The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.
All Official Reports of meetings in the Debating Chamber of the Scottish Parliament.
All Official Reports of public meetings of committees.
Displaying 4806 contributions
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 29 January 2025
Audrey Nicoll
That it is a helpful clarification.
I have a final question for Detective Superintendent Brown. The police submission seems to raise some concern about section 20, which places a duty on the chief constable to co-operate with the review process. Would you care to share a wee bit more on that particular point?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 29 January 2025
Audrey Nicoll
Okay. I will flip the question on the scope of the review around a wee bit and ask whether there are relationships that are not included that you think should be. Based on what you have said already, I suspect that the answer is no, but it is worth asking the question.
11:30Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 29 January 2025
Audrey Nicoll
Thank you—there are some really interesting points there. We may be straying slightly from the provisions, but you are helpfully circling them back to the review process that is being proposed.
With that, I bring in Liam Kerr.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 29 January 2025
Audrey Nicoll
That was really helpful. A clear theme is emerging around the practicalities and cost implications.
I have one follow-up question, and I would welcome hearing from anyone who wanted to come in on it. Last week, we took evidence from, among others, Stuart Munro of the Law Society of Scotland, who referred to a piece of work that is supported by a working group convened by Sheriff Principal Aisha Anwar. It is looking specifically at the development of a virtual custody process to address the concerns that had been identified in the pilot of that process. Are any of you involved in that working group?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 29 January 2025
Audrey Nicoll
That is super. I take it that you are involved, too, Laura Buchan.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 29 January 2025
Audrey Nicoll
Thank you very much, Neil. Those were helpful opening comments.
I want to link the point about learning lessons with the question of what the experience of other jurisdictions has been. First, I will go to John Devaney and then I will jump back to Neil Websdale. Are there similar review systems in other jurisdictions that could inform our approach to considering the process of learning lessons from reviews? Do you think that the bill reflects what is necessary in that space—if that makes any sense?
12:00Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 29 January 2025
Audrey Nicoll
Thank you. I will bring in Professor Neil Websdale. I hope that you can hear us okay. We are interested in your initial thoughts on the proposals on the domestic homicide and suicide review process.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 29 January 2025
Audrey Nicoll
I will bring in Neil Websdale on the broad question about lessons learned. I have a specific question within that about timescales. Once we have undertaken or completed the learning process, should timescales apply to how lessons are applied in changing practices?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 29 January 2025
Audrey Nicoll
Mr Kerr is going to pass, so I will bring in Ben Macpherson.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 29 January 2025
Audrey Nicoll
Welcome back, everyone. We now move on to our second panel of witnesses. I am pleased to welcome Professor John Devaney from the University of Edinburgh; Professor Neil Websdale, director of the family violence centre at Arizona State University, who is joining us remotely—a warm welcome to you, Professor Websdale; I hope that you can hear us loud and clear; and Dr Grace Boughton, criminologist. Thank you all for attending today’s meeting. I apologise for the slight overrunning of the first panel.
I thank Professor Devaney and Dr Boughton for their submissions, which have been circulated ahead of today’s meeting. I particularly thank Dr Boughton, as she has travelled from England to join us this morning. As I said, Professor Websdale is joining us from Arizona, where it is maybe 4 am or 5 am—if he disappears for another cup of strong coffee, we will understand why. Thank you all for coming.
I will allow up to 75 minutes for questions. Before we start, I propose to members that, in order to allow enough time for this session, if required, we will defer our private session, which is a review of today’s evidence. We will see how the timing goes.
I start with a general opening question on part 2 of the bill, which sets out a framework for a system of domestic homicide and suicide reviews. I hope that John Devaney and Grace Boughton were able to listen to some of the evidence that we took earlier on part 2. I will come to John first, followed by Grace; then I will bring in Neil Websdale.
What are your general views on the principle in part 2 of having a statutory system of reviews in this area?