a national action plan developed to improve police crime recording.

The force crime registrar (FCR), responsible for oversight of crime-recording arrangements, has completed a national College of Policing course and is fully accredited for the role. Her work is supported by a small audit team.

Despite these advances, the force’s crime-recording must improve in the following areas:

• Frontline officers don’t always identify and record some violent crimes, particularly those arising from domestic abuse incidents like common assault, harassment or malicious communications.
• Frontline officers don’t always record other crimes like criminal damage and public order offences.
• Officers and staff don’t properly understand the crime-recording rules, which often causes incorrect recording decisions. These errors are made worse by limited supervision of crime-recording decisions.
• Not all officers and staff properly understand or use the Home Office classification N100, to explain why the force has not immediately recorded reported incidents of rape as a confirmed crime.
• The force must collect more information about the effect of criminality on identifiable groups within communities, especially groups with identifiable protected characteristics like sexuality, disability or religion.

At the time of our inspection, the force had recognised problems with how it handled reports of domestic abuse crimes. To address them it has recently:

• nominated a detective chief inspector (DCI) to improve domestic abuse crime recording, by raising awareness and giving bespoke training to officers and staff;
• developed a comprehensive domestic abuse action plan to make sure that it responds professionally and effectively to domestic abuse incidents;
• introduced daily sampling and reviewing of domestic abuse incidents to make sure it has correctly recorded all identified crimes; and
• introduced a template which supervisors must complete on all domestic abuse crime records.

These improvements are encouraging.

How effective is the force at recording reported crime?

Overall crime-recording rate

The force has more work to do to make sure it records all reports of crime in accordance with the Home Office Counting Rules (HOCR). We examined reports of crime the force received, and for which an auditable record was created. The force told us that 94.8 percent of crime it records (except fraud) comes through an auditable route. This doesn’t mean that 94.8 percent of crimes reported to Gwent Police come through these routes, but that 94.8 percent of crime is recorded this way.

We found that the force recorded 90.5 percent of these crimes (with a confidence interval of +/- 1.64 percent). We estimate that this means the force is not recording more than 5,100 reports of crime each year.

Of the 1,247 reports of crime we audited, we assessed 333 as related to domestic abuse. Of these, the force had recorded 289. The 44 unrecorded offences were 33 violent crimes, 1 sexual crime and 10 other crimes. We found that many of these crime reports were made at the first point of contact with the force. But the force didn’t record them and didn’t properly explain why. It is vital to record reported crimes of domestic abuse, as many victims are vulnerable to further offences being committed against them.

We found that the force had considered safeguarding requirements in most of these unrecorded reports. But in eight cases we found no record on the report of safeguarding requirements being considered. And in half of these crimes we found that the reported crimes weren’t investigated because there was no crime record. We also found ten occasions where the force had not completed a domestic abuse, stalking and harassment (DASH) risk assessment.

The force’s supervision of crime-recording decisions on the front line and within its communications suite requires improvement.

Violence against the person

We found that 88.9 percent of violent crimes reported to the force are recorded (with a confidence interval of +/- 2.64 percent). This is lower than the overall crime-recording rate above. By our estimate, this means the force fails to record over 1,800 violent crimes that are reported to it each year. As violent crime can be particularly distressing for the victim, and many of these crimes involve injury, better recording is particularly important.

In most cases where violent crimes were not recorded, we found:

• call handlers don’t always record on the incident log full details of their conversation with the person reporting a crime, so attending officers don’t always have the full information to make their crime-recording decisions;
• frontline officers and staff in the force’s communications suite don’t always understand basic crime-recording principles or the recording rules about common assault, harassment, malicious communications, criminal damage and public order offences;
• after a deployment, officers don’t always record a proper explanation for why they didn’t record a crime; and
• limited supervision on the front line and within the force’s communications suite to correct poor crime-recording decisions as soon as possible.

Victims of violence and serious violence often need a lot of support. This should come from the reporting and investigating officers and other appropriate organisations, such as Connect Gwent. In these circumstances, crime recording is even more important. If the force fails to record a violent crime properly, it can mean victims aren’t referred to Connect Gwent. This deprives victims of the support they need and deserve.

Sexual offences

The force records 93.2 percent of sexual offence crimes (including rape) that are reported to it (with a confidence interval of +/- 2.44 percent). We estimate that the force is not recording over 90 reported sexual offence crimes each year.

This recording rate is good. It shows the force has given closer attention to reports of sexual offences since our 2014 report. This is particularly important as many of these crimes are very serious in nature and cause significant harm to their victims.

Our audit identified 16 reported sexual offences which the force had not recorded. These included reports of sexual assault, offences involving sexual activity with a child and an exposure offence.

In most cases where sexual crimes were not recorded, we found that:

• some officers and staff were unsure of the basic crime-recording principles and recording rules about sexual offences;
• incident records that contained multiple crime reports often led to only one crime report being recorded; and
• there is limited supervision of crime recording to correct these decisions as soon as possible.

Addressing these issues will help the force to further improve its sexual offence recording standards.

Rape

Rape is one of the most serious crimes a victim can experience. So it is especially important that reports of rape are recorded accurately. It helps to make sure victims receive the service and support they deserve. And it helps the police identify the nature and extent of sexual violence in their local area.

We found 92 reports of rape that should have been recorded. But the force had correctly recorded only 85 of these. Of these unrecorded crimes, we found that:

• three were incorrectly classified as other crimes;
• two were incorrectly recorded as an N100 record (see below); and
• two went completely unrecorded.

Of the 85 recorded rapes, almost all were recorded within 24 hours as required by the crime-recording rules. We found that the force provided safeguarding to all the victims of the unrecorded crimes. But in three cases it did no subsequent investigation.

We also found the force had over recorded four rapes. It should have classified all of these as sexual assaults.

