Red Stamp means Police recommending a person does not have unsupervised access to children, young people or the more vulnerable members of society.
The purpose of this process is to reduce crime and enhance community safety by minimising access to victims by sexual and violent offenders.
How does vetting work?
Vetting involves gathering information, aside from a criminal record, that may indicate a person is a risk to children, young people or the more vulnerable members of society, or indeed to themselves.
The risk is indicated primarily by substantiated violent or sexual behaviour, or by patterns of behaviour. Where a risk is identified, a red stamp is placed on the consent to disclosure, recommending that person does not have unsupervised access to children, young people or the more vulnerable members of society.
The person concerned may obtain the reason for the recommendation by writing to the Manager: Licensing and Vetting, PO Box 3017, Wellington. The decision to employ remains with the organisation.
What is ‘substantiated information’?
This is information about violent or sexual behaviours that may or may not have resulted in Court action. It includes behaviours where a prosecution has not succeeded, but where there is supporting evidence to suggest the behaviours did in fact occur.
Prosecution may not be taken for many reasons, including:
- The young age of the victim.
- The capability of the victim to endure the prosecution process.
- The victim may be deceased, sometimes having suicided.
- Parents may not permit their children to give evidence (and may have removed them from New Zealand).
A prosecution may not succeed for many reasons, including:
- The young age and/or capability of the victim
- The victim may not be capable of enduring the prosecution process
- The Court may give the alleged offender the ‘benefit of the doubt’
- The death, sometimes by suicide, of the victim.
- The alleged offender may not have committed the offence.
Why a ‘red stamp’ is required
A conviction may have been entered but not reflect the nature of the offence. For example, as in the case where the sexual violation of an intellectually handicapped person resulted in a conviction for assault. Such cases may reflect a lesser charge being laid in order to obtain a guilty plea and save the victim having to endure the Court process.
It is therefore essential that in making the decision to ‘red stamp’ a consent to disclosure, the behaviours are substantiated.
What are substantiated behaviours?
Behaviours may be substantiated by:
- The level of risk the behaviours pose to children, young people or the more vulnerable members of society.
- Comment by police as to why prosecution action was not taken.
- Comment by the Crown Solicitor on why a prosecution has failed.
- The credibility of the complainant as indicated in their statement, and/or as attested by police.
- The credibility of the informant. This especially applies in cases where behaviours have been observed by a third party, but no Court action has been initiated.
- Stated opinion by police as to the behaviours taking place.
- The nature of the behaviours and impact on the victim, especially in cases where the Courts have given the benefit of the doubt to perpetrators in terms of consent (for example, significant injuries sustained during the behaviours, admitted by the perpetrator).
- Strikingly similar behaviour in different locations at different times, especially where the behaviour is repeated over a number of years.
- The perpetrator may have been warned in writing by police, and that warning accepted.
- The likelihood that the behaviours occurred as assessed by the Manager: Licensing and Vetting based on these factors, or a combination of these factors.
- Where young people have behaved in a sexually inappropriate way, especially toward other young people, sometimes younger than the perpetrator:
In determining if behaviours are substantiated reference may be made to:
- Modus Operandi records.
The original file.
Other files.
The investigating staff.
The Teachers’ Council
Police provide a vetting service to the Teachers’ Council under the authority of the Education Act.
In addition to the above process, on rare occasions police hold information about behaviours that do not meet the threshold of the ‘red stamp’ process, but are of relevance to the teacher registration process. In these cases the information is made available to the Director of the Teachers’ Council.
Examples include:
- Information about behaviours of a sexual or violent nature that have come to police notice, and are recorded as having been dealt with by the school.
- Behaviours of a sexual or violent nature at the lower end of the scale that do not indicate a direct risk within the education environment.
Example of letter to individuals seeking explanation as to why they were ‘red stamped’:
On [date] you gave consent for Police to disclose any information to [organisation].
The recommendation that you do not have unsupervised access to children, young people or the more vulnerable members of society was given on the basis that [specify behaviours].
Police consider this information to be true. You may wish to make a personal statement which will be added to the information so that it is read at the same time as this information. You should send that statement to the Manager: Licensing and Vetting, PO Box 3017, Wellington.
The decision to employ is entirely that of the organisation to which the vetting service is provided. Any explanation about the behaviours should be made to that organisation.
You do have recourse to complain to an Ombudsman and/or the Privacy Commissioner.