Peter Woodhams investigation - MPA report

Report: 6a
Date: 10 July 2008
By: Report by Chief Executive

Summary

On 29th May 2008, at a meeting of the Full Authority, the MPA Chair received representations from members of Peter Woodhams family concerning the standard of the police investigation and outcome of the police discipline procedure, in particular the outcome of the Review conducted by AC Ghaffur.

At that meeting, Members supported the proposal from the Chair of the Professional Standards and Complaints Committee (PSCC) that at the next PSCC meeting, Members receive a report on matters relating to the MPS investigation, officer disciplinary process and IPCC involvement.

A report by the Director of Professional Standards on behalf of the Commissioner sets out the background to the murder of Peter Woodhams and failings in the police investigation.

The principal purpose of this report is to inform Members of options available to them in terms of responding to concerns raised by the family of Peter Woodhams’ and their legal representative.

A. Recommendations

That Members note the contents of this report and accept the recommendation for continued monitoring of:

(i) action taken by the MPS to improve investigation capability and;

(ii) MPS progress in response to recommendations made by the IPCC for changes in organisational practices.

B. Supporting information

1. In accordance with the MPA’s Standing Order 2.7, the Authority received a question from the father of Peter Woodhams (deceased) concerning the determination of Assistant Commissioner Tarique Ghaffur to vary sanctions imposed at a misconduct panel hearing, which required Detective Sergeant Case and Detective Constable Suett to resign with immediate effect1.

2. On 29th May 2008, Peter Woodhams (senior) addressed a meeting of the Full Authority at which he re-iterated his disappointment with AC Ghaffur’s decision and invited the MPA to make interventions on behalf of the Woodhams’ family.

3. Following consideration of both written and oral representations, MPA Members resolved that the Professional Standards and Complaints Committee should receive a report on the issues relating to the outcome of the investigation into allegations about the failures in the investigation of the serious assault of Peter Woodhams and the officer disciplinary process [relevant details are contained in a report prepared by the Director of Professional Standards which is included in the committee papers. The MPS report should be read in conjunction with this report].

4. The purpose of this report is to inform Members of options available to them in terms of responding to requests made by Peter Woodhams (senior) and the family’s legal representative for assistance in challenging AC Ghaffur’s determination and the legal implications thereof.

Legal Implications

5. As was discussed and acknowledged by Members of the Full Authority, the MPA’s response to the outcome of AC Ghaffur’s review is limited.

6. The MPA does not itself have the statutory remit to overturn the decision of an Assistant Commissioner’s Review decision. Any challenge would need to be progressed by way of judicial review. The MPA therefore finds itself in a position similar to that of the IPCC.

7. The IPCC were responsible for conducting an independent investigation of allegations relating to the failures in the MPS’ investigation into Peter Woodhams’ stabbing. That investigation culminated in DS Case and DC Suett appearing before an IPCC directed misconduct hearing at which both officers were required to resigned.

8. The IPCC has already received an opinion from a very experienced Counsel about the prospects of pursuing a successful judicial review of AC Ghaffur’s review decision. Counsel’s opinion is that the IPCC does not have grounds to seek a judicial review of AC Ghaffur’s determination. That advice remains the subject of legal professional privilege and therefore is not available to be shared with Members.

9. The MPA has not itself instructed Counsel for an advice on the possibility of initiating judicial review proceedings, or in respect of being joined in any future proceedings as an interested party. The advice of the Solicitor to the Authority is that it is unlikely that advice would be obtained materially different to that given to IPCC or in terms that there are prospects of success sufficient to justify the use of public funds.

10. It is therefore recommended that the MPA takes no further action in relation to initiating or joining in judicial review proceedings as a potential interested party2.

Statutory Responsibility

11. The MPA has a statutory duty to maintain an efficient and effective police service. In his representations to the Full Authority, Mr Woodhams’ (senior) reminded MPA Members of the importance of fulfilling that responsibility.

12. Members of the Professional Standards and Complaints Committee are therefore encouraged to demonstrate their continuing commitment to monitor MPS compliance with recommendations made for organisational learning, whether made in the context of public complaints and conduct investigations or as a result of review and inspection.

13. This could be achieved by seeking regular updates from the MPS on revisions to policy, for example the new Critical Incident policy - as referred to in the annex to the MPS’ concurrent report. Such action would enable the MPA to satisfy itself that necessary changes are being implemented in a timely manner. The MPA should also continue to monitor whether suitable training is being provided to enable officers to effectively fulfil their responsibilities in accordance with updated standard operating procedures.

14. The MPA, via the Professional Standards and Complaints Committee, will continue to support the introduction of a new disciplinary process, which as of 1st November 2008 will remove the right of appeal to an Assistant Commissioner against findings and sanctions imposed by a misconduct panel.

C. Race and equality impact

Monitoring the MPS’ response to recommendations for organisational learning increases the lines of accountability to the MPA, which ultimately strengthens the MPA’s capacity to ensure that the MPS acts upon recommendations that contribute to improvements in operational policing to the benefit of London’s diverse communities.

D. Financial implications

There are no financial implications directly arising from this report. However, any decision by the MPA to initiate judicial review proceedings, join in proceedings as an interested party or provide financial assistance would have cost implications.

E. Background papers

None

F. Contact details

Report authors: Claire L Lister, Professional Standards Officer, MPA

For more information contact:

MPA general: 020 7202 0202
Media enquiries: 020 7202 0217/18

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback