Nazir Afzal and the Mystery of the Molester Memo

What went on with the supposed Home Office document sent to police forces?

While Elon Musk was making a lot of noise about the Pakistani rape gangs in the UK, a rumour re-emerged that when Gordon Brown was Prime Minister, the Home Office sent out guidance to all police forces telling them to regard the victims as girls who had made a personal choice. The crimes, so it goes, were therefore not investigated properly, and the offenders were not pursued.

This was brought to public attention by Nazir Afzal, one of the Chief Prosecutors under Starmer when Sir Keir was DPP. Afzal had been in charge of prosecuting the despicable Rochdale gang. In a November 2018 interview with BBC Radio, he said:

You may not know this, but back in 2008 the Home Office sent a circular to all police forces in the country saying “as far as these young girls who are being exploited in towns and cities, we believe they have made an informed choice about their sexual behaviour and therefore it is not for you police officers to get involved in” If that's the landscape coming from the top down in 2008, rest assured all agencies are going to listen to it"

He went on, of course, to claim credit for righting this travesty, aided by his 'forensic' boss of whom he is still a huge fan. Afzal also wrote a poorly written article repeating the story.

The term "child prostitute" was used extensively to describe them [the victims] and it should be noted both [I assume he means 'also'] that the Home Office in a circular to police in 2008 used that term and spoke of girls making an "informed choice" to engage in this behaviour

To say this twice, Afzal must have been confident in his information, right? Well he would later conclude he got it wrong. In July 2019, an angry Jacqui Smith queried the claim on Twitter, tagging Afzal. Smith had been the Home Secretary in 2008, and was now getting flak for the alleged memo. Six months later (!) Afzal replied and said that "dozens of police officers" had told him, but he had "never seen it". You'd think a senior prosecutor tasked with pursuing a rape gang would have looked into such claims at the time, or at least been cautious about repeating them.

Smith asked for the specific date and reference number, which Afzal gave. Smith looked up the document and pointed out although it was a circular about child safeguarding, it did not contain the phrases Afzal had quoted. Indeed, the only thing it said was: "It is important always to take account of the child's reactions, and his or her perceptions, according to the child's age and understanding". That common sense observation is nothing like what Afzal quoted. Smith concluded that if any such document existed, it was not a Home Office release. Afzal conceded to this and absolved Smith of any wrongdoing.

Fast forward to the Musk furore, and Afzal felt compelled to correct the record. On January 2nd 2025 he posted:

Let me clarify an issue: I was told by some officers that Home Office Circular 17/2008 had led to others interpreting it as permitting them to allow a child, past the age of puberty, to continue engaging in sexual activity where the officer perceived them to understand dangers

He repeated the relevant line, then wrote:

It has to be said that it’s taken out of context from the rest of the circular and that it was an incorrect interpretation... But it’s true that some had wrongly applied this approach in their dealings with some children. It’s also a fact that Ministers would not have signed off each circular as they are issued by officials. There was no circular saying to not prosecute grooming gangs

On January 6th Musk reposted the infamous quote from Afzal's 2018 interview. This led to much outrage and renewed attention on Jacqui Smith. Afzal again decided to address the issue:

According to some police, Home Office guidance - issued by officials NOT ministers - was interpreted by them to mean that lifestyle choice was a factor in whether or not victims were safeguarded. This was their WRONG interpretation but nonetheless one that contributed to inaction... There was NEVER any circular of guidance specifically on "child rape gangs" or "grooming gangs"

It is quite amusing that someone who is usually against 'misinformation' and 'conspiracy theories' appears to have been spreading misinformation themselves, even if unwittingly, and has been forced to backpedal.

I am unconvinced police really did misinterpret this innocuous sentence in a Home Office memo. I am even sceptical that the ordinary police officer would even bother to read such a document. Perhaps one or two police commanders were looking for a reason not to pursue the Pakistani gangs and seized upon the phrase; or perhaps they used it after the fact to excuse their own incompetence. Maybe the advice was a rumour or a case of Chinese whispers, then police (and indeed Afzal) realised it was untrue and tried to find an official statement to demonstrate the story had credence. There is an outside chance there was such guidance given by a Home Office figure or some other public servant, but perhaps it was off the record. Drawing attention to the 'perceptions' remark, then, could be a way of covering up what the real advice was.

This is a peculiar footnote in the sorry saga of the rape gangs. But for now we have to file it under falsehood, as there is no evidence such advice formally existed. It is however, the sort of thing that would warrant further investigation in the full inquiry that is finally set to happen, after much reluctance by Labour.

I'm updating this article after the U-turn. Indeed, Labour tried their level best not to have the inquiry, labelling it a "far-right bandwagon" in January, but their hands were forced by Baroness Casey's recommendations. Ever the loyal Starmer goon, Nazir poo pooed the idea at first. That most forensic and diligent prosecutor observed:

For those of you suggesting a national public inquiry into so called grooming gangs will deliver accountability. Do you know that the grand total of people brought to justice following the Hillsborough, Grenfell, Post Office, Infected Blood & Bloody Sunday public inquiries is ONE?

Very flawed logic there, wilfully ignoring the purpose of a full, legally empowered inquiry. Inquiries are primarily to find answers, not to secure prosecutions. But they *can* secure prosecutions - it depends what is turned up. One might ask the question why this man, and indeed the Labour government he clearly supports, was so against the prospect.

When the political situation changed, of course, Afzal offered a different take:

I’ve not had sight of the Louise Casey Audit but if Casey, believes that a National Inquiry into “grooming gangs” is necessary, then the Govt has no choice but to set one up

Perish the thought Starmer and Labour have brains and moral compasses of their own. It was clear an inquiry was needed since day one, yet for political reasons they avoided it. Now a venerated expert has stated the obvious, they pull up the handbrake and the car spins in a cloud of burning rubber. Ironically, by making that political choice, it was bad politics. It added to the perception of a cover-up, appeared callous towards the victims, didn't appreciate the public rage about the issue, and was deliberately tied to a political smear. And now the reversal looks cynical and weak. Just another day in the Starmer government.