Police training in non-contact sexual offences welcomed by mother of murdered student Libby Squire
The online learning module has already been completed by more than 2,000 officers and is being rolled out across England and Wales in response to a recommendation made by the Angiolini Inquiry, which looked into how the serving police officer and voyeur Wayne Couzens slipped through the net to go on and kidnap, rape and murder Sarah Everard in 2021.
"It's so important that we encourage police officers to take non-contact offences seriously," explained Lisa Squire, speaking to Sky News. "I'm really pleased to see it come together."
A non-contact sexual offence is any sort of sexual gesture that is unwanted and not a contact. It includes upskirting, voyeurism and exposing yourself to others.
Ms Squire thinks Pawel Relowicz exposed himself to Libby months before he raped and killed her. During his trial, the jury heard Relowicz had a string of past non-contact sexual offences, including masturbating in public.
Data from 2022 shows the overwhelming majority of sexual exposure crimes and offenders do not come in contact with the police.
There is some evidence that greater levels of interaction with victims during sexual exposure may be a risk factor for offenders who move to contact sexual offending.
"Before our daughter was abducted, raped and murdered I was aware of non-contact sexual offences but they were just things strange men did. Now when we look back on the offender (Relowicz) he had a prolific history of these offences. Some had been reported, some hadn't. There is an escalation pattern," Ms Squire said.
Ms Squire said prior to her daughter's and Ms Everard's death, attitudes to non-contact sexual offences were, "You're just making a fuss".
"We just accepted these things happened. But we didn't talk about the escalation. It's incredibly traumatic to a woman to be a victim," she added.
An inquiry after Ms Everard's death which looked into how a known voyeur like Couzens could slip through the net and commit more serious crimes criticised police attitudes.
Its chair, Dame Angiolini, called for a step change in the way police respond to indecent exposure cases.
"Victims deserve to have their cases investigated properly each and every time. Attitudes towards the experience of those victimised by alleged incidents of exposure are not commensurate with the harm caused," she said.
Jamie Daniels, detective chief superintendent at the College of Policing, said this was a real opportunity for change.
"We know that non-contact sex offences disproportionately affect women and girls and they're also extremely underreported so that's why we see these things as integral to how we improve trust," he said.
He added: "If we get that message right in terms of how we respond, we build trust, we have better outcomes for victims and we start to see the improvements the public rightly deserve."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
3 days ago
- The Independent
Policing must strike a balance between transparency and justice
Given the sensitivity of the issue, the high level of public interest, and the clear danger of legitimate public protests descending into mob rule, it is entirely right that the police should be given new guidance on releasing details of the ethnicity and nationality of a suspect in some, limited circumstances. The new interim guidance, issued by the National Police Chiefs' Council and the College of Policing, is, if anything, somewhat overdue – because it has been distressingly clear that surmise, conjecture, speculation, misinformation, propaganda, 'asking questions', and downright lies about serious crimes, can be weaponised by malign agents. Conspiracy theories have generated enormous public concern, and then disorder. Some calm analysis is required. Crime is crime, and criminals are criminals, and crime cannot be racialised. The release of information concerning a suspect's nationality, race, or immigration status (as has been suggested but, for the moment, resisted) cannot be used as an excuse for a riot. An offence is not more serious because it has been committed by, say, an asylum seeker, and an individual is not in some sense more guilty because of the colour of their skin. Except in cases involving a racial motive or incitement to hatred, such considerations ought to be irrelevant. Generally, they will continue to be. That has to be the default position. However, if a senior police team judges that the safety of the public is best served by the release of certain defaults, then a degree of discretion is justified. 'Guidance' is just that – a set of guidelines, not hard rules. The violent summer riots of 2024 were serious enough, but they could have been much worse had the truth about the Southport murders not emerged when it did, and had the untrue rumours about the suspect being a Muslim asylum-seeker who had come straight off a small boat not been dispelled – not that it should have made a difference in terms of criminal justice. As in all operational matters, the police should have an appropriate degree of discretion in the particular circumstances of any given situation they face, and equally, they should be free of political interference – and the demands of certain populist politicians and 'activists' to use heinous crimes and the suffering of victims for their own cynical purposes. These particular public figures don't care, in any case, whether people they don't like receive a fair trial, and are cheerfully contemptuous of the rule of law, particularly the provisions of the Contempt of Court Act 1981. But no democratic society should concede the universal principle of the right to a fair trial, uncontaminated by widespread misreporting of circumstances and motives such that a jury cannot do its job. The Home Office has not written these new guidelines – which is as it should be – but it has welcomed the interim proposals. The home secretary, Yvette Cooper, is complementing the move by asking the Law Commission to clarify how increased transparency and limited discretion for the police to release certain details could affect a free and fair trial. At the same time, the police have to be able to justify and defend their own actions in a world in which corrosive and baseless allegations of 'two-tier' policing, and 'cover-ups', are thrown around with such recklessness on social media and, sadly, by the so-called mainstream media as well. Like the guidance on what the police can reveal about suspects, the law on contempt of court also needs to be revisited. Since the relevant legislation was put on the statute book, the world has changed beyond recognition. Then, it was a matter of ensuring that a relatively small number of domestic press outlets and broadcasters behaved responsibly. For many years, because journalists are