The evidence in relation to the seven complaints that WMP interviewed young witnesses (under the age of 18) in an inappropriate way was more clear-cut.
One complainant, who was 15 at the time, described being so upset that his mother intervened. Another person who was also 15 at the time recalled being stopped by police officers on his way home from school, and being asked to get in the police car, where he was interviewed; a family member spotted this and intervened. A third teenager recalled being interviewed by two WMP officers at home when his parents were out. He was asked a series of leading questions and said the officers were aggressive.
Guidance at the time stated that when the police interviewed anyone under the age of 18 as a witness, there should have been an appropriate adult present. However, this was only guidance and not a requirement; it appears this was not always followed by WMP officers working in Merseyside in the aftermath of the disaster.
By contrast, the IOPC established that the ‘house to house’ questionnaire used by WMP officers when interviewing local residents in Sheffield had advice printed on it to the effect that no questionnaire should be taken from a juvenile. No such advice was included on the questionnaire used for interviewing Liverpool supporters, or indeed on the other supporter questionnaires.
Regardless of the instructions, officers should have been sufficiently alert to recognise when witnesses were vulnerable or where a traumatised witness had become too distressed to continue the interview.
As a result, the IOPC upheld all but one of the complaints about WMP interviewing under 18s without an appropriate adult present.
It should be noted that WMP interviewed many under 18s in relation to the disaster; some in the company of a parent or other adult, some on their own. The majority of these did not lead to complaint. This may suggest that in other instances, the interviews were conducted more sympathetically.
