She learned the truth about the man she fell for. Now she's terrified with nowhere to turn

Each time Alicia leaves her house, she braces herself for what lies just around the corner.

Even a quick trip to the shops, or a walk down the street to pick her child up from school has become dictated by fear over running into her ex-partner Simon*, who she alleges was consistently abusive towards her.

Although he has never been convicted of any violence or coercive control against her, Alicia alleges Simon was consistently violent towards her during the course of their three year relationship. However, a court did grant her a non-molestation order barring him from contacting her or going within 50 metres of her home after she told them he was repeatedly harassing her following the end of their relationship.

However, he has repeatedly broken the terms of the order, resulting in four short-term spells in jail since October 2022. Each time his sentence is up, he is released within two miles of her - and on multiple occasions, just a street away.

To make matters worse, Alicia says she is never given notice of his release date by authorities - meaning she is constantly on high alert. She told the Manchester Evening News she has even considered abandoning her family home and fleeing the area she has raised her children in to get away from him - but feels she should not have to give up her life as a consequence of Simon's actions.

READ MORE: 'I'm a victim of Netflix cyberstalker Matthew Hardy - he left me scared for my life'

"All my doors are locked all the time," she said. "I have visions of him in the garden, waiting for me to come home. I think if he was living somewhere else it would be out of sight, out of mind. But because he's so close, I can't go to the shops or walk to the school.

"I'm constantly on edge."

Domestic violence charity Refuge say experiences such as Alicia's 'highlight the unfair burden of responsibility being put upon survivors to protect themselves,' and called on authorities to 'prioritise the safety of women'.

The pair started dating in 2016, and their relationship moved quickly, with Simon moving into Alicia's house and living alongside her children within months. At first, she felt positive about him, but became increasingly concerned after living together revealed his excessive alcohol and drug habit, she claims.

"I'd find bottles of vodka hidden behind the stove, behind the cupboards, in the bin, in the garage," Alicia said. "Every time I called him out he'd get angry and say, why are you spying on me?"

Alicia quickly discovered she was pregnant with Simon's child, but during her pregnancy the relationship grew more fractious, and Simon's angry outbursts began to turn violent. Alicia recalls one particular day she left him in charge of her eldest child, begging him not to drink.

"I picked them up and he was a mess," she recalled. "So when we got home I was giving him the silent treatment. But then he dragged me down in my kitchen and pinned me to the floor in front of my son."

On several occasions, Alicia kicked Simon out of her house - only for him to return, begging for another chance and telling her he had changed. Conscious of their unborn child, Alicia would let him back in, despite the alleged abuse.

But, after one particularly nasty incident, Alicia knew she had to end the relationship for good. She asked Simon to leave her house, and not to return.

However, Alicia says he continued to harass her both over text messages and in person, alleging that he glued her locks shut, smashed her car up, and threw bricks through her window.

"I got to the point where I'd had enough," she said. "I went to the police to report the violence and the messages. I put my foot down and had to be strong."

Simon was arrested and a non-molestation order surrounding Alicia and her children was put in place. But Alicia says Simon continued to 'do anything' to get in touch with her and breach the order - even messaging her family and friends and visiting her home, directly contradicting the terms of the non-molestation order.

Simon was later jailed for six months. Since then, he has been sent back to prison three times for his repeated harassment of Alicia.

"He doesn't care," she said. "Anything they give him, he's not bothered. He's not showing any signs of doing any better - he's been released to the same address, same friendship groups, he's doing the same things. Releasing someone into the same environment, how can they expect him to change?"

Alicia said she has even considered leaving her family home to get away from him, and was told she could stay in a hostel if she needed to leave the area. But she has been left questioning why she should have to leave her house when she is the victim.

"Why can't he be released to a hostel in a different area?," she said. "They wanted me to go out of the area when I've done nothing wrong - and I don't want to move.

"I just feel like, why should I have to go?"

Alicia said she has repeatedly complained to her victim liaison officer (VLO) about Simon being released a street away from her. Prior to his latest release, she successfully campaigned for him to be released further away from her after a complaint to the probation service through her VLO. However, he was still released within two miles of her home, to a street classed in the same area as hers.

The M.E.N approached the probation service for comment, and we were passed on to the Ministry of Justice. We asked why a known offender has been consistently released back to an address so close to his victim, whether this is safe, and if in situations such as these it is possible for an offender to be released to temporary accommodation elsewhere.

A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said: “The Government has introduced domestic abuse prevention orders, tagging and other restrictions on vile perpetrators to make sure victims feel safe in their own homes.

“Victims also have the opportunity to request licence conditions prohibiting offenders contacting them or going to certain areas with the prospect of being hauled back to prison if they break the rules.”

However Alicia has also faced struggles to keep measures designed to keep her safe in place. After Simon's non-molestation order was enforced, Alicia's housing association put cameras up around the entrances to her property. But these have since been taken down and described as a 'temporary measure' - despite them capturing vital evidence of Simon's breaches in the past.

Her access to a support worker has also been sporadic, as each time Simon returns to prison she says the support is removed due to her no longer being 'high risk'.

"They've taken my security blanket away," she said. "It just feels like I haven't got anybody. There's nobody fighting my corner. There's just not the support out there.

"Why should I flee, when he's the perpetrator and I'm the victim?"

Alicia's housing association Stockport Homes Group said: "The safety of customers, and the community is of utmost importance to Stockport Homes Group. A dedicated Safety Neighbourhood Team works collaboratively with partners to ensure support is available for customers.

"John Bowker, Executive Director of Operations says, “Our teams have been supporting the resident to ensure their safety, including the use of our ‘Lend a Cam’ service, which places cameras in the home for up to 28 days to help capture evidence of crime and antisocial behaviour. In this particular case, the cameras were left in situ for around 4 months, and successfully captured evidence that led to the residents ex-partner being arrested and remanded into custody.”

“These cameras are in high demand across the Borough with a waiting list currently in place and they are distributed in accordance with the risk posed. Following the 4 month period, a risk assessment was carried out with the resident and the decision to remove the camera was agreed. With the perpetrator in prison at that time, the risk had significantly reduced.

SHG will continue to review the risk with the resident and take appropriate supportive action in conjunction with other agencies."

Jessica Eagelton, Head of Policy, Public Affairs and Research at Refuge, said: "The failure to recognise the acute risk housing a perpetrator nearby to their survivor poses, speaks to the minimisation of violence against women and girls across society. It is extremely worrying to see that women’s safety is not being prioritised in basic decision-making processes, be that within the criminal justice system, or decisions made by the police or local authorities.

"Such experiences highlight the unfair burden of responsibility being put upon survivors to protect themselves. To ensure women’s safety, we must put the onus firmly on perpetrators to stop committing crimes against women and on authorities to prioritise the safety of women. We must restore survivors’ trust in our public services and criminal justice system to prevent negligent oversights that endanger women and their children.”

*Names have been changed to protect the victim's identity