Source · IOPC Learning Case

Woman reported as missing found dead - Metropolitan Police Service, August 2018

Metropolitan Police Service Ref: 2018/107428 Recommended 1 Oct 2019 Response due 26 Nov 2019

Death and serious injury

Case background

Text published by the IOPC.

On 18 July 2018, a man reported his mother missing to the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS). The man told police he had not seen his mother for approximately one month, her home address had been checked several times and she was not there. He also stated her suitcase was missing. The man told police his mother had family outside of the UK but he had checked with those she would normally visit and she was not with them. Police graded the woman as a ‘medium-risk’ missing person and undertook initial enquiries, including hospital checks, which proved negative.

On 19 July, police received information from another person that the woman was a frequent traveller and had likely gone abroad, forgetting to inform anyone of her whereabouts. Based on this information, the missing person report was closed.

On 30 July 2018, the man contacted police again to report that his mother was still missing. After conducting further enquiries, police established that the woman had not travelled abroad. On 1 August 2018, officers went to the woman’s home and found her dead. It appeared she had been there for a significant period of time.

During the investigation, investigators obtained accounts from a number of the officers involved in both missing person investigations. Investigators also reviewed police records to determine what information police were given, what actions police undertook to locate the woman, whether the risk grading during each missing investigation was appropriate, and whether officers acted in accordance with force policy. We also consulted the MPS missing person subject matter expert.

There was evidence to suggest that, following the initial missing person report, there were opportunities for other investigative actions to be carried out, and that the missing person’s investigation may not have been as comprehensive as it could have been. However, there was also evidence to suggest the woman may not have been missing at all.

The officer who made the decision to close the initial missing person investigation provided a detailed rationale for their decision and outlined the information upon which they based this decision. There was nothing to suggest that important information was omitted, and the officer also acknowledged contradictions in the information upon which they based their decision. We were of the view that there was evidence to suggest that this decision may have been a poor one, but that it had been made in good faith.

Based on the evidence available we found no indication that any person serving with the police may have behaved in a manner that would justify the bringing of disciplinary proceedings, or had committed a criminal offence.

We also identified some areas of learning for the force (see below).

We concluded our investigation in August 2019.

After reviewing our report, the MPS agreed. The force’s view was that the officer would benefit from learning, in the form of management action, as to when it is appropriate to close a missing person’s investigation.

Recommendations and responses

3 indexed

Recommendation 1

Link to recommendation · Accepted

Addressed to: Metropolitan Police Service

Linked bodies: Metropolitan Police Service

IOPC recommendation

The IOPC recommends that the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) ensures that all Local Resolution Team members across the MPS are aware of their roles and responsibilities under the Revised Missing Persons Investigation Protocol.

This follows an investigation where two missing person reports were received in relation to a woman who was later found dead. Our investigation found that it could not be evidenced officers had adhered to the force’s Revised Missing Persons Investigation Protocol in responding to the reports. There was no evidence that certain actions had been completed. We also found that it was not possible to identify which individuals had been responsible for progressing actions.

Response published by the IOPC

Do you accept the recommendation?

Yes

Accepted action:

The Local Resolution Team (LRT) Policy Guidance was updated in July 2019 to clarify roles and responsibilities and will be relaunched through publishing within the Missing Persons Policy in 2020.

The LRT protocol for the initial investigation and risk assessment of missing persons remains a standard approach across the 12 Basic Command Units (BCUs). Action will continue to be taken by the Lead Responsible Officer (LRO) and the Continuous Policing Improvement Command (CPIC) to actively encourage the implementation of the LRT Missing Persons Investigation Protocol and to ensure staff working within the LRT have the requisite knowledge to fulfil their role. Over a three month period an inspector will be visiting every BCU to provide guidance and assistance to team inspectors, for quality assurance purposes and to ensure consistency in investigations. These visits will commence in January 2020 and will focus on the LRT and Duty Officer links and their roles in managing missing persons. Any issues raised will be taken to the Commander for Frontline Policing as well as the CPIC Missing Persons Team. The Commander will then work with the BCU HQ Superintendent and Response Superintendent to ensure any improvements or learning are implemented. CPIC are also developing a Webinar (internet seminar) dedicated to the first 48 hours of missing person investigations, including an instructional video which will focus on the process and benefits of the LRT. This will be aimed at Frontline Police Officers and is expected to be in place by March 2020.

In early December 2019, the Commander for Frontline Policing delivered a presentation on the importance of the Missing Persons Investigation Protocol to BCU Early Response Policing Team and HQ Superintendents. The delivery included signposting to the protocol and the MPS’s expectation that staff must have knowledge of its content. In addition, the Commander underlined the impact of not having full awareness of this protocol and set out expectations regarding service delivery and accountability for Superintendents to dip sample each missing person record.

Check the original case on the IOPC website

Recommendation 2

Link to recommendation · Accepted

Addressed to: Metropolitan Police Service

Linked bodies: Metropolitan Police Service

IOPC recommendation

The IOPC recommends that the Metropolitan Police Service ensures that it is possible to identify who is (or was) responsible for progressing actions under the Revised Missing Persons Investigation Protocol, and consider how this is recorded on MPS systems to ensure this information is easily accessible to everyone working on the investigation.

Response published by the IOPC

Do you accept the recommendation?

Yes

Accepted action:

The ownership and progression of live missing person cases is an essential part of an investigation as, without it, the MPS cannot expect to respond to changes in circumstances and react in a manner proportionate to risk.

The process many UK forces implement across the initial handling of missing persons, involves ownership by frontline officers who operate across 24 hour shifts. In the MPS, for low and medium risk cases, frontline officers take ownership for the initial 48 hours and high-risk missing persons are owned by the Safeguarding Detective Inspector. The LRT Policy Guidance provides clear pathways to transfer ownership according to risk level, however cases are rarely owned by an individual as reactive crime allegations would be.

The MPS recognises the importance of ensuring there is clear inspector ownership at the point of shift change handovers, and such ownership includes the progression of actions to be taken. Currently Duty Officers (Inspectors) hand over medium risk ongoing missing person enquiries at the start of their shift to the next Duty Officer. To improve this, the MPS is reviewing its recording systems and processes to clarify ownership of investigative actions and the review will be complete by June 2020.

Check the original case on the IOPC website

Recommendation 3

Link to recommendation · Accepted

Addressed to: Metropolitan Police Service

Linked bodies: Metropolitan Police Service

IOPC recommendation

The IOPC recommends that the Metropolitan Police Service implements quality reviews of missing person reports to monitor compliance with force policy, including the MPS toolkits and the Revised Missing Persons Investigation Protocol. This will ensure that any concerns regarding adherence to policy can be addressed.

Response published by the IOPC

Do you accept the recommendation?

Yes

Accepted action:

The MPS already has methods of thematic review across missing persons. The referenced case audits completed by the Child Safeguarding Delivery Group (CSDG) are: Specialist Crime Review Group reviews of cases where a missing person is found deceased; the implementation of “health-checks” to BCU), where the BCU conduct level 1 assurance of their safeguarding investigations, including missing people, which will be amalgamated into the Data Quality Ethics and Assurance Boards once they are embedded; organisational risk and learning reviews (missing persons is one of the 12 safeguarding areas reviewed within this rolling timetable). These prompt BCUs to review their cases, manage risk in the relevant operational area, and provide a clear route for them to manage any barriers hindering their ability to achieve best practice.

However, to improve the ongoing review of all cases, the MPS is incorporating ‘Data Quality Ethics and Assurance Boards’ to prompt ongoing reviews on a dip sampling basis. This initiative is being overseen by the Commander for Frontline Policing. Reviews will include safeguarding, data quality and basic checklists for safeguarding areas including missing persons. The reviews will be undertaken by BCUs and Operational Command Units but overseen by a central board annually throughout the year. This is expected to commence this month.

The quarterly thematic reviews will continue to feature missing persons and concern the wider response by each BCU to this business area.

Check the original case on the IOPC website