Police officers who shared picture of the bodies of Nicole and Bibaa at Fryent Country Park crime scene jailed

 From the Metropolitan Police

Two former Metropolitan Police officers have both been jailed for two years and nine months after taking inappropriate photographs at the scene of a double murder in Wembley.

Deniz Jaffer, 47, and Jamie Lewis, 33 – previously both PCs at the North East Basic Command Unit – were sentenced at the Old Bailey on Monday, 6 December having previously pleaded guilty to misconduct in public office.

Assistant Commissioner Helen Ball, Professionalism, said: "Our thoughts are once more with the family and friends of Bibaa Henry and Nicole Smallman. I am so sorry that during the most difficult time in their lives the actions of these two officers caused them so much additional pain and distress.

“Today former PCs Jaffer and Lewis have been punished for their actions which were utterly unprofessional, disrespectful and deeply insensitive.

“All of us in the Met and wider policing are horrified by their shameful behaviour."

An accelerated misconduct hearing was held for the officers on Wednesday, 24 November.

The hearing was to determine allegations their actions breached the Standards of Professional Behaviour in relation to discreditable conduct, honesty and integrity, equality and diversity, authority, respect and courtesy, duties and responsibilities, confidentiality and challenging and reporting improper conduct.

The allegations were all found proven. PC Lewis was dismissed without notice and it was determined that former PC Jaffer, who had resigned, would have been dismissed without notice had he still been a serving officer.

Both former officers have been added to the Barred List held by the College of Policing. Those appearing on the list cannot be employed by police, local policing bodies (PCCs), the Independent Office for Police Conduct or Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire and Rescue Services.

On 17 June 2020 the Met’s Directorate of Professional Standards was informed of allegations anonymously reported that non-official and inappropriate photographs had been taken by police at the crime scene in Fryent Country Park, Wembley, in relation to the murders of Bibaa and Nicole. The sisters were killed in the early hours of Saturday, 6 June 2020 with their bodies found the following day.

During the early hours of 8 June 2020, PC Jaffer and PC Lewis were placed on the cordon to protect the crime scene. They left their posts to take pictures on their mobile phones of the victims and the crime scene.

PCs Jaffer and Lewis shared images with other officers via WhatsApp. PC Jaffer also shared images with members of the public, including pictures of the victims.

PC Lewis created an image on his phone in which he superimposed his own face in a ‘selfie’ pose in front of the bodies. He shared this image with PC Jaffer.

Both officers belonged to one WhatsApp group called the ‘A Team’ which had 41 officers as members. Images were shared to that group of the crime scene, but not of the victims.

PCs Jaffer and Lewis both used the disrespectful and derogatory term “dead birds” to describe the victims while sharing the images.

Followed the reported allegations, the MPS made a referral to the IOPC, which launched an independent investigation. PC Jaffer and PC Lewis were arrested on Monday, 22 June 2020 by the IOPC on suspicion of misconduct in public office and subsequently released under investigation.

A file was referred by the IOPC to the CPS and both officers were charged on Wednesday, 28 April 2021. They pleaded guilty to the offence on Tuesday, 2 November 2021.

Following their arrest, the officers were suspended from duty. Former PC Jaffer resigned and left the Met on Wednesday, 18 August 2020. Under the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2020, serving officers are allowed to resign or retire without requiring permission but still face misconduct matters as appropriate.

As soon as this matter came to light, the MPS took action on the North East Command to remind officers of their responsibilities in using WhatsApp and other social media channels. Local senior management spoke to officers on the command to outline what is expected of them in terms of their behaviour as well as encouraging anyone who has a concern about a colleague’s behaviour to come forward. This has subsequently been repeated across the whole Met.

The IOPC investigation made two fast-time learning recommendations to the MPS. The first was to ensure all officers within a single police station in the North East Command conform to the expectations of their behaviour under the Code of Ethics, whilst on and off duty, and are aware that failure to do so could severely damage the public’s confidence in policing.

The second was for the MPS to review whether supervisors and senior management at that police station are taking personal responsibility to identify and eliminate patterns of inappropriate behaviour, whilst simultaneously promoting a safe and open culture which makes clear to officers and staff that they are duty bound to challenge and report behaviour that does not align with the Code of Ethics.

These recommendations, which were received on Monday, 16 November 2020, have been implemented, not just within the single police station but across the entire North East Command.

In addition, across the MPS, all officers have been reminded that the standards they are expected to uphold apply at all times, including when they are off duty and when they are communicating on social media and using messaging apps.

Senior officers will continue work to ensure these recommendations are fully implemented throughout the organisation. This is being overseen by the DPS’s prevention and learning team.

+ We're working hard to raise standards in the Met and have commissioned an independent review by Baroness Louise Casey to examine our culture and standards of behaviour. 

The behaviour of Lewis and Jaffer initially came to light because someone had concerns and anonymously reported them. We encourage all our officers and staff, and members of the public, to report wrong-doing and we will act on those reports.

Do your bit to save London's public transport

 The current TfL funding settlement from Government expires in 6 days’ time on 11 December 2021.

 

To help to decarbonise the transport network, TfL would need an investment of £70m for the first three years, to support zero emission buses and £125m per year for healthy streets and active travel.

 

The London Assembly on December 2nd  called on the Government to provide a new long-term sustainable funding model and to include the £1-1.5bn of additional investment funding each year that TfL requires, as part of the next funding settlement.

 

Elly Baker AM, who proposed the motion, said:

 

London was largely glossed over in the Chancellor’s recent Budget. Transport for London was left out in the cold, despite the fact that it is hanging over a financial cliff-edge due to the pandemic.

 

Our transport system urgently needs proper investment from the Government to drive forward the whole country’s economic recovery and boost our efforts to meet legally binding commitments to reach net zero and clean up our air.

 

Cities should be empowered by Governments so they can be at the forefront of tackling the climate emergency.

 

The full text of the motion is:

 

This Assembly notes that the Government’s October 2021 Budget and Comprehensive Spending Review confirmed £7bn to level-up urban transport in cities around England, but there was no new funding announced for Transport for London (TfL). Furthermore, the current TfL funding settlement from Government expires in 11 days’ time on
11 December 2021.

 

The Assembly notes that the TfL submission to the Government’s spending review outlined plans to invest £2.5 - £3bn per year over the long term, to meet the Government’s climate change, levelling up and economic recovery ambitions. To help to decarbonise the transport network, this investment would include £70m for the first three years to support zero emission buses and £125m per year for healthy streets and active travel.

 

The Assembly believes that if the Government is serious about the UK’s legally binding decarbonisation and air quality commitments then funding must be provided to TfL.

 

This Assembly therefore calls on the Government to provide a new long-term sustainable funding model and to include the £1-1.5bn of additional investment funding each year that TfL requires, as part of the next funding settlement.

 The TfL Finance Committee listed these impacts if emergency funding was not forthcoming from the Government:

• 18 percent reduction in London bus services, with 100 routes to be axed (a seventh of the network) and reduced frequency across 200 more (about one third of all additional routes).
• 9 percent service reduction across the London Underground with possible scenarios including permanent closure of the 115-year-old Bakerloo line or the Jubilee, Metropolitan or Hammersmith & City lines.
• Non-replacement of ageing train fleet (for example 50-year-old Bakerloo trains) with rolling stock renewal contracts cancelled.
• Scrapping of bus electrification with existing bus vehicles to be kept in service longer to reduce costs.
• No progress towards Vision Zero (safety), decarbonisation, improving air quality or active travel to support a shift towards more sustainable modes of transport.
• End of capital expenditure on disability access for transport passengers, with non-renewal of “step free” assets resulting in “more frequent failures of lifts and escalators”.
• London’s road assets to “remain in current degraded condition” with a “high risk of unplanned bridge and tunnel closures”.
• ·Cancellation of TfL supply chain contracts impacting on 43,000 jobs in Derby, Falkirk, Bolton, Liverpool, Yorkshire, and Ballymena, Northern Ireland.
• The cuts are so deep that by TfL’s own admission they will push London’s transport system into a state of “Managed Decline”.

KEEP LONDON MOVING CAMPAIGN

 

London Travel Watch in a campaign called Keep London Moving to fight the the budget cut and is urging people to write to their MP, London Assembly members and councillors as part of the campaign. On their website you just have to fill in your postcode to automatically send a letter to all of them. LINK

 

London faces a transport funding crisis. 

Transport for London have been getting financial support from the Government because of the pandemic, but this funding deal is due to expire on the 11th of December. If London's transport doesn't get the money it needs after that date, we could see an 18% reduction in bus services and a 9% cut to Tube services as well as a complete end to all active travel funding. This could result in a million fewer public transport journeys a day and drive a significant number of Londoners back into their cars. 

Public transport and active travel enables the poorest and most excluded individuals to get to work and access education and services. Affordable, reliable and frequent public transport services are also essential if London is to reduce its carbon emissions and clean up the toxic air which shortens the lives of thousands. 

