Police and self ID crime recording

[Velella]

Sorry if this is being discussed elsewhere but I couldn't see anything.

It seems clear that the police are using self ID to decide whether a crime is recorded as male or female. There does not seem to be any legal basis for this, although I'm no lawyer. There is also the issue of searches being done on a same gender basis instead of same sex.

I was wondering if one of the organisations such as FPFW would be prepared to mount a challenge if we crowdfunded. This issue really worries me.

I'd be prepared to donate to see this addressed.

I think a number of organisations like FPFW, WPUK etc. are planning their strategy and I hope that they're going to announce programmes that show leadership on a number of fronts (including appropriate collation of data and statistical analysis).

There are so many poorly-funded women's groups that nonetheless have impressive and very sound expertise behind them. I'd like to see them collaborate on producing reputable fact checking (think something like Full Fact) on women's issues. It would allow a central bank of researchers and contribute to better standards in civic discussions and the reporting of issues in the media.

One of Full Fact's biggest successes has been their ability to identify the source of zombie statistics and pursue them so that they can no longer be used. I'd like to see that achieved in a number of contemporary debates and issues that are being heavily marred by the use of false numbers and zombie assertions.

I like the vision of a central action/resource/campaigning facility arranfan.

The issues surrounding self id and crime reporting are huge. Particularly for organisations working with women exiting custody. (I work in this area)

I have yet to see penal reform organisations take this worrying latest revelation up and campaign. Fact is, they're likely to be fearful of repercussions. To date, I have only seen Richard Garside speak up from CJS.

From Richard Garside's exchanges on Twitter and elsewhere, I would hope that it would take very little to link up FPFW, CJS, Howard League, Justice for Women plus the various women in prison and other organisations. Added to that is the expertise of Anne Ruzylo and those with a similar history and from what you say of your experience, I should think that you know many more organisations and people who should be included.

I care enormously about the abuse of evidence, facts, and numbers in civil and public debate. I strongly support the notion of procedural justice and the consideration of validated evidence within an ethical framework: it is essential that the data should be collated and collected accurately or everything else that depends upon it is invalidated.

I agree. I know Richard is on top of this. I know Anne Ruzlo, HL, WIP so I'd certainly be able to speak with some orgs.

I agree on the gathering of data/evidence. It needs to be framed correctly and ethically and an academic partner would be vital. I'd recommend Professor Gelsthorpe - she's written widely on women in conflict with the law for the last three decades.

The organisations working with women exiting custody work from a range of women-centred frameworks.

Women's Centres
MBUs - residential centres in localities. Maybe used as an alternative to custody for example.

Approved Premises - women only former bail hostels.

That's just for starters.

On this note. I Am concerned not only that self Id is being used to record sex when a person is accepted into custody but also for searching. Both the officer's self id and the detainees. So if an officer was born male but self ids as female then they search women but if a detainee was born male and ids as female then female officers are made to search them. These incidents are not being recorded because the trans issue is not being recorded.

I've been reading Joe Halewood for some time on the unintended consequences of various benefit caps, Universal Credit, and the removal of supporting housing status from various projects (such as Approved Premises and similar).

I'm very concerned about the impact of wrong statistics or inappropriate data when it comes to making the case for systemic injustice in funding decisions.

Joe Halewood knows his onions on this topic. It's enhanced housing benefit that funds refuges, (not APs that is funded by the MoJ as it is measured on risk) AFAIK, supported living has been put on the back burner for a time.

l worked in Crime Recording for 28 years, until 2012. Back then the force l was with had a centralised crime recording unit.
However, that's since been disbanded, and l believe officers are recording their own crimes using iPads. l've been told by someone l used to work with that "it's a right mess, they're missing all sorts off."
So unfortunately l think in situations like that, it depends on the accuracy and integrity of the recording officer. l was a manager for 16 years, and l trained a hell of a lot of people in crime recording. l very much doubt that officers these days have had one to one training like we gave, certainly not for about three months, (in fact l'd put my pension on it) until we were happy that the operator was capable and competent of recording the information according to the Home Office standards. After that we still did daily audit checks on their input.
We had flagged fields on the MO (modus operandi - how the crime is committed) screen for such instances as this. l doubt it's being correctly completed in the majority of crimes - most of the time the supervising officers weren't even aware or cared back then, never mind now.
There needs to be proper consistency like we had, with emphasis on accuracy and adherence to Data Protection and Home Office Crime Recording Counting Rules, not this random 'fill in what you can be bothered' system that seems to be in use now, certainly with the force l used to be with.

Another fan of Joe Halewood here.

I agree the expertise exists in feminist and allied circles for really productive work and lobbying to be done. I'd certainly be more than happy to contribute to financing such.

@katseyes7,

That's interesting. Having been in prison myself, I know how my details were recorded. However, a good question on Twitter tonight was asked. 'How are identification details established if say Steven Brown gave his name as Stephanie Browne?'

If I were pulled over and I gave somebody else's details, then that would be a crime in itself? I know it's been covered before, but when I got married, I was pulled over by the police and when they ran through me the PNC I was asked if I was formerly known as xxxxx

I must admit that I was baffled recently when someone asserted that it is legal for them to have 2 legal identities with very different names, one as male and the other female.

I have no idea how that is handled in places where one can declare on the spot (so to speak) such as if charged with an offence as opposed to ones that are declared in advance such as when applying for documentation. E.g., I'd be startled if one could hold 2 driving licences.

I could be very wrong. However, given that I'm confused by this I'd by surprised if that's entirely just me.

This all sounds positive. Do let us know if you get any feedback Mc.

Or if there is a crowd funder. .