Child Q - strip searched by Met Police - the court case

[ArabellaScott]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cev4k0zke24o

I'm sure many will recall this horrific case. Three officers involved are now at a misconduct tribunal and could face dismissal.

'A schoolgirl was "demeaned" and "physically violated" when she was strip-searched at school by police while on her period.
She was wrongly suspected of carrying cannabis, a misconduct hearing for the three Metropolitan Police officers involved has heard.
The girl, who was 15 at the time, will not being giving evidence at the three-week south-east London tribunal, "because of the psychological effects that this strip search has had on her", the panel heard.
Det Con Kristina Linge, PC Victoria Wray and PC Rafal Szmydynski all deny gross misconduct over their treatment of the girl known as Child Q.
All three officers were PCs at the time of the search which allegedly took place without an appropriate adult present in Hackney, east London on December 3 2020.'
...
'All of this happened without authorisation, in the absence of an appropriate adult, and with no adequate concern being given to Child Q's age, sex, or the need to treat her as a child, it is also alleged.'

FFS I don't give a shit if she had been carrying cannabis - this is fucking disgraceful. Kristina has since been promoted.
And the police don't understand why people don't trust them

I have no words to be honest. It horrifies me every time I read about it. Firing the officers does not seem enough, at what point does something like this become sexual assault?

😡 Ooh this made my blood boil! That poor girl, disgusting treatment! 😡

Exactly my thought.

It’s so bizarre. I thought the police had clear procedures to follow. As far as I can see the only cause was the child smelling of cannabis but there could be many reasons for that.

Poor child - disgusting. What an awful awful way to treat a child.
And one PC was promoted- whilst under investigation?????

Just to point out, which Hackney council is keen to cover up, is that this happened because the teachers in the school called in the police. And the teachers enabled the strip search.

Not that that excuses the police, but they didn't just casually pick this school and say lets pop in and see if we are needed.

And despite the images you may see of a big demo outside of Hackney down hall, the majority of those were in fact booing the platform because Hackney council used it to deflect criticism of themselves in colluding with the school to cover up that they were the instigators, and that the school failed to act as appropriate adults so that parents continued to send their children to this school.

I have no particular faith in the Met, but many times when there is a lot of hyperventilating about the Met it is by people who are equally to blame.

Are any of the teachers facing midconduct investigations and possible dismissal?

No

Two faced hypocrasy.

The moment they broke the laws around strip searches as far as I'm concerned

This happened to me but I was 16, not 15. Not in a school but in a police station.
Not only was I strip searched without an appropriate adult present. It was also done in full view of several male officers who thought it amusing and appropriate to mock my physical appearance (intimate body parts).

I can fully appreciate the girl being traumatised. I hope they throw the book at them, but I won't hold my breath.

Wow @GreenFriedTomato that is horrendous. I don't know how you'd get past that - or even come to terms with it.

It was almost 40 years ago and lots of life has happened since. It was horrific at the time though. Police misconduct was pretty normal in the 80's. It really should not still be happening in this day and age but here we are

Absolutely horrendous. That poor girl. I hope they throw the book at them. How on earth is potentially having weed a reason to expose a child's genitals, especially without an appropriate adult present?!

GreenFriedTomato I'm so sorry. Bloody hell.

The Head left on health grounds (the usual way that the wealthiest and most powerful get to go) - they would have been the person who made the decision to call the police because the staff would not have been able to search for anything themselves. They were also responsible for contacting - or not, in this case - the parents.

As the police are facing misconduct proceedings, it means that it wasn't (or shouldn't have been) normal searching - assuming that they would follow established procedure would mean placing staff outside rather than in the room for the child's privacy, to not know that a staff member has seen them searched & to prevent disturbance from anybody else either unintentionally or to interfere/mock the child. So whilst they are responsible for not calling the parents, it doesn't mean that they or the teachers standing outside in the belief that it was the right way to behave in the circumstances were as guilty as the officers for the actual assault under the cover of a search.

By overstepping the boundaries of appropriate searches by a fucking mile and more, the police have ensured that in many schools, the idea of calling the police for anything short of waving a firearm around in class is now out of the question because they will not have sexual assault or humiliation as a consequence in their behaviour policies. Which means that if there's a student who has been seen with a bladed item, has been reported as having one, is suspected of being in possession of significant quantities drugs for sale, stolen property or could have something about their person they intend to self harm with cannot be searched - searching was not intended as a punishment by those schools, but as a means of protection both of others and of the subject - and now those officers have shown that it's not.

But what does anybody expect of an institutionally racist, misogynistic organisation that tries to protect rapists and murderers? Middleclass innocence of this disappeared when the first reports came out. They know what everybody else does now.

