FOI 33/25 Child Sexual Exploitation

Enquiry Reference:  FOI 33-25                                                                                         

 

I write in connection with regards to your Freedom of Information request.  Below is your request and our response.

 

I would like to request under the Freedom of Information act, information held by you on group-based child sexual exploitation.

In particular, I would like to know what definition, if any, you use to identify group-based child sexual exploitation.

 

• Child sexual exploitation is identified from the recording of a qualifier/flag on the crime this is Sexual offences with a child sexual exploitation flag that have more than one suspect recorded.

 

Have you a dedicated team investigating group-based child sexual exploitation? If so, how many officers, by rank, are involved in this team?

 

• The Complex Exploitation Team (CET) deal with a number of specialist areas, one of which is Child Sexual Exploitation of a complex nature (i.e. numerous victims and suspects, organised crime groups and SOC threats). Which Group Based CSAE does often to fall into this category, however each case is assessed on its own merits and allocated to the most suitable department, this is not always CET. CSE investigations (including GBCSAE) are dealt with in force by CET, CID, MOSOVO, POLIT, CAVA. Operation Dean are also dealing with non-recent CSAE investigations which fall under GBCSAE.

 

Complex Exploitation Team (CET)

• 16 x Officers, 2 x Detective Sergeant, 1x Detective Inspector

Criminal Investigation Department (CID) -across the force

• 92 x Officers, 14 x Detective Sergeant, 6 x Detective Inspector

Child and Vulnerable Adult (CAVA)

• 24 Officers, 3 Detective Sergeant, 2 x Detective Inspector

Management of Sex Offenders and Violent Offenders (MOSOVO) 

• 16 x Officers, 3 Detective Sergeant 1x Detective Inspector

Paedophile Online Investigation Team (POLIT)

• 12 x officers, 2 x Detective Sergeant, 1 x Detective Inspector

Historical Investigations Unit (HIU)

• 13 x Police Staff Investigator, 7 x Detective Constable, 1 x Detective Sergeant

 

If there is no dedicated team, how do you investigate allegations of group-based child sexual exploitation?

• See above answer.

 

Please note the below data considerations for the following responses. Although every effort is made to ensure that the data provided is accurate and complete, Cleveland Police systems are designed primarily for the policing purposes and not for the providing data to answer specific FOI enquiries. Although data can be extracted from a number of sources via database queries, the results may be subject to inaccuracies. Care should be taken to understand our return when considering the interpretation or further use of the data.

 

• Child sexual exploitation is identified from the recording of a qualifier/flag on the crime; therefore, the figures wholly rely on the accuracy of its use. The flag has only been used since April 2012.
• The year denotes when the crime was recorded rather than when it was committed. Some of the crimes were committed in the 1970s and 1980s etc.
• A simplistic identification of group-based offending has been used for these counts; this is where there are multiple suspects recorded on the crime. This will include crimes where one suspect has been charged, and another has not. However, there can be data quality issues such as when there are duplicate person profiles and both have been added to the crime, or when a child may have been recorded as a suspect before the role was created of child non-aggravated self-generated indecent image (asking/taking/sending).
• A person might be arrested but not showing as charged due to the investigation not being finalised yet.
• Age relies on the accurate recording of the earliest committed date and suspect DOB.

 

 

I would like to know how many investigations into group-based child sexual exploitation you have carried out since 2000. I would like this figure broken down by year, if possible.

• Number of CSE crimes with more than one suspect

 

2012	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019	2020	2021	2022	2023	2024
*	*	*	*	*	10	27	21	15	10	5

*Less than 5

 

I would also like to know the number of suspects arrested as part of these investigations and the number subsequently charged. If possible, I would like a breakdown of the age, sex and ethnicity of those arrested and charged.

I would also like to know the number of people convicted, again with a breakdown of the age, sex and ethnicity of those convicted.

 

• Number of people recorded as arrested. Please note that if a person is arrested for more than one crime they will be counted for each crime.

