Domestic violence arrests buck policy | Canterbury News | Local News in Canterbury

Police make arrests in only about a fifth of domestic violence incidents in Canterbury – despite them having a policy to arrest wherever there is evidence of violence in the home.

This is the finding of a study being presented at Canterbury University today that says the "pro-arrest’’ policy of police is not being followed.

The low arrest rate is due to officers becoming cynical, as well as the difficulties facing frontline police, the study says.

A pro-arrest policy, introduced in the late 1980s, means police are obliged to make an arrest if they can identify the offender – regardless of whether or not the victim was prepared to make a complaint.

But according to the study, arrests only occurred in about 21% of cases where violence was reported.

Sociology masters student Jenny Cross and Associate Professor Greg Newbold were given access to hundreds of police reports from domestic violence incidents.

They also interviewed police.

District Commander Superintendant Dave Cliff acknowledged that in many situations, police were reluctant to make arrests where they were not satisfied the case would be supported in court.

But he said police had "moved ahead" in the issue since the fieldwork for the study was done. The fieldwork was completed in 2005.

However, Dr Newbold says the policy has been around long enough that the findings are still relevant.

"We have argued that, in spite of high levels of verbal support for pro-arrest, in practice there are a number of factors that prevent police from apprehending (a person) at the scene of a domestic dispute, and a variety of valid reasons why they may decide not to do so even where an arrest is possible," they said.

Dr Newbold said these reasons could include a long history of withdrawn complaints at the address, an arrest is not in the interests of the victim, where two people have assaulted each other, and problems of arresting both when there were children at home.

He said a person could not be forced to testify against a spouse and police could not arrest without "probable cause’’.

"If both parties refuse to speak, then there is a problem," he said.

Christchurch Women’s Refuge chief executive Annette Gillespie said the findings regarding the frequency of arrests were concerning.

She said it was a concern Women’s Refuge would continue to raise with police.

"Sometimes the approach (of an officer attending a domestic incident) is ‘let’s smooth this over and negotiate a safe outcome for both people to stay in the home’ rather than ‘is it appropriate to arrest and do we have enough evidence to arrest?’," she said.

"Arresting every time would certainly send a strong message to the offender that family violence is not ok."

Superintendant Cliff said the recommendations of an internal review last year into the police approach to family violence were currently being implemented.

These included the setting up of "family safety teams" headed up by a detective sergeant in the city that will specifically investigate family violence incidents and look to secure evidence so police could still prosecute when a victim recanted their complaint, he said. "We are putting a very high emphasis on investigating it …as we regard it as a serious crime," he said.