I. INTRODUCTION

These guidelines are prepared to assist Crown prosecutors and the police to provide greater protection for victims of serious domestic violence.

II. NOTIFICATION OF VICTIMS

A selective notification process based on a risk flagging system by police, or at the request of the victim, is recommended.

III. NOTIFICATION OF BAIL APPLICATIONS AND BAIL REVIEWS

• timing (i.e. prior notification or notification of results)
• who notifies the victim

Notification of the victim prior to the initial bail hearing is not practical. It is also impractical to notify the victim prior to the bail review hearing. It is, however, possible to notify victims of the results of both the initial bail hearing and the bail review hearing. Therefore, when police themselves conduct a bail hearing before a Justice of the Peace, they should make any necessary notification to the victim of the results of that hearing.

Prior to Crown prosecutor involvement, only the police are in a position to notify the victim of results in a timely manner. In other cases, approaches should be established at the local level between the Crown prosecutor office and the police to decide whether it is the Crown prosecutor or the police who should ensure that victim notification occurs.

Police provide 24-hour service. Crown prosecutor offices do not operate on a 24-hour basis. In rural areas, the Crown prosecutor may not be resident at the court location where the accused is released. Local needs and resources must, therefore, be considered when determining who should make the notification where the Crown prosecutor conducts the hearing or review. If it is decided that the police are to make notification to the victim and they are not present at a bail hearing, then the Crown prosecutor must notify the police of the results in cases where release is ordered. This will ensure that the police can make the victim notification in a timely manner.

If the offender has been granted bail initially, or upon bail review, but has not been released due to insufficient funds or any other reason, the correctional centre should contact the police when the accused is eventually released. The police or Crown prosecutor will have to, therefore, notify Corrections of the flagged status of the file or request of the victim. Local practices will be established to advise Corrections staff.

{return to top}

IV. METHOD OF NOTIFICATION

• telephone or personally
• mail

Immediate victim notification is to be the established goal. The best person to assess risk is generally the investigating officer. The best method of victim notification is contact by telephone or personally due to its timeliness. However, in some cases this may not be possible.

Where verbal notification is not possible, notification by mail will be the only other alternative. If this method is used, the notification letter should be enclosed in an envelope devoid of official markings. All verbal or written notifications, or attempts to notify, should be recorded.

Interim release terms respecting victim safety should be provided to the victim. Where the victim has gone to another community, the nearest police service should be informed by the investigating police service of the release order and the conditions for the protection of the victim or the victim's family.¹

¹ November 1997 Department of Justice Canada Spousal Assault Prosecutions

V. FLAGGING SYSTEM TO DETERMINE RISK

• who does the flagging
• how the file is to be flagged

Some method of flagging of files is necessary to provide an indication of risk to the victim if an accused is released on bail. Files should be flagged on the basis of:

1. risk factoring, or
2. a request from the victim for notification.

The police should flag the file with respect to risk to the victim. The Crown prosecutor may receive information indicating that a file should be flagged. In such a case the Crown prosecutor, after discussion with the police, should ask the police to flag the file.

Crown prosecutor files that are flagged should be clearly identified. The police must notify the Crown prosecutor. The method need not be uniform throughout the province. Cases of spousal violence that have been flagged should be referred to specialized police spousal violence units where such units exist.²

Correctional centres should be notified of flagged files to follow up on complaints received from a victim of harassing/threatening telephone calls or for casework purposes where the offender is subsequently sentenced.

² Jury Verdict and Recommendations - Inquest Touching the Deaths of Arlene May and Randy Joseph Iles July 1998

{return to top}

VI. RISK FACTORING

The police and the Crown prosecutor will jointly develop a risk factoring tool at the local level to identify accused most likely to offend while on bail. This information will be useful to the Crown prosecutor when speaking to bail or during bail review. The risk factoring tool will indicate the conditions that should be sought to ensure the safety of the victim, in the event that the court is inclined to release the accused. Individuals completing the risk factoring tool should be trained in the dynamics and cycle of domestic violence. A risk factoring tool is attached as a practice model. Since community resources and needs vary throughout Alberta, the practice model attached is put forward as a guide. Different models may be equally effective.

To ensure that Crown prosecutors consistently receive all of the relevant information in each case before a bail hearing is held, and especially where the police are not present, a standardized bail opposition form developed by police services should be provided to Crown prosecutors. Such a form should include information on the likelihood of an accused failing to appear for trial or committing a further offence if released on bail, the potential impact on the victim if the accused is released on bail, the accuser's criminal record, and a clear recommendation for or against bail.³ It should also include recommended terms of release in the event that the accused is granted bail.

³ Commission of Inquiry into the Deaths of Rhonda Lavoie and Roy Lavoie, June 1997

VII. PERSONAL INFORMATION OF VICTIM

Personal information of the victim irrelevant to the charge should not be disclosed. For example, the release of information relating to the address of the victim, where the victim has changed address, could be potentially harmful. It is recognized, however, that disclosure obligations imposed by law upon the Crown prosecutor may force the release of some personal information obtained from the victim to the accused.

VIII. SPECIAL ASSIGNMENT - CROWN PROSECUTORS FOR FLAGGED CASES

When a file has been flagged based on risk factoring, a Crown prosecutor should be assigned responsibility for the file. A Crown prosecutor should be assigned to the case at the earliest opportunity and, where practicable, should remain assigned to the case until its conclusion. In cases with a higher risk of violence (flagged files), the victim should also be provided with the name of the Crown prosecutor who is specifically assigned the file. Reasonable efforts should be made to accomplish this. If the assigned Crown prosecutor is changed, the victim should be notified.

It is preferable that the assigned Crown prosecutor should interview the victim prior to the trial or preliminary hearing. The victim should be referred to a victim assistance program where available if the police have not already done so. Where a change of Crown prosecutor is necessary, arrangements should be made to have the newly assigned Crown prosecutor review the file and then meet with the victim.⁴

⁴ Crown Policy Manual, Attorney General, Ont.-Appendix A of the Wife Assault and the Canadian Criminal Justice System 1995 report-Valverde, MacLeod and Johnson

{return to top}

IX. FOLLOW UP TO ENSURE VICTIM RISK IS BEING MINIMIZED

Police are in the best position to follow up with victims. The greater the risk, the more closely the police should monitor victims' safety. Conditions imposed as a result of a bail hearing should be entered on the Canadian Police Information Centre (CPIC) using the probation category currently used for entry of restraining orders, conditions on probation, and firearms prohibitions.⁵

Police services should also be aware of "Spousal Assaults" or "Other Family Violence" caution flags which, as of January 1997, may now appear on the Criminal Record Synopsis when checking the CPIC system. Police services should ensure that the new sections of fingerprint form C-216 allowing for the flagging of convictions for a number of offences, including these new "Spousal Assaults" and "Other Family Violence," are used where applicable. This tool provides police services with immediate recognition that a subject they may be dealing with or responding to a complaint about has had previous convictions for spousal assaults or family violence. It is also information that can be immediately relayed to the Crown prosecutor on bail applications.

⁵ Alberta Justice Domestic Violence Registry

X. TRAINING

Practices developed to address victim bail notification procedures for cases of serious domestic violence must be included in domestic violence training programs provided to persons employed in the criminal justice system.

Proper training can have dramatic results for police and prosecution services in promoting greater safety for both the victims of this crime as well as the attending officers. Such training should take place at the local level and provincial level, such as at the Criminal Justice Family Violence Course held annually at the Alberta Justice/Solicitor General Staff College since 1991 for police, prosecutors and correctional staff.

Suggested Model of Practice
Calgary Police Service (Oct 1998)

STANDARDIZED SHOW CAUSE

1. What is the current status of the relationship? Is there a history of separations in this relationship? During past separations, has the offender stalked or harassed the victim?
2. What is the history of violence or abuse in the relationship? Include physical, sexual, verbal, financial and emotional abuse. Has the abuse escalated during the last twelve months? Has the abuse ever required medical intervention?
3. Has the offender ever hurt, injured or threatened to hurt the victim, a family member, another person or an animal?
4. Has the offender ever used weapons against the victim, threatened to use weapons, own a firearm or have plans of purchasing a firearm?
5. Are there any children under the age of 18 who have witnessed the abuse or whom the offender has abused? Is Child Welfare presently involved with the family? Has Child Welfare been involved?
6. Has the offender abducted or threatened to abduct the children?
7. Is the offender currently employed? Has the offender's employment history changed during the previous twelve months; become less stable?
8. What is the offender's current status with the legal system? Has the offender ever violated a court order, including a no-contact order and/or peace bond?
9. Have drugs or alcohol ever been a problem for the offender? Does the offender have a history of mental illness, including threats of suicide?

{return to top}

Model: Calgary Police Service - 1998
SHOW CAUSE INFORMATION - DETAILS

1. Criminal record. Is there a history of violence in the family, external to the family, and/or a record of other criminal activity?
   
   Violent offenders with an increased risk for violent recidivism are those who have a history of violence, are violent both in and out of the home, and engage in more frequent and more severe spousal violence than do other domestic abuse offenders (SARA, 1994).
   
2. Relationship history. Is there a history of separations in this relationship? What is the current status of the relationship? Has the victim ever left home in fear for their safety?
   Offenders with unstable intimate relationships tend to have more extensive criminal histories, higher frequency of violent offences, and a higher rate of general and violent recidivism than do those with stable relationships. For domestic violence, the risk of violence appears to be the highest under the following circumstances:
   1. the offender is living with their partner, but the partner wants to end the relationship;
   2. the offender is separated from their partner, but wants to renew the relationship; or
   3. there has been a sudden and/or recent separation.
   
