If anyone was wondering why we Caution so many offenders, it is really very simple.
1. We have been told to increase the number of offenders dealt with ‘out of court’ and therefore we have a target.
2. Many offenders will ‘cough’ the offence in an interview if they know they will get a Caution; quite often there is no other evidence, so any other strategy would be a waste of time, we would not get our detection and …… see 1. above.
Just in case the public are concerned that violent or dangerous offenders may be ‘getting away with it’ by receiving a Caution or PND ticket, fear not. The vast majority of offenders, if they ever bothered to turn up at Court, would probably only get a conditional discharge or a meaningless community sentence in any case.
Gadget Note: I feel the need to repeat the first bit – we have been told to increase the number of offenders dealt with ‘out of court’. For the politicos to act in shocked bewilderment and mock outrage is as fake as their second home tax exemptions.
So, just to be clear, less then a week ago, various politicians including Jack Straw were shouting from the rooftops that the Police were overstepping the bounds by handing out these cautions. The mainstream press were practically wetting themselves to help Jack the lads calls…
And now, word has come from on high… To not only carry on as before, but to increase it?
Is that right?
Looks like it, doesn’t it?
“We have been told to increase the number of offenders dealt with ‘out of court’ and therefore we have a target.”
So, Mr Catcheside was just a target then?
I hope it was worth it to the statsmongers, because the increase in loathing of the police amongst previously law abiding people must have taken a sharp upward tick at reading that story…
Its a real shame about the way this was reported, because as I read it, Mr Catcheside acted in such as way as to cause someone to fear for their safety enough to make a police report. He was dealt with and given a PND which means he doesn’t have a criminal record, and there’s an option to contest it in court if he wants.
If he HADN’T been arrested, a sad-faced council worker would have been in the Daily Mail under a headline of “Assaulted trying to make repairs – Police do nothing” or something similar.
“…because as I read it, Mr Catcheside acted in such as way as to cause someone to fear for their safety enough to make a police report.”
And the police were obviously in agreement about this dire threat to life and linb because they turned up….six days later.
“If he HADN’T been arrested, a sad-faced council worker would have been in the Daily Mail under a headline of “Assaulted trying to make repairs – Police do nothing” or something similar.”
I think even the ‘Daily Fail’ would be wary of that one, given the ‘assault’ consisted of no more than harsh language…
“….fear for their safety….”
An awful lot of peaceful attendees at the G20 Summit experienced the same feeling when faced with numerous unidentifiable, baton-weilding individuals.
Some of the “b-w i”s were even photographed, but I read no reports of dawn raids to arrest them, & HAVING THEIR DNA TAKEN.
The thing is, he wasn’t arrested for “using a single swear word” he was actually arrested on suspicion of assault. The DM totally overlooks that fact as stated by the police at the end of the article.
Though I agree that the PND outcome is solely target driven and words of advice would have sufficed, the actual way the police went about dealing with him is hardly ridiculous. Comments about his cell “having no windows” make me laugh. What do people expect? A room with a view? sntpc is spot on as well about how this could be twisted against the police whatever the outcome.
“The thing is, he wasn’t arrested for “using a single swear word” he was actually arrested on suspicion of assault.”
Not according to the ‘Fail’: “The official complained of feeling ‘threatened’ and six days later Mr Catcheside was arrested at 5.35am on suspicion of ‘causing harassment, alarm or distress in a public place’.”
And not according to the police spokescretin either: “A Cambridgeshire police spokesman said they had been following ‘national policy’ in their response.
She added: ‘We were responding to reports of an assault, which is a serious offence.
‘The suspect was arrested at the earliest possible opportunity, which happened to be at 5.35am.
‘There was not enough evidence to suggest he had committed an assault…”
Still, they were ‘following national policy’. So that’s reassuring, isn’t it?
“Comments about his cell “having no windows” make me laugh. What do people expect?”
Well, you can’t blame him for milking it a bit. Was the arrest justified, that’s the main point. How is the average law-abiding reader going to view the police now, that’s the point too.
There is no doubt that on the face of it the arrest was uneccesary-it was probably done to hit a target and
get the Supts bonus.If I had been the custody officer I wouldnt have let this crock of shit even get near the back door.
He could have been dealt with at home and if necesary given a PND.
I wish was a solicitor specialising in unlawful arrestcases cos I would be on a fortune by now.
Their DNA is already on file. I also love the media when they report “dawn raids” and “six hours in custody”
Pretty much a standard arrest dealt with quite expeditiously then?
Nys – there’s a whole load of press “sayings” aren’t there? One of my favourites is “Squad Car”. I does actually make my blood boil! Any others anyone?
Sounds like he could have been dealt with by contemporaneous note interview, reported for summons (you have an address for him) and then issued with FPND.
It’s a relatively minor offence in the grand scheme of things. Having said that it’s upto the arresting officer to justify, not me.
