North Wales Police: Crime Data Integrity inspection 2017

Please note: This inspection was carried out before 19 July 2017, when HMIC also took on responsibility for fire & rescue service inspections and was renamed HM Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services. The methodology underpinning our inspection findings is unaffected by this change.

References to HMICFRS in this report may relate to an event that happened before 19 July 2017 when HMICFRS was HMIC.

Overall judgment

North Wales Police has made concerted efforts to improve the accuracy of its crime recording since HMICFRS’ 2014 Crime Data Integrity inspection report. Importantly, the majority of officers and staff have made progress in placing the victim at the forefront of their crime-recording decisions. We found that the force:

• achieves high levels of recording accuracy for reported sexual offences;
• has made good progress in its procedures in respect of the cancellation of recorded crimes;
• has worked hard in bringing about improvements in the knowledge and understanding of the crime-recording requirements for modern day slavery crimes among officers and staff;
• has implemented all of the recommendations set out in our 2014 report; and
• has made good progress against a national action plan developed to improve crime recording by police forces.

Work remains to be done, however. Despite advances, based on the findings of our examination of crime reports for the period 1 September 2016 to 28 February 2017, we estimate that the force fails to record over 5,300 reported crimes each year. This represents a recording rate of 88.3 percent (with a confidence interval of +/- 1.82 percent). The 11.7 percent of reported crimes that go unrecorded include serious crimes such as violence offences and domestic abuse. The recording rate for violent crime is a particular cause of concern at only 82.9 percent (with a confidence interval of +/- 3.12 percent). This means that, on too many occasions, the force is failing victims of crime.

In particular, we consider that there are too many failures to make the correct crime-recording decision at the first opportunity and that staff and officers have an insufficient understanding of the crime-recording requirements for more complex crimes, such as harassment and malicious communications. These failings are compounded by inconsistencies in the force’s processes for the recording of reports of crime.

Summary of inspection findings

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

• improved and expanded its investigation support team (IST), which is the force’s crime-recording team;
• implemented all of the recommendations set out in our 2014 report; and
• made good progress against the action plan, developed by the national policing lead on crime statistics following the 2014 report, and which all forces have been asked to implement. These include improvements to the force’s use of out-of-court disposals and to the level of its audit of crime-recording decisions.

We also found that the force crime registrar (FCR) – responsible for oversight of crime-recording arrangements – has completed a national College of Policing course for FCRs and is now fully accredited for the role. His work is supported by an accredited deputy FCR.

Despite these advances, the force’s performance in respect of crime recording could be better in the following areas:

• The force is currently under-recording violent crimes and must improve the accuracy of its recording of such reports.
• The process for identifying violent incidents as crimes within the communication centre does not support accurate crime recording.
• The time taken to record reports of crime is too often in excess of the 24 hours permitted by the Home Office Counting Rules (HOCR), and in turn this leads to delays in the referral of victims to the Victim Help Centre, letting down those victims who need the early support that this centre can provide.
• The force must improve the extent to which it collects information regarding the effect of criminality on identifiable groups within communities.

Those failings are a consequence of officers and staff not always understanding their responsibilities for crime recording, compounded by deficiencies in the processes for crime recording within the force and limited supervision of crime-recording decisions.

How effective is the force at recording reported crime?

Overall crime-recording rate

The force has further work to do in order to ensure it records all reports of crime in accordance with the Home Office Counting Rules (HOCR). We examined reports of crime which the force received, and for which an auditable record was created. The force informed HMICFRS that 94.3 percent of crime that is recorded (excluding fraud) came through an auditable crime reporting route.

We found that the force recorded 88.3 percent of these crimes (with a confidence interval of +/- 1.82 percent). We estimate that this means the force is not recording over 5,300 reports of crime each year. Those failings are depriving many victims of the services to which they are entitled.

Of a total of 1,150 reports of crime that we audited, we found 318 that we assessed to be crimes related to domestic abuse. Of these 318 crimes, the force had recorded 255. The 63 offences not recorded included 52 violent crimes and 11 other crimes.

We found that many of these reports involved the reporting of a crime at the first point of contact with the force, but these crime reports went unrecorded with little rationale to explain why. As domestic abuse often involves victims who are particularly vulnerable to further offences being committed against them, the importance of recording reported crimes of domestic abuse cannot be overstated.

We found that safeguarding requirements had been considered in around three quarters of these reports. The reports where evidence of safeguarding was not found included cases involving threats to kill, stalking and coercive behaviour. We also found that the absence of a crime record resulted in only around half of these reports of crime being investigated, thereby increasing the potential risk of harm to the victim.

The under-recording of crimes related to domestic incidents, and the failure to provide safeguarding and a satisfactory service to these victims, are causes of concern. This is because domestic abuse often involves victims who are particularly vulnerable to further offences being committed against them.

The force has recently introduced a managed response unit (MRU). The role of this team is to improve the force response to those incidents suitable for resolution over the telephone. All MRU staff have undergone HOCR training and are developing expertise in this area. Although new, the force reported that the introduction of this unit had had a positive impact on the service it provides to victims of crime.

Factors contributing to the force’s under-recording of crime reports are its crime-recording processes, the crime-recording knowledge of its workforce and supervision in the communications centre.

• Deficiencies in the crime-recording processes need to be addressed. In particular, we found that:
  • following a deployment officers and staff do not always record a good or valid explanation for why a crime should not be recorded;
  • call handlers do not always record on the incident log full details of the conversation they have had with the person reporting a crime and where they do record this information it is not always passed on to officers attending the crime. This means the attending officer does not always have the full information on which to base a crime-recording decision;
  • limitations on the type of incident codes available on ICAD means crime-related reports are not always coded in such a way as to link to the force’s crime-recording system (Niche). This means that these incidents are not reviewed by the IST for a crime-recording decision to be taken, resulting in many of these reports not being recorded; and
  • when further offences come to light after the initial deployment or during subsequent investigation, the force does not always record reported crimes.
• We found that communications officers, frontline officers and staff in the IST are not always sure of crime-recording requirements. In particular:
  • basic crime-recording principles and knowledge of the crime-recording rules relating to harassment, malicious communications and public order are not always understood; and
  • there is a lack of experience and knowledge of the crime-recording rules among some recently-recruited staff in call-handling and in IST.
• A further problem relates to the force’s supervision of its crime-recording decisions. We found that supervision of its crime-recording decisions requires improvement. In particular, communication centre supervisors do not have the capacity to scrutinise adequately all crime-related incidents to satisfy themselves that crime-recording decisions are correct.

Violence against the person

We found that 82.9 percent of violent crimes reported to the force are recorded (with a confidence interval of +/- 3.12 percent). This is lower than the overall crime-recording rate noted above. By our estimate, this means the force fails to record over 2,800 violent crimes that are reported to it each year. As violent crime can be particularly distressing for the victim, this is an area in which the need for improvement is particularly acute and therefore a cause of concern.

In the majority of cases, where violent crimes were not recorded, we found the principal causes to be:

• the processes currently in place for the recording of a reported crime (described earlier);
• officers and staff not understanding adequately the crime-recording rules, particularly around the complexities of some violence offences such as harassment, malicious communications and public order. This results in the failure to record many such reports of crime; and
• an absence of adequate supervision of crime-recording decisions in the communications centre.

Victims of violent crime and, in particular, victims of more serious violence, often require substantial support. This support should come not only from the reporting and investigating officers, but from other appropriate agencies, such as the Victim Help Centre. Under those circumstances, crime recording takes on a heightened importance. Failing to record properly a violent crime can result in the Victim Help Centre receiving no notification that a person has become a victim of violent crime. That in turn, deprives victims of the support they may need and deserve.

Sexual offences

We found that the force records 96.9 percent of sexual offence crimes (including rape) that are reported to it (with a confidence interval of +/- 1.84 percent). We estimate that this means the force fails to record over 50 reported sexual offence crimes each year.

This recording rate is very good and is indicative of the effort made by the force to improve crime recording since our 2014 report. This is particularly important in respect of sexual offence crimes, many of which are very serious in nature and cause significant harm to their victims. However, we note that the force failed to record a small number of reported offences including exposure and inciting a child to engage in sexual activity over social media.

We found that the force has effective processes and good oversight which helps to ensure reports of sexual offences that are received directly into the communications centre are recorded as crimes. This is because only one of two incident codes can be applied in the case of reports of sexual offences, both of which automatically interface with the crime-recording system (Niche). Additionally, the IST has a dedicated assessor for all reported sexual offences, IST supervisors are rigorous in their quality assurance of such incidents and the FCR and his deputy carry out daily checks of recorded sexual crimes and reported incidents.

Rape

Rape is one of the most serious sexual offence crimes a victim can experience. Therefore, the accurate recording of such reports is especially important. It helps to ensure the victim receives the service they have a right to expect and deserve, and it allows the police to identify the nature and extent of sexual violence in their local area. In turn, this enables the police to operate with the highest practicable levels of efficiency to identify and deal effectively with perpetrators.

We found 72 reports of rape that should have been recorded, and that 70 of these had been recorded. These include reports that originated on the force incident system, reports received directly by the IST from third party professionals, and from a review of N100 records (see below).

Of the two rapes that were not recorded, one was recorded as a different sexual offence and was fully investigated with safeguarding considered. The second was a historic report that was disclosed to healthcare professionals who informed North Wales Police. The victim has been fully safeguarded. The report dates back some thirty years and the force is to begin an investigation when the victims’ health allows.

Again, the rigour of the force processes and the effectiveness of the oversight given to reports of sexual offences means that the force performance in respect of its recording of reports of rape was found to be good.

The force also made very good use of the Home Office classification N100. Introduced in April 2015, the N100 is a record created to explain why reported incidents of rape or attempted rapes, whether from victims, witnesses or third parties, have not been immediately recorded as a confirmed crime. This can include instances where additional information confirms the rape did not occur, or where the rape occurred in another force area and was therefore transferred to the relevant force to record and investigate.

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

Separately, we also reviewed 20 sample records where an N100 classification had been used. Among these, we found five reports which the force had subsequently correctly recorded as crimes of rape and three which should not have been recorded at all. All the others were correctly classified.

As with other sexual offences, the recording of a report of rape is important. Victims generally require significant support from the outset and any delay in providing support can be detrimental to both the recovery of the victim and to any investigation. This, in turn, can negatively influence future judicial proceedings. It is therefore to the credit of the force that its crime-recording arrangements for these offences are effective.

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

Crime reports held on other systems

In order to be confident that vulnerable victims always receive the support they need, it is important that crimes reported directly to the force’s public protection teams are always recorded. We were pleased to find that the force works hard to ensure that this is the case.

We examined 50 vulnerable victim records. Of these, we found that 29 crimes should have been recorded, of which 25 had been. The missing four crimes were of sexual assault on children, all from one incident. The first victim’s initial report was fully investigated. The investigating officer later identified the additional victims and recorded them within the investigation record. We found that all victims and the young suspect have been fully safeguarded.

We found that the force has a good process for managing referrals from partner organisations. All such referrals, usually received by email, are sent to the central referral unit for investigation and for safeguarding to be provided. Importantly, they are also sent to the IST, which is responsible for recording the crimes. This is a good process.

Modern slavery

Offences relating to modern slavery are an important and recent addition to the crimes that forces must record and investigate. We therefore reviewed the recording of reports of modern slavery offences. We also examined the force’s understanding of the origin of such reports.

We found that the force has good crime-recording arrangements in respect of modern slavery crime. Our audit showed that all 18 modern slavery crimes reported, had been recorded. The force had also correctly recorded five additional rape crimes and two assaults, but had not recorded one crime of assault occasioning actual bodily harm.

We also examined three modern slavery referrals received from other agencies. From these the force had recorded all three modern slavery crimes along with three additional rapes.

The force has an identified lead for modern slavery who works at force, regional, national and international levels with other forces, partner organisations and overseas police organisations. Modern slavery is understood by officers at a local level. We were provided with details of effective operations which the force had conducted.

Additionally, the force has recently recruited a police community support officer to work in a modern slavery prevention role and is recruiting a victim co-ordinator who will be responsible for providing support to victims of modern slavery. This is good practice.

Timeliness

The HOCR require that reports of crime are recorded within 24 hours of the receipt of the report. We found that, of the reports of crime that had been recorded by North Wales Police, only 210 out of 432 reports of violent crime, 65 out of 130 sexual offences (excluding rape) and 227 out of 393 other offences had been recorded within 24 hours of the receipt of the report.

While some victims may be referred to support agencies by other means, the delay in recording a reported crime also delays the referral of the victim to the Victim Help Centre. As some victims would benefit from the early support this team can provide, these delays are unacceptable.

We found that these delays can be attributed to:

• backlogs in the IST for the recording of reports of crime; and
• not always recording all crimes reported as part of a single incident.

Cancelled crimes

Where additional verifiable information (AVI) is obtained to show that a recorded crime did not occur, the crime record can be cancelled.

