Jersey Police Complaints Authority: report for 2008.

STATES OF JERSEY

JERSEY POLICE COMPLAINTS AUTHORITY: REPORT FOR 2008

Presented to the States on 6th May 2009 by the Minister for Home Affairs

STATES GREFFE

2009   Price code: B  R.45

JERSEY POLICE COMPLAINTS AUTHORITY ANNUAL REPORT 2008

Jersey Police Complaints Authority 5 Library Place

St. Helier

Jersey

JERSEY POLICE COMPLAINTS AUTHORITY

ANNUAL REPORT 2008

The Jersey Police Complaints Authority is an independent organisation set up by the States of Jersey  under  the  Police  (Complaints  and  Discipline)  (Jersey)  Law  1999.  The  role  of  the Authority is to oversee, monitor and supervise the investigation by the States Police, and such other external Police Forces as circumstances require, of certain complaints made by members of the public against States of Jersey police officers and Honorary police officers.

The Law requires the Authority to approve the appointment of an Investigating Officer and its responsibility is to ensure that the investigations it supervises are carried out in an impartial, thorough and meticulous manner.

The members of the Authority are appointed by the States for a period of 3 years and their services are provided on a voluntary basis. The Authority does not carry out investigations and its members are not trained investigators.

MEMBERS OF THE AUTHORITY

Leslie May – Chairman

Tom Slattery – Deputy Chairman Anthony Beaumont

Andrew Cornish

Advocate Debbie Lang

Stephen Luce

Toni Roberts

JERSEY POLICE COMPLAINTS AUTHORITY ANNUAL REPORT 2008

OVERVIEW

The Authority is pleased to present its 8th Annual Report for the year ended 31st December 2008.

This has been a more than usually demanding year for the Authority. Although the number of new  complaints  from members  of  the  public,  at  27  has  fallen from  36  in  2007,  a further 20 cases were brought forward from 2007 which, when added to 4 internal complaints, brings the total cases under supervision for the year to 51. There has also been an increase in the complexity and sensitivity of certain of the complaints being supervised.

Additionally, the level of seniority of some of the officers subject to complaints in the latter part of 2007 and in 2008 has required the appointment of investigating officers from outside the States of Jersey Police. In fact, if the investigation of internal complaints from within the Police Force supervised by the Authority are included, a total of 5 different UK Police Forces have been used. Supervising these cases has placed a considerable extra workload on members of the Authority and inevitably lengthened the time to complete cases.

On the matter of the seniority of officers against whom complaints are made, the Authority has sought clarification during the year from the H.M. Attorney General in regard to the remit of the  Authority  where  complaints  are  made  against  the   Deputy  Chief  Officer.  It  has  been confirmed that complaints against the Deputy Chief Officer do fall within the Authority's remit, but the Chief Officer is excluded under the governing legislation. Consideration should perhaps be given to formalising the process with regard to the Chief Officer to remove this anomaly.

ANALYSIS OF COMPLAINTS

1. Number of Complaints

A total of 27 complaints, (2007 – 36), were formally made by members of the public against officers  of  the  States  of  Jersey  Police  and  members  of  the  Honorary  Police  and  all  the investigations were supervised by the Authority.

Table 1  shows  the  number  of  complaints  against Police  Officers  supervised  annually  since 2001, averaging 28 per annum.

Table1 – Complaints by members of the Public supervised by the Authority

2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008 TOTAL  COMPLAINTS

SUPERVISED  17  21  30  37  30  30  36  27

2. Nature of complaints

While, as noted above, there has been a reduction in the number of cases reviewed, this does not reflect the more complex nature of some of these cases. In addition, there are situations where the complainant has made a complaint together with a number of secondary allegations. Table 2 analyses the complaints supervised according to the nature of the main complaint.

Table 2 – Nature of complaints supervised

Nature of Complaint  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008

In general the mix of complaints in 2008 is consistent with previous years. The heading of Other'  in  the  analysis  covers  many  different  descriptions  by  complainants,  including  for example,  instances  of alleged  wrongful  arrest,  incorrect  disclosure  of information,  claimed planting of evidence or breaches of the Police Code of Practice.

3. Outcome of complaints supervised

Table 3 shows the results of the investigations completed during the year, of which 3 were substantiated  or  partly  substantiated.  The  Authority  was  totally  satisfied  with  the investigations carried out, and where complaints were substantiated the Authority approved the disciplinary action taken.

Table 3 – Outcome of complaints supervised

Outcome  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008

At the end of 2008, 8 cases were still being investigated, compared to 20 at the end of 2007. Table 4  shows  the  outcome  of  the  2007  cases  brought  forward.  Only  one  case  is  still outstanding at the time of this report, and 2 cases were found to be partially substantiated.

Table 4 – Outcome of 2007 cases brought forward Outcome  Number

TIME TO COMPLETE INVESTIGATIONS

The Authority is very conscious that, in the interests of both the complainant and the officers concerned, investigations should be completed as quickly as practicable with no unnecessary delays.

Unfortunately, the investigation of a number of complaints in 2008 and 2007 has taken a considerable  time  to  complete.  While  in  some  cases  this  has  been  due  to  the  level  of investigation required, the pressure on limited Police resources has also been a contributory factor, compounded in the early part of 2008 by alternative demands on resources as a result of the historic abuse enquiry.

In  addition  there  has  been  an  increase  in  the  number  of  cases  where,  as  a  result  of  the investigation, the matter has been referred to the Law Officers' Department to assess whether a potential criminal action is merited. Although to date, no case has been treated as criminal, this inevitably extends the period before a complaint can be finally resolved.

The Authority believes strongly that more consideration needs to be given to setting more defined completion deadlines, by limiting avoidable delays and ensuring the correct resources are available. It is also proposed to report on average completion times in future Reports to help in assessing how standards are being maintained.

BUDGET

The budget allocated to the Authority for 2008 was £18,000. This has been unchanged since 2001.  The  actual  costs  incurred  in  2008  amounted  to  £18,484,  which  included  significant additional unexpected expenses incurred as a result of the forced relocation from its previous office.

All investigation costs are borne by States of Jersey Police, including the reimbursement of expenditure incurred by external Police Forces where they are utilised.

PROPOSED NEW POLICE LAW

During the year, the Minister for Home Affairs asked the Authority to comment on early drafts of a proposed new Police Law, and the Authority submitted a detailed written response to the Minister.

MEMBERSHIP OF THE AUTHORITY

Advocate Debbie Lang was appointed with effect from 1st January 2008 for a term of 3 years, and Tom Slattery was reappointed for a further 3 years from the same date. The remaining members are due to retire at the end of 2009 in accordance with their terms of appointment. Retiring members are eligible for reappointment.

Jersey Police Complaints Authority 9th April 2009