Minutes

Minutes of a special meeting of the Metropolitan Police Authority held on 18 January 2002 at Church House, Great Smith Street, London, SW1

Present

Members

• Toby Harris (Chair)
• Jennette Arnold
• Anthony Arbour
• Reshard Auladin
• Richard Barnes (Deputy Chair)
• Cindy Butts
• Lynne Featherstone
• Peter Herbert (Deputy Chair)
• Elizabeth Howlett
• Jenny Jones
• Nicholas Long
• Cecile Lothian
• Eric Ollerenshaw
• Sir John Quinton
• Richard Sumray
• Rachel Whittaker

MPA officers

• Catherine Crawford (Clerk)
• Simon Vile (Secretariat)

MPS officers

• Bernard Hogan-Howe (Assistant Commissioner)
• Andrew Hayman (Deputy Assistant Commissioner)
• David Hamilton (Director of Legal Services)

Approximately 70 members of the press/public and other MPA/MPS staff were also present.

Part 1

89. Apologies for absence

Apologies for absence were received from R. David Muir, Graham Tope and Abdal Ullah, and for lateness from Jennette Arnold.

90. Introduction

Toby Harris set out the background to this special meeting. A number of serious concerns connected with deaths in custody have been raised in various quarters and it was appropriate for the MPA, as an independent body, to play its part in trying to resolve and progress these. Clearly there is a limit to the Authority's power and responsibility, for instance it has no control over other agencies such as the Police Complaints Authority or the Crown Prosecution Service. Similarly, the Commissioner is responsible for operational decisions.

However, he hoped that the MPA can exercise influence over a range of issues. Families of those who have died in custody have legitimate concerns about issues that have not been resolved and the Authority may be able to help in progressing these. Hopefully this would also be of benefit to the MPS as these issues make their relationship with the communities they serve more difficult.

Toby Harris emphasised that this meeting was just a starting point in an ongoing process and many of the issues to be discussed at the meeting would be returned to in the future. For instance, a dialogue on outstanding issues would be carried out on an individual basis with those families who wanted to participate. As a starting point, however, he proposed, and the meeting agreed, that the Authority's Standing Orders should be suspended to allow family representatives to address the meeting.

The meeting then considered the various reports on the agenda for the meeting.

91. Police Complaints System

The Authority considered a report by the Clerk setting out the changes to the police complaints system that are likely to be brought about by the Police Reform Bill and the introduction of the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) in April 2003. The Clerk emphasised that it is important that police authorities have a proper role in the process. The MPA is represented on the working party looking into these proposals and there would be feedback on progress through the MPA's Performance Monitoring and Professional Standards Committee.

In discussing the report, Members made a number of detailed comments, which are set out below.

New framework (paras 3 & 4 of the report): there needs to be timescales specified for each stage of the process to ensure that complaints are dealt with in a timely manner.

It is important that the IPCC has new members (as opposed to PCA members carrying over onto the new body) so that there is a fresh start.

There are concerns about the recruitment of independent investigators and there may be an interim position when the use of police officers continues. However, the recruitment and training of independent investigators must be addressed at an early stage to minimise the length of time needed for any such transitional arrangements.

Informal resolution (para 7): the emphasis on management resolution is welcome for minor cases provided it operates in a spirit of openness.

Investigations by IPCC (paras 8 to 11): it is critical that the investigation teams are from outside the police service so that the IPCC is fully independent.

Investigators should be able to infer from the facts rather than the present PCA approach of not taking a view if it is not possible to reconcile conflicting facts.

There are concerns about officers' right to silence and some members drew comparisons with other public sector practice and with court practice where inferences can now be made from a defendant's silence. In addition to these concerns being fed into the reform process, as amendment of regulations or legislation would be required to change this, it was agreed to ask the Police Federation to provide information on what advice they give their members and how widely it is cast (e.g. the right of silence even for officers who are not the subject of the investigation). It was also agreed to ask ACPO what they see as the legitimate parameters.

There is a need to clarify who will pay for the costs of investigations, the IPCC or the police force concerned.

Discipline (paras 14 & 15): the general view of the meeting was that it would not be appropriate for public access to all disciplinary hearings, just the more serious cases. A presumption that every hearing should be open to the public could impact on the timescale and the openness of the police officers concerned.

However, the general principle was supported that complainants should be kept regularly informed about the process and the expected timescale for resolution.

Openness (paras16 to 18): it was agreed that in addition to MPS family liaison officers, the IPCC should also provide a family liaison function in terms of the carrying out of the investigation. There could be an argument for having a designated officer throughout the whole process, including, for instance, the CPS, but there would have to be a statutory obligation on other agencies to share information with this officer. The role of MPA members should be completely separate – although members do have dealings with individual families, it is not their role to act formally in carrying out family liaison.