The force could improve how it uses the Home Office classification N100. The N100 was introduced in April 2015. Its purpose is to explain why reported incidents of rape or attempted rape, whether from victims, witnesses or third parties, haven’t been immediately recorded as a confirmed crime. This can include where new information confirms the rape didn’t take place, or where the rape took place in another force area and was transferred to the relevant force to record and investigate.

We found 21 reports which the force should have applied an N100 classification for. It applied this classification on 13 of these occasions.

Separately, we also reviewed 18 sample records where the force had used an N100 classification. Among these we found: one report that should have been recorded as a rape but wasn’t; one which the force had later correctly recorded as a rape; and one unnecessary N100 record. The force recorded this after it had already recorded the rape crime. The remaining 15 N100 records were correctly classified.

The use of N100s is not well understood by officers responding to incidents, or by staff in the communications suite and elsewhere. So this is an area for improvement for the force.

How efficiently do the systems and processes in the force support accurate crime recording?

Crime reports held on other systems

For vulnerable victims to get the support they need, it is important that forces always record crimes reported directly to public protection teams. We were pleased to find the force works hard to make sure this is the case.

We examined 50 vulnerable victim records. We found that the force should have recorded 31 crimes, of which it had recorded 30. The missing crime was a common assault against a child victim. This was a third party professional report of an additional crime against this child victim. Despite this crime not being recorded, we found that the force had properly safeguarded the victim and completed an investigation.

Modern slavery

Offences relating to modern slavery are an important and recent addition to the crimes that forces must record and investigate. So we examined how well the force records reports of modern slavery offences. We also examined the force’s understanding of the origin of such reports.

We checked 22 modern slavery crime records and found that the force had correctly recorded 21 modern slavery crimes. It had also correctly recorded three additional rape crimes, one grievous bodily harm, one assault occasioning actual bodily harm, one common assault and an offence of robbery.

We also examined 20 modern slavery referrals the force received from other organisations. From these there were seven crimes that the force should have recorded, but it only recorded three. The four unrecorded crimes were three of modern slavery and one of rape. The force should take more care to make sure it records crimes reported through modern slavery referrals.

The force strategic assessment and control strategy lists modern slavery as a priority. The force set up a dedicated modern slavery team in February 2018. This was in response to our modern slavery inspection report, which found that better-performing forces had designated officers or teams to deal with these types of offences. There is strong governance locally and regionally. The chief constable chairs the quarterly threat group and the head of modern slavery is the regional operational lead.

Timeliness

If the information the force gets at the first point of contact satisfies the national crime-recording standard, the force should record the crimes straight away and, in any case, within 24 hours.

We found that, of the reports of crime Gwent Police had recorded, it recorded the following number within 24 hours of receiving the report:

• 437 out of 465 reports of violent crime;
• 201 out of 221 sexual offences; and
• 371 out of 386 other offences.

Generally, when the force makes correct crime-recording decisions, its processes work well to make sure the crime is recorded within 24 hours, as the rules require. This timely recording means the force can make early referrals to Connect Gwent for those victims in need of support. This is very welcome.

Cancelled crimes

If additional verifiable information (AVI) shows that a recorded crime didn’t take place, the record can be cancelled. A recorded crime can also be cancelled when it is found that it was committed in another force area and is subsequently transferred.

We reviewed a sample of cancelled recorded crimes of rape, other sexual offences, violence and robbery.

We found that the FCR had correctly authorised all ten cancelled offences of rape. Other crime cancellation decisions are the responsibility of designated decision makers (DDMs). The DDMs had correctly authorised the cancellation of:

• 16 out of 19 sexual offences;
• 15 out of 20 violence offences; and
• 5 out of 6 robbery offences.

Eight of the nine incorrect cancellation decisions didn’t involve enough AVI to confirm that the crime did not take place. Two of these decisions also show a misunderstanding of the HOCR schools protocol when making crime cancellation decisions. So further improvement of the way DDMs cancel crimes is needed.

If a crime has been cancelled or transferred to another force to investigate, victims should always know the status of their reported crime. If the force decides to cancel a recorded crime, the very least the victim should expect is an explanation of why the force decided this. We found that, of the 36 victims who the force should have told about the transfer or cancellation, 34 were told of the decision. This is good.

Code of Practice for Victims of Crime

The Code of Practice for Victims of Crime (Document) gives police forces clear guidance about the service they should give crime victims. We have concluded that the force is aware of its responsibilities under this code.

Connect Gwent is the victims’ hub for all people in the Gwent area. It was set up by the police and crime commissioner in response to a recognised need to prioritise support to crime victims. Connect Gwent is a multi-agency, free and confidential service for anyone impacted by crime. It doesn’t matter whether a victim has reported the crime to the police or when it happened. Connect Gwent offers its services to all crime victims whose reports are recorded by Gwent Police. It will then contact those victims who require support to discuss what support is available to them. Therefore, the recording of reported crime is important to make sure victims are not denied access to these services.

Equality

We found that the force must improve the way it collects information about crimes affecting identifiable groups within communities.

Protected characteristics, such as gender, sexuality, disability, ethnicity, religion and age, don’t necessarily make someone more vulnerable to the risk of crime. However, it is important that the force records information about victims’ characteristics. This helps to identify any patterns between different community groups and how vulnerable they are to (or how likely they are to report) different types of crime.

We found that the force routinely records age, gender and ethnicity details when a crime is recorded. But it doesn’t record disability and sexual orientation information, which can only be gathered from the narrative or audio recording of the call when it happens to be disclosed.

If the force fails to collect and record such information, it won’t be able to understand clearly whether its crime-recording decisions are consistent across different community groups. So this is an area for improvement.

