Definition of criminal networks, gangs, gang associates and peer groups

12/07
6 July 2007
MPA briefing paper

Authors: Emma Muir, Gavin Hales & Toby Streeter, MPS

This briefing paper has been prepared to inform members and staff. It is not a committee report and no decisions are required.

Summary

1. This paper provides an outline of the definitions that the MPS will use to differentiate between Criminal Networks, Gangs and Peer Groups as well as Gang Members and Gang Associates. There is a need to gain a greater understanding of these groups and their activities though building the intelligence picture. It is therefore essential that there is a clear definition that is understood and used by all.

Introduction

2. Recent academic work in the United Kingdom has shown that being a member of a gang is a significant factor in young people becoming involved in crime and may lead to an increase in level of offending for an individual beyond that of offenders that are not in a gang.

3. Within the gang literature from across the world there is a multitude of definitions for the term ‘gang’, all of which differ in someway. This issue of definition has caused problems both internally for the MPS and at pan-London multi-agency level. A number of consequences arise, not least the inability of police and other agencies to routinely collect data and intelligence on the impact of gangs on crime and disorder, and to do so in a way that is comparable from one location to the next.

4. Internally, there is also a need to illustrate the link between criminal networks and gangs to engage all business groups in the criminal network strategy and disruption process.

5. With work currently underway to develop a national gangs ‘toolkit’ (Home Office) and a London-wide ‘policing gangs manual’ (MPS), the need for clear, unambiguous and (as far as possible) mutually exclusive definitions has assumed greater urgency.

6. The partners that sit on the Gang, Guns, Weapons Reduction Board have agreed to use the definitions proposed by Hallsworth and Young for gangs and peer group. The new definitions provide a clearer interpretation and process for use by front line staff. The characteristics remain the same.

7. The definitions should be seen as part of a continuum from peer group to gang to organised criminal network, and will be subject to ‘grey’ areas. It is essential that a degree of pragmatism and professional judgement is needed when applying them.

Definitions relating to Group Offending

8. This flow chart will require validation in a ‘real world’ environment, and as such should be seen as the first stage in an iterative process, working towards a model that can be rolled out across the MPS (and more widely). Feedback from an initial workshop involving front line officers, analysts and partner agency staff has already been incorporated. The definitions, and the associated flagging systems are currently being piloted by the Five Borough Gang Project in South East London , and were formally endorsed for use by Cluster Commander Paul Minton on 11 June.

Figure 1: Gang and Criminal Network definition flow chart - see Appendix C

Gang Member & Gang Associate

9. The definitions related to these proposed flags have been adapted from definitions currently being used by the Manchester Multi-Agency Gang Strategy (MMAGS) (see Appendix B). They are as follows:

• “A gang member is someone who has been identified as being a member of a gang [fitting the MPS definition], and this is corroborated by reliable intelligence from more than one source (e.g. police, partner agencies or community intelligence).”
• “A gang associate is someone who offends with gang members; or who is associated by police, partner agencies or community intelligence, with gang members; or who has displayed through conduct or behaviour, a specific desire or intent to become a member of a gang.”
• “A non-criminal associate is someone otherwise associated with gang members, but not engaged in criminal activity.”

10. The identification of non-criminal associates as a distinct category recognises the relevance of such individuals to the development of an intelligence profile and risk identification processes, whilst at the same time avoiding the de facto criminalisation of, for example, family members and friends not otherwise engaged in criminal activity.

11. A flow diagram is provided (Figure 2) to indicate the decision-making process relating to gang members and gang associates.

Figure 2: Gang member and gang associate definition flow chart - see Appendix C

Flagging gang-related intelligence and crime on CRIS (Crime Recording Information System) and CrimInt (Criminal Intelligence database)

12. A number of flags have been introduced for use on MPS systems to monitor the offences and intelligence related to gangs on a more formal basis. These form part of a communication strategy for criminal networks and gangs across the MPS and with partners.

