When the public first became aware of Child Q, the outrage was widespread and immediate. Who could not have felt shame and revulsion at what happened to this schoolgirl? I need to warn readers that the description that follows could distress you, especially if you’ve had a similar experience. Child Q was taken out of her school schedule and strip searched because of entirely unfounded suspicions that she was carrying drugs. It wasn’t just that she was stripped naked; two female uniformed officers made her part the cheeks of her bottom and cough. She told them she was menstruating and still they continued, forcing her to remove her sanitary pad so they could have a proper look. She was just 15.
Apart from the fact that the search was completely out of proportion to “the smell of marijuana” that the school first acted on by calling the police, none of the officers thought to ask permission from the child’s parents nor insisted a representative from the school was in the room. Teachers instead waited outside. Child Q was later put in a taxi home.
Can you imagine anything more shaming when you are a young woman? I can’t. You are about to head into an exam and instead you are marched into the school’s medical room and forced to strip in front of two total strangers. And those strangers are in a uniform long associated with historical brutality and racism towards young black people.
To recap for those not familiar with this case, a recent safeguarding review found that the strip-search that took place in Hackney in 2020 was unjustified and that racism “was likely to have been an influencing factor”. Moreover, the impact on the secondary school pupil was “profound” and the repercussions “obvious and ongoing”. Family members described her as changing from a “happy-go-lucky girl to a timid recluse who hardly speaks”, and who now self-harms.
Then we found out yesterday that the two officers involved in the search still have their jobs. They have only been removed from the front line. The other officer who attended has not been reprimanded at all. This completely undermines any confidence we might have that the Met understands the gravity of what happened. Optics matter. There is a special power associated with an officer’s uniform and on that day that power was abused, they should have been suspended immediately while they were investigated by the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC), an investigation which is still ongoing.
As Child Q’s mother said through her lawyer when the safeguarding review was published: “We now look to the IOPC to make sure there is an effective investigation into the officers involved so they are individually held to account and face real consequences for what they have done.”
This case would seem to prove we cannot trust the police to carry out strip searches of children so we should require police to seek parental consent when searching those under 18. As the guidance stands, it completely undermines the principles of parental responsibility. This, however, would not address the deeper issues at play here. Nor will removing or adequately reprimanding the officers involved with Child Q.
Despite the goodwill many Londoners have for the Met, it remains incapable of undertaking profound reform. I don’t want to undervalue the positive steps that have been taken to date. But there is something very wrong at the core. Not a month goes by without another shocking revelation of racism, sexism and cases of officers and their managers protecting their own.
In the light of so many scandals, there’s never been a more pivotal time for the Met as it awaits the appointment of a new commissioner. The family of Child Q has rightly asked that the Home Secretary and Mayor ensure that only someone willing to acknowledge publicly the institutional racism and sexism in the force is appointed. That will be a good start. But the big challenge once a commissioner is found is how they overhaul a system that promotes leaders from within. Institutionalised leadership is at every level. Priti Patel and Sadiq Khan cannot find a suitable candidate for Cressida Dick’s job from outside the Met. That should be telling us something.
Both need to be planning how they will support the new commissioner — and not just with words that later free them from responsibility. They should impose targets that put their reputations on the line, too. And we, the public, need to keep voicing our outrage. Child Q deserves nothing less than wholesale change.
