NOVEMBER 2022 REPORT
NOVEMBER 2022 REPORT
DCCSP members along with Chief Inspector Mark Beavan, Leanne Moorhouse (BWV subject matter expert) Karen Janicka observed six BWVs selected by the panel from the previous month's cases. The following identifies points to action, D&C Police responses, case assessments and outstanding areas that require investigation. Leanne Moorhouse updated the panel on body worn video retention: the system of saving non- evidential recordings for a period of 31 days was put in place in 2017 to comply with MOPI and GDPR. A thematic review of data retention is currently being consulted with a proposal to increase the period of time Stop & Search [S&S] footage is saved to 365 days, allowing greater time for investiging areas of concern.
Body Worn Video Assessment .
Body Worn Video Assessment .
ASSESSING D&C POLICE STOP AND SEARCHES [S&S]
NOVEMBER 2022 REPORT
Body Worn Videos
Via Microsoft Teams, at the start of each case BWV Systems Administrator Leanne Moorhouse 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 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 BWV 1 feedback to be provided
All panel members assessed the S&S as necessary.
The panel agreed the person's sensory needs coupled with age were not taken into consideration here. Subject was compliant, offering information but clearly uncomfortable.
The 15 year old subject raised a number of times that he was autistic and sensory challenged but the officer was dismissive and rude - panel felt uncomfortable with the way the officer spoke to subject, telling him to “stop fidgeting” - a difficult encounter for a very nervous young subject with sensory needs to follow and understand. Young male was very polite, honest and informative. Stated he ‘struggles with meds’. He was trying to follow police instructions.
Officer could have done more to put the subject at ease and listened to what the subject was telling them.
An explanation for the arrest should have been provided before handcuffing.
Young people cannot be expected to understand terms like PACE - more information should have been provided.
Training in trauma and after care / effects to a subject like this would be beneficial, as well as greater understanding of language use.
Panel didn’t hear all of GOWISELY.
Actions to be commended:
Search completed calmly, following the initial stop..
S&S BWV 1 ASSESSMENT
D&C POLICE RESPONSE TO S&S BWV 3
Officer’s response not received.
S&S BWV 2 feedback to be provided
Panel were unsure if S&S was necessary as it was unclear why this subject was stopped - no grounds, attempt to explain what’s happening, context, information, rights, or other elements of GOWISELY provided before search conducted.
Why were there so many officers for a single complaint subject?
‘Fits the description’ appears to be profiling. As does taking his vodka and money stating it’s “probably illegal”
The majority of the panel didn't think the S&S was proportionate and questioned why he was handcuffed - subject was compliant, surrounded by 6 officers and no chance of him getting away.
Some kindness, respect and additional information would have massively helped the situation. As a result the subject's demeanour changed.
Panel members were concerned about the ethics of this S&S - subject stated it was under duress and felt sexually rubbed multiple times, he wasn’t given proof or explanation even when asked, and didn't explain what they were doing with his finger (dishonestly told the subject they were taking his pulse but it was a fingerprint scanner - machine for pulse doesn’t exist) and rather than explain, became quite confrontational and said they'd do it by force otherwise.
S&S felt very rushed and needed to slow down. BWV had poor sound / dialogue very mumbled.
No evidence was found.
GOWISELY was not followed.
The majority of the panel felt this was not the best service the police could have provided - officers need training in the necessity of GOWISELY, effective communication with subjects and addressing officers aggressive tone and approach.
S&S 2 ASSESSMENT
D&C POLICE RESPONSE TO S&S BWV 3
Officer’s response not received.
S&S BWV 3 feedback to be provided
Panel assessed this S&S as proportionate and ethical.
Officers demeanour was calm, courteous, caring and professional despite antagonising language from intoxicated subject - could have easily become confrontational. Good humour used, kept talking to him, which calmed and reassured.
These officers were very respectful and efficient, quickly earning trust and showed care and attention. When the subject said ' I don't want to be here... ' officers continued the conversation with him.
The officers who took him to the toilet and helped him to the hospital - panel would like to thank you for your care and respect, as well as stopping something potentially more serious occurring.
S&S 3 ASSESSMENT
D&C POLICE RESPONSE TO S&S BWV 3
Officer’s response not received.
S&S BWV 4 feedback to be provided
Some panel members were unsure if the S&S was necessary or proportionate as the explanation was provided after subject was handcuffed.
GOWISELY was not very clear- run through very quickly, hard to hear / understand.
Subject is a vulnerable missing child who appears intoxicated - what after care was put in place after being taken back to carers?
Actions to be commended:GOWISELY was followed
Mixed team, male and female officers worked really well and appropriately here.
Female officer completed the search with respect and took into account that the subject may have been scared and informed her of what they were doing and when.
Delivered professionally with care and attention, built a rapport and made sure she was comfortable.
S&S 4 ASSESSMENT
D&C POLICE RESPONSE TO S&S BWV 3
Officer’s response not received.
ASSESSING D&C POLICE USE OF FORCE [UOF]
NOVEMBER 2022 REPORT
Body Worn Videos
Via Microsoft Teams, at the start of each case BWV Systems Administrator Leanne Moorhouse 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 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.
PROPORTIONATE amount of force
LENGTH of force used
ACTIONS of subject warranted use of force
NECESSARY to use force to protect
TYPE used was minimum appropriate
ETHICAL to use force in situation
REASONABLE for officer to employ
UOF BWV 1 feedback to be provided
Panel did not observe deescalation techniques initially from officers - instead they were led by ‘dad’, letting him talk to the child, leaving the room when asked and helping him with restraint. How do we know ‘dad's’ presence wasn't upsetting the child as he clearly didn’t want to be touched by him? Could the situation have deescalated if officers had removed him / sought alternative professional support?
Panel asked if different use of force training is given for under 11s?
Efforts by male in the room did not keep the child calm, causing injuries to his knees, spitting / biting aimed at ‘dad’ and officers, and there was evidence of previous self harm, panel members were concerned about such a subject being left in room even with a foot in the door.
Panel asks for assurance that pava spray was not used on the child in ‘previous encounter’ with police as mentioned.
Medical attention: panel asks for assurance that support is being given to the child by agencies / CAMHS.
Not clear if care home or foster - did the subject have a care plan or risk assessment that could have helped?
With so many people, words and plans could have helped the child.
Missing information in report - no ‘Officer station’ identified.
Missing information in report - no ‘Time since Safety Training’ identified.
Actions to be commended:PLANTER was followed.
Acted professionally, calmly and patiently.
Very considerate to ‘dad’ and subject.
Officers ceased using force when they could and gave child options.
UOF BWV 1 ASSESSMENT
D&C POLICE RESPONSE TO S&S BWV 3
Officer’s response not received.
UOF BWV 2 feedback to be provided
Panel members noted this case as concerning and an example of how S&S should not be conducted / result in use of force.
The panel did not observe any deescalation for this e-scooter stop.
Grounds of the initial search was not provided until after the use of force.
All panel members assessed the actions of the officer as unprofessional and aggressive towards the young male, which escalated the incident very quickly.
The panel did not agree that PLANTER was followed well as force was not ethical, proportionate or reasonable in this situation.
The majority of panel members felt there was bias - the officer was disrespectful to the subject, used threatening language, an aggressive tone, and made personal comments. This thuggish behaviour - ‘us vs them’ attitude is extremely damaging to police-community relations.
UOF BWV 2 ASSESSMENT
D&C POLICE RESPONSE TO S&S BWV 3
Officer’s response not received.
“This provides incredibly valuable insight as a BCU commander”
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
