Officer involved in strip search of Child Q says search 'should have never happened'
One of the police officers involved in the in the strip search of a child while on her period, has told a misconduct hearing that search "should have never happened" and that she is "very sorry for the distressed caused."
Speaking at the hearing on Monday 16 June, PC Wray, was questioned about the training she had received in regards to police searches.
She told the panel that she had received training on police stop and search. Though this included how to conduct a strip search, this itself was not practical.
During this line of questioning it was revealed that PC Wray had never completed her Search Powers and Procedures Course, which covers the legal framework for police searches.
When asked why this course hadn't been completed, PC Wray told the panel: 'I was never made aware that I missed that course'.
She went on to tell the panel that she'd never received any training on what to do if someone you are searching is menstruating - as was the case for Child Q.
PC Wray also told the panel that there was no training on how to minimise the embarrassment nor was she provided any training on how to search children.
Concluding her response to training, PC Wray told the panel that prior to searching Child Q, she had not familiarised herself on how stop and search policies had changed; nor had she read the full guidance laid out in the Authorised Professional Practice - which is the official professional practice for policing.
The hearing heard that on the day of Child Q's search, PC Wray was on shift at a response officer when she received a radio call for a 'female officer to assist with a search'.
PC Wray told the hearing that she understood that to mean a strip search was going to be taking place.
Prior to this, she had never attended a school but had carried out two strip searches - both of which were in a custody cell, none of which involved a child.
She arrived at Child Q's school at around 11am and was taken to the room where the child was.
PC Wray told the panel that she believed this to be a 'very serious incident' and that she had smelt cannabis when she entered the school's medical room.
One of the requirements for a strip search is authorisation from a officer with the rank of sergeant or higher.
However, the hearing today heard no such authorisation was given for the search of Child Q.
PC Wray accepted that she should've checked if the search was authorised and believed that it had been authorised prior to her arrival.
When asked about Child Q's behaviour prior to the removal of her clothes, she said the student appeared 'completely calm' and 'answered all the questions directed at her.'
Rules also require an appropriate adult to be present during this kind of search - this was not the case for Child Q's search.PC Wray said that she assumed Child Q's PE teacher was the designated appropriate adult - even though she was not in the room while the search was taking place.
PC Wray's evidence was followed by a series of apologies.
She told the panel that the strip search of Child Q "should have never happened" and that "she should have spoken to a sergeant", and "phoned Child Q's mother".
She said she never intended the for the search to be "degrading" or "humiliating".
With tears in her eyes she said unconscious bias played no part in her decision to proceed with the search of Child Q.
When asked why no notes or records were made about her involvement in the search, she told the panel that she 'didn't know' she had to make a record of it in her pocket book - despite Metropolitan Police policy requiring a contemporaneous record being made in the event of a strip search.
PC Wray marks the last witness in this case.
The panel will now decide whether she and her other colleagues involved in the search - detective constable Kristina Linge, PC Victoria Wray and PC Rafal Szmydynski - committed gross misconduct and whether they should remain officers in the Metropolitan Police Service.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Evening Standard
3 days ago
- Evening Standard
Police officer who followed BMW before fatal crash denies he was pursuing car
According to Authorised Professional Practice guidance for police forces, the definition of a pursuit is when a car or motorcycle, by their actions or their continuance of their manner of driving, refuses to stop and that the police driver believes the subject vehicle driver is aware of a requirement to stop and the police driver continues to drive behind the vehicle to report its progress or to stop it.
