Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1697642609350.pdf (Australia)
Preventing systemic harm to victim survivors of Domestic and Family Violence.
Submission with Recommendations for improved Local Court practice and enhanced police responses in New South Wales Newcastle Domestic Violence Committee May 2020 By Meighan Jenkins Lead, Strategic Priorities Sub Committee 1 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 Table of Contents Abbreviations and Definitions…………………………………………………………………………………….3-4 Overview……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….5 About Newcastle Domestic Violence Committee…………………………………………………………..6 Objectives and Strategy…………………………………………………………………………………………………7 The call for Specialised DFV Courts……………………………………………………………………………8-31 Enhanced Safer Pathway Responses……………………………………………………………………………32 The call for a dedicated Police Force Unit or Command responsible for ongoing DFV education, training and monitoring of victim survivors’ experiences with NSW Police………………………………………………………………………………….33-47 Summary and Detailed Recommendations……………………………………………………………..48-55 Bibliography……………………………………………………………………………………………………………56-59 The Newcastle Domestic Violence Committee would like to acknowledge the editorial support provided by the Gender Research Network at the University of Newcastle.
2 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 Abbreviations ADVO: AVO: CALD: DFV: DVCIM: DVDRT: DVLOs: FaCS: MOU: LGBTIQ: NDVC: NSWPF: PAC: PD: POI: Apprehended Domestic Violence Order Apprehended Violence Order Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Domestic Family Violence Domestic Violence Court Intervention Model Domestic Violence Death Review Team Domestic Violence Liaison Officer Family and Community Services Memorandum of Understanding Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Intersex or Queer Newcastle Domestic Violence Committee New South Wales Police Force Police Area Command Police District Person of Interest ROSH: Risk of Significant Harm SAM: SFVC: SHLV: Safety Action Meeting Specialist Family Violence Court Division Staying Home Leaving Violence WDVCAS: Women’s Domestic Violence Court Advocacy Service The Newcastle Domestic Violence Committee acknowledges the traditional custodians of the lands on which this report was produced – the Awabakal and Worimi people, – and pay our respects to Elders past, present and emerging.
3 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 Definitions Domestic and Family Violence: Domestic and Family Violence (DFV) is inclusive of any behaviour in an intimate or family relationship which is violent, threatening, coercive or controlling, causing a person to live in fear.

It is usually manifested as part of a pattern of controlling or coercive behaviours.
An intimate relationship refers to people who are (or have been) in an intimate partnership, whether or not the relationship involves or has involved a sexual relationship, i.e.

married or engaged to be married, separated, divorced, de facto partners (whether of the same or different sex), couples promised to each other under cultural or religious tradition, or couples who are dating.
A family relationship has a broader definition and includes people who are related to one another through birth, marriage or de facto partnerships, adoption and fostering relationships, sibling and extended family relationships.
It includes the full range of kinship ties in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, extended family relationships, and constructs of family within lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex or queer (LGBTIQ) communities.1 Service System: The range of government and non-government agencies and personnel funded to provide support to vulnerable groups, enhance life outcomes and administer justice.
For the purpose of this Submission this term refers to the services working at the frontline in the Newcastle and Lake Macquarie area to keep women and children safe as well as hold perpetrators accountable for abusive behaviours.
Since the rollout of the Safer Pathway Reforms in NSW, the key government departments of Police, Community Corrections, Education, Health, Communities and Justice are now embedded in the local service system network (NSW Department of Justice, 2014; ARTD Consultants, 2019 & Women NSW, 2019).

For the purpose of this Submission, NSW Justice Staff and Magistrates’ Courts are also included in the definition of service system.

Victim Survivors: People who have experienced violence, threats or harm.
The Committee acknowledges DFV is a gendered issue.

Although men are victims of domestic and family violence, the evidence shows women represent the majority of victim survivors coming to the attention of police and Courts for protection.
An Australian-wide study of offenders undertaken by Shann Hume, Anthony Morgan and Hayley Boxall revealed that overall, “men accounted for around five in six domestic violence offenders recorded by police”.2 Women and their dependent children are the client base of most of the services represented at the NDVC.

Men and fathers are also supported by some of the representative services.
Systemic harm: The unintentional stress, anxiety or powerlessness experienced by victim survivors as the result of action or inaction undertaken by agencies and personnel in the service system.

For victim survivors this may result in re-traumatisation, which can result in life long adverse health and wellbeing impacts.

1 NSW Government, It Stops Here: Standing together to end domestic and family violence in NSW (Sydney: NSW Government, 2014), https://www.women.nsw.gov.au/?a=289461.
2 Shann Hulme, Anthony Morgan, and Hayley Boxall, “Domestic violence offenders, prior offending and reoffending in Australia,” Trends & Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice 580 (September 2019): 5, https://aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/tandi580.

4 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 Overview “One of the problems we face with perpetrator convictions in the criminal justice system is the high rate of complainant drop out.
It could be as high as 50% of women who will not want to go through with their testimony.

There are many underlying reasons for that.

Some of them are outside the justice system… But to the extent they are within the justice system, I’ll just touch on what I said before.

We have to make the Court experience as untraumatic (sic) as possible for complainants”.
NSW Attorney General and Minister for the Prevention of Domestic Violence, Mark Speakman addressing the Hunter Women’s Safety Forum, January 31, 2020 This Submission was developed on behalf of the Newcastle Domestic Violence Committee (NDVC).

The author and committee members are primarily frontline practitioners with decades of experience working with some of the most vulnerable children and families in the Newcastle and Lake Macquarie local government areas.
A review of federal and state policies and reforms for responding to domestic and family violence has been undertaken.

Significantly, the direct experiences of victim survivors as well as frontline service practitioners living and working in the Newcastle and Lake Macquarie local government areas is included to highlight the rationale for our recommendations.
The recommendations in this Submission focus on two separate but interrelated aspects of the experience victim survivors have when they make their story known to the sector.

The direct experience of victim survivors with the justice system is well known to many in the local service sector.

This is most evident when victim survivors are supported by sector staff to engage with police and Courts.
The initial point of contact with police usually occurs when the victim survivor is in crisis following an assault, when she is fearful of retribution from her abuser and worried that she may not be believed if she attends Court.

The experience of workers in the local sector too frequently find the response from police can be inconsistent and at times insensitive to the victim survivor’s trauma.
The Local Courts similarly can be confusing and intimidating environments where victim survivors report feeling intimidated and disbelieved.

The experience of victim survivors in the Newcastle and Lake Macquarie region is consistent with the evidenced experience of victim survivors in other states and as highlighted in the reports and literature referenced in this Submission.
In acknowledging the problem of “complainant drop out” and the direct causal link to the trauma many victims encounter when they enter the criminal justice system, the Attorney General and the NSW government need to act upon what the research has been telling us for the past decade and implement changes now.
The two priorities and accompanying recommendations that are the focus of this Submission - enhanced Local Court practice and improved police responses will see the ‘system’ in NSW go some way in replicating what has been occurring in Queensland and Victoria for years.

We will see more perpetrators in NSW held to account.

And, more importantly, victim survivors and their children will receive the justice the community of NSW expects.
5 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 About Newcastle Domestic Violence Committee “Members of the Newcastle Domestic Violence Committee are committed to providing a forum where government and non-government agencies, the corporate sector and the wider local community can unite and cooperate in providing support, community education and initiating community action around this issue.
We will be the collective voice in our Newcastle community and will speak out against and act for the prevention of the crime of domestic violence.” Newcastle Domestic Violence Committee Mission The majority of representatives on the NDVC comprise personnel who work directly with vulnerable families including children assessed as being at Risk of Significant Harm (ROSH).

Most of these families have experienced current or recent exposure to DFV, primarily intimate partner abuse.
Other representatives include workers from NSW Health, men’s behaviour change programs, local council, victims support services, local academics, and police and justice agencies.

The Safer Pathway Reforms in NSW have resulted in increased collaboration across the state-wide service sector and locally we have seen positive outcomes for victim survivors.
Women who have been subject of Safety Action Meetings (SAMs) have reported to service representatives on the NDVC a sense of reassurance that the local system – specifically WDVCAS, SHLV, DVLOs and case management service staff – are working together to protect them.

Many of the NDVC membership also participate in local SAMs and there is wide agreement that this element of the Safer Pathway reforms is working well to protect women and children and hold perpetrators to account.
However, as highlighted in literature, reports and evaluations of the DFV landscape from national and state- wide perspectives over the past decade, there is further work required to better connect the ‘system’, particularly the interface of the Courts and police responses, with the local DFV service sector.

6 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 Objective Preventing systemic harm to victim survivors of Domestic and Family Violence (DFV).
Our objective is consistent with the objectives and targeted work currently underway by government and peaks.
As a collective of local and experienced DFV practitioners, the NDVC aligns with the principles as outlined in the Good Practice Guidelines for the Domestic and Family Violence Sector in NSW, with particular reference to section 8.1, “Workers advance the rights and interests of victim-survivors of DFV at an individual level as requested by the woman (and children) with her consent”, and section 8.2, “Services work to influence policy and legislation to uphold the rights of, and improve responses to victim-survivors of DFV and those at risk”.
Of specific relevance to this Submission is point 8.2.6: “Services work collaboratively with other agencies to push for systemic changes that will improve the lives of those impacted by DFV.

3 Staff and organisations at the coal face of working with victim survivors are well placed to inform ongoing work in developing better systemic responses for victims.
Similarly, as noted in Action 5 of the NSW Domestic and Family Violence Blueprint for Reform 2016- 2021: Delivering quality services, under this action, “Women NSW commit to the codesign of service quality standards with the non-government organisation sector for domestic and family violence services and training requirements for mainstream services”.
The Guidelines also contribute to Action 3: Supporting victims, and Action 6: Improving the system of the NSW Domestic and Family Violence Blueprint for Reform 2016-2021.4 Strategy To provide detailed recommendations that will enable targeted lobbying to the New South Wales State Government for the establishment of: 1.

Changes to existing local Magistrates’ Courts in dealing with DFV matters, eventually resulting in the creation of Specialised Domestic Family Violence Courts in NSW.

2.
2.

A dedicated NSW Police Force Unit or Command that is solely responsible for ongoing DFV research, training and monitoring of victims’ experiences with NSW Police.

As this strategy has been developed by the Newcastle Domestic Violence Committee (NDVC) it draws attention to the experiences of victim survivors, their children, and service sector practitioners in the Newcastle and Lake Macquarie Local Government areas.
3 Domestic Violence NSW, Good Practice Guidelines for the Domestic and Family Violence Sector in NSW (Redfern: Domestic Violence NSW, 2017), http://dvnsw.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/DFV-Practice- Guidelines.pdf.

4 NSW Government, NSW Domestic and Family Violence Blueprint for Reform 2016-2021: Safer Lives for Women, Men and Children, (Sydney: NSW Ministry of Health, 2016), https://www.women.nsw.gov.au/ strategies-and-resources/nsw-domestic-and-family-violence/domestic-and-family-violence-blueprint.
7 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 The call for Specialised DFV Courts In Australia, there are specialised family violence Courts operating in NSW, Victoria, Queensland, Western Australia, South Australia and the ACT.

All are part of the Local or Magistrates’ Courts in the relevant jurisdiction.

The structure and functions of the Courts differ across states.
Many local and Magistrates’ Courts operate a specialised list for protection orders where matters are listed and heard on a particular day.5 With the increasing national awareness of the impacts of domestic and family violence, particularly in recent years, there is an urgency to progress ongoing reform and innovation within the justice system.
This Submission would like to highlight how the Victorian and Queensland Governments are responding to the needs of victim survivors and request the NSW government prioritise similar change.
The Victorian Experience In 2017 the Victorian Labor Government committed over 2.4 billion dollars to implement the recommendations from the Victorian Royal Commission into Family Violence (2016).6 This commitment from the Victorian Government represents more spending on domestic and family violence than all other Australian states combined.7 The progress and status of the various Victorian reforms can be followed at the Victorian Government Website, Latest news - Family violence reform.
The 227 Recommendations are either in Implementation (154 Recommendations) or In Progress (73 Recommendations) phases.8 The following categories cover the scope of the reform’s recommendations: ● Adolescents who use family violence ● Children and young people’s experience of family violence ● Court-based responses to family violence in Victoria ● Data, research and evaluation ● Faith communities ● Family violence and diversity ● Industry planning ● Information sharing 5 NSW Government, Family Violence — A National Legal Response (Sydney: Australian Law Reform Commission, 2010), https://www.alrc.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/ALRC114_WholeReport.pdf.
6 State of Victoria, Royal Commission into Family Violence Report: Summary and Recommendations (Sydney: Victorian Government, 2016), http://rcfv.archive.royalcommission.vic.gov.au/MediaLibraries/RCFamilyViolence/Reports/RCFV_Full_Report_I nteractive.pdf.

7 The Hon.
7 The Hon.

Gabrielle Williams Victorian Minister for Prevention of Family Violence, Women and Youth, quoted from ministerial address at ‘No to Violence: The Australasian Working Together To End Men’s Family Violence Conference’, Melbourne, May 2019, https://www.ntv.org.au/wp- content/uploads/2019/10/NTV1848_Conference-Report-2019-screen-ready_FA3.pdf 8 State Government of Victoria, “The 227 Recommendations,” last updated March 04, 2020, https://w.www.vic.gov.au/familyviolence/recommendations.html.
8 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 ● Investment ● Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex communities ● Male victims ● Offences and sentencing ● Older people ● Pathway to services ● People from culturally and linguistically diverse communities ● People with disabilities ● Perpetrators ● Police: front line operations and workforce ● Police: leadership, resourcing and organisational systems ● Prevention ● Recovery: health and wellbeing ● Restorative justice for victims of family violence ● Review of family violence-related deaths ● Risk assessment and management ● Rural, regional and remote communities ● Sexual assault and family violence ● Specialist family violence services ● Sustainable and certain governance ● The role of the health system ● The workplace ● Women in prison ● Women working in the sex industry This Submission would like to draw the NSW government’s attention to three of the Victorian reforms as highlighted above: • Court-based responses to family violence in Victoria • Police: front line operations and workforce • Police: leadership, resourcing and organisational systems The forecast implementation date of 31 July, 2021 has been given to Recommendation 61: All family violence matters are heard and determined in specialist family violence Courts.9 As this overarching reform is interdependent with several other recommendations, the Magistrates’ Court of Victoria is undertaking extensive planning on this group of recommendations with the Department of Justice and Regulation to develop legislative and governance changes.
Amendments to establish the Specialist Family Violence Court Division in the Magistrates’ Court Act 2009 commenced on 29 9 State Government of Victoria, “The 227 Recommendations.” 9 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 March, 2019.

There are currently five sites identified to roll out a comprehensive project implementation approach to the Specialist Family Violence Court (SFVC) model.
The five sites are being managed by a project team that oversees the construction updates as well as the implementation of the SFVC service delivery model.10 There are, however reforms that have been implemented in Victoria that could be replicated in NSW that do not require such extensive structural changes to current Local Magistrates Court operations in NSW.
These are recommendations 64, 66 and 67 as detailed below: Recommendation 064: Magistrates’ Court staff hold daily meetings before hearings start in a family violence list.

Implemented.

11 The Magistrates’ Court of Victoria staff hold a daily coordination meeting before hearings begin in a family violence list.
The purpose of the meeting would be to give priority to high-risk cases, ensure that interpreters are available, liaise with legal representatives to manage conflicts, and liaise with applicant and respondent support workers.

.
.

