Crisis Unfolds: The Shocking Surge in Britain's Policing of Innocent Black Children.

Crisis Unfolds: The Shocking Surge in Britain's Policing of Innocent Black Children

The news that there has been a 13% increase in the last year in the stop and searches of Black children will come as both horrifying and devastating news to many in Britain's Black communities and beyond. 

Recently published Home Office data revealed that in the last year, we have seen a massive ramping up of racial profiling and targeting black children by British police forces across the UK and, in particular, London at the hands of the Metropolitan Police. 

And the terrible news is these figures are rising, and child arrests are becoming increasingly violent. 

In addition to this worrying new trend, London-based youth charity Redthread has publically expressed its concerns after youth workers reported seeing increased incidents of black children, particularly black boys, arriving in hospital A& E departments after suffering from Taser injuries, head injuries, memory loss and trauma resulting from violent arrests. 

The majority of these arrests have led to no further action. In other words, most children are innocent of any crime. 

Recently published Home Office statistics indicate that out of 100,000 children stopped by police nationally last year, 20% were black youth, a stark overrepresentation given they constitute only 6% of the general population. 

Figures courtesy of @gmhalyes on X 

Alarmingly, nearly 90% of these young individuals, subjected to the indignity and distress of racial profiling under the guise of 'intelligence-led' policing, were subsequently found to be innocent.

Figures courtesy of @gmhales on X 

According to a report discussed in November 2023 at the newly created London Policing Board, over 70 children required hospital treatment, including plastic surgery for dog bites and taser injuries following violent, aggressive arrests that caused a range of injuries and severe trauma.

Terrell Decosta Jones-Burton, a 15-year-old, receiving critical hospital treatment following a wrongful and violent arrest while cycling in Bermondsey, South London, in 2017. 

The Officer concerned was cleared of any wrongdoing. 

The political context. 

The very year that saw the cases of Child Q, X and A (a ten-year-old Black girl tasered by the Met) alongside the excoriating publication of the Casey Review, the response from officers on the ground was to target more Black children. 

That message from the ranks was crystal clear; they gave us the metaphorical middle finger; despite the warm words and rhetoric of the Commissioner and statements by the Mayor of London about 'tackling racism in the Met,' the objective response is clearly written in these disturbing figures. 

In short, Met officers have decided the best way to respond to widespread concerns about their proactive racist practice is to ramp up the targeting of Black children. 

The consequence is that we now see a new development in the nature and scale of systemic racism in operational policing. That is the transparent extension of the type of vicious systemic racism and heavy-handed police brutality generally reserved for adults, which is now being extended to our children.

Think about that for one minute. 

OK, let's keep it moving.  

The Met is a police force, not a service. Referring to a systemically racist institution as a 'Service' is a total misnomer that fails to accurately reflect the reality of their oppressive policing of London's Black communities. 

The term 'Service' implies a commitment to public welfare and safety, a standard that is starkly contradicted by the systemic racism and brutality embedded within the culture of the Metropolitan Police. 

The stone-cold truth and their own figures prove this the Metropolitan Police Force oppresses black communities rather than protecting them and discriminates rather than serves. 

London's Black communities should redefine the Metropolitan Police as the ' Metropolitan Police Force.'  This encapsulates the harsh, bitter truth and the oppressive nature of the policing of London's Black communities  

Publically redesignating the Met as a force, not a service, acknowledges the harrowing experiences of those on the receiving end of their racist policing practices and serves as a constant reminder of the urgent need for systemic reform within this institution.

The Met doesn't care about your concerns. 

We all know the horrendous cases of Child Q, Child X and Child A and the public outcry that followed. Yet here we are today, with these new Home Office figures confirming that what we are witnessing is a very worrying and growing trend: the criminalisation of black children being subject to racial profiling and violent arrests.  

The Alliance for Police Accountability (APA) highlighted the issue of adultification and the Case of Child X late last year, revealing the horrific armed hard stop that saw a 13-year-old schoolboy rammed off his scooter and held at gunpoint. At an APA public meeting (held at the IDPAD Centre in Hackney, the family's home borough), we saw a packed venue and a furious crowd demanding justice and accountability. Yet despite widespread and overwhelming public condemnation – not a single officer has been disciplined regarding this Case.  

