IPCC publication of Stockwell 1 report: MPA statement

56/07
08 November 2007

Len Duvall, chair of the Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA), welcoming publication of the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) Stockwell 1 Report, said:

"The shooting dead of Jean Charles de Menezes was a tragedy that should never have happened, whatever the circumstances were at the time. And we all accept the circumstances were momentous. Suicide bombers had successfully attacked London on 7 July, there had been another attempt to cause murder and mayhem on 21 July, and police were urgently following up leads in their attempt to prevent further atrocities. These are not excuses, just the circumstances in which this tragedy happened.

"I welcome the publication today of the IPCC's Stockwell 1 Report after such a long delay. Now the facts are finally out in the open it is possible for Londoners to know what actually happened that day and for the public debate about those events to take place on an informed basis.

"The IPCC has identified a number of areas of concern and made recommendations to ensure procedures and practices are in place to prevent a repeat of those circumstances that led to the death of an innocent young man.

"The MPA, as the independent statutory body that oversees the work of the MPS, is determined to see that the lessons from the IPCC reports are firmly embedded in police practice. Over the past two and a half years the Authority has worked hard with the Met to carry out root and branch examinations of operational policing systems, internal and external communication procedures, as well as Operation Kratos, the national policing response to suicide terrorists.

"We have been assured, at public meetings by the Commissioner and his Senior Management team, that the recommendations from Stockwell 1 and the previously published Stockwell 2, along with further work we have undertaken, have been implemented. I am confident that the whole of the MPS, both individuals and the organisation, has learned the lessons from this tragic event. Indeed this is corroborated by the recent review by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) which indicated just how much the MPS has already done to address all the shortcomings identified in the IPCC reports. But Londoners should rest assured that, in the course of our regular supervision of the Met's work, the MPA will be monitoring processes and procedures rigorously.

“To this end, we have set up a small group of MPA members who will look in detail at the issues that need to be addressed, including any that come to light during the review and those that have been highlighted in the IPCC reports and following the Health and Safety trial. I will lead that personally. I also wish to make clear I played no part whatsoever in the decisions concerning disciplinary action.

“Although we are confident changes will minimise the possibility of an innocent person being shot in the future, there is no copper-bottomed one hundred percent guarantee that it will never happen again. That is impossible to promise and we must be realistic about what might happen during a fast-moving police operation or a terrorist threat in the future. What I can guarantee is that the MPA will continue to work with the Metropolitan Police to ensure policies and procedures are developed to minimise as much as possible those risks. No one wants a repeat of what happened so tragically on that fateful day – least of all the police who are often faced with impossible choices.

“Even though this was not a Kratos operation, we have reviewed the way in which Kratos is used by police and we will continue to do so to refine it as much as possible to ensure its effectiveness and reduce the risks to innocent members of the public during operations where it has been instigated.

"No one individual is to blame for what occurred on 22 July 2005, and we should remember the selfless dedication with which MPS officers and staff displayed on that and subsequent days, and who continue, in sometimes dangerous circumstances, to keep London safe. However, we must remember an innocent man died during the course of a Met police operation. Our thoughts continue to be with the Menezes family and friends, together with those of the other victims."

The MPA is now urging the IPCC to resolve outstanding disciplinary issues for senior officers within the MPS.

DAC Cressida Dick

In the Stockwell 1 Report the IPCC asked the MPA to consider if disciplinary action should be taken against DAC Cressida Dick (Commander Dick as she then was). The Authority submitted a lengthy memorandum to the IPCC in February 2007 setting out its recommendations, specifically that it did not propose to bring disciplinary proceedings against Commander Dick. This was expressed to be a provisional view subject to reconsideration in the light of the evidence presented at the Health and Safety at work trial.

The MPA's assessment was that the IPCC Report did not disclose the basis for disciplinary proceedings under any provision of the Police Code of Conduct.

Following careful and extensive consideration of the IPCC report and the evidential materials supplied to the MPA by the Commission, the Authority considered that Commander Dick and other police officers on 22 July 2005 were operating in the context of a real, immediate and unprecedented level of threat to public safety and an intensity of counter terrorism activity and investigation never before experienced in Britain. (This context is well described in the IPCC Report itself.) The Authority considered that she was systematic and methodical in her approach to her command of operations on the morning of 22 July 2005, that she had a clear understanding of her responsibilities, and that she set out to create an appropriate structure for the achievement of the strategy set by Commander McDowell.

The Authority judged that she established an operating framework in which public protection was the key objective; that she developed and put in place suitable lines of command and communication; and that she made reasoned decisions and issued instructions that were sound, consistent, cohesive and clear in a fast developing situation.

It was clear to the Authority that at material times she was convinced from the information she was receiving that the identification of Jean Charles de Menezes as a suspected bomber was positive. It was also clear that she took steps to secure the arrival of CO19 Specialist Firearms Officers to support the operation, and should not be held personally responsible for the delayed arrival of those assets. The Authority considered that throughout the operation she acted and gave commands with due professional skill, care and responsibility. For all these reasons the Authority decided that disciplinary proceedings should not be brought against her.

The MPA is informing the IPCC today that its provisional view reached in February 2007 has been reconsidered in the light of the Health and Safety prosecution, and the provisional view is confirmed as final.

AC Andy Hayman

In the Stockwell 2 Report published in August 2007 the IPCC invited the MPA to consider whether AC Hayman should be charged with misconduct. The MPA submitted a memorandum to the IPCC on 6 November 2007 setting out the Authority's recommendation that no disciplinary proceedings should be brought against AC Hayman. The MPA accepted that there did appear to be some mismatch between what AC Hayman said and/or agreed during the period of about 2¼ hours from about 16:30hrs to about 18:45hrs. The Authority considered that it was more realistic to suppose that this was caused by carelessness amounting to a lack of conscientiousness and diligence rather than by deliberate dishonesty or lack of integrity on his part.

The MPA is satisfied that, even if AC Hayman were found by a disciplinary tribunal to have failed to meet the appropriate standard under Code 5, the conduct would not justify the imposition of any sanction under the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2004. The MPA therefore concluded that there should not be disciplinary proceedings and that the matter should be dealt with by the Commissioner and the Chair of the MPA Professional Standards Committee giving AC Hayman advice on the standard of his future conduct.

The final decision whether disciplinary proceedings should be brought against DAC Dick or AC Hayman rests with the IPCC. The MPA is urging the IPCC to resolve both cases swiftly.

Notes to Editors

1. Since July 2005 the MPA has been working with the MPS to radically improve the way the organisation communicates internally and externally, and in the context of operational policing.

The following reports presented by the MPS to the Authority, and initiatives by the Authority, draw together the work completed to date.

Operation Kratos

The strategy for responding to the threat of suicide terrorism.
www.mpa.gov.uk/news/press/2006/06-011.htm

MPA scrutiny of MPS media and communications
The Authority was concerned about the approach taken by the MPS to managing the press coverage of Forest Gate and conducted a short scrutiny of the Directorate of Public Affairs (DPA) to consider what lessons can be learnt from that experience.
www.mpa.gov.uk/committees/cop/2007/070405/05.htm

MPS Review of internal communications systems
This report outlines the progress made in relation to MPS procedures and resilience in a range of key areas that developed from the response to the unprecedented policing challenges in July 2005. It specifically updates on the role of MPS Management Board sitting as a Crisis Management Team, reassurance and community engagement, command resilience, support to Crisis Management and Investigative teams, the Operation Kratos Review Group and training.
www.mpa.gov.uk/committees/mpa/2006/060223/08.htm

MPA 'Counter-Terrorism: The London Debate'
The MPA sought the views on terrorism and counter-terrorism of a diverse selection of over 1000 people who live and work in London.
www.mpa.gov.uk/news/press/2006/06-036.htm

2. Matters relating to the conduct of senior officers of the MPS are dealt with by a sub-committee of the MPA members led by the Deputy Chair Reshard Auladin. In both cases (DAC Dick and AC Hayman) the sub-committee considered not just the IPCC reports but the underlying evidence, as supplied by the IPCC. The sub-committee was advised by the Solicitor to the Authority and by a QC in once case and an experienced barrister in the other.

Further media information

For further information, please contact the MPA press office 

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback