Please can you clarify the meaning of ‘other’, and provide as much detail as possible on the offences for which verbal warnings were given, and arrests made. At the very least, please can you say how many of the arrests were for terrorism-related offences, what these offences were, and how many resulted in prosecutions.
K.Simmons, Policy and Support Officer for the Metropolitan Police Service, responded on 10 October 2008 with the following further information for MPS Sec44 Searches and Outcomes to Feb 2008 (the first table is the same as the one resulting from the first request):
|MPS Section 44 Searches; January 2003 – February 2008|
|Outcome Type Description||Number of Searches|
|NO FURTHER ACTION||140,989|
|Breakdown of ‘Other’ search outcome type|
|Outcome Type Description||Total|
|PART 4 CJ – REMOVED FROM DESIGNATED AREA||145|
|DIRECTED TO LEAVE ALCOHOL LOCN.||26|
|Proportional Breakdown of Arrests following Stop and Search under S44, January 2003 – March 2008|
|Arrest Reason Group||Arrest Reason Type Description||Total||As % Total|
|S60||ANTICIPATED VIOLENCE (S60 CJPO)||5||0.24%|
|S60 Total||Total Section 60 Arrests||5||0.24%|
|S44 Total||Total Section 44 Arrests||220||10.44%|
|PACE/ Other||ARRESTED OTHER OFFENCE(S)||1,092||51.80%|
|PACE/ Other||OTHER POWER (ANNEX A OF CODE A PACE)||240||11.39%|
|PACE/ Other||DRUGS (S23 MISUSE OF DRUGS ACT)||198||9.39%|
|PACE/ Other||STOP & SEARCH FOR STOLEN PROPERTY (S1 PACE)||147||6.97%|
|PACE/ Other||OFFENSIVE WEAPONS (S1 PACE)||117||5.55%|
|PACE/ Other||OFFENSIVE WEAPONS (S139 – CJA, SCHOOLS)||40||1.90%|
|PACE/ Other||GOING EQUIPPED (S1 PACE)||21||1.00%|
|PACE/ Other||FIREARMS (S47 FIREARMS ACT)||20||0.95%|
|PACE/ Other||S.163 RTA||6||0.28%|
|PACE/ Other||ARTICLES TO CAUSE CRIMINAL DAM||2||0.09%|
|PACE/ Other Total||Total PACE/ Other Arrests||1,883||89.33%|
On the subject of my request to clarify the meaning of ‘other’, the response was:
We are unable to clarify what others are as there is no information on the stops form to clarify this, also we cannot tell him how many resulted in prosecutions. Some of the information needed for the reply is on the attachment below.
[I’m assuming “him” is me, and this was copy and pasted from an internal email.]
As was seen on the first request, 20.8% of all searches under Section 44 were recorded with an “other” outcome. (39,817 of 191,478 searches).
Of these, further clarification revealed that for 38,009 of these 39,817 searches (95%, or 19.9% of all searches) no outcome was recorded – but this does not mean “no further action” was taken, as these are classified separately. So what happened to this group?
For the arrests – the outcome of 2,108 of the 191,478 searches (1.1%) – the breakdown shows that Section 44 arrests – i.e. arrests that justified the initial search under the powers of Section 44 – comprise just 10.44% of the total – and the MPS can’t tell us how many of these resulted in prosecution, let alone conviction.
The vast majority of arrests – 89.33% – are for standard PACE offences, with 51.80% of the total again classified as “other” – so we have no idea what happened. Of the named offences, the largest group by far is drugs offences at 9.39%.