Man dies on way to custody - Thames Valley Police, November 2017
On 24 November 2017, Thames Valley Police was called to a disturbance in Oxford where a man had allegedly assaulted two people and was in possession of a knife. Officers spent several hours searching for him. At one point they stopped and searched the man they were looking for, however, they did not believe it was the right person at that time and let him go. Officers later located the man again and arrested him for assault and possession of …
Recommendations
3 totalInformation about a previous drug-related incident involved the same individual as this case had not been put on his Police National Computer (PNC) record. While it did not materially affect this case, awareness of this information could potentially have affected the police response to his behaviour. This type of information could also have material bearing on cases in future with other individuals. The IOPC recommends that Thames Valley Police (TVP) update their policy/guidance to clarify when drug-related incidents should be updated on to an individual’s PNC record. Do you accept the recommendation? Yes
Accepted action: In March 2016 [a man] had presented to hospital in Oxford reporting that he had ingested heroin and cocaine; he absconded from hospital, which was reported to the police who brought him back and arrested him. [The man] refused a further scan, stating that he had vomited up the drugs. Following medical opinion that he no longer had drugs in his body, he was de-arrested. This did not lead to a warning marker being placed on PNC and therefore this information was not provided to the arresting officers in November 2017. During the March 2016 incident [the man] was never taken to a police custody suite. The application of PNC warning markers has mainly been the responsibility of Custody Officers, however increasingly individuals are dealt with by police without passing through custody (for example those detained under the Mental Health Act). TVP has issued updated guidance to all officers reminding them that, where a person is not brought into custody but they identify information that would assist in managing risk to the individual, the wider public and police officers they must ensure appropriate Warning Markers or Operational Information are applied on PNC. The process to achieve this has been amended to make it less bureaucratic. We will bring these recommendations to the attention of Force Evidence Manager, Learning & Development Department & PIM Co-ordinator (DCI) to undertake further learning distribution (amendments to policy, CPD events, supervisory training etc.) where necessary.
Officers in this case were not separated and were permitted to turn off their body-worn video (BWV) for the journey to the police station for the post incident procedure. This means that there is no record of any discussion that may have taken place during this time. The IOPC recommends that Thames Valley Police (TVP) update their policy/guidance to reflect the statutory guidance issued recently by the IOPC to ensure that where key policing witnesses are not separated, alternative measures are taken to ensure demonstrable integrity of their evidence and a transparent process. Do you accept the recommendation? Yes
Accepted action: In March 2018, Thames Valley Police issued the following broadcast to officers and staff; Post Incident Procedure (PIP) – Body Worn Video (BWV) usage Thursday 22 March 2018, 8:51am This Post Incident Procedure (PIP) is an established response to the action or perceived inaction of the police resulting in the death of, or serious injury to, another, has revealed failings in command or has unduly placed an officer or member of the public in danger. There is a positive obligation to ensure that all activity relating to the recording of accounts is transparent, auditable and capable of withstanding scrutiny. You are reminded that, where possible, those who may be considered or identified as Key Police Witnesses (KPW) should not confer in the post incident phase and where practicable, be separated or be accompanied by an officer(s) not directly involved in the incident until they arrive at the designated PIP venue. Those who are in possession of Body Worn Video (BWV) should continue to record all post incident activity until they arrive at the designated PIP venue; if the initial incident was not captured, they should start recording at their earliest opportunity. Any escorting officer(s) in possession of BWV should start recording from their initial interaction with the KPWs through to handover at the designated PIP venue Thames Valley Police has now issued new operational guidance that specifically addresses the recommendations.
Evidence in this case suggests that all officers could have benefited from more comprehensive and clear advice regarding conferring and the use of body-worn videos. The IOPC recommends that Thames Valley Police (TVP) considers how it can ensure that first line supervisors are able to give effective and appropriate instructions to officers immediately following a death or serious injury and that their role and responsibilities in this process are clear. Do you accept the recommendation? Yes
Accepted action: In March 2018, Thames Valley Police issued the following broadcast to officers and staff; Post Incident Procedure (PIP) – Body Worn Video (BWV) usage Thursday 22 March 2018, 8:51am This Post Incident Procedure (PIP) is an established response to the action or perceived inaction of the police resulting in the death of, or serious injury to, another, has revealed failings in command or has unduly placed an officer or member of the public in danger. There is a positive obligation to ensure that all activity relating to the recording of accounts is transparent, auditable and capable of withstanding scrutiny. You are reminded that, where possible, those who may be considered or identified as Key Police Witnesses (KPW) should not confer in the post incident phase and where practicable, be separated or be accompanied by an officer(s) not directly involved in the incident until they arrive at the designated PIP venue. Those who are in possession of Body Worn Video (BWV) should continue to record all post incident activity until they arrive at the designated PIP venue; if the initial incident was not captured, they should start recording at their earliest opportunity. Any escorting officer(s) in possession of BWV should start recording from their initial interaction with the KPWs through to handover at the designated PIP venue Thames Valley Police has now issued new operational guidance that specifically addresses the recommendations.