Following an Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) investigation into a police shooting in Liverpool, Merseyside Police has made changes to ensure more incidents are fully captured by officers’ body-worn video cameras.
Our independent investigation, which followed a mandatory referral from the force following the non-fatal shooting of a woman in Toxteth on 9 July 2020, concluded in March. We found no indication that any police officer may have behaved in a manner that would justify the bringing of disciplinary proceedings or committed a criminal offence.
However, due to a force policy in place at the time, a setting on the officers’ body-worn cameras, which would have allowed the moment the shot was fired to be recorded, was not enabled. This has now been addressed as a result of our recommendation to Merseyside Police.
Following the incident, we attended the scene and conducted a detailed examination. During the investigation, we obtained witness statements from police officers and members of the public; conducted house to house enquiries; and launched a witness appeal. We analysed CCTV and body-worn camera footage; downloads from Tasers, radio and telephone transmissions; and information contained in experts’ reports.
We found the force incident manager had decided officers equipped with body armour and Tasers should attend the scene to assess the situation following reports of a woman with knife acting erratically in North Hill Street. Two firearms officers, who were equipped with Tasers but who had not been specifically deployed, told us they were in the area and decided to attend to support their colleagues after learning of the incident from radio transmissions.
During the incident, one of the firearms officers drew their Taser. The woman came towards the officers with the knife in her hand. The other drew their pistol and fired once at the woman, seriously injuring her.
The woman continues to recover from her injuries, having been discharged from hospital in June.
Following the conclusion of the investigation, we issued a statutory recommendation to the force in relation to the use of body-worn video cameras. While the devices have a 30-second pre-record feature, allowing footage to be captured prior to being activated, force policy was not to enable this setting due to its impact on battery life. It meant that despite the officers activating their body-worn cameras to record when they first approached the woman, the footage only began after the woman had been shot.
In its response, the force confirmed it would be using the pre-record feature in future and had been working to address concerns about the battery life of the cameras.
IOPC Regional Director Amanda Rowe said: “This was an extremely distressing incident that left a woman with very serious injuries and we wish her well with her continued recovery.
“We recognise the impact this has had on those involved, as well as the wider community. That is why it was so important for this use of potentially lethal force to be subject to a detailed investigation that was independent of the police.
“The officers involved put themselves in harm’s way to protect members of the public and we found the use of force was necessary and proportionate in the circumstances. However, we did find opportunities for the force to learn from this incident and we welcome the change to the way body-worn cameras are being used, which will benefit officers and the public alike.”
We also issued a learning recommendation regarding the need for all staff to be reminded that officers involved in a shooting should not be identified during the post-incident procedures.
And learning was identified in relation to the storage of crime scene logs after we had difficulty obtaining this information. As result, the force has developed a new process to ensure records are stored in a consistent manner and circulated details to staff.
In addition, we found individual learning for the two firearms officers, who should have informed the force incident manager of their decision to attend the incident. We decided this was best dealt with through a reflective conversation with supervisors rather than disciplinary action. Both officers were treated as witnesses throughout the investigation.
A summary of our investigation and details of our statutory recomendations can be found here.
An act of parliament that provides the core framework of police powers to combat crime and provide codes of practice for the exercise of these powers.
Leads and manages the development of the police service in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.
The body that represents the interests of all police constables, sergeants, and inspectors.
Deals with someone’s inability or failure to perform to a satisfactory level, but without breaching the Standards of Professional Behaviour.
Focuses on putting an issue right and preventing it from happening again by encouraging those involved to reflect on their actions and learn. It is not a disciplinary process or a disciplinary outcome.
Department within a police force that deals with complaints and conduct matters.
Refers to lower-level misconduct or performance-related issues, which are dealt with in a proportionate and constructive manner.
This means doing what is appropriate in the circumstances, taking into account the facts and the context in which the complaint has been raised, within the framework of legislation and guidance.
The average is calculated using the individual results of the forces in that most similar force group.
An investigation carried out by IOPC staff.
Carried out by the police under their own direction and control. The IOPC sets the terms of reference and receives the investigation report when it is complete. Complainants have a right of appeal following a supervised investigation (unless it is an investigation into a direction and control matter).
This act sets out how the police complaints system operates.
How a police force is run, for example policing standards or policing policy.
An investigation carried out by the police under the direction and control of the IOPC.
The organisation that is responsible for assessing how to deal with a complaint. For example – whether it can be handled locally or reaches the criteria for referral to the IOPC. The appropriate authority may be the chief officer of the police force or the PCC for the force. If a complaint investigation finds that someone has a case to answer for misconduct, the appropriate authority is responsible for arranging any misconduct proceedings. If you make a complaint, the appropriate authority for your case will contact you.
An intelligence-led agency with law enforcement powers, it is also responsible for reducing the harm that is caused to people and communities by serious organised crime.
Policing bodies include police and crime commissioners, the Common Council for the City of London, or the Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime.
Investigations carried out entirely by the police. Complainants have a right of appeal following a local investigation (unless it is an investigation into a direction and control matter).
IOPC guidance to the police service and police authorities on the handling of complaints.
A complaint or recordable conduct matter that doesn’t need to be referred to the IOPC, but where the seriousness or circumstances justifies referral.
Parameters within which an investigation is conducted.
A person is adversely affected if he or she suffers any form of loss or damage, distress or inconvenience, if he or she is put in danger or is otherwise unduly put at risk of being adversely affected.
This is where a manager deals with the way someone has behaved. It can include: showing the police officer or member of staff how their behaviour fell short of expectations set out in the Standards of Professional Behaviour; identifying expectations for future conduct; or addressing any underlying causes of misconduct.
This could be the Police and Crime Commissioner, the Common Council for the City of London, or the Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime.
A flexible process for dealing with complaints that can be adapted to the needs of the complainant. It may involve, for example, providing information and an explanation, an apology, or a meeting between the complainant and the officer involved.
A flexible process for dealing with complaints that can be adapted to the needs of the complainant. It may involve, for example, providing information and an explanation, an apology, or a meeting between the complainant and the officer involved.
A breach of standards of professional behaviour by police officers or staff so serious it could justify their dismissal.
A matter where no complaint has been received, but where there is an indication that a person serving with the police may have committed a criminal offence or behaved in a manner that would justify disciplinary proceedings.
Disapplication means that a police force may handle a complaint in whatever way it thinks fit, including not dealing with it under complaints legislation. This may only happen in certain circumstances where the complaint fits one or more of the grounds for disapplication set out in law.
The ending of an ongoing investigation into a complaint, conduct matter or DSI matter. An investigation may only be discontinued if it meets one or more of the grounds for discontinuance set out in law.
Quarter 1 covers 1 April - 30 June
Quarter 2 covers 1 April - 30 September
Quarter 3 covers 1 April - 31 December
Quarter 4 covers the full financial year (1 April - 31 March).
You can request a review/appeal if you’re not satisfied with how your complaint has been handled.
Used to house anyone who has been detained.
Complainants have the right to appeal to the IOPC if a police force did not record their complaint or notify the correct police force if it was made originally to the wrong force.
The purpose of an investigation is to establish the facts behind a complaint, conduct matter, or DSI matter and reach conclusions. An investigator looks into matters and produces a report that sets out and analyses the evidence. There are three types of investigations: local, directed and independent.
The ending of an ongoing investigation into a complaint, conduct matter or DSI matter. An investigation may only be discontinued if it meets one or more of the grounds for discontinuance set out in law.
The type of behaviour being complained about. A single complaint case can have one or many allegations attached.
A person who makes a complaint about the conduct of someone serving with the police.
The ending of an ongoing investigation into a complaint, conduct matter or DSI matter. An investigation may only be discontinued if it meets one or more of the grounds for discontinuance set out in law.
List of officers and staff who have been dismissed from policing, or would have been if they had not retired or resigned.
The type of behaviour being complained about. A single complaint case can have one or many allegations attached.
Disapplication means that a police force may handle a complaint in whatever way it thinks fit, including not dealing with it under complaints legislation. This may only happen in certain circumstances where the complaint fits one or more of the grounds for disapplication set out in law.
An independent judicial officer, the coroner enquires into deaths reported to him/her.
A breach of the Standards of Professional Behaviour that would justify at least a written warning.
No further action may be taken with regard to a complaint if the complainant decides to retract their allegation(s).
A record is made of a complaint, giving it formal status as a complaint under the Police Reform Act 2002.
This is a format where information is written in plain English and short sentences.
The IOPC must be notified about specific types of complaint or incidents to be able to decide how they should be dealt with.
No further action may be taken with regard to a complaint if the complainant decides to retract their allegation(s).
Casework involves assessing appeals. Casework staff also have a role in overseeing the police complaints system to help ensure police forces handle complaints in the best possible way.
Disapplication means that a police force may handle a complaint in whatever way it thinks fit, including not dealing with it under complaints legislation. This may only happen in certain circumstances where the complaint fits one or more of the grounds for disapplication set out in law.
Conduct includes acts, omissions, statements and decisions (whether actual, alleged or inferred). For example: language used and the manner or tone of communications.
You can request a review/appeal if you’re not satisfied with how your complaint has been handled.
You can request a review/appeal if you’re not satisfied with how your complaint has been handled.