Letter from Princes ward Police Sergeant concerning recent riots

The chair of VGERTA passed to me a letter from Robert Lockyer, the Police Sergeant of Princes ward Safer Neighbourhood Team. 

Kennington, Oval and Vauxhall are spread across Princes, Oval and Bishop's Wards (and a bit into Vassall ward too).  I'm afraid I don't have police letters from any of the other wards, but if you have one, feel free to send it on if the contents are significantly different:

Princes Safer Neighbourhood Team
Kennington Police Station,
49-51 Kennington Road,
London
SE1 7QA

11th of August 2011

Dear resident and member of community,

I write you to as the Safer Neighbourhood Sergeant on the Princes Ward, which is the local
Policing team dedicated solely to policing your area.

As you will no doubt be aware London has suffered unprecedented occurrences of
spontaneous crime and disorder over the past few days, which has unfortunately been
caused by some people who live within the borough of Lambeth and may be local residents
within your ward.

You will be pleased to know that there have not been any such incidents within your
community, but I am appealing for your help to bring the perpetrators to justice and to inform
us of any criminal activity or disorder you feel may occur within the near future.

The persons responsible have caused much pain and suffering to many people, businesses
and business owners across London, and any assistance you can give in identifying anyone
that you believe was involved will be greatly appreciated.

In particular if you saw or see any members of your community carrying or offering for sale
any electrical or clothing items or any goods that did not look like they were procured in the
usual manner, please let us know.

I encourage you to contact us directly or indeed via Crimestoppers, which you can do anonymously.
Crimestoppers can be contacted either online at http://www.crimestoppers.co.uk/ or by telephone on 0800 555 111.

As a reminder all emergencies or incidents of crime which are happening ‘now’ should be
called through to Police on 999.

All other non-emergency incidents can be brought to the attention of us on the dedicated
Princes Safer Neighbourhood Team mobile on 07920233835 or landline 0208 721 2627.

You can also call the dedicated Metropolitan Police non-emergency number on 101.
Please report anything suspicious to us and help look after your community.

Yours sincerely,
Sergeant Bob Lockyer 59LX

Oval SNT police consultation on closing Kennington Park Midnight path at night

Apologies for the late notice, but I only discovered this afternoon (through @KenParkFriends on Twitter) that the Oval SNT will be conducting a consultation from 5.30pm TONIGHT (Wednesday 13th October) about closing the Midnight path through Kennington Park at night.  The midnight park connects Kennington residents in Lambeth with Kennington residents in Southwark and is a quick and useful cut through.  It always looks well used to me, especially at weekends.

This evening, the police will ask anybody that walks through the park whether they use the path at night, whether they feel safe when using the path and if they don't feel safe, whether they would like the path to be closed at night.

Apparently, 21 robberies have taken place recently (may have been over the last year, but I missed that crucial piece of info), and 80% of them have taken place when the park has been closed, and the majority of people that have been robbed have been men.

This is just the start of the consultation, and residents on both the Brandon Estate and the other side of the park are due to be consulted on the matter.  My view (since you asked) is that it's better not to use the path if you don't feel safe, and I'd argue against its closure.  Feel free to go to the consultation this evening and make your own views known. 

I wish I'd heard about this earlier, as it's of interest to local people.  I still can't figure out where it's been publicised up to this point.

New statistics on Lambeth: CPCG Police and Community Safety 2010 (part 1)

Every couple of years, just as the local area census data starts to look old, somebody commissions a report that sheds light on current trends and produces a new fascinating set of statistics.  On this occasion, it's the turn of the Community Police Consultative Group. Catriona Robertson (their project manager and report writer) has produced a superb account on the state of Lambeth community/police relations.  (Ms Robertson has her own blog and is also on Twitter).  I love statistics, (although my analysis skills are non-existent, so I'm just going to add some commentary in bold type).  I really welcome additional data about the area.  The report, Whose Shout? : Engagement on Community Safety in Lambeth, can be found here. 