 Things are getting worse. 

This important Hackney public meeting, followed by another APA pubic meeting among the Somalia communities of Lambeth at Stockwell Community Centre (where a 14-year-old Muslim girl was aggressively arrested outside her school by a School Police Officer) both gave a solid mandate for the APA urgently expose and address this critical issue. Parents at both meetings were angry and demanded action. The APA is serving the community and has decided to take action.  

According to data provided by the Metropolitan Police, 31 children between 11-17 years old required hospitalisation for police-related injuries across London in 2023. However, this figure was immediately challenged by Redthread, who alone recorded 24 child injuries after the use of police force in the same period at just eight London hospitals. The conclusion is clear - we can have no confidence that the Met's figures capture the actual reality. 

We suspect there is a massive underreporting of the violent arrests of all children, particularly Black children, who are hospitalised due to the use of police force, the vast majority of whom are guilty of no crime.  Redthread youth workers reported seeing increased numbers of children arrive at hospitals with injuries such as police dog bites and other injuries received during arrest and other interactions with the police. These included head injuries, fractures, memory loss and wounds requiring plastic surgery. 

The significant point to note is that this disproportionality has increased over the last two years, at the same time as public concerns over previous child arrests and the publication of the  Casey Review. Black communities are being policed by the worst nightmares and stereotypical anti-Black assumptions of serving racist police officers and commented upon by a largely unrepresented and hostile press. 

What the above figures show is that despite the racist stereotypical reporting of sections of the press, the reality is that both Asian and White communities are more likely to be arrested for gun crimes. Figures courtesy of @gmhalyes on X

The Talk.

One aspect of the lived Black experience that is not well understood is the extent to which black parents are forced to provide survival techniques and advice to their children in the event they encounter aggressive and racist policing. 

Baroness Casey, in her searing and devastating report into police racism, misogyny, and homophobia, was at pains to point out to predominantly white audiences, in many subsequent interviews and speeches, this little-known (outside of Black communities) fact. 

Until she spoke with black parents, she was entirely unaware of the realities of how black families are forced to equip their children with the skills necessary to successfully navigate the realities of systemic racism in policing. There comes a time as children approach adolescence when Black parents will sit down with their sons and daughters and have "the talk." 

This coming-of-age 'talk' involves equipping their children with the knowledge, tactics, and skills to de-escalate an encounter with racist police officers. Is this really the vision of a multicultural Britain we want to see? One where our children are increasingly seen as 'fair game' by a predatory police force that refuses to accept the toxic reality of their profoundly dysfunctional policing culture

It's less than a year since Baroness Casey published her damning review highlighting what the black community has known for the last five decades that the Metropolitan Police Service is a systemically racist, misogynist, and homophobic organisation. We would add to that list Institutional islamophobia. 

What is crystal clear is the persistence of police racism leads us to conclude that racism is secreted into the very sequencing of the Met's organisational DNA. 

What the Baroness Casey Review revealed was the reality of a racial hierarchy and a bruising, dominant and deeply dysfunctional policing culture that infects every aspect of the organisation. 

And let's be clear about the broader dynamics at play: it took the brutal murder of a woman, Sarah Everards (whose grandfather was a Jamaican from Saint Elizabeth), by a serving police officer, followed by the vicious policing of the Sarah Everard memorial at Clapham Common, and finally the intervention of another white woman Baroness Casey, to inform the British public, of precisely the very same things Black communities have been telling the powers that be for the last 50 years. 

London accounted for almost a third (32%) of stop and searches of children in England and Wales. Baroness Casey was right when she said stopping and searching by force needed "a fundamental reset". She also highlighted research that shows "larger numbers of Black people felt traumatised and humiliated by the experience of stop and search than other ethnic groups."

Black Trauma Matters. 

Imaging the trauma experienced by Black children, their families and the broader community of repeated, aggressive and, on occasion, violent policing by a hostile force? 

