SEPTEMBER 2024 REPORT (7-9pm)
SEPTEMBER 2024 REPORT
DCCS Panel members along with Chief Inspector Tom Cunningham, Karen Janicka (BWV Subject Matter Expert for Devon & Cornwall) and Lauren Duguid (Assist BWV Subject Matter Expert) welcomed new panel members and visiting Chief Superintendent Scott Bradley with BCU Commander for Plymouth, Rachel Bailey - Chair of Dorset’s Scrutiny Panel
This month’s cases selected BWV involving the time of year (high tourist periods) - August. Areas - Plymouth / North & West Devon. Ethnicities - Asian, Black, Other
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]
SEPTEMBER 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 - Information provided by member of the public regarding drug dealing by two black males in Plymouth:
Investigation, responses and learning required with:
Questionable necessity and intelligence: several Panel members questioned the necessity of the stop and search, especially since nothing was found and the intelligence appeared weak. There were concerns about the reliability of the information provided by an’ off-duty officer’ who didn’t show credentials. More due diligence in gathering intelligence was recommended before conducting such encounters.
The Panel was unsure if this encounter was proportionate. The use of handcuffs was seen as unnecessary, given the subject’s compliance. Some panel members felt the handcuffs could have been avoided, particularly since there was no clear indication of danger or intoxication.
The Panel was unsure if this encounter was ethical. Some Panel members raised concerns about potential bias, particularly around the "othering" of the subject, such as asking where they were from. One Panel member pointed out that this could reflect unconscious bias.
The search took place in public view, which some felt compromised the subject’s dignity.
Some Panel members felt that the officer conducting the search appeared uncertain, particularly with delivering GOWISELY and explaining entitlement to a copy of the search record. This could have been improved with more confidence or further training in delivering stop and search protocols smoothly.
It was assessed that a male officer would have been more appropriate for conducting the search, especially since the subject was male, and there were three male officers present during this incident.
Missed opportunity for learning in a calm interaction - explaining to the subject why their behaviour was concerning, and what their rights are.
Actions to be commended:
Professionalism and courtesy: officers were generally polite and professional during the stop and search, with several panel members noting that officers explained their actions well. The officer conducting the search apologised when nothing was found and thanked the subject for their time, demonstrating respect and maintaining rapport.
GOWISELY was covered.
The subject was compliant, and officers acknowledged this, which contributed to a smoother encounter. The stop and search was efficient and polite, minimising unnecessary tension in what could be a stressful situation for the subject.
Response received from visiting BCU Commander Scott Bradley
“The type of activity described is normally an indication of criminal activity in the night time economy, Who reported it is not relevant. Officers could have been more discreet - moved the other subject further out of view.
I would have preferred to see more professional curiosity and communication on any plausible reason for the subject frequenting the toilet so that powers may not have needed to be exercised.”
S&S BWV 1 ASSESSMENT
D&C POLICE RESPONSE TO UOF BWV 1
Officer’s response not received
Panel response:
The DCCS Panel recognises that there are areas of excellent practice from this officer and areas of learning. May the former be a strong foundation for the latter.
S&S Case 2 - Report of black male bleeding and wearing black shorts seen with a knife in Plymouth city centre:
Investigation, responses and learning required with:
The Panel asks why there is no NICHE reference number.
Unclear necessity and intelligence: several Panel members questioned whether the stop and search were necessary, as the intelligence was deemed weak. The description given did not entirely match the individual stopped (e.g., no black shorts and not visibly bleeding), and there was concern that the officer may have acted on vague or unreliable information.
Some Panel members felt that the officer should have listened more carefully to the individual's explanation of their movements. Deeper questioning from the start might have revealed sooner that the subject was not the person they were looking for and saved time for both the police and the subject.
Concerns around bias and profiling: there were concerns that racial bias might have played a role in the encounter, with one Panel member asking if this was a case of "any black man will do" based on the vague report of a suspect. A couple of members noted that the way the suspect was “pointed out” by a member of the public did not seem to happen as described, raising questions about the accuracy of the information and whether the individual was profiled based on race.
GOWISELY was not fully covered.
Public understanding of police powers and terminology is limited, and officers need to explain these clearly, avoiding jargon that may confuse the subject.
Some Panel members noted that there appeared to be a disproportionate number of officers present for the situation, which could have been intimidating for the individual. Additionally, a second officer attempted to handcuff the subject even after the initial officer indicated it was not necessary, raising concerns about bias and leadership among the officers.
Although the situation remained calm due to the subject’s compliance, some Panel members felt the initial approach could have been perceived as escalating (no introduction or explanation of what was happening), particularly with the presence of multiple officers. This highlights the importance of ensuring the initial approach does not heighten tension unnecessarily.
Some Panel members were concerned by the lack of humility with an incorrectly stopped subject, as well as the subsequent lack of action to find the reported male who was bleeding with a knife.
The Panel asks if anything more can be done with the no further action cases to improve the police service and intelligence acted on?
Actions to be commended:
Multiple panel members noted that the officer remained calm and professional throughout the stop and search.
Despite the suspicion of a weapon, the first officer chose not to immediately use handcuffs.
Response received from visiting BCU Commander Scott Bradley
“We are duty bound to act on intelligence given by the community. However, we need to do our best to assess and obtain more information where required, and resolve a case without use of police power where possible.
There were discrepancies in language used - ‘you’ve been pointed out’ changed to, ‘based on description’, then back to being ‘pointed out’. This is a concern as it was a description and direction of travel - not pointed out. In the initial description, there were discrepancies - said the subject was bleeding, which this stopped individual clearly wasn’t. There was enough concern to get further details from the original member of the public who reported it but there should have been a greater degree of professional curiosity before the search.
Interaction was relatively polite but not proportionate with the second officer physically engaging with the subject which could have escalated the situation.
The initial interaction also needed to be dealt with differently.”
S&S BWV 2 ASSESSMENT
D&C POLICE RESPONSE TO UOF BWV 2
Officer’s response not received
ASSESSING D&C POLICE USE OF FORCE [UOF]
SEPTEMBER 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 - Lone officer called to a street fight where white female was knocked to the ground by white male:
Investigation, responses and learning required with:
Panel members were concerned with the lack of assertiveness and clear leadership in a very chaotic incident. The officer took cues from others present rather than taking control of the situation, resulting in confusion.
Some Panel members stated it was unclear who the aggressor was, yet the subject restrained by another was treated as the perpetrator. The officer appeared to accept the word of the individual doing the restraining without investigating further, stating at one point “not a clue what’s going on”. This confusion contributed to a situation where those present continued the incident, with the male verbally abusing and condescendingly hitting the subject’s arm whilst he was handcuffed.
The Panel was unsure if PLANTER was fully followed.
The Panel assessed that in this context, the subject did not receive the best service the police could have provided.
Some Panel members raised concerns about the subject’s wellbeing - his hand angle didn’t look like the handcuffs had been put on correctly by the unknown male, and the subject was in pain. The Panel asked if first aid was given to the subject who was bleeding.
Actions to be commended:
Officers made efforts to address the subject's discomfort, loosening the cuffs when requested and showing concern for the subject's welfare.
Response received from visiting BCU Commander Scott Bradley
“As it was a lone officer, may have caused further issues to be overly controlling in this scene when so outnumbered but leadership was needed and would have liked to have seen the handcuffs adjusted and pain alleviated sooner. There would have been further questions and investigation into this incident when more officers arrived on scene. Resources are a challenge and lone officers happen more often than we like.”
UOF BWV 1 ASSESSMENT
D&C POLICE RESPONSE TO UOF BWV 1
Officer’s response not received
UOF Case 2 - Female in mental health crisis who ran away from the hospital:
Investigation, responses and learning required with:
The Panel asks why there is no NICHE reference number.
Several panel members raised the concern that all the officers present were male, which could have exacerbated the distress of a young, vulnerable female subject. A suggestion was made that female officer backup should have been requested to provide a more sensitive approach. This was highlighted in multiple responses, particularly when dealing with mental health or trauma-related issues.
Some Panellists expressed concern over whether a trauma-informed approach was adequately applied, particularly regarding whether Section 136 mental health support was called. There was a suggestion that the situation might have been managed without physical restraint if the officers had employed more trauma-informed techniques.
Actions to be commended:
The officers made several efforts to de-escalate the situation. Their handling was described as calm, patient, and professional. Several comments highlighted that the officers showed compassion and care, particularly towards a distressed female subject, with no alternative but to return her to the hospital for her safety. Officers repeatedly reassured the subject she wasn’t in trouble, used her name, and explained the reasons for their actions.
The majority of Panel members assessed the use of force as proportionate and necessary.
PLANTER was followed.
The officers were mindful of the subject's mental health, recognising her distress and need for medical attention.
Panel members unanimously agreed that there was no discrimination, bias, or prejudice involved in the officers' actions. The treatment of the subject was described as fair and proportionate.
Response received from visiting BCU Commander Scott Bradley
“Ongoing challenge to make the police service represent the community - benefits of having male and female officers is something we strive to achieve. Better use could have been made of the female member of the public who was off-duty NHS staff. Or an opportunity to use boyfriend present to help de escalate the situation. It is a difficult balance to prevent harm to the subject themselves and others even if they reassure officers they won’t do anything.
The subject was detained for her own safety to get proper care and attention that police are unable to provide.”
UOF BWV 2 ASSESSMENT
D&C POLICE RESPONSE TO UOF BWV 2
Officer’s response not received
Panel response:
The DCCS Panel recognises that there are areas of excellent practice from this officer and areas of learning. May the former be a strong foundation for the latter.
“I walk away from every scrutiny panel more enlightened not only with how my staff engage with the public but how panel members perceive these cases”
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.
