Quickly exit this site by pressing the Escape key Leave this site
We use some essential cookies to make our website work. We’d like to set additional cookies so we can remember your preferences and understand how you use our site.
You can manage your preferences and cookie settings at any time by clicking on “Customise Cookies” below. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Cookies notice.
Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can update your cookie settings at any time on the cookies page.
Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can update your cookie settings at any time on the cookies page.
Sorry, there was a technical problem. Please try again.
This site is a beta, which means it's a work in progress and we'll be adding more to it over the next few weeks. Your feedback helps us make things better, so please let us know what you think.
We have found a few records recently where items have been found during a search, but no further action has been taken, whilst on further investigation with the officer the No Further Action decision has been appropriate the record has not made it clear why. Strictly speaking this information does not need to be included on the Grounds or search record however adding the info to the record enhances transparency and allows better decision making when reviewing records.
If you are searching for a subject and find an item that leads to arrest you can still complete the search under the stop search power rather than switch to a Section 32 (post-arrest search power). Complete a thorough search using your initial power making sure no further items are missed.
Front line policing is seeing a constant flow of new officers, all will have had stop search inputs as part of their initial training but it is important that the points we have been trying to embed as business as usual for the past couple of years through emails such as these plus the Having the conversation training continues to be shared with everyone and reinforced. This should be seen as a constant theme to maintain the improvement in standards we have seen.
We are still hearing some negative feedback and wariness around Community scrutiny panels and the work they do. Some officers still have the attitude of ‘what do they know’ / ‘they don’t understand what its like to be a front-line cop’ but we have learnt and seen over the last couple of years that they are not there to criticise us and find fault unnecessarily, rather they give up their own time to help us improve. All of the feedback from the panels is shared into the organisation and the vast majority of it is positive with any developmental feedback aimed at helping officers do a better job and stay safe (see next point!).
Final point this month is some real concerns around officer safety when reviewing BWV footage. We regularly see officers with long hair not tied up- a real risk to them if they are in a confrontational situation. We are also regularly seeing officers deploying with just black covers on their body armour, in particular Taser officers, Taser is an overt item of PPE and default position for all front line officers (with or without Taser) should be to wear high vis covers on body armour unless a they have a specific reason not to. Having watched live CCTV of different incidents, it is virtually impossible to identify officers on screen when not wearing high vis and hats which is a clear safety issue but also potentially an evidential one if assaults on officers occur. This whole issue around uniform standards has to be lead by front line supervisors making sure their teams are deploying in correct kit and uniform.