Police racism is deep, persistent and consistent. History demonstrated that within the beating heart of the culture of policing lies an unrelenting river of racism infecting every aspect of operational policing, stop and search, road traffic stops, drug possession, rape, murder investigations, Case after wretched Case has been publicly exposed and driven home the terrifying point that we are subject to the soft apartheid and devastating outcomes of police service that has effectively demonised Black adults and children as being inherently criminal and dangerous. 

Racial profiling requires a closed system mindset and is just one aspect of a systemic culture of racism. It's a self-reinforcing belief system where disproportionate focus on Black people leads to disproportionate stop and searches and increased arrests that inevitably leads, somewhat ironically, to the reinforcement of police prejudicial stereotypes that justify a continued disproportionate focus on Black people. Psychologically, police officers have, in other words, executed, rationalised and justified their innate prejudice as 'just doing my job."

Policing culture. 

Such is the ferocity of the culture of policing (and all greenlit by the stubborn refusal of the Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley to admit his force is systemically racist) that the subculture or what was once known as 'canteen culture' simply eats race equality policies for breakfast, followed by sexual equality for lunch, and a late snack on those tasty LGTBQ policies. Such woke policies are despised mainly and ignored by the massed ranks of PCs. 

A Call To Action. 

In conclusion, the Alliance for Police Accountability (APA) is issuing an urgent call to action, appealing to every concerned citizen, community leader, and human rights advocate to amplify our message. We urge you to share this article and our crucial petition. This petition is directed at the Mayor of London, the London Policing Board, and the Home Office, demanding immediate action to address the profoundly concerning practices of the Metropolitan Police Force. 

You can sign the petition here. 

Specifically, we are calling for the Metropolitan Police Force to be mandated to routinely monitor and report all interactions with children under the age of 18, especially in instances where force is used or the children require hospital treatment. 

This is a critical step towards transparency and accountability, ensuring that the rights and well-being of our children are safeguarded.

Furthermore, we insist that the Metropolitan Police and the Mayor directly consult with London's Black communities. The aim is to develop stringent, transparent, and fair protocols governing the strip search of children, particularly in sensitive cases where intimate body parts are exposed. Such measures are vital to protect our youth's dignity and rights and prevent the misuse of police authority.

Your support in sharing this article and endorsing the petition is invaluable. It is a step towards ensuring justice and upholding the rights of our children and towards building a society where the safety and dignity of every child are paramount, irrespective of race or background.

To this end, the APA will also host a "Policing and the Black Child Conference" (hat tip to Diane Abbott MP- if you know, you know) in May  19th 2024 in partnership with the University of East London's Peel Centre on Policing one year on from the publication of the Casey Review. Contact us if you want to join our APA-focused youth working group developing the conference's theme.  

Conference details will be announced soon. 

Follow APA for more info. 

 

 

Institutional racism in Policing: Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Cressida Dick hides behind an unremitting wall of institutional racism and routine denial.

 

There is a saying in British black communities that all serious accusations of systemic institutional racism are a bit like eternal truths; they both tend to start their lives as heretical blasphemies. Always denied and when eventually accepted it's with begrudging reluctance.  

 

In Britain, there appears to be no exception to this general rule with no historical precedent of serious accusations of racism eliciting immediate acceptance and apology. Only the crudest examples of offensive racism, usually involving the use of racist language, prompts quick apology and regret. All major accusations of systemic and institutional racism are routinely denied. 

And even where 'progress' is achieved Britains cultural default setting, institutional racism, is so deeply engrained into the countries cultural DNA that racism, once the political pressure is relaxed almost always snaps back to its original setting. 

Of course, some progress has been made over the last 50 years. It would be churlish to suggest otherwise but in the words of the legendary reggae, compose/producer Lee Perry on his iconic tune "Down Ina Babylon" it's almost one step forward two steps backwards. 

Accusations of racism are almost always denied. For black communities here in the UK, the word denial denotes don't even notice I am lying. Where policing is concerned denial is often the preface to the justification of injustice.