Officer and staff survey

We carried out a survey of officers and staff in Gwent Police about their experience of crime recording. Over 270 respondents took part. We were pleased to find almost all respondents said that the chief officer team clearly communicates the need for ethical crime recording and doing the right thing for the victim. The respondents also said that they are aware of their responsibility to challenge unethical behaviour around recording reported crime.

How well does the force demonstrate the leadership and culture necessary to meet the national standards for crime recording?

The force has strong, demonstrable leadership around crime-recording expectations and a clear commitment to get crime recording right. We also found that officers and staff place the victim at the forefront of their crime-recording decisions.

We found evidence of strong governance at senior level. There is an annual audit plan, regular audits are carried out and the results are reported through regular performance meetings. Crime recording also features on the force risk register.

The FCR regularly attends relevant board meetings when crime-recording compliance is on the agenda. Either the assistant chief constable (ACC) or the deputy chief constable (DCC) chairs these boards.

The DCC has recently reviewed the crime-recording governance arrangements, to make sure they are fit for purpose and robust enough to improve performance. Because of this, crime recording is now part of local and strategic management meetings. This is welcome.

The force has developed a crime-recording action plan. This includes all the causes of concern and areas for improvement listed in the reports we have already published during this inspection programme. This allowed the force to analyse gaps in its processes, and to address some of these gaps before this inspection. This is good practice.

The force has implemented all the recommendations made in our 2014 report, and in the national action plan which the national lead on crime statistics developed following our 2014 report.

Conclusion

Gwent Police has made good progress in its crime recording since 2014 and continues to work on further improvements. The strong leadership and positive approach among most officers and staff towards victims is welcome. It gives us confidence that the force can respond quickly and effectively to the outstanding issues we found in this inspection.

We welcome the force’s continuing efforts to address the remaining gaps in its crime-recording arrangements identified in this inspection.

What next?

We expect the force to make progress against the areas for improvement we make in this report. We will monitor this progress.

As with all forces, we may carry out another unannounced crime data integrity inspection of this force at any time.

Dyfarniad Cyffredinol

Mae Heddlu Gwent wedi gwneud pob ymdrech i wella cywirdeb cofnodi troseddau ers Uniondeb Data Troseddu 2014 HMICFRS(Saesneg). Yn bwysig, gwelsom ymrwymiad i gofnodi troseddau moesegol sydd yn canolbwyntio ar y dioddefwr ac yn rhydd o bwysau perfformiad o unrhyw fath.

Canfuom fod y heddlu:

• wedi datblygu a darparu hyfforddiant ar gyfer cofnodi troseddau i’w holl swyddogion heddlu a’r staff sy’n gyfrifol am wneud penderfyniadau cofnodi troseddau;
• wedi cyflawni lefelau da o gywirdeb cofnodi yn ymwneud â throseddau rhywiol, dioddefwyr bregus a throseddau caethwasiaeth fodern;
• wedi gweithredu’r holl argymhellion a gyflwynir yn ein hadroddiad ar gyfer 2014; a
• wedi gwneud cynnydd da yn ôl cynllun gweithredu cenedlaethol a ddatblygwyd i wella cofnodi troseddau gan heddluoedd.

Er gwaethaf y datblygiadau hynny, mae’r heddlu dal yn methu rhai dioddefwyr troseddau. Gwnaethom archwiliad o adroddiadau troseddau am y cyfnod rhwng 1 Tachwedd 2017 a 30 Ebrill 2018. Yn seiliedig ar y canlyniadau hynny, rydym yn amcangyfrif bod yr heddlu’n methu â chofnodi dros 5,100 o droseddau a adroddir bob blwyddyn. Mae hyn yn cynrychioli cyfradd cofnodi o 90.5% (â chyfwng hyder o +/-1.64%). Mae’r 9.5% o droseddau a adroddwyd a aeth heb eu cofnodi yn cynnwys troseddau treisgar a throseddau sy’n deillio o ddigwyddiadau cam-drin domestig.

Achosir camgymeriadau ynghylch cofnodi troseddau’n rheolaidd gan swyddogion a staff nad ydynt yn deall y rheolau ynghylch cofnodi troseddau. Mae’r heddlu wedi darparu hyfforddiant ychwanegol i afael â’r maes hwn. Serch hynny, gwnaethom ganfod bod rhai staff a swyddogion dal heb ddeall yn iawn gofynion cofnodi troseddau yn y meysydd canlynol:

• ymosodiad cyffredin;
• aflonyddu;
• cyfathrebiadau maleisus; a
• throseddau trefn gyhoeddus.

Ychwanegir y camgymeriadau hyn at y diffyg goruchwyliaeth o benderfyniadau ynghylch cofnodi troseddau.

Crynodeb o ganfyddiadau’r arolygiad

Mae’r llu wedi gwella’i brosesau cofnodi troseddau ers ein hadroddiad yn 2014. Yn benodol, canfuom fod yr heddlu wedi:

• gwella ei brosesau ystafell gyfathrebu;
• gwella o ran ei allu i gofnodi rhai troseddau ar y cyswllt cyntaf, lle mae digon o wybodaeth yn bodoli i’w wneud;
• sefydlu fframwaith sicrhau ansawdd yn ei ystafell gyfathrebu i wella safonau, gwasanaethau a’i gydymffurfiad â chofnodi troseddau;
• sefydlu tîm yn ei hystafell gyfathrebu sy’n gyfrifol am sicrhau bod adroddiadau troseddau yn cael eu cofnodi o fewn 24 awr;
• gweithredu’r holl argymhellion a gyflwynwyd yn ein hadroddiad yn 2018; a
• gweithredu’r holl argymhellion yn ôl cynllun gweithredu cenedlaethol a ddatblygwyd i wella cofnodi troseddau gan heddluoedd.

