More Than A Tick-Box? The Role Of Training In Improving Police Responses To Hate Crime
| Author | Dr Stevie-Jade Hardy, Prof Neil Chakraborti, Ilda Cuko |
| Pages | 4-20 |
4
British Journal of Community Justice
©2020 Manchester Metropolitan University
ISSN 1475-0279
Vol. 16(1) 4–20
MORE THAN A TICK-BOX? THE ROLE OF TRAINING IN
IMPROVING POLICE RESPONSES TO HATE CRIME
Stevie-Jade Hardy, Neil Chakraborti and Ilda Cuko, University of Leicester
Abstract
In the years since the publication of the Macpherson report, many countries across the
world have implemented policy and legislative frameworks in order to respond more
effectively to hate crime. Within the UK, and despite laudab le progress in some contexts, a
set of significant challenges remains in relation to the under-reporting of hate crime,
widespread victim dissatisfaction with police responses and inconsistent recording
practices. This broader landscape of flawed responses illustrates the need for and
importance of eff ective training for police professionals. However, little is known in
connection to what training is delivered and to whom, despite a series of government action
plans committing to the rollout of a national training package.
Drawing from a body of empirical evid ence gathered from Freedom of Information (FOI)
requests, in-depth semi-structured interviews and observations of police training, this
article highlights that although hate crime training is being delivered within forces, a series
of structural, organisational, operational and individual barriers are undermining its delivery
and effectiveness. At a time when levels of hate crime are rising, it is imperative that police
officers and staff are equipped with the necessary understanding and skills to deliver a
service which meets the needs of diverse communities. This article identifies how existing
training provision can be improved in order to facilitate such an outcome.
Keywords
Policing; Macpherson; hate crime; training
Hardy, Chakraborti and Cuko
5
Introduction
The racially motivated murder of Stephen Lawrence by a gang of white youths in 1993, and
the flawed police investigation that followed, are commonly referred to as the catalyst for
the development of the UK’s hate crime policy (Hall, 2013; Travis, 2013). Led by Sir Wil liam
Macpherson, the judicial inquiry into the police inv estigation of Lawrence’s death found
that it was ‘marred by a combination of professional incompetence, institutional racism and
a failure of leadership by senior officers’ (Macpherson, 1999:365). Macpherson (1999)
proposed 70 recommendatio ns which sought to eliminate racism within the police and to
improve levels of trust an d confidence amongst historically marginalised communities.
Hailed by many as a watershed moment in the context of policing and race relations,
Macpherson’s report brought about key changes with regard to police training in an effort
to enhance officers’ understanding of and engagement with the diverse communities whom
they serve (Bennetto, 2009). This included the implementation of equality and d iversity
training, and commitments made by the Association of Chief Police Officers and
subsequently the College of Policing to tackle under-reporting and provide a better service
for hate crime victims (ACPO, 2005; Hall et al., 2009; College of Policing, 2014).
Despite laudable progress, the police continue to struggle to provide an appropriate and
effective response to victims of hate crime. Indeed, recent evidence illustrates that, when
compared with victims of crime that is not motivated by hate, victims of hate crime are less
likely to be satisfied with the police respo nse in terms of both the fairness and the
effectiveness of the service provided, and these negative experiences are likely to deter
victims from reporting to the police again in the future (Hardy and Chakraborti, 2016; Home
Office, 2018; Sharrock et al., 2018). Within this context, the availability and delivery of
training is imperative to help address such shortcomings; and yet a recent report by Her
Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS) found that
while forces stated that they offer hate crime training to new recruits, most officers had
received no such training (HMICFRS, 2018). Furthermore, the report found that in the
absence of a national hate crime training package, the training that is being delivered across
forces is ‘neither co-ordinated nor provided to everyone that needs it’ (HMICFRS, 2018:19).
Currently, there is a dearth of knowledge p ertaining to the content, mode of delivery and
impact of hate crime training delivered to police officers. While the HMICFRS (2018) report
provides valuable insights into the availability of hate crime training across forces in England
and Wales, it does not consider the impact that such training has on officers’ understanding
of hate crime. To date, Trickett and Hamilton’s (2016) review of hate crime training is the
only study that considers officers’ perceptions of such training; however, the study’s sample
was limited to officers with in one police force. In this context – and grounded in a
substantial body of evidence gathered from Freedom of Information (FOI) requests and in-
depth semi-structured interviews with a wide range of police professionals and policy-
makers – the present study offers a unique insight into both the availability and perceived
effectiveness of current hate crime training. As outlined in subsequent s ections, this study
found that the availability of dedicated hate crime training is limited across forces in England
and that while forces recognise the need to implement such training and to ensure that it
is meaningful for officers and staff, a series of interconnected barriers operating at strategic,
organisational, operational and individual levels are preventing them fro m doing so.
To continue reading
Request your trial