 

Having challenged institutional police racism for the last 35 years, and as one of the foremost black experts on police-community relations and a former Policing Director for London, I am going to make a confident prediction. Alas, much like an oracle, my predictive track record on these issues, is sadly hundred per cent solid being one of the many who correctly predicted the disturbances of 1981, 1986, 1996 and 2011.  

 

My prediction is that we are heading for a significant series of civil disturbances as a result of the deteriorating relationship between the Metropolitan Police Service and London's African and Caribbean communities. It is only as a consequence of this summers Covid-19 lockdown that we've narrowly averted such a conflict taking place. For many public commentators and ethical black community leaders, people such as former senior black officer Leroy Logan (founder member of the Metropolitan Black Police Officers Association), things that they are as bad today as they were in the early 1980s.

 

They say that history comes round in 30 to 40-year cycles and next year sees the 40th anniversary of the 1981 Brixton uprisings that sparked massive confrontations with the police throughout the country. 

Back then despite repeated warnings by community campaigners warning of the likelihood of community police conflict, the Commissioners and government of the day chose to stick their heads in the sand. Their response was to deny the police were racist or the was a crisis of black confidence in policing. Sound familiar? 

 

Activists of the day, people like Frank Crichlow and Darcus Howe of the Mangrove Community Association, Kaoumba Balagoun of St Pauls, Bristol, Alex Bennet of Merseyside Race Equality Council and Dorothy Kukuya, Linda Bellos the first black women leaders of a Council (Lambeth) and the young, radical campaigning lawyer of the day Paul Boateng, all consistently warned of trouble on the streets as a result of increasing police racism. All were routinely ignored. 

 

Precisely the same thing happened again in 1986, and in the early 90s, it was only the hope offered by Stephen Lawrence public inquiry that prevented a re-occurrence. Nevertheless, disturbances erupted in 1996 in Brixton and again in 2011 in Tottenham. On both occasions, senior police officers and Home Secretaries denied there was a problem. Community activists warnings were routinely ignored at an extraordinarily high cost to the country and black communities.

 

Today the Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, Home Secretary Prit Patel, and Metropolitan Police Commissioner Cressida Dick are united in the continuance of this political tradition, the consistent rejection and denial of accusations of institutional police racism.

 

In the aftermath of the tragic death of George Floyd, we have seen and public institutions businesses around the world, reflecting on the nature of their commitment to race equality, embarking on a process of having a dialogue with black and ethnic minority employees and communities on issues of fairness, justice, diversity and anti-racist practice. 

 

The global concern about the issue of police racism, violence and accountability have been central to these ongoing conversations, discussions that have echoed around the world everywhere except in England and Wales. 

 

Even though public confidence in policing of the African and Caribbean community is at an all-time low, the leading police officer in the country Commissioner Cressida Dick, like her counterparts of old, refuses to acknowledge the Mets culture of institutionalised racism. It's this pernicious culture that is the driving force behind the persistent and increasing rates of racial disproportionality in almost all aspects of operational policing in London.

 

Given the wall-to-wall research and statistics that demonstrate the industrial scale of police racism towards black people, the question is, why would she choose to continue to deny this overwhelming and compelling objective reality?

 

It is my view that the police officer "canteen culture" is deeply hostile to the concept of institutionalised racism. The 20-year long backlash against the publication and findings of the Stephen Lawrence report that deemed the police to be institutionalised racist runs deep in the cultural and political DNA of the Met Commissioner Dick cannot contemplate accepting this reality without facing a virtual revolt among the reactionary ranks.

 

The evidence of such resistance can be discerned not only by the figures demonstrating massive racial disproportionality in operational areas such as stop and search: use of police force on black people; racial differences in the rates of cautioning and charging for drug offences; the refusal of bail for black suspects, the failure to sufficiently recruit African and Caribbean officers; and the overrepresentation of serving black officers in police disciplinaries and investigations, it is also evident in the attitudes of police officers as revealed in an alarming new survey conducted by You Gov. 

 

Published in June of this year with very little media coverage, this critical survey revealed the dark attitudinal underbelly of the persistent culture of racism that persists within the Metropolitan Police.