From the report, I discovered that there is a State of the Borough Report (2008) which is perhaps worth examining further, and the GLA may also have produced additional figures in 2009, which help us identify who lives in the area, what they do and what opportunities are open to them.  In the mean time, I've mined the CPCG report for the following statistics, which I think you might find interesting:

* The annual turnover of population in Lambeth is 22% or 27%, if you include people who move within the borough (p5)
[This is exceedingly high, but not sure how it compares to London as a whole.]

* The population in Lambeth in 2007 was 285,580, although those registered with GPs in March 2009 was 352,762.  (p6)
[Assuming that there hasn't been a sudden rise of 68,000 residents in a year, that means that there are a lot of "hidden" folk in Lambeth.  Are these asylum seekers?  Undeclared relatives?  Folk from neighbouring boroughs who want to keep using Lambeth GPs?].

* Lambeth is the most ethnically diverse borough in London, with 52% of population beign white british, 14% being white (other), 34% being black, Asian and other. (p6). 
[It's probably worth exercising some caution here, since these figures are based on the 2001 census, and if we've got an annual turnover of 22%, I don't expect these figures to remain unchanged.  I say "hurrah" for diversity, but I'm intrigued to know whether the Borough is integrated enough, or whether some people live in unintentionally segregated groups.  I ask, on account of some recent comments on the blog, and some of the comments raised at the recent KOV meeting.]

* 60% of Lambeth is Christian, 5% Muslim, 8% other, and 29% preferred not to answer. (p6) 
[Seems to total over 100%, but nevermind.  I'd be really intrigued to know the breakdown of the 8% "other", assuming it's not Jedi or something silly.  I've a vague theory that Lambeth seems to have a higher than average number of Buddhists.  I suspect the 60% Christian figure is much higher than the national average, even once you factor out people who answer C of E by default.]

* Reliable sexual orientation data isn't available, but local surveys suggests an LGBT population of 3%-5%. (p6).  Homophobic crime rose by 46% during 2009-2010 
[Perhaps that's true of Lambeth as a whole, but my view is that Princes, Oval and parts of Stockwell wards have a significantly higher LGBT population, which I don't think is accounted for with this figure, which seems to only reflect national percentage.  The rise in homophobic crime is atrocious, but /could/ result in greater willingness to report crime.]

* Crime fell over 30% in Lambeth over seven years to 2009, although Lambeth remains a high crime area, with the third most recorded offences of all London boroughs 2008-2009. (p6) 
[I'm really suspicious of measurement of crime statistics because every few years, the police alter the definitions of certain crimes.  Also, many people still fail to report crime (especially if they're not supposed to officially be here), making this very difficult to track.  A 30% reduction, however, is probably high enough to be significant.  See here for my controversial view that knife crime is worse in North London than South London.]

* In 2009-1010, gun crime is up 33% in Lambeth and rape by 25%. (p6)
[I believe that the Borough Commander recently explained that the rise in gun crime is as a result of commercial incidents eg. bank robberies / holdups.  Obviously, that doesn't really excuse it, but I think it is worth noting that this is not necessarily gang related.  The rape statistic is very very concerning.]

* 16% of Lambeth population have a long-term limiting illness. (p7) 
[Is it me, or is this a horrifying statistic?  Surely 16% of the UK doesn't have a long-term limiting illness?  Perhaps this ties in with the recent statistic that Lambeth is the top London borough for unemployment  (9.3% of Lambeth /working age/ people are unemployed).  I suspect that the limiting illness figure is related to obtaining benefits, and that more money is available if you can demonstrate illness.  But from that figure, I want to be careful of drawing Daily Fail type conclusions.  I suspect that in Lambeth, many people draw benefits to care for older and ill extended family members and prefer to raise their own families (instead of buying in labour).  This likely reduces the bill to the state on child care and adult care homes.  However, I suspect the Tory/Lib Dem coalition may not interpret things quite as charitably!] 

