JULY 2021 REPORT
JULY 2021 REPORT
DCCSP members along with Chief Inspector Mark Beavan and Body Worn Video [BWV] Systems Administrator Ian Cocklin observed five BWVs selected by the panel from the previous month's Stop and Searches [S&S]. The following identifies points to action, D&C Police responses, case assessments and outstanding areas that require investigation.
Case Selection .
Case Selection .
ACTION POINT 1
Community Complaints Trigger received in March - outcome received from Simon Hardwick shows no visible change. Tweets have not been deleted [in fact there are more comments reinforcing it on the threads] and the tone of the account has not changed. Being spoken to by a Supervisor isn’t enough if the public sees no difference or accountability and this service won't be trusted or utilised if no resolution is perceived. Panel requests the policy on social media accounts for officers on duty and what visible response will be actioned regarding this matter..
D&C POLICE RESPONSE 1
Raised at Board meeting. Ch Supt and OPCC rep took away action to review in relation to this specific matter and more generally moving forward.
ACTION POINT 2
Panel member raised a question to be investigated: “Why is there such disparity with D&C BAME S&S figures and somewhere like Bristol which is still in the southwest?”
D&C POLICE RESPONSE 2
MB emailed Rhea Brooke, Equality and Diversity officer to ask her to provide a formal response to the panel for this question – I will feedback soon.
ACTION POINT 3
Contact provided and point actioned.
D&C POLICE RESPONSE 3
Contact the Corporate Communications Dept. in relation to promoting the Panels work via D&C Police website.
ACTION POINT 4
Queries about IC1 chart being different from W1 chart - information to be provided.
D&C POLICE RESPONSE 4
Chart sent and distributed to panel members.
ACTION POINT 5
MB to retain facilitating the panel activity and will be scoping for support from other Chief Inspectors over the next 3 months to ensure additional support is in place.
D&C POLICE RESPONSE 5
Speak with D&C Police's internal team about the resilience structure between police and the panel.
ACTION POINT 6
Following the selection process and the scrutiny itself, the panel noted that there was no use of BWV in cases involving under 18s. An explanation was given that minors are not filmed. Panel member question to be investigated: “The policy for not videoing under 18s in S&S is often viewed as the police protecting themselves rather than the young person, which is why they often take their own camera footage - can young people request cameras be turned on? Is there a better way to communicate and/or collect information on this interaction to assess correct practice?" Recommend that this position is reviewed for the protection of both the officer and child.
D&C POLICE RESPONSE 6
BWV and under 18s – D&C Police will liaise nationally on this topic but guidance remains unchanged for the time being. MB raised this at the Board meeting and an Action was raised for discussion nationally and with national BWV SPOC [who is now Ian Cocklin]. At this time the guidance remains but suggest the Action remains open pending discussion nationally D&C POLICE RESPONSE 7 and at next Board meeting.
ACTION POINT 7
ACTION POINT 7 Panel requests investigation into those cases without BWV highlighted during selection.
D&C POLICE RESPONSE 7
MB shared responses received from the officers where BWV footage was not available. In one case [where there were two officers linked] there was in fact footage – it was linked to the crime number raised but somehow did not show up during IC's search. In the second case [where there were 5 officers linked] these were Proactive Team officers who are in plain clothes and do not carry BWV. IC shared that there is a BWV National Decision Making Policy - if officers don’t turn on cameras, it doesn’t mean they’ve breached policy as long as they can warrant why. The reason for this could be due to a member of public's faith, or it impeding an individual from talking to the officer. The policy is currently being reviewed, looking at whether it should be changed from ‘should be’ recorded to ‘must be’.”
Body Worn Video Assessment .
Body Worn Video Assessment .
ASSESSING D&C POLICE STOP AND SEARCHES (S&S)
JULY 2021 REPORT
Body Worn Videos
Via Microsoft Teams, at the start of each case BWV Systems Administrator Ian Cocklin played selected clip, Chief Inspector Mark Beavan read the corresponding report submitted from case officer(s) before the DCCS Panel discussed and submitted the below feedback and assessments.
Senior officers in each Force area where the S&S cases under scrutiny took place have been asked to feedback the panel’s observations and reminders for officers. Supervising officers were contacted by MB after the panel meeting to enable Supervisors to view BWV footage that would not be retained beyond 31 days, ahead of the panel report.