The force operates a system whereby only the FCR and one of his staff can cancel recorded crimes. We found these arrangements to be effective.

We reviewed a sample of cancelled recorded crimes of rape, other sexual offences, violence and robbery. We found that the FCR and his staff had authorised correctly the cancellation of 20 out of 20 offences of rape, 19 out of 20 sexual offences, 18 out of 20 violence offences and two out of three robbery offences.

The force has identified that not all frontline staff have a good knowledge of what amounts to AVI for the purpose of cancelling a recorded crime. Consequently, it has introduced a process whereby all cancellation requests must be routed through a fully trained sergeant in each local policing area. This ensures inappropriate cancellation requests are not submitted to the FCR and his team, and also helps to educate those officers who may make requests with insufficient AVI. This is good practice.

Where a crime has been cancelled a victim should always know the status of his or her reported crime. In the case of a decision to cancel a recorded crime, the very least the victim should expect is an explanation of the reason for this decision. We found that the force had informed victims of this decision on all but one occasion. This is good and demonstrates appropriate consideration of victims’ needs.

Code of Practice for Victims of Crime

The Code of Practice for Victims of Crime (Document) provides clear guidance to police forces regarding the service that should be provided to the victims of crime. We have concluded that the force is aware of its responsibilities under this code. In particular, we found that the force, after it records a crime, sends victims a standard letter which provides them with information about the offence to which they have been subject.

The force has a Victim Help Centre which is funded by the police and crime commissioner. While some victims can refer themselves to the team the majority of referrals come when a crime is recorded on the force’s crime system. An initial victim needs assessment is conducted by the attending officer and this is provided to the Victim Help Centre. A second detailed victim needs assessment is conducted by staff within the team, and those who require more support receive this. We found this to be a good process which considers victim needs effectively.

We also found that staff are aware of their responsibilities under the code.

Equality

HMICFRS found that the force must improve in its collection of information regarding crimes affecting identifiable groups within communities.

Protected characteristics, such as gender, sexuality, disability, ethnicity, religion and age do not necessarily increase the vulnerability of an individual to the risk of crime. However, it is important that the force records information regarding the characteristics of victims of crime in order to identify any patterns which may exist between different community groups and their vulnerability to (or their relative likelihood to report) different types of crime.

Importantly, so long as the force fails to record such information, it will be unable to understand clearly whether its crime-recording decisions are consistent across different community groups. This is, therefore, an area for improvement.

Officer and staff survey

We conducted a survey of officers and staff in North Wales Police of their experience in respect of crime recording. Some 267 respondents completed the survey. We were pleased to find that the vast majority of respondents believe that doing the right thing for the victim is the aim of the force and this has been reinforced by senior managers. They also reported that the force’s approach to crime recording had improved or significantly improved since our 2014 inspection. Furthermore, staff were clear that they no longer felt under any pressure to minimise the number of crimes recorded on the basis of performance targets.

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

The culture and leadership with regard to crime recording in the force is outstanding.

Senior officers demonstrate strong leadership with regard to crime-recording expectations. Without exception, we found an approach among officers and staff which places the victim at the forefront of their crime-recording decisions.

We also found evidence of strong governance in respect of crime recording. The FCR regularly attends dedicated crime-recording force performance meetings, one of which the deputy chief constable chairs.

The force has made good progress with implementing changes recommended in our 2014 report, and as a result all of these recommendations have been completed.

The force has also made good progress against the national action plan, developed by the national lead on crime statistics following our 2014 report and which all forces have been asked to implement. The development of the IST and the introduction of the MRU are good examples of how the force is maintaining the drive to ensure it has good crime-recording standards.

Conclusion

North Wales Police has made progress in its crime-recording processes since 2014. However, improvements must continue to be made.

The strong leadership and positive approach among officers and staff toward victims of crime is welcome, and some of the systems and processes used to ensure good crime-recording decisions are taken are to be commended. However, more needs to be done if the gaps in the force’s crime-recording arrangements identified in this inspection are to be overcome.

What next?

HMICFRS expects the force to make progress implementing recommendations we make in this report.

The cause of concern found during this inspection is such that HMICFRS may re-visit the force in 2018 to assess progress.

Sylwer: Cynhaliwyd yr arolygiad hwn cyn 19 Gorffennaf 2017, pan gymerodd HMIC gyfrifoldeb am arolygiadau gwasanaeth tân ac achub ac fe’i hailenwyd yn Arolygiaeth Heddluoedd Ei Mawrhydi a Gwasanaethau Tân ac Achub. Nid yw’r newid hwn yn effeithio ar y fethodoleg sy’n sail i’n canfyddiadau arolygu.

Gall cyfeiriadau at HMICFRS yn yr adroddiad hwn ymwneud â digwyddiad a ddigwyddodd cyn 19 Gorffennaf 2017 pan oedd HMICFRS yn HMIC.

Mae’n bosibl y bydd rhai o gysylltiadau we’r adroddiad hwn yn eich cyfeirio at wybodaeth uniaith Saesneg. Os hoffech gyfieithiad Cymraeg o’r wybodaeth hon, e-bostiwch contacthmicfrs@hmicfrs.gov.uk

Dyfarniad Cyffredinol

Mae Heddlu Gogledd Cymru wedi gwneud ymdrechion pendant i wella cywirdeb ei broses o gofnodi troseddau ers yr adroddiad arolygu Uniondeb Data Troseddu 2014 HMICFRS. Yn bwysig iawn, mae mwyafrif y swyddogion a’r staff wedi gwneud cynnydd wrth roi’r dioddefwr ar flaen y gad yn eu penderfyniadau ynghylch cofnodi troseddau. Canfuom fod yr heddlu:

• yn cyflawni lefelau uchel o gywirdeb cofnodi ar gyfer troseddau rhywiol a adroddir;
• wedi gwneud cynnydd da yn ei weithdrefnau mewn cysylltiad â chanslo troseddau a gofnodwyd;
• wedi gweithio’n galed i sicrhau gwelliannau yn yr wybodaeth a’r ddealltwriaeth o ofynion ynghylch cofnodi troseddau ar gyfer troseddau caethwasiaeth fodern ymhlith swyddogion a staff;
• wedi gweithredu’r holl argymhellion a nodwyd yn ein hadroddiad ar gyfer 2014; ac
• wedi gwneud cynnydd da yn ôl cynllun gweithredu cenedlaethol a ddatblygwyd i wella’r broses o gofnodi troseddau gan heddluoedd.

