Home Affairs Committee: Written evidence Localised child grooming This volume contains the written evidence accepted by the Home Affairs Committee for the Localised child grooming inquiry. No. Author Page 01 Greater Manchester Police 1 03 Jim Phillips 3 04 The End Violence Against Women Coalition 4 05 NSPCC 8 05a Supplementary 13 06 Department for Education 16 06a Supplementary 35 07 Barnardo’s 41 08 Birmingham City Council 53 09 Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre 56 10 Missing People 65 11 Home Office 79 12 Carol Hopewell 86 13 The Howard League for Penal Reform 89 14 Serious Organised Crime Agency 94 15 Esther Rantzen 97 16a Steven Walker and Samantha Roberts 102 17 The Children's Society 107 17a Supplementary 120 18 South Yorkshire Police 125 19 Safe and Sound Derby 129 20 Chris Longley MBE 133 21 The Law Society 135 22 NWG Network in Association with Victim Support 137 23 Shaun Wright, South Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner 140 24 Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council 144 24a Supplementary 149 As at 23 April 2013 Supplementary written evidence submitted by Sir Peter Fahy, Chief Constable, Greater Manchester Police (LCH 01) Thank you for your letter dated 20th June 2012 requesting further information following the evidence we gave to the Committee on the 12th June. In GMP we consider the following alternative methods both in terms of investigation and/or in order to disrupt offenders activity in respect of grooming and child sexual exploitation cases: 1. DNA testing of clothing of potential victims of CSE. Often deployed in relation to regular Missing From Home's who are not disclosing intelligence to form the basis of a case. 2. Prosecution without a victim's account. Use of forensics as above and any circumstantial evidence we can build; we have had successful prosecutions in this way. 3. Obtaining access to Facebook and other similar social network sites using consent to print off potential evidence when unable to obtain evidence via conventional methods. 4. Intelligence based investigation. We often undertake in depth research on small pieces of intelligence and social media conversations to identify suspects. We used a Facebook conversation and photographs posted on-line which identified a registered sex offender who was targeting one of our victims through social media. 5. Forensic examinations of mobile phones and computers play a large part of our enquiries. We often use evidence of communications to corroborate or build up circumstantial evidence where we have little "traditional" evidence available. 6. Pro-active deployment to CSE Hotspots to identify potential CSE victims and build intelligence on possible offenders. A recent deployment and protect investigation led to finding a female who had been a high risk missing person for in excess of 6 weeks. 7. Disruptions • Warnings under S2 Abduction Act or under S49 Childrens Act. When possible we use body cameras or taped recorded interviews to record the evidence that the warnings have been given to negate future evidential disputes. • Intelligence profiles to identify other offences to take action. One case led to the arrest of a male for possessing firearms and drugs. Although we couldn’t prove the CSE he received 5 years imprisonment. • Use of other agencies- UKBA for deportation, housing associations for eviction, trading standards agencies to impose conditions/closure of premises. A recent case regarding an off licence, where there was insufficient evidence for a criminal case, is likely to lead to the suspect losing his licence for selling unlawful alcohol. • Work with Social Care to identify issues regarding appropriate accommodation for the child. 1 With reference to the IPCC involvement in the Rochdale case please find below the current terms of reference for their investigation which was dated 15th March 2012. i. It is agreed that the term “Initial Investigation” covers the period from 2008 up to February 2010 when the PPIU took over investigation of the incident. ii. GMP Professional Standards Branch (PSB) will obtain and review all relevant material obtained during the review process conducted into this case by the Major Crime Review Team. iii. The Rochdale Division Senior Leadership Team’s involvement and decision making in relation to the initial investigation will be investigated and the report will include details of the investigations undertaken and findings reached. iv. PSB will further consider whether notices should be served on any officer, including members of the SLT, and whether further investigation is required. Notices will be served / further investigations undertaken where it is identified that this is necessary. No final decision will be reached without consultation with the IPCC. v. The Investigating Officer's report will be reviewed and re-written in line with the above