Its worth remembering that the police are public servants, and whilst I agree with not winding them up and much of the time they do a difficult job well, they are accountable for their actions, the same way you and I are and hiding id badges and generally beign scared of being identified points to doing something you know is wrong and calculated, not just a spur of the moment action
I agree that all officers should be fully accountable and identifiable. There should never be an issue with shoulder numbers. Ever since that incident came to light, supervisors have become much stricter on standards of uniform - so positive change has already happened in the force.
Believe it or not, officers are accountable in extreme ways that most other professions aren't. When we deal with an incident, we often have to justify what we
don't do as much as what we actually
do do. Let me give you a typical example, and try to imagine yourself as an officer at the incident.
You are called to a domestic incident where a man is accused of beating up his girlfriend. She has called the police, and as officers arrive she has a cut lip and reddening all over her face. She is crying and distressed, and you can hear her boyfriend shouting and screaming in the background, smashing the place up. As you enter the house, the man confronts you in the hallway, brandishing a table lamp and is holding it as if he is about to smash you over the head with it. He screams and swears at you, and swings for you. He is disarmed by force and arrested on suspicion of assault.
1. The officers must write a statement covering their notes of the arrest. This should fully justify any use of force and detail exactly what happened and why.
2. A statement should be taken from the girlfriend. This will form the basis of the evidence in this case. Photographs of injuries and the scene could be taken.
3. A domestic crime reporting book will be completed, where officers have to take down full family details, ask questions about home life and make risk assessments to judge the likelihood of further harm. The officers have to account for their risk assessment, and may have to do anything from sorting out emergency accommodation to arranging hospital treatment for the victim.
4. A crime report will be completed and viewed by a supervisor, outlining investigative steps to be taken, justifying action taken so far and the necessity of future action.
5. In custody, the Sergeant has to account for the prisoner's physical and mental state. The Sergeant will ask a series of questions, explain the prisoner's rights in custody, then make a risk assessment based on all the information available. This assessment will have to be justified. The Sergeant will open a custody record, and the prisoner will have to sign to indicate that he has had his entitlements. The arresting officers will have to account for all the property they take off the prisoner while it goes into temporary storage. There are cameras throughout the custody suite, recording both images and sound. Many cells also have CCTV cameras installed with the same capability. The suspect will often have to see a doctor to assess his fitness for detention and interview, and again this will be recorded on a confidential medical form.
6. The prisoner (for this case) will have his fingerprints, photograph and DNA taken. The reasons for this must be recorded. If the prisoner is to be strip searched (for example, for drugs or concealed weapons), then this too will have to be documented with reasons given. The prisoner may also have to undergo a drug test in certain circumstances, and again there is a huge swathe of legal bumph we are required to read out and get them to sign to indicate that we have actually done it.
7. Every time the prisoner is visited at the cell wicket, makes a request, or generally has anything happen to him in custody, an entry will be made in his custody log.
8. Once the officers have completed their notes, statements and reports, they will be collected into a case file. This will then be used in interview, which will be conducted on tape in 99% of cases. This will often be in the presence of a solicitor, who will be given disclosure of the evidence against the suspect. The solicitor is not required to account for the advice he gives the suspect, but the officers can be required to account for the disclosure they give the solicitor. The interview tapes will be signed and sealed to prevent any tampering.
9. The officers will take their assembled evidence to a supervisor (normally a Sergeant) to make a decision on what to do with the case. The supervisor will have to justify every decision from taking No Further Action to approaching the Crown Prosecution Service. They may also decide to release the suspect on bail while further investigation is conducted.
10. If the suspect is released on bail, the reasons for this must be given. If the bail is to be conditional, again reasons for this must be recorded and justified against Human Rights considerations (since conditional bail usually restricts someone's freedom of movement or association).
11. If the officers are taking their case to the CPS, then they must prepare further paperwork outlining the disposal decision they are seeking (most likely a charge) and detailing the extent of the investigation. The CPS in turn will review the evidence, then write a statement (an MG3 for those in the know) justifying their decision - whatever that may be.
12. If the suspect is charged, the offence will be detailed to the suspect, down to the exact section and subsection of the Act he is suspected to have contravened.
13. If the suspect is charged and released on bail, this works as 10 above. If the suspect is to be remanded in custody to appear at court the next day, the reasons for the remand must be fully outlined with supporting evidence. The suspect's solicitor - or the suspect himself - have the right to make documented representations about why they disagree with a remand decision.
14. The suspect - or anybody else for that matter - has the right to complain about the police. There is an internal unit - the Directorate of Professional Standards (within the Met) - that oversees complaints that cannot be resolved locally. The DPS can interview the officers involved, gather statements, and are to all intents and purposes an internal police force. Up from them is the IPCC, which is a body completely separate from the police. In any complain matter, all these departments will be reviewing all of that paperwork generated throughout this arrest and detention, and officers may have to further account for their actions beyond their original arrest notes. They may also have to account for things that they did
not consider.
I will be amazed if anybody has read down this far, but I hope that gives you some idea of the level of accountability and documentation involved in a fairly common scenario. All of this paperwork - aside from the letter from police to CPS - is disclosable in court and will be served on any defence.
My first question would be "So who the **** are you" Therefore he gets his opportunity to identify himself and prove it, otherwise he's just Joe Bloggs as far as I'm concerned...