From the guardian
Steven Morris
Wednesday January 10, 2001

Police could do much more to stop demonstrations erupting into violence if they had a greater understanding of the subtle dynamics at work in large crowds, a conference in Liverpool was told yesterday.

Researchers who have studied disturbances such as the anti-capitalism riot in the City of London in 1999 challenged the notion that trouble was usually caused by a handful of well-organised activists. They claimed that violence tended to flair up if normally law-abiding citizens felt they were being treated as a dangerous, anonymous mass. Such treatment inevitably provoked them into acting exactly in that way.

The researchers argued that historically the authorities had assumed that a crowd was a primitive, "pathological" mass - either that it was made up of individuals compulsively motivated or that in a crowd everybody became "pathological". But close study of disturbances such as the anti- capitalist demonstration and football violence, had shown a different picture.

Steve Reicher, of St Andrew's University, told a conference of investigative psychologists at Liverpool University that most crowds contained a variety of smaller groupings with different values and outlooks. The dynamics of how the crowd acted depended on how it was perceived and treated.

Professor Reicher, who worked with the Association of Chief Police Officers and the Metropolitan police, said: "If you pre-suppose that a crowd is dangerous and pathological then it's bound to be like that."

Clifford Stott, a lecturer in psychology at Liverpool University, said that the clashes between the police and the demonstrators in the poll tax riot had led to changes in the nature of the participants' social identity. Those who had previously rejected violence began to see fighting with the police as both possible and even proper. He said: "There was a tendency by the police to be indiscriminate. This aggravated the crowd and people felt their legitimate right to protest was compromised. It changed their view about how they felt about violence."

Dr Stott also studied football hooliganism and found similar patterns. He pointed out there was no reason why England fans and Scotland fans should act so differently abroad, but while Scots were welcomed most places, the arrival of England fans was greeted with fear. Dr Stott believed England fans tended to misbehave not because a hard core of hooligans organised the violence but because they were treated as a dangerous mass. Because the Scots fans were treated with respect they did not cause trouble.

The riot that occurred during an anti-capitalist demonstration in London's City area in June 1999 was also examined at the conference. Forty-four people were injured and £2m of damage was caused as protesters went on the rampage. A police review soon after blamed the commanding officers' lack of experience, failure in communication, and the sheer scale of the violence, for the policing errors on the day.

Research by Patrick Cronin, of St Andrews University, concluded that officers' decisions on the day were guided by differing ideas on accountability and that those differences led to confusion. Similarly, the City of Police had looked to protecting City institutions in the Square Mile, while the Met felt more beholden to the Home Office. The research has been passed to the police.

The researchers agreed the starting point for the police and other authorities dealing with crowds ought to focus on how they should help the crowd achieve its aims.

Professor Reicher said: "The police need to ask, how can we facilitate the legitimate aims of the majority - not how can we contain the minority."

--------------------------------------------------
be great to get hold of the conference write up...