Time is running out but you can still make your voice heard. 

If we act now, we can remind politicians that public transport and active travel is vital to all Londoners and people travelling in to the city. Let your MP, London Assembly member and councillor know why we need to #keeplondonmoving.

Congratulations to Rumi's Cave for winning the Beacon Mosque Award for Best Services to Women

 

Congratulations to the the amazing Rumi’s Cave who have just won the  Best Women's Services Award in the British Beacon Mosque Awards Dec 2021

Rumi's Cave  describes itself as an alternative community hub, arts and events venue in Brent (based in Carlton Vale, South Kilburn and Willesden Lane), presenting a diverse range of cultural and social programmes to connect hearts, minds and communities. It is a non-defined social space open to all to reflect and share, inspired by the legacy of poet Jalauddin Rumi.

 Introducing the video of the Award presentation on YouTube, Rumi's Cave said:

Thank you to everyone who voted and the panel from Beacon Mosque for this amazing award, alhamdulilah. All praise is due to God. Rumi's Cave is open to all, from all walks of life and religions. But we feel strongly about women at the forefront and being in positions of leadership following our blessed spiritual traditions of Islamic women of the past. Notably Khadijah (ra) & Aisha (ra) wife's of the Prophet Muhammad who were key business women, entrepreneurs and scholars. We would secondly like to thank Sheikh Babikir our chairman who has pushed the women to be at the forefront to stand alongside the men from Rumi's inception. Women being in the back has never had a basis in our Islamic tradition but following the Medinan example of women also supporting the wider community is a strong message Sheikh Babikir has promoted since the beginning. To all the amazing women who run / have run the cave Glaiza, Nazra, Rakaya, Sukina, Tayyibah, Nuria and Aminah to all the amazing volunteers who give selflessly without recognition we love you and we hope Rumi's always feels like your home and supports your voice inshallah.

Accepting the Award, Aminah Babikir, Director of Rumi's Projects said:

By educating and empowering women we are actually empowering and educating a whole generation.

She recalled her father Sheikk Babikir  telling her, 'Be brave, stand firm with the men, don't feel you can't be at the forefront,' - it had taken a decade to lead from the front and realise how important that is in developing and supporting the spiritual, intellectual and emotional needs of women.

Ram Singh Nehra, - a Wembley Indian in the 1930s - Part 1

This Guest Post by Philip Grant reveals an interesting moment in Brent history and perhaps our national history.

 

This article results from a local history enquiry received in October 2021. What did we know about a British Indian Union Garden Party, held at 43 Chalkhill Road Wembley in July 1934, or Mr & Mrs R.S. Nehra who hosted it? The initial answer was “nothing”, but further research online by several Wembley History Society members began to uncover a story which deserved to be shared with a wider audience. That’s what I hope to do here.

 

The British Indian Union Garden Party invitation card. (Image from the internet)

 

Ram Singh Nehra was not the first Indian to live in Wembley. A former farmhouse at the eastern end of what is now Wembley High Road was renamed “Rhampore” in 1882, when it became the residence of His Highness Rajah Rampal Singh. He was one of the founder members of the Indian National Congress Party, and started “The Hindusthan” monthly newspaper while living here, before returning to India as ruler of Kalakankar in 1885. After his first (Indian) wife died in 1871, he had married an English woman, Princess Alice.

 

Mr Nehra, we discovered, was a solicitor. He was also Joint Honorary Secretary, along with an Englishman, of the British Indian Union, an organisation aimed at fostering good relations between people in this country and the Indian “Dominion” that it ruled. It’s interesting to note that the VIPs who guests were invited to meet included an Afghan, a Nepalese and a Saudi Arabian. As well as the invitation, we also have photographs of the garden party, and the Nepalese Ambassador who attended it.

 

A magazine photograph and caption about the garden party in July 1934.

 

 

General Bahadur Rana, the Nepalese Ambassador, in full uniform. (Images from the internet)

 

As well as his involvement with the British Indian Union, Ram Singh Nehra was also the President of the Central Hindu Society of Great Britain. In that capacity, he had welcomed General Bahadur Rana at Victoria Station, when he arrived to be his country’s first Ambassador to the United Kingdom in May 1934, greeting him with a garland of pink and blue sweet peas.

 

In a short speech, Nehra welcomed the General to London, as the only representative of an independent Hindu State. He went on to say: ‘The independent kingdom of Nepal is the ancient Raj that has preserved its integrity and independence, and has withstood all foreign attacks and attempts at conquest.’ The “Daily Mirror” reported this, with a photograph.

