Author Archive

The End of Policing… Sex Work

Posted by admin

Alex S. Vitale, Professor of Sociology at Brooklyn College, discusses the policing of sex work and offers an excerpt from his new book The End of Policing

 

Police in Manchester and across the UK are hard at work  criminalizing people involved in sex work. We should all be concerned about poor working conditions and acts of violence and coercion that sometimes occur in this industry. What is clear, however, is that using police to manage this is counterproductive. Recent raids in Manchester conducted in the name of fighting trafficking and helping women have uncovered poor working conditions but not coercion and the women arrested or referred to services have not seen dramatic improvements in their life circumstances. Police have even admitted that many have returned to sex work. It’s time to embrace the work of groups like the English Collective of Prostitutes and the Sex Workers and Advocacy Movement (SWARM) and call for the decriminalization of sex work.

The following is an excerpt from my book The End of Policing that describes the problems with relying on police to regulate commercial sex.

When we allow police to regulate our sexual lives, we inflict tremendous harm on some of the most vulnerable people in our society. Young people, poor women, and transgendered persons who rely on the sex industry to survive and even thrive are forced by police into the shadows, leaving them vulnerable to abuse, exploitation, and diminished health outcomes.

Despite decades of police enforcement, commercial sexual services remain easily available, from the $5,000-a-night escorts hired by Wall Street executives and elected officials to those who turn $20 tricks in inner-city alleyways. Even when individual sex workers move out of the profession as a result of police action, others replace them, and there is never a shortage of clients. At best, police can claim that their efforts limit the extent and visibility of the sex industry. It is true that concerted intensive police enforcement can sometimes drive streetwalkers from a specific location, but they move to more remote outdoor locations or indoor ones. This may provide some benefits for residents but does nothing to reduce the overall prevalence of commercial sex or improve the lives of sex workers themselves. Commercial sex has proven largely impervious to punitive policing.

Policing has aimed not to eradicate prostitution but to drive it underground. This process leaves these workers without a means to complain when they are raped, beaten, or otherwise victimized, strengthens the hands of pimps and traffickers, and contributes to unsafe sex practices. When sex workers are forced to labor in a hidden, illegal economy, they have little recourse to the law to protect their rights and safety. Even when they are technically able to ask for police protection from violence, it is rarely forthcoming. Because of their social position and a history of disregard and abuse at the hands of police, these workers rarely see police intervention as being in their best interest. Sex workers have an interest in maintaining the anonymity of their clients; criminal prosecution and public embarrassment are bad for business. There are rarely credit-card receipts, photocopies of IDs, or surveillance footage that might be used to identify and prosecute offenders. Even when there is some evidence, victims are generally loath to open themselves up to additional police scrutiny for fear that they or their establishment might be raided.

In addition, sex workers have no ability to access basic workplace protections. They cannot complain about fire hazards or file complaints about stolen wages. They can’t sue for theft of services or contractual breaches. The only tool they have is to withhold their labor, but even this may be constrained by coercive labor practices ranging from psychological manipulation to enslavement.

Criminalization also strengthens the hand of pimps, organized criminals, and traffickers. Because there are limited legal ways of entering most sex work and because of the criminal status of most of this work which can produce huge financial rewards, third parties play an important role in recruiting and coercing participants. Also, there is a value in being able to provide protection, secure hidden work sites, and organize cooperation from the police. These services are best provided by those already involved in illegal activity. All of this makes it difficult for workers to self-organize to participate independently in the sex economy. Property rentals, security services, and advertising must all be handled covertly, often through fictitious companies or other fronts. Even streetwalkers must contend with informally organized strolls, in which more regular and organized participants either drive off newcomers or force them into their own organizations. In some cases, pimps force sex workers into their “protection” as a way of guaranteeing their ability to ply their trade. Other pimps work in true partnership with sex workers, providing support and protection for a share of the earnings.