Mae cofrestrydd troseddau’r heddlu (FCR), sy’n gyfrifol am oruchwylio gofynion cofnodi troseddau, wedi cwblhau cwrs Coleg Plismona cenedlaethol ac wedi’i achredu’n llawn ar gyfer y rôl. Cefnogir ei gwaith gan dîm fach o archwilwyr.

Er gwaethaf y datblygiadau rhain, mae rhaid i’r llu wella ei berfformiad o ran cofnodi troseddau yn y meysydd canlynol:

• Nid yw swyddogion rheng flaen bob amser yn nodi a chofnodi rhai troseddau treisgar, yn enwedig y rhai sy’n deillio o ddigwyddiadau cam-drin domestig megis ymosodiad cyffredin, aflonyddu neu gyfathrebiadau maleisus.
• Nid yw swyddogion rheng flaen bob amser yn cofnodi troseddau eraill megis difrod troseddol a throseddau trefn gyhoeddus.
• Nid yw swyddogion a staff yn deall y rheolau ynghylch cofnodi troseddau yn iawn, a gall hyn yn aml yn arwain at benderfyniadau anghywir ynghylch cofnodi troseddau. Gall y camgymeriadau hyn fod yn waeth eto oherwydd diffyg goruchwyliaeth am benderfyniadau cofnodi troseddau.
• Nid yw’r holl swyddogion a staff yn deall neu yn defnyddio yn iawn dosbarthiad N100 y Swyddfa Gartref, i esbonio pam nad yw’r heddlu wedi cofnodi digwyddiadau o dreisio a adroddwyd fel trosedd a gadarnhawyd.
• Mae rhaid i’r heddlu gasglu mwy o wybodaeth ynghylch effaith troseddoldeb ar grwpiau y gellir eu nodi o fewn cymunedau; yn enwedig grwpiau gyda nodweddion gwarchodedig adnabyddadwy megis rhywioldeb, anabledd neu grefydd.

Ar adeg ein harchwiliad, roedd yr heddlu wedi canfod problemau ynghylch sut mae’n ymdrin ag adroddiadau am droseddau cam-drin domestig. Er mwyn gafael â’r problemau hynny, mae’r heddlu wedi gwneud y canlynol yn ddiweddar:

• enodi ditectif brif arolygydd (DCI) i wella cofnodi troseddau cam-drin domestig, trwy godi ymwybyddiaeth ac yn rhoi hyfforddiant penodol i swyddogion a staff;
• datblygu cynllun gweithredu cynhwysfawr ar gyfer cofnodi cam-drin domestig i sicrhau ei fod yn ymateb yn broffesiynol ac yn effeithiol i ddigwyddiadau cam-drin domestig;
• sefydlu samplo ac adolygu dyddiol o ddigwyddiadau cam-drin domestig i sicrhau ei fod wedi cofnodi bob drosedd a adroddwyd yn gywir; a
• cyflwyno templed y bydd rhaid i oruchwylwyr ei chwblhau ar gyfer bob cofnod trosedd cam-drin domestig.

Mae’r gwelliannau rhain yn galonogol.

Pa mor effeithiol yw’r heddlu wrth gofnodi troseddau a adroddir?

Cyfradd gyffredinol ar gyfer cofnodi troseddau

Mae gan yr heddlu waith pellach i’w wneud er mwyn sicrhau ei fod yn cofnodi pob adroddiad am drosedd yn unol â Rheolau Cyfrif y Swyddfa Gartref (Saesneg) (HOCR). Gwnaethom archwilio adroddiadau am droseddau a dderbyniwyd gan yr heddlu, ac y crëwyd cofnod archwiliadwy ar eu cyfer. Hysbyswyd ni gan yr heddlu bod 94.8% o droseddau a gofnodir (ac eithrio twyll) yn dod trwy lwybr archwiliadwy ar gyfer cofnodi troseddau. Nid yw hyn yn golygu bod 94.8% o droseddau a adroddir i Heddlu Gwent yn dod trwy’r llwybrau hynny, ond bod 94.8% o droseddau a gofnodir yn y ffordd hon.

Canfuom fod yr heddlu wedi cofnodi 90.5% o’r troseddau hyn (â chyfwng hyder o +/-1.64%).

O’r 1,247 o adroddiadau am droseddau a archwiliwyd gennym, canfuom 333 a aseswyd gennym fel troseddau yn gysylltiedig â cham-drin domestig. O’r 333 o droseddau hyn, roedd yr heddlu wedi cofnodi 289. Roedd y 44 o droseddau nad oedd wedi’u cofnodi yn cynnwys 33 trosedd treisgar, 1 trosedd rhywiol a 10 trosedd arall. Canfuom fod llawer o’r adroddiadau hyn wedi’u digwydd ar y cyswllt cyntaf gyda’r heddlu, ond ni chofnodwyd yr adroddiadau hyn gan yr heddlu ac nid oedd rheswm dilys i esbonio pam. Mae’n hanfodol i gofnodi adroddiadau am droseddau cam-drin domestig, gan fod llawer o ddioddefwyr yn agored i fwy o droseddau yn digwydd iddynt.

Canfuom fod yr heddlu wedi ystyried gofynion diogelu yn y mwyafrif o’r achosion hyn nad oedd wedi’u cofnodi. Ond, canfuom mewn 8 achos nad oedd cofnod am adrodd gofynion diogelu wedi’i ystyried. Canfuom mewn hanner o’r troseddau hyn nad oedd y troseddau a adroddwyd wedi’u harchwilio oherwydd nad oedd cofnod trosedd. Gwelsom hefyd deg achlysur lle nad oedd yr heddlu wedi cwblhau asesiad risg cam-drin domestig, stelcian ac aflonyddu (DASH).

Mae angen gwella goruchwyliaeth yr heddlu wrth wneud penderfyniadau cofnodi troseddau sy’n digwydd ar y rheng flaen ac o fewn ei hystafell gyfathrebu.