Fodd bynnag, mae gwaith i’w wneud eto. Er gwaethaf cynnydd, yn seiliedig ar ganfyddiadau ein harchwiliad o adroddiadau troseddu ar gyfer y cyfnod 1 Medi 2016 hyd at 28 Chwefror 2017, rydym yn amcangyfrif bod yr heddlu’n methu â chofnodi dros 5,300 o droseddau a adroddir bob blwyddyn. Mae hyn yn cynrychioli cyfradd cofnodi o 88.3 y cant (gydag ysbaid hyder o +/- 1.82 y cant). Mae’r 11.7 y cant o droseddau a adroddwyd sy’n mynd heb eu cofnodi yn cynnwys troseddau difrifol megis troseddau trais a cham-drin domestig. Mae’r gyfradd gofnodi ar gyfer troseddau treisgar yn peri pryder arbennig ar 82.9 y cant yn unig (gydag ysbaid hyder o +/- 3.12 y cant). Mae hyn yn golygu, ar ormod o achlysuron, bod yr heddlu’n methu dioddefwyr troseddu.

Yn arbennig, rydym o’r farn bod gormod o fethiannau i wneud y penderfyniad cywir ar gyfer y trosedd ar y cyfle cyntaf a bod gan staff a swyddogion ddealltwriaeth annigonol o’r gofynion ynghylch cofnodi troseddau ar gyfer troseddau mwy cymhleth, megis aflonyddu a chyfathrebu maleisus. Caiff y methiannau hyn eu cymhlethu gan anghysonderau ym mhrosesau’r heddlu ar gyfer cofnodi adroddiadau am droseddau.

Crynodeb o ganfyddiadau’r arolygiad

Mae’r heddlu wedi gwella ei brosesau ar gyfer cofnodi trosedd ers ein hadroddiad ar gyfer 2014. Yn arbennig, canfuom fod gan yr heddlu:

• wedi gwella ac ehangu ei dîm cymorth ymchwilio (IST), sef tîm cofnodi troseddau’r heddlu;
• wedi gweithredu’r holl argymhellion a nodwyd yn ein hadroddiad ar gyfer 2014; ac
• wedi gwneud cynnydd da yn ôl y cynllun gweithredu, a ddatblygwyd gan yr arweinydd plismona cenedlaethol ar ystadegau troseddu yn dilyn adroddiad 2014, y gofynnwyd i’r holl lluoedd ei weithredu. Mae’r rhain yn cynnwys gwelliannau i ddefnydd yr heddlu o cwrs Coleg Plismona cenedlaethol ar gyfer FCRs ac i lefel ei archwilio o benderfyniadau ynghylch cofnodi troseddau.

Canfuom hefyd fod cofrestrydd troseddau’r llu (FCR) – sy’n gyfrifol am oruchwylio trefniadau cofnodi troseddau – wedi cwblhau cwrs Coleg Plismona cenedlaethol ar gyfer FCRs c erbyn hyn mae wedi’i achredu’n llawn ar gyfer y rôl. Cefnogir ei waith gan ddirprwy FCR achrededig.

Er gwaethaf y datblygiadau hyn, gallai perfformiad yr heddlu mewn cysylltiad â chofnodi troseddau fod yn well yn y meysydd canlynol:

• Ar hyn o bryd mae’r heddlu’n tan-gofnodi troseddau treisgar a rhaid iddo wella cywirdeb ei gofnodi o’r fath adroddiadau.
• Nid yw’r broses ar gyfer nodi digwyddiadau treisgar fel troseddau yn y ganolfan gyfathrebu’n cefnogi proses gywir o gofnodi troseddau.
• Mae’r amser a gymerir i gofnodi adroddiadau o droseddau’n cymryd dros y 24 awr a ganiateir ganReolau Cyfrif y Swyddfa Gartref (HOCR), yn rhy aml, ac yn ei dro, mae hyn yn arwain at oedi wrth atgyfeirio dioddefwyr i’r Ganolfan Gymorth i Ddioddefwyr, gan siomi’r dioddefwyr hynny sydd angen y cymorth cynnar y gall y ganolfan hon ei ddarparu.
• Rhaid i’r heddlu wella i ba raddau mae’n casglu gwybodaeth ynghylch effaith troseddoldeb ar grwpiau y gellir eu nodi o fewn cymunedau.

Mae’r diffygion hynny’n ganlyniad i’r ffaith nad yw swyddogion a bob amser yn deall eu cyfrifoldebau am gofnodi troseddau, wedi’i waethygu gan ddiffygion yn y prosesau ar gyfer cofnodi troseddau o fewn yr heddlu a goruchwyliaeth gyfyng o arolygu ar benderfyniadau ynghylch cofnodi troseddau.

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

Cyfradd gyffredinol ar gyfer cofnodi troseddau

Mae gan y llu waith pellach i’w wneud er mwyn sicrhau ei fod yn cofnodi pob adroddiad am droseddu yn unol â Rheolau Cyfrif y Swyddfa Gartref (HOCR). Fe wnaethom archwilio adroddiadau am droseddau a dderbyniwyd gan y llu, ac y cofnodwyd cofnod archwiliadwy ar eu cyfer. Hysbysodd yr heddlu HMICFRS fod 94.3 y cant o droseddau a gofnodir (ac eithrio twyll) wedi dod trwy lwybr archwiliadwy ar gyfer adrodd am droseddau.

Canfuom fod yr heddlu wedi cofnodi 88.3 y cant o’r troseddau hyn (ag ysbaid hyder o +/- 1.82 y cant). Rydym yn amcangyfrif bod hyn yn golygu nad yw’r heddlu’n cofnodi mwy na 5,300 o adroddiadau am droseddau bob blwyddyn. Mae’r methiannau hynny’n amddifadu llawer o ddioddefwyr o’r gwasanaethau mae ganddynt hawl iddynt.

O’r cyfanswm o 1,150 o adroddiadau am droseddau a archwiliwyd gennym, canfuom 318 inni eu hasesu fel troseddau yn gysylltiedig â cham-drin domestig. O’r 318 o droseddau yma, roedd y llu wedi cofnodi 255. Roedd y 63 o droseddau heb eu cofnodi’n cynnwys 52 o droseddau treisgar a 11 o droseddau eraill.

Canfuom fod llawer o’r adroddiadau hyn yn cynnwys adrodd am drosedd wrth y cyswllt cyntaf gyda’r heddlu, ond aeth yr adroddiadau hyn am droseddau heb eu cofnodi ag ond ychydig o sail resymegol i esbonio pam. Gan fod cam-drin domestig yn aml yn cynnwys dioddefwyr sy’n arbennig o agored i droseddau pellach yn cael eu cyflawni yn eu herbyn, ni ellir gorbwysleisio pwysigrwydd cofnodi troseddau o gam-drindomestig.

Canfuom fod gofynion diogelu wedi’u hystyried mewn oddeutu tri chwarter o’r adroddiadau hyn. Roedd yr adroddiadau lle na chafwyd tystiolaeth o ddiogelu yn cynnwys achosion yn ymwneud â bygythiadau i ladd, stelcio ac ymddygiad gorfodol. Canfuom hefyd bod absenoldeb cofnod trosedd wedi golygu mai dim ond oddeutu hanner yr adroddiadau hyn am droseddau wedi cael eu hymchwilio, gan gynyddu’r risg bosibl o niwed i’r dioddefwr.

Mae tan-gofnodi troseddau cysylltiedig â digwyddiadau domestig, a’r methiant i ddarparu mesurau diogelu a gwasanaeth boddhaol i’r dioddefwyr hyn, yn peri pryder. Mae hyn oherwydd bod cam-drin domestig yn aml yn cynnwys dioddefwyr sy’n arbennig o agored i droseddau pellach yn cael eu cyflawni yn eu herbyn.

Yn ddiweddar, cyflwynodd y llu uned ymateb a reolir (MRU). Rôl y tîm hwn yw gwella ymateb y llu i’r digwyddiadau hynny sy’n addas i’w datrys dros y ffôn. Mae’r holl staff MRU wedi cael hyfforddiant HOCR ac maent yn datblygu arbenigedd yn y maes hwn. Er ei fod yn newydd, dywedodd y llu bod cyflwyno’r uned hon wedi cael effaith gadarnhaol ar y gwasanaeth mae’n ei ddarparu i ddioddefwyr troseddau.

Y ffactorau sy’n cyfrannu at y ffaith bod y llu’n tan-gofnodi adroddiadau am droseddau yw ei brosesau ar gyfer cofnodi troseddau, gwybodaeth ei weithllu am gofnodi troseddau a’i oruchwyliaeth yn y ganolfan gyfathrebu.

• Mae angen mynd i’r afael â diffygion yn y prosesau ar gyfer cofnodi troseddau. Yn arbennig, canfuom:
  • yn dilyn adleoli nid yw swyddogion a staff bob amser yn cofnodi esboniad da neu ddilys am pam na ddylid cofnodi trosedd;
  • nid yw trinwyr galwadau bob amser yn cofnodi’r manylion llawn ynghylch y sgwrs maent wedi’i chael gyda’r person sy’n adrodd am drosedd a lle nad ydynt yn cofnodi’r wybodaeth hon, nid yw bob amser yn cael ei throsglwyddo i swyddogion sy’n mynychu’r trosedd. Mae hyn yn golygu nad yw’r swyddog mynychu bob amser yn meddu ar y wybodaeth lawn i seilio penderfyniad cofnodi trosedd arni;
  • mae’r cyfyngiadau ar y math o godau digwyddiad sydd ar gael ar ICAD yn golygu nad yw adroddiadau sy’n ymwneud â throseddau bob amser yn cael eu codio mewn ffordd sy’n cysylltu â system gofnodi troseddau’r llu (Niche). Mae hyn yn golygu na chaiff y digwyddiadau hyn eu hadolygu gan yr IST i benderfyniad cofnodi trosedd gael ei wneud, gan olygu nad yw llawer o’r adroddiadau hyn yn cael eu cofnodi; a
  • pan fydd troseddau pellach yn dod i’r amlwg ar ôl yr adleoli cychwynnol neu yn ystod ymchwiliad dilynol, nid yw’r llu bob amser yn cofnodi troseddau a adroddir.
• Canfuom nad yw swyddogion cyfathrebu, swyddogion rheng flaen a staff yn yr IST bob amser yn siŵr o ofynion ynghylch cofnodi troseddau. Yn arbennig:
  • nid yw egwyddorion sylfaenol ynghylch cofnodi troseddau a gwybodaeth am y rheolau ar gyfer cofnodi troseddau sy’n ymwneud ag aflonyddu, cyfathrebu maleisus a threfn gyhoeddus bob amser yn cael eu deall; ac
  • mae diffyg profiad a gwybodaeth i’w gweld ynghylch y rheolau ar gyfer cofnodi troseddau ymhlith rhai staff a recriwtiwyd yn ddiweddar ym maes trin galwadau ac yn IST.
• Mae problem arall yn ymwneud â goruchwyliaeth yr heddlu ar ei benderfyniadau ynghylch cofnodi troseddau. Canfuom fod angen gwella’r broses o oruchwylio ei benderfyniadau ynghylch cofnodi troseddau. Yn arbennig, nid oes gan oruchwylwyr y ganolfan gyfathrebu’r gallu i graffu’r holl ddigwyddiadau cysylltiedig â throseddu’n ddigonol i ymfodloni bod penderfyniadau ynghylch cofnodi troseddau’n gywir.

Trais yn erbyn y person

Canfuom fod 82.9 y cant o droseddau treisgar a adroddir i’r heddlu yn cael eu cofnodi (gydag ysbaid hyder o +/- 3.12 y cant). Mae hyn yn is na’r gyfradd gyffredinol ar gyfer cofnodi troseddau a nodir uchod. Yn ôl ein hamcangyfrif, mae hyn yn golygu bod yr heddlu’n methu â chofnodi dros 2,800 o droseddau treisgar a adroddir wrthynt bob blwyddyn. Gan fod troseddau treisgar yn gallu bod yn arbennig o ofidus i’r dioddefwr, mae hwn yn faes lle mae’r angen am welliant yn arbennig o ddifrifol ac felly’n achos pryder.

Yn y mwyafrif o achosion, lle na chofnodwyd troseddau treisgar, canfuom mai’r prif achosion oedd:

• y prosesau sydd yn eu lle ar hyn o bryd ar gyfer cofnodi troseddau a adroddir (a ddisgrifiwyd yn gynharach);
• nid yw swyddogion a staff yn deall y rheolau ar gyfer cofnodi troseddau’n ddigonol, yn arbennig o ran cymhlethdodau rhai troseddau trais aflonyddu, cyfathrebu maleisus a threfn gyhoeddus. Mae hyn yn arwain at fethu â chofnodi nifer o’r fath adroddiadau am troseddau; ac
• absenoldeb goruchwyliaeth ddigonol o benderfyniadau ynghylch cofnodi troseddau yn y ganolfan gyfathrebu.