The Independent
4 days ago
- The Independent
Race and lack of accountability involved in Child Q strip search, tribunal hears
Race and lack of accountability are at the heart of why and how a 15 year-old black girl was strip-searched at school by police after being wrongly suspected of carrying cannabis was handled, a misconduct hearing has been told. The degree of failures surrounding the 'grossly disproportionate search', allegedly without an appropriate adult present, meant the Metropolitan Police officers did not look to protect a potentially vulnerable child, according to the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC). Their actions could possibly undermine public trust and confidence in the police, the IOPC warned. The girl, known as Child Q, was strip searched by officers in Hackney, east London, on December 3 2020. She arrived for a mock exam smelling of cannabis and was taken to the medical room to be strip-searched while teachers remained outside. This involved the removal of her clothing including underwear, her bending over and having to expose intimate parts of her body while she was menstruating, the panel heard. Trainee detective constable (TDC) Kristina Linge, Pc Victoria Wray and Pc Rafal Szmydynski, who were all police constables at the time, all deny gross misconduct over their treatment of the girl. In closing submissions Elliot Gold, for the IOPC, said discrimination is not the sole ground the panel needs to consider, but added: 'The issue of race provides you with the only explanation that is left as to why the officers' failures were so great and why so much went wrong and the only explanation as to why it all went so badly.' He told the tribunal panel in south-east London, who could consider sacking the officers if gross misconduct is proved: 'The resolution of this case should primarily be forward-facing. 'It is about preventing similar misconduct from recurring in the future, with the consequent damage to trust and confidence in the police, especially within the black community, which these events have caused.' He added: 'This case shows, that members of racial groups need protection from conduct driven by unrecognised or unconscious bias as much as from conscious and deliberate discrimination.' Mr Gold also noted 'there are almost no contemporaneous documents or records of this case – why? That's because it is the officers who failed to make them.' No drugs were found by the teachers before the school's safeguarding deputy called police. They were called amid fears Child Q could have been carrying drugs for someone, being exploited or groomed in the community – which meant it was a safeguarding issue for her and other school pupils. Mr Gold said 'there is a potential evidential conflict as to whether the teachers were insistent there should be a search'. He added: 'There may be criticism of the school calling the police for advice on a safeguarding matter but that shows they did not know what to do, rather than being insistent (on a search) it shows uncertainty.' Child Q's mother, who was described as a 'supportive' parent, was not present during the strip search and neither was any appropriate adult. Mr Gold said that 'simply being questioned by two police officers, two white police officers for a young black girl may be daunting.' Mr Gold said: 'No adult was present to assist child Q during this time – whether during the conversation with child to decide on the search, when the decision was made to perform a search or when the decision was made to perform a strip search.' PC Linge told Child Q she would be arrested if she failed to consent to being searched, the panel heard. Child Q told the two officers who searched her that she was menstruating, but the search continued during which her sanitary pad was exposed, the panel was told. When no drugs were found after the strip search, Child Q's hair was also scoured. When Child Q said she was on her period this was 'a new piece of evidence' for the officers and it was a chance for the officers to consider the proportionality of what they were doing, according to the IOPC. Within days of the strip search, Child Q had gone to her doctor with symptoms of anxiety. Mr Gold went through a series of doctors' notes including one which suggested Child Q had the 'appearance of symptoms of anxiety consistent with PTSD'. He added: 'No one is likely to suggest that Child Q was anything other than distressed and shaken by a traumatic episode.' According to the allegations, Pcs Linge and Szmydynski performed a search that exposed the girl's intimate parts when this was 'disproportionate in all the circumstances'. Pcs Linge and Wray are also accused of performing or allowing the search in a manner which was 'unjustified, inappropriate, disproportionate, humiliating and degrading'. It is alleged that all of this happened without authorisation, in the absence of an appropriate adult, and with no adequate concern being given to Child Q's age, sex, or the need to treat her as a child, and that the child's race was an effective cause of this. Pcs Szmydynski and Linge are further accused of giving a 'misleading record' of the search afterwards. Outrage over Child Q's treatment led to protests outside Stoke Newington Police Station. Scotland Yard has previously apologised over the incident.
BBC News
6 days ago
- BBC News
Child Q Met Police officer followed lead on strip-search, panel told
A Metropolitan Police officer who strip-searched a 15-year-old black schoolgirl has told a misconduct panel she had been "following the lead of other officers".The girl, known as Child Q, was strip-searched at her school by PC Victoria Wray and a female colleague in Hackney, east London, on 3 December 2020 after her teachers wrongly suspected her of carrying search involved her removing all of her clothing and exposing intimate parts while she was menstruating, the panel has been told. PC Wray apologised to Child Q and her family for the search but had thought she was "doing the right thing". She and two other officers deny gross misconduct over their treatment of the girl. Giving evidence to the misconduct panel, PC Wray, who undertook the search alongside PC Kristina Linge, admitted a series of failings in her handling of the Morris, representing her, asked: "Do you think you were performing an overly intrusive search?""I thought the skipper had authorised it, I thought the officers at the scene had covered all bases," she whether she was aware of certain stereotypes relating to black people, PC Wray replied: "If I am aware of the stereotypes, I don't use those stereotypes to make any decisions."Those decisions are purely based on facts, on my surroundings, on the intel; I prefer to make very objective decisions." 'Such a quick interaction' The panel heard records showed the majority of the individuals stopped and searched by PC Wray were black or Morris continued: "Do you think your actions have been unconsciously biased by race?""No, not at all," she if she thought the search should have taken place at all, PC Wray responded: "No.""There were so many things that should've been done," she told the panel. "We should've spoken to the teachers more, we should've phoned mum, we should've spoken to the sergeant more."Mr Morris went on to ask why she did not stop to do those things and reassess the situation, to which PC Wray replied: "I was just following the lead of other officers."It was just such a quick interaction; I am sorry and I should've stopped and I should've thought and I should've checked, I am really sorry," she added. The officer, who was 25 at the time of the incident, said of the search: "I never intended it to be humiliating and degrading."The hearing continues.
