Question
Further to the PSNI response attached, to ask the CC if the PSNI have recorded the reasons why the 26 strip searches of Under 18s were all considered urgent and if so, to furnish those reasons?
Answer
Of the 26 strip searches carried out, 25 were considered urgent due to the fact that the detainee had been previously ‘flagged’ as concealing either drugs or weapons that could be utilised to harm themselves or others. The 26th case involved an individual who had no such ‘flag’, but had been arrested for a drug related offence. The Custody Sergeant had reasonable cause to suspect the detainee may have been concealing further drugs because immediately prior to arrest Officers had recovered a bag of Class A and Class B drugs on their person.
The Police Services’ Niche Records Management System provides the functionality to assign a warning, or ‘flag’, against an individual’s record. This is used to inform others about any specific needs or associated risk factors.
Within the custody environment, if staff become aware of an incident that would pose a risk to the individual or any other person, for example, concealment of drugs, attempts at self-harm and so on, then a corresponding warning ‘flag’ outlining the area of risk/concern is created. The process for all arrests involves custody staff researching the arrested person on the Records Management System to establish if any warning flags exist, especially those that may have been created during a previous detention in police custody. This information is used to ensure the safety of the individual and others whilst they are detained.
The presence of a warning flag does not automatically generate a strip search, but it does provide information for the custody staff to consider. It may be considered negligent, or an abrogation of duty of care to that individual, or others, if staff do not respond to a risk which has the potential to impact on health and welfare.
Mike Nesbitt - UUP