JB-15.15 Accepted

SOP for covert monitoring post evidence recording

Jermaine Baker Inquiry · Report into the Death of Jermaine Baker · Issued 5 July 2022 · Addressed to: Metropolitan Police Service

Source — verbatim from the inquiry

Inquiry recommendation, 15.15

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.

Jermaine Baker Inquiry, Report into the Death of Jermaine Baker · 5 Jul 2022 Source PDF →

Published evidence summary

Publicly available evidence relating to this recommendation:

- The Metropolitan Police Service stated on 28 October 2022 that it had not yet developed the SOP for CMP evidence and intelligence recording, pending the national D-DaCS system, but was reinforcing the national Surveillance Manual of Standards via internal guidance and training (MPS Response to Jermaine Baker Inquiry, October 2022).
- No published evidence that the MPS has completed a specific SOP for CMP audit trail recording has been identified to March 2026.

Sources

Response — verbatim from government

Metropolitan Police Service

MPS formally responded on 28 October 2022 (para 30). MPS has not yet developed SOP pending national D-DaCS system. Reinforcing national Surveillance MoS via internal guidance and training.

Metropolitan Police Service · 28 Oct 2022 Written response →

Evidence trail — what's actually happened since

  • 1 Aug 2023 Status as of College of Policing APP-AP update (August 2023): In Progress Source →

Each entry above links to a primary source — gov.uk written statement, consultation response document, or inspection report. The Index does not characterise government intent; it tracks what has been published.

How this page is built

Source and Response are verbatim from primary documents. The Evidence trail records published activity since — written statements, consultation outcomes, inspection findings, parliamentary references. The Index does not paraphrase or characterise intent; it tracks what has been published. Where the evidence is the absence of action (a missed deadline, a slipped timetable), that absence is documented from primary sources rather than inferred.

This recommendation's data is verified periodically against primary sources. The Index is monitored for staleness weekly.