Mae dioddefwyr troseddau treisgar ac, yn arbennig, dioddefwyr trais mwy difrifol, yn aml yn galw am gefnogaeth sylweddol. Dylai’r gefnogaeth hon ddod nid yn unig oddi wrth y swyddogion adrodd ac ymchwilio, ond gan asiantaethau priodol eraill, fel y Ganolfan Gymorth i Ddioddefwyr. O dan yr amgylchiadau hynny, mae cofnodi troseddau’n bwysicach byth. Gall methu â chofnodi troseddau treisgar mewn modd priodol olygu nad yw’r Ganolfan Gymorth i Ddioddefwyr yn derbyn unrhyw hysbysiad bod person wedi dioddef trosedd treisgar. Mae hynny, yn ei dro, yn amddifadu dioddefwyr o’r cymorth y gallent ei angen a’i haeddu.

Troseddau rhywiol

Canfuom fod y llu’n cofnodi 96.9 y cant o droseddau rhywiol (gan gynnwys treisio) a adroddir wrtho (gydag ysbaid hyder o +/- 1.84 y cant). Rydym yn amcangyfrif bod hyn yn golygu bod yr heddlu’n methu â chofnodi dros 50 o droseddau rhywiol a adroddir bob blwyddyn.

Mae’r gyfradd gofnodi hon yn dda iawn ac mae’n arwydd o’r ymdrech a wnaed gan yr heddlu i wella’r broses o gofnodi troseddau ers ein hadroddiad ar gyfer 2014. Mae hyn yn arbennig o bwysig o ran troseddau rhywiol, ac mae llawer ohonynt yn ddifrifol iawn ac yn achosi niwed sylweddol i’w dioddefwyr. Fodd bynnag, rydym yn nodi bod y llu wedi methu â chofnodi nifer fach o droseddau a adroddwyd gan gynnwys dinoethi ac annog plentyn i gymryd rhan mewn gweithgaredd rhywiol dros gyfryngau cymdeithasol.

Canfuom fod gan y llu brosesau effeithiol a goruchwyliaeth dda sy’n helpu i sicrhau bod adroddiadau am droseddau rhywiol sy’n cael eu derbyn yn uniongyrchol i’r ganolfan gyfathrebu yn cael eu cofnodi fel troseddau. Mae hyn oherwydd mai dim ond un o ddau gôd digwyddiad y gellir ei weithredu yn achos adroddiadau am droseddau rhywiol, y ddau ohonynt yn rhyngweithio fel mater o drefn â’r system gofnodi troseddau (Niche). Yn ogystal, mae gan yr IST asesydd penodedig ar gyfer pob trosedd rhywiol a gofnodir, mae goruchwyliwyr IST yn drylwyr o ran eu sicrwydd ansawdd ar gyfer digwyddiadau o’r fath ac mae’r FCR a’i ddirprwy yn cynnal gwiriadau dyddiol ar droseddau rhywiol a gofnodir a digwyddiadau a adroddir.

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 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. Yn ei dro, mae hyn yn galluogi’r heddlu i weithredu gyda’r lefelau uchaf posibl o effeithlonrwydd i nodi a delio’n effeithiol â chyflawnwyr.

Canfuom 72 o adroddiadau am drais rhywiol y dylid wedi’u cofnodi, a bod 70 o’r rhain wedi’u cofnodi. Mae’r rhain yn cynnwys adroddiadau a ddechreuodd ar system ddigwyddiadau’r heddlu, adroddiadau a dderbyniwyd yn uniongyrchol gan yr IST oddi wrth weithwyr proffesiynol trydydd parti, ac o adolygiad o gofnodion N100 (gweler isod).

O’r ddau achlysur o dreisio nad oeddynt wedi’u cofnodi, cofnodwyd un fel trosedd rhywiol gwahanol a gafodd ei ymchwilio’n llawn gan ystyried mesurau diogelu. Roedd yr ail yn adroddiad hanesyddol a ddatgelwyd i weithwyr gofal iechyd proffesiynol a oedd yn hysbysu Heddlu Gogledd Cymru. Mae’r dioddefwr wedi’i ddiogelu’n llwyr. Mae’r adroddiad yn dyddio’n ôl ryw 30 mlynedd a bydd y llu’n dechrau ymchwiliad pan fydd iechyd y dioddefwr yn ei ganiatáu.

Eto, mae manylrwydd prosesau’r heddlu ac effeithiolrwydd yr oruchwyliaeth a roddir i adroddiadau am droseddau rhywiol yn golygu bod perfformiad yr heddlu mewn cysylltiad â chofnodi adroddiadau am dreisio’n dda.

Hefyd gwnaeth y llu ddefnydd da iawn o ddosbarthiad 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 ymgeisiau i dreisio a gofnodwyd, boed hynny gan ddioddefwyr, tystion neu drydydd partïon, wedi cael eu cofnodi ar unwaith fel troseddau a gadarnhäwyd. 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 llu perthnasol i’w gofnodi ac i ymchwilio iddo.

Canfuom 13 o adroddiadau am ddigwyddiad y dylai’r heddlu fod wedi gweithredu dosbarthiad N100 ar eu cyfer. Fe’i gweithredwyd ar yr holl achlysuron hyn.

Ar wahân, rydym hefyd wedi adolygu 20 o gofnodion sampl lle defnyddiwyd dosbarthiad N100. Ymhlith y rhain, fe wnaethom ganfod pum adroddiad roedd y llu wedi eu cofnodi’n gywir wedyn fel troseddau treisio a thri na ddylid wedi’u cofnodi o gwbl. Dosbarthwyd y rhai eraill i gyd yn gywir.

Fel gyda throseddau rhywiol eraill, mae cofnodi adroddiad o dreisio’n bwysig. Yn gyffredinol, mae angen cymorth sylweddol ar y dioddefwyr o’r cychwyn cyntaf a gall unrhyw oedi wrth ddarparu cymorth fod yn niweidiol i adferiad y dioddefwr ac i unrhyw ymchwiliad. Gall hyn, yn ei dro, ddylanwadu’n negyddol ar achosion barnwrol yn y dyfodol. Felly, mae’r heddlu’n haeddu credyd am fod ei drefniadau ar gyfer cofnodi’r troseddau hyn yn effeithiol.

Pa mor effeithlon mae’r systemau a phrosesau yn y llu’n 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 cymorth sydd arnynt ei angen, mae’n bwysig cofnodi troseddau a adroddir yn syth wrth dimau diogelu’r cyhoedd y llu bob amser. Roeddem yn falch o weld bod y llu’n gweithio’n galed i sicrhau bod hyn yn wir.

Fe wnaethom archwilio 50 o gofnodion dioddefwyrhyglwyf. O’r rhain, canfuom y dylai 29 o droseddau wedi’u cofnodi, ac o’r rhai hynny cofnodwyd 25 ohonynt. Roedd y pedair trosedd ar goll yn ymwneud ag ymosodiad rhywiol ar blant, i gyd yn tarddu o un digwyddiad. Ymchwiliwyd yn llawn i adroddiad cychwynnol y dioddefwr cyntaf. Yn ddiweddarach, nododd y swyddog ymchwilio y dioddefwyr ychwanegol a’u cofnodi o fewn y cofnod ymchwilio. Canfuom fod yr holl ddioddefwyr a’r person ifanc a amheuir wedi cael eu diogelu’n llawn.

Canfuom fod gan yr heddlu broses dda ar gyfer rheoli atgyfeiriadau gan sefydliadau partner. Anfonir pob atgyfeiriad o’r fath, a dderbynnir fel arfer trwy e-bost, at yr uned atgyfeirio ganolog i’w hymchwilio ac i fesurau diogelu gael eu darparu. Yn bwysig, fe’u hanfonir at yr IST hefyd, sy’n gyfrifol am gofnodi’r troseddau. Mae hon yn broses dda.

Caethwasiaeth fodern

Mae troseddau sy’n ymwneud â chaethwasiaeth fodern yn ychwanegiad pwysig a diweddar i’r troseddau mae’n rhaid i lluoedd eu cofnodi a’u hymchwilio. Felly, fe wnaethom adolygu’r broses o gofnodi adroddiadau am droseddau caethwasiaeth fodern. Hefyd fe wnaethom archwilio dealltwriaeth y llu o darddiad adroddiadau o’r fath.

Canfuom fod gan yr heddlu drefniadau da ar gyfer cofnodi troseddau mewn cysylltiad â throseddau caethwasiaeth fodern. Dangosodd ein harchwiliad fod yr holl 18 o droseddau caethwasiaeth fodern wedi’u cofnodi. Roedd yr heddlu hefyd wedi cofnodi pum trosedd treisio ychwanegol a dau ymosodiad yn gywir, ond nid oedd wedi cofnodi un trosedd o ymosodiad oedd wedi achosi niwed corfforol gwirioneddol.

Hefyd fe wnaethom archwilio tri atgyfeiriad caethwasiaeth fodern a dderbyniwyd gan asiantaethau eraill. O’r rhain, roedd y llu wedi cofnodi’r tri throsedd caethwasiaeth fodern ynghyd â thri digwyddiad arall o dreisio.

Mae gan yr heddlu arweinydd a nodwyd ar gyfer caethwasiaeth fodern sy’n gweithio ar lefelau llu, rhanbarthol, cenedlaethol a rhyngwladol â lluoedd, sefydliadau partner a sefydliadau heddlu tramor eraill. Mae caethwasiaeth fodern yn cael ei deall gan swyddogion ar lefel leol. Darparwyd manylion inni ynghylch ymgyrchoedd effeithiol roedd y llu wedi’u cynnal.

Yn ogystal, mae’r llu wedi recriwtio swyddog cymorth cymunedol yr heddlu’n ddiweddar i weithio mewn rôl atal caethwasiaeth fodern ac mae’n recriwtio cydlynydd dioddefwyr a fydd yn gyfrifol am ddarparu cymorth i ddioddefwyr caethwasiaeth fodern. Mae hwn yn arfer da.

Amseroldeb

Mae’r HOCR yn mynnu bod adroddiadau am droseddau’n cael eu cofnodi o fewn 24 awr o dderbyn yr adroddiad. Canfuom, o’r adroddiadau am troseddau a gofnodwyd gan Heddlu Gogledd Cymru, mai dim ond 210 o 432 o adroddiadau am droseddau treisgar, 65 o 130 o droseddau rhywiol (ac eithrio treisio) a 227 o 393 o droseddau eraill oedd wedi’u cofnodi o fewn 24 awr o dderbyn yr adroddiad.

Er y gall rhai dioddefwyr gael eu cyfeirio at asiantaethau cymorth trwy ddulliau eraill, mae’r oedi wrth gofnodi trosedd a adroddwyd hefyd yn oedi atgyfeirio’r dioddefwr i’r Ganolfan Gymorth i Ddioddefwyr. Gan y byddai rhai dioddefwyr yn elwa o’r cymorth cynnar y gall y tîm hwn ei ddarparu, mae’r oedi hwn yn annerbyniol.

Canfuom y gellir priodoli’r oedi hwn i:

• ôl-groniadau yn yr IST ar gyfer cofnodi adroddiadau am droseddau; a
• pheidio â chofnodi pob trosedd a adroddir fel rhan o un digwyddiad bob amser.

Troseddau a ganslir

Lle ceir gwybodaeth ychwanegol y gellir ei dilysu (AVI) i ddangos nad oedd trosedd a gofnodwyd wedi digwydd, gellir canslo cofnod y trosedd.

Mae’r heddlu’n gweithredu system lle mai dim ond yr FCR ac un o’i staff sy’n gallu canslo troseddau a gofnodwyd. Canfuom fod y trefniadau hyn yn effeithiol.

Fe wnaethom adolygu sampl o droseddau a gofnodwyd ac a ganslwyd o dreisio, troseddau rhywiol eraill, trais a lladrad. Canfuom fod yr FCR a’i staff wedi awdurdodi’n gywir i ganslo 20 o 20 o droseddau treisio, 19 o 20 o droseddau rhywiol, 18 o 20 o droseddau trais a dau o dri throsedd lladrad.

Mae’r llu wedi nodi nad nad oes gan bob aelod o’r staff rheng flaen wybodaeth dda o’r hyn mae AVI yn ei olygu at ddiben canslo trosedd a gofnodwyd. O ganlyniad, mae wedi cyflwyno proses lle mae’n rhaid i bob cais am ganslo gael ei gyfeirio trwy ringyll wedi’i hyfforddi’n llawn ym mhob ardal blismona leol. Mae hyn yn sicrhau na chaiff ceisiadau amhriodol am ganslo eu cyflwyno i’r FCR a’i dîm, ac mae hefyd yn helpu i addysgu’r swyddogion hynny a allai wneud ceisiadau ag AVI annigonol. Mae hwn yn arfer da.