 

The survey asked officers if they believed stereotypes about other groups of people to be true. An astonishing 41% agreed with the statement compared to just 24% of the general public. More worryingly over half of the officers surveyed (55% ) agreed with the suggestion that human rights laws have been bad for British justice. About race equality in the workplace, 65% expressed opposition to any form of positive discrimination in attempts to level up the lack of representation of black people within British companies and institutions.

 

These overwhelmingly racially hostile attitudes provide a unique insight into the prevailing culture within the Met, and that makes this Commissioner a prisoner of her workforce.

 

This, in part, explains why the Met has seen a resurgence in such prejudicial hostile attitudes among serving police officers. What we are witnessing today in this survey is the result of the Mets historical and contemporary hostility towards the Stephen Lawrence report and their retreat from the majority of its recommendations in most notably in the areas policy and performance scrutiny and diversity focus in police cadet training.

 

I recently submitted a Freedom of Information request to the Met asking them to provide me with "...the total number of mandatory, probationary constable training hours solely dedicated to ethnic diversity…". The answer I received from the Met's Information Rights Units reveals the brutal extent of that retreat. 

 

The fact is, in one of the most diverse cities on the face of the planet, there are no specific lessons for police cadets dedicated focused solely on ethnic diversity training or the critical lessons learned from the Stephen Lawrence, none.

 

Whilst there is training for unconscious bias, it lasts precisely two hours. There is a broader one-day training input on the more general question of "diversity" covering the entirety of the equality strands.

 

Finally, there are some online voluntary training packages. Nothing on anti-racist policing practice or the rich and diverse history of Amylticulatutal London. Nothing on the fraught history of the Met and London's multicultural communities. This explains why institutional racism is so resurgent in the Met. Refusal to listen to communities, retreat from the recommendations of the Stephen Lawrence report, failure to mainstream anti-racist practice in one of the greatest multicultural cities in the world. policy and 

 

For a city like London, this is woefully inadequate. 

 

Police denial of institutionalised racism places a lid on the relational and emotional pressure cooker that constitutes relations between African and Caribbean heritage communities and police services. The longer we leave it on, the more pressure we build up. That pressure is becoming intolerable and will, at some point, explode onto our streets with devastating consequences. Denial of the problem is the lid. 

That's why so little focus is given to this issue in police training, it's simply not considered that important by the Commissioner. This is a fatal and critical failure of leadership. 

 

Charles Tremper of the Nonprofit Risk Management Center, Washington, DC, warning of the dangers of denial wrote, "Denial is a common tactic that substitutes deliberate ignorance for thoughtful planning."     

 

The problem for this Commissioner is the routine denial of truth does not invalidate its objective reality. The worst lies are the ones we tell ourselves. 

 

This Commissioner has made the fatal political calculation that it's better to offer friendly denial than accept the realities of institutionalised racism.

 

She knows, as the survey suggests, that all demands for compliance to anti-racist policing practice will elicit a hostile response from the rank and file. Policing is the only area of command and control employment where such huge power is located in the lowest subordinate rank. 

 

We're in for a hellish time. It was the 17th century English writer John Bunyan who said, "The road of denial leads to the precipice of destruction." This statement is as true today as the day it was written. Having failed to learn from the past, we are about to repeat tragic history

 

You heard it here first, second and third. 

Britain’s Rodney King Moment. The Romford Police Assault

Thursday 23rd January 2020 saw the magistrate's trial and ultimate acquittal of Metropolitan Police Officer, Detective Constable Kevin Rowley on the charge assault and battery of a young black boy. 

You may remember this officer seen on a video that went viral, where the officer is seen using his baton to repeatedly strike a terrified young 17-year-old black boy outside a parade of shops on Heath Park Road, Romford on April 22nd of last year.

The case was heard at Hendon Magistrates Court, a court that is miles away from inner London. I've seen this type of court scheduling before and its usually politically motivated. It's the common practice of moving controversial trials of police officers that take place in inner London, as far away from where the original incident took place, or in where that not possible in the tiniest inaccessible court venues. 