13. QQGANG already exists within the CrimInt system and its use, and guidance for use, is being re-marketed. A GA – Gang-related activity flag has been introduced to CRIS to flag offences that are believed linked to gang activity. This flag will employ the same methodology as the Domestic Violence and Hate Crime Flags and exact criteria has been established for the removal of the flag from any offence.

14. It is also envisaged the new fields will be introduced to CrimInt Plus to indicate whether a subject is a Gang Member or Gang Associate (or Non-criminal Associate). At the current time the use of these terms are being encouraged in the free text of intelligence records.

Conclusion

15. As efforts to address gang membership and gang-related criminal activity have increased, greater attention has been focussed on ensuring that the MPS and partner agencies have a shared understanding of gangs and gang-related activity and the key differences between peer groups, gangs and organised criminal networks. This paper has sought to translate these definitions to fit with the operational requirements of the MPS and partner agencies, not least in being able to identify in a consistent manner gang related offences, gang members and their associates in a variety of crime, intelligence and case management databases.

16. There are risks associated with both under-acknowledging and over-defining the scale of offending related to gangs and other criminal groups and the framework presented here should at the very least help establish the parameters of these decisions in a consistent manner.

Race and equality impact

17. The specific equality and diversity issues relating to this paper are acknowledged. Establishment of definitive definitions regarding criminal network, gangs and peer groups will allow the MPS to obtain and analyse intelligence and consequently allow informed strategic and tactical decisions in a multi-agency environment. This will effectively inform existing structures.

18. The definitions are being piloted on the Five Borough Gang Project and will be monitored through the use of the associated flags. Searches of CRIS and Crimint will be carried out on a quarterly basis (from 11 June when the definitions were formally circulated to the boroughs) to identify; whether flags are being applied to the correct offences and intelligence; any offences which have not been flagged, but are gang-related; whether there is an increase in identifiable gang-related information on these systems.

19. The nationality/ethnicity of suspects and victims of those offences flagged with GA – Gang-related activity will also be monitored. The figures detailed in the Pan-London Gang Profile will be used as a baseline for comparison.

20. Current intelligence indicates that these flags will identify an over-representation of individuals from black and minority ethnic communities.

21. The intention is that once the definitions have been successfully rolled out within the MPS, they will be passed to other agencies and organisations as the recognised standards. This will allow effective communication and information sharing.

22. ACPO will be using these definitions for their work on Gangs.

Financial implications

23. There are no financial implications.

24. Any implementation costs will come from existing MPS budgets.

APPENDICES

Appendix A – Hallsworth and Young’s (2006) Definitions

1. Peer Groups: “Peer groups are relatively small, unorganised and transient entities that coalesce in public spaces. Members are usually friends who share similar life trajectories and experiences and simply ‘hang around’ together. Delinquency and criminal activity is not integral to the identity or practice of this group but it can occur in certain situational contexts. Offending by this group is periodic, spontaneous, intermittent and opportunistic. The offences are often low-level nuisance/anti-social in nature with little to no engagement in serious assault or acquisitive crime.” (Hallsworth and Young, 2006: 4)

2. Gangs: “The gang is a relatively durable, predominantly street-based group who see themselves and are seen by others as a discernible group for whom crime and violence is intrinsic to group practice and solidarity. It is a mutation of the peer group. Crime, especially violent crime in the gang is instrumental as well as expressive as it involves that construction and reconstruction of a distinctive form of culture and masculinity.” (Hallsworth and Young, 2006: 4)

Appendix B – Manchester Multi-Agency Gang Strategy (MMAGS) Definitions of Gang Members and Gang Associate

1. “A gang member is someone who has self-identified themselves as being a member of a gang, e.g. through verbal statements, tattoos, correspondence, graffiti etc., and this is corroborated by police, partner agencies or community intelligence.”

2. “A gang associate is someone who offends with gang members; or who is associated by police, partner agencies or community intelligence, with gang members; or who has displayed through conduct or behaviour, a specific desire or intent to become a member of a gang.”

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback