Quickly exit this site by pressing the Escape key Leave this site
We use some essential cookies to make our website work. We’d like to set additional cookies so we can remember your preferences and understand how you use our site.
You can manage your preferences and cookie settings at any time by clicking on “Customise Cookies” below. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Cookies notice.
Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can update your cookie settings at any time on the cookies page.
Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can update your cookie settings at any time on the cookies page.
Sorry, there was a technical problem. Please try again.
This site is a beta, which means it's a work in progress and we'll be adding more to it over the next few weeks. Your feedback helps us make things better, so please let us know what you think.
Title: IOPC Learning Recommendation Made Under Paragraph 28A of Schedule 3 to the Police Reform Act 2002
MPS Reference: PC/2907/20
Author: Prevention and Learning Team, Directorate of Professional Standards, Metropolitan Police Service
A man was stopped and searched by Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) officers in London. During the search, one of the officers used force comprised of kneeling on his neck for around four minutes.
The IOPC recommends that the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) takes immediate steps to ensure that Borough Commanders ensure their Professional Standards Units (PSUs) are adhering to their legal duty under Schedule 3, Part 1 of the Police Reform Act (PRA) 2002 to preserve evidence relating to complaints.
This follows an IOPC investigation in which a complaint made by a member of the public was allocated to an officer within the local PSU, before being referred to the IOPC months later. The PSU officer took no investigative steps, such as reviewing the existing material, securing local council CCTV or contacting potential witnesses, as they said they were waiting on the complainant to confirm the heads of their complaint. They also said that, as the matter had initially been assessed as misconduct only, it was not proportionate to conduct fast time actions such as securing CCTV. When the officer did review the existing material for the complaint, two months after allocation, they identified that the matter should be assessed as gross misconduct, and it was referred to the IOPC. By this time, local council CCTV was no longer available and opportunities to obtain eye witness accounts had been lost.
This case is not an isolated incident, as similar issues have been identified through our Oversight work and on other IOPC cases that have initially been allocated to PSUs. In one such case, the complainant was waiting in a queue for allocation to a PSU officer for 6 months, during which time opportunities to preserve evidence were lost and the confidence of the complainant in the complaints process was impacted.
If this recommendation is accepted by the MPS, as the duty to preserve evidence is a legal requirement, the IOPC are requesting a letter of assurance from the Commander of the Directorate of Professional Standards (DPS) setting out the steps they will be taking to ensure this legal obligation is being complied with.
The MPS accepts the IOPC’s recommendation and have taken the following steps to ensure that Basic Command Unit (BCU) Commanders ensure their Professional Standards Units (PSUs) are adhering to their legal duty under Schedule 3, Part 1 of the Police Reform Act (PRA) 2002 to preserve evidence relating to complaints.
On 8th July 2021, the Directorate of Professional Standards (DPS) Prevention and Learning Team (P&L) Engagement Team sent an e-mail to all MPS Professional Standards Units (PSU) and Appropriate Authorities (AA) reminding them of their responsibilities and legal duties to preserve evidence relating to complaints. It was emphasised that complaint handlers must look to secure any potential and all available evidence at the earliest opportunity. Any decision by a complaint handler to not carry out a particular line of enquiry, must be documented appropriately so it can be included with any background papers, should the complaint be subject to a subsequent review.
The Commander for the DPS has written separately to the three NPCC Commanders for Frontline Policing who have responsibility for all BCUs, to disseminate a letter he has written to the BCU Commanders reminding them of their legal responsibilities and duties, and requesting that they enforce this message across their Commands.
DPS P&L are in the process of creating a comprehensive investigators toolkit for complaint handlers which will include, but is not limited to, the following;
1. The necessity to secure and preserve evidence.
2. The responsibilities of the AA and the investigator to ensure a reasonable and proportionate investigation is conducted.
3. To focus on ensuring evidence is secured at an early stage to prevent loss.
4. Discretion should be exercised to ensure resources are used in the most efficient way and that the investigating officer should document what evidence has been identified and why it is not being secured.
5. Officers will be reminded that criminal powers of seizure do not apply to complaint/conduct matters unless there is an allegation of criminality, for example, misconduct in public office.
6. The Severity Assessment to include a section for the AA to specify the known evidence and the AA’s instructions on securing it.
This will be delivered in three phases, the first being anticipated in September 2021* and concluding December 2021. The material will be shared with the IOPC as part of this investigation
In addition to the above, the DPS P&L Engagement Team will create a checklist to be completed on receipt of a complaint to ensure that any potential early evidence is considered and where appropriate seized. This will be disseminated to all complaint handlers and investigators and shared as above
Whilst the MPS accepts this recommendation the MPS Commander for DPS does not have governance over PSUs, they are under the Commanders for Frontline Policing (FLP). The Commander has written to each of the FLP commanders to ensure they are fully sighted on the recommendation and the approach that is required.
*This has been delayed until March 2022.