 

Ram Singh Nehra welcoming General Bahadur Rana in May 1934. (“Daily Mirror” image)

 

Another organisation that Nehra was a member, and early Treasurer, of was the League of Coloured Peoples. This had been founded in London in 1931 by the Jamaican-born doctor, Harold Moody, with the aim of fighting discrimination against coloured people, especially in employment and housing, and to improve relations between the races. 

 

It’s magazine “The Keys”, in July 1933, reported a speech given by Nehra to a conference the League had organised. His subject was “The East African”, and he spoke from personal experience. He described East Africa as ‘the land of the future’, but said that racial relations there were very bad, and that ‘the African did not have a very happy time’. ‘The lot of the Indian’, he said, ‘was a bit better than that of the African, but they were beginning to realise that co-operation between them was essential if any progress was to be made.’

 

To explain how Ram Singh Nehra came to be in East Africa, it is probably best to start at the beginning. He was born in the Punjab city of Ludhiana, to a well-off family, in 1896. After matriculating from the local Arya High School, he went to the Government College in Lahore, gaining a B.A. Honours degree in 1917. Because of the First World War, he had to wait until 1919 before he could come to England, to study law at London University. 

 

Nehra qualified as a barrister of the Middle Temple in 1921. There was little chance for an Indian to exercise his profession successfully in this country, so he started his practice at the High Court in the British controlled Uganda Protectorate. After finding that Uganda was ‘too small’, he moved Britain’s Kenya Colony and the seaport of Mombasa. Here he soon became Secretary of the Mombasa Indian Association, and involved in local social and political life. 

 

A 1920s postcard view of the Old Harbour, Mombasa. (Image from the internet)

 

It was in Mombasa that Ram Singh met the future Mrs Nehra. Eileen Myfanwy Brazel was born in Swansea in 1897, and shipping lists record that Miss E.M. Brazel, a short-hand typist, boarded a ship bound for Mombasa in June 1923. I would assume that she had been recruited in the UK for a job in Kenya, either by the colonial government or a large trading company. How ever she came to be in Mombasa, she met Nehra, and married him.

 

Eileen must have returned to Britain when expecting their first child, as their son, Grenville Brazel Nehra, was born at her parents’ home in Swansea in December 1925. Nehra himself remained in Mombasa, carrying on his profession in the courts there, and becoming a pillar of the Indian community. 

 

There had been trading links between India and East Africa for centuries, before indentured labourers were brought from India in the 1890s to build the Uganda Railway. Some of these men settled in what became the Kenya Colony, and their families and other Indians came to join them, particularly from the Punjab and Gujerat. 

 

By the 1920s, the Indian and Arab communities were allowed a small number of seats on the Colony’s Legislative Council. At first, they refused to nominate candidates for these elections, demanding as many seats as the British (although there were none for the native Africans!). Their demands were ignored, but the Colonial Government appointed local Indians to fill those seats, and Ram Singh Nehra became a member of Kenya’s Legislative Council.

 

I don’t know exactly when Nehra left Kenya, and finally moved to Wembley. The birth of Mr & Mrs Nehra’s second child, Sheila, in July 1930 was registered in the Hendon District, which included Wembley, so they may have been living at 43 Chalkhill Road by then. Their home, “The Shalimar”, was part of the Metropolitan Railway’s Chalkhill Estate, laid out on land the company had bought in the 1880s to build their tracks across, and developed as part of “Metroland” after the First World War.

 

The Chalkhill Estate on the 1935 O.S. map, with “The Shalimar”, 43 Chalkhill Road, arrowed.

 

Nehra was certainly practicing as a solicitor, from an office in High Holborn, by 1930. As well as directory entries for him, a case in Willesden County Court, where he was acting for the claimant, was reported in the “Daily Herald” in March 1931, under the headline “House for Veiled Woman and Retinue”!

 

Not content with his legal work, and the organisations he was active in, Ram Singh Nehra also founded and edited a magazine, “The Indian”. He said: ‘This journal is a link between Indians all over the world. The more they know of each other, the better for all concerned.’ Its aim was: ‘To protect, strengthen and further the political, social, economic and general welfare of Indians everywhere.’ The annual subscription in 1935 was 9 shillings, or 6 Rupees (post free). 

 

As well as articles by contributors on subjects such as Swaraj (self-rule) for India, and the caste system, challenging prejudice was one of the main subjects for Nehra’s own pieces. In a 1935 article, headed “Colour Hatred” he began with an incident at a London council meeting:

 

‘It is most regrettable that an increasing amount of evidence is available on the question of colour hatred in England, Germany, Italy, etc. Recently, Alderman Richards, a Conservative member of Finsbury Council, London, passed an unbecoming remark against Dr C.L. Katial, an Indian member of the Council, simply on the ground of colour.’

