Recommendations - Metropolitan Police Service, July 2021

· Ref: 2021/149640

Recommendation date: 27 July 2021

Response due: 21 September 2021

Published: 14 January 2022

Custody and detention

The identified learning relates to a serious injury while in custody in February 2021. The detainee had been arrested on suspicion of possession of Class A drugs. Two small packets of brown and white substances were found on the detainee. These packets had been seized by the arresting officer and were mislaid in custody. They were subsequently found and it is believed they had been erroneously binned by a member of cleaning staff while clearing rubbish from the custody area but were eventually recovered from the refuse bag.

View on IOPC website

Recommendations (2)

Recommendation 1 Accepted

Recommendation

The IOPC recommends that the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) should conduct a formal review of the custody procedures regarding the safekeeping of seized evidence before it enters an evidential store. It is important that the procedures in place are sufficiently … Read more

Force Response

Accepted action: The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) Met Detention Command partially accepts this recommendation. In 2019/2020 a formal review of some key risk areas was conducted. The review was named Met Search and was led by a Custody Inspector and … Read more

Recommendation 2 Accepted

Recommendation

The IOPC recommends that the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) should review the custody handover practices to ensure there is adequate monitoring of occupied cells during handover periods. We would recommend that as part of this, it is also ensured that … Read more

Force Response

Accepted action: The ‘MPS’ Met Detention have reviewed and accept this recommendation by the IOPC. Met Det Senior Leadership Team (“SLT”) and Safety and Compliance Team has set clear expectation on handover conduct. This has been communicated to staff via … Read moreAccepted action: The ‘MPS’ Met Detention have reviewed and accept this recommendation by the IOPC. Met Det Senior Leadership Team (“SLT”) and Safety and Compliance Team has set clear expectation on handover conduct. This has been communicated to staff via a number of mediums to include all staff emails, briefings, staff professional development and most recently in the February 2021 Command newsletter. However, a review of Met Detention Custody Policy and associated role profile documents, has revealed that this expectation is not adequately set out. The expectation is that all cell buzzers must be responded to without delay, at all times. Policy around cell isolation recognises that the cell call buzzer system is the only way for a detainee to summons help in a medical emergency and as such any cell isolations must be authorised by a Custody Officer and adequately justified. Recent organisational learning following a public complaint was disseminated across Met Detention covering this exact issue as above (Feb 2021 newsletter). As the custody estate lacks uniformity, owing to the age of the suites, each Custody Manager/CSI was tasked with making arrangements with their team to ensure detainees were adequately monitored/catered for during handover periods and none were ignored in favour of the handover process. This may involve a physical visit or a cell intercom interaction to assess the nature of the assistance required depending on the equipment available. This recommendation has unveiled that our current handover policy states, “Where possible all other custody business should be paused to allow the handover to take place. If the handover takes place in or around the booking in area, the custody suite should be cleared of all other personnel. Custody officers and other custody staff, including the healthcare professional (if available), should carry out the handover together.” Custody business is a vague term and could be interpreted to mean answering call buzzers which is not in line with Senior Leadership expectation. As such a policy update needs to be considered to ensure this message is clear and that any absent staff members conducted checks are fully briefed where required. This will be the responsibility of the Grip Sergeant. Show less