* There is a much higher prevalence of mental illness in Lambeth, compared with the country as a whole.  around 37,000 (over 10% of the population) were being treated for anxiety and depression in 2008. (P7) [Again, this is a very high figure.  I wonder whether people who suffer from mental illnesses tend to live in boroughs where they know that they can seek treatment, or whether those who suffer from mental illness seek one another out, or whether mental illness is better diagnosed in Lambeth or even whether there's some kind of environmental factor that results in the higher correlation between living in Lambeth and mental illness.]

* Lambeth is the 5th most deprived Borough in Lambeth and the 19th most deprived borough in England (2007).  (p7)

This is part 1 of my summary of the Whose Shout? report, and really just contains the headline statistics and the points (with my commentary in blod) that I find most interesting and which I've not seen elsewhere.  I've not commented at all upon the police / community consultative angle of the report, and I'll do that in part 2.  The report comes in at a whopping 91 pages, and I doubt it will reach a wider audience unless it's summarised somewhat.  It's very useful on account of its length, but I think that there are some other conclusions that readers of this blog might be interested in, without needing to read the whole thing.  Expect part 2 in the next few days.

An evening with Chief Superintendent Nick Ephgrave - KOV Meeting Part 1

Today's offering is divided into two parts, on account of the fact that last night's Kennington, Oval, Vauxhall forum meeting was very long.

The first section of the meeting was an introduction and Q&A section with Nick Ephgrave, who is the Chief Superintendent for the Borough of Lambeth and who has been in place now for nearly a year.

Ephgrave's 3 aims for the Lambeth Police force are:
1.  Reduce crime and disorder
2.  Build public confidence in policing service
3.  Make sure the police working environment is healthy and effective.

There were 3 issues, concerning north Lambeth citizens, that had been drawn to the Chief superintendent's attention.  These were sirens, gang involvement and dangerous dogs.  The chair added the visibility of Safer Neighbourhood Teams (henceforth known as SNTs) in Oval/Vauxhall to the list, and Ephgrave promised to look into trying to base the team further south (as opposed to Waterloo, where they're currently based).

Sirens:
Q:  A woman suggested that directional sirens for police cars have been produced, but the manufacturer said they'd not been tested by any police authority.  Apparently, as they have to be mounted outside of a vehicle, a Home Office official felt their use would affect fleet re-sale value, and that was the end of the matter.  The question asker suggested that, since directional sirens are used in reversing vehicles, on vehicles at the Olympic site and on Heathrow buggies, that the police might consider their use.

A: NE was very sympathetic and said he wouldn't want to live next door to a police station.  He promised to go and look at the police's position on directional sirens, but noted that it would be a central, rather than a Lambeth decision.  Ephgrave also noted that there had been 10 serious collisions this year and officers had to make a personal choice about when to use sirens to avoid accidents.  Finally, he said that there are a number of different units that might need to pass through SE11 to reach their destination; the bomb squad and armed response unit to name a few, and so it's likely that the trunk roads here might experience more noise than other areas.  (That's hardly a comfort to those of us that live here, but it's an interesting observation).

Police Communication:
Q:  A man asked Ephgrave what he was doing about enabling the police to talk to one another, and whether there were issues with intelligence not being shared.  It transpired that the mugging incident which I blogged about in Hotspur Street had been preceded by two nights of disturbances on Vauxhall Gardens Estate.  When the man had telephoned the SNTs on the Monday after the weekend, they knew nothing of any of the events.

A:  NE responded that the Borough had so much police activity that they needed 3 radio channels, so not everybody knew everything that went on in the area.  Despite that, the units are all briefed before they go out, but not everybody's experience is perfect.