   A victim leaving their home in fear is a behavioral descriptor of past serious dispute(s) and may indicate a desire to separate from the offender. Murder of an abused partner by an offender is most likely to occur in the context of a marital separation (SARA, 1994).
   
3. Are there any children under the age of 18 who have witnessed the abuse or whom the offender has abused? Is child welfare presently involved with the family? Has child welfare been involved?
   The impact of domestic violence on children in the home is profound.
   
   • Children are more vulnerable to abuse when they are in a home where there is domestic violence between the adults. Forty per cent to 75 per cent of children are both witnesses and victims of violence. Children living with a parent who is being abused are 12 to 14 times more likely to be sexually abused (Emery & Lauman-Billings. "An overview of the Nature, Causes, and Consequences of Abusive Family Relationships: Toward Differentiating Maltreatment and Violence." American Psychologist 53, 1998).
   • Children who witness violence are affected as much as those who were actually physically abused themselves (Peter Jaffe et al. "Similarities in Behavioural and Social Maladjustment Among Child Victims and Witnesses to Family Violence." American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 50, 1986).
   • Serious behaviour problems are 17 times higher for boys and 10 times higher for girls who live in violent homes (D.A. Wolfe et al. "Children of Battered Women: The Relationship of Child Behaviour to Family Violence and Maternal Stress." Journal of Clinical and Consulting Psychology 53, 1985).
     {return to top}
     
4. Has the offender abducted or threatened to abduct the children?
   Control over the children is another aspect of the domestic conflict and an attempt to intimidate the partner. It also indicates a concern for the welfare of the children and is reportable to child welfare.
   
5. What is the offender's current status with the legal system? Have they ever violated a court order, including a no contact order and/or peace bond?
   If legal sanctions have not previously proved effective in managing the behavior of an offender, this may be an indication of the anticipated compliance with future orders and will have implications for the safety of the victim(s).
   
6. Has the offender ever hurt/injured or threatened to hurt the victim, a family member, themselves, another person or an animal? Has the offender ever damaged any of the victim's property?
   Threats to property and other family members are part of a pattern of intimidation and an attempt to control the victim. Offenders who make credible threats of death or serious bodily harm against their partners are at serious risk for recidivism (SARA, 1994).
   Suicidality is often indicative of a desperate "crisis" situation for the offender and is generally considered a risk factor. Offenders who murder their partners often report experiencing suicidal ideation or intent prior to committing their offence. It is not unusual for these offenders to attempt or even complete suicide after the murder (SARA, 1994). In one study, the offender killed themselves after killing their partner 70 per cent of the time (Firearms and Domestic Violence, Department of Justice, 1995).
   
7. What is the history of violence or abuse in the relationship? Include physical, sexual, verbal, financial, and emotional abuse. Has the abuse escalated during the last twelve months? Has the abuse ever required medical intervention? Is there presently, or is there a history of the offender stalking, harassing, or intimidating the victim?
   Offenders who have demonstrated assaultive behaviour in either past or current intimate relationships are at risk for future violence. Recidivism rate estimates for domestic abuse range from 30 to 70 per cent over a period of one to two years. These rates seem to apply regardless of whether or not the offender is arrested and/or treated. A pattern of recent escalation in frequency or severity of assault is associated with imminent risk for violence recidivism (SARA, 1994).
   Stalking and harassment indicates an increased desire of the offender to threaten, intimidate and control the victim. If coupled with credible threats this can indicate an increased risk to the victim.
   
8. Has the offender ever used weapons against the victim, threatened to use weapons, own a firearm, have easy access to a firearm or have plans of purchasing a firearm?
   A 1991 Canadian spousal homicide study indicated that in 38 per cent of the incidents, firearms were used (Firearms Control and Domestic Violence, 1995). Domestic offenders who have used a weapon (firearms, knives and weapons used as clubs) in past assaults on partners or others, or who have threatened future use of a weapon, are at increased risk of recidivism (SARA, 1994). Opportunities exist to limit access and prohibit possession of a firearm under the Firearms Acquisition Certificate Process.
   
9. Have drugs or alcohol ever been a problem for the offender?
   Substance abuse is related to criminality and recidivism in general, recent substance misuse is associated with risk for violent recidivism among domestic offenders. Alcohol abuse is considered a prominent risk factor for domestic violence (SARA, 1994).
   
10. Is the offender currently employed? Has the offender's employment history changed during the previous twelve months, become less stable?
    Unemployment is associated with an increased risk for general recidivism. Unemployed offenders are also more likely to recidivate violently. Low income and financial stresses are also a risk factor for involvement in domestic abuse. A sudden recent change in employment status may be associated with increased risk.

{return to top}