Work on this recommendation involves: ● consulting with stakeholders to agree on policy and the roles of key agencies ● undertaking a co-design process ● undertaking implementation of co-ordination meetings Where the implementation is up to: Daily coordination meetings have been developed in line with best practice guidelines and rolled out across all the headquarter Magistrates’ Courts from April 2018.
The standards for coordination meetings set out in the Family Violence Court Division Operating Procedures (2007) have been adapted to ensure they capture the new family violence landscape, including the family violence Information Sharing Scheme and the Support and Safety Hubs.

The Information Sharing Scheme, which commenced on 26 February 2018, has enabled all relevant information to be shared and appropriate cases given high priority, which has further enhanced the daily coordination meetings.
The coordination meetings include Court staff, Victoria Police, legal services, specialist family violence service providers and applicant and respondent practitioners.

This recommendation relates to the work for Recommendations 62, 65, 67, 68, 73 and 135.

10 Recommendation 061 is ‘in progress’.


Victorian Government, “All family violence matters are heard and determined in specialist family violence Courts – Recommendation Details,” Accessed April 28, 2020, https://w.www.vic.gov.au/familyviolence/recommendations/recommendation- details.html?recommendation_id=196.
11 Victorian Government, “Magistrates’ Court staff hold daily meetings before hearings start in a family violence list,” Accessed April 28, 2020, https://w.www.vic.gov.au/familyviolence/recommendations/recommendation- details.html?recommendation_id=193.

10 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 Recommendation 066: Magistrates receive an affidavit before applying for a family violence intervention order.
Implemented.12 Victoria Police ensure that before applying for a family violence intervention order the relevant Magistrate receives an affidavit (prepared by the Police Prosecutor or civil advocate) specifying: • any previous family violence intervention orders relevant to the affected family member and respondent • whether the respondent is on bail for any offence and the conditions of any such bail • whether any previous family violence intervention orders have been breached • whether there are previous or forthcoming criminal proceedings, and the status of any such proceedings • whether there have been previous family violence incident reports (L17 forms) • • relating to the same parties relevant risk factors relating to the current incident—including a status update on any risk factors described in the L17 relating to the application the family violence intervention orders sought by police and whether the affected family member consents to those orders.
A Victoria Police representative, for example, the Police Prosecutor, a civil advocate or the family violence Court liaison officer, should discuss the particulars of the affidavit with the affected family member before the hearing.

The Victorian Government is liaising with the Magistrates' Court of Victoria and partner agencies to consider a number of reforms to improve information sharing across the family violence system, including between police and Courts.
Reforms for information sharing will include developing a standardised report to support an application for a Family Violence Intervention Order (FVIO) that specifies particular information as recommended by the Royal Commission into Family Violence.

Where the implementation is up to: Victoria Police has developed an affidavit to be completed by police members to support an application for an FVIO.
The affidavit was developed in consultation with Magistrates' Court of Victoria which includes all information listed within the scope of the recommendation and other critical information identified through the project to inform the decision making by Magistrates.

12 Victorian Government, “Magistrates receive an affidavit before applying for a family violence intervention,” Accessed April 28, 2020, https://w.www.vic.gov.au/familyviolence/recommendations/recommendation- details.html?recommendation_id=191.
11 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 Recommendation 067: Magistrates’ Court registry provide the Magistrate a summary from other Courts.
Implemented 13 The Magistrates’ Court of Victoria registry, in all police-initiated applications for family violence intervention orders, provide to the Magistrate a summary indicating the status of any related proceedings in the Children’s Court of Victoria (or vice-versa), the Family Court of Australia and/or the Federal Circuit Court of Australia.

If information is not available from other jurisdictions, this should be stated.
In non-police initiated family violence intervention orders, the Magistrates’ Court registry should also provide the information recommended to be provided by Victoria Police in an application initiated by it.

The Magistrates’ Court registry should also adopt a practice of providing risk assessments made by applicant and respondent support workers to Magistrates as a matter of course.
The Magistrates’ Court is working to make Courts safer and less traumatic for victim survivors by developing innovative approaches to improve the Court experience.

This recommendation relies on the work for other recommendations, particularly Recommendation 66.
In consultation with Victoria Police, the Magistrates’ Court will progress this recommendation by: ● examining the funding and resourcing requirements to implement this recommendation ● undertaking consultation with key stakeholders, including other Court jurisdictions ● identifying system improvements to enable the recommended information sharing ● identifying any requirements for legislative change.
Where the implementation is up to: The implementation of the Family Violence Information Sharing Scheme and the Multi-Agency Risk Assessment and Management Framework during 2018 has underpinned the approach to this recommendation.

The Magistrates’ Court of Victoria has developed best practice guidance for family violence list management, as well as developed operational processes that support Registrars to prepare family violence intervention order Court files.
This has been developed with the safety of women and children at the forefront.

This recommendation has been informed by consultation with the Children’s Court of Victoria, the Family Court of Australia, the Federal Circuit Court of Australia and Victoria Police.

The Magistrates’ Court of Victoria has approached implementation of this recommendation in an integrated manner with other key information sharing recommendations (particularly Recommendations 65, 66 and 136).
This recommendation relies on the work for Recommendations 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 68, 73, 135 and 136.

13 Victorian Government, “Magistrates’ Court registry provide the Magistrate a summary from other Courts,” Accessed April 28, 2020, https://w.www.vic.gov.au/familyviolence/recommendations/recommendation- details.html?recommendation_id=190.
12 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 The Queensland Experience The Queensland Government’s commitment to improving the experience of victim survivors as they progress through the justice system is also evident in the establishment of a specialist domestic violence Court trial in September 2015.
This was in response to the Recommendations in the February 2015 Report of the Queensland Special Taskforce on Domestic and Family Violence.14 The Queensland Southport Domestic and Family Violence Court commenced in 2015 as a trial incorporating elements of other successful Australian and international specialist Court models.
The evaluation of the trial undertaken in 2017 compared the specialist Court to a conventional Court model and found the Southport specialist Court had made strong progress on its short and medium- term process outcomes.15 Significant outcomes include: ● The role of the specialist Magistrates was vital to facilitating collaborative change process in establishing the specialist Court.
● The enhancement of strong collaborative relationships between the Court, domestic violence services, Police Prosecutors and duty lawyers resulted in improved coordination of matters and services.

● Ratings of satisfaction and perceived procedural justness of the process reported by victims was higher at specialist Court compared to the comparison Court.
● Levels of self-reported understanding of Court outcomes for both victims and perpetrators were higher at the specialist Court, compared to the comparison Court (although the findings were more mixed for perpetrators).
● There were indications that perceptions that offenders were being held accountable were higher at the specialist Court compared to the comparison Court.16 The Evaluation did highlight areas for improvement specifically related to the volume of matters appearing before the two specialist Magistrates and resulting delays for contested matters and hearings.
It also noted the need to tailor the specialist approach to domestic and family violence to support diverse communities in more remote areas, particularly Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities.

The outcomes of the trial informed the establishment of specialist DFV Courts in Townsville and Beenleigh.

The work continuing in Queensland focuses on the need for a specialist approach to supporting victims and holding perpetrators accountable.
Collaborative cross agency relationships are key to driving the model as well as investment in modifying the physical environs of the Court to promote victim survivor safety and confidence to participate in the justice process.

14 Queensland Government.

Not Now, Not Ever Report (2015), https://www.csyw.qld.gov.au/campaign/end- domestic-family-violence/about/not-now-not-ever-report.

15 Christine Bond et.

al.


Summary Report: Evaluation of the Specialist Domestic and Family Violence Court Trial in Southport.

(Queensland: Griffith University, 2017), https://www.Courts.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/515430/dfv-rpt-evaluation-dfv-Court-southport- summary-report.pdf.

16 Bond, et al., Summary Report, ii.


13 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 The NSW Experience The Domestic Violence Court Intervention Model (DVCIM) The DVCIM was established as a trial in New South Wales in 2005.

It continues to operate at Wagga Wagga and Campbelltown Local Courts.
The DVICM was first introduced as an interagency program involving the then NSW Attorney General’s Department, the NSW Department of Community Services, the NSW Department of Corrective Services, the Legal Aid Commission of NSW and the NSW Department of Housing.
The objective of the DVCIM was to improve the response of the criminal justice system to domestic violence.17 To achieve this objective the model sought to: ● Improve police evidence gathering in relation to domestic violence ● Improve the efficiency of the Court response to matters of domestic violence ● Provide greater support to victims of domestic violence and ● Improve the management of domestic violence offenders 18 The DVCIM was first evaluated in 2008 by Laura Rodwell and Nadine Smith.19 This Evaluation showed limited evidence of success of the DVICM in terms of police and Local Court outcomes.
The evaluation focused on ● Whether there was any change in the proportion of alleged domestic violence offenders brought before the Courts ● Whether there was any change in Court outcomes and penalties for domestic violence matters and ● Whether domestic violence matters were being dealt with more expeditiously What the Evaluation did find, however, was that the experiences of victim survivors and Court and agency staff did improve: “overall the majority of key stakeholders thought that the DVICM was successful, and that it should be continued and possibly rolled out to additional LACs”.20 In the later DVCIM Evaluation undertaken by Emma M. Birdsey and Nadine Smith in 2012, outcomes measures focused solely on Court and police outcomes.
These examined whether there had been changes since the implementation of the DVCIM, specifically analysing if there were increases in POIs being charged and brought before the Court, with the findings seeing increases.
Birdsey and Smith also found, “There was however little evidence that the DVCIM increased the proportion of domestic violence matters finalised on a plea of guilty; reduced the proportion of domestic violence 17 Emma M. Birdsey and Nadine Smith, “The Domestic Violence Court Intervention Model: A follow-up Study,” Crime and Justice Bulletin, NSW Bureau of Statistics and Research, 155 (2012), https://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/CJB/cjb155.pdf.
18 Birdsey and Smith, “Domestic Violence Court Intervention Model,” 2.

19 Laura Rodwell and Nadine Smith, An Evaluation of the NSW Domestic Violence Intervention Court Model (Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2008), https://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/r58.pdf.

20 Birdsey and Smith, “Domestic Violence Court Intervention Model,” 3.
14 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 matters that were dismissed; increased the proportion of penalties of a supervised bond; or increased the proportion of penalties of imprisonment”.21 Significantly, the experiences of victim survivors and key staff and services working within the DVCIM were not included in the 2012 evaluation: “Other (DVCIM) initiatives, such as victims’ support, offender intervention and the interagency practice elements were not investigated…Key stakeholder interviews and victim surveys were also not repeated”.22 The NSW government need to consider what outcomes measures were used in these early evaluations of the DVCIM before dismissing the model as having limited success and relying upon this data to reject calls from the sector for specialised domestic violence Courts in NSW.
The NSW Domestic Violence Death Review Team The NSW Domestic Violence Death Review Team (DVDRT) is a multi-agency committee that undertakes comprehensive analyses of deaths occurring in a context of domestic violence situations.

Since its establishment in 2010 the DVDRT has produced five reports and made 88 recommendations aimed at improving the response to domestic and family violence in NSW.
The DVDRT identifies issues arising in individual, or across, cases, trends and patterns in quantitative data and highlights limitations or weaknesses in service delivery from its qualitative analysis.
Reports are completed across two yearly cycles, with the ensuing recommendations tabled for government responses.23 The deaths reported by the DVDRT encompass domestic violence related deaths that include domestic violence homicides, and domestic violence related suicides, as well as where fatal accidents are caused by domestic violence.24.
In the NSW DVDRT report for the period 2015-2017, recommendation 7 highlighted the importance of the justice system working more holistically with a client focussed support framework, as well as the importance of adapting the benefits of specialised Court approaches to the existing Local Court operations in NSW.
Resourcing constraints, particularly ensuring consistent practice, geographical issues and the availability of suitably qualified personnel were considered some of the challenges to rolling out specialised DV Courts across NSW.25 The report also went on to recommend: 7.1: That the Attorney General in consultation with relevant stakeholders, consider how the approaches reflected in the Domestic Violence Justice Strategy, such as the application of specialist Court practices in all Local Courts can be further advanced.
7.2: That the NSW Government review the support needs of victims in contested domestic violence matters, and the adequacy of current supports, with the aim of providing consistent support across 21 Birdsey and Smith, “Domestic Violence Court Intervention Model,” 13.

22 Birdsey and Smith, “Domestic Violence Court Intervention Model,” 3.
23 NSW Government, Domestic Violence Death Review Team Report 2017-2019 (Lidcombe: NSW Government, 2020), http://www.coroners.justice.nsw.gov.au/Documents/2017-2019_DVDRT_Report(online).pdf.

24 NSW Govt., DVDRT Report 2017-2019, xv.

25 NSW Government, Domestic Violence Death Review Team Report 2015-2017 (Camperdown: NSW Government, 2017), p. xvi, http://www.coroners.justice.nsw.gov.au/Documents/2015- 2017_DVDRT_Report_October2017(online).pdf.
15 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 NSW.

This should include an examination of the specific needs of Aboriginal women including in relation to attending Court.
7.3: The Attorney General approach the Chief Magistrate to discuss how the expertise of judicial leaders can be harnessed to further improve responses to domestic violence in Courts.26 The NSW government’s responses to the Recommendations of the NSW DVDRT can be found at http://www.coroners.justice.nsw.gov.au/Documents/DVDRT%20Report%202015-17%20- %20Government%20response_received%2029June2018(for%20web).pdf 27 The whole of government response to recommendations 7 (1-3) as reported in 2018 was supported, with the Lead Agency listed as the Department of Justice: In 2018 the Department of Justice will review the Domestic Violence Justice Strategy.
The review will include a focus on improving the Court experience for particularly vulnerable victims, and include consideration of: 1.

How the application of specialist Court practice in Local Courts can be further enhanced.

2.

Support needs of victims in contested domestic violence matters, and the adequacy of current supports including an examination of the specific needs of Aboriginal women attending Court.

3.
3.

How the expertise of judicial leaders can be harnessed to further improve responses to domestic violence in Courts.

Consultation will commence in the second quarter of 2018 and will include key judicial, government and non-government stakeholders as well as service users.

The review will be completed in late 2018.28 While this round of consultations and reforms were being considered by government during the period January 2019-December 2019 another 21 women lost their lives in NSW.
During the same period there were 31,187 reported incidents of domestic violence related assaults, up 5% from the previous year.

22,689 of these victims are recorded as female.

There were 16,050 reported incidents of intimidation, stalking and harassment, up 10.5 % from the previous year.

13,351 of these victims are recorded as female.

There were 16,959 reported incidents of Breach ADVOs, an increase of 12.4 % from the previous year.
13,360 of these victims are recorded as female.29 However, as practitioners in the service system know and as acknowledged by the Attorney General, statistics tell only part of the story.30 There is wide acknowledgement that many victim ‘complainants’ do not proceed to Court.

There are also many victim survivors known to the service sector who do not report incidents to police for fear of being misunderstood or worse, disbelieved; in effect re-traumatised.
Local examples are provided later in this Submission.

26 NSW Govt., DVDRT Report 2015-2017, xvi-xvii.

27 NSW Government, Domestic Violence Death Review Team Report 2015-2017: Government Response (NSW Government, 2018), http://www.coroners.justice.nsw.gov.au/Documents/DVDRT%20Report%202015-17%20- %20Government%20response_received%2029June2018(for%20web).pdf.

28 NSW Govt., DVDRT Report 2015-2017: Government Response, 6-7.
29 Source: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, Domestic Violence Statistics 19Q4.

30 Hunter Women’s Safety Forum, Cameron Park, January 31, 2020.

16 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 The most recent DVDRT Report 2017-2019, released in March 2020, details the progress made by government agencies to implement the Team’s previous Recommendations: Recommendation 7.1: Whole of government update - 2019.

Underway.
Underway.

Expected completion in early 2020.

Details of implementation: The Department of Communities and Justice is currently undertaking a review the Domestic Violence Justice Strategy (DVJS) to explore opportunities to improve justice responses to domestic violence.

This aligns with recommendations 7.1, 7.2, 7.3 and 23.1 of the DVDRT 2015-2017 Report.

The DVJS is expected to be released in early 2020.


Opportunities, challenges and/or consequence: The establishment of the Department of Communities and Justice provides an opportunity to align the DVJS with strategies for other human services systems, e.g.

housing, homelessness, out of home care, child protection, early intervention and targeted intensive services aimed at reducing the risk of children entering care.
Policy progress since recommendation was made: Consultation with peak bodies, government agencies, service providers, victims and perpetrators took place between May 2018 and February 2019.31 Apart from summarising how the new Department of Communities and Justice has been structured and naming existing programs with an intent to align strategies, there is no information in this update that directly addresses the original recommendation.
Specifically, that the Attorney General in consultation with relevant stakeholders, consider how the approaches reflected in the Domestic Violence Justice Strategy, such as the application of specialist Court practices in all Local Courts can be further advanced.

Recommendation 7.2: Whole of government update-2019.

Underway.
Underway.

Details of implementation: The Department of Communities and Justice is undertaking a review of the Domestic Violence Justice Strategy (DVJS) to explore opportunities to improve justice responses to domestic violence.

The review will include how to best support victims including Aboriginal women and consider how existing good practice can be enhanced and what opportunities there are to implement further reform.

The review and development of a new DVJS will be completed in early 2020.
See the response to recommendation 7.1 for further information.

Responding to the unique needs of Aboriginal women, including in relation to attending Court, is also being addressed through a co-design pilot, currently under development by the Department of Communities and Justice and Aboriginal Affairs.

The co-design pilot will develop a trauma-informed and culturally safe pilot for Aboriginal women experiencing domestic and family violence.
The pilot will be co-designed with Aboriginal community groups, Aboriginal women, service users and other stakeholders.

The objectives of the pilot will be to ensure that Aboriginal women feel safer, supported, more empowered and have stronger relationships with the justice system and that the justice system service responses are directly informed by the needs of Aboriginal women.

Stage 1 pilot co-design is expected to finish by the end of 2019.

31 NSW Govt., DVDRT Report 2017-2019, 166-167.


17 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 Opportunities, challenges and/or consequences: See the response to recommendation 7.1.32 In regard to this update, the NDVC welcomes the government’s commitment to developing new ways for Aboriginal women to access justice in NSW.
The principles of the codesign approach to developing this Pilot including Aboriginal practitioners, community groups and users is to be applauded.

We will wait with interest to see how this Pilot is implemented.

The question however remains; given all women in NSW need to be able to access justice safely, will this Pilot or a similar model be extended to victims who identify as non- Aboriginal?
Recommendation 7.3: Whole of government update - 2019 Update: Underway Details of implementation: The Attorney General is continuing to engage with the Chief Magistrate about how to leverage the expertise of judicial leaders to improve responses to domestic violence in Courts.

The Department of Communities and Justice is consulting with representatives from the Chief Magistrates’ Office as part of the review of the Domestic Violence Justice Strategy (DVJS).
The review includes identifying existing good practice in Courts and opportunities for its further enhancement.

The DVJS is expected to be released in early 2020.

The Chief Magistrates’ Office has also been engaged in preparation for the implementation of reforms to the Apprehended Domestic Violence Order Scheme.

These reforms are in response to the review undertaken by the (then) Department of Justice in response to Recommendation 3 of the DVDRT 2015-2017 Report.
The Department of Communities and Justice is leading the implementation of the reforms.

Opportunities, challenges and/or consequences: See the responses to recommendations 3 and 7.1.33 The NDVC eagerly awaits the release of the new NSW Domestic Violence Justice Strategy.

Unfortunately, change is slow in NSW.


We share the frustration expressed in the 2020 DVDRT Report introduction at Chapter 4: “While the Team notes that the NSW Government and relevant agencies have supported the majority of its previous recommendations, it remains that some of these recommendations have not been fully implemented, and there continues to be a lack of clarity around the progress of actions anticipated under other recommendations the Team has made.
While the Team acknowledges that there has been significant reform in the state’s response to domestic violence since this review process was established, some Team members have expressed their frustration that so many years since the death review process became operational, the Team is now effectively re-making recommendations across a number of areas”.34 At pages 136-137 of the Report, the DVDRT reviewed recurring issues with the criminal justice responses to DFV and focused ways to strengthen victims’ access to justice, transparency and accountability within the system.35 Apprehended Domestic Violence Orders (ADVOs) remain a primary arm of the criminal justice response to domestic violence, providing for civil protection orders binding perpetrators of violence 32 NSW Govt., DVDRT Report 2017-2019, 167.
33 NSW Govt., DVDRT Report 2017-2019, 167-168.

34 NSW Govt., DVDRT Report 2017-2019, 52.

35 NSW Govt., DVDRT Report 2017-2019, 136.

18 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 and protecting victims, where a breach of the order constitutes a criminal offence.

In many of the Team’s cases police or victims have applied for ADVOs which do not then proceed to final orders.
In many cases, on review it is not clear why these ADVOs have not proceeded, and the current data capture from the Justice system (through Justicelink) is limited to simply stating that the ADVO was ‘withdrawn/dismissed’.
The Team has discussed the considerable difference between cases being withdrawn by the victim, or cases being dismissed by the Magistrate, and is of the view that unpacking this distinction is necessary to improve the visibility and transparency of why many ADVOs do not proceed to final orders.
The Team has been advised that data is being collected in Justice systems about why ADVOs do not proceed, but this data is not routinely made available or communicated to Court workers on the ground (for instance, workers from the Women’s Domestic Violence Court Advocacy Service, who provide specialist support for victims at Court).
Better understanding the reasons ADVOs are not finalised is important to assessing the overall functioning of the system, and highlighting weaknesses and strengths in the current response.

In light of these issues, the Team is of the perspective that minor amendments to Justicelink are needed to improve – at a basic level – visibility and data around how the criminal justice system is functioning in respect of ADVOs.
However, this should form part of a bigger piece of work aimed at improving transparency around why some ADVOs do not proceed to final orders.

Promoting better understanding of the reasons why orders do not proceed is important to understanding how ADVOs are being used and sought, and making improvements to systems.
Accordingly, the Team recommends: Recommendation 28 That the Department of Communities and Justice identify opportunities to better understand the circumstances in which an Apprehended Domestic Violence Order application or domestic violence related criminal prosecution has been dismissed.
Consideration should be given to improving the functionality of Justicelink to improve recording of the reasons as to why an application has been dismissed.36 This is a crucial and welcome Recommendation and relates directly to the experiences of local practitioners and victim survivors, as detailed in the Case Scenarios included in this Submission.
This Recommendation, however, also needs to consider how services/practitioners who do not have access to Justicelink can understand and communicate ADVO outcomes to victim survivors on their case load.

Victim survivors are in frequent, often daily contact, either face to face or via phone contact with local service practitioners, not police or Victims Services staff.
LCP SAM Coordinators currently attempt to be the conduit for this vital information flow to victim survivors and their support service practitioner/s.

It is also the responsibility of the practitioner, who has a trusting casework relationship with the victim, to help her reconcile the Courts’ decision and help the victim survivor plan the next steps to keep her and her children safe.
Similarly, delays in communicating Court outcomes to victims occur most frequently when victim survivors do not attend Court.

As highlighted in “Sally’s Story” later in this Submission, even when the victim survivor is subject of a SAM, processes for information exchange are dangerously inadequate.

36 NSW Govt., DVDRT Report 2017-2019, 136-137.


19 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 The DVDRT go on to note the importance of disseminating information especially when bail is granted: In a number of the Team’s cases in this reporting period, concerns were raised about the bail notification procedure with respect to domestic violence perpetrators.
In particular, Team members raised concern around victims not being advised that a perpetrator had been granted bail, or information about a perpetrator’s bail status otherwise not becoming known to processes such as the Safety Action Meetings (who take into account a perpetrator’s custodial status when making decisions and plans for victims’ safety).37 The following commentary by the DVDRT on what should occur in NSW is noted by NDVC members.
However, as is the case with so much of the work undertaken with victim survivors, policy does not always translate to practice.

Under the Charter of Victims’ Rights the officer in charge (OIC) of the investigation is obliged to notify victims about perpetrators being granted bail from a NSW Court (local, district or supreme) in a reasonable time.

This is also contained in the NSW Police Force SOPS where it is stated that the OIC is to notify the victim in a ‘timely manner’.
The Team raised concern that what constitutes ‘reasonable’ or ‘timely’ may take into account things such as the OIC having rostered days off, which may in practice result in considerable delay for victims in finding out about a perpetrator’s bail status.

The Team also raised concern that there is no current mechanism by which the Courts inform police (including the OIC) about a perpetrator’s bail status and the OIC is required to find this information out by making independent inquiries.
The issue becomes more complex in relation to proceedings which do not involve the victim and which may be heard in a different Court (e.g.

District Court), and where bail may have been granted by the Court but not immediately entered into the Court system.

The lack of clarity around bail notification is likely to disadvantage victims, as well as victim advocates or specialist workers such as those in the SAMs.
Further, while it would in many ways be ideal for victims to be automatically notified as soon as a perpetrator is granted bail, the Team was of the perspective that it would be more appropriate for any notification to be accompanied by a support referral, such as into a specialist organisation to assist the victim with safety planning.
Accordingly, the DVDRT Team recommends: Recommendation 30: That the NSW Police Force and the Department of Communities and Justice review the process for notifying domestic violence victims of the release of a defendant on bail by Police or a Court, without the victim being present or if the defendant is released from custody at short notice.
The process should link to Safer Pathway and provide for timely notification of victims and ensure they are linked to support services.38 The call for change by the DFV sector It is difficult to ascertain the government’s policy planning agenda in regard to DFV specialisation in Local Courts.

At the Hunter Region Women’s Safety Forum held on January 31, 2020 in Lake Macquarie the NSW Attorney General and Minister for the Prevention of Domestic and Family 37 NSW Govt., DVDRT Report 2017-2019, 138.
38 NSW Govt., DVDRT Report 2017-2019, 138.

20 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 Violence, Mark Speakman, advised attendees there will be DFV ‘evaluations occurring in 2020’.
However, the details are unclear.39 The NDVC is assuming, as many of the key NSW policy and strategy platforms which guide the government‘s response to DFV in NSW are reaching their expiration in 2021, the current ‘evaluations’ will inform the next round of government priorities and strategies, in particular, the Domestic Violence Justice Strategy (DVJS), however there was no explicit reference made to the review of the DVJS by the Attorney General in January.
As frontline practitioners who are all too familiar with the shortcomings in the criminal justice system’s response to DFV, it is increasingly frustrating for NDVC members to see the same themes with similar recommendations being repeatedly put to government in successive DVDRT Reports.
The most recent Report released in March 2020 speaks directly to this fact and is summarised earlier in this Submission at page 18: While the Team acknowledges that there has been significant reform in the state’s response to domestic violence since this review process was established, some Team members have expressed their frustration that so many years since the death review process became operational, the Team is now effectively re-making recommendations across a number of areas.40 Sector peaks across NSW have also been calling for changes to the justice response in NSW for many years.
In 2017, the Redfern Legal Centre produced a Position Paper, Specialist Domestic Violence Courts (Or Court Lists days) in New South Wales supporting the recommendation by the NSW DVDRT that the government consider how approaches reflected in the Domestic Violence Justice Strategy such as the application of specialist Court practice in all Local Courts can be further advanced.41 The Position Paper also referred to the advantages of the Southport Model as well as highlighting the ‘feasibility’ of implementing changes into Local Courts in NSW, where domestic violence list days are already embedded in local practice, with support staff, DVLOs and prosecutors in attendance and Magistrates working to Local Court Practice Note 2 of 2012; with the object of promoting consistency and efficiency in AVO proceedings.42 The NSW Women’s Alliance in their Safe State Campaign leading up to the 2019 election echoed the critical need for changes in the structure and administration of justice for victim survivors in NSW.43 The NSW Women’s Alliance was established in 2012 by a number of NSW peak organisations and state-wide service providers responding to and working to prevent violence against women.44 The Alliance developed the policy platform for A Safe State in the lead up to the 2019 NSW Election to 39 Attendees of this forum included Mark Speakman, NSW Attorney General and Minister for the Prevention of Domestic and Family Violence; Trish Doyle, Shadow Minister for Women and the Prevention of Domestic and Family Violence; Hayley Foster, CEO of Women’s Safety NSW; and several local State Government members.
40 NSW Govt., DVDRT Report 2017-2019, 52.

41 Susan Smith, Specialist Domestic Violence Courts (Or Court Lists Days) in New South Wales, Redfern Legal Centre Position Paper (Redfern, 2017), https://rlc.org.au/sites/default/files/attachments/171117-RLC-Position- Paper_Specialist-Domestic-Violence-Courts-in-NSW.pdf.

42 Smith, Specialist Domestic Violence Courts.

43 See, https://www.safensw.org.au/.

44 See, https://www.dvnsw.org.au/about/history/nsw-womens-alliance/.
21 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 call on all political parties to act to end sexual, domestic and family violence.

This work built upon the Alliance’s previous platform for A Safer State developed in the lead up to the 2015 NSW Election.

Two of the key priorities included in the 2019 Safe State campaign (numbers 4 and 6) are of particular relevance to this Submission and are referenced below.
4): Ensure people experiencing violence can access justice safely Services are not funded enough to give every person who has experienced sexual, domestic and family violence the legal, social and financial support they need to access justice.

Courts are not always safe, and NSW Police sometimes do not respond appropriately to all reports.
Specifically, 4 (c): Establish specialist domestic and family violence Courts (NSW Women’s Alliance, 2019, p. 29).45 6): Be accountable to specialist workers and the wider community Specifically, 6 (b): Implement all recommendations of the NSW Domestic Violence Death Review Team, and 6 (h): Train specialist, mainstream, and government workers, legal practitioners, judicial officers and Court staff to respond to sexual, domestic and family violence in a trauma-informed way.46 No to Violence is the peak body for organisations and individuals working with men to end family violence in Victoria and NSW.
In 2019, No to Violence conducted a regional tour of NSW canvassing the opinions and experiences of front line DFV service staff and community members.

The Listening Tour Report that ensued detailed priority areas focused on working with perpetrators and strengthening collaborative practice across the sector.
Specialist DFV Courts were identified by attendees as a way to increase coordination and management of family violence cases across regional centres.47 As No to Violence is a member of the NSW Women’s Alliance, it also endorsed the recommendations put to the NSW Government in early 2019 in the Safe State campaign, including the call to establish specialist domestic and family violence Courts (A Safe State 4c).
The No to Violence Report detailed costings for government of undertaking a feasibility study into specialist domestic and family violence Courts at $250,000.48 The No to Violence Report also went on to list costings of $10 million over two years for A Safe State priority 6 (h): Train specialist, mainstream, and government workers, legal practitioners, judicial officers and Court staff to respond to sexual, domestic and family violence in a trauma-informed way.49 45 NSW Women’s Alliance, Safe State: Acting to End Sexual, Domestic and Family Violence (2019), p. 29, https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/safensw/pages/41/attachments/original/1540514938/A_Safe_State_ -_Final_Policy_Platform_%28Oct_2018-Mar_2019%29.pdf?1540514938.
46 NSW Women’s Alliance, Safe State, 38 & 42.

47 NSW No to Violence, Listening Tour Report 2019 (2019), p. 9. https://www.ntv.org.au/wp- content/uploads/2019/02/NTV1793_Listening-Tour-Report_screen-ready_FA3.pdf.