Exploitative pimps are motivated to coerce participation in sex work by the money, and because they know that workers have little legal recourse. Police often view these sex workers as offenders rather than victims and fail to take their requests for help seriously. Also, those who are pressured, coerced, or even voluntarily enter this work often come from very disadvantaged circumstances and may have mental health and substance abuse problems or have been the victims of childhood sexual abuse. All of this contributes to social isolation and vulnerability that makes them easier to control. Simplistic “rescue” efforts fail to deal with the depth of isolation and hardship facing these people. Sex workers who are offered counseling and drug treatment but not jobs and housing will often return to sex work, even in an abusive form, because they are not given a sustainable way out. Exploiters capitalize on this dynamic to keep them isolated and dependent.

The illegality of both sex work and drugs creates profit incentives for organized crime to link the two. Sex workers are sometimes given drugs or pressured to become drug dependent as a way of managing them. Others become enticed or coerced into sex work to maintain their drug habits. Clients are also often offered drugs as part of their sexual experience. Offering these two services in tandem is wildly profitable for organized crime, since the avenues of distribution and the provision of security from police and competitors often overlap.

Marginalization also contributes to unsafe sex practices. One of the most troubling is that police often regard possession of condoms as evidence of prostitution. Since streetwalkers often work in cars, parks, or other informal locations, the only way to ensure safe sex practices is to carry condoms. They must then weigh the long-term risks of disease against the short-term risks of arrest and prosecution. Clients will sometimes pay more for sex without condoms, and pimps can drive women to earn more in this way or risk abuse.

Finally, while a few cities, such as San Francisco, have public health clinics for sex workers, many workers have difficulty accessing appropriate care because they lack health insurance and fear being stigmatized or criminalized. Finally, the police themselves have been implicated in demanding unprotected sex as a condition of avoiding arrest.

 Police corruption plays a major role in the abuse and marginalization of sex workers and undermines public confidence in the police. Vice crimes such as gambling, prostitution, and substance abuse lend themselves to police corruption for a number of reasons. Police can enact harsh penalties, and those engaged in illegal activity usually have the resources to buy them off. Furthermore, enforcement is largely discretionary, so there is tremendous temptation for police to look the other way in return for bribes or actively pursue bribes as a form of “rent seeking,” in which they use their position to maximize extorted earnings.

In just the last few years, American police have been implicated in running and providing protection for brothels, demanding sex from prostitutes to avoid arrest, hiring underage prostitutes, acting as pimps, stealing from and assaulting sex workers, and demanding bribes from prostitutes and their clients. There is no way to know the full extent of these practices, but the problem is widespread and ongoing. A 2005 survey of sex workers found that 14 percent had had sexual experiences with police and 16 percent had experienced police violence, while only 16 percent reported having had a good experience going to the police for help. Another study found that a third of the violence young sex workers experienced came at the hands of police.

The goal of any new approach to sex work should be to take the coercion out of the process while understanding that, whether you personally find it distasteful or not, sex work will continue. Therefore, we should endeavor to improve the lives of sex workers and offer them voluntary pathways out of a job that can be difficult, demeaning, and even dangerous. While those who fit the idealized image of the college student paying her way through school with sex work before going on to a successful “legitimate” career are a small sliver of the market, many choose this work over low-paid employment in sweatshops, diners, hotels, and kitchens. All of these workplaces can also be demeaning, dangerous, and even sexually exploitative—just ask domestic workers in Singapore, maquiladora workers in Mexico, or hotel maids in Manhattan.

In upstate New York, Susan Dewey found that almost all the sex workers she interviewed had previous employment and that most cycled between sex work and low-paid service work. Most preferred sex work because of the potential for financial windfalls, whereas service work was “exploitative, exclusionary, and without hope of social mobility or financial stability.”

From Mexico to New Zealand to rural Nevada, decriminalizing or regulating sex work reduces harm to sex workers, their clients, and communities, with very little role for the police. Decriminalized sex work has dramatically reduced the role of organized crime and police corruption and in many cases allows for greatly improved working conditions in which sanitation, safety, and safe sex practices are widespread and reinforced through government oversight. Civilian health workers rather than police are the primary agents of regulation, encouraging greater cooperation and compliance. This approach also undermines the view of sex workers as helpless victims in need of saving, which is degrading, stigmatizing, and simply inaccurate.