On this occasion, the trial was held, in what is a notoriously difficult part of London to get to for 10 am on a Thursday morning. 

I suspect, though I cannot prove, that the decision to have the trial in an area of the capital with virtually no African Caribbean communities, was based on finding a court that would be difficult to get to, and would prevent any protests outside the court itself, no doubt justified, on this occasion by concerns for 'the officers safety' 

Hendon Magistrates Court No 2 is a tiny court with a public gallery that seats around 20 people.  Two-thirds of the public gallery was packed with press and police officers

Last year London's black communities and many more besides, were left angry and traumatised by the shocking video showing a young black boy, pleading with DC Rowley to stop assaulting him.  Many Police officers have told me that they believe the violence used was both disproportionate and unnecessary.  I agree with that analysis.

The first thing to say about this prosecution is that for a police officer to face charges of battery and assault, on a black person, is an extraordinarily rare event. 

In over 40 years in challenging police abuses, this is the first such case I've come across.  So it was with some degree of relief and hopeful anticipation that the family of the young boy concerned, and I attended this trail.  

There's was the hope that maybe, this trial would hold the police to proper account particularly where the Met themselves admit to using disproportionate force when arresting black males. London's black communities believe they are being racially targeted for drug searches and are subjected to unnecessary violence on arrest, and all this against a backdrop where Black communities public confidence in the Met police is at an all-time low. 

So it was with some little hope that the family and myself sat in this far-flung tightly packed, little court.

However, once the prosecution began it was clear to me this wasn't going to be our day.  

As the trial unfolded I concluded that bizarrely, the witnesses for the prosecution appeared to me, to be witnesses for the defence.

I have purposely not written this sequentially, as in the order of evidence as it was given on the day. Instead, I have written this as a reflective piece pointing out some of the salient points that struck me as a former Policing Director of London and an ardent campaigner for justice.  

That will no doubt lead some to conclude that I'm presenting the evidence to suit my own perspective and people are entitled to that view. Nevertheless, I contend that many in the black community and those prepared to take a critical lens to this case will share my analysis. 

My motivation for doing so is to simply present a community perspective informed by decades of institutional police racism and the deeply embedded lack of trust that now exists between the London black community and the police. 

Let us start with DC Rowley's evidence to the court. He told the court that his attention was drawn to two black boys walking across a zebra crossing. 

He said: 'Initially we saw them as they crossed the zebra and the cars paused. One of them had a wad of cash notes in his hands raised to the sky. It looked a bit out of place." 

Black boys on zebra crossing looked out of place? 

Here I'm guessing that what he really meant is that these two black boys, looked out of place in the predominantly white area of Romford. 

He mentions that the cars paused, well yes, they were crossing the road, what’s the significance of that comment, and what did he expect the cars to do? 

He goes on to say one of the boys had a wad of cash in his hand, in fact, they didn't, the eldest boy was holding a single £20 note, pocket money of two brothers who lived locally, and coincidently the only black family in this area. These boys were simply on the way to the shops to change the £20 so they could split the cash between them. 

The officer went on to say, 'They looked like they had no purpose there. They walked into a fish and chip shop for five seconds, and walked back out again.'

Firstly, what leads him to conclude, they had no purpose there? Why? Are black boys not supposed to be in Romford? 

The boys were local and were simply popping into local shops asking if they could change a £20 note to split their pocket money. 

He goes on to say, 'Most people keep money in their wallet or their bag. I said to the other police officer, keep an eye out on those boys. I thought they looked a bit weird.'  

Had they been walking with a large amount of cash in their hand, then that may give rise to some suspicion, but these boys had a single £20 note and kids don't usually have a wallet and young men don't usually carry money in bags. When arrested the young man did not have a wad of cash, as described by Rowley, he had precisely £20. The prosecution decided not to pursue that point. 

As to the reason why they were stopped, well this comes straight out the police playbook and the most singularly cited reason offered by Met officers for stop and searches; 'I asked them what they had been up to and I was hit with a strong smell of cannabis.'