 

	2012	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019	2020	2021	2022	2023	2024
Female		*		*			5		*	*
Male	*		5	*	5	9	13	6	17	10	9

*Less than 5

 

 

	2012	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019	2020	2021	2022	2023	2024
Under 18		*		*		*	*		*	6	*
18-24		*	*	*	*	5	*	*	7	*	6
25-34	*			*			5		*	*	*
35-44			*	*	*	*	5			*	*
45-54							*	*	*	*
55-64								*	*
65+									*

*Less than 5

 

Self-defined ethnic group	2012	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019	2020	2021	2022	2023	2024
A2. Asian Pakistani inc Asian British			*			*			*		*
A9. Any other Asian background			*	*	*				5
B1. Black Caribbean inc Black									*		*
B9. Any other Black background				*		*
O9. Any other ethnic group					*		*
W1. White British	*	*	*	*	*	*	17	*	10	12	*
Not recorded					1	2		2		1

*Less than 5

 

• Number of people recorded as charged on a crime that has been finalised as a charge/summons. Please note that if a person is charged for more than one crime they will be counted for each crime.

               No crimes recorded in 2024 have resulted in a charge so far.

 

 

	2012	2015	2017	2018	2020	2021	2022	2023
Female		*	*					*
Male	*		*	*	*	*	*	*

*Less than 5

 

	2012	2015	2017	2018	2020	2021	2022	2023
Under 18		*			*
18-24			*		*	*		*
25-34	*		*				*	*
35-44			*	*	*
45-54					*			*
55-64						*	*
65+							*

*Less than 5

 

Self-defined ethnic group	2012	2015	2017	2018	2020	2021	2022	2023
B9. Any other Black background			*
W1. White British	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	*
Not recorded						*

*Less than 5

 

To note regarding convictions, it the duty of Cleveland Police to identify, apprehend suspects, decisions regarding prosecutions are the responsibility of the Crown Prosecution Service and Convictions is that of HM Courts Service therefore Conviction data is held by HM Courts.

 

Having made enquiries within the Force above is all the information we hold and anything else we reply upon the following exemption.

 

Section 1 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 places two duties on public authorities.  Unless exemptions apply, the first duty at Section 1(1) (a) is to confirm or deny whether the information specified in a request is held.  The second duty at Section 1(1) (b) is to disclose information that has been confirmed as being held.  Where exemptions are relied upon, Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act requires that I provide the applicant with a notice which: a) states that fact b) specifies the exemption(s) in question and c) state (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the exemption applies.

 

Cleveland Police can confirm we hold the information pertinent to this request as the duty in Section 1(1) (a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 does not apply, by virtue of the following exemption:

 

Section 40(2) Personal Information

 

Section 40(2) is an absolute exemption which does not require me to evidence the harm that disclosure would cause and does not require consideration of a public interest test in justification of its use.

 

This exemption is engaged where disclosure of information could lead to the identification of an individual, either from that information alone or combined with other information from within the Police Service or public domain. In this case, because of the low numbers it could be likely to identify the individuals concerned. Such a disclosure would breach an individual's rights under Article 5(1) of the GDPR.

 

Please note that all statistical data supplied in relation to Freedom of Information requests is a snapshot of data held at the time the request was received by the Freedom of Information office and is subject to constant change/updates.

 

The Cleveland Police response to your request is unique and it should be noted that Police Forces do not use generic systems or identical procedures to capture and record data therefore responses from Cleveland Police should not be used as a comparison with any other force response you receive.

 

If you are not satisfied with this response or any actions taken in dealing with your request, you have the right to request an independent internal review of your case under our review procedure. The Freedom of Information Code of Practice (see below link) states that a request for internal review should be made within 20 working days of the date on this response or 40 working days if extenuating circumstances to account for the delay can be evidenced. Public authorities are not obliged to accept internal reviews after this date.

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/freedom-of-information-code-of-practice

 

Yours sincerely

Information Rights Decision Maker