Do these approaches encourage sexual commerce by giving it the patina of legitimacy? Perhaps. But if the central social concerns of coercion and disease are being managed more effectively than under prohibition, isn’t that a success? We should embrace these approaches as a starting point for policies that directly address social harms rather than moral panics. While commercial sex work will always have harm attached to it, so do legal sweatshops. In fact, the subordinate position of women in our economy and culture is the real harm left unaddressed by prohibition. Despite the lofty goals of abolitionists, as long as they are denied equal economic and political rights and equal pay for equal work, women will be forced into marginal forms of employment. As long as women and LGBTQ people are poor, socially isolated, and lack social and political power; as long as runaway and “throw away” kids have no place to turn but the streets, they will be at risk of trafficking and coercion. Neither the police nor the “rescuers” seem keen to address these social and economic realities.

 

Alex S. Vitale is a professor of Sociology and Coordinator of the Policing & Social Justice Project at Brooklyn College. He is the author of The End of Policing and tweets at @avitale

New study finds little if any evidence to suggest increased stop and search can reduce levels of violent crime

Posted by admin

Matteo Tiratelli of the University of Manchester discusses new research findings on stop and search.

Stop and search has been a controversial topic over the last few years. In 2014 the then Home Secretary, Theresa May, told MPs that as many as 250,000 street searches were probably carried out illegally last year and called for significant reductions in their use. In London these changes were already being championed by the commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, Sir Bernard Hogan Howe, who boasted that they had been reduced by almost a third. But, recently, as violent crime has risen, there’s been a backlash. Last year the new Met chief, Cressida Dick, called for more stops and searches. And earlier this year London’s Mayor, Sadiq Khan, went back on his election pledge and revealed that police would be ‘significantly’ increasing stop and search in London.

There are many different angles to approach stop and search form. Reports have shown a startling disparity in the likelihood of black and Asian men being stopped and searched. There have also been investigations into its impact on communities, on trust in the police and its possible role in the 2011 Riots. But, its rare to see people explicitly assess whether changes in the level of stop and search deter people from committing crimes. This is the implicit, ‘common-sense’ idea that lies behind recent attempts to use the overall level of stop and search as a policy tool to reduce crime. But, despite a feeling amongst many officers and policy-makers that ‘it must have an effect’, there’s not much evidence to base these policies on.

Our study aimed to test this ‘common-sense’ assumption. Using ten years of Metropolitan Police data (2004-2014), grouped in months and weeks within each London Borough, we tested a large number of possible associations between stop and search under different powers and different crime types. The central finding is that the effect of stop and search on crime is marginal, at best. Although you can never prove a null hypothesis, there’s precious little evidence of a meaningful effect. We find some associations, particularly suggesting that stop and search might be reducing the number of recorded drug offences, but the overall picture is of tiny and inconsistent effects. Given recent trends in London, we were particularly interested in the connection between stop and search and violent crime. Looking initially at non-domestic violent crime we found no real evidence of an effect. The tiny association between section 1 and section 47 (weapon) searches showed that a 10% increase in stop and search would lead to a 0.01% decline in crime, but this effect disappeared when we looked across months and other search powers. When we tested the same models using ambulance incident data for calls related to ‘stab/shot/weapon wounds’, we found no significant effects whatsoever. This all suggests that, if there is any association between the overall level of stop and search and crime, it is likely to be at the outer margins of social and statistical significance.

This finding echos earlier studies. A Home Office report into the impact of Operation BLUNT 2 (a knife crime initiative involving a large increase in section 60 searches in some Metropolitan Police borough) found no effects. There were similar findings from a variety of other studies looking at New York, London and Chicago, all of which we describe in our paper. If this is the evidence base for Sadiq Khan’s policy proposals, then it’s not a strong one.

What should we conclude from this? If we are interested in policy tools which will reduce the overall level of crime, particularly violent crime, then there’s not much evidence to suggest that forcing/empowering officers to do extra searches on each patrol is going to be effective. But, this was never the legal justification for stop and search in the first place. The question should not be about if token stops and searches will deter potential offenders, but whether each and every stop is legally and operationally justified.