Trais yn erbyn y person

Gwnaethom ganfod bod 88.9% o droseddau treisgar a adroddir wrth yr heddlu yn cael eu cofnodi (â chyfwng hyder o +/-2.64%). Mae hyn yn is na’r gyfradd gofnodi troseddau gyffredinol a nodir uchod. (Saesneg). Gall trosedd treisgar fod yn ofidus iawn i’r dioddefwr, ac mae llawer o’r troseddau hyn yn cynnwys anafiad, felly mae’r angen am ddull gwell o gofnodi troseddau yn hynod o bwysig.

Yn y mwyafrif o achosion lle na chofnodwyd troseddau treisgar, gwnaethom y canfyddiadau dilynol:

• nid yw trinwyr galwadau bob amser yn cofnodi holl fanylion eu sgwrs gyda’r person yn adrodd y trosedd ar log y digwyddiad, felly nad yw swyddogion sy’n mynychu’r trosedd bob amser yn cael yr wybodaeth lawn y gall seilio penderfyniadau ynghylch cofnodi troseddau arni;
• nid yw swyddogion a staff rheng flaen yn ystafell gyfathrebu’r heddlu bob amser yn deall egwyddorion sylfaenol ar gyfer cofnodi troseddau neu am reolau cofnodi ynghylch ymosod cyffredin, aflonyddu, cyfathrebiadau maleisus, difrod troseddol a throseddau trefn gyhoeddus;
• ar ôl ymdrin â throsedd, nid yw swyddogion bob amser yn darparu digon o wybodaeth i esbonio pam na chofnodwyd trosedd; a
• diffyg goruchwyliaeth ar y rheng flaen ac o fewn ystafell gyfathrebu’r heddlu i gywiro penderfyniadau gwael ynghylch cofnodi troseddau cyn gynted â phosib.

Mae dioddefwyr troseddau treisgar a dioddefwyr trais mwy difrifol yn aml angen cael llawer o gefnogaeth. Dylai’r gefnogaeth hon ddod gan swyddogion adrodd a swyddogion ymchwil a sefydliadau priodol eraill, megis Connect Gwent(Saesneg). Yn yr amgylchiadau hynny, mae cofnodi troseddau yn fwyfwy pwysig. Os bydd yr heddlu yn methu â chofnodi trosedd treisgar yn briodol, gall hyn olygu na fydd dioddefwyr yn cael eu cyfeirio at Connect Gwent. Gall hynny, yn ei dro, amddifadu’r dioddefwyr o’r gefnogaeth y maent ei hangen a’i haeddu.

Troseddau rhywiol

Mae’r heddlu yn cofnodi 93.2% o droseddau rhywiol (gan gynnwys treisio) a adroddir wrtho (â chyfwng hyder o +/-2.44%). Rydym yn amcangyfrif nad yw’r heddlu yn cofnodi mwy na 90 o droseddau rhywiol a adroddir bob blwyddyn. (Saesneg)

Mae’r gyfradd gofnodi hon yn dda. Mae hyn yn dangos bod yr heddlu wedi rhoi mwy o sylw i adroddiadau am droseddau rhywiol ers ein hadroddiad yn 2014. Mae hyn yn hynod o bwysig gan fod llawer o’r troseddau hyn yn ddifrifol iawn a gallent achosi niwed sylweddol i’w dioddefwyr.

Nodwyd yn ein harchwiliad 16 o adroddiadau am droseddau rhywiol na chofnodwyd gan yr heddlu. Ymysg y rhain, roedd adroddiadau o ymosodiad rhywiol, troseddau yn ymwneud â gweithgarwch rhywiol gyda phlentyn a throsedd dinoethi.

Yn y mwyafrif o achosion lle na chofnodwyd troseddau treisgar, canfuom fod:

• rhai swyddogion a staff yn ansicr am egwyddorion sylfaenol ar gyfer cofnodi troseddau ac am reolau cofnodi ynghylch troseddau rhywiol;
• cofnodion digwyddiadau yn cynnwys nifer o adroddiadau troseddau wedi arwain yn aml at un adroddiad yn unig am drosedd yn cael ei gofnodi; a
• diffyg goruchwyliaeth am gofnodi troseddau i gywiro’r penderfyniadau hyn cyn gynted â phosib.

Bydd gafael â’r problemau hynny yn helpu’r heddlu i wella ei safonau am gofnodi troseddau rhywiol yn bellach.

Treisio

Mae treisio’n un o’r troseddau rhywiol mwyaf difrifol y gall dioddefwr ei brofi. Felly, mae cofnodi adroddiadau o’r fath yn gywir yn arbennig o bwysig. Mae’n helpu i sicrhau bod y dioddefwr yn derbyn y gwasanaeth y mae ganddynt hawl i’w ddisgwyl a’i haeddu, ac mae’n caniatáu i’r heddlu nodi natur a maint trais rhywiol yn eu hardal leol.

O’r 92 o adroddiadau o dreisio y dylid wedi’u cofnodi, gwnaethom ganfod bod 85 wedi eu cofnodi yn gywir gan yr heddlu. O’r troseddau nad oeddynt wedi’u cofnodi, canfuom fod:

• tri wedi’i ddosbarthu yn anghywir fel troseddau eraill;
• dau wedi’i gofnodi yn anghywir fel cofnod N100 (gweler isod); a
• dau heb gael ei gofnodi o gwbl.

O’r 85 o droseddau treisio a gofnodwyd, roedd bron pob un wedi’i gofnodi o fewn 24 awr yn unol â rheolau cofnodi troseddau. Canfuom fod yr heddlu wedi darparu camau diogelu i bob un o ddioddefwyr y troseddau nad oeddynt wedi’u cofnodi. Serch hynny, nid oedd ymchwiliad dilynol mewn tri achos.