not on the whole bent on causing injustice and triggering retrials, the arrangements worked well. Times change. The last year or so, in particular, has proved how social media operates in an entirely different way. It is practically lawless. A very old adage springs to mind when one considers the speed of modern dissemination – a lie can be halfway around the world before the truth has got its boots on. This is an environment in which none of the tech giants take full responsibility for what appears on their platforms, or for the very real harm it can inflict. Vile racial slurs about non-existent crimes or suspects can originate far from the UK, and be amplified by bots and augmented by AI. There is a balance to be struck, essentially, between transparency and justice. That balance requires constant monitoring and periodic adjustment as technology moves forward and public expectations evolve. There will never be complete consensus, or success, often because the radical populists, both online and off, have a vested interest in fostering – indeed, creating – such unpleasant myths and conspiracies. But there is a sense here of a government and a police service being alert to the urgency of the challenge. In an often bleak social-media landscape, that is encouraging.
Sky News
4 days ago
- Sky News
A father criticised the use of airdrops in Gaza. Five days later, he was killed by a falling pallet
Why you can trust Sky News Five days before he was killed by a falling aid package, father-of-two Uday al Qaraan called on world leaders to open Gaza's borders to food - and criticised the use of airdrops. "This isn't aid delivery," said the 32-year-old medic as a crowd of children rummaged through the remains of an airdrop behind him. "This is humiliation." Using footage from social media, satellite imagery, eyewitness testimony and flight tracking data, Sky News has examined the dangers posed by airdrops - and just how little difference they are making to Gaza's hunger crisis. A tangled parachute and a crowd in chaos Based on six videos of the airdrop that killed Uday, we were able to locate the incident to a tent camp on the coast of central Gaza. We determined that the drop occurred at approximately 11.50am on 4 August, based on metadata from these videos shared by three eyewitnesses. Flight tracking data shows that only one aid plane, a UAE Armed Forces C-130 Hercules, was in the area at that time. Footage from the ground shows 12 pallets falling from the plane. The four lowest parachutes soon become tangled, and begin to fall in pairs. As a crowd surges towards the landing zone, a gunshot rings out. Nine more follow over a 90-second period. Sakhr al Qaraan, an eyewitness and Uday's neighbour, says that Uday was among those running after the first pallet to land. "He didn't see the other pallet it was tangled up with, and it fell on him moments later," says Sakhr. "People ran to collect the aid in cold blood, devoid of humanity, and he suffocated under that damned blanket - under the feet of people who had lost all humanity." The scene descended into chaos as Palestinians, some armed, tussled over the limited food available. By the time Uday was pulled from the crowd and rushed to hospital, it was too late. The UAE Ministry of Foreign Affairs did not respond to a request for comment. Parachutes failed in half of airdrops analysed This was not the first time that airdrops at this location had posed a threat to those on the ground. The day before Uday was killed, the same plane had dropped aid over the site. The footage below, shared by the UAE Armed Forces, shows the view from inside the plane. Just before the footage ends, it shows that one of the parachutes was broken. Hisham al Armi recorded the scene from the ground. His video shows the broken parachute, as well as another that had failed completely. Military planes dropped aid at the site on eight consecutive days between 30 July and 6 August. Sky News verified footage showing parachute failures during four of those eight airdrops. Flight tracking data shows that almost all of the 67 aid flights over that period followed a similar route along the coast, which is densely packed with tent camps. An Israel Defence Forces (IDF) official told Sky News that the airdrops are routed along the coast, because this is where much of Gaza's population is now concentrated. An IDF spokesperson added the Israeli military "takes all possible measures to mitigate the harm to uninvolved civilians". Hisham al Armi told Sky News he is grateful to the countries that donated the aid, but "the negatives outweigh the positives". "Fighting occurs when aid is dropped, and some people are killed ... due to the crush and parachutes." Other dangers are also posed by the airdrops. The footage below, taken on 29 July, shows Palestinians venturing into the sea in order to chase aid that had drifted over the water. The IDF has banned Palestinians from entering the sea. One woman, a relative of Uday who witnessed his death, described the airdrops as the "airborne humiliation of the people". "There is not enough aid for them," she said. "It creates problems among the people, and some are killed just to obtain a little aid. And most people don't receive any aid, they remain hungry for days." Between 27 July and 1 August, Gaza received an estimated 1,505 tonnes of food aid per day via land routes - 533 tonnes short of what the UN's food security agency says is needed to meet basic needs. Based on flight tracking data, we estimated that airdrops added just 38 tonnes daily, 7% of the shortfall. "The quantities involved are minuscule in terms of the scale of the need," says Sam Rose, Gaza director of UNRWA, the UN agency previously responsible for distributing food in the territory. UNRWA claims it has enough food stationed outside of Gaza to feed the population for three months, but that Israel has not allowed the agency to bring in any food since 2 March. "We should be dealing with that rather than introducing something else which is costly, dangerous, undignified and somehow legitimises ... the access regime by suggesting that we found a way round it through airdrops," Rose says. COGAT, the Israeli agency responsible for coordinating aid deliveries, referred Sky News to a statement in which it said there is "no limit on the amount of aid" allowed into Gaza. An IDF spokesperson also denied restricting aid, and said the Israeli military "will continue to work in order to improve the humanitarian response in the Gaza Strip, along with the international community". In his interview five days before he was killed, Uday al Qaraan appealed to world leaders to open Gaza's borders. "What would happen if they just let the aid in?" he asked. "If you can fly planes and drop aid from the sky then you can break the siege, you can open a land crossing."