 

Matteo Tiratelli is a PhD candidate at the University of Manchester looking at the changing practice of rioting in Britain from 1800 to 1939. His broader interests are in power, protest and the state. He also works for the Labour MP, Marsha de Cordova. He tweets at @MatteoTiratelli

The full academic article upon which this blog is based can be found here: https://academic.oup.com/bjc/advance-article/doi/10.1093/bjc/azx085/4827589

 

The Angiolini Review

Posted by admin

Dr Lisa Long provides her expert analysis on the Angioloni Review but expresses concerns are around the extent to which the government will take up the mantle and respond to what are some very good recommendations.

The long delayed report of the Independent Review of Deaths and Serious Incidents in Police Custody, chaired by Dame Elish Angiolini is far-reaching in scope and sets out some brave and necessary recommendations for urgent change to policy and practice. The recommendations pertain significantly to the police, but also to the NHS, Local Authorities, Coroners Investigations, The Health and Safety Executive and the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC).

The use of restraint is one of the key issues for the review, in particular the convergence of policing with management and treatment of mental health conditions and the exacerbation of risk of death posed by a mental health crisis. Angiolini should be commended for recognising the role that stereotypes play in shaping the experience and outcome of policing contact for those deemed to pose an exceptional risk. Those experiencing mental health crisis are one such example and those from Black and ethnic minority communities are another. It acknowledges that issues of stereotyping surrounding risk and threat shape police responses and indeed, this recognition is long overdue.

The report evidently draws from the experiences of the families of those who have died in police custody and their welfare and role in the investigation is central to the report and its recommendations. Unsurprisingly, it finds that the families of those who die in police custody have little faith in the Independent Police Complaints Commission with its independence brought into question by the number of former police officers who act as lead investigators. Further, the perception of a failure in accountability is compounded by unnecessary delays in the process and a lack of information about the investigation.

The reviews 110 recommendations are most importantly aimed at preventing future deaths in police custody, through the appropriate use of restraint techniques and an awareness developed through mandatory and standardised training including a focus on de-escalation particularly in response to those most vulnerable.  When death follows police contact, the recommendations focus on expediency of the investigation, relieving the emotional and financial burden on the family and loved ones and ensuring transparency and accountability through the established processes.

The Governments initial response to the report indicates that change in some areas will follow. For example, the government has made a commitment to phasing out the use of police stations as a designated place of safety for children detained under Mental Health Act. However, it appears less committed to the provision of automatic access to non-means tested legal aid or a dedicated counselling service to support families to deal with the trauma. It highlights that, in cases where charges of murder or manslaughter are likely to be brought, the family will be eligible to access the Ministry of Justice funded National Homicide Service. Indeed, if the likelihood of criminal investigation continues to follow the current pattern, most families will remain ineligible for support.

Crucially however, the government has so far failed to respond to or acknowledge the claim made in the review that ’deaths of people from BAME communities, in particular young Black men, resonate with the Black community’s experience of systemic racism, and reflect wider concerns about discriminatory over-policing, stop and search, and criminalisation (5.6)’.   In response to ethnic disproportionality, the government refers to the rolling out of unconscious bias training.  This approach focuses on the individuals unconsciously held attitudes and beliefs but avoids dealing with the entrenched institutional racism within the police service.  Lessons must be learnt from the failure of the post-Macpherson reform to result in any meaningful and sustained change in how Black and ethnic minority communities experience policing. This highlights the risk posed by defensive or denial responses in mitigating against meaningful and sustainable change.

It is imperative that this government responds with urgent legislative and policy responses and investment in services in order to prevent further deaths in custody. One death is one death too many. As argued by Stafford Scott, if the government  fail to act in the face of these robust evidence based recommendations, the Home Office will be to blame for likely future deaths in custody- they will have  blood on their hands.

 

Dr Lisa Long is a Senior Lecturer in Criminology at Leeds Beckett University. Her teaching and research interests focus on race and racism in policing. She is currently writing a book –Perpetual Suspects?: A Critical Race Theory of Black and Mixed-Race experiences of Policing – to be published by Palgrave Macmillan in Summer 2018.

sound of da police livestream

Posted by admin

Below is the livestream video from the event : sound of da police 8th August 2017 STUN studio, Z-Arts

 

[https://youtu.be/MIc0MqzocoA]

How do we address police harassment, brutality and racism in a world where our Black and Asian communities are often considered ‘gangsters’ and ‘terrorists’?

Listen to our fantastic panel, drawing on the expertise of local academics, youth and community workers.

– Becky Clark, Senior Lecturer, Manchester Metropolitan University
– Patrick Williams, Senior Lecturer, Manchester Metropolitan University
– Akemia Minott, Moss Side Youth Worker
– CHAIR: Anthony Downer, Social Activist

This event is hosted by the Northern Police Monitoring Project (NPMP).
We are an independent grassroots organisation and we take no money from the state or the police.

Police legitimacy and accountability; a reflection on protest and rage.

Posted by admin

Dr Lisa Long

If rage had no capacity for producing change, then it would not be regarded as being as threatening as it is. With so much overt and covert racialized hatred and violence against black bodies, it is a powerful distortion of rage that the group on whom the oppression is imposed is seen as the one full of uncontrollable rage (Cohan, 2017: 38).

Edir Frederico Da Costa, a young black man and father died on Wednesday 21st June, six days after his arrest by the Metropolitan Police. It is reported that the arrest involved use of force and the deployment of CS gas. Da Costa’s family claim that they had been told by a doctor at the hospital that he had severe injuries which had caused him to convulse. The official narrative, as may be expected, is different. The IPCC (Independent Police Complaints Commission) sought to halt the spread of information regarding Da Costa’s injuries by releasing the conclusions of the preliminary coroner’s report on Friday 23rd June. The IPCC states that the coroner found no evidence to support the claim that his neck was broken on arrival at hospital and the coroner found no evidence of severe injuries (IPCC, 2017). Investigations are continuing into the cause of death.  Meanwhile, the IPCC has begun an investigation into the circumstances surrounding Da Costa’s death.

It is unsurprising that the family of da Costa and the local community want answers- as we all should.  On Sunday 25th June there was a planned ‘peaceful protest’ outside of Forest Gate police station in London. Later in the day, stories emerged on social media of protesters clashing with police and riot police being deployed to the area.  Some commentators on social media have already condemned the protesters as ‘barbaric’, as ‘black gangsters’ and Da Costa as a criminal who is to blame for his own death. The media focus is on the six police officers who, it is claimed, sustained injuries during the clashes.

This is business as usual. The rage of families and communities following a death in custody is frequently depoliticised through the relocation of blame on the victim and the community. The perception of black and brown bodies as threat is reflected in the discourses surrounding deaths in custody- ‘State Talk’ (Pemberton, 2008).  These discursive strategies legitimise the use of force and perpetuate the criminogenic image of the black male and increasingly other bodies of colour-most recently Asian men.  This is not just a police problem, the media construct and reproduce images, the state and law enforcement agencies respond to them and the racialization of crime becomes a fact that the police respond to legitimizing harsher policing strategies (Hall et al., 1978).

In the midst of terrorism fears, the National Police Chief’s Council is to debate offering guns to all frontline officers (Dodd, 2017). A terrifying prospect taking into account disproportionality in restraint related deaths in custody. In 2016, Janet Hills, the President of the National Black Police Association expressed concerns over the proposal to roll out tasers to all police officers (Asthana and Grierson, 2016). She was right to do so, people of colour are disproportionately on the receiving end of a taser discharge – 40% of cases where tasers have been used since 2014 involved black or black mixed-race ‘suspects’ (CRAE, 2017). This includes children; according to the CRAE, 70% of all children tasered by the police were from ethnic minority communities.  Taser is not a soft alternative to guns, it is a potentially lethal firearm linked to a number of deaths including that of retired black footballer Dalian Atkinson in August, 2016.  

There were a total 510 ‘BME’ deaths in custody (police, prison and mental health detention) between 1991 and 2014. This includes 10 unlawful killing verdicts at inquest. However, there have not been any successful prosecutions in this time (Athwal and Bourne, 2015). If police accountability is ‘constructed’ in order to maintain state narratives of accountability (Baker, 2016), rather than to hold the police to account for their actions, it is inevitable that both the police and the mechanisms for investigating their mis/conduct, including the IPCC, will not be viewed as legitimate.  In the absence of a trusted system for securing accountability, protest is a legitimate response.  Protest is not ‘barbaric’. It is the reaction of communities in pain; communities that are subjected to systemic racist violence on a daily basis. As Cohan argues above, rage can produce change; in the face of systemic inequalities sometimes rage is the only power we have.   

