10.03.2015 Views

Final Report of the Morris Inquiry: The Case for Change

Final Report of the Morris Inquiry: The Case for Change

Final Report of the Morris Inquiry: The Case for Change

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

THE CASE FOR CHANGE<br />

7.86 Whilst we have received evidence praising <strong>the</strong> way in which DPS dealt with a<br />

case, this was very much <strong>the</strong> exception ra<strong>the</strong>r than <strong>the</strong> rule.<br />

7.87 We would like again to put on record our thanks to all <strong>the</strong>se individuals who<br />

took time to tell us about <strong>the</strong>ir experiences. We know that <strong>for</strong> many <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>m <strong>the</strong><br />

process <strong>of</strong> coming be<strong>for</strong>e <strong>the</strong> <strong>Inquiry</strong> and reliving <strong>the</strong>ir experiences was somewhat<br />

distressing. Without exception, all <strong>the</strong> individuals we heard from were motivated by<br />

a desire to prevent ano<strong>the</strong>r person going through what <strong>the</strong>y had experienced.<br />

7.88 We hope that <strong>the</strong> MPS listens to what <strong>the</strong>y have told us and finds <strong>the</strong><br />

determination to learn from <strong>the</strong>ir experiences.<br />

7.89 We have attempted to group our concerns under convenient headings but,<br />

as will be clear from <strong>the</strong> evidence, some cases are illustrative <strong>of</strong> more than one issue.<br />

Delay – “Lives on hold”<br />

7.90 We have already referred to <strong>the</strong> issue <strong>of</strong> delay as being one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> criticisms<br />

we have received in relation to <strong>the</strong> Regulations <strong>the</strong>mselves. It is one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> reasons<br />

we are recommending wholesale re<strong>for</strong>m.<br />

7.91 However, we have received evidence which would indicate that <strong>the</strong> delays<br />

that occur in pr<strong>of</strong>essional standards matters in <strong>the</strong> MPS are not solely a result <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> system.<br />

<strong>Case</strong> <strong>of</strong> Ms JJ<br />

Ms JJ was one <strong>of</strong> a number <strong>of</strong> <strong>of</strong>ficers subject to a disciplinary investigation arising out <strong>of</strong> an<br />

incident in February 1999. <strong>The</strong> incident resulted in criminal proceedings against two<br />

members <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> public and also a public inquiry. <strong>The</strong> public inquiry reported in January 2003.<br />

Despite <strong>the</strong> investigation having started in 1999, it took a fur<strong>the</strong>r 18 months after <strong>the</strong> report<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> public inquiry (i.e. until July 2004) <strong>for</strong> decisions to be taken about whe<strong>the</strong>r any <strong>of</strong>ficers<br />

should face disciplinary charges.<br />

Even when a decision was made that <strong>the</strong>y should face charges, those involved were not told<br />

what <strong>the</strong>se charges would be. <strong>The</strong>y were told that <strong>the</strong> discipline team had not yet had time<br />

to decide, notwithstanding <strong>the</strong> fact that <strong>the</strong> investigation had started over 5 years earlier.<br />

154

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!