@GreenFriedTomato so sorry to learn what you went through, words fail me on the males seeing you my goodness how fucking awful

The Head left on health grounds (the usual way that the wealthiest and most powerful get to go) - they would have been the person who made the decision to call the police because the staff would not have been able to search for anything themselves. They were also responsible for contacting - or not, in this case - the parents.

Well I've heard a rather different story.

But if you are saying that ultimately the head was responsible, then they were also responsible for ensuring that the teachers directly involved behaved correctly, in line with procedures.

My reference to parents, was not about Child Q's parent as that would have been about whether if they couldn't be contacted which member of staff, whether teacher or nurse should have acted as an appropriate adult (even in light of the child's privacy).

I was refering to the parents of all the pupils who were not told of the event until it became public (and sadly then exploited by rival political interests in the boroug). ie even to say as a reminder to parents that in the event of a child being suspected of being in possesion of drugs and refusing to co-operate would then have to face the police being called in. (suspect that they had never informed parents that this was their policy.) So in covering this up parents continued to send their child/ren to a school where this was seen to be the way to deal with a suspected drugs issue.

Its not about being "as guilty" it is about the fact that their failure to act in an appropriate way led to the situation. They instigated this. They made the call. Added to which, as has been said the child was sitting a mock exam, not running wild in the corridors.

They could for instance have waited until the mock was over, and tried to find out if the allegations are true. Whichever teacher set this in motion was either totally badly trained in correct behaviour and / or had a grudge.

Its dispicable. And Hackney Council went out of its way by trying to cover it up.

Finding 1:
The school was fully compliant with expected practice standards when responding to its concerns about Child Q smelling of cannabis and its subsequent search of Child Q’s coat, bag, scarf and shoes. This demonstrated good curiosity by involved staff and an alertness to potential indicators of risk.

Finding 2:
The decision to strip search Child Q was insufficiently attuned to her best interests or right to privacy.

Finding 3:
School staff deferred to the authority of the police on their arrival at school. They should have been more challenging to the police, seeking clarity about the actions they intended to take. All practitioners need to be mindful of their duties to uphold the best interests of children.

Finding 4:
School staff had an insufficient focus on the safeguarding needs of Child Q when responding to concerns about suspected drug use.

Finding 5:
The application of the law and policy governing the strip searching of children can be variable and open to interpretation.

Finding 6:
The absence of any specific requirement to seek parental consent when strip searching children undermines the principles of parental responsibility and partnership working with parents to safeguard children

Finding 7:
The Covid-19 restrictions in place at the time appeared to have frustrated effective communication between school staff and the Safer Schools Officer.

Finding 8:
Having considered the context of the incident, the views of those engaged in the review and the impact felt by Child Q and her family, racism (whether deliberate or not) was likely to have been an influencing factor in the decision to undertake a strip search.

https://chscp.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Child-Q-PUBLISHED-14-March-22.pdf

School at centre of scandal has made ‘radical changes’ after listening to pupils, according to new report
https://www.hackneycitizen.co.uk/2023/06/23/child-q-school-radical-changes-listening-pupils-new-report/

Some recent stats: https://www.childrenscommissioner.gov.uk/blog/the-power-of-storytelling-in-highlighting-the-reality-of-strip-searching-for-young-people/

This simply should not have happened & must never happen again. A child should be protected not violated.

This is such a horrific violation and abuse of power.

The whole thing was horrific.

I hope that child is OK, but it must be awful having it all over the news what happened to her.

I just can't grasp in my mind the thought processes of the police officers to do that. I know people will leap onto it to say well not all police behave like that, their colleagues will be appalled etc etc but it's abusive, dominating behaviour against a child.

It was the smell of cannabis, not a bomb. She wasn't going to harm anyone with a bit of spliff. I don't think she even had any on her did she.

I also very much agree with PP about the cover up within the school. Appalling management of the whole situation. What sort of safeguarding team allows that to happen to a child on their premises? For all the blather in the training sessions we have about challenging inappropriate behaviour, following upon concerns, never being afraid to ask questions - what the FUCK did they do? Nothing, just meekly acquiesce to the police.

The whole thing stinks.

the teachers didn't, couldn't, force the met police to do what they did.

The police overstepped big time. And they need to be fired.

Horrible case. That poor child. This was totally disproportionate. And racist.

It makes my blood boil what they did to that poor girl.
I hope all the officers lose their jobs.

How is it possible that one of the officers involved has since been promoted?

And half of London smells of weed, FFS. This is disgraceful, and how bitter for @GreenFriedTomato (and, doubtless, many other) to know that this still goes on.