Disclosure (para 18): more clarity is needed on the circumstances where disclosure might not be possible. The Home Office is currently reviewing Coroners Courts and the MPA should possibly feed into this review on the issue of disclosure as there are similar issues.

There should be a presumption in favour of disclosure, rather than discretion. The process needs to be firmed up with a clear set of guidelines so that it is not used as a means of preventing families from getting information.

Civil cases against the police (para 19):

It was suggested: that where there is a finding in court there should be a presumption that the IPCC would investigate automatically. Where actions are settled, thought is needed on what level of settlement should automatically trigger an IPCC investigation.

Role of IPCC in criminal proceedings (para 20): The Attorney General is currently reviewing prosecution policies; he should be made aware of the problem many families have had of getting the CPS to review cases after an unlawful killing verdict. The view was also put that such decisions should be taken by a group of lawyers who have no contact with the particular police force as part of their other duties.

In conclusion, it was agreed that the issues outlined above should be fed into the government's review process in the most appropriate way.

92. A response to the Home Office consultation paper on revising the definition of categories of deaths of members of the public during or following police contact

The Authority considered a proposed response by the MPS to this consultation paper.

The Authority endorsed this response, subject to an additional comment about the need for greater clarity about the circumstances where a person dies after leaving police custody, particularly recognising the difficulties of specifying an applicable timescale.

93. 'Lessons From Tragedies' – update

The Authority considered a report by the Commissioner which outlined the present position in regard to the MPS response to the 22 recommendations made in the 1996 Lambeth Community Police Consultative Group report.

The meeting made the following comments about the recommendations detailed in the report, where it was felt that further action or information was required.

• Rec 1: that the Authority receives a breakdown of cases using the proposed Home Office categories for deaths in custody.
• Rec 3: it was noted that custody nurses could provide a key role in assessing people arrested for being drunk and disorderly. It was a greed that a paper be brought back to the relevant MPA committee on what is happening across London and how this recommendation might be taken forward.
• Rec 4: a report was requested on feasibility of introducing a system to produce management data on when and where more than one person is detained in a cell, with the aim of identifying problem areas.
• Rec 6: Rachel Whittaker asked about the implication of all night courts in terms of defendants on remand being returned to police cells and the consequential pressure on facilities. AC Hogan-Howe undertook to look at this issue. Richard Sumray asked whether provision has been made in the medium-term capital programme for the changeover to concept cells.
• Rec 7: It was generally felt that Home Office guidance should be awaited on whether ICVs should be able to view CCTV footage. There are differing views on whether ICVs would want to do this and this issue could then be explored further with ICV Panels, including whether there is a need to develop a protocol about this. It was agreed that this be taken forward by the members' sub-group which looks at ICV issues, for report to the Consultation, Diversity and Outreach Committee.
• Rec 9: A report was requested on the outcome of the January trial of a digital video system in a police van.
• Rec 12: It was recognised that it was not necessary for a Liaison Officer to be of Inspector rank or above – the choice of officer is skills based rather than rank based.
• Rec 13: The MPS were urged to produce a fact sheet for families of people who die in custody.
• Rec 14: It was agreed that the Home Office be lobbied on the provisions of the Home Office Circular on disclosure of information as this was seen as fundamental to a more equitable system. However, the MPS was also asked to consider how it might go beyond Home Office guidance in exercising its discretion to disclose information, particularly when it is anticipated that it will need to be disclosed for the inquest.
• Rec 17: Nick Long offered to take forward with CPCGs the issue of a training pack.
• Rec 19: It was recognised that care must be taken about who speaks to the media on sensitive issues, such as a death in custody, and there should be an audit trail of who has said what to the media. The MPS has adopted the national Senior Investigators Course, which includes training on media and family liaison issues. Similar issues apply to MPA members giving media interviews and the MPA should look to develop a protocol to guide members.

It was agreed that the actions identified above should be progressed either by report to the Authority or to relevant committees.

94. Police suspensions policy

The Authority considered a report by the Commissioner outlining the MPS policy in regard to the suspension of police officers.

The discussion at the meeting highlighted the difficulties faced in achieving a policy on police suspensions which takes account of both public concerns and those of the police. Some members considered that it is not unreasonable for the public to expect a suspension in serious cases, such as when a death ensues from police action. This could demonstrate openness and restore public confidence that such events are taken seriously. This would require a culture shift in the MPS so that suspension did not imply guilt but was seen as the start of a transparent inquiry process.

Other members had reservations about a blanket approach and considered that, for instance, a better definition of 'serious cases' is needed and that there should be prima facie evidence before a suspension occurs. Because investigations can be protracted, total suspension from all duties could have a serious impact on the officer concerned. In the case of shooting incidents, they argued that the officer could be seen as being penalised for carrying out what they were trained to do, although there was support for the current practice of removing an officer from firearms duty.