48 NSW No to Violence, Listening Tour Report 2019, 13.

49 NSW No to Violence, Listening Tour Report 2019, 13.

22 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 It is unclear what the government response has been to the No to Violence Report.
Women’s Safety NSW is also promoting state-wide reforms that make it safer for women to achieve justice.
In their current campaign Women’s Safety NSW are focusing on: ● Outlawing direct cross examination of domestic violence complainants by their accused ● Providing for all domestic violence matters to be heard in closed Court proceedings ● Providing right of access to audio visual link facilities to give evidence in domestic violence matters ● Increased funding for women’s domestic violence advocacy services to support women through domestic violence hearings and related proceedings ● Requiring domestic violence matters to be heard by specialist Magistrates and judges (encompassing ADVO and domestic violence list days and domestic violence focused Court user forums).50 As is the case with other peak DFV advocacy services in NSW, the NDVC is unsure what consideration the NSW government is giving to the sector Peaks’ Reports and Campaigns.
We can only assume these will assist to inform the new Domestic Violence Justice Strategy due in 2021.

The call for systemic change in the administration of justice within the local Magistrates’ Courts in NSW has been on the sector and political agenda for several years.

The following pages include observations and experiences of NDVC members as well as case scenarios from local victim survivors that further amplify the call for change.
The Local (Newcastle and Lake Macquarie) Experience Local Magistrates’ Courts are busy and often difficult environments for community members to navigate.

Although some Courts may have designated DFV list days or schedules, it is the all too frequent experience of Newcastle and Lake Macquarie support service staff that critical information may not be presented to the Court.
This may occur when Police Prosecutors overlook information provided to them because of time constraints, when the investigating police officer is excused or not in attendance due to leave, when the victim has been told she does not need to attend Court, or worse, when the victim does attend but does not hear her matter being called and is therefore not present in the Courtroom.
This is not a rare occurrence especially given the volume of matters on any list day when the attending WDVCAS or other support service staff or the DVLO are attending to another victim, and may be out of earshot of Court staff and /or when the victim survivor is in the safe room.

The impact of having to be in the same building or room as their abuser is one of the most traumatic experiences victim survivors report when they attend Court.
This may be further complicated by attendance of the extended family or friends of the accused who may threaten and intimidate the 50 Women’s Safety NSW, Annual Report 2018-2019 (Haymarket: Women’s Safety NSW, 2019), p. 13, https://www.womenssafetynsw.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Womens-Safety-NSW-Annual-Report- 2018-19.pdf.

23 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 victim, even if the accused does not directly do so.
Waiting rooms and safe rooms are frequently cramped and do not provide effective mechanisms to know what progress is occurring through Court lists, and as highlighted above, can result in matters proceeding whilst the victim remains waiting in the safe room.

In the event the victim is unable to secure childcare the additional stress of having to entertain a child/ren while their other extended family may be a few feet away can be a deterrent to even attend Court for some women.
The examples in the following pages are actual scenarios recorded directly from local victim survivors and service practitioners.

These experiences not only demonstrate the stress and precarious safety of victim survivors, but their declining confidence in the justice system.

Similar experiences are repeated across the country and are well documented in the literature and research appended in the bibliography.
Practitioner Case Scenario: Basically what happened here was her ex breached the AVO twice, once we got great footage of him breaking into her home (where he assaulted her but so far has not been charged with that offence), the other breach is text evidence of him contacting her when it is a no contact order.

The first breach of break and enter (no assault charge or investigation as he said she assaulted him) he was charged and bailed the same day he broke in and assaulted her.
The second breach for the texts he was charged and given a 7-day jail sentence!

No one Police, other services at the SAMS or even the Superintendent of Police thought there was such a thing (as we spoke about this once they received my complaint).

Our concern is why do ADVOs have written on them in big letters at the top ‘If you breach this order and are convicted you could be jailed for up to 2 years and fined up to $5000’.
For a long time now we have not seen these things happening, I know the new laws are for sentences to be served in the community but what message is it sending to the victims…for god’s sake this man (who is a repeat DV offender with an awful criminal history) knew the cameras were there and broke in in broad daylight while they were all still asleep, 6 children further traumatised by what they saw, this is another issue the Courts are not taking seriously enough…the impact on children witnessing such things.
24 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 The lack of understanding and sensitivity to a victim survivor’s experience of a serious assault is highlighted in the first example.

The important role legal officers as well as Magistrates hold in ensuring proceedings do not further harm victim survivors cannot be overstated.
This is why there have been repeated calls to have the Judicial Commission of NSW and legal practitioners working in DFV across local Magistrate and Family Law Courts participate in ongoing training in understanding DFV.
As noted in the NSW DVDRT Report 2015-2017 commentary on their previous reports and recommendations: “In this review period the team considered the tensions that arise between the incident-focused operation of the justice system and the repeated patterns of behaviour characteristic of domestic and family violence.
Under a criminal law model each episode of violence is examined in isolation and this can result in patterns of domestic violence being misconstrued or inadequately addressed”.51 In describing the responsibilities of legal practitioners working with families experiencing DFV, the DVDR Team’s earlier 2013-2015 Report recommended: “That the NSW DVDRT work collaboratively with the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW), The NSW Bar Association, the Law Society of NSW and the NSW Public Defender’s Office to develop appropriate strategies to better support lawyers in recognising and responding to domestic violence”.52 Similarly, the effectiveness of ADVOS, particularly the length and sufficiency of short term (6 -12 month ADVOS) in cases involving significant histories of violence was also questioned and also informed the DVDRT recommendation (3).
Importantly, the DVDR Team go on to reinforce while the functionality and resourcing of Court systems is a pressing consideration, the safety of victims is key and the Team was of the perspective that practice change was warranted in this area.53 As a result, the following Recommendation (3) was made: That the Attorney General consider mechanisms to ensure that ADVOs are made for an appropriate duration, including: ● Increasing the default length of ADVOs from 12 months to a longer duration to promote enhanced victim safety and ● Requesting that the Judicial Commission of NSW update the Local Bench Book or other education and training to invite judicial officers to consider factors relevant to setting an appropriate duration for an ADVO (including any period of time the offender is in custody) to ensure that the person in need of protection is protected upon the defendant’s release.54 The Whole of Government Response (2018) to this Recommendation was supported, with a review undertaken on the length of ADVOS, including the timing of breaches and related offences and the 51 NSW Govt., DVDRT Report 2015-2017, 82.
52 NSW Govt., DVDRT Report 2015-2017, 86.

53 NSW Govt., DVDRT Report 2015-2017, 87.

54 NSW Govt., DVDRT Report 2015-2017, 87.

25 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 period of time an offender was in custody.
Further, the review included consideration of approaches in other jurisdictions.55 In the DVDRT 2017-2019 (2020) Report released in March 2020, the following progress on the implementation of Recommendation 3 is noted: Recommendation 3: Whole of government update-2019.

Underway- Legislation was passed on 22 November 2018.
Details of implementation: The 2018 ADVO review led to the development of key reforms to ensure ADVOs are made for an appropriate duration including: • extending the default period for which a final ADVO for adult defendants will be in force to two years.

• providing guidance on the duration of an ADVO that should be sought by an applicant for a final ADVO.

• setting out the factors to be considered by a Court in determining the duration of a final ADVO.
• extending the period of an ADVO following an adult defendant’s release from custody.

• enabling police to vary an existing ADVO in certain circumstances.

• allowing orders in relation to adult defendants to be made for an indefinite period.

These reforms were introduced in the Crimes Legislation Amendment Act 2018.

Some legislative amendments are required in late 2019 and 2020 to clarify the operation of the reforms.
While the legislation is yet to commence, the NSW Police Force has implemented a practice change and has commenced applying for ADVOs for a two-year period by default.

Opportunities, challenges and/or consequences: In preparing for implementation, agencies have identified a number of challenges that require minor legislative amendments.
The Department of Communities and Justice is consulting with stakeholders to resolve operational challenges.56 The NDVC welcomes the legislative changes announced in March 2020 to the administration of ADVOs.

Specifically extending the default period to two years, options to seek indefinite ADVOs and including space on ADVO application forms for applicants to state the reasons why an extended duration is being sought.
The NDVC is however mindful of the importance of monitoring how these changes will be implemented.

It is unclear if there is in fact a review and monitoring component or if, as has been the case in previous years, with previous legislative changes, these reforms will be administered in an ad-hoc and potentially inconsistent manner.
It is one thing to enact legislative and procedural change, however the focus needs to be on monitoring the implementation on the ground by way of sound data collection from NSWPF and Local Courts.

55 NSW Govt., DVDRT Report 2015-2017: Government Response, 44.

56 NSW Govt., DVDRT Report 2017-2019, 63.

26 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 Victim Survivor Case Scenario - Sally’s story: He’s breached AVOs more than 20 times.
The relationship ended with John after Jane was born in 2016.

One night I fled the house with Jane and some nappies, he followed me and tried to rip Jane out of my arms.

I didn’t know what to do.

I sat at a bus stop.

A lady helped me until the police came.

They took a statement from me and the lady.

John was back at the house.

I had to go and get formula from him.

This was the start of the first AVO application, we went to Court two weeks later and FaCS became involved.
I was five minutes late to Court and went directly to the safe room.

I didn’t know what was happening and didn’t realise that my matter was being heard in the Court.

A lady came into the safe room and said to me ‘your matter’s just been heard’.

The conditions were varied to allow him to come to the house.

I had no say.

Through 2016 John would come inside the house when I wasn’t there; he would leave notes, he would hide in the house, in the bedrooms.
Police at the time tried to get the AV0 conditions varied back to what they should’ve been because FaCS were involved.

John said he was prepared to work with them (FaCS).

I started seeing Family Functioning (Therapy) Service and started to see issues with him.

FaCS removed me and the boys into refuges.

John would see me at the local shops and follow me.

In September 2018 he broke into my house at 4 am.

He’d been in the roof and had turned the power off, he knew I had cash.
He came down, into my bedroom and punched me in the face, my nose was bleeding but the girls were in bed so I didn’t want to scream too much.

He punched me in the face again, I felt a white flash of pain.

Emma was in bed screaming.

I didn’t go to the neighbours but went to a public phone box.

The police came around 5.30 am.

They found him and he was arrested for other things; driving offences and theft.

The police asked me what happened to my eye, but at that stage John wasn’t in handcuffs.
I was scared as I knew he was watching what I said.

The police said to me we are going to let him say goodbye to the girls.

He was allowed to cuddle them and the police then took him in a paddy wagon.

The police never took a statement from me about my face.

They didn’t come back to check on me.

27 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 Sally’s Story continued: “John went to jail, but he was out a couple of months later, in December 2018.
He broke into my house again only 12 hours after being released from jail.

That night I screamed loudly because I knew he was going to hurt me.

The neighbours heard me, knew it was John and chased him off.

The police came and picked him up fairly quickly”.

(Note; Sally was referred to the X Safety Action Meeting at Serious Threat and a Safety Plan ensued).

“John went back to jail and was released again in July 2019.

He was supposed to be in until September, but he got a reduced sentence on appeal.
I didn’t know he was appealing the sentence and didn’t go to Court”.

(Note; SAM members were not advised this matter was going back to Court on appeal, therefore there was no liaison with the Police Prosecutor to advocate strong opposition be put to the Court for the appeal to be dismissed).

“I received text messages a few hours after his release over the weekend.

The police and my support workers discovered it was coming from his phone and he was again charged with breaching the AV0.
When the matter went back to Court that charge was dismissed as the judge couldn’t be convinced John was intentionally contacting me.

He argued through his solicitor that he was intending to text his other kids’ mother, not me.

But why would you be sending multiple texts in the early hours of the morning to arrange a visit with them, it’s ridiculous.

The Police Prosecutor didn’t seem to know the full story and so that charge was dismissed”.
Note: On this occasion when John returned to Court Members of the SAM anticipated Sally’s ex- partner would be incarcerated due to this Breach and his history.

However, the investigating police officer was excused on the morning the matter returned to Court.

The Police Prosecutor was not adequately prepared and failed to highlight to the Court crucial details such as the volume and time the texting took place, which was in the early hours of the morning.

The matter was dismissed.


The practitioner who was in attendance that day at Court with Sally continues to support Sally and her children.

The other services involved with this family are continually alert to the potential that Sally’s ex-partner could harm her again.

In effect he has been emboldened by the failure of the justice system to hold him to account.
The lack of a formal mechanism to flag matters to the Local Court that are subject of a SAM and where a Safety Plan has been developed can result in Court outcomes that continue to place victim 28 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 survivors at ongoing serious threat.

These include examples, such as Sally’s where repeated ADVO Breaches and, importantly, their impact on victims, are not considered by the Court.
The seriousness of some repeat offenders’ behaviours is sometimes overlooked, and the local service providers are left to hope the victims are not harmed or killed during adjournments, particularly when perpetrators are given bail when the expectation of the SAM and victim is that he will be incarcerated.

There have been examples where perpetrators not only Breach ADVO conditions but also their existing Parole Conditions.
The expectation of both victim survivors and service staff when this occurs is that offenders will be returned to prison whilst their matter is adjourned.

When this does not transpire, it would be useful if the SAM members were provided communication from the Court Registrar that day as to the rationale the Court relied upon to reach its decision.
If the victim survivor does not attend Court (as she may have been advised not to by police), currently the local services working with the victim survivor rely on a clunky information exchange process to determine what has occurred.

This usually involves trying to speak to the Court Registrar, the SAM LCP Coordinator, the DVLO, WDVCAS staff or Community Corrections staff.
Although the Corrective Services Victims Register is intended to provide information to victim survivors, as was the case with Sally; unless the perpetrator is convicted of an ADVO breach, victims are not eligible for inclusion on the Victims Registry.

The victim survivor may be the last to know what has taken place at Court and as Sally’s case demonstrates, this can leave women feeling disappointed, confused and unsafe.

Sally’s Story continued: It depends which Judge you get at Court.
Some are good, some understand: ‘oh yeah, she’s trying to get away’.

But mostly they need to understand DV.

They need to understand it’s not black-and-white, there’s so much grey.

It’s like they just don’t know, there’s a lack of empathy and understanding of the scale of incidences, from medium to severe situations.

I knew it was safer to have him somewhere around than for him to completely disappear.
And I need to be taken seriously; not to be judged for giving him chances in the past, for the relationships with the kids.

It starts to mess with your head.

I feel like saying you don’t understand how unsafe I am.

He’s getting away with it.

It’s making him angry and me more unsafe.

The Courts and police have put me at more danger than what I was when he was around.

Now I do feel safer with an alarm and cameras than going to the police or the Court.
Note: the client referred to in the following Practitioner Case Scenario is “Sally”; she bravely intervened to help a neighbour who was being attacked.

This incident took place during the same month as Sally was attending Court on her own ADVO matter.
29 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 Practitioner Case Scenario: As you will know I recently supported a client to attend X Local Court (Criminal Jurisdiction) for a hearing where she had been subpoenaed to attend as a witness as she had seen the defendant assault her neighbour and subsequently made a statement.
At the hearing the Magistrate was quite clear that he wouldn’t consider incarceration as the defendant’s solicitor argued that it was ‘only a common assault; the lowest level assault’, despite the PINOP receiving facial bruising from being punched in the face multiple times.

Community Corrections appeared to write a scathing report of the defendant also according to the Magistrate and the defendant had been incarcerated for similar offences for a four month period previously.
In light of this, the Magistrate was happy for the defendant to be placed on an Intensive Corrections Order.

I was told this week by my client the defendant breached the ADVO within hours of the hearing finishing at Court.

He reportedly made a phone call threatening to kill the PINOP.

The PINOP reported this to Police and apparently the defendant is now in custody.

Note: The following Practitioner Case Scenario is referring to Sally again.
This details the re-emerging concerns of the local SAM service representatives in early 2020.