Police Community Support Officers (PCSOs):
Q:  (This was more of a ramble than a question, but one man was concerned that two passing female PCSOs were talking to one another, instead of stopping a crazed/drugged man, when he'd asked them to intervene.  He wanted to know why the PCSOs didn't stop to talk to people like him (probably because they'd be stuck all afternoon) and finally he concluded that the PCSOs were making themselves look stupid on account of the fact that the grammar on their leaflets was not very good.  Said chap then volunteered to check their material before it hit the press.  (Anybody listening might have thought that we Lambeth was free from significant criminal elements, and that the most serious crime in the area concerned apostrophe misappropriation).

A: NE responded by admitting that he was a strong fan of police offiers patrolling alone (so that they didn't chat, and would be fully cognisant of their surroundings), and that he too was also an apostrophe freak (he didn't quite put it like that).

Incident response times:
Q:  One man said that he lived on Vauxhall Gardens Estate and that he and his neighbours had experience a number of violent incidents where the response times from police amounted to about 20 minutes (long after perpetrators had fled).  He also thought that people didn't report crime on account of the fact that they were scared, or thought that nothing would be done about it.

A: NE said that there was a police commitment to a 12 minute response time, which included the time taken to make the phone call, by which the police should be on the site of the crime.  That target is hit about 85% of the time.  People can report crime online, by phone or to their local SNT, if they're too scared to report it any other way.

Resourcing:
Q: One person noted that they'd asked for more resources at night, but had been told by police that it could not be done.

A: NE said 3pm-6pm, and 12pm-2am were crime peaks in which police resources were focused on the places that they felt incidents might take place.  He added that he felt that there are resourcing issues.

Police response to crime:
Q: One man noted that he couldn't get hold of the SNT and that they didn't respond to messages.  In the last few months, he'd experienced a knifing, a car jacking and the mugging of a close relative and that he'd still received no response, to the point that he felt that there was no point in reporting crime.

A: NE said that robbery was a huge priority for him (as well as statistics, and gangs) and that he was disappointed that the police response did not happen in the incidents described by the man.  He said that he'd take the man's details (which he did) to look into the matter.

Dangerous dogs:
Q:  One woman described her situation in which she has a particularly gentle dog, and she felt that she was safer to walk alone, on the basis that this didn't attract dangerous dogs.  This particular individual felt that the dangerous dog problem had diminished somewhat, but wondered whether it was possible to attach ASBOs to persistent offenders.

A: NE said that 20 dogs had been seized in the last operation.  Some of them had been microchipped, but had to be given back, on the basis that they weren't prohibited breeds.  One condition that is sometimes applied is that the dog must be made to wear a muzzle in public.  The superintendent advised trying to get information about dogs and their owners eg. a name/address, if possible, as it's not possible to report rumours to the police.  ("I saw a nasty dog in Kennington Park and it looked as though it would eat my puppy" is not acceptable, but "The man that lives at 3 Smith Street, SE11, has a dog that looks dangerous" is information that can be acted upon).  At that point, things became farcical with the woman asking if it were possible to issue ASBOs to children with large dogs, when the dogs weren't badly behaving and the children were in control of them.  NE erred on the side of, erm, human freedom, and pointed out that this would probably constitute harassment!
Gang crime:
Q: One local estate secretary said that they'd experienced a spate of gun crimes recently, and what could NE do?

A: NE launched into an answer about gun crime, and how it was up on the basis of commercial armed robberies, before it became apparent that the chap had actually asked about /gang/ crime.  NE said that there was an operation in progress to disrupt gang crime using online material and use of ASBOs, which could be issued, even if it could not be proven that somebody had committed a crime.  ASBOs can have conditions of association and place attached to them, which can disrupt people from meeting together.  A number of guns had been recovered from people posing on Youtube with their guns, and a lot of work was co-ordinated by the intelligence unit, working mostly in Tulse Hill and Brixton.  Finally, the police are trying to work with children on the cusp of primary/secondary school about the consequences of gang membership by the age of 30 (killing somebody, being killed or in prison for an offence).  NE added, "Ultimately, the solution lies within the communities themselves.  I worry about the future of young people in this borough because I don't have the answer."

