Leave this site
We use some essential cookies to make our website work. We’d like to set additional cookies so we can remember your preferences and understand how you use our site.
You can manage your preferences and cookie settings at any time by clicking on “Customise Cookies” below. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Cookies notice.
Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can update your cookie settings at any time on the cookies page.
Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can update your cookie settings at any time on the cookies page.
Sorry, there was a technical problem. Please try again.
This site is a beta, which means it's a work in progress and we'll be adding more to it over the next few weeks. Your feedback helps us make things better, so please let us know what you think.
Question 1
Number of offences recorded under Home Office code 71/17 between 1st April 2024 and 31st
March 2025 - Total Count 52
Question 2
|
|
11 and under |
12-15 |
16 and over |
Unknown Age |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Female |
|
22 |
|
2 |
|
Male |
* |
* |
|
|
|
Unknown |
|
* |
|
22 |
|
Sum: |
0 |
22 |
0 |
24 |
Question 3
I can advise that the requested information is held; however, it is exempt from disclosure by virtue of the following:
Section 40(2) Personal Information
Section 40 is an absolute class-based exemption, which does not require evidence of the harm disclosure would cause and does not require consideration of a public interest test. That being said, where Section 40(2) is engaged, in order to make the exemption absolute there needs to be evidence that a Data Protection Principle would be breached by disclosure.
This exemption is engaged where disclosure of information relates to personal data of a third party or could lead to the identification of an individual, either from that information alone or combined with any other information from within the Police Service or public domain. In this case, due to this being only one child, providing the requested information about outcomes is likely to identify an individual and provide personal information in relation to that individual. Such a disclosure would breach individuals’ rights under the Data Protection Act 2018, in particular Article 5(1) of the GDPR which states that personal data shall be processed lawfully, fairly and in a transparent manner in relation to the data subject.
This letter serves as a refusal notice under Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act for these parts of the request.
In an effort to be helpful, I can advise that the youngest victim was a male aged between 5 and ten years old.
Question 4
Number of suspects/perpetrators linked to the offences described above - Total Count 43
Question 5 &6
|
Method of communication |
Total times used |
|---|---|
|
Fabguys |
1 |
|
|
6 |
|
Fast Flirting |
1 |
|
Kik |
3 |
|
Not known |
1 |
|
Online - not specified |
1 |
|
Roblox |
2 |
|
Skout |
1 |
|
Snapchat |
24 |
|
Tagged |
1 |
|
Text Messages |
3 |
|
TikTok |
2 |
|
Unknown app |
1 |
|
Verbal |
1 |
|
|
9 |
|
XBOX |
4 |
|
Grand Total |
61 |
*Please note that some offences involved more than one method of communication, therefore the above total will be higher.
Our data analysts are not experts in social media platforms or the messaging services they provide. We have included all platforms which we consider to be relevant within the scope of your request above.
Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that the data has been extracted from a number of data sources used by forces for police purposes. The detail collected to respond specifically to your request is subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large-scale recording system. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes, and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when interpreting the data.
If you decide to write an article or use the enclosed data, we would ask you to take into consideration the factors highlighted in this document so as to not mislead members of the public or official bodies or misrepresent the relevance of the whole or any part of this disclosed material.