Canfuom fod yr heddlu wedi cofnodi pedwar trosedd treisio yn anghywir. Dylai wedi dosbarthu pob un o’r rhain fel troseddau rhywiol.

Gallai’r heddlu wella ei wybodaeth am sut mae’n defnyddio dosbarthiad N100 y Swyddfa Gartref. Wedi’i gyflwyno ym mis Ebrill 2015, mae’r N100 yn gofnod a grëwyd i esbonio pam nad yw achosion o dreisio neu geisiadau i dreisio a gofnodwyd, boed hynny gan ddioddefwyr, tystion neu drydydd partïon, wedi cael eu cofnodi ar unwaith fel troseddau a gadarnhawyd. Gall hyn gynnwys achosion lle mae gwybodaeth ychwanegol yn cadarnhau nad oedd y treisio wedi digwydd, neu pan ddigwyddodd y treisio mewn ardal heddlu arall ac felly fe’i trosglwyddwyd i’r heddlu perthnasol i’w gofnodi a’i ymchwilio.

Canfuom 21 o adroddiadau am ddigwyddiadau y dylai’r heddlu fod wedi gweithredu dosbarthiad N100 ar eu cyfer. Gweithredwyd y dosbarthiad hwn ar 13 o’r achlysuron hyn.

Ar wahân, rydym hefyd wedi adolygu 18 o gofnodion sampl lle defnyddiwyd dosbarthiad N100. Ymhlith y rhain, gwnaethom ganfod: un adroddiad y dylai wedi’i gofnodi fel trosedd treisio ond na chofnodwyd fel hyn; un adroddiad a oedd wedi’i gofnodi yn gywir yn hwyrach fel trosedd treisio; ac un cofnod N100 na ddylid wedi’u gofnodi. Cofnodwyd hyn gan yr heddlu ar ôl cofnodi’r trosedd treisio. Dosbarthwyd y 15 o gofnodion N100 yn weddill yn gywir.

Nid yw’r defnydd o ddosbarthiadau N100 yn cael ei ddeall yn iawn gan swyddogion yn ymateb i ddigwyddiadau, neu gan staff yn yr ystafell gyfathrebu a fan arall. Felly, mae hwn yn faes i’w wella o fewn yr heddlu.

Pa mor effeithlon ydy’r systemau a phrosesau yn yr heddlu yn cefnogi cofnodi troseddau’n gywir?

Adroddiadau am droseddau a ddelir ar systemau eraill

Er mwyn bod yn hyderus bod dioddefwyr hyglwyf bob amser yn derbyn y gefnogaeth sydd ei angen arnynt, mae’n bwysig bod yr heddlu yn cofnodi troseddau a adroddir yn uniongyrchol i’w dimau diogelu’r cyhoedd bob amser. Roeddem yn falch o weld bod yr heddlu yn gweithio’n galed i sicrhau bod hyn yn wir.

Gwnaethom archwilio 50 o gofnodion dioddefwyr hyglwyf. O’r rhain, canfuom y dylai 31 o droseddau wedi’u cofnodi gan yr heddlu, ac o’r rhai hynny cofnodwyd 30 ohonynt. Roedd y trosedd ar goll yn ymwneud ag ymosodiad cyffredin ar ddioddefwr plentyn. Roedd hyn yn adroddiad proffesiynol trydydd parti o drosedd ychwanegol yn erbyn y dioddefwr plentyn hwn. Er na chofnodwyd y trosedd hwn, canfuom fod yr heddlu wedi darparu camau diogelu i’r dioddefwr ac wedi cynnal ymchwiliad.

Caethwasiaeth fodern

Mae troseddau sy’n ymwneud â chaethwasiaeth fodern yn ychwanegiad pwysig a diweddar i’r troseddau y mae’n rhaid i’r lluoedd eu cofnodi a’u hymchwilio. Felly, gwnaethom adolygu pa mor dda ydy’r heddlu yn cofnodi adroddiadau am droseddau caethwasiaeth fodern. Gwnaethom hefyd archwilio dealltwriaeth yr heddlu o darddiad adroddiadau o’r fath.

Edrychom ar 22 o gofnodion am droseddau caethwasiaeth fodern a chanfuom fod yr heddlu wedi cofnodi 21 ohonynt yn gywir. Roedd hefyd wedi cofnodi yn gywir tri trosedd treisio ychwanegol, un trosedd niwed corfforol difrifol, un trosedd ymosodiad yn achosi gwir niwed corfforol, un trosedd ymosodiad cyffredin ac un trosedd lladrata.

Yn ychwanegol, gwnaethom archwilio 20 o atgyfeiriadau caethwasiaeth modern a dderbyniwyd gan sefydliadau eraill. O’r rhain, roedd saith o droseddau y dylai wedi’u cofnodi gan yr heddlu, ond o’r rhai hynny cofnodwyd tri yn unig. O’r pedwar trosedd nad oedd wedi’i gofnodi, canfuom fod tri ohonynt yn ymwneud â throseddau caethwasiaeth fodern a bod un ohonynt yn ymwneud â throsedd treisio. Dylai’r heddlu fod yn fwy gofalus er mwyn sicrhau ei fod yn cofnodi troseddau a adroddir drwy atgyfeiriadau caethwasiaeth modern.

Mae strategaeth asesu a rheoli yr heddlu yn nodi caethwasiaeth fodern fel blaenoriaeth. Sefydlwyd tîm bwrpasol gan yr heddlu i ymdrin â throseddau caethwasiaeth fodern ym mis Chwefror 2018. Roedd hwn mewn ymateb i’n hadroddiad archwilio caethwasiaeth fodern, (Saesneg) lle canfuom fod gan rhai lluoedd swyddogion neu dimau penodedig i ymdrin â throseddau o’r fath. Mae rheolaeth gref ar lefelau rhanbarthol a chenedlaethol. Mae’r prif gwnstabl yn cadeirio’r grŵp chwarterol yn trafod bygwth ac mae’r pennaeth y maes caethwasiaeth fodern yw’r arweinydd gweithredol rhanbarthol.

Amseroldeb

Os bydd yr wybodaeth a dderbynnir gan yr heddlu, ar ei gyswllt cyntaf, yn bodloni’r safon genedlaethol ar gyfer cofnodi troseddau, dylai’r heddlu gofnodi’r troseddau yn syth, ac mewn unrhyw achos, o fewn 24 awr.

Canfuom, o’r adroddiadau am droseddau a gofnodwyd gan Heddlu Gwent, ei fod wedi cofnodi’r ffigyrau dilynol o fewn 24 awr o dderbyn yr adroddiad:

• 437 o 465 o adroddiadau am droseddau treisgar;
• 201 o 221 o droseddau rhywiol; ac
• 371 o 386 o droseddau eraill.

Yn gyffredinol, pan fydd yr heddlu yn gwneud penderfyniadau cywir ar gyfer cofnodi troseddau, mae ei brosesau yn gweithio yn dda o ran sicrhau bod y trosedd yn cael ei gofnodi o fewn 24 awr, fel y caniateir gan y rheolau. Mae’r cofnodi amserol hwn yn galluogi’r heddlu i wneud atgyfeiriadau cynnar i Connect Gwent ar gyfer y dioddefwyr hynny sydd angen cefnogaeth. Mae hyn yn galonogol iawn.

Troseddau a ddilëir

Lle ceir gwybodaeth ychwanegol y gellir ei dilysu (AVI) i ddangos nad oedd trosedd a gofnodwyd wedi digwydd, gellir ddileu cofnod y trosedd. Gellir dileu trosedd a gofnodwyd os ceir gwybodaeth i ddangos bod y trosedd wedi digwydd mewn ardal lu arall a throsglwyddwyd y trosedd o ganlyniad.

Gwnaethom adolygu sampl o droseddau a gofnodwyd ac a ddilëwyd o dreisio, troseddau rhywiol eraill, trais a lladrata.

Canfuom fod y FCR wedi awdurdodi’n gywir i ddileu 10 o 10 o droseddau treisio. Cyfrifoldeb staff penodedig sy’n gyfrifol am benderfyniadau ynghylch dileu troseddau eraill a elwir yn wneuthurwyr penderfyniadau penodedig (DDMs). Roedd y DDMs wedi awdurdodi’n gywir i ddileu:

• 16 o 19 o droseddau rhywiol;
• 15 o 20 o droseddau trais; a
• 5 o 6 o droseddau lladrata.

Roedd wyth o naw o benderfyniadau dileu a oedd yn anghywir yn gysylltiedig â diffyg AVI i gadarnhau nad oedd y trosedd wedi digwydd. Dengys dau o’r penderfyniadau hyn gamddealltwriaeth am brotocol yr ysgolion HOCR wrth wneud penderfyniadau i ddileu trosedd a gofnodwyd. Felly, mae angen gwella’r broses yn bellach ynghylch sut mae DDMs yn dileu troseddau.

Lle mae trosedd wedi’i ddileu neu ei drosglwyddo i lu arall i’w ymchwilio, dylai dioddefwyr bob amser wybod statws y trosedd a adroddwyd ganddynt. Yn achos penderfyniad gan yr heddlu i ddileu trosedd a gofnodwyd, y lleiaf oll y dylai’r dioddefwr ei ddisgwyl yw esboniad o’r rheswm dros y penderfyniad hwn. Canfuom fod y 36 o ddioddefwyr a ddylai wedi cael eu hysbysu o’r trosglwyddo/dileu, roedd 34 wedi cael gwybod am y penderfyniad. Mae hyn yn dda.

Côd Ymarfer ar gyfer Dioddefwyr Troseddau

Mae’r yn rhoi cyfarwyddyd clir i heddluoedd ynghylch y gwasanaeth y dylid ei ddarparu i ddioddefwyr troseddau. Rydym wedi dod i’r casgliad bod y llu yn ymwybodol o’i gyfrifoldebau o dan y côd hwn. (Document)(Saesneg)

Connect Gwent yw’r ganolfan ddioddefwyr i bawb sy’n byw yn ardal Gwent. Sefydlwyd Connect Gwent gan Gomisiynydd yr Heddlu a Throseddu mewn ymateb i angen a nodwyd i flaenoriaethu cymorth i ddioddefwyr troseddau. Mae Connect Gwent yn wasanaeth rhyngasiantaethol sydd am ddim ac yn gyfrinachol i unrhyw un sydd wedi cael ei effeithio gan drosedd. Nid yw o bwys a yw’r dioddefwr wedi adrodd y trosedd i’r heddlu neu pryd ddigwyddodd y trosedd. Mae Connect Gwent yn cynnig ei wasanaethau i bob dioddefwr trosedd ag adroddiad a gofnodir gan Heddlu Gwent. Bydd yn cysylltu â’r dioddefwyr hynny sydd angen cefnogaeth i drafod pa gefnogaeth sydd ar gael iddynt. Felly, mae cofnodi troseddau a adroddir yn hollbwysig i sicrhau bod dioddefwyr yn cael mynediad i’r gwasanaethau hyn.

Cydraddoldeb

Canfuom fod rhaid i’r heddlu wella o ran ei broses o gasglu gwybodaeth ynghylch troseddau sy’n effeithio ar grwpiau adnabyddadwy o fewn cymunedau.

