'Joint Enterprise'* and deportation!

by John Wilkins

AN article in The Guardian caught my eye this week because it dealt with the use of what it termed “controversial and discriminatory joint enterprise law.” It also involved the order to deport the person involved in a crime.

I will outline the case first but then look at how double standards seem to be involved when it is a 'black' person rather than a 'white' or 'brown' person involved.

Osime Brown is 21 years old Jamaican born man who came to the UK aged just 4. He is autistic and was slow as a child even in learning to walk. He had behavioural and learning problems at school and it resulted in exclusion aged 16. It would seem his problems had not been forensically diagnosed until then so he never received adequate support, merely being labelled disruptive.

He had been engaged in low level criminal behaviour but the latest crime involved the theft of a mobile phone. Although he was part of the group who took the phone witnesses said he had asked the other teenagers he was with to stop the street robbery, but he was convicted under the joint enterprise law which anyone considered complicit in a crime can be arrested even if they played no part in the crime. Critics say this law has disproportionately criminalised many young black men with those imprisoned through it being 11 times their presence in the community.

I used the term double standards in the headline for a reason. Our local Campaign Group, BOLD, have been following up the way our local authority have appeared to 'sweep under the carpet' the conviction of only 4 out of nearly 20 men who were present when a local workman suffered three broken ribs, a punctures lung and nearly had his hand severed in an axe attack. They were summoned by one of the gang by phone after the victim interceded in a dispute between the man and a lady driver.

The judge quite clearly termed it gangsterism and when local MP was asked to condemn the case as gangsterism he was happy to publicly acknowledge it as such also. Despite councillors, including the leader, the Local Authority officials being asked not just to condemn the gangsterism and how they can work with the police to reduce it in area no one is prepared to comment. A contrast here is that the police have been very open and forthright about how they are working on this issue.

That is one comparison with how Osime has been treated but let me turn to a more startling disparity, that of deportation. The effect of imprisonment itself on Osime has been considerable. He has suffered racial abuse and bullying. Without, his mother says, a mentor or support worker his health has deteriorated and he is self harming. He does not fully comprehend how he would cope in Jamaica, thinking he could catch a bus to visit mum from there!

I have over time felt that those now termed Immigration Enforcement Officers will use easy targets to boost their figures for deportations. Now I come to another very worrying comparison again from my town Rochdale.

Few people will not have knowledge of the grooming scandal involving vulnerable young girls in Rochdale. Three members of the grooming gang remain in the UK more than 18 months after they lost an appeal against losing their British citizenship. I concur with the Independent's sub headline: 'Home Office accused of prioritising offenders with Jamaican roots over sex abusers.'

Yes Osime has been involved in low level crime, but deportation would be extremely cruel for him with no family support in Jamaica and a condition which will make him even more vulnerable there. It is known that at least 11 have died as a result of unjust deportation from the Windrush scandal, it is likely that Osime could be another unnecessary death. I urge you to sign the Change.org petition for Osime Brown.

* Editor's note on Joint Enterprise:

'Why joint enterprise is unfair and needs changing' by Sandra Paul in The Law Society Gazette 23 December 2014

Exactly two years ago, I stood in tears outside Wood Green Crown Court, having just left my 16-year-old client, one of four teenage black males of previous good character, in the cells facing a three-year custodial sentence for GBH. Some 18 months earlier, he had been part of an altercation at Hendon tube station.

He was guilty of common assault, even ABH, and certainly affray. All of these were offered as guilty pleas to the prosecution. However, they were rejected on the basis that joint enterprise would convict a group of the more serious offence of GBH.

CCTV footage shows my client was as far as 20 feet away from the victim at the time he was stabbed. However, my client was convicted of section 18 GBH on the basis that it was ‘reasonably foreseeable’ that others might get involved when he punched the complainant and that ‘serious harm might’ result, irrespective of whether that was what he intended. My client was 14 at the time of the incident and I am convinced could not have forseen that his action could have led to the ultimate outcome which resulted.

Looking at the CPS guideline published since then, I am hopeful, but not convinced, that a review on the same facts would lead to a different result. Consideration of the judge’s directions for the jury outlined in the Crown Court Bench Book is equally problematic for young people.