The scenario illustrates the effectiveness of cross agency information sharing and collaboration under the Safer Pathway reforms.

Unfortunately, it also clearly demonstrates the need to include Local Courts and the State Parole Authority in the Safer Pathway framework.
30 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 Practitioner Case Scenario: Sally was added to a recent X Safety Action Meeting (SAM) agenda as Sally was again assessed at serious threat from her ex-partner.
The SAM heard Sally’s ex-partner was not complying with his parole conditions including entering the exclusion zone (to protect Sally) as recorded by his electronic monitoring device; he is now of no fixed place of abode having been asked to vacate the family home by his mother and he is not attending his drug treatment program.
Given his electronic monitoring device is scheduled to be removed in a few weeks’ time and his previous repeated patterns of non-compliance with Court orders, including attempts to harm Sally, there will be an application made for revocation of parole in the first instance.

As the SAM agreed the parole revocation could not be assured, arrangements were made to have Sally and her children relocated temporarily whilst her housing transfer was expedited as a matter of urgency.
John’s parole was not revoked and his electronic monitoring ceased as per the original Orders.

He did however remain subject of the ADVO conditions and was flagged for monitoring by the NSW Police DV High Risk Offender Team.

Sally has been relocated with her children to another area.

Ongoing therapeutic work continues with Sally and her children to help them recover from the trauma they have all experienced.
Sally’s story is perhaps one of the most disturbing examples of victim re-traumatisation seen locally.

If components of the Victorian Family Violence framework for supporting victims at Court were operational in NSW, the following could have occurred: An Evidentiary Affidavit supplied from a ‘client advocate’ detailing Sally’s circumstances regarding her children’s experiences and the intensive supports being provided to them by the local services would have provided the Court important context.
The Police Prosecutor’s task to demonstrate the increasing seriousness of the offender’s escalating behaviours would also have been made simpler.

If a Coordination Meeting had occurred on the mornings Sally was at Court prior to the start of the day’s list Court staff, legal representatives and the Police Prosecutor would have been aware of what evidence was available to them for the information of the Court and any safety concerns for Sally’s attendance at Court would have been flagged.
Support staff similarly would have been aware of the importance of communicating the estimated timeline of the day’s proceedings so Sally had some understanding of what time her matter would be heard.

If victims were able to give evidence outside the Courtroom, Sally would not have experienced the added stress of facing her perpetrator and his family and friends in the Court room and surrounds.
This would also remove the potential for women like Sally to miss being “called into the Court room” and in effect be denied the opportunity to participate in their own proceedings.

31 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 Enhanced Safer Pathway responses Changes to improve information exchange between Police and the SAM Local Co- ordination Point (LCP) with Local Courts may enable justice to be more effectively administered to victim survivors.
At present the LCP disseminates SAM Minutes and Safety Plan Actions to SAM attendees following every SAM.

If this information was also electronically transmitted to the Local Court Registrar and Police Prosecutor from the LCP when a matter is due in Court that fortnight, the level of threat to the victim survivor posed by the Person Of Interest (POI) would be evident.

This is included as a key Recommendation of this Submission at page 52.
The local DFV sector understands the demands placed on local police to present the best evidence possible when investigating DFV matters and when seeking ADVOs in our Local Courts.

The following section of this Submission looks at NSW Police Force (NSWPF) policies and practices in responding to DFV at a state-wide and local level.

Consideration is also given to relevant Victorian Policing reforms and how they could translate to improving police responses to DFV in NSW.
The recommendations in this Submission echo some of the themes emerging in the most recent NSW DVDRT Report, particularly the need for local police to be embedded in the local DFV service system.

Ultimately victim survivors will be better served by our Courts if their stories are accurately and comprehensively presented by police.

This however is predicated on improved police training and ultimately requires a commitment from government to increase resourcing of the NSWPF.
32 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 The call for a Dedicated NSW Police Force Unit or Command that is solely responsible for ongoing DFV education, training and monitoring of victims’ experiences with NSW Police Police are often the first responders to emotionally charged, volatile and distressing incidents of domestic and family violence.
There is a critical need for enhanced training that needs to be ongoing for police to be able to work effectively in keeping victim survivors and their children safe whilst ensuring police are supported in their work.

The Victorian Experience Victorian government initiatives to confront domestic and family violence appear exponentially more advanced than NSW, even prior to the Victorian Royal Commission into Family Violence in 2016.
The realisation that police priorities and practice needed to shift has been fundamental in driving change in Victoria for the past fifteen years.

As the gatekeepers of the criminal justice system, police are critical in shaping the community understandings of crime.

If the police don’t take a crime seriously, it’s likely the public won’t either.

Until the 1980s criminal assault in the home was, in police parlance, generally considered to be “just a domestic”.
Those now labelled perpetrators of family violence were seen as having gone “a little too far with the missus”.

When women called police for help, officers either did not attend or did not intervene to protect the woman or arrest the perpetrator.
Once a woman calls for help and does not receive it, or has the abuse trivialised or blamed on her actions, she’s unlikely to call again.57 In 2004, under the newly appointed Victorian Police Commissioner Christine Nixon, a violence against women strategy was published, from this a Code of Practice was developed that included a requirement that police prioritise responding to family violence calls.
The code has continued to evolve and is known as the Code of Practice for the Investigation of Family Violence.

There is an evident commitment to ongoing evaluation and review in Victoria.

The most recent Edition of this code (Edition 3 V4, 2019) is currently under review.58 In 2015 Victoria established Australia’s first Family Violence Command to assist Victoria Police to develop a more effective response to family violence.
The command acts as a central point of accountability for family violence within Victoria.59 The Victorian Police Family Violence Command is responsible for combating family violence, sexual assault and child abuse.

The focus on victim 57 Jude McCulloch et al., (2017).

“Finally, police are taking family violence as seriously as terrorism,” The Conversation, Accessed April 28, 2020, https://theconversation.com/finally-police-are-taking-family-violence- as-seriously-as-terrorism-88939.
58 Victoria Police, “Code of Practice for the Investigation of Family Violence,” 3.4.

(2019), https://www.police.vic.gov.au/code-practice-investigation-family-violence.

59 See, Victorian Law Reform Commission, www.lawreform.vic.gov.au.
33 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 centric policing when responding to DFV is embedded in the Code of Practice for the Investigation of Family Violence.60 The Outcomes described in 1.3 of the Code detail the three main functions police have in responding to family violence: 1.

Maximise the safety and support to those involved, 2.
Identify and investigate incidents of family violence and prosecute persons accused of criminal offences arising from family violence, and 3.

Assist in the prevention and deterrence of family violence in the community by responding to family violence appropriately.

The Code goes on to provide detailed direction to police in how to respond appropriately.
For instance, at Chapter 2.3 every reported incident details Compulsory Police Action which includes: Undertake a family violence risk assessment which incorporates but is not limited to the background and identification of the recent pattern of violence, recognition of risk and vulnerability factors and the victim’s own assessment of their level of fear.
Identify the primary aggressor and where physical violence has occurred assess if it is likely that someone has been acting in self defence.61 The Victorian Police Risk Assessment and Risk Management Police Options Model, as outlined in Chapter 3 of the Code of Practice, focuses on the importance of identifying the primary aggressor and instructs police on undertaking a risk assessment that informs how the DFV matter will be managed beyond simply responding to a “call out” to a one off incident.
Understanding how to respond upon arrival at a DFV scene is critical practice training for police.

Victim survivors often report by the time police arrive at their home, the perpetrator may have calmed enough to present to police as lucid and reasonable.

This is particularly dangerous for victim survivors who may be fearful of telling police what has occurred knowing there will be reprisals from the perpetrator after police depart the scene.
Perpetrators skilled in coercive controlling behaviours may also be able to convince attending police there is actually nothing for them to investigate.

Or worse, convince police that in fact the victim is the unreasonable, aggressive and violent party.

This Submission includes local case scenario examples where this has occurred.

The family violence risk assessment and risk management process in Victoria has become an integral part of informing decisions on how best to assist Affected Family Members.
A Family Violence Risk Assessment and Management Report (VP Form L17) is completed for every family violence incident and interfamilial-related sexual offence and child abuse reported to police.
The primary purpose of the L17 is to help guide police through a complex risk assessment and risk management process which includes: identifying and recording the most relevant evidence-based risk factors and indicators; ensuring that decisions by police or others regarding the safety and welfare of AFMs are well informed; making a structured assessment on the likelihood of future family violence; and determining the most appropriate risk management strategy.
Using this process can also help the AFM feel safer and enhance their confidence in police intervention.

It can subsequently lead to the AFM disclosing more about the abuse and participating more fully in the investigation.62 60 Victoria Police, “Code of Practice,” 39.

61 Victoria Police, “Code of Practice,” 15.

62 Victoria Police, “Code of Practice,” 23.


34 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 The NSW Experience There have been numerous Reports, Submissions and Evaluations undertaken in NSW over the past decade that evidence the rationale underpinning this Submission for enhanced police training.

This training needs to be given the highest priority as rates of police attendance as first responders to incidents of DFV are increasing.
Despite the priority given to improving police responses to DFV in Victoria, the evidence presented to the Victorian Royal Commission into Family Violence (2016) demonstrated the ongoing prevalence of attitudes toward DFV held by some police that were seriously undermining the potential to keep victims safe.

It could be argued, given NSW governments have not given the same priority as Victoria to improving police responses to DFV, there is even more work to be done in NSW.
The importance of police responding in a way that is victim-centric and holistic, in that police consider the wider circumstances and relationship dynamic rather than simply attending an isolated “incident”, is critical in shifting practice.

The primary focus of enhanced training in NSW needs to replicate Victoria’s example and embed police understanding of identifying the primary aggressor when attending incidents of DFV and the dynamics of coercive control in intimate relationships.
The current practice in NSW has resulted in victims being mistakenly identified as aggressors due to the attending police focus on establishing a victim and a perpetrator.

The use of the Domestic Violence Safety Assessment Tool (DVSAT) is often inconsistently applied and, as highlighted in the 2019 Safer Pathway Evaluation Report (included here at pages 36-38), some police report limited training and low confidence in applying it.
As highlighted in previous pages the NSW Women’s Alliance (2019) A ‘Safe State’ Campaign also called for enhanced police training, specifically at their Recommendations; 4(g): Train NSW Police Officers to respond appropriately and consistently to breaches of Apprehended Violence Orders (AVOs) and 4(h): Train NSW Police Officers on how to identify a person who is the predominant aggressor of domestic and family violence.63 Successive NSW Domestic Violence Death Review Team (DVDRT) Reports have also repeated the need for ongoing improvements to police training and support when attending DFV incidents.
In the DVDRT Report 2015-2017 Recommendations 2.1 and 2.2 clearly identified the need for changes to the way police respond.

Recommendation 2.1: That the NSW Police Force reviews how it captures, records and displays data on domestic violence events with a view to making appropriate changes that would support operational police to view the incident holistically and in the context of the history of the parties and relationship.
This will assist police to make informed decisions as to what action to take in the context of the incident they are dealing with.64 63 NSW Women’s Alliance, Safe State, 27.

64 NSW Govt., DVDRT Report 2015-2017, xviii.
35 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 In the NSW Government’s 2018 Response to the NSW DVDRT Report (2015-2017), Recommendation 2.1 was supported.65 In the DVDRT 2017-2019 (2020) Report the following implementation of Recommendation 2.1 is summarised: Details of implementation: Since this recommendation, the NSW Police Force (NSWPF) Domestic & Family Violence Team reviewed the capture, recording and display of data within COPs.
As a result, a number of changes within the existing COPs system have been implemented.

Police are now able to view a ‘DV Summary’ that displays if a person of interest has a domestic violence (DV) history, which assists Police to make informed decisions as to what action to take.

Pre-filled DV narrative: A large portion of the narrative is now pre-filled from the incident field/Computer Aided Dispatch message and the DV Safety Assessment Tool (DVSAT).
This information is also included in the Apprehended Domestic Violence Order (ADVO) application to assist the Magistrate.

Alignment of ADVO conditions and bail conditions: Changes have been made to align the ADVO and bail conditions, which allows for accurate and complementary conditions to be imposed on DV offenders for the protection of victims.
Allow for DV Events where there is no charge or ADVO resulting to be completed in the field on tablet (‘Mobipol’) devices: Police record over 80,000 DV ‘No- Offence detected’ events per year.

Enhancements commenced in June 2019 to allow police to complete a large number of DV events, including the DVSAT, while at the scene and to provide the victim with the reference number straight away.
Opportunities, challenges and/or consequences: NSWPF has made these changes to support frontline police to make informed decisions by increasing the information available to them and reducing the time spent on the input of data.
66 Recommendation 2.2 of the DVDRT 2015-2017 Report was also Supported: The DVDRT identify real life case studies which demonstrate issues/difficulties of identifying domestic violence as a complex pattern of behaviours and supply these to the NSW Police Force together with relevant commentary.
That the NSW Police Force incorporate these real-life case studies into the police training regime.67 The Implementation of Recommendation 2.2 is also summarised in the DVDRT 2017-2019 (2020) Report and is listed as underway: Details of implementation: Both the DVDRT Secretariat and the NSW Police Force support this recommendation.
The NSW Police Force already uses real life case studies in its training programs offered at the Police Academy, as well as in the ongoing education and training of police officers.

These programs are updated as necessary with new and more current case studies.

The DVDRT Secretariat will, within the next 6 months, supply the NSW Police Force with relevant case studies drawn from across section of metropolitan, regional, rural and remote locations, for their potential inclusion in the relevant courses.
65 NSW Govt., DVDRT Report 2015-2017: Government Response, 1.

66 NSW Govt., DVDRT Report 2017-2019, 161-162.

67 NSW Govt., DVDRT Report 2015-2017, xviii.


36 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 The DVDRT Secretariat is working with the NSW Police Education and Training Command to determine how to incorporate learnings from the case studies into the revised post-Academy training material.68 Safer Pathway Evaluation and ongoing Police Training The NDVC acknowledge the NSW Police Force Education and Training Command on progressing this work.
The issue, however, is the ongoing annual training program being planned for police in NSW.

Ongoing regular training that transfers knowledge into sound practice at the local (station) level is also required.

It is unclear what the new training encompasses.

To further support police officers in the complex and challenging work of responding to DFV, training also needs to include principles of critical reflection.
This is embedded in professional practice support provided by agencies to staff working in the local DFV sector.

In the Safer Pathway Evaluation: Final Report (2019), specifically at Chapter 3, “Implementation: 4.2 Training and Support for police”, the need for more comprehensive and ongoing training, especially for General Duties Police emerged.

The police who participated in the Evaluations’ Focus Groups demonstrated a range of attitudes and understanding of the Safer Pathway Reforms.
The most concerning of these are the inconsistent experiences police reported of their training in the use of the Domestic Violence Safety Assessment Tool (DVSAT) and of their attitudes toward using it.69 As a result, the following Safer Pathway Evaluation Recommendations have been outlined: Recommendation 7: Strengthen the adequacy and availability of training in DFV, Safer Pathway and the DVSAT for police as part of ongoing training.
The training should cover DFV dynamics and coercive control, provide support in developing skills and approaches to ask difficult questions and make clear the role of the safety assessment in prioritising a multi-agency service response to victims of DFV.70 The need to shift police officers’ traditional operational focus of their role from ‘investigating a crime” to include “assessing risk for victims” when attending DFV incidents requires ongoing training and support.
The Safer Pathway Evaluation revealed a range of attitudes toward the requirement to use the DVSAT and of its purpose: ‘Some police reported a sense of alienation from their work and felt as though they had not been given a reasonable explanation of why they were expected to incorporate the administration of the DVSAT into their response to DFV incidents….
Some officers revealed they were not made aware of the 12-point threshold for a serious threat rating’ and ‘Officers expressed a desire to know more about the process that follows their response to an incident, particularly the outcomes of the DVSATs they administer’.71 68 NSW Govt., DVDRT Report 2017-2019, 161-162.

69 ARTD Consultants, Safer Pathway Evaluation Final Report (2019), pp.

32-33. https://www.artd.com.au/news/safer-pathway-evaluation-released/.

70 ARTD, Safer Pathway Evaluation, 33.


71 ARTD, Safer Pathway Evaluation, 72.

37 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 The following are the Responses to some key Recommendations of the Safer Pathway Evaluation Final Report 2019.
72 Safer Pathway government partner agencies who participated in the Review and in developing these Responses include: NSW Police Force, Legal Aid NSW, Victim Services, FaCS, NSW Health, Corrective Services NSW, Department of Education, and Safer Pathway non- government partner agencies.

Recommendation 7 (outlined above) was Supported.


Recommendation 8: Explore additional opportunities and mechanisms for information sharing and cross- learning for LCP/LSS staff, including reviewing and promoting participation in local DFV interagency meetings in the areas in which their clients live was Supported in principle.
Safer Pathway Evaluation Recommendation 16 was also Supported: NSWPF ensure that training for police includes: ● The role of the safety assessment in investigation of an incident and in referral into and prioritisation of victims within Safer Pathway.

● DFV dynamics and coercive control, identifying victims and perpetrators of DFV in complex situations, and identifying and assessing male victims of DFV.
However as highlighted previously, the NDVC is unclear what the current General Duties Police training program includes in respect of DFV.

Anecdotal reports from some local police officers and information presented by the Northern Region Domestic Violence Coordinator at the Hunter Women’s Safety Forum in January 2020 indicate there is a new training focus on helping police understand how childhood trauma impacts adults and police are being encouraged to work from a trauma informed perspective.
If NSW police, however, are only receiving block training on an annual or biannual basis, without ongoing ‘on the job’ skills consolidation, opportunities to effectively embed training into practice will be lost.

The NDVC is also unclear as to how police training needs are identified and progressed from local stations to Districts that then go on to inform regional and central police training priorities.
The role of the Police Training Unit in disseminating information on police training priorities to the service sector and allowing input is also unknown.

It appears there is a significant role for local Domestic Violence Liaison Officers (DVLOs) to inform local police training priorities.
The NSW Police Force (2018) Code of Practice for the NSW Police Force response to Domestic and Family Violence lists descriptions of the roles and functions key police personnel undertake.73 DVLOs are specialist officers, often part of a DV Team in a Police Area Command (PAC) or Police District (PD).
This specialist role provides support to other police by providing vital linkages with 72 Women NSW, Response to ARTD Safer Pathway Evaluation Report - Lead Agencies (Strawberry Hills: NSW Government, 2019), https://www.women.nsw.gov.au/download?file=650329.
73 NSW Police Force, Code of Practice for the NSW Police Force Response to Domestic and Family Violence (Parramatta: NSW Government, 2018), https://www.police.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/165202/Code_of_Practice_for_the_NSWPF_resp onse_to_Domestic_and_Family_Violence.pdf.

38 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 community issues and concerns, information and intelligence, while forming partnerships for victim support and follow up.
Responsibilities include: (not all are listed here) ● Where local programs/supports are in place, ensure agreed protocols are followed ● Conduct a quality assurance of domestic and family violence related events and identify any deficiencies by the investigating officer and or any issues in the subsequent verification by the Supervisor.

DVLOs bring these deficiencies to the notice of the Supervisor and the investigating officer.
● Maintain liaison with support agencies or services as well as NSWPF Liaison Officers e.g.

Gay and Lesbian Liaison Officers (GLLOs), Aboriginal Community Liaison Officers (ACLOs), Multicultural Community Liaison Officers (MCLOs) to ensure consistency and continuity of the victim follow up process.

● Ensure a detailed list of appropriate services and their role within the Command is supplied to all Police within the Command.
● Keep police abreast of the latest legislative changes and research in domestic and family violence and bring such changes to the attention of police within the Command.

These responsibilities do not include the operational duties a DVLO also has to undertake during their shift, specifically taking victim statements, arresting offenders and attending Court on their own matters as well as providing support at Court during DV List Days.
The NDVC would argue the role of the DVLOs in Newcastle and Lake Macquarie is particularly onerous, with the additional expectations they provide updates to the local SAMs and follow up actions as directed by the SAM Chair.

In effect it is entirely unrealistic to expect that the current number of DVLOs in Newcastle and Lake Macquarie (8) can also fulfil the responsibilities of their role as outlined in the NSW Police Force Code of Practice above.
Similarly, the role of the NSW Police Force Region Domestic Violence Coordinators (RDVCs) is too broad and the position is not adequately resourced.

There are only two RDVCs covering the entire Northern Region from the Central Coast in the south to the Tweed in the north.
As a result, there is little allowance for this position to be embedded in the local service system landscape, as evidenced by the inability of the RDVC to regularly attend DFV Interagency Meetings or develop ongoing professional networks in the Newcastle and Lake Macquarie area.

The role of the RDVC is that of a senior officer position, whose role is to contribute to the development of a more integrated, coordinated response to domestic and family violence.
The complexity of domestic and family violence requires a multi-agency response and partnerships with other key agencies on a regional basis are strengthened through the RDVC.

The RDVCs work closely with PACs/Police Districts, DVLOs, and develop community-based solutions to address the prevalence of domestic and family violence.

39 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 RDVCs engage with operational managers in key partner agencies (e.g.
Family and Community Services, Health, Department of Justice) and specialist providers, in relation to the delivery of local and regional services in a whole of government approach to domestic and family violence.74 As well as contributing to developing an integrated, coordinated police response, as outlined above, the RDVC is also responsible for contributing to corporate monitoring.
RDVCs assist Commanders to monitor operational performance and trends within the PAC/Police District to improve the PAC/Police District response to domestic and family violence.
This includes the provision of strategic support and advice to CMU officers to help identify repeat offenders and victims and develop appropriate strategies with the aim to reduce domestic and family violence, prevent re-offending and referring victims and families to ongoing support.75 It is evident the role of the NSW Police RDVCs is considerable, however, as highlighted previously, there are only two RDVC positions across the Northern Region.
There is one RDVC who is required to cover the Districts of Newcastle City, Lake Macquarie, Hunter Valley, Port Stephens-Hunter, Brisbane Water and Tuggerah Lakes.

The NSW Police Force, Performance and Program Support Command (2018) Domestic and Family Violence Policy also references the importance of local connections with agencies and services working to address perpetrator behaviour and support victims and their children.

This document further outlines the NSW Police Force DFV Corporate structure.
As well as outlining the roles and responsibilities of local DVLOs and RDVCs the policy goes on to further detail the wider governance structure.76 The Corporate Response to Domestic and Family Violence Team consists of The Corporate Sponsor who holds the responsibility for representing the Commissioner.

The Domestic and Family Violence Team provide advice and support to both the NSWPF Senior Executive and the field on operational, legal and corporate issues.
The Team is also a strategic and active partner in many interagency forums with government and non-government agencies.

The team includes a Legal Consultant who is a specialist domestic violence Police Prosecutor.
The Domestic and Family Violence Team is instrumental in developing and implementing projects and strategies to holistically improve NSWPF response in the investigation and management of domestic and family violence.77 Region Domestic Violence Sponsors (RDVS) also contribute to the Performance and Program Support Command.

RDVS role is to promote awareness and understanding of contemporary policing in the investigation and management of domestic and family violence within their respective regions.
The Sponsors provide a critical link between operational responses and corporate issues.

In addition, they 74 NSW Police Force, Code of Practice, 101.

75 NSW Police Force, Code of Practice, 102.

76 NSW Police Force, Domestic and Family Violence Policy (NSW Government, 2018), https://www.police.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/477267/Domestic_and_Family_Violence_Policy_ 2018.pdf.

77 NSW Police Force, Code of Practice, 27.


40 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 maintain an awareness of interagency work and promote the benefits of coordinated responses to domestic and family violence across the Region.78 It is unclear to the NDVC how the local Police Districts communicate local issues, apart from relying on raw NSWPF data and where the NSWPF relevant personnel canvass emerging trends and practice issues in their regions.
The newly appointed Acting Northern Region Domestic Violence Sponsor was invited to attend the NDVC meetings via email correspondence in late January, following a conversation with the Author at the Hunter Women’s Safety Forum, however there was no response to this invitation.

The NDVC is unaware who the previous Northern Region Domestic Violence Sponsor was.
It is also difficult to ascertain what informs the NSW Police Force Domestic and Family Violence Team (Performance and Program Support) Training strategy.

Similarly, it is unclear who contributes locally (within Newcastle and Lake Macquarie) to developing information on local sector trends or how this may inform regional priorities.

The Northern Region Domestic Violence Regional Strategy Group has no interface with or participation in the NDVC.
This is despite the NDVC email list comprising over one hundred recipients.

Minutes of monthly NDVC Meetings and Agendas are distributed via this email list every month.

It is, however, clear that resourcing constraints impact the attendance of NSWPF representatives at local DVC Meetings.

This was the explanation provided to the NDVC in 2017/18 by Newcastle District DVLOs who had sought permission to attend from their Inspector at the time.
They reported being told they were unable to be released to attend NDVC Meetings.

The Local Experience The NDVC acknowledges the commitment and professionalism of our colleagues working in the Newcastle and Lake Macquarie Police Districts, in particular the efforts of our local DVLOs who work tirelessly to ensure victim survivors are supported.

The experience of NDVC members, however, too frequently sees a lack of basic understanding of DFV shown by General Duties Police.
This includes an inability to identify the primary aggressor during call outs to incidents, not understanding the impact of intergenerational trauma on both victim and perpetrator behaviour, being unaware of the impact on children exposed to chronic DFV, exacerbated by a complete disconnect from the local service sector networks.

Attendance by operational representatives of NSW Police to local Domestic Violence Committee Meetings is sporadic in Lake Macquarie and non-existent in Newcastle.
During the period 2015-2018 there was regular monthly attendance by local DVLOs at the Lake Macquarie DVC Meetings, however throughout 2018/2019 until now (May 2020) attendance declined dramatically.

There has been no attendance of operational Police at the NDVC meetings during the same period.

Police Representation at the NDVC meetings has been undertaken by the RDVC on two occasions and the CALD Liaison Officer on two occasions.
As important as this attendance is, the RDVC has informed the NDVC that ongoing resourcing barriers continue to prevent attendance by local DVLOs.

78 NSW Police Force, Code of Practice, 27-28.

41 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 The importance of DVLO attendance at local Committee Meetings cannot be overstated.

This is a forum where local Practitioners share emerging knowledge and program initiatives aimed at supporting vulnerable community members.
The opportunity to develop working relationships that strengthen the ability to respond to local community needs is also provided to committee members.

The NSW Police Force Code of Practice clearly articulates the important role local DVLOs have in their community: ‘This specialist role provides support to other police by providing vital linkages with community issues and concerns, information and intelligence, while forming partnerships for victim support and follow- up….
Responsibilities include but are not limited to the following: Maintain liaison with support agencies or services as well as NSWPF Liaison Officers e.g.
Gay and Lesbian Liaison Officers (GLLOs), Aboriginal Community Liaison Officers (ACLOs), Multicultural Community Liaison Officers (MCLOs) to ensure consistency and continuity of the victim follow-up process as well as Ensure a detailed list of appropriate services and their role within the Command is supplied to all police with the Command.79 The ability for local services to have direct access to a known point of contact when victim survivors need information or further advocacy with Police is also provided by local DVLOs.
Members of the NDVC rely upon key agency contacts to expedite concerns or queries on behalf of women and their children.

This extends to the NSWPF.

Historically local practitioners tend to rely more on local DVLOs than being confident in contacting their local Police station and requesting assistance from General Duties (GD) police.
It has been an all too frequent experience of Practitioners supporting victim survivors that GD police answering the phone or responding to walk-in enquiries at local Police stations are less receptive to progressing action than DVLOs.

It is for this reason some services request to speak to the Duty Officer if a DVLO is unavailable.
The following scenarios have been provided by local Practitioners, all of whom would be prepared to discuss other local examples that demonstrate the pressing need for more targeted police support and training, particularly the need to embed elements of the Victorian model of victim-centric policing.

Identifying details such as the Police Station involved have been removed.

Client names have also been changed.

79 NSW Police Force, Code of Practice, 33.


42 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 Practitioner Case Scenario: Carol and I went to X Police Station to report Tony’s breach of ADVO.

We spoke to the officer at the front counter and told him about both the Breach in ADVO and Carol’s address being posted on Facebook.

I found the police officer to be very unhelpful in all regards.
I explained that Tony had an extensive history, and that Carol had been on Safety Action Meeting (SAM) agendas on numerous occasions.

Our statement was originally taken from the desk until I requested a room.

We were informed that none of the incidents were chargeable and that none were strong enough to be able to be prosecuted.

I discussed the clear breach of ADVO with phone calls from jail.
The officer said that as Carol had already contacted the jail about these, it was already addressed and there wasn’t much need to address it further.

I discussed that it was displaying a clear pattern of behavior and as Tony had been incarcerated for DV and ADVO breaches that it was of utmost importance that this breach be addressed as it would likely occur after Tony’s release.

The officer said from a charge perspective there wasn’t much to go on.
We then discussed that Carol’s address had been broadcast all over Facebook, and the safety concerns regarding this.

The police officer stated that if someone turned up to call the police.

We said we would like the post to be deleted and that we were worried about the safety implications for Carol, the police officer took the telephone details of the two that were known to have posted Carol’s address and said he would telephone them.
Carol then played a voice recording of an argument she had with Sarah, Tony’s current partner.

The officer said there was nothing there that could be prosecuted.

We discussed that it wasn’t just about prosecution it was about safety and as Tony had been part of the X Safety Action Meeting.

I thought that the police would be interested in the information to keep Carol and her daughter both safe.

The officer suggested we ask for an ankle bracelet on his release.
After we left I apologised to Carol for what had been a horrible experience and that I was disappointed the police officer wasn’t more helpful.

Carol was somewhat relieved that her address would now be taken off Facebook.

43 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 Practitioner Case Scenario: Julie said that she woke up today (her birthday) and Simon began again to verbally abuse her.

She said that he was ‘schitzing because Tegan (their daughter) woke up’.
Julie had been experiencing bleeding again and was trying to rest but Simon said, ‘it’s your fault you can’t carry a baby like a normal woman’ and, ‘you are a shit mother, just like your mother’.

He has been calling her names like ‘slut and ‘cunt’ and belittling and abusing her daily.

Julie said she felt that she could not go through this any longer.

Simon had kicked her air conditioner unit today and she had felt frightened and felt that she needed to get Tegan out of the house.
Julie told me that she had called X Police in distress, and asked for their assistance, stating to the officer she had been in a DV relationship for a long time and that Simon had been verbally abusing her today and that she was scared.

Julie said the police told her Simon had ‘just as much right’ to the house and the care of Tegan as she did, and that ‘if you are feeling like that, - leave’.
Julie was devastated as she had been crying to the officer on the phone, but the officer was unsupportive and dismissive.