We've all known plenty of black non-smokers subjected to stop and search who have similarly been wrongly accused by police officers of smelling of cannabis. 

In the minds of London's black communities, we consider this as a joke. It always amazes me that while white people report higher drug use, according to the British Crime Survey. much more than black communities, they are not subjected to the same level of racially targeted police stops and searches. 

The officer goes on; 'It was coming from them. I told them they were going to be detained as part of a drug search. [The youth] said, 'you're not searching me, I know my rights.' 

The officer then reports that at this moment the second boy had runoff. Yes he did, he ran to his nearby home to alert his mother and followed in hot pursuit by another officer. 

Rowley’s statement here strikes me as being almost scripted in an effort to begin to frame the boy into the widely held violent black youth stereotype. It’s the trigger words used as a nod and a wink to the magistrate, igniting shared white stereotypes and fears. 

The problem was that this evidence was contradicted by a witness who had previously given evidence in which she says she saw the events from an adjacent window overlooking the scene and described the initial encounter as 'quite calm'.  

Teri Vigers told the court,

'He was a little bit hesitant, he obviously didn't really want to be there, he was a bit edgy but did allow the police officer to put him in handcuffs without any problem.’ 

Well yes, being a young kid and being subjected to a stop and search, given the awful reputation of the Met would make most people ‘a little bit hesitant'

Her description of the encounter is at odds with Rowley’s who said the boy was extremely agitated. 

Vigers goes on to say, 

'He asked the young boy to sit down on the floor, it looked like he was trying to call for backup or speak to someone on the radio.' 

'The young boy was asking about his brother, I think he was trying to find out about his brother.' 

Ms Vigers told the court she had given her witness statement to  
the police the day after the event. 

This was a surprise as the family had not at that stage, submitted any formal complaint, so why and for what reason was a statement taken by the police? It could be inferred that the police coached her to provide a helpful statement, as they knew instantly that what Rowley did was wrong. 

Personally, I was disinclined to disbelieve her evidence from this point on. 

Back to Rowley, he stated in court that once the second boy ran off: 

‘I'm now alone with an agitated and aggressive male who is not complying. He's made it clear that I'm not searching for him. It's a concern for me as I'm alone with this male.' 

The officer told the court that the boy said he wanted to see his brother and that he tried to reassure him.'

So the older boy was concerned for the safety of his little brother. Given the acute lack of trust in the police, it's perfectly reasonable that he should be concerned. 

Witness Terri Vigers also went on to say, after Rowley had placed the boy in cuffs that the boy had sat down, stood up, then sat down, then stood up again, and was the edging away from the officer while DC Rowley goes onto say that boy was struggling like a man possessed.  

'First of all, we could smell cannabis. But this behaviour was not possession of cannabis. I've had experience of catching people with knives, drugs, guns.

'He was putting up such a fight I didn't know what he had on him. He hadn't been searched at this point.

'He was aggressive, desperate to get away, pulling me, dragging me, pushing me. It was not the behaviour of someone who has a single count of possession on him.’

'He might be 17, but he's my height and build, and he was very strong. Because he was so aggressive, he had a lot of adrenaline.'

So the boy complied with arrest and allowed himself to be cuffed without and resistance. As for the officer's description, this is a regularly used trope used by police officers, in controversial arrests where they routinely describe black people as possessing superhuman strength, being violently aggressive. A set policing script that has been used regularly for the last 40 years. 

Rowley goes onto to state; 

'I wasn't trying to hurt him. All I was trying to do was detain him. Because he was in such a rage he was not listening to anything I was trying to do.'

Another witness who lives locally a Mr Anthony Bailey gave his evidence. Mr Bailey said:

'As part of my job I use restraint. He was struggling to restrain the youth. 

He went onto say, 

'He was struggling to keep him there from what I have experienced in safeguarding.

Really? What job is that then? He wasn't asked. The terms restraint and safeguarding are terms usually used by people with either professional policing or security experience or both. The prosecution didn’t ask him. 

His evidence was that the young man whilst cuffed was violently swinging the officer around from side to side. 