 

Dr Lisa Long is a Senior Lecturer of Criminology at Leeds Beckett University, her research addresses race, racism and policing.

This piece is her first blog post and a response to the widespread social media condemnation of Forest Gate protesters in the wake of the death of  Edir Frederico Da Costa following his arrest by the Metropolitan Police.

 

References

Asthana and Grierson (2016). Leader of black police officers warns against taser rollout proposals. The Guardian. 16th August [online] www.theguardian.com

Athwal, H and Bourne, J (2015) Dying for Justice: IRR:London [online] http://s3-eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/wpmedia.outlandish.com/irr/2017/04/26155052/Dying_for_Justice_web.pdf

Baker, D (2016) Death after police contact: constructing accountability in the 21st century. Basingstoke:Macmillan-Palgrave.

Cohan, D (2017) Rage and Activism; The Promise of Black Lives Matter chapter in Weissinger, S.E, Mack, D.A and Watson, E. Violence Against Black Bodies: An Intersectional Analysis of How Black Lives Continue to Matter. London:Routledge.

Children’s Rights Alliance (2017). CRAE Press Statement on increase in Taser officers. [online] http://www.crae.org.uk/news/crae-press-statement-on-increase-in-taser-officers [accessed 23.06.17]

Dodd, V (2017) Police chiefs to discuss offering guns to all frontline officers. The Guardian. 23 June. [online] https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/23/police-chiefs-to-discuss-offering-guns-to-all-frontline-officers?CMP=share_btn_tw [Accessed 23.06.17].

Hall et al (1978) Policing the Crisis: Mugging, the State and Law and Order.

IPCC statement following the death of Edir Frederico Da Costa, IPCC, June 23rd 2017  [online] https://www.ipcc.gov.uk/news/update-ipcc-statement-following-death-edir-frederico-da-costa

Pemberton (2008) Demystifying Deaths in Police Custody: Challenging State Talk. Social and Legal Studies Vol 17(2) 237-262

 

Police Stop and Search Powers – A brief guide

Posted by admin

The police have various powers to stop and search individuals. When misused a person may later be able to pursue a complaint and/or civil claim against the police for false imprisonment, assault or breach of their human rights.

The main police stop and search powers are as follows:

S1 Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984

This power can be used to stop anyone in a public place. A police officer can stop, detain and search a person or vehicle or anything in the vehicle for stolen or prohibited items. The police officer must have reasonable suspicion for suspecting they will find a prohibited item.  This stop and search power is frequently used by the police.

S23 Misuse of Drugs Act

The police often search individuals suspected of carrying drugs. Like the power under s1 of PACE, the police have to show that they have reasonable suspicion to suspect that a person is in possession of a controlled drug.

NOTE:  The police officer conducting the search is required to create a search record recording the object of the search, the grounds for making it, the date, time and place of conduct of the search and whether anything was found.  This search record or receipt should be provided at the scene but can also be obtained by the individual at a local police station.

NOTE: A police officer can ask an individual to remove outer clothing when conducting a search. If the police officer wants to remove more than outer clothing the search must be conducted by a person of the same sex. If an individual is asked to remove religious clothing e.g. a veil or turban, this must be done out of public view.

‘Stop and account’

This occurs when a person is approached by a police officer and asked to account for their behaviour, presence or any items in their possession. There is no law that allows police officers to require a person to ‘stop and account’ and an individual is not obliged to cooperate with the police. However, refusal to provide information may form grounds for reasonable suspicion to stop and search an individual under the statutory powers described above.

S60 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994

The police can stop and search any person or vehicle in a defined area within 24 hours without the need to establish reasonable suspicion. This power originally arose out of a need to tackle football hooliganism and is often used today to target low-level disorder, protests and knife crime.

Schedule 7 Terrorism Act 2000

The powers under the Terrorism Act allow ‘examining officers’ at ports and airports, to stop, question and detain individuals whom they suspect are involved in acts of terrorism, without the need for any reasonable suspicion.