Community solutions:
Q: On a related note, one woman asked, what exactly the community could do to prevent crime in the area(something readers will know is close to my own heart), and whether NE could cite any effective community initiatives that had been put in place elsewhere?

A:  NE mentioned a pastor who ran a youth group had found a way of connecting with young gang members, and suggested that faith might be an answer.  There's also Kid's Company, for those who are in Southwark.  Finally, he suggested that Lambeth Council's program, Young and Safe, working with high risk people, offering them a way out of a criminal lifestyle was quite effective.  When it was pointed out that Lambeth Council's program wasn't really a community initiative, NE said that it did have a number of 3rd parties associated with it, but ultimately commented, "I will have to go and think about that.  I don't know what the answer is."  (Perhaps it's not a police priority to think up community initiatives, but his answer is indicative that perhaps the police and the community could still work more closely together.)

Police stations:
Q: One man, who identified himself with a local planning forum, pointed out that there's a ring of police stations in Lambeth, with a hole in the middle where Vauxhall falls, and pointed out that there was perhaps an opportunity (with the new developments being erected) to get the police a space in Vauxhall.

A: NE felt that the place for PCSOs is on the streets, and not in buildings.  On a related note, he made it clear that he was not aware that a "Welwyn Garden City" sized development (a reference to the Nine Elms Development plan) would lead to any further police resouces.  (Something that I'd imagine will have to be part of the masterplan).

Police harassment:
Q:  One woman felt that there's a lot of persistent youth crime in the area, but that a number of youth receive unjustified harassment from the police, who will disperse them, even when they've done nothing wrong.  The woman lived on China Walk Estate, and noted that there's nothing there for boys (who hang around together, having been to primary school together), to do.  4 or 5 times in one day, she had noticed the police "persecuting" young boys for hanging around together.  She suggested that it would be more productive to find the boys something to do eg. music/sport.  (This then descended into a bit of a battle about BME representation at the KOV meeting, and how she felt that the BME Community was not really present (which was true). 

A:  NE didn't really get a chance to get a word in edgeways.  It was pointed out by the Chair that everybody was welcome to attend KOV meetings, since they are open to the public.  A BME individual stood up and said that she had been pushing for BME representation for a long time in Vauxhall, but that people could not be forced to come to meetings, and that much local community action in her group involved the same 5 old people (quite true, for a lot of organisations, really).  (It seems to me that there's room for a larger debate about how to encourage wider community participation, but I'm fast coming to the belief that this is a London-wide problem, and not really a Lambeth problem.  If anything, North Lambeth seems to be oddly community-minded (what with all of the tenants' associations, and community organisations), but it is true that many public meetings lack racial balance, being predominatly attended by retired, upper middle-class white people.  (I wonder if this is due to the times meetings are held, lack of childcare provision and more class than race driven, but I'd be curious to know what others think).

Carl Beatson Asiedu - Goding Street murder

I didn't update the entry on the Goding Street murder in Vauxhall on 1st August since London-SE1 covered the story far more comprehensively than I would due to the fact that the car transporting the victim to hospital was stopped in Baylis Road by police on the way.

However, the murdered man was named as rapper Carl Beatson Asiedu and whilst several arrests have been made, the police are still appealing for more information. A special email address has been set up for enquiries. It is: carlsappeal@met.police.uk and metropolitan police would like anybody that isn't comfortable calling them to consider emailing them information about the stabbing. If you do have more details about what happened, you can always set up a free anonymous Hotmail or Gmail account and email police without them knowing your details.

Somebody must know something, and it's incredibly frustrating that so many cases don't appear to be satisfactorily resolved. There are a fair few people up and around in Vauxhall at 5am, given the vibrant scene in the area. Somebody must have been near or outside Life and noticed something at that time in the morning.

