Page 22 - Top Cover Issue 6

22 TOP COVER ISSUE 6

ARmED pOlICING SuRVEy - yOuR VIEWS!

The IPCC has recently published its “Draft
statutory guidance to the police service on
achieving best evidence in death or serious
injury matters”. This is a consultation document
but with its language and surrounding commentary,
you could be forgiven for believing that the only change
we will see at the end of the consultation period is the
removal of the word “draft”.
Post Incident Procedures are set out in Module 7 of
the Armed Policing Authorised Professional Practice
(APP). This guidance was drafted with the support of
leading Counsel and taking account of a great deal of
credible academic research into trauma, memory recall
and achieving best evidence. The guidance reflects our
commitment to the Article 2 investigation, achieving
best evidence and a search for the truth, this is what
every police officer wants. It has been refined as a
result of the learning from high profile cases and it has
been tested in the courts as a result of Judicial Review.
Ironically the IPCC were part of the working group that
helped us to refine the guidance.
ACPO is currently subject to a further Judicial Review
brought on behalf of the Duggan and Delezuch families.
In summary, the claim is that the APP, in respect of Post
Incident Procedures, is insufficient to prevent officers
from conferring prior to making their notes. ACPO will
contest this JR and we are currently formulating our
response, which is inextricably linked, to our response
to the IPCC consultation.
This article focuses on firearms officers, but the IPCC
consultation and JR have broader implications for
officers who are unfortunate enough to become
involved in a death or serious injury matter. The IPCC
propose that post incident “key policing witnesses”
should be separated until detailed accounts have been
taken from them, furthermore these detailed accounts
will be required before the officer goes off duty. Our
response will evidence why separation is unnecessary,
impractical and counterproductive.
The fact is that officers are keen to give their accounts, but
their confidence in the IPCC’s ability to
conduct a balanced investigation has
been undermined by past experience
and the IPCC’s own acknowledgement
of various ineffective investigations.
The current APP recommends a four-
stage approach to providing accounts:
Stage One – the officers will
immediately provide a situation report,
usually via the control room, to ensure
that the Tactical Firearms Commander
has sufficient information to manage
the ongoing incident and commence
the post incident procedures.
Stage Two - the Post Incident Manager
will establish and record the basic facts