The DVDRT 2017-2019 Report (2020) has again highlighted the responsibility police have in preventing further trauma to victim survivors: Over a number of reporting periods the Team has identified that victims or bystanders who report violence at the police station may not always receive a consistent positive response from officers at the front counter.
Issues identified from the Team’s cases in recent reports have included that in some cases: information or complaints have not been recorded correctly, or in some cases not recorded at all; officers have provided victims with inaccurate advice; and the way victims have been treated by some officers in these settings has led the victim to desist from reporting future episodes of domestic violence.80 Further, the DVDR Team noted that rather than reflecting “cultural or other issues within police”, these service issues reflect the workload and the environment of the police station, with police working on counter duties having additional administrative, public, including people reporting on bail and phone duties.
The DVDR Team go on to make recommendations, as detailed below that ask government to consider developing a Hub model (as seen in the Victorian example; Orange Door), wherein local specialised DFV services are co-located with local police and other key agencies.

As well as providing targeted resources to victim survivors, the hub model would look to improve 80 NSW Govt., DVDRT Report 2017-2019, 133.
44 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 collaborative practices between police and local services and develop networks beyond the DVLOs that could extend to include all police in the local station.
Recommendation 27 27.1 That the NSW Police Force consider opportunities to provide enhanced support to domestic violence victims who approach police stations, and other actions to improve responses to initial approaches for assistance, including to consider the co-location of specialist domestic violence services at police stations.

Any co-location initiatives should be developed in partnership with local domestic violence specialist services, including Aboriginal services.
Recommendation 27.2 That the NSW Government examine and review the Orange Door (Support and Safety Hubs) model being used to deliver services to victims of domestic and family violence in Victoria and consider whether this (or a similar) model should be adopted in NSW.81 The NDVC welcome this most recent DVDRT Report Recommendation as it aligns with this Submission’s focus on improving the relationship between local DFV services and police in the Newcastle and Lake Macquarie Districts.
Particular emphasis is placed on the potential for local police to leverage existing expertise across the local service sector.

Refer to this Submission’s Recommendations at pages 54-55.

Practitioner Case Scenario: Jan ended her relationship with the father of her youngest child, Barry, a few months earlier, following many years of psychological abuse perpetrated by Barry on Jan and her eldest son.
Jan allowed Barry to come to the home on Monday to take Emma for an ice-cream that afternoon, on the proviso that Barry return Emma that evening.

Barry failed to return Emma.

At around 10.30pm Jan went to Barry’s home to try to get Emma back, however Barry refused this, and he ended up pushing Jan down the stairs of his home.

Jan’s other children were with her at the time.


Jan then immediately went to X police station and made a report, however police told Jan as she had approached Barry’s house and was refused entry by Barry, police could only take a statement and would not breach the AVO Jan had taken out.

Jan asked that police do a welfare check for Emma, however they did not.

Jan contacted X Police station again on the Thursday and requested a welfare check.
This occurred and Barry went into X Police station later that evening and reported in with Jan. Barry told Jan he had explained everything to the Police and she (Jan) was not to bother them.

81 NSW Govt., DVDRT Report 2017-2019, 136.

45 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 Practitioner Case Scenario: Support services involved to help both parents address their mental health issues stemming from their own respective adverse childhood experiences.
The focus also being to help them understand the impact on their children’s development from exposure to high level conflict between their parents.

There are three children under four living with their parents.

We were aware there had been several previous police callouts to the home and other services were concerned physical abuse was also being perpetrated by the father, with the mother frequently presenting with unexplained bruising and damage to the walls in the home observed during home visits.
On this occasion neighbours called Police due to hearing the mother screaming and children crying.

The father subsequently told both statutory and NGO workers that the attending police told him ‘it wasn’t DV’ and police ‘agreed with the parents, it was just a fight’.

The family were listed on the following week’s Safety Action Meeting Agenda.

The mother was identified as the Person of Interest (POI) with the father named as the victim at serious threat.
The matter was subsequently flagged and returned ‘for amendments as there appears to be some incorrect info regarding who is the victim’.

In this scenario the police did not use any form of risk assessment that would have helped determine who the primary aggressor was and would not have resulted in the victim survivor being named as the Person of Interest (POI).
If used in this type of “call out”, the Victorian Risk Assessment framework detailed previously would have guided the police response so they could more accurately determine the family’s circumstances.

This example clearly highlights the way police focus on the incident they are called to with their objective being to determine a victim and a perpetrator.
This overly simplistic response was flagged at the local SAM, however there was no subsequent feedback provided by police to the services engaged with this family.

As noted on page 28 of this Submission and in the Recommendations at page 52, the Safer Pathway framework could become a vital linkage between police, the LCP and service sector.
As well as providing electronic information exchange to Courts, if the NSWPF database also had electronic 46 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 notification from the SAM LCP, all police would be able to see local victim survivors already assessed at ‘Serious Threat’ and respond with increased urgency.
New operating procedures would need to be developed between NSWPF and the LCP provider (WDVCAS), however this information exchange would prevent instances of victim survivors’ circumstances being unknown or misunderstood and reduce the potential for inappropriate and potentially unsafe police responses.
47 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 Summary The NDVC are calling upon government to re-consider the implementation of specialised DFV Courts as a matter of urgency.

Specialisation in applying justice in domestic and family violence jurisdictions in Queensland and Victoria have proven to be effective in providing sound victim centred responses.
The Domestic Violence Intervention Court Model (DVICM) operating in Wagga Wagga and Campbelltown has been shown during evaluation to be effective in supporting victims.82 We know the DVCIM model evaluations have shown no impact on perpetrator reoffending, conviction rates or Court efficiencies as detailed in the Evaluations.

We do however know, as demonstrated in the initial DVCIM Evaluation, victim survivors reported feeling supported during the Court process.
As noted at the beginning of this Submission, the NSW Attorney General is aware of the reasons for “complainant drop out”, acknowledging in January “we have to make the Court experience as “untraumatic (sic) as possible”.

The Government needs reminding this is one of the crucial considerations in addressing change within the criminal justice system.
For this to occur there needs to be practice and structural changes that enhance rather than diminish a victim survivors’ sense of confidence that the criminal justice system will keep her safe.

If the current government is unwilling to implement specialised Courts, there are ways the current Local Court system could be improved.

As is the case in Victoria, Evidentiary Affidavits could be provided for the information of the Court.
These affidavits could include information from local service practitioners who invariably hold highly relevant context regarding the current circumstances of victim survivors and, importantly, their children.

Another example of changes that could be implemented without significant resourcing implications are the establishment of Coordination Meetings at the commencement of domestic violence Court list days, as is occurring now in Victoria.
The explicit intent of this measure is to prevent miscommunication and mistakes occurring.

The examples provided of unsafe Court outcomes in this Submission demonstrate the need for a more streamlined flow of information exchange between justice agencies so that Magistrates make informed Orders that keep victim survivors safe.

Opportunities to harness existing justice frameworks in NSW such as Safer Pathway also need to be considered.
Current Safety Action Meeting (SAM) participants represent the key justice agencies in NSW, as well as the local service sector.

However, the Local Courts, arguably the most critical 82 Rodwell and Smith, An Evaluation of the NSW Domestic Violence Intervention Court Model.

48 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 component in the NSW justice structure, are not linked administratively to the Safer Pathway information circuitry.
The existing Safer Pathway framework could be extended to include Local Courts.

For instance, when victim survivors are listed on a local SAM Agenda, the resulting Safety Action Plan could be electronically transmitted to the Local Court Registrar for attachment and consideration in ADV0 matters going before the Court.

This would need to be undertaken by the Local Coordination Point (LCP) SAM Coordinator.
An Evidentiary Affidavit, as described previously, could also originate from a participating SAM service provider engaged with the victim survivor and their family.

Similarly, notice could be sent electronically to the Court Registrar that an Evidentiary Affidavit is being forwarded from the LCP to the Police Prosecutor’s office.
If SAM Plans and Evidentiary Affidavits were sent directly to the Police Prosecutor’s office from the LCP following each SAM, the potential for crucial information to be lost would be overcome.

As is evidenced in this Submission’s Case Scenarios, Courts cannot make appropriate Orders without sufficient evidence.

Similarly, this information exchange would ensure the brief of evidence supplied by the investigating police officer to the Police Prosecutor was complete.
If Local Court Registrar’s offices were able to transmit ADVO proceeding outcomes to the LCP, this information could be effectively disseminated to the SAM members in a timely fashion.

As well as providing a logical feedback loop with local Safer Pathway agencies, the victim survivor could be relisted on the next SAM Agenda.

This would occur in the event the perpetrator does not receive a custodial sentence or if any variations to ADVO conditions heighten concerns for the victim survivor’s safety.
The importance of ensuring Local Court Magistrates are provided with emerging research and practice trends in the fields of intergenerational trauma and violence education is also a key component in understanding the experience of victim survivors and their children.

The Judicial Commission of New South Wales could include expert insights and training be made available to Magistrates during their annual training calendar.
Specifically training on how intergenerational trauma is expressed in many of the families coming before Local Courts and how adverse childhood experiences impact individuals across the lifespan.
Given the importance the human services sector place on working from a trauma informed perspective, aimed at disrupting the cycle of violence and disadvantage seen in the cohort of families in the sector, it is reasonable to expect this could also form part of the evidence base that underpins the work of our judicial officers.

Understanding socio political constructs that determine gender roles and reinforce gendered disadvantage is critical knowledge for practitioners working within the DFV sector.
Further, sociological concepts of masculinity, including male privilege and entitlement and, importantly, the attitudes that continue to drive abusive behaviour is accepted foundational knowledge across the sector.

If the Judicial Commission also considered including the study of gendered violence in their training calendar, its membership may be provided deeper insights into the DFV matters coming before their Court.
49 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 Similarly, more nuanced training on DFV is required to improve police responses in NSW.

All NSWPF members need to understand their role in promoting victim survivors’ access to justice.

This extends beyond historical police functions of identifying, investigating and progressing matters to Court.
A critical component of a revised policing approach to DFV is the need to embed specialist DFV services and local staff within local police districts.

As detailed in this Submission’s recommendations this requires renewed commitment from State, regional and local NSWPF leadership.
50 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 The NDVC makes the following RECOMMENDATIONS: In respect of changes to existing Local Magistrates’ Courts in dealing with DFV matters, eventually resulting in the creation of Specialised Domestic Family Violence Courts in NSW: 1.
(a) The Attorney General and Minister for the Prevention of Domestic Violence provide preliminary advice as to the extent the new DV Justice Strategy is considering DFV specialisation in Local Magistrates’ Courts.
This relates to Recommendation 7.1, 7.2 and 7.3 of the DVDRT Report 2015-17 that looked to consider 7.1: How the application of specialist court practice in Local Courts can be further enhanced; 7.2: That the NSW Government review the support needs of victims in contested domestic violence matters, and the adequacy of current supports including an examination of the specific needs of Aboriginal women attending Court; and 7.3: How the expertise of judicial leaders can be harnessed to further improve responses to domestic violence in Courts.
In the DVDRT Report 2017-2019 (2020), the whole of government update to the implementation of these Recommendations is included at page 17-19 of this Submission.

Apart from summarising how the new Department of Communities and Justice has been structured and naming existing programs with an intent to align strategies across these agencies, there is no information in this update that directly addresses the original Recommendation 7.1.
Specifically, “That the Attorney General in consultation with relevant stakeholders, consider how the approaches reflected in the Domestic Violence Justice Strategy, such as the application of specialist Court practices in all Local Courts can be further advanced.” In respect of Recommendation 7.2, The NDVC welcomes the government’s commitment to developing new ways for Aboriginal women to access justice in NSW.
The question, however, remains: Given all women in NSW need to be able to access justice safely.

Can the Attorney General clarify if a similar Pilot will be extended to victim survivors who identify as non-Aboriginal?

In respect of Recommendation 7.3 of the DVDRT 2017-2019 Report: The Attorney General is continuing to engage with the Chief Magistrate about how to leverage the expertise of judicial leaders to improve responses to domestic violence in Courts.
The Department of Communities and Justice is consulting with representatives from the Chief Magistrates’ Office as part of the review of the Domestic Violence Justice Strategy (DVJS).

The review includes identifying existing good practice in Courts and opportunities for its further enhancement.83 Can the Attorney General clarify if this includes identifying Local Court Magistrates who have demonstrated specific skills and insights in conducting DFV matters?
If so, will these Magistrates be available to work across circuits and include the Newcastle/Lake Macquarie area?

1.

(b) That the Attorney General and Minister for the Prevention of Domestic Violence advise if priority is being given to progress the current DVDRT 2017-2019 Recommendation 28: “That the Department of Communities and Justice identify opportunities to better 83 NSW Govt., DVDRT Report 2017-2019, 167.
51 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 understand the circumstances in which an Apprehended Domestic Violence Order application or domestic violence related criminal prosecution has been dismissed.
Consideration should be given to improving the functionality of Justicelink to improve recording of the reasons as to why an application has been dismissed”.84 This is a crucial and welcome Recommendation that relates directly to the experiences of local Practitioners and victim survivors, as detailed in the Case Scenarios included in this Submission.

The NDVC urge the government to prioritise the DVRT 2017-2019 Recommendation 28 as described at pages 19-20 of this Submission.

1.
1.

(c) That the Attorney General and Minister for the Prevention of Domestic Violence give consideration to undertaking a revised Evaluation of the NSW DVCIM, extending the 2008 and 2012 Evaluations, with outcomes measures focused on victim survivors’ experiences and interagency collaboration, instead of perpetrator conviction rates, re-offending and Court efficiencies.

As detailed at pages 14-15 of this Submission.

1.


(d) That the Attorney General and Minister for the Prevention of Domestic Violence progress the recommendation to complete a feasibility study of Specialised DFV Courts in NSW as recommended in the No to Violence Listening Tour Report (2019), as detailed at page 22 of this Submission.

In respect of enhancing the current Safer Pathway reforms to include the Local Magistrates’ Courts, the government consider: 2.
(a) Including the Local Court Registrar and Police Prosecutors office in electronic communiques from the Local Coordination Point (LCP) following each Safety Action Meeting (SAM).

The information should include SAM Safety Plans and flag PINOPs who remain ‘at Serious Threat’ and/or appear on subsequent SAM Agendas.

Similarly, the Local Court Registrar provide electronic advice to the LCP of ADVO Court outcomes.
(This is consistent with the DVDRT 2017- 2019 Recommendations 28 and 30 for more efficient information exchange and as detailed at pages 19-20 of this Submission).

2.

(b) Including Evidentiary Affidavits in the brief of evidence for all ADVO matters, especially where there is involvement of local services with the complainant and where the matter has been listed on a SAM Agenda.

2.
2.

(c) Implementing Coordination Meetings prior to the commencement of DFV List Days to review DFV matters coming before the Local Court that day.

As per the Victorian model detailed at page 10 of this Submission.
In respect of establishing a dedicated NSW Police Force Command that is solely responsible for ongoing DFV research, training and importantly, monitoring of victims’ experiences with NSW Police (or at a minimum enhancing the current Domestic and Family Violence Team (Performance and Program Support) to be responsible for consulting with the sector on training priorities for DFV education and act as a central sector liaison point for practice complaints resolution: 3.
(a) The NSW Government acknowledge the ongoing calls by sector peaks and the NSW DVDRT for enhanced police training in DFV and commit to resourcing the NSWPF adequately.

That a review of the Victorian Police Force Family Violence Command be undertaken to scope how 84 NSW Govt., DVDRT Report 2017-2019, 136-137.

52 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 elements of the Victorian experience can be replicated in NSW.
Specifically focusing on the benefits of establishing a Command that is solely responsible for ongoing DFV research, training, sector liaison and importantly, monitoring of victims’ experiences with NSW Police.

3.

(b) In respect of Recommendation 2.1 of the DVDRT Report 2015-2017: the NSW Police Force (NSWPF) Domestic & Family Violence Team reviewed the capture, recording and display of data within COPs.