*********************************************************************

The Curse Of Selective Outrage by Les May

THE news channel I mostly watch, AlJazeera, regularly has little snippets pointing out how easily our emotions can be manipulated by ‘fake news’ on social media.

This morning I watched the 8am news on AlJazeera. One of the items, which I knew was NOT fake news, was video of a man getting into his car and behind him stood a Wisconsin policeman firing seven bullet into the man’s back.

Yes I was outraged, but then I asked myself what was it about the scene that brought on that emotion. Was it that it was a black man who I saw being shot or was it that it was another human being who was being treated in this way? Would my sense of outrage have been the same if the victim had not been black? Would it have been the same if it had been say Chinese police shooting an unarmed man in the back?

The answer is

‘Yes it would!’

Any country which makes any pretensions to be civilised does not allow this to happen. The colour of someone’s skin does not come into the equation.

WHO'S AFRAID OF SAM O'BRIEN?

Editorial comment:  This month it was brought to our attention that two live links had been taken down on the Rochdale Friends of Jeremy Corbyn Facebook page.  The links were to items on the NV Blog that had been put up as comments by Stefan Cholewka and led to posts critical of the establishment politics in Rochdale.  Since they were removed a local Rochdale activist, Sam O'Brien, has admitted that he threatened to withdraw from membership of the Facebook site, if the links were not removed.  

There are eleven administrators on the site and two have told NV that they were not consulted.  At this time we have not been able to contact the other administrators and it may be that they have not been consulted either, but Sam O'Brien has been kind enough to offer his thoughtful observations below.  We leave it our readership to judge the profound wisdom of his case.  We understand that any one of the administrators could remove content on the Rochdale Friends of Jeremy Corbyn Facebook page.

*************

Can this really be the language of the Enlightenment?

Editor's explanation:  Below is a recent e-mail from Sam 

O'Brien, a Rochdale trade unionist who prides himself on 

being an ardent 'anti-racist'.  Northern Voices does not 

believe in providing 'trigger warnings' on content 

as generally we anticipate our readers will have 

stern constitutions and to be intellectually robust.  

Yet some may easily find Mr. O'Brien's style 

surprising and even curious. 

Hello Brian,

'I didn't object. I said it was racist bollocks. I feel I am probably wasting my time but I will ty [sic] to spell it out to you. 

'You say in your article that Rochdale has been overrepresented by Muslim councillors and that has not been healthy for the democracy and moral status of the town. That is racist. Saying that there are too many Muslim councillors and that damages the democracy and morality of the town is racist bollocks. Complete and utter racist bollocks. Its the sort of racist bollocks that the BNP used to come out with, It is what the EDL say. Can you not hear yourself and how fucking offensive you are being?

'You go on to say that you are worried that the problems of the Indian sub-continent are becoming too much of an issue in the politics of the town. So the way Rochdale's councillor's vote is not influenced by whether they are left right or centre but by what is going on in Kashmir and Bangladesh. Racist crap. Again straight from the leaflets of the BNP to the pages of Northern Voices. 

'You implicitly blame all Muslims in Rochdale for propping up paedophile MP Cyril Smith. Racist bullshit. Was it not the white politicians who covered for him? Was it not the Met who disappeared the files on his abuse? The white chief executive who was willfully ignorant of the abuse? No somehow in your bizarre racist conspiracy theory world it was Muslims who were to blame. Shameful and disgraceful to publish this disgusting crap.

'I would love to know who it is on the admin team of the Friends of Jeremy Corbyn Facebook Page who thinks this is ok?

'If Stefan is standing by this racist bullshit he should consider his position within the trade union movement. 

'If this appears again on the Friends of Jeremy Corbyn page I will be leaving it.'

Sam

 

 NV Editor's Footnote [10th, August 2020]:   We would suggest that the decision of Rochdale's Friends of Jeremy Corbyn Facebook page administer who took down the contents of Stefan Cholewka comments without apparent debate, following Sam O'Brien's threat has behaved in a cowardly manner and by so doing has effectively brought the site into disrepute.  This is apparently being compounded by the fact that since then Stefan has been unable to post comments on the site.  Shortly we hope to be able to make a fuller statement on this matter explaining our own approach.

Editorial update [12/08/20]:

YESTERDAY a source close to the Rochdale Friends of Jeremy Corbyn Facebook page told us that comments by Stefan Cholewka have now been enabled again on the site.  This is clearly to be welcomed.

Meanwhile, Sam O'Brien has e-mailed us to say that 'All my comments are in a personal capacity' and not in any way related to any of his political or trade union affiliations. 

 

****************************

Forget Slavery – Have a Scone!

by  Christopher Draper

THE downfall of Edward Colston sent shock waves through the massed ranks of NATIONAL TRUST top brass.  Founded in 1895 primarily to protect threatened landscapes, over succeeding decades NT has increasingly focussed on acquiring, conserving and celebrating the legacy of the genocidal colonial adventurers, aristocratic land grabbers and grubby financiers that created Britain’s despicable slave trade. These blood money palaces, stately homes and grand gardens were designed to flaunt their patron’s social standing and aesthetic good taste and camouflage the barbaric reality.  It was myth-making on a grand scale and it’s a tradition the NATIONAL TRUST has assiduously maintained and enhanced.

Rattling the Tea Cups

Suddenly the hierarchy feel exposed and vulnerable – Colston’s statue was pulled down on the 7^th June 2020 and within four days NT bosses had spirited away and hidden the “Kneeling Slave” statue that formerly greeted visitors to Dunham Massey Hall, Altrincham.  Visitors had long questioned the Trust’s failure to explain and justify the prominent exhibition of this racially demeaning icon and in response NT bosses defended the racist imagery with an outrageous lie…

Whitewash

NT management refuse to admit any failure of moral or historical judgement and instead claim they belatedly acted solely out of concern for visitors’ emotions;

“The statue has caused upset and distress because of the way it depicts a black person and because of its prominence at the front of the house”

Typical NT weasel words, in truth it acted to pre-empt the embarrassment of a public toppling in a Black-Lives-Matter related incident.  This is evident from NT’s application to the planning authorities for retroactive “listed structure” consent for the statue’s removal.  A spokesman for Trafford Council confirms that,

“The NATIONAL TRUST have written to the council’s planning service to advise that the statue was removed in order to preserve the structure”!

NT continue to claim,

“We don’t want to censor or deny the way colonial histories are woven into the fabric of our buildings…”

But this is precisely the reverse of the truth…

The BIG LIE!

In response to visitors’ critical enquiries, a decade ago NT erected an “interpretive” plaque alongside the Dunham Massey statue,

“This sundial is in the style of one commissioned by King William III. It represents Africa, one of four continents known at the time.  The figure depicts a Moor, not a slave…”!

No-one, apart from the NATIONAL TRUST, has ever made such an absurdly dishonest claim. Academics routinely refer to this and similar statues as “Kneeling Slaves”, sometimes as “Blackamoors”, never a Moor and always acknowledging the servile pose and colonial context.  A 1725 inventory details the figure as, “A negro Slave kneeling on one knee and bearing a Sun Dyall on his head” (sic).   The slave’s bent, kneeling posture bearing the full weight of a stone sundial for the benefit of aristocratic observers (and latterly modern visitors) offends everyone but the NATIONAL TRUST for as Madge Dresser emphasises, “The Blackamoor’s humanity is subsumed by his utilitarian function”.

The NT is structurally and philosophically wedded to a White Supremacist version of history.  It polishes, maintains and reproduces the reactionary views of a politico-cultural elite and denies the life histories of the exploited.  Despite being a mass membership organisation the NT is essentially a rich, powerful corporation that makes only occasional, spasmodic efforts to portray the lives of the lower orders.  The organisation eschews vital historical analysis preferring to retail romanticism, infotainment, refreshments and pseudo-historical nick-knackery – enter through the car-park and exit through the gift shop.

I’ll tackle more aspects of NT racism, greenwash and assorted flummery in future posts but focus here on the iconography of the “Kneeling Slave” and there’s another one on the other side of the Pennines…

A Telling Alternative

Wentworth Castle near Barnsley was built by a notorious slave trading family whose “Blackamoor” statue is now housed in the conservatory, which, along with extensive parklands is administered by the NATIONAL TRUST.  It’s a similar “Kneeling Slave” bearing a stone sundial, although it’s slightly earlier c.1720 rather than Dunham’s c.1735, it’s in much better condition.  This is not simply because it’s now kept indoors but because it was sensitively restored in 2011 by conservators who took great care to create a realistic black skin tone. When installed in the conservatory further scrupulous work was undertaken to research the context and historical significance of the figure most notably by Patrick Eyres.  Eyres subsequently led public walks around the grounds explaining the politico-historical context of the house and gardens and the particular significance of the “Blackamoor”.  These researches culminated in publication of his (highly recommended) book “Blackamoors in the Georgian Garden” (New Arcadian Press) and the erection of accurate and insightful interpretive signage at Wentworth, eg;