Lle mae trosedd wedi’i ganslo, dylai dioddefwr bob amser wybod statws y trosedd a adroddwyd ganddo neu ganddi. Yn achos penderfyniad i ganslo trosedd a gofnodwyd, y lleiaf oll y dylai’r dioddefwr ei ddisgwyl yw esboniad o’r rheswm dros y penderfyniad hwn. Canfuom fod yr heddlu hysbysu’r dioddefwyr o’r penderfyniad hwn ar bob un ond un achlysur. Mae hyn yn dda ac yn dangos ystyriaeth briodol o anghenion dioddefwyr.

Cod Ymarfer ar gyfer Dioddefwyr Troseddau

Mae’r Cod Ymarfer ar gyfer Dioddefwyr Troseddau (Document) 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’n ymwybodol o’i gyfrifoldebau o dan y cod hwn. Yn benodol, canfuom fod y llu, ar ôl iddo gofnodi trosedd, yn anfon llythyr safonol i ddioddefwyr sy’n rhoi gwybodaeth iddynt ynghylch y trosedd maent wedi’i brofi.

Mae gan y llu Ganolfan Gymorth i Ddioddefwyr a ariennir gan y comisiynydd heddlu a troseddu. Er bod rhai dioddefwyr yn gallu eu hatgyfeirio eu hunain at y tîm, mae’r mwyafrif oatgyfeiriadau’n dod pan gofnodir trosedd ar system droseddau’r llu. Cynhelir asesiad cychwynnol o anghenion y dioddefwr gan y swyddog sy’n mynychu a darperir hwn i’r Ganolfan Gymorth i Ddioddefwyr. Cynhelir ail asesiad manwl o anghenion y dioddefwr gan staff o fewn y tîm, ac mae’r rhai hynny sydd angen mwy o gymorth yn cael hwn. Canfuom fod hon yn broses dda sy’n ystyried anghenion dioddefwyr yn effeithiol.

Hefyd canfuom fod y staff yn ymwybodol o’u cyfrifoldebau o dan y cod.

Cydraddoldeb

Canfu HMICFRS fod rhaid i’r llu wella o ran ei broses o gasgllu gwybodaeth ynghylch troseddau sy’n effeithio ar grwpiau y gellir eu nodi o fewn cymunedau.

Nid yw nodweddion gwarchodedig, megis rhyw, rhywioldeb, anabledd, ethnigrwydd, crefydd ac oed o reidrwydd yn cynyddu agoredrwydd unigolyn i’r risg o ddioddef troseddau. Fodd bynnag, mae’n bwysig bod yr heddlu’n cofnodi gwybodaeth ynghylch nodweddion dioddefwyr troseddau er mwyn nodi unrhyw batrymau a allai fodoli rhwng gwahanol grwpiau cymunedol a’u hyglwyfder i (neu’r tebygolrwydd cymharol y byddant yn adrodd am) wahanol fathau o droseddau.

Yn bwysig, cyn belled â bod yr heddlu’n methu â chofnodi’r fath wybodaeth, 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

Fe wnaethom gynnal arolwg o swyddogion a staff Heddlu Gogledd Cymru ynghylch eu profiad mewn cysylltiad â chofnodi troseddau. Cwblhaodd rhyw 267 o ymatebwyr yr arolwg. Roeddem yn falch o weld bod mwyafrif helaeth yr ymatebwyr o’r farn mai gwneud y peth iawn i’r dioddefwr yw nod y llu, ac mae hyn wedi cael ei atgyfnerthu gan uwch reolwyr. Hefyd, fe wnaethon nhw ddatgan bod ymagwedd y llu at gofnodi troseddau wedi gwella neu wedi gwella’n sylweddol ers ein harolygiad yn 2014.Ymhellach, roedd staff yn glir nad oeddynt bellach yn teimlo o dan unrhyw bwysau i leihau nifer y troseddau a gofnodwyd ar sail targedau perfformiad.

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

Mae’r diwylliant a’r arweinyddiaeth o ran cofnodi troseddau yn y llu’n rhagorol.

Mae uwch swyddogion yn arddangos arweinyddiaeth gref o ran disgwyliadau ynghylch cofnodi troseddau. Yn ddieithriad, fe wnaethom ganfod ymagwedd ymhlith swyddogion a staff sy’n gosod y dioddefwr ar flaen y gad yn eu penderfyniadau ynghylch cofnodi troseddau.

Hefyd gwelsom dystiolaeth o lywodraethu cryf mewn cysylltiad â chofnodi troseddau. Mae’r FCR yn mynychu cyfarfodydd perfformiad cofnodi troseddau’r llu’n rheolaidd, ac mae’r dirprwy brif gwnstabl yn cadeirio un ohonynt.

Mae’r heddlu wedi gwneud cynnydd da wrth weithredu’r newidiadau a argymhellir yn ein hadroddiad ar gyfer 2014, ac o ganlyniad mae’r holl argymhellion hyn wedi’u cwblhau.

Hefyd mae’r heddlu wedi gwneud cynnydd da yn ôl y cynllun gweithredu cenedlaethol, a ddatblygwyd gan yr arweinydd cenedlaethol ar ystadegau troseddu yn dilyn ein hadroddiad ar gyfer 2014 ac y gofynnwyd i bob heddlu ei weithredu. Mae datblygu’r IST a chyflwyno’r MRU yn enghreifftiau da o sut mae’r llu’n cynnal yr ymdrech i sicrhau bod ganddo safonau da ar gyfer cofnodi troseddau.

Casgliad

Mae Heddlu Gogledd Cymru wedi gwneud cynnydd yn ei brosesau ar gyfer cofnodi troseddau ers 2014. Fodd bynnag, mae’n rhaid i welliannau barhau i gael eu gwneud.

Mae’r arweinyddiaeth gref a’r ymagwedd gadarnhaol ymhlith swyddogion a staff tuag at ddioddefwyr troseddau yn galonogol, ac mae rhai o’r systemau a’r prosesau a ddefnyddir i sicrhau y gwneir penderfyniadau da ynghylch cofnodi troseddau i’w ganmol. Fodd bynnag, mae angen gwneud mwy i sicrhau bod y bylchau yn nhrefniadau cofnodi troseddau’r heddlu a nodwyd yn yr arolygiad hwn yn cael eu goresgyn.

Beth nesaf?

Mae HMICFRS yn disgwyl i’r llu wneud cynnydd ar weithredu’r argymhellion a wnawn yn yr adroddiad hwn.

Mae’r achos pryder a ganfuwyd yn ystod yr arolygiad hwn yn golygu y gallai HMICFRS ail-ymweld â’r llu yn 2018 er mwyn asesu cynnydd.