Police and Crime Commissioner Clare Moody appears to be more interested in being on the same page as her Chief Constable than her constituents.
By Claire Loneragan
"Avon and Somerset Police has denied it is “sanctioning serious sexual offences within its own ranks” over its treatment of female officers. The police force has policies in place to protect both its female officers and female members of the public, such as ensuring strip searches of a suspect are carried out by an officer of the same sex."
This is how Daniel Mumby opens his report of our attendance at the police and crime panel in Taunton at the beginning of February. Unfortunately, Daniel is mistaken.
Three of us – Jodie, Charlotte and I – wanted to know what the current Avon and Somerset transgender policies are, and what our elected representative, Clare Moody the PCC, is doing to look after our interests.
It turns out that our PCC and Chief Constable Sarah Crew aren’t all that interested in what the public wants. I’ve looked carefully at their responses (you can see the transcript here), and they confirm that police policies do not ensure strip searches are carried out by an officer of the same sex. Instead, Clare Moody and Sarah Crew prefer to interpret the Equality Act 2010 so that those who claim an identity that differs from their sex get exactly what they want.
I wrote about how captured A&S Police are a while back. Unbelievably, their policies stated that “gender fluid” officers can have more than one warrant card, so Charlotte asked whether this policy was still in place. Moody and Crew’s answer:
"The guidance regarding ID/warrant cards was updated in January 2025 to state that officers may only carry one ID/warrant card at a time. The Facilities Policy remains unchanged, offering gender-neutral and single-sex options."
And yet, the policy document previously found on the A&S Police website remains unchanged*. It clearly states that multiple warrant cards may be held. And that unchanged facilities policy says that “transitioning” officers (in other words, anyone) can “change from using one set of toilets and other single-sex facilities to another”. Labelling facilities “single-sex” does not provide safety or privacy to female police officers if men can choose to use them.
Ironically, with gender-neutral facilities providing private cubicles, female police officers may prefer to use them to the single-mixed-sex variety.
Despite the outcry following the publication of the WRN Police report in January 2024, an outcry which led to the NPCC transgender search policy being withdrawn because it is unlawful, no lessons have been learned. It isn’t just the search policy that is unlawful, it’s every policy that requires women to accommodate men who claim they are women. (The For Women Scotland case might yet require us to accommodate men who have a GRC, but current Avon and Somerset Police policies are clear that no GRC is required).
In answer to Jodie’s questions, Moody and Crew assured us that Equality Impact Assessments are an important source of information (although what they learned from the EIA compiled for the transgender search policy is anyone’s guess), and that women’s groups are not routinely consulted during policy development. In news that will surprise nobody, it appears the police prefer to consult almost exclusively with themselves:
"The consultation process for policies and procedures varies depending on the subject matter of the policy or procedure. For amendments to the searching in Custody procedure, representatives from the Diverse Outreach team, Human Resources department, Legal Services and the Stop and Search Lead. Consultation also took place with staff associations and diversity networks."
And what of that withdrawn transgender search policy? Has it been amended so that members of the public will only be searched for more thorough searches, including strip searches, by an officer of the same sex as reported by Daniel Mumby? The answer I was given explained that the policy has been consulted on. That it is inclusive. That it is quality assured. That the process for delivering it was followed. And that:
"No new policy has been developed in relation to more thorough searching. In January 2025, ASP reviewed and updated the Custody Standard Operating Procedure to increase clarity for those involved in searching"
In other words, none of our objections to the previous unlawful policy have been addressed, and women cannot be assured that they will be searched only by a female officer. The problem isn’t that the search policy was unclear, it’s that it is unlawful.
Police and Crime Commissioners are elected by us, the public, to represent our interests and hold the Chief Constable to account. To ensure that the electorate gets the police force we need.
We do not have that in Avon and Somerset. And Moody and Crew look to be every bit as ominous a pairing as they sound.
* One day this obscene policy will be removed but you can still find a copy of it here.
