Awareness of issues of sexual abuse between children and a commitment to the safeguarding of children from such abuse are probably at higher levels in our society than they have ever been, but such issues must be addressed with the utmost care, consideration and sensitivity – lest in trying to solve one problem those in authority create another problem.
A BBC report last year highlighted that more than half the teachers consulted from the NASUWT Union felt that their schools did not have adequate procedures in place to deal with ‘peer on peer’ sexual abuse and a lot of the teachers consulted felt ill equipped to address these issues because they lacked training.
Sadly, the Police are another professional body whose actions suggest that their Officers often lack the proper training to respond with appropriate sensitivity and proportionality to allegations of sexual abuse in which the alleged perpetrator and the alleged victim are both children.
The unnecessary criminalisation of a child
In late 2020 my client, a 13-year-old schoolgirl, was arrested at home on suspicion of common assault, false imprisonment, making or distributing indecent images of a child and inciting a child to engage in sexual activity. In a subsequent witness statement, the arresting Police Officer re-counted the explanation that he gave to my client at the time of her arrest as follows:-
“We have received a report today that over the summer you and a couple of others have been in an outbuilding in some sort of garden where it has been alleged that REDACTED has been dared to kiss a boy called REDACTED then has been dared to give him oral sex. Later on all the group has gone back to the address and it has been alleged that you have told REDACTED that she did not do it right and she would have to do it again. She has refused and it has been alleged that you have pushed her into the shed and held the door shut. …………..It has been alleged that you and another girl have recorded this and it has now been distributed.
At this time, the Police also seized my client’s mobile phone.
My client was then transported into Custody at a Police Station where she was required to provide her fingerprints and a DNA sample – just as if she were an adult criminal suspect – and was then detained for several hours before being interviewed (in the presence of her mother) and then released at approximately midnight ‘under investigation’.
The arrest necessity reasons as specified in the Custody Record were as follows:-
- Allow the prompt and effective investigation;
- Protect a child or other vulnerable person.
During my client’s interview under caution, it transpired that the event giving rise to the alleged offence had occurred several months earlier (on an unspecified date in the summer of 2020) and that the Police had not yet obtained a formal statement from the alleged victim.
It was also put to my client that other children had been present at the time of the alleged offence and that somebody may have videoed the incident. Under legal advice, my client chose not to answer any of the questions put to her.
A month later, my client’s mother received a telephone call from the Police to advise that no further action would be taken against my client on the basis that no criminal activity had taken place and my client’s mobile phone was returned to her.
Truth or Dare?
The Detective Sergeant who had investigated this matter wrote a summary of her findings as follows –
In summary, this is a case of a truth and dare game that has possibly escalated. REDACTED accepts that she was not forced into committing a sexual act on REDACTED but felt peer pressure into doing it. This is denied by all other people present at the time. There is no evidence of any coercion or incitement, no assault and no false imprisonment. REDACTED states that there were 2 incidents. This is not supported by any other witnesses who all maintain that there was just one.
The DS went on to conclude –
This case therefore is now complete. I request that the matter is filed. Although it is clear that a sexual act has taken place between two 14 year old children, there is no evidence to suggest that this was forced in any way and there was no imbalance of power or threats. Although REDACTED indicates she felt peer pressured into doing it, she also accepts that she did not verbalise this and therefore no one would have been aware. She was not assaulted or falsely imprisoned in the shed at any time and therefore there is no evidence to support or prove any of the offences for which the children were arrested. Although it is confirmed that a recording took place, there are differing stories around how this came about and whose idea it was. It was confirmed that it was recorded on the sister’s phone, again with differing explanations as to how this came about. As stated, CPS would not criminalise children for this. I request that this matter is filed with no further action.
The Rights of Children
A lawful arrest requires 2 elements:-
- A person’s involvement or suspected involvement or attempted involvement in the commission of a criminal offence; and
- Reasonable grounds for believing that the person’s arrest is necessary.
When I was consulted by my client’s mother, it was my opinion that her arrest and detention were manifestly unlawful, as not being founded upon reasonable suspicion of the commission of the alleged offence and/or because arrest was not necessary as required by Section 24 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE).
Even leaving aside the lack of evidence that any crime had been committed in the first place, it was clear to me, when you considered the young age of the persons involved and the length of time that had elapsed since the alleged offence that it simply could not have been “necessary” to arrest my client – and that in so far as was required, the investigation into this matter could and should have been progressed by means of a voluntary interview, taking place without the shock and stigma of arrest.
The Police in rushing to arrest my client – as if she were an adult rather than a young teenager – were in dereliction of the guidance set down by the College of Policing for such matters –
a. Children and young people are a protected group with specific vulnerabilities. Their treatment in detention is governed not only by domestic legislation but also by the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) which the UK has signed and ratified. The UNCRC defines a child as a human being below the age of 18, unless the relevant laws recognise an earlier age of majority. Officers must take into account the age of a child or young person when deciding whether any of the Code G statutory grounds for arrest apply. They should pay particular regard to the timing of any necessary arrests of children and young people and ensure that they are detained for no longer than needed…
b. Of note, the UNCRC specifically states that “no child shall be deprived of his or her liberty unlawfully or arbitrarily. The arrest, detention or imprisonment of a child shall be in conformity with the law and shall be used only as a measure of last resort and for the shortest appropriate period of time”.
Words of Advice
The Police investigation log for this incident noted that “strong words of advice” had been given to my client and the other children involved in this matter.
I would like to echo such ‘strong words of advice’ back in the direction of the Police – who in unnecessarily arresting my client caused her real and really easily avoidable trauma. Teens generally have enough of an emotional maze to navigate each week of their lives without also having to process the shame, embarrassment and anxiety of being arrested in the place of safety that should be their homes, in front of their parents, deprived of their liberty and semi-criminalised by the dehumanising custody process. For a long time after this event, my client suffered nightmares, depression and low self- esteem. Fortunately, she has now overcome this and has regained her emotional confidence and health, but the consequences of her ill-advised and unnecessary arrest could have been far worse and long- lasting.
Safeguarding children is one of the key foundation stones of our society – and that includes responding sensitively and appropriately to allegations of ‘peer on peer’ sexual abuse and ensuring that, in attempting to help an alleged victim, harm is not unnecessarily caused to other innocent children, in this case the trauma of ‘adult’ arrest.
My client is now happily able to move on with her life; she has recovered a significant award of compensation to reflect her wrongful arrest and the record of her arrest on the Police National Computer has been deleted. I trust that the Police Force concerned will take the lessons learned in this case to heart.
You must be logged in to post a comment.