Home   Kent   News   Article

Kent Police grants 1 in 10 child sex offender disclosure scheme requests under Sarah's Law

Police in Kent have granted little more than 10% of requests for background checks on suspected paedophiles, we can exclusively reveal.

Under Sarah's Law - named after murdered schoolgirl Sarah Payne - anyone worried about the safety of a child can ask police if someone has a record of committing child sex offences or poses a risk to youngsters.

Since it came into effect in March 2011, the Kent force has received 403 requests under the Child Sex Offenders Disclosure (CSOD) scheme - but has granted just 45.

Schoolgirl Sarah Payne was murdered by Roy Whiting in July 2000
Schoolgirl Sarah Payne was murdered by Roy Whiting in July 2000

It comes as it's revealed a total of 1,603 registered sex offenders are currently living in the county.

Following a Freedom of Information request, Kent Police refused to reveal how many convicted perverts were living in each town through fear of provoking vigilantism.

But the force did say that as of September this year, 454 were based in the north west of the county, 404 in the south west, 375 in the north east and 370 in the south east.

A report by the NSPCC suggests an average of 1 in 6 Sarah's Law requests are granted by police forces throughout the country.

Kent County Council is reviewing the number of looked after children are referred. Stock image, posed by model.
Kent County Council is reviewing the number of looked after children are referred. Stock image, posed by model.

Following the research published earlier this year, the child cruelty charity called for more action to ensure the law was working properly.

A spokesman told KentOnline: "Applications may not result in disclosures for a variety of valid reasons and are decided on a case by case basis.

"We do think there needs to be regular independent evaluation of this scheme to ensure it is working effectively everywhere" - NSPCC spokesman

"There may be nothing to disclose, the risk posed by an offender could be increased through disclosure, or someone else other than the applicant may be in a better position to protect children.

"But we do think there needs to be regular independent evaluation of this scheme to ensure it is working effectively everywhere."

Sarah's Law was introduced after the kidnap and murder of eight-year-old Sarah Payne by convicted paedophile Roy Whiting in 2000.

It was backed by Sarah's parents Sara and Michael Payne, who always believed a child sex offender was responsible for their daughter's death.

Sara said a scheme allowing people controlled access to the sex offenders' register would have saved her daughter's life.

Sarah's parents Sara and Michael Payne, pictured after Roy Whiting was found guilty of their daughter's murder. Picture: PA.
Sarah's parents Sara and Michael Payne, pictured after Roy Whiting was found guilty of their daughter's murder. Picture: PA.

Michael was found dead in his Maidstone flat in October 2014 after developing a drink problem following his daughter's death.

Kent Police said that even when a Sarah's Law application is rejected, officers may still take action to ensure a child's safety.

Superintendent Andy Pritchard said: "The overarching priority for Kent Police is protecting vulnerable children from harm.

"Where members of the public make requests for disclosure under the scheme, we carefully consider the circumstances of each request, balancing the confidentiality of the individual and any potential risk to a child in coming to a decision whether or not to make a disclosure. Where it is appropriate the necessary disclosure is made.

"Where disclosure is not made action may nevertheless be taken in the form of referral to partner agencies including social services and disclosure under other legislation.

"Additionally, there will be occasions where insufficient information has been provided to enable an application to be fully processed, or the application is withdrawn prior to completion.

"It is also important to note that sometimes there is nothing to be disclosed about an individual.

"We would not regard these as 'unsuccessful applications', nor we suspect would many of the applicants and their families who are reassured when this is the case."

Close This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.Learn More