Home Affairs CommitteeSupplementary written evidence submitted by Sir Peter Fahy, Chief Constable, Greater Manchester Police (LCG 01)

Thank you for your letter dated 20 June 2012 requesting further information following the evidence we gave to the Committee on the 12th June.

In GMP we consider the following alternative methods both in terms of investigation and/or in order to disrupt offenders activity in respect of grooming and child sexual exploitation cases:

1. DNA testing of clothing of potential victims of CSE. Often deployed in relation to regular Missing From Home’s who are not disclosing intelligence to form the basis of a case.

2. Prosecution without a victim’s account. Use of forensics as above and any circumstantial evidence we can build; we have had successful prosecutions in this way.

3. Obtaining access to Facebook and other similar social network sites using consent to print off potential evidence when unable to obtain evidence via conventional methods.

4. Intelligence based investigation. We often undertake in depth research on small pieces of intelligence and social media conversations to identify suspects. We used a Facebook conversation and photographs posted on-line which identified a registered sex offender who was targeting one of our victims through social media.

5. Forensic examinations of mobile phones and computers play a large part of our enquiries. We often use evidence of communications to corroborate or build up circumstantial evidence where we have little “traditional” evidence available.

6. Pro-active deployment to CSE Hotspots to identify potential CSE victims and build intelligence on possible offenders. A recent deployment and protect investigation led to finding a female who had been a high risk missing person for in excess of 6 weeks.

7. Disruptions

Warnings under S2 Abduction Act or under S49 Childrens Act. When possible we use body cameras or taped recorded interviews to record the evidence that the warnings have been given to negate future evidential disputes.

Intelligence profiles to identify other offences to take action. One case led to the arrest of a male for possessing firearms and drugs. Although we couldn’t prove the CSE he received five years imprisonment.

Use of other agencies- UKBA for deportation, housing associations for eviction, trading standards agencies to impose conditions/closure of premises. A recent case regarding an off licence, where there was insufficient evidence for a criminal case, is likely to lead to the suspect losing his licence for selling unlawful alcohol.

Work with Social Care to identify issues regarding appropriate accommodation for the child.

With reference to the IPCC involvement in the Rochdale case please find below the current terms of reference for their investigation which was dated 15 March 2012.

(i)It is agreed that the term “Initial Investigation” covers the period from 2008 up to February 2010 when the PPIU took over investigation of the incident.

(ii)GMP Professional Standards Branch (PSB) will obtain and review all relevant material obtained during the review process conducted into this case by the Major Crime Review Team.

(iii)The Rochdale Division Senior Leadership Team’s involvement and decision making in relation to the initial investigation will be investigated and the report will include details of the investigations undertaken and findings reached.

(iv)PSB will further consider whether notices should be served on any officer, including members of the SLT, and whether further investigation is required. Notices will be served/further investigations undertaken where it is identified that this is necessary. No final decision will be reached without consultation with the IPCC.

(v)The Investigating Officer’s report will be reviewed and re-written in line with the above enquiries. Wherever recommendations are made, the report will provide the rationale for those recommendations. If any notices have been served, the report will reach clear findings on whether the member of staff/officer has a case to answer for misconduct or gross misconduct.

(vi)The report will also include a new section on the progress GMP has made within Child Protection arena since this case first came to light. This will include an explanation about the creation of the Public Protection Division and the Sunrise project dealing with Child Sexual Exploitation Team in Rochdale Division.

(vii)GMP will provide the IPCC with detailed monthly updates on the progress of this case until it is satisfactorily concluded.

I trust this information is useful and if you require any further information please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sir Peter Fahy
Chief Constable
Greater Manchester Police

26 June 2012