MARCH 2024 REPORT (3-5pm)
MARCH 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 Superintendent Ian Thompson (West Cornwall BCU and Lead on Taser Scrutiny and Usage).
This month’s cases selected BWV involving subjects aged between 1-17 years.
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]
MARCH 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 - Young male passengers in car
BWV 1 feedback to be provided:
Investigation, responses and learning required with:
The officer needed to be more explicit and clear stating the grounds, rather than saying “the reason for grounds are what you’ve given me”.
Position of the officer's body-worn video needed addressing to show what was being handled / searched.
Subject was nervous and mentioned he was “scared right now” - this was an opportunity to address concerns and educate.
Officers reminded to verbalise their actions when touching the subject’s body throughout the search - not just their waistband.
Actions to be commended:
All panel members assessed this encounter as proportionate.
Subject was informed of BWV.
GOWISELY followed.
Officer was respectful, calm and friendly.
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 - young male reported with weapon
BWV 2 feedback to be provided:
Investigation, responses and learning required with:
The panel recognised the officer requested further context on the child and additional needs from the school staff member present, however as a minor with SEND and safeguarding needs, more details could have been sought, such as the subject’s age (identified late into the S&S) - provided earlier this might have given a clearer understanding of the individual.
Further communication with the vulnerable young person before starting S&S could have helped to calm him down. An explanation about why he was being stopped (grounds) may have alleviated some initial panic.
Subject was having a trauma response and behaviour suggested previous police trauma and trust issues. Officer’s language needed to be simplified and clearer at the start (such as avoiding words like ‘restraining’ that caused an emotional response.)
GOWISELY was not fully followed. Officer didn’t explicitly state grounds or legal power. The panel does appreciate this wording may have been adapted / missed to avoid further upset.
Officer reminded to verbalise their actions when touching the subject’s body throughout the search.
Police presence in these schools would be beneficial to address fears / trauma young people may have and educate on process / rights.
Panel ask if there are follow up welfare checks in cases like these?
Actions to be commended:
All panel members assessed this encounter as proportionate.
This could have very easily escalated - officer independently balanced S&S process, risk of weapon and subject welfare well.
When additional officers arrived on scene causing the subject to panic, escalation was quickly avoided by keeping them back, explaining reasons for attendance and reassuring the vulnerable subject that it was for everyone’s safety.
Officer addressed the subject's fears of “going to jail”.
Processed slowly, officer didn’t rush.
Officer showed emotional maturity, empathy and compassion for a very scared young male.
Brought in another responsible adult to support return to school when appropriate rather than a police officer.
Repetition, reiteration and reassurance of safety was excellent.
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.
Request case is referred to Section 136 Panel for scrutiny.
S&S Case 3 - young males running from police officers
BWV 3 feedback to be provided:
Investigation, responses and learning required with:
Officer initially shouting “stay there” in an aggressive tone at the subjects from the police van could have escalated the situation.
The panel was uncomfortable with this S&S and unsure if this encounter was necessary. Officers appeared to be fishing for grounds - mentioned ‘car break-ins’, ‘similar clothing’ but this would be section 1 of PACE which wasn’t mentioned. Subjects being out late, ‘suspicious’ and running appeared to be the only intel.
The search started before GOWISELY was started. Officers overstepped before the legal process.
GOWISELY was not fully followed.
Officers didn’t state what objects they were looking for. If it was car parts, this would have been visible in the subject’s coats.
Officers reminded to verbalise their actions when touching the subject’s body throughout the search.
There was inconsistency in how the 2 subjects were processed - only one male was asked his age and told the “grounds are the same as before.” Each S&S needs to be approached as a separate incident, run through all information separately with all subjects.
Panel members highlighted welfare concerns with 14-year old subjects being out at 4am. During the S&S, a condom was found and the officer stated “I’ve got no problem with that.” This is a safeguarding issue as the subject is underage for sex and evidence could indicate trafficking.
Actions to be commended:
Officers tone changed to more respectful once S&S started.
Third male was located and all 3 subjects taken home.
S&S 3 ASSESSMENT
D&C POLICE RESPONSE TO S&S BWV 3
Officer’s response not received.
ASSESSING D&C POLICE USE OF FORCE [UOF]
MARCH 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 - young male reported by mother
BWV 1 feedback to be provided:
Investigation, responses and learning required with:
Panel asks if both officers had their BWV turned on.
Some panel members were confused with what the officers wanted from the subject at the start - to see him, talk to him or for him to come out of his room. This lack of clarity may have contributed to the situation escalating.
Subject was pulled from the room and handcuffed - creating a physical interaction. However, officers did provide a warning beforehand re: handcuff use.
More information / communication could have been helpful when searching during S&S. Officers reminded to verbalise their actions when touching the subject’s body throughout the search.
The way this subject was presenting suggested signs of mental health or substance misuse issues. Subject should have been asked at the start about medication and wellbeing before they became noncompliant - may have helped with deescalation.
Actions to be commended:
Officers attempted to deescalate the situation with opportunities to comply.
Gave subject choices and options and asked if there was anything that would help to deescalate the situation.
Excellent execution safely removing a non-compliant subject in such a small space.
Both officers were calm, controlled and didn’t react unprofessionally to any hostility, swearing or threats from the subject.
Officers continued to listen and support the subject's welfare despite derogatory comments. Thorough check on handcuffs when the subject mentioned them hurting.
PLANTER was followed well.
Young person was placed in emergency accommodation following this.
UOF BWV 1 ASSESSMENT
D&C POLICE RESPONSE TO UOF BWV 1
The DCCS Panel commends this officer's actions and use of police powers in this particular case.
Awaiting confirmation regarding the assisting officer’s BWV use.
“Thank you for your time and contributions. I’ve really enjoyed joining this afternoon’s DCCS Panel scrutiny”
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.