Stopping motorists under the Road Traffic Act 1988

The police have the power to stop a vehicle for any reason and an individual will be committing a criminal offence if they fail to stop. A police officer can ask to see an individual’s driving licence, insurance documents or MOT certificate. If these documents are not provided at the time an individual must provide them to a police station within 7 days.

 

Taken from http://www.broudiejacksoncanter.co.uk/blog/2016/08/police-stop-and-search-powers-a-brief-guide

 

Institutional Racism Stretches From McKinney To The Met

Posted by admin

POLICING LONDON: The Met is the subject of a BBC documentary

BY NOW you will have seen the video of Texas police officers aggressively rounding up black teens at pool party to which they were invited.

Those that haven’t can watch the chilling incident here:

Watching the video evokes imagery of a slave master rounding up his unruly slaves.

This is perhaps unsurprising when you consider that today’s police force emerged from slave patrols, and has since failed to account for its institutional racism.

Much as slaves of the past committed no offence, the only ‘offence’ committed here was to have the audacity to accept a party invitation.

The video that shows Eric Casebold throwing a teenage girl to the ground, drawing his gun on unarmed black teenagers and hurling a tirade of profanities (all while the white teenagers seemed invisible), drew widespread criticism; criticism that has, accompanied by some flimsy excuses from his attorney, led to his resignation.

Those moving to celebrate this resignation as the serving of racial justice should recognise that this is a move that allows the officer to retain his pension and benefits.
More importantly, as the problem is framed as one of the individual and his bizarre Power Ranger-style barrel role, this is a resignation that should be seen as an attempt for the police force to retain its reputation.

This incident should be viewed in its larger transatlantic social context; that is, as another racist incident in an interminable line of police brutalities and disproportionality.

Earlier this week the first episode in the BBC’s documentary about The Met Police saw the commissioner acknowledge the racism in his force – a good start.

Unfortunately, the documentary failed to show any meaningful attempts at reform.
Showing a force obsessed with managing its public image on racism, rather than its actual endemic racism, did little to restore faith.

This was epitomised by the showing of the black Haringey Borough Commissioner Victor Olisa struggling, rather robotically, to empathise with the black community.

His concerns seemed to be primarily with the black community not accepting him, rather than the widely criticised Mark Duggan inquest verdict.

The show saw a black youth being fined for cannabis possession, the response to a report of a ‘Somali male with a gun’ that resulted in officers finding only some gardening shears in a bin; an all-white panel discussing issues of race; and Stephen Greenhalgh, the deputy mayor for policing and crime in London, disrespecting, rather than listening to, the well-known black activist Lee Jasper.

The commissioner, Bernard Hogan-Howe, was right to suggest that racism is a societal issue. Recent reports of calls to the police to report suspicious activities such as ‘walking whilst Black’ stand testament to this.

Hogan-Howe however needs not to use this to excuse his force, but to recognise the police’s central role in creating and maintaining these stereotypes of Black criminality.

As Cornell William Brooks, director of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), said: “The resignation of Corporal Eric Casebolt is a good first step, but hardly the last.”

On both sides of the Atlantic, relations between the police and Black communities are at a considerable low. We need to continue to put pressure on the police for wholesale reform.

Remi Joseph-Salisbury is a PhD candidate at the University of Leeds with broad interests in race and racism, particularly in the UK and US

In Memory of Deyika Nzeribe (1966-2017)

Posted by admin

Deyika Nzeribe was one of the founders and main organisers of the Northern Police Monitoring Project. His hard work and creativity made many of the events and services that the NPMP have offered in the past, possible. However, Deyika’s work transcended NPMP. He was a tireless campaigner, a friend, a father, a brother and an inspiration to all those whose lives he had touched. But it was the humilty, that informed all of his work, that made what he did infinetely more admirable.This short piece, written by Tanzil Chowdhury, was originally read out at as a eulogy at his funeral.

There is something interesting about the humble giant. She, or in this case he, gives themself selflessly to their family, friends and their community. Their presence in those peoples lives is persistent, positive and enriching. They always are there to help us if we need them, to lean on. Yet though we benefit from them and our lives are nourished by their selflessness, the humble giant remains quiet. His work is almost always behind the scenes, never done for any public praise or gratitute, but exclusively motivated just to make the lives of others better.

They are an oxymoron, for their presence in our lives is so notable and benevolent but they remain the unsung hero. Deyika, was one such person. You may not know it, but whatever is better and good in your community, was most likely because it was in someway touched by this great brother.

When Deyika was ever involved with something, it gave one the comfort and confidence that anything was possible. There is a story I’ve told many others, that one night a few months ago, Deyika texted me out of the blue and simply said ‘Tanzil, we need to Free the Black Panthers from jail.’ Had anyone else said that, I would have replied with sour realism. But with Deyika, anything  was a possibility. It is no surprise therefore, that my last interaction with this titan of a man, was trying to free political prisoners.

Rest in eternal Power Deyika. Keep an eye on us all from above.

Know Your Rights Workshop

Posted by admin

‘KNOW YOUR RIGHTS’ WORKSHOP & BRIEFING

NORTHERN POLICE MONITORING PROJECT 

Intro

 

 

Stop & Search

General Points

 

 

The Power to Search

Being Searched

If The Police Find Something

After the Search

Breakdown of Search Procedure

 

Potential Offences

General Points

 

Being Moved Out Of An Area

Trespass

 

 

Aggravated Trespass

 

 

Obstruction of the Highway

 

Section 14 Public Order Act 1986 ‘Public Assembly’

 

Behavioural Offences

 

Section 1 Public Order Act 1986 ‘Riot’

 

 

Section 2 Public Order Act ‘Violent Disorder’

 

Section 3 Public Order Act ‘Affray’

 

Section 4 Public Order Act ‘Threatening Behaviour’

 

Section 4A Public Order Act ‘Disorderly Behaviour With Harassment’ 

 

Section 5 Public Order Act ‘Disorderly Conduct’

 

Breach of the Peace

 

 

Assaulting or Obstructing A Police Officer

 

 

 

 

Arrest

 

General Advice

 

 

Guidelines on Police Behaviour

 

The Result

 

  1. You are released with no further action taken against you.
  2. You are charged with an offence and released on bail to appear in court at a later date. There may be bail conditions imposed, such as staying away from a certain area or not attending specific events. There has been some interest in challenging the way bail conditions have been imposed in a ‘blanket’ manner when a large group of people have all been arrested together. To be released on bail, you must sign a paper agreeing to the conditions, legal advice should be requested before you sign.
  3. You are charged and held over to be brought into court the next day (or the following Monday if it is a weekend). This is usually done if you do not agree to your bail conditions, or if the police do not believe they should release you (because you might leave the country, etc.).
  4. You are bailed, pending further enquiries, to return to the same police station at a later date. This means the police have not decided whether to charge you or not. It often means they need more time to look over the evidence. You might, as above, be given bail conditions. You will need to sign a paper before being released.

 

 

Action Against The Police

 

General Points

Wrongful Arrest

 

 

Malicious Prosecution

 

Injured by the Police

 

Practical Advice

 

  

Sources

Adapted and expanded from the Green and Black Cross ‘Know Your Rights’ Training v3.1

http://greenandblackcross.org/legal/resources

http://www.activistslegalproject.org.uk/

http://www.coomber-rich.co.uk/offences_guide/public_order_offences/

http://netpol.org/resources/law-and-occupations/#3

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2010/jun/10/stop-and-search-terror-police-statistics

http://netpol.org/2012/08/13/end-s60-stop-and-search/

http://www.iengage.org.uk/component/content/article/1-news/1241-home-office-releases-latest-stop-a-search-figures

http://www.pannone.com/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/25355/Actions-Agaianst-The-police.pdf

http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2011/feb/24/stop-and-search-fall-counterterrorism-powers

http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2012/10/rough-guide-to-filming-police-during-a-stop-search-2476222.html

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/p_to_r/public_order_offences/#Riot

http://www.inbrief.co.uk/offences/prosecution-for-assaulting-a-police-officer.htm

http://www.inbrief.co.uk/offences/breach-of-the-peace.htm

http://www.inbrief.co.uk/offences/public-nuisance.htm

Public Order Offences Solicitors

previous events

Posted by admin

Some of the previous events NPMP have run:

Gangsters & Terrorists? – criminalising our black and asian communities

Death on Camera: Justice4 Christopher Alder

Riots reframed documentary screening

Monitor training days