Spectator
4 days ago
- Spectator
Police chiefs must learn to use their common sense
Britain's top cop club has released new guidance to forces in England and Wales on when and how to describe the suspects of serious crimes. It's a day late and a dollar short. The National Police Chiefs Council (NPCC), stirred from their deckchairs by nationwide riots of only twelve months ago, are now advising constabularies that it's probably a good thing in most circumstances if people's ethnicity and immigration status are disclosed at the point of charge. If you're wondering why it takes this body in conjunction with the College of Policing to tell chiefs they are allowed to use common sense, you're in good company. But let's apply this new dispensation to a real-life example to see if it flies. Say, the one where police obfuscation over the identity of a suspect contributed to the worst public order breakdown for over a decade. Alex Rudukabana, the Southport child murderer, was arrested on 29 July last year. Police gave the first information about him to the public later that same evening, which did nothing to contradict misinformation already halfway round the world. Its selectivity only fuelled public anger. After arrest for multiple murders, the police had 96 hours to charge or release him under legislation. By the time police announced he had been charged on the morning of 1 August, serious disorder had broken out in five locations with dozens of officers injured and a violent contagion was released across the UK. It's fair to say that this anaemic intervention should at least stop huge inconsistencies that exist across the country. Chief officers are clearly befuddled by what they perceive to be legal or community tension obstacles to doing the right thing at the right time. Merseyside police, perhaps stung by their mishandling of the Southport massacre comms, swung into action when a car-ramming horror happened on the streets of Liverpool in May. The ethnicity of the alleged assailant – 'a white British man' – was released two hours after his arrest and long before Paul Doyle was charged with multiple counts of GBH. Contrast this with the arrant idiocy of Warwickshire police, whose extreme reluctance to confirm the immigration status and ethnicity of two reported asylum seekers suspected of the rape of a 12 year old girl in Nuneaton recently was based not on any legislative obstacle but on the lack of guidance to tell them they could. The precise status of the alleged attackers Ahmad Mulakhil and Mohammad Kabir is still shrouded in mystery. While they are entitled to the presumption of innocence and due process, I can't see anything that would preclude those facts from being released. Beyond, of course, the cack-eyed fealty to 'community cohesion', which seems to eternally ignore the fact that this social contract relies on the majority in the country believing in it. There is no substitute for the fullest information being disclosed accurately and fast. Where there might be a legal impediment, for example age, that is relied upon to stop any early disclosure, this must be changed. The National Police Chiefs Council ought to be an anachronism these days. We introduced local democratic accountability years ago in the form of policing and crime commissioners (PCCs). But they are too often incompetent duds and political retreads far behind the curve of public opinion that elected them. If this architecture must exist along with the insatiable bureaucracy of the College of Policing, it ought to spend more time ensuring that police chiefs and their guidance are both fit for purpose. Otherwise we will continue to see people like Essex Chief Ben-Julian Harrington well over his head when it comes to policing protests, such as those tinderbox concerns over illegal migration, despite being the NPCC lead for public order. His misunderstanding of the Human Rights Act and the convention it is built on meant that masked antifa protestors from outside the community were given a police escort into and away from a then peaceful demonstration by townspeople outside a hotel for migrants in Epping. This had disastrous results both in terms of disorder and public confidence. One thing PCCs can do is hire chief officers who are able and willing to do the thing public trust relies on – police without fear or favour – and fire those who can't. Perhaps it is not too late for them to step up.