“Sir Thomas Wentworth helped to negotiate the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713. This international treaty confirmed Britain as the most important commercial power in Europe. It included a lucrative monopoly over the Atlantic slave trade. Wentworth represented this in his house and gardens, including a statue of a kneeling African man supporting a sundial that now stands in the conservatory. Like many of his contemporaries, Wentworth made a great deal of money from the sale and labour of enslaved Africans. This human misery helped pay for the house and gardens he built.”

Exception Proves the Rule

Wentworth’s enlightened admissions contrast sharply with Dunham Massey’s denial and the explanation isn’t hard to find for NT only gained control of Wentworth Castle Gardens a year ago.  Wentworth’s admirable research and restoration had already been completed by volunteers who formed a community “Heritage Trust” that administered the gardens for two decades until shortage of funds forced them to hand over to NT in 2019.  The community trust recognised the Blackamoor as an icon of colonial exploitation that if exhibited unexplained would embody and perpetuate a racist world-view but when sensitively restored and contextualised offered enormous potential for critical re-evaluation of imperial history.  It’s imperative that the local trust’s interpretation endures and that visitors monitor the possible “re-interpretation” of the “Kneeling Slave” under NT stewardship.

“Not Another One!”

“Kneeling Slaves” were the eighteenth century’s best selling lead garden statues after William III, who owned both house and plantation slaves, commissioned a couple from Van Nost in 1701 for his Hampton Court Garden.  Supply and demand collapsed with the demise of the last London manufacturer, John Cheere in 1787, the year the Committee for the Abolition of the African Slave Trade was formed. Rather than boast of personal involvement in the slave trade, stately home owners grew embarrassed by the origins of their wealth and “Blackamoors” disappeared from grand gardens to be sold on, hidden away or melted down. Now only eight “Kneeling Slaves” continue to occupy their original garden, including our two NT examples but if the celebrated “Brenda of Bristol” were to visit her local NT property, she might well utter her famous catchphrase, “Oh no, not another one!”

Unbelievably a bedroom on show at the NATIONAL TRUST’s Dyrham Park “boasts” not just one but two “Kneeling Slaves”!  As house rather than garden slave, they’re borne down by the weight of huge exotic seashells rather than stone sundials but the pose is identical and leaving absolutely no scope for denial their servility is emphasised by their shackling with slave collar and chains.

Wilful Ignorance or Worse?

Wentworth’s sensitive restoration, display and interpretation exemplifies how these figures can be properly exhibited but distortion, denial and obfuscation more typically characterises NT’s approach.  Although NT received a copy of Eyres’ research it continued to exhibit the Dunham and Dyrham “Blackamoors” in the de-contextualised aesthetic fashion favoured by their original aristocratic owners.  In February 2018 a visitor was so shocked by Dyrham’s “Blackamoors” display that they complained on TRIPADVISOR;

“I was deeply disturbed during my visit to Dyrham Hall when I witnessed chained depictions of enslaved human beings in subservient positions casually being displayed as ornamental features…there was no explanation of these artefacts in the room or in the interpretation leaflets (there was only information about paintings and pottery)…”

Another post registered “revulsion” at the racist display.  Six months later Dyrham Park’s “Public Relations Manager” responded by insisting there are,“information leaflets on display next to the stands which put them into context”. However, no leaflets or info boards are apparent in extant photographs and although NT did recently supply me with an undated copy of a leaflet contextualising the “Blackamoor Stands” its value is academic as NT have now removed both Dyrham’s “Chained Slaves” from public view.

As I write, visitors can still gain sight of Wentworth’s “Blackamoor” through the windows of a locked conservatory but the Dunham and Dyrham “slaves” have been hidden away and their images removed from the NT website.  In future posts I’ll explain further how black lives don’t matter much to NT, and neither do white working class lives, nor internal democracy but in the meantime Northern Voices would appreciate readers’ feedback on your opinions and experiences of the NATIONAL TRUST.

