Indecent images and youths – when may a caution be possible?

At Olliers we regularly represent young people who are under investigation in relation to allegations involving indecent images.

Different police forces have different approaches in relation to offering cautions or conditional cautions for such offences however the Child Gravity Matrix introduced in 2023 provides comprehensive guidance to decision makers.

The Child Gravity Matrix

The police utilise a tool known as the ‘Child Gravity Matrix’ to triage decision making in relation to children and young people (under the age of 18) in terms of deciding on the most appropriate outcome or disposal. The disposal outcomes include cautions, conditional cautions or prosecution and non-statutory outcomes including community resolutions, deferred prosecutions, deferred caution and voluntary diversionary activity.

Decisions are based upon the offence itself committed, any aggravating or mitigating factors in relation to the offence, for example, the child’s previous convictions and any known vulnerabilities. The views of a victim where it is possible to obtain these should also be taken into account.

Police will then need to identify the offence, review and consider any evidence and consider all aggravating mitigating and vulnerability factors. The ‘Child Gravity Matrix’ is to be used as a guide only and each case should be looked at on an individual basis in accordance with the Director of Public Prosecution’s Guidance on Charging (6th Addition).

A case must be referred to the CPS where the offence does not fall within the responsibility of the police to make a decision.

It is important to establish whether the child’s or young person’s needs can be met through any diversion schemes and whether any risk can be managed with an out of court disposal. The term ‘out of court disposal’ incorporates both formal options and informal options.

The guidance reminds decision makers that the person being dealt with is a child and therefore adult slander should not be applied to them regardless of their offence or their offending history.

Gravity Scores

The document provides gravity scores to reflect changing attitudes to the way in which children and young people are seen and dealt with by the Criminal Justice System.

The scores range from 1 to 5 accounting for changes in disposal options.

The scores are as follows:

1. Suitable for No Further Action (NFA) where no intervention is being applied
2. Criminal Resolution Triage – if the young person is willing to engage in voluntary support with another agency body such as the Youth Justice Service. Deferred prosecution or a deferred caution could be considered where there is no admission of guilt for those police forces that use such disposals.
3. A Youth Caution – consideration can also be given for the use of deferred cautions or deferred prosecutions if the police force uses these
4. A Youth Conditional Caution – again consideration can be given for use of deferred cautions or deferred prosecution
5. Usually results in a prosecution – indictable only offences must be referred to the CPS. Where the evidential stage of the code test is met, even if the public interest test is not deemed to have been met, the case must still be referred to the CPS.

The guidance in relation to the matrix tool provides relevant documentation for decision makers to consider:

Sentencing Youths – Overarching Principles

‘It is important to avoid criminalising children and young people unnecessarily; the primary purpose of the Youth Justice System is to encourage children and young people to take responsibility for their own actions and promote re-integration into society rather than to punish. Restorative justice may be of particular value for children and young people as they can encourage them to take responsibility for their actions and understand the impact their offence may have on others’.

DPP Guidance (Charging) 6th Edition

The police are responsible for:

• Recording the rationale for their decisions to deal with a case by way of an out of court disposal or charge
• Identifying cases that are appropriate for an out of court disposal as early as possible
• Taking ‘no further action’ in cases that cannot meet the appropriate evidential standard, without referral to a prosecution

How to use the Child Gravity Matrix?

The Child Gravity Matrix scoring tool should be applied as follows:

1. Locate the offence in the table of specific offences
2. Apply specific aggravating and mitigating factors in relation to the offence and adjust the gravity score accordingly
3. Use the general factors for all offences table to identify and apply any additional general aggravating/mitigating factors and adjust the gravity score accordingly
4. Use of vulnerability factor table to identify and apply any vulnerabilities that may apply to the circumstances of the offence and impact the decision making
5. Use the final gravity score guide lined table for guidance on outcomes and actions to be considered
6. Consult the disposal chart for suitable disposals and out of court disposal options

The guidance details general aggravating factors and mitigating factors for all offences.