This, of course, is in direct contradiction to Ms Vigers testimony that described the boy as doing nothing more than 'edging away'

Bailey then says, ‘The officer struck him as the teenager did not respond to his command to get down.' I find the word 'command' interesting. 

Returning to witness Teri Vigers she went on to state, 

‘The police officer said he would have to use force if he didn't listen. He removed his stick and repeated quite a lot of time he didn't want to use it.’

'The police officer stated he didn't want to use force and then struck him on the legs.'

She said the boy was 'trying to irritate the police officer' by screaming, in order to draw a crowd, well yes being beaten will lead you to scream. And let's be real, this isn't Brixton that crowd was white, and even they were angry at what they saw as evidenced by the commentary on the video.

She goes on to say, that Rowley had been ‘reasonably calm until he used the baton.’

'I think I recall him saying he didn't want to use force that was after they moved across to the shop.’

'He's obviously got to the point where he was being really nice and really calm and raised his voice and withdraws the baton.’

She makes the whole incident sound like an exercise in textbook community policing. 

Yet none of the video audio captured any of this, and yet Vigers, Bailey and the Rowley all claim these words were spoken throughout the later part of the encounter i.e. outside of the parade of shops. All were very clear on this particular point.  

The audio from the video is clear and there are no instructions heard from the officer to the boy to sit down, nor is there any warning offered to the boy. Yet everything else is captured, comments by the crowd, traffic noise and the boy himself. Was the officer whispering? 

Vigers, Bailey all say that they heard the officers comments in their homes and yet we can hear nothing on the audio. Vigers says she heard the boy expressing concern for his brother from inside her home. Yet throughout the video, the officer shouts get down once.  

Another witness, an elderly white gentleman whose name I did not catch stated he knew the officer personally and was concerned and had wanted to help him.  How did he know the officer, Rowley was in plain clothes that day so what was their relationship? The prosecution simply ignored the response.

Hard of hearing, the man was shown a video of the incident and asked if he recognised a man standing near the incident, in a red t-shirt hands on his hips. After scrutinising the video, the man answered he did not recognise the man. 

That was strange because the man he was asked if he recognised, was the actual witness himself, which he later conceded to. His evidence clearly couldn't be relied upon. 

The prosecution went on, in my view to demonstrate inconsistencies in DC Rowley's initial description of events and the evidence he gave in court however despite this, and the contradictions I've highlighted, the magistrate acquitted the officer. 

Of course, the family are deeply disappointed and will be considering the verdict and what options are available to them. There is still the option that the officer though found not guilty of assault could be disciplined by the Metropolitan Police service. 

Let us hope, for the sake of police, community relations that this option is exercised. 

Am I surprised? Not really, I've seen such travesty's of justice before and will no doubt see them again. This case will, however, reinforce the black community strongly held belief that when it comes to the police, disproportionate violence and black people there is little if any justice to be had.     

Speaking to the family they’ve had enough and lost all confidence in British justice, policing and criminal justice. They told me their packing up and leaving the country, which they said had become a hostile environment for young black people. 

They didn’t want their sons to suffer the indignity of false accusation, baseless suspicion and violent arrest. They felt betrayed by British institutions. They spoke of the weight of racism being too heavy a burden to carry for their sons.  They want them to prosper in a country where talent, not colour is the defining characteristic of young black people.

Angry, depressed and determined, they are heading home to Africa, Ghana to be precise where their sons can be free of the racism so brutally inflicted on them in the UK.  

The boys mother spoke to me and said, ‘As black people we’ve spent decades, pleading, begging, cajoling and appealing to the angels of their better natures only to be kicked in the teeth, targeted, excluded and arrested. There comes a time when enough is enough and our duty as parents is to safeguard our children from this toxic racism takes priority.’  

I for one couldn’t fault her logic. From the criminalisation of our communities to exclusions from school, the Windrush scandal Britain, raging unemployment and poverty Britain has become hostile and unapologetic for its growing culture of unabashed, unashamed racism and many like this family, are saying maybe its time to leave. Those of us who remain must fight on.