I still wonder whether justice might be done for Ashley Kemete's relatives, (he was shot in Kennington late last year). I remember a few people were arrested and bailed, but have heard nothing since.

Princes Ward elections - Political party watch

A quick roundup of where we are with the upcoming election:

1. Conservative candidate = Michael Poole-Wilson

Michael appears not to have his own website, but there's a new item about his selection on the Lambeth Conservative website here with a lovely comment from his mother, assuring us all that he grew up in the area. I'm not hugely sure that the campaign a photograph taken outside the Prince's Arms in Cleaver Square is the best way to appeal to the entire electorate in Princes Ward. As much as I am a fan of the pub, it might be deemed slightly exclusive. Cleaver Square is decidedly posh Kennington, but somebody has to campaign to keep those pint prices down.

Also, what manifesto is Michael actually putting forward? I'm not sure that being passionate about civil liberties is enough for Lambeth. Is there any more online literature of which I'm not aware? Any online literature will be brutally attacked and pulled apart (see below).

2. Labour candidate = Mark Harrison

Mark Harrison is definitely winning in the online presence stakes, since his party have their own blog. In case you've not seen the piece on his election, it's here on the Princes Ward labour blog and they've had lots of time to take photos. However, we think that Labour have a distinct advantage in that they've known that naughty Sam Townend was likely to stand down, and have had Mark as their "shadow" placement for quite some time now.

Anyhow, yesterday, whilst we were all enjoying the sun (or not), Mark was busy whipping up his anti-crime manifesto, which can be found here. A few comments...? Yes, I think so.

a. Who will actually be charged with putting the tags /on/ the dangerous dogs? Would you volunteer? If they're dangerous, they shouldn't exist in the first place. Do we wait for them to attack, and then tag them? Sounds a bit dubious to me. Is there an actual dangerous dog tagging procedure in place anywhere else in the country?

b. Where is Mark going to get the money to get the CCTV on the estates working again? I don't believe in money until I'm told what budget it will come from and who will authorise its release.

c. I will warn /anybody/ in this campaign right now to steer well away from anything related to the former Lilian Baylis School because I'm going to sit here behind my keyboard shouting "rhethoric" very loudly. Why?

The current Labour council have already declared their partners in the school to be: All Nations Church (ANC), Sports Action Zone (SAZ) and the Ethelred Nursery. That's public information, declared in February 2009 and found here. Any youth work will be ANC or SAZ related, but there isn't a "Plan B" for the former Lilian Baylis School, and the project is already quite advanced. Just try speaking with the council officer in charge of the project. The partners have been chosen, and that's that. Some of us are keen to know how the project will hold together, but if you have any more info, please inform me. So... What exactly does Mark propose when he suggests "Saving" the former Lilian Baylis?

d. I hardly think that Labour (or any political party) can act to prevent drug dealing in Lambeth. I presumed that that was up to the police.

e. I really like the idea of saying "no" to Boris' police cuts. See below, but it looks as though Mark is campaigning to prevent more job losses, which makes it look as though Mark is campaigning to prevent John losing his job!

In his favour, Mark actually does appear to have some policies, and to have given them some independent thought.

3. Liberal Democrat candidate = John Roberts

John appears not to have his own website, but there's a news item about his selection on the Vauxhall Lib Dem website here.

An anonymous contributor on the blog has written that they are surprised at John's standing because they have asserted that John might live in Whitstable and that he was kicked off the "MPA"? (I'm guess Metropolitan Police Authority) by Boris. It sounds like the slurs have begun. I've tweeted for a response from John, since the Lib Dems say that John lives on the Ethelred, but have so far heard nothing.

It seems to me that the Lib Dems are are a bit slow on the uptake with their campaign. Labour (if Twitter is to be believed) have been out canvassing for weeks. Let's have some firm and clear policies set out please, as it looks as though Labour have something of a head start, and one man campaigns are always rather tedious to report... I need something interesting to pick apart and since I've given Mark Harrison a good grilling, I need to give John Roberts a thorough roasting.

4. We've had no response from the Green Party in Lambeth to say whether there's anybody standing and I don't know whether there are any independents. Does anybody else know?

Crime in SE11, Lambeth, Southwark and surrounds

On some of my previous posts, I've been scathing about people who consider South London to be dangerous, full of crime and not worthy of their attention. I've been interested for some time about how much crime is really committed in the different parts of London, and what type of crime etc. I'm most interested in SE11, but being so close to SE1, SE17, SW8 and SW9, it seems that a wider view ought to be taken. We can hardly stop people postcode hopping to commit crime!

Crime statistics are massively flawed for (at least) the three following reasons:

1. Crime stats. depend upon people reporting crime. I know lots of people who are the victims of petty theft who wouldn't report their crime if they didn't think that there was anything the police could do.

2. The police, periodically, change the definition of of what constitutes a crime "bracket" for a particular crime. So if one bracket goes up too much eg. "violent crime", they'll remove car crime from the bunch and place it in a different bracket. This makes long term study of crime very difficult because it's hard to tell where the boundaries have moved from and to.

3. Periodically, the area boundaries for measurement of crime are changed. I'm not sure whether this is so much of a problem as changing definitions, but it no doubt factors.

Anyhow, having said that, I found that the Metropolitan police (with some cleverish google mapping) have plotted a crime map of London (excluding the City). The "crimes" it counts are burglary, robbery and vehicle crime. The map uses colour to display highest crime areas in orange and red, and average in yellow. One can then break the areas down furthur and see the crime in particular wards.

Overall, Lambeth has a yellow shading (average crime), but Southwark has a red shading (high crime) for June 2008. I checked the figures, which state 850 crimes in June 2008 in Southwark, and 739 in Lambeth. It seemed to me then that the margin of difference between the brackets was small. However, I've played around a little more and it seems that the average numbers are calculated on the size of the borough in question. Westminster had fewer crimes committed than Lambeth, but since it's smaller, it records "above average" crime for London. The site is only in "Beta/testing" mode at the moment and I've asked for feedback as to more detail on the crime for future versions....

Anyhow, looking at Lambeth overall, there are (as is predictable) pockets of parts of Lambeth with more crime than others for June 08, but the good news first:

Average Crime compared with the rest of London: Bishops Ward, Princes Ward, Vassall Ward, Stockwell Ward, Larkhall Ward, Clapham Town Ward, Clapham Common Ward, Brixton Hill, Herne Hill, Thornton Ward, Tulse Hill Ward, Streatham Hill Ward, Streatham South, Streatham Wells, Gipsy Hill, Knight's Hill,

The bad news (but note that Lambeth has no wards with "high" crime:
Above Average Crime compared with the rest of London: Oval Ward, Ferndale Ward, Cold Harbour Ward, Thurlow Park Ward and St Leonards Ward.

Lambeth is statistically safer (but remember that this is an odd figure because of the different ward sizes) than both Southwark and Westminster.

SE11 has average crime levels for June 2008 (much of the area is in Princes Ward so that seems correct), the small Oval Ward subsection of SE11 also has average crime levels. The west of SE11 (a small subsection of Princes ward) has above average crime, but it's not clear how much of that might stem from the Albert Embankment.

However, the borders of SE11 are not so good. At the south and east side, SE11 is surrounded by 3 pockets of "above average" crime and 1 pocket of "high" crime (I suspect that that is due to Vauxhall Station and its unpleasant surrounds). Directly north of SE11 near Elephant, there is a pocket of "above average" crime as well.

As I said above, I'm hoping that the Metropolitan Police Crime Map will be developed over the next few months so that it will be possible to compare different periods of time and break down the type of crime in any area. I'll report back as soon as they release the figures for July 2008, so we can just see whether it was a quiet month, of whether Lambeth might really be declared to be a place of only "average" crime.