***************************

Rethinking British Policing!

T-A-S-E-R

 A 5 Point Manifesto.

by Charles D. Crichlow

IT has become abundantly clear that policing within the British criminal justice system is not working.  For decades, trust and confidence in policing among the UK Black community has been comparatively low and for good reason.  Ministry of Justice data on Race and the Criminal Justice System has consistently throughout the 21st Century shown that Black people are unjustly treated.  The call from the streets in the aftermath of the George Floyd murder is, ‘We want Equal justice under the law’; ‘We want change and we want it now’ and ‘No Justice No Peace’.

Incrementalism will not suffice.  No longer can we afford to engage in ‘look how far we have come-ism’  Herein is the outline of a manifesto for a radical rethink of policing.  I believe, that this is what sections of the public, who have been oppressed by the present system for far too long, deserve.  Upon close examination one will quickly recognise that these changes will not simply benefit a minority of the population but the whole of society.  I must point out, that the ideas put forward here, are only the beginning of what will be a long continuous road towards public safety, protection and equal justice.  No one should have a monopoly on good ideas and undoubtedly others will bring forth other welcome suggestions. This manifesto is not for faint-hearted evolutionists but rather for a genuinely radical rethink of policing in its current form, which I argue is not fit for the essential purpose of racial justice.

This manifesto is deliberately brief, so as to make way for more nuanced and detailed discussion and collective framing of ideas. What is for sure; is that it’s high time that our political leaders take a bold and dispassionate look again at British Policing and the Criminal Justice System.  Whilst also resisting the tendency to be seduced by the awesome power of police leaders to dazzle and seduce with an overly romanticised vision of policing and focus them on the hard reality of racial injustice in this nation.

I therefore set out below, the T-A-S-E-R Model which is based upon the accumulation of experience over my thirty years (Participant Observation) as an Operational Police Officer a Community Organiser and former President of the National Black Police Association. I say respectfully to those within the policing profession, that it should not be for you to determine the merits of this manifesto. Instead, it is for you to work for the public. Since you are supposed to police with our consent, I implore you to set aside the customary disdain for anything resembling a usurpation of your power to determine the policing dispensation. And that instead you pay attention to the cry for justice which is ringing out loud and sweeping across the globe. You now have at the very least the opportunity to contribute something on the right side of history. To think or do otherwise will see your authority slip even further away and pave the way for future anarchy.

T-A-S-E-R MODEL = Transparency Accountability Scrutiny Education Reparation Transparency.

Transparency For far too long, the police have been allowed to operate effectively in secret when it comes to implementing reforms.

They have effectively been given free reign to ‘mark their own homework’. This can be seen in terms of duties under the Equality Act (2010) where the public have little or no insight into how they operate and how they are monitored.

As a police officer, I have witnessed first hand the cavalier approach to these legal duties and the total disregard to its application at the front line of policing. This has to end. And a new era of Radical Transparency must be ushered in, whereby the public get to have maximum real-time insight into how the police, carries out its duties under the Equality Act. ‘The public is the police and the police is the public’ has effectively become a brainwashing mantra that misleads the public and police officers into a romantic perception of the reality. This has to be addressed by opening up policing, much more to the public gaze.

I propose that unless there is a compelling argument for confidentiality, police boardrooms where matters of public interest are to be discussed should be made accessible (via camera) to the public. It should not be left to the police alone to decide upon the many aspects of policing activity that in my view can and should be made transparent to the public. There must be a radical approach to this. Accountability

Each and every police officer is invested with extraordinary powers of discretion, to act in ways that no ordinary citizen can. Therefore much should be expected in terms of holding them to account for their actions.

In far too many cases, accountability is non-existent or is severely hamstrung by aspects of the very Criminal Justice System that is intended to protect the public. We have seen many examples of rogue officers escaping justice or, moreover, being protected by the organisation. Conversely, good officers have all too often, been hurriedly forced out of policing in questionable circumstances and Black officers have disproportionately and inexplicably found to be in this category.

I propose that the application of police Professional Standards be taken completely out of the hands of the police service and that this is coupled with a completely independent mechanism for investigating police misconduct. This would mean the complete abolition of the Independent Office of Police Conduct and the replacement with something, which is fit for purpose particularly in terms of racial justice. In addition there should be a presumption that accountability is a public concern therefore notwithstanding appropriate confidentiality issues, questions of misconduct should be answered in public.

Scrutiny

Hand in hand with a new Radical Transparency so too must there be a new era of Super Scrutiny. At present we have an extraordinary state of affairs, whereby police forces either have little or no scrutiny, of how they implement the legal requirements of the Equality Act and yet they get to pick and choose who is deemed appropriate to scrutinise their work.

The current system of inspection by the ‘Her Majesty Inspector of Constabulary’ is completely inadequate. I have seen at first hand how the police are able to very easily ‘pull the wool over the eyes of HMIC’ - a toothless tiger. Police and Crime Commissioners whose role is to hold the Chief Constable to account on behalf of the public have been fantastically ineffective in terms of racial justice. Many of these PCC’s are hopelessly incapable of performing this task not only due to competence but many are ideologically driven.

I propose the establishment of a completely independent body of highly professional and competent scrutineers in the field of equal justice with the necessary powers to ensure compliance. Their remit will include identifying disparity and ensuring police compliance with equality duties and its own equality strategies.

Education

From Training to Education, there is ample evidence to suggest that police forces are not capable of recruiting, training and developing the workforce, the public and the whole of the system required for equal justice to flourish. Policing has recently been placed on a more professionalised footing, whilst this is a welcome step it is not enough.

I propose that the recruitment and development of all police personnel should be taken completely out of the hands of the police force and placed in a framework of Education rather than simply regimented training. A genuine new ethos of Education for Public Service should be the goal where Police Forces will become genuine Police Services. This should include every aspect of current training including and particularly ‘Use Of Force’ training. This should not in anyway signal a pivot towards privatisation of any aspect of current policing functions but rather to establish new ways within the public realm, of improving policing. The College of Policing has been a signal failure in terms of its 6 remit, particularly in regard to race equality, it has simply come to reflect and replicate the racial hierarchies that exist within policing. Moreover it represents a huge waste of public money that could be put to better use. The same applies to many of the institutions, which represent policing from top to bottom.

Reparation

In order for any of this manifesto to be implemented, the current police force and justice system must come to reckoning with its past and therefore genuine reparative racial justice must be brought about.

Whole communities have been criminalised labelled and brought to ruin by institutional racism not just by hostile policing but by an entirely hostile environment in terms of education, housing policy, health and generally towards the presence of Black people in the United Kingdom who were brought here to work, build and be used as was the case under Colonialism and Enslavement.  Indeed, the roots of some of the crimes, which have plagued the Black community, particularly those of a seriously violent nature (often framed as so called ‘Black on Black’ violence) can be located in the legacy of a history of violent oppression.  These ‘chickens are now coming home to roost’ and all the tough talking about ‘rioters’ and ‘thugs’ will not drown out the voices of those who have a just cause and demand for reparatory justice.

In short, reparatory justice is the first and necessary step toward equal justice.  Any attempt to build a future upon the unquestioned foundations of the current broken system will prove to be an exercise in futility and we will be back here again. The backlash to the current movement has already begun and the need for courageous leadership is palpable. Failure to take the necessary steps will prove to be a concession towards those who benefit from the privilege of status quo and the advancement of white supremacy. We have seen and heard that the call of ‘white silence is violence’ thus, political cowardice is also violent and must be called out loudly. This brief manifesto is submitted / launched at the Windrush Defenders – ‘Burning Work: In the Wake of Windrush’ Conference (22.06.2020) however, this is a public document and will be open to much wider conversation.

Charles D. Crichlow 21.06.2020

A former police officer with 30 years service. President of National Black Police Officers Association from 2009-2013.Graduate of Manchester University School of Law with a Masters in criminology. Served as Independent Special Advisor to Tutu Foundation review into institutional racism.

Quotes: (“...pay attention to the cry for justice which is ringing out loud and sweeping across the globe. You now have at the very least the opportunity to contribute something on the right side of history. To think or do otherwise will see your authority slip even further away and pave the way for future anarchy.”)

(“We have seen and heard that the call of ‘white silence is violence’ thus, political cowardice is also violent and must be called out loudly.”)

*********************************

Time to prevent our UK police service morphing into a US-style police force

by Ex-Superintendent Victor Olisa

POLICING by consent is the foundation on which a ‘service’ style of policing dominates over an ‘enforcement’ style.   In the United Kingdom, the police are praised around the world for its service style of policing.  Yet evolving changes in the language and style of UK policing are shifting that style towards more ‘enforcement’ than ‘service’ for Black people.

The heart-wrenching images of the killing of George Floyd on 25^th May 2020 in Minneapolis, United States of America, has become a powerful driver for change in the way Black people are treated by the police around the world. In the UK, some people console themselves that such a barbaric act would not happen here because of the checks and balances in place to prevent that level of police misbehaviour, such as inspections by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary Fire & Rescue Services.

However, the words ‘police culture’, often evokes negative mental images of police misbehaviour and indiscipline.  The criminologist Robert Reiner argues that the ‘core’ characteristics of police culture, such as ‘mission’ and ‘action’, engender in officers the belief that policing is not just a job but a way of life.   It is the reason why officers rush towards danger when others run away.

The Canadian criminologist John Lee described a characteristic of police culture that he termed police ‘property’.   He explained that “modern police forces emerged out of the need to protect dominant communities from dangerous classes” and as a consequence police soon learned to distinguish the ‘public’ they were supposed to serve and protect and the ‘public’ they were supposed to control and punish (i.e. blacks, women, Indians, and others)”.   Police ‘property’ are “low status, powerless groups whom the dominant majority see as problematic or distasteful and are prepared to let the police deal with their ‘property’ and turn a blind eye to the way this is done.”

Today, the concept has become a powerful reality in the wake of the killing of George Floyd, because of the callous way it was done by the officer: hands in his pocket as he surveyed all around him in triumphant nonchalance.

As a police officer for 35 years who has worked in forces in the UK and with police organisations across the world in my experience the majority of officers are professional and committed people who uphold the ideals of public service.

So, the question is, how has such a powerful and respected social institution allowed some of its officers to police with unimaginable brutality, and engage in irrational activity?

In the sense of irrational activity, the misuse of ‘stop and search’ exemplifies the notion of police ‘property’

The negative impact of stop and search has been well documented, for example, the conclusion of a 2013 Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary inspection on stop and search states:

“…with a few exceptions, forces were not able to demonstrate an approach to using stop and search powers that was based upon a foundation of evidence of what works best to fight crime…”

Today there is a growing practice (as often posted on social media and according to anecdotal information I hear from accounts of police training) of officers handcuffing young Black boys who have not been arrested and are not resisting or showing any signs of aggression, before they start searching them. This happens whilst white friends that are with them are searched without being handcuffed.

This is a worrying development of a practice that seem to reinforce the stereotype that conflates Blackness with dangerousness:  Black boys are considered ‘dangerous’ and so have to be treated differently (restrained), and in a way that is humiliating and degrading, without a rational justification.  Black boys are treated as police ‘property’ whilst their white friends that are with them are treated very differently, with courtesy and respect.

An often-articulated statement by police officers is that people from BAME background do not want to join the police.  True, not all BAME people want to join the police but enough do. My plea to senior officers is work to reduce the rate of attrition for those that do join:  For example, Home Office data (March 2019) suggests that 23% of recruits to MPS were people from BAME backgrounds, so joining at a higher rate BUT the same document shows that voluntary resignation is 26% BAME and 17% white officers.  Additionally, 2.6% of BAME officers are dismissed compared to 1.2% white officers.

The journey for many Black officers (in my experience the BAME category fair better collectively) is comparable to them running a 400 metres stable chase alongside their white colleagues who are running a 4x1 400 metres sprint relay.  Consequently, Black officers never realise their potential, because the hurdles they must overcome grinds them down and saps away their energy.

When Government take an active role to understand the reasons why Black people face structural racism by public bodies, they would receive confidence in their commitment by not appointing a lead for a commission who is on record doubting the existence of institutional racism.

Whatever our colour, race or social standing, society needs the police. If we are genuinely going to address racism and its destructive effects, every one of us need to look at ourselves and ask:

What do I need to do to take Black people off the list of police ‘property’?

• The answer is to stop stereotyping Black people as low status, unintelligent, aggressive, dangerous, self-destructive, and sub-human, and recognise the privilege and comfort that comes from remaining ‘silent’.