Nid yw nodweddion gwarchodedig, megis rhyw, rhywioldeb, anabledd, ethnigrwydd, crefydd ac oedran o reidrwydd yn gwneud i unigolyn yn fwy bregus i’r perygl o droseddu. Fodd bynnag, mae’n bwysig bod yr heddlu’n cofnodi gwybodaeth ynghylch nodweddion dioddefwyr troseddau. Mae hyn yn helpu nodi unrhyw batrymau a allai fodoli rhwng gwahanol grwpiau cymunedol a’u bregusrwydd i (neu eu tebygolrwydd cymharol o adrodd am) wahanol fathau o droseddau.

Canfuom fod yr heddlu’n cofnodi gwybodaeth ynghylch oedran, rhyw a manylion ethnigrwydd ar bob achlysur pan gofnodir trosedd. Serch hynny, nid yw’n cofnodi gwybodaeth ynghylch anabledd a rhywioldeb, a all ond gael ei gasglu o’r adroddiad neu’r galwad ffôn ar yr amser a ddatgelir.

Os bydd yr heddlu yn methu â chofnodi gwybodaeth o’r fath, ni fydd yn gallu deall yn glir a yw ei benderfyniadau ynghylch cofnodi troseddau’n gyson ar draws gwahanol grwpiau cymunedol. Felly, mae hwn yn faes i’w wella.

Arolwg o swyddogion a staff

Gwnaethom gynnal arolwg o swyddogion a staff Heddlu Gwent ynghylch eu profiad mewn cysylltiad â chofnodi troseddau. Cwblhaodd rhyw 270 o ymatebwyr yr arolwg. Roeddem yn falch o weld bod mwyafrif helaeth yr ymatebwyr o’r farn bod tîm y prif swyddog yn cyfathrebu’n glir yr angen am gofnodi troseddau moesegol a gwneud y peth iawn ar gyfer y dioddefwr. Dywedodd yr ymatebwyr hefyd eu bod yn ymwybodol o’u cyfrifoldeb i herio ymddygiad anfoesegol yn gysylltiedig â chofnodi troseddau a adroddir.

Pa mor dda ydy’r llu yn arddangos yr arweinyddiaeth a’r diwylliant sydd eu hangen i ddiwallu’r safonau cenedlaethol ar gyfer cofnodi troseddau?

Mae gan y llu arweinyddiaeth amlwg gref ynghylch disgwyliadau cofnodi troseddau ac ymrwymiad clir i gael y broses o gofnodi troseddau’n iawn. Gwnaethom ganfod ymagwedd ymhlith swyddogion a staff sy’n gosod y dioddefwr ar flaen y gad yn eu penderfyniadau ynghylch cofnodi troseddau.

Gwelsom dystiolaeth o lywodraethu cryf ar lefel uwch. Mae cynllun archwilio blynyddol ac mae archwiliadau rheolaidd yn cael eu cynnal gyda’r canlyniadau yn cael eu hadrodd trwy gyfarfodydd perfformiad rheolaidd. Mae cofnodi troseddau hefyd yn ymddangos ar gofrestr risg yr heddlu.

Mae’r FCR yn mynychu cyfarfodydd bwrdd yn rheolaidd lle mae’n rhan o’r agenda i drafod cydymffurfiad â chofnodi troseddau. Mae’r naill ai’r cynorthwyydd brif gwnstabl (ACC) neu’r dirprwy brif gwnstabl (DCC) yn cadeirio’r cyfarfodydd bwrdd hyn.

Mae’r DCC wedi adolygu trefniadau llywodraethu ynghylch cofnodi troseddau yn ddiweddar, i sicrhau eu bod yn addas i’r diben a digon cadarn i wella perfformiad. Oherwydd hyn, mae cofnodi troseddau nawr yn rhan o gyfarfodydd rheoli lleol a strategol. Mae hyn yn galonogol.

Mae’r llu wedi datblygu cynllun gweithredu ynghylch cofnodi troseddau. Mae hyn yn cynnwys yr holl achosion pryder a meysydd i’w gwella a restrir yn yr adroddiadau yr ydym eisoes wedi eu cyhoeddi yn ystod y rhaglen archwilio hon. Mae hyn wedi galluogi’r llu i ddadansoddi bylchau yn ei brosesau, ac i afael â rhai ohonynt cyn yr archwiliad hwn. Mae hyn yn ymarfer da.

Mae’r llu wedi gweithredu’r holl argymhellion a wnaed yn ein hadroddiad yn 2014, ac yn ôl y cynllun gweithredu cenedlaethol a ddatblygwyd gan yr arweinydd cenedlaethol ar ystadegau troseddu yn dilyn ein hadroddiad yn 2014.

Casgliad

Mae Heddlu Gwent wedi gwneud cynnydd da yn ei brosesau ar gyfer cofnodi troseddau ers 2014 ond mae’n rhaid i welliannau barhau i gael eu gwneud. Mae’r arweinyddiaeth gref a’r ymagwedd gadarnhaol ymhlith y mwyafrif o swyddogion a staff tuag at ddioddefwyr troseddau yn galonogol. Mae’n rhoi ffydd inni y gall y llu ymateb yn gyflym ac yn effeithiol i’r materion sy’n weddill fel rhan o’r archwiliad hwn.

Mae’n galonogol gweld ymdrechion parhaus yr heddlu i sicrhau bod y bylchau yn y trefniadau cofnodi troseddau a nodwyd yn yr arolygiad hwn yn cael eu goresgyn.

Beth nesaf?

Rydym yn disgwyl i’r llu wneud cynnydd ar weithredu’r argymhellion a wnawn yn yr adroddiad hwn. Byddwn yn monitro’r cynnydd hwn.

Gall y llu, fel yn achos pob heddlu, fod yn destun arolygiad uniondeb data trosedd dirybudd arall ar unrhyw adeg.