Jermaine Baker Inquiry

There should be clearer guidance from the MPS, College of Policing and/or the NPCC on the separation of roles between the Senior Investigating Officer (SIO) and the Tactical and Strategic Firearms Commanders (TFC and SFC). The guidance should be clear that not only should the SIO and TFC/SFC be different individuals, but the importance of the separation of responsibilities under those roles should also be emphasised.

In October 2022, the College of Policing stated that it was drafting amendments to national armed policing guidance and training curriculum content to further clarify and emphasise the separation of command and investigation responsibilities (Andy Walker response, Oct 2022). The Metropolitan Police Service reported in the same month that an interim policy remained in force requiring strategic firearms commanders to come from its firearms command to guarantee separation from investigators (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022). The record holds no update since the College of Policing's response of October 2022 (Andy Walker response, Oct 2022).

Training should emphasise that multidimensional risk assessments must be carried out throughout police operations, including the planning and briefing of operations. Those risk assessments should assess the future threat and risk at all stages of the operation.

In October 2022, the College of Policing stated that the national armed policing training curriculum emphasised multidimensional threat assessment throughout operations, and it was drafting an amendment to Authorised Professional Practice to detail the requirement further (Andy Walker response, Oct 2022). The Metropolitan Police Service reported in October 2022 that it was supporting the development of national command log templates to assist commanders in recording these assessments (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022). The record holds no update since the College of Policing's response of October 2022 (Andy Walker response, Oct 2022).

In order to provide for efficacy and transparency, the NPCC and College of Policing should be tasked with providing a document management system for FA (and equivalent) forms. The system should allow for the auditing of completion and submission dates as well as version management.

Andy Walker, writing for the College of Policing and NPCC Armed Policing in October 2022, stated that national bodies cannot mandate a single document management system, though forces were advised to use CLIO as an interim measure while the NPCC's D-DaCS project worked on a long-term solution and the College drafted revised guidance on version control (Andy Walker response, Oct 2022). The Metropolitan Police Service confirmed in October 2022 that it continued using FA forms because adopting CLIO required substantial additional training for officers outside firearms command (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022). The record holds no update since the Metropolitan Police Service's response of October 2022 (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022).

There should be an amendment to FA (and equivalent) forms to: a. encourage a multidimensional risk assessment (to comply with Article 2) to minimise, to the greatest extent possible, recourse to lethal force; b. include a provision for reference to evidential and, where appropriate, geographical tipping points; c. include a dedicated box on the FA2 form to be completed when no FA1 form has been completed, with an explanation for the reason therefor; d. include the provision (and the requirement) for updating the forms during the course of an operation.

Writing for the College of Policing and NPCC Armed Policing in October 2022, Andy Walker stated that an ongoing national review of command log standards would explicitly reflect the recommendation's requirements, with the results to be incorporated into authorised professional practice (Andy Walker response, Oct 2022). The Metropolitan Police Service reported in October 2022 that it had issued interim guidance to tactical advisers, but noted that further force guidance and training remained dependent on the national review (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022). The record holds no update since the Metropolitan Police Service's response of October 2022 (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022).

Appropriate training and refresher courses on the usage and completion of FA (and equivalent) forms should be made compulsory for firearms commanders and Tactical Advisors.

In October 2022, the College of Policing stated that it was reviewing firearms commander training programmes to ensure that sufficient time is dedicated to completing command logs (Andy Walker response, Oct 2022). The Metropolitan Police Service reported in the same month that it had set aside training time for firearms authorisation forms, but noted that further training in their use and completion remained outstanding pending national command log revisions (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022). The record holds no update since the Metropolitan Police Service's response of October 2022 (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022).

The NPCC should commission a national review of the frequency with which this strategic option is used and its efficacy. The NPCC should consider whether contain and call out is being given meaningful consideration in the planning of armed deployments.

In October 2022, Andy Walker of the College of Policing, writing for the College and NPCC Armed Policing, stated that the review commissioned by the National Police Chiefs' Council would be restricted to containment and call out from vehicles, incorporating a retrospective statistical audit and consideration of doctrine and training (Andy Walker response, Oct 2022). The Metropolitan Police Service confirmed in October 2022 that it had offered to support the review and continued to train firearms officers in the tactic (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022). The record holds no update since the Metropolitan Police Service's response of October 2022 (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022).

MPS Armed Policing Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) to be amended so that: a. Notes and/or audio recordings should be made of all meetings in relation to general strategy where it is envisaged that firearms may or will be deployed during the course of a planned operation, and training given to explain why it is so important – for reasons of accountability and to establish an audit trail. b. Such notes should include the date, location and duration of the meeting, the identity of those present, the capacity in which they are attending, and details of decisions made and actions accepted or rejected. c. All planning meetings should be properly minuted and the minutes thereof should be centrally retained. d. All briefings relating to firearms operations should be audio-recorded unless it is not reasonably practicable on the grounds of sensitivity of information/intelligence to do so, in which case they should be minuted in the same way as planning meetings.

The Metropolitan Police Service stated in October 2022 that it had issued internal guidance requiring planning meetings for authorised armed operations to be comprehensively minuted, and had reviewed training to ensure proper record keeping across operational roles (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022). It added in October 2022 that recording all firearms briefings remained under national review alongside the College of Policing, after which it would consider necessary amendments to its standard operating procedure (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022). The record holds no update since the Metropolitan Police Service's response of October 2022 (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022).

The NPCC and/or College of Policing should ensure that these amendments are reflected in the guidance and training given to forces nationally.

In October 2022, Andy Walker, writing on behalf of the College of Policing and NPCC Armed Policing, stated that existing national guidance lacked the recommended detail and that Authorised Professional Practice on recording armed operation briefings was being reviewed (Andy Walker response, Oct 2022). The Metropolitan Police Service stated in October 2022 that recording firearms briefings remained under review with national colleagues, leaving revised guidance outstanding (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022). The record holds no update since the Metropolitan Police Service's response of October 2022 (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022).

The College of Policing's Authorised Professional Practice – Armed Policing (APP-AP) should clarify that, during the course of an operation, any relevant intelligence should be briefed out to the firearms officers even if it is appropriate, in the circumstances, to provide clarification or a limitation warning together with the intelligence.

The College of Policing stated in October 2022 that it was reviewing Authorised Professional Practice to assess whether further guidance could be included regarding "limitation warnings", and would examine curriculum content to clarify terminology (Andy Walker response, Oct 2022). The Metropolitan Police Service stated in October 2022 that it had conveyed its willingness to assist with the review (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022). The record holds no update since the Metropolitan Police Service's response of October 2022 (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022).

When intelligence is being provided, the use of any language that is capable of misinterpretation is to be avoided. Training to address this point should be provided to all officers and staff directly or indirectly involved in armed operations.

Andy Walker, Head of Delivery, Uniformed Policing, stated on behalf of the College of Policing and NPCC Armed Policing in October 2022 that it was reviewing Authorised Professional Practice to assess whether to include guidance on "limitation warnings" and reviewing curriculum content to clarify terminology (Andy Walker response, Oct 2022). The Metropolitan Police Service stated in October 2022 that it was actively reviewing steps to address consistency of language between armed operations personnel alongside that national review (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022). The record holds no update since the Metropolitan Police Service's response of October 2022 (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022).

Only those officers who have received the requisite training and accreditation should be posted to a Covert Monitoring Post (CMP).

The Inquiry recommended staffing covert monitoring posts exclusively with trained, accredited officers. In October 2022, the Metropolitan Police Service reported that internal guidance restricts postings to trained and authorised personnel, that all its operatives met applicable standards, and that further courses running through January 2023 would train 60 additional managers (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022). In a letter that month, Chris Haward, National Police Chiefs' Council (NPCC) Lead for Surveillance, stated that relevant standards were published on the College of Policing Learning Hub to widen access, with an ambition to ensure all training is delivered by the College or recognised providers (Chris Haward response, Oct 2022). The record holds nothing dated later than the response of October 2022 (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022).

There should be clear and unequivocal written guidance for the CMP from the TFC as to the key information and intelligence that is being sought.

The Inquiry recommended clear written guidance from tactical commanders to covert monitoring posts. In October 2022, the Metropolitan Police Service reported that an amended Surveillance Manual of Standards addressing the recommendation was in draft under National Police Chiefs Council (NPCC) governance following review by the National Covert Monitoring Post Working Group (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022). Earlier in October 2022, Chris Haward, NPCC Lead for Surveillance, stated that the manual would be updated to require post decision logs to record written guidance from commanders on key intelligence sought (Chris Haward response, Oct 2022). The record holds nothing dated later than the response of October 2022 (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022).

The training referred to in paragraph 15.11 must emphasise the importance of covert monitoring officers (CMOs) making accurate notes of: (a) what they have heard; and (b) what they have passed on.

The Inquiry asked for covert monitoring officer training to emphasise accurate note-taking. In October 2022, the Metropolitan Police Service stated that accurate note-taking and organised dissemination systems are explored in its covert monitoring post awareness course and H2 training (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022). That same month, Chris Haward, National Police Chiefs Council (NPCC) Lead for Surveillance, stated that surveillance standards would be strengthened to require staff to maintain an accurate contemporaneous record of what they have heard and what they have passed on (Chris Haward response, Oct 2022). The record holds nothing dated later than the response of October 2022 (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022).

CMPs should not be established without the appointment of a properly trained CMP manager, whose responsibility it should be to appoint a team of CMOs, once satisfied from proper assessment as to their qualifications and ability.

The Inquiry recommended requiring trained managers to oversee covert monitoring posts and appoint staff. In October 2022, the Metropolitan Police Service stated that internal guidance reaffirmed that covert monitoring posts cannot be established without an accredited manager, who appoints appropriately trained operatives and whose appointment must be verified before technical surveillance support is approved (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022). In October 2022, Chris Haward, National Police Chiefs' Council (NPCC) Lead for Surveillance, stated in a letter that national surveillance standards were being updated to require that an appointed manager ensure all post staff are competent, licensed, and authorised (Chris Haward response, Oct 2022). The record holds nothing dated later than the response of October 2022 (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022).

When a CMP is being used to gather evidence or intelligence, the MPS (and other forces) should consider developing an SOP to ensure that the information is adequately recorded to provide a clear audit trail.

In October 2022, the Metropolitan Police Service stated that it had not yet developed a standard operating procedure because of anticipated changes to digital platforms, adding that further consideration would follow the introduction of national technical solutions (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022). Earlier in October 2022, Chris Haward, NPCC Lead for Surveillance, reported that a Situational Awareness system was in procurement and implementation while a Decision and Case Management System remained in design and development (Chris Haward response, Oct 2022). The record holds no update since the Metropolitan Police Service's response of October 2022 (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022).

APP-AP should be amended to cover the following: a. Sustained public protection should never be the object of an operation unless and until there is a clearly recorded note of the possible charge(s) that are anticipated, the evidence that will be required to establish guilt, the evidential (and, if appropriate, geographical) tipping points, and the probable sentence – expressed if necessary as a range within which the sentence is likely to fall, at the conclusion of any trial. b. This may necessitate the involvement of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), whose early advice should be sought if there is any uncertainty as to any of the matters set out in paragraph 15.16a. c. Written sentencing guidelines exist for almost all serious offences and, like the Criminal Procedure Rules (see paragraph 15.21), should be readily accessible to inform any opinion as to the probable sentence (see paragraph 15.16a).

In October 2022, Andy Walker for the College of Policing and NPCC Armed Policing stated that the bodies were seeking legal and Crown Prosecution Service advice regarding necessary amendments to current guidance (Andy Walker response, Oct 2022). The Metropolitan Police Service stated in the same month that it was considering the recommendation and any contribution it could make to the response, observing that sustained public protection is broader than conviction and imprisonment alone (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022). The record holds no update since the Metropolitan Police Service's response of October 2022 (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022).

Police medic training should emphasise that, in cases of catastrophic external torso haemorrhage, the immediate action is to apply direct pressure and then progress directly to using haemostatic gauze. Chest seals should only be used where there is no evidence of ongoing catastrophic haemorrhage.

In October 2022, the College of Policing stated that a working group was reviewing its First Aid Learning Programme to reprioritise life-preserving learning outcomes, with catastrophic bleeding management already established as a priority (Andy Walker response, Oct 2022). The Metropolitan Police Service stated in the same month that an internal review found no gap in its own medic training, though it had added a scenario addressing upper chest and neck bleeding and consulted national armed policing (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022). The record holds no update since the Metropolitan Police Service's response of October 2022 (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022).

Training should be made mandatory for command officers in the use of the Computer Logging of Intelligence Operations (CLIO) system and the Serious Organised Crime Tasking and Briefing (SOCTAB) system (a firearms version of CLIO which has specific tabs created in it and lends itself to firearms deployments). This should include training to enable the CLIO system to be compatible with the FA forms.

In October 2022, the College of Policing stated that this recommendation was addressed within its response to recommendations 3, 4 and 5 (Andy Walker response, Oct 2022). The Metropolitan Police Service reported on 28 October 2022 that MO3 had led work on improving CLIO training and command-level usage, and that requirements for future capabilities were factored into an ongoing procurement process (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022). The record holds no update since the Metropolitan Police Service's response of October 2022 (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022).

Advice should be given by the College of Policing about the benefits of uniformity in instructions and commands. Ultimate discretion as to what is said must be left to the CTSFOs, based on the situation that confronts them, but the protocol should encourage agreement to be reached on the command/instruction that is to be given.

In October 2022, the College of Policing stated that it was consulting with the National Police Chiefs' Council, operational commanders, and practitioners to review guidance and assess the potential for greater clarity (Andy Walker response, Oct 2022). The Metropolitan Police Service confirmed in October 2022 that it was in consultation on the issue and welcomed assistance regarding best practice in firearms operations (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022). The record holds no update since the College of Policing's response of October 2022 (Andy Walker response, Oct 2022).

There needs to be proper and objective consideration by the NPCC as to whether, and if so when, it is appropriate for a firearms officer to return to active deployment following their part in a fatal shooting. Such consideration must always occur at an appropriately senior level in the organisation and take account of the views of the family of the deceased and all relevant public interest matters. A proper audit trail must be kept of the process.

In October 2022, Andy Walker, writing for the College of Policing and NPCC Armed Policing, stated that the National Police Chiefs' Council would "consult with stakeholders in developing further guidance" regarding officers returning to work following a police shooting (Andy Walker response, Oct 2022). The Metropolitan Police Service stated in October 2022 that it did not consider it appropriate to respond at that stage because the recommendation applied nationally (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022). The record holds no update since the Metropolitan Police Service's response of October 2022 (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022).

There should be an amendment to the Criminal Procedure Rules which govern the process in applications for a firearms presence in court – a requirement for witness statements, sworn evidence and the taping of proceedings should all be included.

In October 2022, Lord Justice Holroyde, deputy chairman of the Criminal Procedure Rule Committee, stated on behalf of the Committee that the recommendation was not accepted, noting that while it would be content if the Senior Presiding Judge proposed amending relevant Criminal Practice Directions currently under review, members unanimously considered Practice Directions the more appropriate authority and agreed that "Criminal Procedure Rules should not be substituted for those Directions" (Lord Justice Holroyde response, Oct 2022). The record holds no update since the Committee's response of October 2022 (Lord Justice Holroyde response, Oct 2022).

