Clean bill of health for police over Sarah Everard vigil shows ‘institutional sexism running through force’, organisers say

Claims by the policing watchdog that officers did nothing wrong in responding to the Sarah Everard vigil show “institutional sexism running through the force”, the organisers of the event have said.

A review by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary released on Tuesday found the Metropolitan Police “did not act inappropriately or in a heavy-handed manner” at the vigil and that the force was “justified” in its approach.

The findings came despite widespread criticism of the policing of the event, with distressing images shared of women being manhandled and pinned to the floor.

The vigil was called to commemorate Sarah Everard, a 33-year old south Londoner who went missing earlier this month. A serving police officer has been arrested and charged with her murder.

Reclaim These Streets, which had originally organised the gathering, said the watchdog’s report showed “disregard for us as women organisers”.

Read more:

And Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey, who earlier this month called for Met chief Cressida Dick to resign, said she and the home secretary Priti Patel had put officers in an “impossible position” and that it was wrong to try to stop the vigil going ahead.

“We all saw the appalling scenes at the Clapham Common vigil,” Sir Ed said. “Police officers were ordered to manhandle and arrest women, just for exercising their rights to peaceful assembly.”

“In the circumstances, we simply do not agree that the Met was right to treat this vigil as if it was just any other large gathering during the pandemic, and therefore to try to stop it going ahead.

“This was a peaceful vigil to mark the death of Sarah Everard. Women rightly wanted to show their sorrow for her death, and their anger that too many women are killed by too many men.”

He added: “We are enormously grateful to police officers on the front line, putting themselves in harm’s way to keep us all safe.

Reclaim These Streets said the watchdog’s report was “disappointing”.

“The Met Police’s antagonistic actions around the vigil forced us to cancel the event, which then in turn, caused a greater number of people to attend due to their publicity,” the group said in a statement.

“We warned the Met Police on Friday night that forcing us to cancel would cause additional risk to public safety, as did Lambeth Council. They completely dismissed our warning and concerns.

“The report also shows a failure from the home secretary and policing minister on providing a political steer for the police on this event.”

The group added: “Instead of taking responsibility for their actions, the Metropolitan Police is standing behind claims that we were inexperienced organisers, despite some of us being elected officials and others having a decade-long track record of working with police and councils on events. We anticipated a fair and balanced inquiry and are instead being told not to believe what we saw and heard reported two weeks ago. This inquiry is not representative of our experience with senior Met officials.”

“The disregard for us as women organisers in the report is clear [and] there is still institutional sexism running through the force,” the group said.

Baroness Jenny Jones, a Green Party peer who previously sat on the Metropolitan Police Authority, said the watchdog had a “natural bias” towards the police.

“We all saw the footage and we all saw the police treating women extremely badly at a vigil for a woman allegedly murdered by a police officer. It was the worst possible way to handle that whole protest,” she told The Independent.

“I don’t know where the order came from, if it came from Priti Patel or Cressida Dick but either way it was a terrible mistake. I’m afraid the report doesn’t make me feel confident about the police and it doesn’t make me feel confident about the inspectorate of constabulary.”

She added: “Part of the problem is that they use a fair number of ex-police officers for their investigation. Of course you need some police officers because you need to understand how the Met or any police force works, but at the same time you’re going to get a natural bias towards the police from those investigations.

“I think that’s inappropriate and somehow they just don’t take a tough line with the Met and so I think they’re not fulfilling their function properly.”

But Ken Marsh, chairman of the Metropolitan Police Federation, said the outcome of the watchdog’s review was “no surprise” and hit out at what he called “armchair critics”.

Mr Marsh added that criticism of the police by politicians was “outrageous behaviour from those who should know better”, adding: “We said on the very evening that politicians of all parties should make themselves aware of all the facts before rushing to judgment and making statements.”

Sadiq Khan, the mayor of London, said he “completely” understood why “women, girls and allies wanted to hold a vigil to remember Sarah at Clapham Common” and “show solidarity with all women who have been subjected to violence at the hands of men”.

He added that it was “my job to stand up on behalf of Londoners and ensure that there is effective scrutiny of the Metropolitan Police – particularly in the light of such widespread public dismay”.

The review found officers did their best to peacefully disperse the crowd, remained calm and professional when subjected to abuse and did not act inappropriately or in a heavy-handed manner.

The inspectorate found it was unrealistic to hold a Covid-safe event on Clapham Common in light of the number of people who would attend and the short time available, and said the force was right to conclude the health risks of holding a vigil were too great.

However, it said there was insufficient communication between police commanders as events changed on the ground.

Matt Parr, Her Majesty’s inspector of constabulary, who led the inspection team, said: “Amidst a heightened public debate on women’s safety, and during an unprecedented pandemic, the Metropolitan Police faced a complex and sensitive policing challenge at Clapham Common.

“Condemnation of the Met's actions within mere hours of the vigil – including from people in positions of responsibility - was unwarranted, showed a lack of respect for public servants facing a complex situation, and undermined public confidence in policing based on very limited evidence.

“After reviewing a huge body of evidence – rather than a snapshot on social media – we found that there are some things the Met could have done better, but we saw nothing to suggest police officers acted in anything but a measured and proportionate way in challenging circumstances.”