Dbs Query

[lsharp]

hi all please don't be judgemental rude or ignorant as iv had on previous posts i'm after someone who can give me a straight answer, basically a couple of years ago i was in a bit of a to do with my ex partner which led me to get arrested and charged with battery it went to court but there was lack of evidence therefore the judge put in place a "non conviction restraining order" to stop future problems between us, i have had an enhanced dbs come back and it says under convictions part: 1 conviction....the offence, dates etc but it also says "disposal: order varied". Does anyone know what this means and why it is under the convictions part when technically i wasn't actually convicted? i'm worrying myself sick now because i work in a school kitchen and have been honest with the head since day dot, she understood my circumstances at the time and was fine, but now it makes me look like iv lied to her, iv spoken to police, courts and my solicitor at the time who all said i wasn't convicted so why does it say that on my dbs??
thanks

[EDDIE51]

As I see this there was not enough evidence to convict you but there was sufficient evidence to issue a restraining order. That is what the DBS says, 'disposal' in this context means 'what the outcome of the case was' in your case it was the issue of an order.
If you had been convicted the DBS would say 'disposal community service
or 'disposal 3 months custody'
Hope someone with more knowledge sees this, New Judge for example

[lsharp]

oh ok so how comes it comes under the conviction part on a dbs even though i wasn't found guilty?

[EDDIE51]

I assume there is no other place to put it. A DBS is a record of convictions and cautions. There is no separate place for restraining orders so they are listed with convictions.

[EDDIE51]

Thinking about this.You were not found guilty, but nor were you found 'not guilty'. If you had been found not guilty nothing would appear on your DBS. You need to explain this to your head. You were not convicted but there was a restraining order issued.

[lsharp]

thank you for your help, iv already sat down with my head and explained that it went to court but i wasn't convicted instead a restraining order on aquitaine was issued she was absolutely fine with it as it was all domestic but now my main worry is the dbs says convictions 1

[New Judge]

“Thinking about this.You were not found guilty, but nor were you found 'not guilty'. “

No, you would not have been found either guilty or not guilty. Assuming you did not face a trial (where you would have been declared Not Guilty) it is probable that the prosecution “offered no evidence” in return for you accepting to be subject to the Restraining Order. If the charge was withdrawn then it is as if it was never put and your status (being either guilty or not guilty) is the same as mine in relation to the same allegation.

I think that the reason for the RO appearing under the “convictions” section of the DBS report is, as has been mentioned, that there is simply nowhere else to put it. It is quite clear from the wording that you have not been convicted and this should be obvious to anybody reading the report.