[2025] EWCA Crim 1320

The Serious Harm Prevention Order

By the SHPO, the judge made conventional orders to prevent unsupervised contact with girls. Paragraph 6 of the order then required that the appellant should not:

"... refuse to engage or take part in any polygraph examination as required to do so by the police officer or police staff member responsible for your management. The defendant must:

make his visor/offender manager for his area aware of any new relationships."

Section 343 of the Sentencing Act 2020 provides that a prohibition or requirement can only be included in an SHPO if it is necessary for protecting the public or any particular member of the public from sexual harm from the offender. In R v Parsons[2017] EWCA Crim 2163, this court explained that to be necessary the provisions of a SHPO must be effective, clear and realistic. They must be readily capable of enforcement and it must be remembered that breach of a prohibition or requirement constitutes a criminal offence punishable by imprisonment. The requirements must not therefore be oppressive or disproportionate. Here, paragraph 6 imposed two separate obligations. First, that the appellant should not refuse to engage or take part in any polygraph examination as required by the police responsible for his management. Secondly, that he should make an offender manager aware of any new relationship.