enquiries. Wherever recommendations are made, the report will provide the rationale for those recommendations. If any notices have been served, the report will reach clear findings on whether the member of staff / officer has a case to answer for misconduct or gross misconduct. vi. The report will also include a new section on the progress GMP has made within Child Protection arena since this case first came to light. This will include an explanation about the creation of the Public Protection Division and the Sunrise project dealing with Child Sexual Exploitation Team in Rochdale Division. vii. GMP will provide the IPCC with detailed monthly updates on the progress of this case until it is satisfactorily concluded. I trust this information is useful and if you require any further information please do not hesitate to contact me. Sir Peter Fahy Chief Constable Greater Manchester Police 26 June 2012 2 Written evidence from Jim Phillips [LCG 03] I attach something from 19951 and indicates what I had known for years before. I had forgotten about this multiple avoidance by the system, which is now covered up by sophistry with the MP's not having a clue what is meandering before them at their Select Committees. Just as they themselves do when ducking and diving in front of Jeremy Paxman! Clearly, the present system will never work, and anyway the extent of the problem will become much much worse as result of the austerity measures (I could forecast the effects quite easily). I would suggests pouring the available funding into national preventative measures and restructuring a new structure ... in effect, a paradigm shift. It means looking at the Big Picture rather than a few pixels. You need to look at the roots before a strong healthy plant grows. I have been talking and writing for 30 years and realise there is no point in going against statutory agencies who have different agendas to me. So the children really haven't a chance and will continue to have the millstone around their necks ..... and the eventual victim blame. The most severely abused always get blamed the most. The attached letter indicates that I was ahead of the system all those years ago ..... I have extended that gap and would do anything to close it, though by now I am rather fed up with the meat hooks! Also, regarding incidence: this can be found by extrapolating mental health figures as biological psychiatry is totally flawed. I have done all this research over the years and I am really too tired to keep on wasting my time with my offers. SS are worse than the police, but they all write well even if the volumes and volumes indicates they are not fit for purpose. Do you not realise what is hidden from your knowledge by simply ignoring the evidence and not investigating? I have known this for years. A politician wanted me to write about my Index Cases a some years ago, but I was put off because I knew that no one in the police/SS who were able to understand such heavily documented cases (all cock ups by the system - very severe abuse that was likely to be intergenerational). She wanted to send the cases to a senior in IPCC who was about to go on gardening leave. I decided to focus on a bigger picture. Jim Phillips 7 August 2012 1 Not published 3 Written evidence from The End Violence Against Women Coalition [LCG 04] About the End Violence Against Women Coalition The End Violence Against Women (EVAW) Coalition campaigns for governments at all levels around the UK to take urgent action to eliminate all forms of violence against women and girls. We are the largest coalition of its kind in the UK representing over 7 million individuals and organisations. A full list of members is on our website www.endviolenceagainstwomen.org.uk. Summary We warmly welcome the Home Affairs Committee’s Inquiry into ‘Localised child grooming’. All the research we have to date suggests that men are overwhelmingly the perpetrators and girls disproportionately the victims so it is essential to take a gendered approach to understanding and responding. This should be addressed in a coordinated way and connected to the Home Office-led Call to End Violence Against Women and Girls strategy which the Committee has previously considered. We would suggest that the remit of the Inquiry should be broader to consider sexual abuse and exploitation in the round. We note that ‘grooming’ is not a specific form of child sexual abuse, but rather a way in which perpetrators target children and manipulate environments about which there is much expertise (the first paper on ‘child sex rings’ was published in 1979). A broader remit would ensure that the focus remains on the gendered nature of the problem, and avoids the risk of becoming racialised. Further, that the range of routes and processes through which girls and young women become ensnared in exploitative networks and relationships, beyond ‘grooming’, are also addressed.