Source · IOPC Learning Case

National recommendations - National Police Chiefs Council, September 2020

Ref: 2019/116923 Recommended 7 Sep 2020 Response due 2 Nov 2020
Use of force and armed policing

In March 2019, police officers from West Midlands Police’s Firearms Operations Unit assisted in the execution of a Section 8 Police And Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) search warrant, following a Public Protection Unit (PPU) investigation. Firearms officers gained access to the property using a set of keys. The chain was across the door and they used an enforcer to force entry. The occupant of the address was in a bedroom opposite officers. He was stood, wrapped in a duvet, concealing …

View on IOPC website ↗

Recommendations

2 total
Recommendation 1

The IOPC recommends that national guidance be amended/updated to state that prior to firearms operations, where timing allows (e.g. pre-planned operations) and where doing so would not present any issues regarding safety and security, an incident log should be created within the Force Control Room containing accurate address details of where the firearms operation will be conducted. Where a log has not been created prior to an operation, guidance should state that the Tactical Firearms Commander (TFC) should ensure that the tactical plan identifies who will have responsibility for requesting an ambulance directly, to avoid any delay caused by requesting one via the Force Control Room. Where it is reasonable to believe that requesting an ambulance from the scene directly may cause a delay e.g. where phone or radio coverage is poor, a request should be made via the Force Control Room, ensuring that full address details are communicated at the time of making the request. In this case, following shots to a suspect, an ambulance was deployed to an incorrect address, similar in name to the correct address, due to a misunderstanding within the Force Control Room. Had a log been in place with correct address details, this delay could have been avoided. Whilst, in this case, the delay in an ambulance arriving was rectified quickly and had no bearing on the survivability of the injured party, this may not be the case in future incidents. Where the Force Control Room requests an ambulance, they will not have the first-hand knowledge of the address or other details that may be helpful to avoid any delay and ensure the ambulance is deployed to the correct address. Do you accept the recommendation? Yes

Addressed to: National Police Chiefs Council
Linked bodies: National Police Chiefs Council
Accepted
Force response

Accepted action: ​APP to be updated/amended to reflect recommendation.

Recommendation 2

The IOPC recommends that the NPCC lead for complaints and misconduct works with all forces to ensure that requirements around delivering the message about a police-related death are clear and understood. This includes the requirement that the senior officer on duty with responsibility for Professional Standards and liaison with the IOPC should: The IOPC has seen several cases nationally where delivery of the death message has been a point of concern for the deceased’s next of kin, either due to the way in which the message was delivered or how long it took to be delivered. In this case in particular, the message was delivered by a junior officer who was given a ‘form of words’ to read out. IOPC guidance on family liaison which can be located in Appendix 2 of the National Policing Improvement Agency Family Liaison Guidance (2008), published on behalf of the Association of Police Officers, states the responsibility for delivering the death message lies with the police. Delivery of the message should be discussed with the IOPC SIO (usually an Operations Manager or higher) however, all efforts should be directed to ensuring the message is delivered without delay. Do you accept the recommendation? N/A

Addressed to: National Police Chiefs Council
Linked bodies: National Police Chiefs Council
Awaiting response