Every senior police leader advocating for change must make a commitment to empty the police ‘property’ list so that Black people and others subject by the majority to negative stereotyping as ‘low status’ are not treated contemptuous and with excessive force and they don’t end up as a death in custody. 

************************************* 

World Refugee Day: Who ******* Cares?

by Les May

YESTERDAY was Juneteenth, it marks the day when slavery was finally ended in the state of Texas 155 years ago.   It produced rallies all over the USA and today there will be ’demos’ in major cities in the UK ostensibly in support of ‘black lives matter’, though not doubt the opportunity to air other grievances will not be missed.

Today is World Refugee Day, it marks the fact that 80 million people, 1% of the world population, have been displaced by war, persecution and famine.  Will it produce similar ‘demos’ throughout the land?  Probably not.

What was it that George Orwell’s animals in his fable Animal Farm had to say? Oh yes! ‘All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others’.

************************* 

After statutes, is it book burning next?

Statue of Edward Colston Toppled by Protestors in Bristol

I well understand why some people in Bristol wanted to pull down the statue of the Tory slave trader, Edward Colston, and I won't lose any sleep over that . But where does the toppling of statues lead to?  Certainly, it will lead to counter protests from the far right defending the statues, and the far right demanding the removal of monuments connected with the left, such as that of Karl Marx, in Highgate Cemetery.  I believe it already gets regularly vandalised.

And are we going to have ritual book burnings next, of books that contain racist, sexist, imperialist, colonialist, transphobic, homophobic, themes?  If we do, authors like Dickens, Trollope, Orwell, Conrad, and Waugh, had better watch out.

This trying to turn the clock back in order to transplant modern views onto the past to rewrite history, can set a dangerous precedent.  Are we trying to bury the past, hide it, and sanitize it?   It's not just the English imperialist Cecil Rhodes that they want to remove after taking his scholarships for donkeys years, but there is also a campaign by feminists to remove a bust of Arthur Koestler, from Edinburgh University, because they've accused him of being a 'rapist'.  I gather that vegans and vegetarians are also trying  to get a statue of 'Cow Pie' Desperate Dan, removed in Dundee.

There are also demands to remove a statue of the journalist, explorer, Henry Morton Stanley, (real name John Rowlands), which was unveiled in Denbigh in March 2011. Robert Aldrich, his biographer, says Stanley's birth certificate describes him as a 'bastard' who was abandoned by his mother and family and dumped in the St Asaph Union Workhouse, for ten years from the aged of six to sixteen.  He emigrated to the US in 1859 aged 18, arriving in New Orleans, and after working in various jobs and having fought in the civil war, he became a journalist working for the New York Herald.

I watched the unveiling of his statue on youtube, and there was a delegation of black people from the Congo.  One of them said that they realised that the name of Stanley was controversial (he was accused of being a slave trader and of using indiscriminate cruelty against Africans, including shooting them, which is all true), but they came and spoke at the unveiling ceremony.  I also know that William Morris and members of the Socialist League wrote pamphlets against Stanley and demonstrated at meetings.

Stanley is best known for finding Dr Livingstone and the source of the Nile.  But he also worked as an agent for King Leopold II of Belgium.  It was the Afro-Arab slave trader Tippu Tip, that helped Stanley to find Livingstone.  It is said that on one occasion, Tippu Tip, raided 118 villages, killed 4,000 Africans, and had 2,300 slaves, mostly women and children, bound in chains and transported to the markets of Zanzibar.

As regards the question of slavery, it's not just whites like Colston who were slave traders.  We must not forget the Muslim Barbary pirates who abducted people to sell them in slave markets all the time and who felt it was their religious duty to do this to the infidel.  This went on for centuries and in 1631, they abducted 107 people from the little village of Baltimore, in West Cork, Ireland, for a life of slavery in Algiers.  Today, this is known as the 'Sack of Baltimore'.

And should we start a campaign to remove the plaque in Ashton to the famous travel writer, H.V. Morton, who was born in the town?  It is alleged that he was a Nazi sympathizer and an antisemite.  In a diary entry from February 1941, he confessed:

'I must say Nazi-ism has some fine qualities', and, 'I am appalled to discover how many of Hitler's theories appeal to me.'  Another diary entry describes the US as 'that craven nation of Jews and foreigners.'

Let me know what you think.

**************************************