NOVEMBER 2023 REPORT (2.30-4.30pm)
NOVEMBER 2023 REPORT
DCCS Panel members along with Chief Inspector Tom Cunningham and Body Worn Video [BWV] Systems Administrators Karen Janicka welcomed new panel members and visiting police Chief Superintendent Jennifer Bristow - North East and West Devon.
This month’s cases selected BWV are from officers previously rated with ‘unknown’ cases.
Before observing body-worn footage selected by the panel from the previous month's cases, the Chair reminded panel members of wellness practice and the opportunity for debriefing at the end of the meeting, as well as an update to the DCCS Panel’s logo.
The Chair also shared a recent update following our DCCS Panel Reports submitted to D&C Police:
If no BWV is submitted for a Stop & Search (S&S), this will now be automatically flagged as a ‘Red’ RAG rating and officers must explain why there is no footage.
Plain-clothes officers have been provided outfits with attachments that can allow cameras to be quickly clipped on once they’ve identified themselves.
All data showing missing BWV will be given to the Chair of each BCU Panel to actively challenge use of BWV through line managers.
The following report identifies points to action, D&C Police responses, case assessments and outstanding areas that require investigation.
Body-Worn Video Assessment .
Body-Worn Video Assessment .
ASSESSING D&C POLICE STOP AND SEARCH [S&S]
NOVEMBER 2023 REPORT
Body-Worn Videos
Via Microsoft Teams, at the start of each case BWV Systems Administrator Karen Janicka played the clip selected by the panel before members completed their anonymous assessment, discussed and submitted the below feedback.
Chief Inspector Tom Cunningham circulated this report with actions and recommendations to D&C Police Basic Command Unit, Operations Department, Learning and Development, Force Stop and Search Lead and Force Use of Force Lead.
All confirmed discussions, decisions and/or actions taken by officers and supervisors following receipt of the DCCS Panel report are identified in bold blue text.
Panel members use GOWISELY as part of their scrutiny assessment. It is an acronym that officers must use to provide information to a subject before the Stop and Search. If the GOWISELY procedure is not followed then the S&S is highly likely to have been unlawful.
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 Case 1 - Officer previously rated as ‘unknown’ (case without BWV), Cullompton
BWV 1 feedback to be provided:
Investigation, responses and learning required with:
Panel was unsure if this S&S was necessary - it was a call of ‘disturbance’ but what are the legalities of police entering a house and pressuring search of a shed with no grounds? If this intelligence had been explained earlier, along with greater communication with the subject, the atmosphere could have been kept calmer.
Was there a follow-up welfare check on children “playing in shed” when there were drugs present? Did a capture / referral take place?
It should be explained to subjects that they can still collect a receipt from the station even if they refuse to give their name. Especially with it being residential, details can be provided of the location to locate the case.
Actions to be commended:
Officers kept the situation contained and away from children / the other incident in the house.
GOWISELY was fully followed.
Officer had a calm tone throughout.
S&S BWV 1 ASSESSMENT
D&C POLICE RESPONSE TO S&S BWV 1
The DCCS Panel commends this officer's actions and use of police powers in this particular case.
S&S Case 2 - Officer previously rated as ‘unknown’ (case without BWV), CCTV reports of male possessing ‘white powder’
BWV 2 feedback to be provided:
Investigation, responses and learning required with:
Panel appreciated the subject ran away and the officer gave reasoning for handcuffs but as the subject was compliant, panel members asked if they could have been positioned at the front?
Officers could have asked the subject if he was linked in with support networks and given information about organisations if interested.
Actions to be commended:
Panel assessed this encounter as necessary.
Panel assessed this encounter as ethical.
Officer was well-mannered, spoke to the subject respectfully and demonstrated good empathy - showed care for mental health and wellbeing (complimented older ipod when subject appeared embarrassed and made sure he wasn’t cold).
Encounter was well-paced, thorough, calm and professional.
GOWISELY was fully followed.
Search explained thoroughly prior and during search.
The officer offered his warrant card despite being in uniform - the first time the panel had seen this, which was excellent practice especially as the subject had mentioned police made him ‘anxious’.
Officer welcomed any questions and encouraged the subject to ask them.
Officer checked on the subject's welfare when he stumbled / didn't prevent him from sitting down.
The officer provided education on law re: not opening beer in the city centre to prevent further legal issues.
Officer explained the follow-up process if drugs were found dumped but released from arrest.
Panel assessed that in this context, the subject received the best service the police could have provided.
S&S BWV 2 ASSESSMENT
D&C POLICE RESPONSE TO S&S BWV 2
The DCCS Panel commends this officer's actions and use of police powers in this particular case.
ASSESSING D&C POLICE USE OF FORCE [UOF]
NOVEMBER 2023 REPORT
Body-Worn Videos
Panel members use PLANTER as part of their Use of Force scrutiny assessment:
PROPORTIONATE amount of force implemented
LENGTH of force used
ACTIONS of subject warranted use of force
NECESSARY to use force to protect the subject, officers or members of the public
TYPE used was minimum appropriate
ETHICAL to use force in the situation
REASONABLE for officer(s) to employ
UOF Case 1 - Ongoing incident, officers in one address, other officers waiting for update
UoF: non compliant handcuffing, leg restraint
BWV 1 feedback to be provided:
Investigation, responses and learning required with:
The panel were unsure if officers tried to deescalate the situation.
The subject appeared to be getting increasingly frustrated as she didn’t understand why she was being arrested. The female student officer did not give reasoning or know the grounds, which escalated the incident.
Four officers was not proportionate for a small female - if a more experienced officer had taken the lead, with fewer officers surrounding / holding her, the use of force may have been avoided.
Subject was initially calm, the situation became more emotional and stressed for all involved.
Tutors need to be aware that student officers travelling in these larger groups are not always suitable for each case.
Use of force happened very quickly and some sections of footage were difficult to see.
Panel assessed that officers did not implement use of police power constructively.
PLANTER was not fully followed.
Actions to be commended:
-
UOF BWV 1 ASSESSMENT
D&C POLICE RESPONSE TO UOF BWV 1
Officer’s response not received.
UOF Case 2 - Group of males causing damage to hotel, Barnstaple
UoF: non compliant handcuffing, leg restraint
BWV 2 feedback to be provided:
Investigation, responses and learning required with:
No pre record - footage began with officers grappling on the floor with the subject.
No deescalation attempts.
No other officers BWV gave clarity as to why the subject was detained.
No grounds and very little information provided.
Subject was clearly intoxicated - doesn't appear to understand everything. Very little communication by any officers when going through belongings.
Officers were unprofessional - swearing and laughing at the subject, talking about him, delivering veiled threats.
Panel did not assess the subject’s wellbeing as considered - no care when he mentioned his hand bleeding, only concern for officers contracting "hep b". Subject was also bundled into the floor of the van with his head against the seat - this is not a safe position for a handcuffed subject unable to protect their head. When the subject started goading the officer, the officer appeared to retaliate and grab the subject’s throat / implement further UoF.
Panel did not assess PLANTER as being fully followed.
Actions to be commended:
Leg restraints kept off when arriving at the station so the subject could walk in.
At the station, female officers showed care - encouraged the subject to "try and relax", asked him questions, used his name and told officers to stop pulling him in different directions. If these officers were present at the start, the incident could have been de-escalated.
UOF BWV 2 ASSESSMENT
D&C POLICE RESPONSE TO UOF BWV 2
Officer’s response not 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.