 

He reported that a motion had been tabled, expressing ‘profound abhorrence’ of the Alderman’s personal attack on a distinguished fellow member, and his ‘refusal to withdraw his unseemly remarks.’  When the motion, under which the Council ‘unhesitatingly dissociated itself’ from what Alderman Richards had said, because it ‘militated against the maintenance of harmonious relationships between persons of different races’, was put to a vote by the Mayor: ‘the local Council passed it by 13 votes to 11.’ 

 

Nehra’s article went on to give further examples of colour hatred, from elsewhere in London, in Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy. It concluded with these thought-provoking paragraphs:

 

‘We wonder where these hatreds by the white men would lead them to if the coloured people begin to retaliate, on the ground of the colourless skin of the semi-civilized Europeans who simply pride themselves on the absence of the sun-resisting pigment in their skin. 

 

[George] Bernard Shaw at the conclusion of his South African tour gave as his considered opinion that the best way to avoid world war and ensure peace was to encourage marriages between coloured and colourless races in large numbers.’

 

In reporting the Finsbury Council vote (above), Nehra had noted: ‘The eleven represented the Tory Party.’ His own views were more to the left, and there is clear evidence of that. The previously separate Urban Districts of Kingsbury and Wembley agreed to merge from April 1934. Elections were arranged for all of the seats on the new Wembley Council, to take place in March. When the candidates were announced, this was the entry in the “Wembley News” on 2 March 1934 for Kingsbury’s Fryent Ward:-

 

 

Ram Singh Nehra, ‘an Indian’, was standing as a Labour Party candidate for a seat on the new Wembley Council. You can see him pictured among the photos of those candidates, from the 16 March 1934 edition of the “Wembley News”:-

 

Some of the Labour candidates, pictured in the “Wembley News”. (Images courtesy of Brent Archives)

 

If elected, Nehra would not be the first foreign-born local councillor (see José Diaz – the Spanish Chairman), but would the people of Wembley in the 1930s vote for a man who wasn’t white?

 

 I hope you can join me next weekend, for Part 2, to find out.

Philip Grant,
December 2021.

UPDATED: Casey Review highlights issues regarding the management and responsibilities of the zones around Wembley Stadium that should be resolved

UPDATE 15,15 Friday: A Brent Council spokesperson said: "We welcome Baroness Casey's detailed and balanced report. This is not about a blame game, this is about learning lessons to ensure that the shocking scenes of EURO Sunday can never be repeated. We will work closely with partners, including the FA and Metropolitan Police, to take forward the recommendations."

The Casey Review published today LINK  finds that the arrival of large numbers of ticketless fans at Wembley on the day of the final was predictable. What was unexpected was the ferocity and scale of these efforts. The behaviour of those who may not have come to Wembley planning to get into the stadium but joined in, often violently, when it became apparent that this was possible, was particularly striking.

However, warning signs (involving earlier matches in the tournament) were not recognised as parts of a bigger picture of trouble looming. This was largely due to assumptions that trouble was more likely to flare after the game and across London. Brent Council were the exception to some degree, having flagged concerns in the days leading up to the final. On the day around 9am a Brent Council official flagged up that ticketless fans were queueing up at pubs near the stadium.

Chapter 4 of the Review  concludes that although action was stepped up for the final there was an absence of risk assessment for the occasion that Euro Sunday represented. This amounted to a collective failure by partners involved.

 

Summary of key findings (extracted from the Review) Highlighting mine.

The key findings of the Review are as follows:

• ●  The behaviour of a large minority of England supporters was not just disgraceful, it recklessly endangered lives
• ●  There were a series of crowd ‘near misses’ which could have led to significant injuries or even death
• ●  Planning and preparation for Euro Sunday was hampered by a set of unique conditions, including the ongoing need to manage the Covid-19 pandemic, which combined to create a ‘perfect storm’
• ●  Many of the events that unfolded were foreseeable, and, while there were many mitigating factors, there was a collective failure to plan for the worst case scenario
• ●  A loss of experienced stewards as a result of the pandemic left Wembley’s stewarding operation vulnerable when confronted with the most aggressive and disorderly crowd Wembley had ever seen
• ●  The absence of a fan zone or fan zones denied the police and other agencies a key crowd management tool and was potentially a very significant factor
• ●  There was insufficient enforcement of the ban on consuming alcohol on public transport in London
• ●  The policing of the final did not sufficiently mitigate the risk of ticketless fans with officers deployed too late in the day
• ●  There are a lack of enforcement mechanisms available to respond to and deter the kind of behaviour witnessed at Euro Sunday
• ●  Planning of the final did not match the ‘occasion’ that was Euro Sunday 
  

 

 

 Recommendations 

 

This Review makes 5 recommendations for national consideration and 3 specifically for the FA and Wembley and its partners. This Review has been conducted on behalf of the FA to look at their own responsibilities with regard to Euro Sunday.

 

We have considered the wider partnerships and the national context within which the event took place and taken the liberty of making some recommendations with that in mind. It should also be noted that while this Review is concerned with football there are many lessons that could be applied to the wider stadium and event industry. 

 

1. I recommend that the Government considers a new category for football matches of national significance 

 

The majority of partners treated the Euro final as another match albeit a significant one, rather than an event of national significance. As a result, the security arrangements surrounding the final were underpowered and public safety was not given the prominence it deserved. 

 

In the future, there should be a new category for football matches of national significance, with the SGSA, police, and other key partners setting out what steps should be taken for such matches. This could include:

• ●  A maximalist police (and other agencies with enforcement powers) resourcing and deployment plan
• ●  The establishment of a sterile area within Zone Ex which is restricted to ticket- holders
• ●  More robust governance arrangements including an independent checkpoint as part of the process
• ●  Enhanced enforcement of bans on alcohol consumption on public transport and in other designated public spaces 
  

 

The prospect of new legislation is welcome and timely as it gives the Government the opportunity to update the legal framework that governs spectator safety which has not been significantly reviewed since the Hillsborough tragedy. 

 

2. I recommend that the Government consider tasking the SGSA to work with the FA and the event industry to undertake a review of stewarding 

 

SGSA should undertake a review and research the current challenges faced by live sporting events in securing sufficient numbers of trained stewards and provide guidance to the sector on how public safety can be assured. 

 

A range of wider factors, including the pandemic (which prompted many experienced stewards to find new vocations) and global supply chain challenges, have created significant workforce challenges for the stewarding sector. It is important that the implications of these shortages are understood for the wider events sector. 

 

The SGSA should work with key partners (including the FA and United Kingdom Crowd Management Association (UKCMA)) to understand the particular factors in play here and their implications for the longer-term sustainability of the stewarding role at major sports events. That, in turn, should inform wider considerations within the Government and the sector itself. 

 

3. The SGSA, the events industry, the police and local government agree on a way forward on who is accountable for Zone Ex 

 

There should be clear accountability for public safety in Zone Ex. The question of who was responsible for public safety on Olympic Way was a contributing factor to the inability to deal with the disorder seen in the build-up to kick-off. The police and stadium operators have for many years contested the issue of who is responsible for safety and security in Zone Ex (the area of public space outside the stadium used by supporters) and the financing of it remains a contested issue. This should be resolved. 

 

The SGSA should review the provisions of the 1975 Safety of Sports Grounds Act, together with its oversight powers and any associated guidance for local authorities, to determine if they are still fit for purpose, particularly in relation to the control and management of Zone Ex. 

 

4. I ask that The FA - as the governing body that oversees football - lead a national campaign to bring about a sea-change in attitudes towards supporter behaviours 

 

The appalling behaviour of supporters on Euro Sunday should be a wake-up call for us all. For too long, the actions of a minority of England fans have been tolerated as a part of our national culture (albeit an embarrassing one), rather than confronted head-on. 

 

The FA and Wembley, working with others, should step up action on eradicating such behaviours from football, including:

• ●  refusing to allow entry to fans who arrive chanting foul abuse and/ or are clearly under the influence of alcohol and/ or drugs
• ●  stricter enforcement (with police support) against those behaving badly inside the stadium, with consideration being given to ejections also leading to an automatic exclusion and ban from all football grounds (not just Wembley)
• ●  more proactive engagement with the Football Safety Officers Association around intelligence-sharing, particularly with regards to fan behaviours
• ●  a considerable step-up action again to stamp out racism by the FA, Premier League and English Football League
• ● Appoint the Football Supporters Association (supported by the FA) to a leading role in working with fans and others to eradicate these behaviours 
  

 

5. I recommend that the Government consider strengthening the penalties for football-related disorder, particularly behaviours which recklessly endanger lives and these penalties should be well understood and robustly enforced 

 

The existing enforcement mechanisms available to the police and other enforcement officers do not offer enough deterrent against those determined to use the cover of football matches to commit criminal offences. Tailgating, for example, should become a criminal offence. Sanctions for those breaking into football stadiums and/ or recklessly endangering lives is weak. 

 

It is welcomed by the Review that the Prime Minister has committed to making it possible to obtain a football banning order against a person convicted of online racist offences. 

 

In light of expert advice provided to this Review by Daniel Greenberg CB, we recommend that the Home Office considers options for strengthening the legal framework surrounding football-related disorder, with a particular focus on addressing the weaknesses and gaps identified in this Review. Specifically, the Home Office should consider:

• ●  ensuring that the FBO regime to ensure drugs-related disorderly behaviour is treated in the same way as alcohol-related disorder
• ●  identifying a suitable legislative mechanism for deterring the practice of tailgating, such as through an expanded FBO regime or through the application of PNDs
• ●  identifying a suitable legislative mechanism for a new offence of endangering public safety in a stadium through reckless behaviour, such as interfering with emergency doors, triggering fire alarms or damaging barriers and other safety infrastructure, with penalties comparable to those for endangering the safety of an aircraft
• ●  Greater urgency to introduce the Online Safety Bill should be given as it is a real opportunity to stiffen penalties for racism and hate speech online

 

6. Recommendations specifically for the FA/Wembley and key partners

6.a The FA and Wembley should strengthen plans for safety both physical and human, ahead of any matches or events of significant risk. This should include but not be limited to:

• ●  The physical fences and means of separating and filtering unticketed fans from those with legitimate access.
• ●  Particular attention should be made to ensuring those entering through gates provided for wheelchair users and other more vulnerable members of society are not endangered by the reckless actions of others.
• ●  A staff survey of all those involved with security, stewarding and safety on Euro Sunday so the FA can be doubly sure their views are taken into any future changes
• ●  Security plans should be regularly peer reviewed by experienced safety and security professionals to ensure rigour
• ●  The incoming Chair of the FA should take steps to be sure that she and the FA Board have suitable oversight of safety and security at Wembley Stadium 
  

 

6.b. A more joined up approach between Wembley and the MPS is required to managing public safety on match-days, including joint tasking and debriefing of operational teams 

 

6.c The key partners represented on the Wembley SAG, most notably the MPS, the FA and Brent Council, need to make a concerted effort to proactively solicit and listen to each other’s concerns and avoid any single agency from becoming too dominant.

 

 CAROLYN DOWNS, BRENT COUNCIL CEO, RAISED CONCERNS AFTER THE GERMANY MATCH WITH THE MET POLICE MATCH COMMANDER AND CABINET COVID-19 TASK FORCE

 

EXTRACT:

A written submission from Brent Council to the Review indicates that as England progressed through the tournament, antisocial behaviour increased around the stadium. When England played Scotland, the council noticed ticketless fans gathering for the first time in the plaza at the end of Olympic Way. On the day of the following match, against the Czech Republic, the council issued 17 Fixed Penalty Notices (FPNs) for public urination, street drinking and littering near the stadium. 

 

The council’s concerns about fan behaviour inside and outside the stadium escalated significantly after England played Germany in the ‘round of 16’ with stadium capacity increased to 40,000. Some fans arrived in the morning without tickets and began drinking on Olympic Way outside the Co-op supermarket and Butlers convenience store. By the afternoon they were climbing on street furniture such as bins, benches and lamp posts, and throwing glass bottles in the air. The council subsequently issued 22 FPNs for public urination. 

 

“People were buying crates of beer. That’s something that I hadn't seen before at Wembley (football games).” - Sports Ground Safety Authority official 

 

Other ticketless fans gathered outside the White Horse pub and moved to the foot of the Spanish Steps during this match, prompting a Euro 2020 Fans Embassy representative to warn police there could be trouble unless this crowd was moved on. 

 

Brent officials were now concerned about off-licence sales to supporters who could not get into pubs and bars to watch matches due to Covid-19 restrictions. 

 

“We were concerned after the Scotland game but it was the Germany game that really worried us. People were openly saying they had no tickets. They were partying until 6pm. None of this is normal for Wembley.” - Brent Council official 

 

Brent Council chief executive Carolyn Downs was sufficiently concerned about the gathering of crowds around the White Horse and on Olympic Way to speak to the MPS Match Commander after the match and request they ensure officers move them on. In addition, Downs asked her staff to explore options to stop shops selling alcohol completely if England progressed in the tournament. Her team believed that they did not have that power and that it would be for the police to apply to a magistrates court. 

 

Downs was sufficiently concerned about the disorder surrounding the Germany game on 29 June to raise it not only with her own staff but with the Cabinet Office and MPS. 

 

On 30 June, a meeting of senior government officials was convened by the Cabinet Office’s Covid-19 Taskforce. The meeting’s purpose was solely Covid-19 related, and was not due to consider any other issues regarding the tournament. Downs, however, used the meeting to raise her concerns about fan behaviour outside Wembley when England had played Germany. Downs told the meeting that the atmosphere had been “toxic” and the council was unhappy about ticketless fans gathering by the stadium. The chief executive of the Sports Ground Safety Authority also expressed his concerns about fan behaviour, having witnessed “trampolining” on empty seats covered with UEFA branded tarpaulins. 

 

Though the MPS were not invited to this meeting, Downs repeated her views about the toxic atmosphere to a senior MPS officer later that day. 

 

The following day (1 July) the Wembley Safety Advisory Group (WSAG) met at the request of Downs to discuss Brent and the SGSA’s concerns ahead of the semi-final matches. Safety Advisory Groups (SAG) meet in order to consider events at a stadium or sports ground which present a significant public safety risk. Though advisory by nature, a SAG is typically chaired by the local council which issues a stadium with the safety certificate it needs in order to operate. Prior to the tournament, the Wembley SAG met on 18 March and 4 June to discuss tournament preparations. 

 

At this meeting it was clear that the MPS were angry not to have been invited to the Cabinet Office ‘challenge session’ on 30 June as a delivery partner. They had feedback from the Home Office which they believed questioned their operational independence. This was unfortunate as it set the tone for the WSAG on 1 July. 

 

A video recording of the 1 July WSAG, chaired by Brent Council’s Director of Community Safety and attended by officials from the FA, Wembley, the SGSA, the MPS and Brent, makes it clear there was shared concern that the levels of intoxication within the stadium had become unprecedented. 

 

An SGSA official present at England's game against Germany told the meeting they “had never seen behaviour like it...They were all drunk on the concourse, you know, there was beer going everywhere.” The official described persistent standing around the stadium as “dreadful”, and concluded that the prospect of similar behaviour if England reached the semi-finals, with a larger number of fans inside the stadium, was “really, really frightening”. 

 

A Brent Council official recounted intervening personally to prevent a drunken fan falling from the parapet of level 5 while celebrating an England goal. They concluded: “As for the drunkenness and spillage...I've been in the stadium for a number of years, and I haven't seen that kind of mess or behaviour.” 

 

Stadium records seen by the Review show that 56 people required medical treatment during the match against Germany, with people taken to hospital for drunkenness, injuries suffered when falling down steps, and heart problems. 

 

The Wembley officials agreed that fan behaviour had changed from before the pandemic, but described it as “jubilant”. One told the meeting: “I do think we do have to take into account we've never, ever faced anything on the back of a pandemic. And I definitely feel that there is a release that happened on that day.” 

 

The stadium promised to increase stewarding on level 5 in the semi-finals again by redeploying staff from outside the stadium following kick-off. Drinks per person were further reduced, from four pints to two.

However, the SGSA official expressed a preference for a total alcohol ban if England reached the semi-finals, to prevent fans injuring themselves seriously. They told the meeting: “I have never seen that behaviour at Wembley before. And, you know, there is no way you can deal with that behaviour.” 

 

When the meeting discussed fan behaviours outside the stadium, the MPS Silver Commander for Euro 2020 did not agree with the view that the atmosphere was toxic when England played Germany. Their information was that the England fans were “exuberant and happy'' and that the atmosphere was no different from other high stakes football matches at Wembley, such as a play off final. He concluded that the police were preparing for “more of the same” behaviour should England progress to the semi-finals. 

 

Nobody at the WSAG challenged the MPS’ position, despite the council and the SGSA having different opinions. 

 

Nor did anybody at the meeting attempt to reconcile the police view that there was nothing unusual about what was happening outside the stadium with the concerns strongly expressed about the unprecedented fan behaviour inside the stadium. 

 

The meeting concluded with an agreement to support the MPS Silver Commander in asking for a larger number of police officers for future matches. The MPS subsequently added in an extra TSG unit of 33 officers inside Wembley on top of the two TSG units. The MPS told the Review that this decision reflected concerns about the adequacy of stewarding within the stadium. 

 

The MPS told the Review that it debriefed after each match at Wembley, fed back to the WSAG and increased officer numbers there steadily through the tournament and tasked them to be more assertive in moving on fans who gathered outside the stadium.