In summarising the various issues, Toby Harris suggested that there are various circumstances when suspension issues arise and this militates against a blanket approach. In some other public services suspension is deemed to be a neutral act. Equally, it may not be applied unless there is some indication of misconduct. It may be that an officer should be automatically suspended for a sufficient period of time to establish the overall facts and to determine whether there is a prima facie case to answer.

In noting the report, it was agreed that a members' working group should be set up to consider the issues in more depth, particularly in terms of the various circumstances and to develop options on how they might be addressed. It was agreed that membership of this working group should be open to any member who wished to sit on it.

95. MPS firearms policy, performance and training

The Authority agreed that this report should be deferred to a future meeting to allow more time to consider it. At that time the report should include more detail about the development of less lethal alternatives to firearms and information about the training given to firearms officers on how to deal with people with a mental illness.

96. Speakers from the floor

At this point, members or representatives of families of those who have died in custody were invited to address the meeting. The United Families and Friends Campaign also tabled information for MPA members.

Deborah Coles, the Co-Director of Inquest, expressed disappointment that neither the Commissioner nor the Deputy Commissioner were present at the meeting as she felt that this gave out the wrong message. She welcomed the responses to the 'Lessons from Tragedies' report but, as the situation has moved on since the publication of that report, she would be putting further comments in writing.

Referring to the deaths of Roger Sylvester and Harry Stanley, she said that there is no legal basis on which the MPS could not disclose the information on these cases. It is three years since Roger Sylvester died and the family have not received any information about the case. This is not due to the Coroner as the power of disclosure lies with the MPS.

She supported the request for the production of a fact sheet to give to families when such an event occurs and she commented on the disproportionate number of minority ethnic deaths following the use of force.

With regard to openness and transparency she commented that even where there is an unlawful killing verdict prosecutions do not follow so the only, limited, public forum is the inquest. There is a need for fully independent judicial inquiries into deaths.

Mr Sylvester addressed the meeting and commented on some of the problems that families face. He felt that the police blame the victim for their own death and that there is no independent process as all of the agencies 'sleep in one bed together'. He could not understand why prosecution does not automatically follow an unlawful killing verdict, and asked for a definition of 'unlawful killing'. Mr Hamilton, the MPS Director of Legal Services replied that an unlawful killing was the deliberate killing of another or a grossly negligent act for which there would be a manslaughter verdict.

Sherman Thomas described for members an incident in July 2000 when he had been injured. A police car had chased him when he was driving his moped. He had dismounted and ran off. The police car stopped then accelerated and drove into him for no reason, pushing him through a brick wall. His leg had been broken in three places and he had been in hospital for four weeks and in plaster for nine months. He can no longer pursue his interests such as basketball and he feels he has no future. He said that the police have admitted that this act was done on purpose and the case has been to court but the Crown Prosecution Service say that there is not enough evidence to charge those responsible. He felt that it is impossible to get the police to investigate the police and called for a public inquiry. Toby Harris said that he would ask for a report on the progress of Mr Thomas' complaint.

Referring to the case of Mr Bishop, Tony Garde said that justice will not be achieved by simply reshuffling the bureaucratic procedures. He said that the government has resisted every call for a public inquiry and the MPA, the GLA and the Mayor should press for one. He tabled a letter which had been sent to Lambeth Council requesting a scrutiny committee but he considered that such scrutiny needed to be Londonwide. He had heard that the MPA was unwilling to co-operate with the Mayor's proposals to scrutinise deaths in custody.

Alex Owolade, the Chairman of the Movement for Justice, said that he had been dismissed by Lambeth Council for speaking out about deaths in custody and police brutality. This showed that the authorities are not interested in discovering the truth. Anger at the shooting of Derek Bennett had exploded on the streets and a public inquiry is essential if the position in local communities is not to become untenable. People are being denied fundamental truth about what has happened to their loved ones.

In responding to some of these points, Toby Harris said that it was not the province of the MPA to comment on disciplinary action taken by Lambeth Council. He said that he was on record as wanting a full judicial inquiry into deaths in custody. He was aware that the Mayor had considered a GLA inquiry but he questioned what new information this would bring into the public domain. In discussing this with the Mayor, Toby Harris had said that part of the action taken by the MPA should be to listen directly to the families' concerns and then consider what might be added by a GLA inquiry.

97. Deaths in custody

The Authority had before them a report by the Commissioner on recent and current cases. This included, on the exempt part of the agenda, a log of these cases. Toby Harris said that this log was not as full as he would have hoped but he intended to share this information with individual families to start a dialogue with them on outstanding issues. At his suggestion, the Authority noted the report and the exempt appendix and agreed that discussions take place with those individual families who wished to enter into a dialogue to look at and progress outstanding issues.

Toby Harris thanked everyone for attending the meeting and repeated that this was the start of a process of further work by the MPA to address the various issues.

The meeting ended at 12.50 pm.

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback