IPCC chief can't say if she trusts police officers

[David Guyatt]

I, for one, don't, so it shouldn't really come as a surprise that the head of the tarnished Independent Police Complaints Commission also doesn't trust them either.

They're corrupt, racist and lie.

Maybe they should all apply to enter politics...

Police complaints chief can't say if she trusts officers

Dame Anne Owers, the IPCC chairman, says police needs to take a long hard look at itself if it is to recover its reputation following the Stephen Lawrence scandal

Dame Anne said the police service needs to 'take a long hard look at itself' Photo: PA









By Patrick Sawer

11:59AM GMT 08 Mar 2014



In a withering assessment of the conduct of police officers, Dame Anne Owers, the chairman of the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) described many of those she comes into contact with as behaving like "sulky teenagers" who refuse to answer questions about their conduct.

Her comments followed the latest revelations over the behaviour of the Metropolitan Police during the Stephen Lawrence scandal.

Dame Anne said the police service needs to "take a long hard look at itself" if it is to recover its reputation in the eyes of the public.

Asked directly whether she trusted the police, she was unable to give an answer. After a long pause, she said: "I don't ... I can't answer that."

Dame Anne spoke as the Met continued to face questions following revelations, in a report by Mark Ellison QC, over the use of undercover officers to spy on the family of the murdered black teenager and the role of former detective sergeant John Davidson, an officer on the case suspected of corruption.

Related Articles

• Counter terror boss moved from role over Stephen Lawrence disclosures
  07 Mar 2014
  
• 'Corrupt' officer's daughter worked at Scotland Yard
  07 Mar 2014
  
• Corrupt detective linked to murderer's family, report finds
  06 Mar 2014
  
• Time for the Met to put on crash helmets
  07 Mar 2014
  

Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, said on Friday the Ellison report was "devastating" and that reading its findings had been "one of the worst days that I have seen as a police officer".
The IPCC was also heavily criticised by Mr Ellison for its 2006 investigation, which he said was "wrong" to conclude there was no evidence to suggest Scotland Yard withheld information in relation to corruption from the Macpherson inquiry into Stephen's death.
She apologised to the Lawrence family for the commission's part in prolonging "the search for the truth about the failed investigation into their son's murder".
But she also rounded on police officers who she claimed did their best to disrupt any attempt by the IPCC to get to the truth of the matter on the Lawrence and other cases over which police had faced scrutiny.
Dame Anne said during a radio interview: "Police officers that come to us appear all too often like sulky teenagers and wont say anything in interviews. I and the public find it very difficult to understand how a police officer, who is a professional, doesn't want to cooperate with an inquiry as a witness to what happened, why it happened and how something like that can be prevented in future."
She gave as an example an investigation into the tasering of an unarmed man during which officers where asked how the man had approached them. One had replied: "He used his legs."
Dame Anne added: "The police service has to take a long hard look at itself and the way it represents itself to the public."
Stephen, who wanted to become an architect, was murdered by racists thugs at the age of 18 in Eltham, south-east London, in April 1993 and it took nearly 20 years for two of the gang of up to six killers to be brought to justice.
His mother, Baroness Doreen Lawrence has written to the Met commissioner urging him to take "decisive action" and cooperate fully with the judicial inquiry ordered by the Home Secretary following the Ellison review's "devastating" revelations.
Mr Ellison found that DS Davidson, one of the officers on the original investigation into Stephen's death may have acted corruptly. It was claimed that Davidson had admitted having a "corrupt connection" with Clifford Norris, the gangland boss father of David Norris, who was finally convicted of Stephen's murder in 2012.
It also emerged on Friday that Mr Davidson took part in the controversial investigation into the death of Daniel Morgan, a private detective found dead in a London car park with an axe in his head, in 1987.
An undercover officer also passed on personal details concerning the Lawrence family, such as comments on the separation of Stephen's mother and father Doreen and Neville, the review found.
In the letter, Baroness Lawrence is said to have called on Sir Bernard to take "the relevant and appropriate action" against individuals identified in the Ellison review.
Sir Bernard said on Saturday he would "assist in any way possible" with any investigation into the claims. He plans to appoint an independent investigator to search Met archives to try to find any available evidence for the public inquiry into undercover policing.
In another embarassing move for Scotland Yard, following the publication of Mr Ellison's report, Commander Richard Walton has been temporarily removed from his job as head of the Met's counter-terrorism command SO15.
The Ellison report revealed that an undercover officer - known as N81 - held a meeting in 1998 with Mr Walton, who was then an acting detective inspector working on Scotland Yard's Lawrence review team, responsible for making submissions to the Macpherson Inquiry.
That inquiry was conducted in the late-1990s to look at the way the police had originally investigated the murder of Mr Lawrence.
N81 infiltrated a group in the late 1990s, which then sought to influence the Lawrence family campaign to further its own agenda, the Ellison report revealed.
Speaking on Saturday Sir Hugh Orde, the President of the Association of Chief Police Officers, said the Met contained officers of the "highest calibre and professionalism", but added that "this is a critical moment in policing".