As a result, a number of changes within the existing COPs system have been implemented.
NSWPF has made these changes to support frontline police to make informed decisions by increasing the information available to them and reducing the time spent on the input of data.3 As detailed in the DVDRT 2017-2019 Report and as summarised at ages 35-36 of this Submission The NDVC welcomes these changes, particularly the desired intent to assist police make more informed decisions when responding to incidents.
Can the Minister for Police explain 1. how these new processes are being embedded in local training.

And 2. is there inclusion of guided risk assessment and management components as seen in the Victorian Police Risk Assessment and Risk Management Police Options Model, as detailed at pages 35-36 of this Submission.

3.
3.

(c) In respect of Recommendation 2.2 of the DVDRT Report 2015-2017; The DVDRT Report 2017-2019 outlines the implementation is underway: The DVDRT Secretariat is working with the NSW Police Education and Training Command to determine how to incorporate learnings from the case studies into the revised post-Academy training material.
And The DVDRT Secretariat will, within the next 6 months, supply the NSW Police Force with relevant case studies drawn from across section of metropolitan, regional, rural and remote locations, for their potential inclusion in the relevant courses.85 Can the NSW Minister for Police and the Police Commissioner consider how local case studies such as those included in this Submission can be included in the revised post-Academy training material?
The NDVC acknowledge this work is now being progressed by the NSW Police Force Education and Training Command.

The issue however is the ongoing annual training program being planned for police in NSW.

Ongoing regular training that transfers knowledge into sound practice at the local (station) level is also required.

It is unclear what the new training encompasses.


To further support police officers in the complex and challenging work of responding to DFV, training also needs to include principles of critical reflection and strategies in managing vicarious trauma.

This is embedded in professional support provided by agencies to staff working in the local DFV sector.

Therefore, can the Minister for Police outline: 1.


How ongoing training on responding to DFV will be delivered beyond Academy or annual block training to police.

85 NSW Govt., DVDRT Report 2017-2019, 161-162.

53 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 2.

What training is provided by NSWPF in identifying and managing Vicarious Trauma and how are police with a lived experience of DFV supported.
Further, can the Minister for Police progress to government that immediate priority be given to general duties police training in line with The Victorian Police Risk Assessment and Risk Management Police Options Model, as detailed at page 34 of this Submission.
With a specific focus on identifying the primary aggressor and understanding the contextual elements of DFV, specifically coercive control and this training be provided in continuing education (beyond block training) to all police by way of continuing onsite (station) workshops in the local district.

The absence of a formal process to help improve practice and address local issues from a police training and support perspective is the current experience of the local sector.
This could be overcome by identifying key police representatives who assist the police district in identifying training needs and acts as a conduit to the service or practitioner experiencing difficulties.

This would provide local data on local experiences, including practice examples that could inform the NSW Police Force Domestic and Family Violence Team (Performance and Program Support) Training strategy.
Opportunities could also be realised that provide feedback on the positive experiences of practitioners and victim survivors to the relevant police officer and their supervisor.
If either the DVLOs and/or the RDVC are identified as the key contact point or conduit for the service sector with local police, it is erroneous to assume the current number of RDVCs (2) for the entire Northern Region is adequate, especially given the geographical expanse; nor are any of the current DVLOs in Newcastle and Lake Macquarie able to assume this additional workload.
Therefore, the NDVC also Recommends: ● The Government commit to increasing the number of Northern Region DFVCs from 2 to 6 and increase the number of DVLOs in the Newcastle and Lake Macquarie Districts from 8 to 12.

This would begin to enable these positions to fully implement their respective roles as outlined at pages 101-102 of The NSW Police Force (2018) Code of Practice for the NSW Police Force response to Domestic and Family Violence.
As well as the state-wide Recommendations detailed above, the following are Recommendations for consideration by the local Police Districts of Newcastle and Lake Macquarie: The purpose of these recommendations is to improve local sector networks, leverage the existing local sector expertise available for police and ultimately improve the experience of local victim survivors.

● The monthly NDVC Meetings occur at either Newcastle, Waratah or Belmont Police Stations.
This would negate the need for local police personnel to source a vehicle, travel to another site and otherwise impact their shift.

It would also start an informal opportunity for agency partners to become a more familiar presence at their local police stations.

● Local Forums occur with invitations to all local police, that include emerging evidence on national and international sector trends (e.g.

intergenerational trauma and evolving DFV reforms and policy in Australia, the UK and USA).
● Consideration be given to developing MOUs between local Police Districts with local services for Role Exchange Placements.

This would provide opportunities for local police personnel to spend time at the coal face alongside local service practitioners as they engage children and families experiencing DFV and other coexisting vulnerabilities (e.g.
mental ill health, drug 54 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 and alcohol misuse, homelessness, educational neglect, developmental and learning delay etc.).

● Investigating police who have a matter going before a SAM attend that Meeting.

● All General Duties station staff are given regular (quarterly) information sessions on what their local service sector does by way of mini forums/ presentations on the Safer Pathway reforms.
These could most readily occur following SAMs when they are held in police stations and when local service representatives are already on site.

The NDVC acknowledge the ongoing commitment of our State Government and Opposition in combating violence against women and children.

We respectfully request the NSW Government consider these Recommendations.

Victim survivors and their children are our priority.

Members of the NDVC have a responsibility to give voice to the experiences of the people we work with.
As that voice we respectfully ask that Government listen.

We are looking to help address what are now well documented, chronic systemic shortcomings that continue to jeopardise the lives and wellbeing of the families we work with.

We are therefore calling upon our local elected Members to progress this Submission as a matter of urgency.

55 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 Bibliography ARTD Consultants.

Safer Pathway Evaluation Final Report.


2019. https://www.artd.com.au/news/safer-pathway-evaluation-released/.

Australian Domestic and Family Violence Death Review Network.

2018 Data Report.

Camperdown: NSW Government, 2018. https://apo.org.au/sites/default/files/resource-files/2018-05/apo- nid174811.pdf.

Australian Law Reform Commission.

Family Violence―A National Legal Response: Final Report.

Sydney, NSW Government, 2010. https://www.alrc.gov.au/wp- content/uploads/2019/08/ALRC114_WholeReport.pdf.
Birdsey, Emma M and Nadine Smith.

“The Domestic Violence Court Intervention Model: A Follow-up Study.” Crime and Justice Bulletin.

NSW Bureau of Statistics and Research, 155 (2012): 1-55. https://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/CJB/cjb155.pdf.

Bond, Christine, Robyn Holder, Samantha Jeffries, and Chris Fleming.

Summary Report: Evaluation of the Specialist Domestic and Family Violence Court Trial in Southport.
Queensland: Griffith University, 2017. https://www.Courts.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/515430/dfv- rpt-evaluation-dfv-Court-southport-summary-report.pdf.

Department of Social Services.

Fourth Action Plan: National Plan to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children 2010- 2022.

Australian Government, 2019. https://www.dss.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/08_2019/fourth_action-plan.pdf Domestic Violence NSW, Good Practice Guidelines for the Domestic and Family Violence Sector in NSW.
Redfern: Domestic Violence NSW, 2017. http://dvnsw.org.au/wp- content/uploads/2017/08/DFV-Practice-Guidelines.pdf.

Gombru, Amanda, Georgia Brignell, and Hugh Donnelly.

Sentencing for Domestic Violence.

Sentencing Trends and Issues 45.

Judicial Commission of NSW, 2016. https://www.judcom.nsw.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/sentencing_trends_45.pdf.

Hulme, Shann, Anthony Morgan, and Hayley Boxall.


“Domestic violence offenders prior offending and reoffending in Australia.” Trends & Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice 580 (September 2019): 1-22. https://aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/tandi580.

Judicial Commission of NSW.

Annual Report 2017-2018.

Sydney: NSW Government, 2018. https://www.judcom.nsw.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Judicial-Commission-of- NSW-Annual-Report-2017-18.pdf.

Justice Victims Services.


Charter of Victims Rights (Victims Rights and Support Act 2013).

NSW Government, 2017. https://www.victimsservices.justice.nsw.gov.au/Documents/fs10_charter.pdf.

Lumley, Kate.

“Enduring Values and Evolving Services: 30 years of the Judicial Commission.” Judicial Officers’ Bulletin.

Judicial Commission of NSW 29.10 (2017): 83-94. https://www.judcom.nsw.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/enduring-article.pdf.

Magistrates Court of Queensland.


Domestic and Family Violence Protection Act 2012.

Brisbane: Queensland Government, 2019. https://www.Courts.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/435026/dv-bench- book.pdf McCulloch, Jude, Jane Maree Maher, Kate Fitz-Gibbon, and Sandra Walklate.

“Finally, police are taking family violence as seriously as terrorism”.

The Conversation.

Accessed April 28, 2020.


56 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 https://theconversation.com/finally-police-are-taking-family-violence-as-seriously-as- terrorism-88939.

No to Violence.

NTV Discussion Paper: Predominant Aggressor Identification and Victim Misidentification.

2019. https://www.ntv.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/20191121- NTV-Discussion-Paper-Predominant-Aggressor-FINAL.pdf.

No to Violence.
No to Violence.

The Australasian Working Together to End Men’s Family Violence Conference.

2019. https://www.ntv.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/NTV1848_Conference- Report-2019-screen-ready_FA3.pdf.

NSW Department of Justice.

It Stops Here: Safer Pathway Overview.

Parramatta: NSW Government, 2014. http://www.crimeprevention.nsw.gov.au/domesticviolence/Documents/It %20stop/Overview_Safer-Pathway.pdf.

NSW Government.

NSW Domestic Violence Death Review Team Report 2015-2017.
Camperdown: NSW Government, 2017. http://www.coroners.justice.nsw.gov.au/Documents/2015- 2017_DVDRT_Report_October2017(online).pdf.

NSW Government.

Domestic Violence Death Review Team Report 2015-2017: Government Response.

NSW Government, 2018. http://www.coroners.justice.nsw.gov.au/Documents/DVDRT%20Report%202015-17%20- %20Government%20response_received%2029June2018(for%20web).pdf.

NSW Government.

Domestic Violence Death Review Team Report 2017-2019.
Lidcombe: NSW Government, 2020. http://www.coroners.justice.nsw.gov.au/Documents/2017- 2019_DVDRT_Report(online).pdf.

NSW Government.

Family Violence—A National Legal Response.

Sydney: Australian Law Reform Commission, 2010. https://www.alrc.gov.au/wp- content/uploads/2019/08/ALRC114_WholeReport.pdf.

NSW Government.

It Stops Here: Standing together to end domestic and family violence in NSW.

Sydney: NSW Government, 2014. https://www.women.nsw.gov.au/?a=289461.

NSW Government.
NSW Government.

NSW Domestic and Family Violence Blueprint for Reform 2016-2021: Safer Lives for Women, Men and Children.

Sydney: NSW Ministry of Health, 2016. https://www.women.nsw.gov.au/strategies-and-resources/nsw-domestic-and-family- violence/domestic-and-family-violence-blueprint.

NSW Government.

NSW Domestic Violence Justice Strategy: Improving the NSW Criminal Justice System’s Response to Domestic Violence 2013-2017.
Sydney: Attorney General and Justice https:// www.crimeprevention.nsw.gov.au/domesticviolence/Documents/domestic- violence/jag2391_dv_strategy_book_online.pdf NSW No to Violence.

Listening Tour Report.

2019. https://www.ntv.org.au/wp- content/uploads/2019/02/NTV1793_Listening-Tour-Report_screen-ready_FA3.pdf.

NSW Police Force.

Code of Practice for the NSW Police Force Response to Domestic and Family Violence.
Parramatta: NSW Government, 2018. https://www.police.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/165202/Code_of_Practice_for _the_NSWPF_response_to_Domestic_and_Family_Violence.pdf.

57 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 NSW Police Force.

Domestic and Family Violence Policy.

Performance and Program Support Command.

NSW Government, 2018. https://www.police.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/477267/Domestic_and_Family _Violence_Policy_2018.pdf.
NSW Women’s Alliance.

A Safe State Campaign.

2019. www.safensw.org.au.

NSW Women’s Alliance.

Safe State: Acting to End Sexual, Domestic and Family Violence.

2019. https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/safensw/pages/41/attachments/original/154051 4938/A_Safe_State_-_Final_Policy_Platform_%28Oct_2018- Mar_2019%29.pdf?1540514938.

Queensland Courts.

“Specialist Domestic and Family Violence Court.” Queensland Government, 2019. https://www.Courts.qld.gov.au/Courts/domestic-and-family-violence-Court.
Queensland Government.

Not Now, Not Ever Report.

2015. https://www.csyw.qld.gov.au/campaign/end-domestic-family-violence/about/not-now- not- ever-report.

Rodwell, Laura, and Nadine Smith.

An Evaluation of the NSW Domestic Violence Intervention Court Model.

Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2008. https://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/r58.pdf.

Smith, Susan.

Specialist Domestic Violence Courts (Or Court Lists Days) in New South Wales.
Redfern Legal Centre Position Paper: Redfern, 2017. https://rlc.org.au/sites/default/files/attachments/171117-RLC-Position-Paper_Specialist- Domestic-Violence-Courts-in-NSW.pdf.

State Government of Victoria.

“The 227 Recommendations.” Last updated March 04, 2020. https://w.www.vic.gov.au/familyviolence/recommendations.html.

State of Victoria.

Royal Commission into Family Violence Report: Summary and Recommendations.
Sydney: Victorian Government, 2016. http://rcfv.archive.royalcommission.vic.gov.au/MediaLibraries/ RCFamilyViolence/Reports/RCFV_Full_Report_Interactive.pdf.

Victoria Police.

“Code of Practice for the Investigation of Family Violence.” 3.4 (2019).

https://www.police.vic.gov.au/code-practice-investigation-family-violence.

Victoria Police.

Future Directions to Victim-Centric Policing.

The State of Victoria, 2015. https://www.police.vic.gov.au/victims-crime#future-directions-to-victimcentric-policing.
Victorian Government.

“All family violence matters are heard and determined in specialist family violence Courts – Recommendation Details”.

2019. https://w.www.vic.gov.au/familyviolence/recommendations/recommendation- details.htmlrecommendation_id=196.

Victorian Government.

“Latest News – Family Violence Reform.” https://www.vic.gov.au/latest- news-family-violence-reform.

Victorian Law Reform Commission.

www.lawreform.vic.gov.au.

Williams, The Hon.

Gabrielle.


Victorian Minister for Prevention of Family Violence, Women and Youth.

Quoted from ministerial address “No to Violence: The Australasian Working Together To End Men’s Family Violence Conference.” Melbourne, May 2019.

58 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1 https://www.ntv.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/NTV1848_Conference-Report-2019- screen-ready_FA3.pdf.

Women NSW.
Women NSW.

It Stops Here: Standing together to end domestic and family violence in NSW.

NSW Government, 2014. http://www.women.nsw.gov.au/?a=289461.

Women NSW.

NSW Domestic and Family Violence Blueprint for Reform 2016-2021: Safer Lives for Women, Men and Children.

NSW Government, 2016. https://www.women.nsw.gov.au/strategies-and-resources/nsw-domestic-and-family- violence/domestic-and-family-violence-blueprint.

Women NSW.
Women NSW.

NSW Domestic and Family Violence Prevention and Early Intervention Strategy 2017-2021.

NSW Government, 2016. https://www.women.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/388846/dfv-prevention- intervention-strategy.pdf.

Women NSW.

Response to ARTD Safer Pathway Evaluation Report - Lead Agencies.

NSW Government, 2019. https://www.women.nsw.gov.au/download?file=650329.

Women’s Safety NSW, Annual Report 2018-2019.


Haymarket: Women’s Safety NSW, 2019. https://www.womenssafetynsw.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Womens-Safety- NSW-Annual-Report-2018-19.pdf.

59 | P a g e Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violenceSubmission 242 - Attachment 1