GROUNDS of the search
OBJECT of the search
WARRANT card [if not in uniform]
IDENTITY [officer name & number]
STATION [where officer is based]
ENTITLEMENT to receipt
LEGAL power used
YOU are detained for S&S
S&S BMV 1 feedback to be provided to officer
Some areas of GOWISELY were vague and could've been clearer. Quite a spectacle in the high street with 3 officers around the subject who was handcuffed. Recorded as taking place out of public view [which would have been better practice but didn't appear to be actioned] and no mention of drugs in the records. Recommend MB looks into drop- down options recorded as officers could have included extra information.
D&C POLICE RESPONSE TO BWV 2 REPORT
This was not a misuse of drugs [s23] S&S, it was a PACE search following a report of a male putting a knife up his sleeve. Initially I did not remove the subject from public view as the allegation was that he may have a weapon. I felt safer searching for this in full view of the nearby CCTV cameras, for the safety of myself, other officers and the public. It was not particularly busy and the S&S did not appear to draw much attention – had it done so, I would have considered removing the subject sooner.
S&S BWV 2 feedback to be provided to officer
A lot of information provided about being detained and searching the car alongside GOWISELY. Request clarity with drop-down options:
Driver linked to drug use in the report but at what point did they know this if the officer was from another area? Officers discretion didn't appear to test for section 4 dangerous driving. Why wasn't this identified as a risk? Is it policy to check for drugs before officers know who the car belongs to?
D&C POLICE RESPONSE TO BWV 2 REPORT
IC - vehicle had an intel marker which is why subject to a section 23 drug search. No response yet received from officers regarding points for clarity.
S&S BWV 3 feedback to be provided
Officer told his colleague that the individual was being detained for section 23 before the detainee [this may have been because she was a student officer]. Recommend clarity with procedures involving individuals whose first language isn't english - in this scenario the subject was communicating well so officers continued. If this wasn’t the case, what other options would be provided / support contacted? When a vehicle is stopped for suspected drug S&S the other passenger would also have been searched. Panel requests information on this additional S&S. Limitations of current database has found to often create confusing labelling [multiple cases found to be true of this] - recommend that MB ask officers about their experiences when reporting on the system as it is likely that they also find this frustrating.
S&S BWV 3 ASSESSMENT
D&C POLICE RESPONSE TO BWV 3 REPORT
From my understanding the driver spoke good English and understood what we were saying to him so I do not believe language barriers were a concern at the time. The car were pulled over due to a moving traffic offence, the driver was detained and searched under section 23 due to his eyes being pin pricks and him shaking and sweating when my colleague initially spoke to him.
He was clear but then the car was searched and drugs were found in his vehicle and due to the location we believed these belonged to him. I did not search the passenger myself and I cannot remember if my colleague did or not as I searched the vehicle. The driver also had a breath test. I do not believe there was any indication the passenger had taken any drugs when he was spoken to at the time as he was alert caring for his dog on the roadside. Please note I am a student who was only 4 weeks in at the time of doing the search so was being guided my colleague at the time.
S&S BMV 4 feedback to be provided
Quick but good example of how to run through GOWISELY. Panel requests MB look into what the community resolution was. This outcome is selected by officers through the ‘National Decision Model’ where they will justify reasoning via crime record [based on quantity/drug class].
S&S BWV 4 ASSESSMENT
D&C POLICE RESPONSE TO BWV 4 REPORT
The community resolution was for the male to admit that he had cannabis on him and for him to give up that cannabis to the officers. He would then agree not to smoke or possess cannabis again. The community resolution can only be distributed once and the male was aware of this.
S&S BMV 5 feedback to be provided
Conversational but quite chaotic so the panel couldn’t hear if all of GOWISELY was followed but no evidence of grounds or object. Officer clearly knew the subject but concerning that station and entitlement were prompted by the individual being searched. This could antagonise/escalate the situation more than needed to be.
First time hearing the search notice could be requested by post rather than email / attending station - is this something only Plymouth Station offers? Panel recommends there is a standardised approach re: how that report can be delivered / requested.
D&C POLICE RESPONSE TO BWV 5 REPORT
This was in regards to a S&S for two males where earlier that day, a male had their ear cut/bitten off and both of the males whom we S&S matched descriptions passed to us from comms. I do apologise if this seemed rushed, there were multiple units searching for a group of males whom were believed to be suspects and we stopped our patrol car and detained the males in a matter of seconds, hence not being able to use a pair of gloves. From recollection, I did state my name and station, however it was somewhat disjointed and I stated it later in the search. In this case, the male asked for a copy of the search and as it was electronic, I was unable to provide it there and then, hence why offering it via post. The male could also have attended a police station where a copy could be provided. Sometimes in dynamic situations, it can be somewhat troublesome to put on gloves. Especially when you are sweating or gloves are tearing. I myself had a needlestick injury which happened through two layers of gloves, so I am always as careful as I can.
DATA SCRUTINY RECOMMENDATIONS
1. TRAINEE OFFICERS S&S: Panel informed that Stop and Searches went up due to new officers requiring mandatory numbers of S&S to qualify. When a S&S is conducted in this situation, is it done so using intelligence or, as desired practice from an officer?
RESPONSE 1: Student officers need to evidence conducting a S&S before they can achieve Independent Patrol Status but they have several weeks to complete all their evidence portfolio and it is usually possible for a student officer to conduct an intelligence-led S&S. Sometimes student officers will be able to respond to a dynamic situation and record self- generated S&S incidents.
2. NO FURTHER ACTIONS [NFA]: 63% of stop & searches were NFA. is this a typical amount as this appears a high figure and questionable good use of police time? Panel would like to do a deep dive into the P4 data ['not recorded' =32, 'not provided' =6] and P5 [where it states 'NFA other'= 56 and 'data not provided'= 18]. We would value a written explanation as to why this is the case. Additionally, what has been the learning from the 5008 NFAs?
RESPONSE 2: D&C Police recognise that there is a high NFA Outcome rate for S&S and that this is often in relation to cannabis possession. The new S&S Plan is focused on shifting the culture and approach of S&S away from low-level drug possession with low outcome rates to more targeted and intelligence led S&S activity focused on higher harm activity like possession with intent to supply.
3. DISPROPORTIONALITY: What is the rationale for the high disproportionality rate in D&C of 1:16 for black people or 1:18 in the slides received? www.police.uk/pu/your-area/devon- and-cornwall-police/performance/stop- and-search The panel requests a breakdown of the NFAs in relation to different ethnicities and asks what are the steps being taken to reduce this disproportionality?
RESPONSE 3: MB has asked Rhea Brooke to provide the panel with an update on this [emailed Nov 2021] and propose that Chief Superintendent Arundale is invited to give a presentation to the panel on the new S&S Plan which will answer some of the queries raised [including the learning taken on board] around data. MB proposes this is done to inform any deep dive the panel then wishes to conduct into NFA data.
In the not recorded ethnicity [P3 % of searches: unknown and not completed], please provide the officer defined data. In the not recorded ethnicity [P3 % of searches: unknown and not completed], please provide the officer defined data.
Only 3 cannabis warnings were given out of 5,388 drug S&S - panel requests more information on this. High positive rate of over 40% actions - please elaborate on this. While S&S have reduced, the number of arrests in June are still the same- please share more clarity on this. On Slide 3, what does the 'other' refer to and what constitutes a positive outcome? Please share with us some more information on the community resolution and what is offered. How is restorative justice included in what is offered? Please clarify why the number of S&S carried out in June 2021 is significantly lower? We would like to celebrate with you if this was down to positive operations and interactions. Please clarify why the black dotted line as average has also changed for the year, [it's increased by 100] compared to the last 12 months? What factors have contributed to the movement in the red, yellow and black lines compared to the previous year? The change makes the data read that the high number of S&S in December 2020, January 2021 and March 2021 would no longer be classed as statistically significant or exceptional.
Data not provided/blank still amounts to quite a high %, what is the reasoning for this? % wise there is no change in the ethnicity of people being stopped compared to the last provided. The number of S&S for black subjects may be less but overall there were less people stopped in total. It looks as though % of searches remain the same for all ethnicities? Is this the case from your understanding and interpretation of this data?
Although there were fewer total S&S in June, the number of arrests/community resolutions/property seized/summons remain the same at 14% compared to the previous data set till mid May. What is the reasoning behind this? Is there a reason for the 0% of cannabis warnings when the reason for S&S was drug related and that it is listed on the data as an outcome option? In what circumstances would a “no data provided” situation occur? For a stop and search to occur we presume there would need to be a lawful reason, raising questions as to why some would be left blank?
We celebrate with you that the data reflects an 80% drop in 'not recorded' info, this is a great improvement on the previous 12 months data. Finally please help us reconcile the two formats of data that we have now. They both read differently in parts and are not the same in the below link and the slides we received www.police.uk/pu/your-area/devon-and-cornwall-police/performance/stop-and-search
RESPONSE 4 MB to investigate. No responses yet received.
Interested in making a difference?
Improve accountability, transparency and trust between D&C police and the communities they serve
Receive free training, work alongside inspiring individuals and help make positive changes
Scrutinise Stop & Search and Use of Force, or join Sub-committees to share your skills or learn new ones
