Recommendation AR-2: Protocol for Post-Incident Debriefing
From The Report of the Azelle Rodney Inquiry, published 5 July 2013.
Recommendation
At an early date there should be liaison between the IPCC, the MPS and ACPO (and, more significantly, lawyers acting for each) with a view to establishing a protocol for the future conduct in the event of a shooting by a police officer of an early debriefing as an obligation equal and complementary to any IPCC investigation.
In brief (written by this site)
The Inquiry recommended establishing a protocol for early debriefings following fatal police shootings. In conclusions from Commander Neil Basu's review in June 2014, the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) stated that it had engaged with the recommendation but had been unable to secure agreement or cooperation from the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) (Metropolitan Police Service response, Jun 2014). The MPS added that debriefs would be disclosable in future judicial proceedings and could not be fully anonymised, restricting their effectiveness (Metropolitan Police Service response, Jun 2014). In August 2014, Deputy Chief Constable (DCC) Simon Chesterman, National Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) Lead for Armed Policing, stated that the MPS, the College of Policing, and ACPO had produced approved practice for conducting debriefs in death or serious injury cases (Simon Chesterman, Aug 2014).
AI-generated summary of the record on this page, checked by a second model and automatic checks, 19 Oct 2026. The record below is the sources' own words.
About this summary
This recommendation applies across many organisations. The record reflects central policy activity; adoption in individual organisations may vary.
Government response
DCC Chesterman agreed with recommendation 2 in his own Tayport review, and AC Rowley endorsed his national recommendation reproduced below. The MPS has actively engaged with this recommendation through the head of Professional standards and the Deputy OCU Commander of SCO19. We have been unable to secure agreement or co-operation from the IPCC to date, although a meeting has been arranged on the 28th April 2014 at the ARI in order to discuss these issues. The reality is that any debrief process will be disclosable evidence in any future judicial proceedings and is not wholly capable of being anonymised. This will restrict its effectiveness.
How this response relates to the recommendation
Site note: This document is on the Inquiry's own website, which closed in 2015. The link is to the UK Government Web Archive capture of 6 April 2015, the only copy on the public record. The review is a two-column table, so the passage is taken from a table-aware extraction: a line-based one interleaves the columns and scatters the sentence. The table row this passage sits in is keyed to the Inquiry report paragraph that carries the recommendation.
Delivery
No statement on delivery from Metropolitan Police Service has been found in the sources searched (last checked 2 October 2026). This is separate from the response above.
What other bodies have found
In their own words. These do not change the delivery statement above.
Association of Chief Police Officers (12 August 2014)
The Metropolitan Police Service, College of Policing and the National ACPO Lead for Armed Policing have worked together to produce approved practice for conducting Organisational Learning Debriefs in Death or Serious Injury Cases. We recognise that previous practice of only conducting debriefs in exceptional circumstances limited our ability to learn from experience in a timely manner. Whilst it is imperative to allow an independent investigation to progress we should act, as soon as practicable, in order to identify areas which can help improve public safety. Conducting a debrief in controlled circumstances is a way of achieving that purpose.
From: Comment by DCC Simon Chesterman for Publication on the Azelle Rodney Inquiry Website to Accompany the Organisational Learning Debrief Note, Authorised Professional Practice in Death or Serious Injury Cases, Simon Chesterman
Site note: This document is on the Inquiry's own website, which closed in 2015. The link is to the UK Government Web Archive capture of 6 April 2015, the only copy on the public record. The passage is from DCC Simon Chesterman's comment, published as the National ACPO Lead for Armed Policing, which names the Metropolitan Police Service, the College of Policing and the National ACPO Lead as its authors. The site files it under the Association of Chief Police Officers, the body its author signed for.
Site note: The source gives this passage once, for recommendations 2 and 3 together. The same words are recorded on AR-2 and AR-3.
Azelle Rodney Inquiry (2 May 2014)
The MPS with the College of Policing, and in consultation with the IPCC, has drafted an extensive Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) covering the procedures for conducting organisational learning debriefs in cases of 'Death or Serious Injury' (DSI) following police contact which are referred to the IPCC. ACPO will seek to ratify this SOP w/c 12 May 2014 at the Armed Policing National Working Group. The MPS is already in the process of implementing the changes through a working group with its Directorate of Professional Standards.
From: Azelle Rodney Inquiry: Recommendations Update
Site note: This document is on the Inquiry's own website, which closed in 2015. The link is to the UK Government Web Archive capture of 6 April 2015, the only copy on the public record.
Site note: The source gives this passage once, for recommendations 2 and 3 together. The same words are recorded on AR-2 and AR-3.
Responsible bodies
Themes and tags
Who has spoken
- Metropolitan Police Service
Response - Association of Chief Police Officers
Finding - Azelle Rodney Inquiry
Finding