Response to reports of harassment - Sussex Police, February – March 2018

Between 26 February and 15 March 2018, a woman contacted Sussex Police a number of times regarding her ex-husband’s behaviour and damage to the family’s property. She described her ex-husband as “becoming more and more aggressive.”

The woman met with the same police officer on 1 and 10 March 2018. On 1 March 2018, the woman said she did not want to provide a full statement, but just wanted police to make a record of her ex-husband’s behaviour. She said she would contact police if his behaviour escalated. A risk assessment form, including a questionnaire regarding domestic violence risk, was completed, and the file was closed.

On 8 March 2018, the woman spoke to a Sussex Police call handler after four vehicles belonging to her and her family were damaged. She also said her ex-husband had been harassing her since she had last spoken to police. The evidence suggested the call handler failed to obtain details of this further harassment, instead updating the original harassment crime record. The call handler also closed the criminal damage file because there was no evidence to suggest it was the woman’s ex-husband who had caused the damage.

On 10 March 2018, the woman returned to the police station and made a full statement, stating she wished to support police action. Her case was passed to an investigator.

On 16 March 2018, Sussex Police received a 999 call from the woman’s sister, who said that the woman’s ex-husband had fired shots at the property the woman shared with her family. During this incident, the man shot and killed the woman and her mother.

Our investigators obtained and analysed a large number of documents, reports and statements. We investigated allegations that the call handler had failed to recognise the further harassment, and inappropriately downgraded the incident. Our investigators interviewed the call handler, who answered all questions.

Our investigators also interviewed the call handler’s supervisor and the officers who were involved in the police investigations, and obtained statements from other call handlers who had spoken to the woman on the phone.

The actions of all the police officers and police staff members were analysed against policies, guidance, other accounts, and the police standards of professional behaviour relevant to their roles.

At the end of the investigation, based on the evidence available, we were of the opinion that the call handler may have a case to answer for misconduct for failing to complete a list of actions set by their supervisor, and for failing to record the additional allegations of harassment made by the woman, and had therefore breached standards of professional behaviour ‘instructions’ and ‘work and responsibilities’. We completed our investigation in December 2018.

After reviewing our report, Sussex Police agreed the call handler should attend a misconduct meeting. At a disciplinary meeting held in early 2019 the allegation against the call handler was found proven, with the call handler receiving management advice.

Our investigation also highlighted areas of learning for Sussex Police around reviewing training for officers and staff when using a stalking risk assessment tool and completing risk assessment questionnaires. The force agreed to review relevant areas.