Misidentification, Vulnerable Groups, and Community Resolutions in Stalking/Harassment Cases

Request Number: FOI/14892

Category: Incident and Crime Statistics - Harassment and Stalking

Subject: Misidentification, Vulnerable Groups, and Community Resolutions in Stalking/Harassment Cases

Request and Answer:
Your request for information below has now been considered. In respect of Section 1(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) We can confirm that the Police Service of Northern Ireland does hold the information you have requested however it is estimated that the cost of complying with your request for information would exceed the “appropriate costs limit” under Section 12(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and this will be further explained below. PSNI have followed the Information Commissioner’s Office guidance ‘Requests where the cost of compliance exceeds the appropriate limit’ in relation to this request, which also provides further detail on the application of Section 12 (1) of the FOIA. This guidance is available on the ICO website at the following link:
https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/documents/1199/costs_of_compliance_exceeds_appropriate_limit.pdf

I am writing to request information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 relating to the handling of stalking and harassment cases by your police force. This request focuses on potential misidentification of victims, the use and misuse of Community Resolutions, and the treatment of individuals with protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010.

Part 1 – Misidentification and Arrest of Victims

Request 1 
Between 2018 and 2024, how many individuals were:

• Arrested on suspicion of stalking or harassment. Later identified as the victim rather than the perpetrator.

Request 2 
Of those cases, please provide any available breakdown by:

• Gender (with particular focus on women where misogyny may have played a role).
• Sexual orientation (including cases involving homophobic abuse).
• Disability or mental health conditions (e.g., bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, PTSD, autism spectrum, anxiety disorders).
• Race/ethnicity.

Any recorded intersectional vulnerabilities, where multiple protected characteristics may be relevant.

Request 3
Of those misidentified and arrested:

• How many were detained in custody.
• How many were released without charge.
• How many resulted in no further action.

Request 4 
Are there any internal reviews, case audits, guidance, or training materials regarding:

• Misidentification of victims in stalking/harassment or domestic abuse incidents.
• Mistaken arrests involving individuals with protected characteristics.
• Handling of cases involving vulnerable or marginalised individuals.

Part 2 – Use and Misuse of Community Resolutions (CRs)

Request 5   
Between 2018 and 2024, how many Community Resolutions were issued for:

(a) Stalking.

(b) Harassment.

Request 6
Of these, please specify how many involved individuals with the following protected characteristics:

• Mental health conditions.
• Disability.
• Gender (female-identifying individuals).
• Sexual orientation (including LGBTQ+).
• Race/ethnicity.

Request 7
In how many cases:

• Was the alleged victim not informed of the CR before it was applied?
• Was the CR applied without the victims consent or knowledge?
• Were individuals led to believe the CR constituted mutual agreement or offered protective benefit, when that was inaccurate?

Request 8
Are there any internal reviews, complaint investigations, IOPC referrals, or safeguarding concerns documented about:

• Inappropriate or non-consensual use of Community Resolutions.
• Use of CRs in stalking or harassment cases involving vulnerable groups.
• Misleading representations of CRs to victims or those misidentified as perpetrators.

Answers
Section 17(5) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 requires the Police Service of Northern Ireland, when refusing to provide such information (because the cost of compliance exceeds the appropriate limit) to provide you the applicant with a notice which states that fact.

It is estimated that the cost of complying with your request for information would exceed the “appropriate costs limit” under Section 12(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. 

Section 12 of FOIA allows a public authority to refuse to deal with a request where it estimates that it would exceed the appropriate limit to either comply with the request in its entirety or confirm or deny whether the requested information is held. The estimate must be reasonable in the circumstances of the case. The ‘appropriate limit’ is currently £600 for central government and £450 for all other public authorities including PSNI. The relevant Regulations which define the appropriate limit for section 12 purposes are The Freedom of Information and Data Protection (Appropriate Limit and Fees) Regulation 2004 SI 2004 No 3244. These are known as the ‘Fees Regulations’ for brevity.

Regulation 4(3) of the Fees Regulations states that a public authority can take into account the costs it reasonably expects to incur in carrying out the following permitted activities in complying with the request:

(i) determining whether the information is held;
(ii) locating the information, or a document containing it;
(iii) retrieving the information, or a document containing it; and
(iv) extracting the information from a document containing it.

Under those regulations PSNI can calculate the time spent on each of these permitted activities at £25 per hour (thus if the activity(s) takes more than 18 hours PSNI will be in excess of the ‘appropriate limit’).

When a public authority is estimating whether the appropriate limit is likely to be exceeded, it can include the costs of complying with two or more requests if the conditions laid out in Regulation 5 of the Fees Regulations can be satisfied. Those conditions require the requests to be: 

• made by one person, or by different persons who appear to the public authority to be acting in concert or in pursuance of a campaign;
• made for the same or similar information; and
• received by the public authority within any period of 60 consecutive working days. 

Regulation 5(2) of the Fees Regulations requires that the requests which are to be aggregated relate “to any extent” to the same or similar information. This is quite a wide test but public authorities should still ensure that the requests meet this requirement.

Enquiries made with the relevant business areas in relation to your requests has identified that retrieval of information to respond to your request would exceed the FOI legislative cost of 18 hours as set by the Secretary of State.

It should be noted that the stalking legislation was only introduced in N Ireland on 19 October 2023. 

The table below provides PSNI’s data for ‘stalking and harassment’ from 2017/2018 – 2024/2025:

To further explain for PSNI to respond to your Requests 1-3 whilst the information would be held electronically this would require manual intervention and would require each occurrence to be individually reviewed in an attempt to ascertain the details and breakdown as follows: 

Gender of victim(s) & suspect(s), Sexual Orientation for both – where relevant and disclosed to police. Disability or mental health conditions – where relevant and disclosed to police. Any other intersectional vulnerabilities, Identify cases whereby victims were misidentified as suspects and how many were taken to custody, Outcome- How many were charged, Outcome- How many were released unconditionally. The review of each case is estimated to take a conservative 20 minutes. 

With regards to Request 6 – whilst it is unclear what is meant by ‘involved individuals’ for example  for all parties involved in the CRN or just the recipient of the CRN, PSNI can advise and to assist protected characteristic data is voluntary and if it has been recorded it is only recorded for the recipient (suspect) of the CRN, not the victim. However the breakdown requested would not be as clearly defined in the CRN data recorded. Mental health conditions are recorded as part of the disability on the CRN data. The CRN data does not record sexual orientation. It is also not possible to distinguish from the CRN data the Gender (female –identifying Individuals) and this again would require a manual trawl of all CRNs which would be beyond 18 hours.

In an attempt to respond to Request 7 – the business area can advise that due to the recording system this would also require manual intervention. Thus grossly exceeding the FOI legislative cost of 18 hours.

In accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000, this letter should be considered as a Refusal Notice, and the request has therefore been closed. 

Advice and assistance
You may wish to submit a refined request in order that the cost of complying with your request may be facilitated within the ‘appropriate limit’. In compliance with Section 16 of the Act, we have considered how your request may be refined to bring it under the appropriate limit. 

PSNI can respond to the following request and submission of a refined request would be treated as a new request, and considered in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000, including consideration of relevant Part II exemptions.

• Request 5

Whilst this will not respond in full to your request, PSNI can provide the following assistance:  

• The PSNI publish on the website data for ‘Stalking/ Harassment Offences’ from 2018. 
   
• Request 7 

The victim’s views should be considered throughout an investigation and if the offence(s) and suspect are eligible for a CRN, the victim’s views should be at the forefront of the resolution agreement and any preferred resolution agreements taken into consideration.
The Investigating Officer and the Supervisor should take the victim’s views into consideration along with the risks, vulnerabilities and other aggravating factors. A victim cannot ‘veto’ the CRN being issued but they can influence the resolution agreement.  It would be impractical to agree a resolution which involves the participation or explicit agreement of the victim if they are unwilling to participate or agree with a suggested resolution.  For example, agreeing a resolution for the suspect to repair damage, caused by the suspect, at the victim’s property when the victim does not want
to see the suspect again.

It is critical that the Investigating Officer and the Supervisor consider if Community Resolution is the right thing to do in the circumstances and takes reasonable steps to explain the process and their rationale to try and secure the victim’s support.

•  Request 8 

 CRNs are quality assured by both PSNI independently and jointly with the PPS. Any concerns/complaints/safeguarding matters identified are directly addressed with the Investigating Officer and their Supervisor and any appropriate actions taken.