There should be training of those who are authorised by reason of rank to present such applications at court, and no-one should act as a substitute for a properly authorised person unless they have been appropriately trained. In any event, a copy of the Rules should be readily available in every chief inspector's office with which any officer making an application should be familiar (as is the case with Special Procedure Material applications).

The Inquiry recommended training for officers presenting court applications and making rules readily available. In October 2022, Lord Justice Holroyde, deputy chairman of the Criminal Procedure Rule Committee, on behalf of the Committee, agreed that the relevant directions should be readily available to police officers (Lord Justice Holroyde response, Oct 2022). Writing in October 2022, he stated that the directions had appeared for some years on websites maintained by the Judicial Office and the Ministry of Justice (Lord Justice Holroyde response, Oct 2022). The record holds nothing dated later than the response of October 2022 (Lord Justice Holroyde response, Oct 2022).

Consideration should be given to the introduction of a practice requiring, as an alternative to a face-to-face interview, the submission of a list of questions for written answer within a fixed time – failure to provide which, absent a reasonable excuse, would amount to misconduct.

Danny Simpson, Solicitor for the Independent Office for Police Conduct, stated in October 2022 that the issue informed police witness guidance published in July 2022, which permits questions to be sent to key police witnesses and notes that a failure to respond in a timely manner may lead to a referral to consider recording a conduct matter (Danny Simpson response, Oct 2022). The record holds no update since the Independent Office for Police Conduct's response of October 2022 (Danny Simpson response, Oct 2022).

The IOPC should be provided with the power to require a force to take 'management action' in situations that fall short of misconduct but where standards of conduct and/or performance have fallen short of a reasonable public expectation. A force required by the IOPC to carry out such 'management action' should confirm within 28 days of the requirement having been notified that it has been carried out and what it entailed, or else provide a written explanation as to why no action has been taken.

The Home Office published no formal response to this recommendation following the Home Secretary's written statement of July 2022 (Home Office response, Jul 2022). In October 2022, Danny Simpson, Solicitor for the Independent Office for Police Conduct, stated that 2020 legislative change gave it power to require management action in conduct and complaints investigations, but it was seeking further legislative change to do so in death or serious injury investigations, leaving it for the department to decide whether to agree to the proposal, draft legislation, and secure parliamentary time (Danny Simpson response, Oct 2022).

Serious consideration should be given to the public interest in amending the current legislation so that allegations of 'simple' misconduct, as distinct from 'gross' misconduct, will survive following a police officer's resignation or retirement. I do not recommend that the survival of allegations of simple misconduct carries with it any threat to a pension entitlement, but any post-resignation/retirement finding of simple misconduct should remain on the relevant personnel file and a matter of public record for a period of two years thereafter.

The Home Office published no formal response to the recommendation, and the Home Secretary's written statement of July 2022 named no specific recommendations (Home Office response, Jul 2022). In October 2022, Danny Simpson, Solicitor for the Independent Office for Police Conduct, stated that the recommendation would require consultation led by the department with all stakeholders in police discipline, adding that it would contribute to any consultation and assist with legislation and implementation if taken forward (Danny Simpson response, Oct 2022).

Consideration should be given by the MPS, Home Office and the NPCC to finding a more suitable solution for smashing windows during the course of an armed operation, so that an officer who is holding a firearm does not need to take their hand off their main weapon to utilise a life hammer.

The Metropolitan Police Service stated in October 2022 that its firearms officers no longer use glass hammers during armed operations, having issued officers with extendable X-ball devices for short-range use and teams with longer devices operated at a distance, enabling officers closer to the vehicle to maintain firearms cover without removing their hands from their weapons (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022). The record holds no update since the Metropolitan Police Service's response of October 2022 (Metropolitan Police Service response, Oct 2022).