Aggravating factors in the Child Gravity Matrix

• The offence is so dangerous which resulted in a high risk of serious harm to others
• Directed, influenced or coerced a vulnerable person to commit the offence/exploitation towards others
• Offence against public servant
• Child abused a position of trust
• The offence though minor is an issue for the local area and is supported by an impact statement
• Offence motivated by hostility of characteristics of the victim such as race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, transgender
• Weapon used or violence threatened during commission of offence
• Victim was vulnerable, deliberately put in considerable fear or suffered a personal attack, damage or disturbance or domestic abuse
• Significant harm caused to victim/high level of physical, psychological or financial impact caused/gratuitous degradation of victim/maximising distress to victim/victim has expressed strong views as to the effect
• Culpability/evidence of premedication used by the child

Mitigating factors in the Child Gravity Matrix

• Child was influenced by others more criminally sophisticated
• Adult involved in commission of offence
• The offence is minor and child who offended has put right harm or lost cause, has expressed regret or offered reparation or compensation
• The offence is so old that the relevance of any responses minimised
• The child who offended wants to engage in the restorative process and has made steps to do so
• Provocation from victim or victims’ group and child who offended reacted impulsively
• Prosecution is likely to have detrimental effect on victim’s physical or mental health
• The child who is offended is also a victim of a separate offence committed at/or near to the time that they offended
• Closer to the age of criminal responsibility may reduce their culpability
• Child demonstrates a lack of maturity, and they are neurodiverse

Child Gravity Matrix in relation to indecent image offences

In relation to indecent image offences the following offences show a score of 4 or 5 on the matrix i.e. that either a conditional caution should be considered or that the matter should usually result in a prosecution.

For each offence there are specific aggravating and mitigating factors detailed.

Possession to show / distribute – indecent photograph / pseudo photograph of a child

Aggravating factors

• Child under 13
• Large number of images
• Images are Cat A and/or B
• Damage caused
• Previous allegations/convictions
• Child known to the offender
• Evidence that the images are/have been distributed

Mitigating factors

• Abuse Victim MH/mental impairment/ learning disability
• Images are of an older child and are considered to be in the same peer group as the child or young person

Making an Indecent Photograph/Pseudo Photograph of a child – Section 1 (1) Protection of Children Act 1978

Aggravating factors

• Child under 13
• Large number of images
• Images are Category A and/or B
• Damage caused
• Previous allegations/convictions
• Child known to the offender
• Evidence that the images are/have been distributed

Mitigating factors

• Abuse Victim
• MH/mental impairment/ learning disability
• Images are of an older child and are considered to be in the same peer group as the child or young person

Distribution of an indecent photograph / pseudo photograph of a child

Aggravating factors

• Large number of images.
• Images of a child under 13.
• Images are Category A and/or B images distributed
• Previous allegations/convictions
• Child known to the offender
• Evidence that the images are/have been distributed

Mitigating factors

• Images are of an older child and are considered to be in the same peer group as the child or young person
• Only a few images have been kept solely for personal use
• The images were viewed but not stored

Possession of a prohibited image of a child

Aggravating factors

• Images of a child under 13
• Images are Cat A and/or B
• Previous allegations/convictions
• Child known to the offender
• Evidence that the images are/have been distributed

Mitigating factors

• Images are of an older child and are considered to be in the same peer group as the child or young person
• Only a few images have been kept solely for personal use.
• The images were viewed but not stored.

Specialist indecent image solicitors

The law in relation to indecent images is complex and benefits from representation by specialist solicitors. At Olliers we have significant experience of dealing with indecent images cases involving youths and of persuading the police to deal with the matter by way of caution or conditional caution.

If you require advice in relation to an indecent images investigation please contact our new enquiry team either by email to info@olliers.com, or by telephone on 020 3883 6790 (London) or 0161 834 1515 (Manchester) or by completing the form below and our new enquiry team will contact you.