Threat and Risk Assessment Process I-TRAC Integrated Threat and Risk Assessment Centre Val Campbell, Director Copyright 2009

Joint Forces Multi-Disciplined Professional Team Police (threat analysts): 4 RCMP 1 Calgary 1 Edmonton 1 Medicine Hat 1 Lethbridge Regional Crown prosecutor Child protection expert Family law expert Consulting psychologist and psychiatrist.

Police Qualifications Must have: experience & training investigating and assessing violence excellent skill and judgment Information relied on must be credible and trustworthy Objective – not involved in investigation or interview of witnesses

I-TRAC Threat Analyst Certification – Police Members Ontario Provincial Police Behavioural Sciences Unit Understudy Program Approximately 2 years Extensive training by authors of instruments Must stay current with all literature and research Continually attend training offered by leading experts Mentoring, Peer Review Reading and testing Must pass OPP TAU Board Certification test

Services Provided Formal threat assessments and case management Recommendations Investigations Charges Court orders Victim safety requirements and Strategies Expert court testimony bail and sentencing child custody and access guardianship Case conferencing Specialized training

REFERRALS Police services Prosecutors Child and Youth Family Services Corrections Mental health LOCAL POLICE MUST ALWAYS BE ENGAGED

Services Not Provided Objectivity and integrity Not a first response unit Does not respond to crisis situations or crime scenes Does not conduct or manage primary investigations Does not meet with offenders or victims/witnesses.

Assistance to Frontline Police Whether to seek detention at bail hearing Evidence at bail hearing Release conditions Case management Offender VSU Children and Youth Services Probation

Screening Process Brief history of offender and relationship, including recent incident Family Violence Investigative Report (FVIR) History Evaluation Assessment Tool (HEAT).

Threat Assessment Involves the evaluation of observable personal and situational indicators on either: risk enhancing or risk reducing individual’s potential for violence. Basically - What risk does an individual pose to a target and how do we reduce /manage that risk?

Risk Assessment Primary objectives: SAFETY by: Assessing risk not predicting violence Informing Managing Preventing

Risk Instruments Potential Applications Law Enforcement Crown Courts – criminal, civil and family Correctional intake and discharge Children and Youth Services Warning third parties Coordination between service providers Expose officials to issues might not otherwise consider Touchstone for victims themselves

Annual Report 2006 Awareness of Domestic Violence Prior to Homicide Family 75% Friends 53% Police 41% Medical Personnel 28% Neighbours 19% Child Protection Services 19% Co-Workers 15% Shelter or DV Program 15% Clergy 4%

Reviews of DV Murders Police shown to have: limited capacity to be more proactive lack of understanding of triggers lack of knowledge of risk factors failed to share information failed to brigade what they knew about offender (including and critically asking the victim)

Criminal Justice System Little expertise in domestic violence and stalking as a whole No one paying attention to history of relationship and patterns of abuse that escalated over time Every act was handled in isolation from previous ones No ability to distinguish minor offenders from lethal ones.

Information Sources Victim is source of critical information about history and personality of the perpetrator Police Corrections Children’s Services Mental Health CAUTIONS: Credibility of Informant (witness/victim) Unproven prior misconduct may be challenged No dismissals or acquittals

Barriers to Informed Decision Making by Courts Lack of offender’s history, context of relationship Lack of knowledge regarding risk enhancing factors No flow of information between criminal and family court Civil litigants/lawyers have no access to police or corrections information Common assumptions and misperceptions: Isolated act or one-off Parties mutually combative vs. self-defence Fabrication to gain advantage in child custody/access Both parents should have access children Victim is safer after separation Traumatized parent perceived as lacking in parental abilities

Case Law - Bail R. v. Bleile Alta. Q.B. (2000) Per: Martin, J. “The proper administration of justice requires that the judge determining bail understand the circumstances of the offence and the background of the offender in order to decide whether the offender is likely to resort to further violence or intimidation if released. That information can only be produced at a bail hearing if it was elicited during the investigation and passed on to the crown prosecutors office, and from the Crown to the court. Unfortunately that is not being done in all cases. As a consequence, some decisions as to release of persons charged with assaulting their partners are not as informed as they should be. Sadly, Canadian legal history has been punctuated with cases where offenders charged with spousal assault may have been released on bail and thereafter visited even greater violence on the victim.”

Assistance to Crown Whether to seek detention at bail hearing; Evidence at bail hearing; Alerting Crown and court that a psychological assessment of dangerousness is in order Evidence at sentencing Conditions of release/probation orders