[David Guyatt]

Oh, poor, poor innocent Bill.

The quick-trick trigger-puller Peelers are now whinging that they won't any longer be able to convene to blend their testimony together when they shoot and kill innocents.

It is best, it seems, to try to tarnish their persecutor than allow interference in their chosen recreational blood sports?

IPCC: Firearms officers 'believe police watchdog is out to get them' in hunt for scalps



Firearms officers believe the IPCC is 'out to get them'

PAUL PEACHEY

CRIME CORRESPONDENT

Sunday 09 March 2014

The body investigating police wrongdoing is out for scalps and more concerned with introducing changes to look tough than seeking out the truth, a senior officer has claimed.

Firearms officers believe that the Independent Police Complaints Commission is "out to get them" after planned changes to ban officers from talking to each other before giving statements after fatal shootings by police, according to Deputy Chief Constable Simon Chesterman.
DCC Chesterman, who is the national lead on firearms, said that officers were worried about their safety and their livelihoods every time they went on an armed operation.
"The IPCC is an organisation that is under scrutiny from the government and the public about how it holds the police to account that is its job, I fully understand and I am completely supportive of the need for accountability.
"However, the fear that I have is that the pendulum with the watchdog has now swung to a point where officers believe that the organisation is now actually out to get them'.
"In short, the IPCC is giving the perception that it is after scalps," he told the Police Oracle.
His comments follows the damning Ellison report that criticised the IPCC's inquiry into corruption linked to the Lawrence murder investigation, the latest in a long list of failures by the IPCC to properly investigate and hold officers to account.
That came a day after the IPCC warned that allowing police officers to talk after a fatal police shooting could undermine police confidence. "This begs the question what is the problem we are trying to solve here?' I fear this is more about the IPCC being seen to be tough as opposed what it should be, namely a search for the truth," said Mr Chesterman.
Police firearms teams came under scrutiny during two major inquiries last year over the shootings of suspected gangsters Azelle Rodney and Mark Duggan. A retired judge found that an officer, known only as E7, had no "lawful justification" to shoot Mr Rodney. The officer made a High Court challenge against the finding but lost.
An IPCC spokesman said: "The IPCC is not about gaining scalps', but is about holding police to account and searching for the truth. The public, and we, rightly expect police who witness a death or serious injury in a professional capacity to fully co-operate with an investigation."

[Magda Hassan]

Police tend to get really shitty if they have to abide by the same rules as every one else. And they have no intention of actually being held accountable to the same standard. There is usually some sort of a back deal agreement done to give the green light and the get out of jail free card a la Menendez. While some are expecting compliance I doubt they are in any position to follow through on implementing it. It will return to business as usual soon.

[David Guyatt]

Yep. Years ago they all threatened to go on strike at a critical time when unlawful killing prosecutions were in the air, and guess what? Pending and potential prosecutions evaporated. Just like that.

Stage magic.