The police’s serious IT failures over stop and search

The use of stop and search by the police, particularly in London, has often come under criticism. Most often it’s been about ridiculous cases where someone has been stopped or, more seriously, the deeply held suspicion amongst many communities that their members are irrationally singled out by the police for far more searches than their numbers or crime rates justify. This argument about what is sometimes called disproportionality should not only be of concern in terms of wanting to see the police free of discrimination, but also of concern in terms of wanting the police to be using their time effectively to catch criminals. If the police are wasting time irrationally persecuting particular communities, it’s not just those communities who suffer. We also suffer from the waste of police time that could have gone on better things.

So when I was recently reading various committee papers from the Met Police, as you do, my eye was caught by a document about stop and search in London.

Ah, I wondered: so how do patterns of stop and search match up with crime hotspots?

Alas, the police don’t know as a matter of course:

The MPS [Metropolitan Police Service] is unable to ‘hotspot’ where stops are taking place or overlay them against crime hotspots or taskings because there is no field on the current Form 5090 – used to record stop and search – to record a Geo-code, and the database that stores the data does not Geo-code the location. The Personal Digital Assistants – palm-top computers – recently introduced by the MPS do have GPS capability, however, they are not GPS enabled and therefore it is not possible to Geo-code stops recorded on the PDA.

The police do go on to say they’ve done some individual research, but it’s a pretty damning indictment of their IT set-up that fundamentally the police can’t match up the work they do to stop crime with records of where crime takes place. It’s not even that they are struggling with antiquated IT equipment, kept in use to cut costs. It even applies with the “recently introduced” new equipment.

So then I wondered: but surely at least the police know the outcome of their stop and searches, e.g. how many convictions occur per 1,000 stop and searches?

Alas, once again the police doesn’t know:

The MPS is unable to provide any data relating to persons charged or cautioned subsequent to a stop and search because this information is recorded separately on two different databases which are incompatible. Arrests and subsequent case disposals are recorded on the national NSPIS custody computer system, stops and searches are recorded on the MPS Crimint Plus ‘Stops’ database.

Once again, quite underwhelming. Quite how the police are managing their work when they don’t know if an activity actually results in people being charged or cautioned is a real puzzler, but given the police don’t match up stop and search with crimes, charges or cautions it’s a tactic that almost certainly isn’t being used in the most effective and appropriate way.

The Met go on to say, “The Next Steps Project involves a number of activities intended to demonstrate the effective and efficient ‘intelligence led’ use of stop and search”. With a bit of luck (or even some prodding from London Assembly members, hint hint) that may involve taking rather more seriously the need for proper data to answer the questions “are we doing this in the right places?” and “do we end up catching criminals?”.

Read more by or more about or .
This entry was posted in London.


  • They’re useless. They’re also a bunch of inveterate liars (“wearing a bulky coat, jumped over the barrier”), so when they say they can’t match the data, it doesn’t actually tell you very much.

    A few years ago Belgium disbanded its police force and started again. We should do the same.

  • Chris Mills 12th Jun '10 - 8:50am

    They don’t have geocoding?

    Surely they record a street name? I would assume that their GIS system would be using OS MasterMap.

    With some free data from OS Code Point (this was made available as OS OpenData last April) this could be done relatively easily and cheaply (OS Code Point gives a point to a street and postcode).

    The Met seriously need to learn how to use the resources they already have!

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?


Recent Comments

  • Nonconformistradical
    @Thelma Davies I don't have a problem with your views on parental responsibility. But what do you think should be done about children whose parents are irr...
  • Alex Macfie
    @Tristan Ward: Each country has its own political party system, which has evolved because of multiple factors of which the electoral system is only one. In some...
  • Thelma Davies
    @Nonconform. I'm stating that it's my responsibility & my husband's that my children were toilet trained & had basic reading and writing skills prior to...
  • Mary ReidMary Reid
    @Simon Atkinson - I am so pleased you like our musings on Max's impact within and beyond the party. And please accept my sympathies to the whole family for the ...
  • Chris Moore
    @ExLD Leeds: that's a ludicrous reason not to vote LD. Theakes is in a vanishingly tiny minority regarding the desirability of PR, as you must well know. LDs...