FEBRUARY 2024 REPORT (3-5pm)
FEBRUARY 2024 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 Detective Superintendent Scott Bradley (acting Plymouth BCU in Matt Longman’s absence).
DCCS Panel Chair Nathan Kiyaga shared the latest changes based on the panel’s feedback:
a new Resources section on the website to share with others / access.
new alternative accessible forms for those who'd prefer tick box responses instead of text.
an update on D&C Police new streamlined approach to BWV retention.
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]
FEBRUARY 2024 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 - female stopped at 3am
BWV 1 feedback to be provided:
Investigation, responses and learning required with:
Some panel members were unsure if this encounter was necessary as earlier conversation with context / grounds was not captured by BWV.
Some panel members raised concerns re: ethics of officers questioning the subject about their medication and whether they were known to the police. This could be perceived as care but in this context, it raised alarms. There should be a balance of appropriate questions and the subject being told they have the right to not answer. It helps with relationships to let people know you don’t have to answer questions. The panel understands asking about medication may be to avoid issues if pills were found, however it would be good practice to share this reasoning with the subject.
More explanation of the search as it was taking place would be positive, especially being a female alone at this time of night.
Actions to be commended:
All panel members assessed this encounter as proportionate.
Good practice to observe the female officer conducting the search.
Officer was respectful, calm and polite.
GOWISELY was fully followed.
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 - female reported by bus security
BWV 2 feedback to be provided:
Investigation, responses and learning required with:
The panel were unsure if this encounter was proportionate. With 4 officers in attendance as well as security, there didn’t appear to be a need to hold or handcuff the subject who was calm and compliant.
The panel were unsure if this encounter was ethical as due to officers' language and instructions being unclear and unnecessary.
Section 50 was being used for obtaining subject’s name and DOB but this is for name and address - abuse of power - training required in legislation.
The panel strongly recommends officers avoid using informal, sexist language: ‘my love’, ‘darling’.
More support, empathy and reassurance could have been given for the subject as a vulnerable, homeless person who was anxious about missing the last bus and their bed allocation (repeatedly mentioned it but it wasn’t addressed).
When the subject disclosed she had cannabis concealed in her bra, she should have been taken somewhere more discreet for the search than a public bus station surrounded by males.
Police BWV expert was unable to find a record of the female officer who conducted the search - panel requests officer’s shoulder number to check their BWV was turned on. Reporting officer’s camera was pointed in the wrong direction so no visibility.
During the search, the officer didn’t explain what was happening - this process prevents escalation and trauma.
GOWISELY was followed (although not immediately and some sections were unclear / difficult to hear due to raised voices).
Actions to be commended:
Panel assessed this S&S as necessary due to the intelligence received.
Female officer patiently communicated with the subject and was able to obtain the subject's name. Conversation was more effective than direct confrontation.
Officer asked for the subject's email so she had an electronic receipt of the search.
S&S BWV 2 ASSESSMENT
D&C POLICE RESPONSE TO S&S BWV 2
Officer’s response not received.
Awaiting further investigation into BWV availability.
S&S Case 3 - report of male collapsed on the road
BWV 3 feedback to be provided:
Investigation, responses and learning required with:
The panel were unsure if this encounter was necessary - the vulnerable subject clearly needed help and to be moved out of the road. Understand that police may have responded to the call instead of paramedics as they were close-by but a wellbeing check would have been more suited. Was this followed up? Person-centred approach required in this context.
Panel members were unsure if this encounter was proportionate. There was not enough concern for the subject's health and condition, especially after he disclosed being in the hospital earlier.
Panel members were unsure if this encounter was ethical. Subject needed support rather than a search which didn’t achieve / produce anything. Officers seemed to get together to decide what legislation they could use to conduct a search. Officers stated “he admitted to drugs so could use section 23”, but when observing this footage, the panel noted the subject did not say this. NOT TRUTHFUL (to be investigated by TC - refer to professional standards if this is the case)
Officers told the radio comms that the subject was detained but didn’t state this to the subject.
GOWISELY was not followed. Grounds were not lawful. Officers talked very quickly - hard for the panel to understand, let alone the subject in that context.
Search was not talked through - prevents escalation.
Use of language was informal and unprofessional - constant use of the word ‘mate’ when primary aim appears to be search rather than medical welfare.
Actions to be commended
Moved subject away from another member of public who was speaking to officers.
Took subject to The Salvation Army and arranged a bed for the night.
S&S 3 ASSESSMENT
D&C POLICE RESPONSE TO S&S BWV 3
Response received from officer: “I believe that the primary form of safeguarding was that the male was taken out of a dangerous position where he had been lying in the road. I spoke to Salvation Army staff who were familiar with him as he had been staying there as part of the rough sleeper program and raised that if there was any deterioration in his condition that it may be appropriate to consider calling ambulance services.”
Panel acknowledges officer’s response: “Whilst we are appreciative of the response, we sense that there might be a passing of responsibility. Further checks on the subject or calling an ambulance would have been better practice as Salvation Army members may not have similar access to triaging systems.”
Awaiting TC further investigation.
ASSESSING D&C POLICE USE OF FORCE [UOF]
FEBRUARY 2024 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 - allegations of female dealing drugs in taxi
BWV 1 feedback to be provided:
Investigation, responses and learning required with:
Started with S&S which quickly escalated into use of force.
When told to stand up, a male officer immediately put the subject’s arms behind her back despite being compliant and unstable as she was intoxicated.
The panel assessed male officers' language and actions as reactionary and escalating the incident. The subject could have been arrested for public order offences and taken off the street.
Male officer used repeated patronising, informal, sexist language “love” - not professional. Training needed for this communication across the force - seen repeatedly.
Some panel members assessed male officers as reacting to subject’s name calling / insults.
Male officers should have stepped back and female officer led the incident - the subject asked just to deal with her and had a better demeanour. Incident could have been a lot calmer.
The panel were unsure if the welfare and wellbeing of the subject was considered as the angle of BWV made UOF difficult to observe. Female officer was heard saying “be careful of her head” - was this impact on the concrete followed up?
The panel were unsure if PLANTER was fully followed.
All panel members assessed that in this context, the subject did not receive the best service the police could have provided.
Actions to be commended:
Officers were friendly and calm at the start of the incident.
Panel members assessed the female officer as professional and respectful throughout. Her actions and communication helped to de-escalate: sitting the subject back up after UOF, asking for subject’s permission, covering the subject up when clothing moved, kept subject’s focus by speaking to her / asking questions / keeping informed.
UOF BWV 1 ASSESSMENT
D&C POLICE RESPONSE TO UOF BWV 1
Officer’s response not received.
“The DCCS Panel provides an absolute wealth of knowledge - it is such a benefit to see the world through a lens that we don’t always perceive”
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.
