JUNE 2023 REPORT
JUNE 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 Chief Constable Will Kerr and three Chief Superintendents: Matt Longman (Commander for Plymouth), Benjamin Deer (Commander for Cornwall and Isles of Scilly), and Roy Linden (Commander for South Devon).
This month’s cases selected BWV involving 3 previously observed cases for reflection and 2 S&S and 2 UoF
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.
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]
JUNE 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 - Plymouth | 2 females
BWV 1 feedback to be provided:
Investigation, responses and learning required with:
Panel were unsure if the S&S was necessary as the grounds were not clear from the onset. Subjects being stopped as they were outside a ‘known area’ is not intelligence, nor is previous knowledge of a subject's prior behaviour.
Grounds became more developed as S&S progressed - officers appeared to use reasoning to fit after the fact. The stop seemed to be by association of females and knowledge of previous searches/conviction/criminality rather than genuine suspicion. For this reason, panel members questioned the ethics of speculative search.
Over officious officer - missing basics, making up laws as she went along about rights to search the subject's phone and having to give details about unknown car passengers.
Officers shouldn’t have discussed the subject’s past and her personal details in the street, especially when there are known concerns in place for her safety.
Officers did not run through GOWISELY in full with the first subject and only did so after a lot of conversation and information searching, legislation only with the second subject.
No information was provided about the search - even if the officer is the same sex, subjects should be kept informed of where they will be touched, especially as the subject disclosed she suffered from anxiety.
Panel did not assess the subject as receiving the best service the police could have provided.
Actions to be commended:
Officers changed tone when the subject mentioned anxiety.
Officers answered questions and didn’t shut the subjects down.
S&S BWV 1 ASSESSMENT
D&C POLICE RESPONSE TO S&S BWV 1
Officer’s response not received.
ASSESSING D&C POLICE USE OF FORCE [UOF]
JUNE 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 - Plymouth | Compliant Handcuffing and Taser Red Dot - Landlord Dispute
BWV 1 feedback to be provided:
Investigation, responses and learning required with:
The panel did not assess the officer as using de escalation - there was no dialogue or questioning with the subject before taser drawn.
Panel members noted a heavy handed approach and discussed if the lowest level of force was used.
The panel were confused re: lawfulness and ethics of officer entering someone’s private property with a tenants key - most people would react badly to someone letting themselves into your house with a drawn taser and officers' approach could have escalated the situation. By knocking on the door or announcing his entry, the officer could have prevented this.
The panel did not assess the officer as using policing powers constructively. Although there was information about a golf club, the male was at the top of the stairs holding a drill and some distance from the officer who could have used verbal commands rather than immediately drawing a taser to get him down the stairs.
Subject was concerned about his dogs being left without care - what happens in these situations? Need to communicate procedure with subject.
Actions to be commended:
Female officer’s breezy attitude and language helped deescalate.
D&C POLICE RESPONSE TO S&S BWV 1
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.