Joe public – I’ll bet some of the bobbies at the G20 were in fear of the their safety after being dramatically out numbered by the baying mob spitting and screaming in front of them .
Undoubtably.
But the incident highlighted by JuliaM is that a person who “feels” threatened can make an allegation that results in an (innocent) individual having his DNA taken, and kept for 6 years.
A “feeling” is only an unprovable personal perception.
As “A Tangled Rope” cynically blogged yesterday:-
“A government spokeswoman said:
We believe that six years will give us enough time to find something that you are guilty of, or – if all else fails – it will give us enough time to make up a new law to make whatever it was you were doing the first time you were nicked against the law too.”
http://atangledrope.blogspot.com/2009/11/stop-that-right-now-whatever-it-is.html
.
I read it that they responded to a complaint of assault but subsequently issued the ticket once there was insufficient evidence to substantiate a complaint of assault – a PND CANNOT be issued (and compliant) without the consent AND admission of the recipient…….
This isn’t a new dictat, this is an old one. The point IG is making is that the reason there are so many cautions is because we were told to do as many out-of-court disposals as possible.
Now, the politicians who gave us those targets are acting shocked because public opinion has gone against them and trying to act surprised and horrified that so many crims ‘escape’ justice as a result (IG’s point about the ‘punishment’ they’d receive if they went to court instead is a valid one, though.)
I think we should set up a petition to Oxford English dictionary to get the word ‘politician’ more clearly defined as two-faced, deceitful, and self-serving.
As for Mr Catcheside, as always it’d be beneficial to hear both sides of the story. On the face of it though, it seems draconian and the PND (Penalty Notice for Disorder – the ‘ticket’ he’s holding up to the camera) disposal does, indeed, seem to be driven by these targets.
Exactly the same thing happened when the media sniffed out the ’scandal’ of foreign prisoners being released rather than deported.
The government acted horrified and promised to rectify this tragic mistake – despite the fact that those of us working in Immigration knew full well that releasing dangerous foreign-born criminals to prey on the British populace was not a mistake, it was the government’s deliberate policy; assisted as always by the Human Rights Act.
Two days after the Commissioner went on TV to act surprised and remorseful about the number of cautions and tickets issued, I received yet another email enjoining me to hand out PNDs like they were sweeties.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/dorset/8354094.stm
The above is a good story, and as a serving police officer I am fully behind this guy.
He had to go as far as a judicial review to get justice.
One of the things that puts me off going for Inspector is the fact that I would be handing cautions to people in these sort of cases. I couldn’t live with myself.
Except in this case it was a Conditional Caution, which has to be approved by the CPS, so the Inspector clearly didn’t think a caution would be enough. But I get your meaning. And well done on this guy – I wonder if he’ll ever get his compensation though?
Notwithstanding the above point about the fact this was a conditional caution issued by CPS, the fact is that discretion remains there for inspectors to decline to issue cautions where they believe it is inappropriate to do so … someone assaults a victim to the extent they did here, you just refer it to CPS (and you could outline how the inspector thinks a caution is inappropriate because of: level on injury; aggravating factors; etc.,) You don’t HAVE to give a caution.
We also need to take some of the blame. I get a number of staff come to me for a disposal decision and a significant number want to go for the easiest option for them and not what is right for the victim or justice.
Some of our people need to understand why they wear a uniform. It is not about a quick disposal with a ticket or a caution. But to be fair to them, this is what weak leadership and a performance culture has caused.
We have been told to issue more tickets, we have been told to divert offenders from court, we have had our charging decision making taken off us.
CPS are a bloody disgrace and now they are rowing back on the debacle of precharge advice. Lost files, late cases, shit decisions, victims let down and justice fails.
One of mine suggested to me today, why don’t we make CPS have to inform victims of their decisions and of court results rather than the police. Bloody good idea if you ask me, give that man a bonus payment.
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article6911752.ece
Labour have fcuked it all up and guess who is going to sort it out again the poor old bill. Unfortunately I think we are going to be too late on this one.
Couldn’t agree with you more … various officers I’ve had the privilege of leading look at my like I’m mad when they come for consideration of a caution and I ask, “what does the victim think about that?” 100% of the time they look at me like I’m mad … weak leadership is everywhere. Except that isn’t leadership, is it …
Of course, when you then find your self being second guess by some thick c**t at 9am who speaks fluent GANTT and who last hit the streets prior to the point where NuLabour fu**ed my country, it impresses upon you the importance of your spine, your experience and standing your ground.
My greatest achievement as an inspector is my failure to get promoted each time I try … it settles a deeply held personal fear that I might be morphing against my will into a suitable candidate for middle-management!
System of law should be team work, in finding the evil that dothe lurk, apprehending the evil doer, and prosecuting same and applying Justice to prevent repeats and compensate the victim. There appears to be enough checks and balances to limit a miscarriage, but it dothe appear to be a game that the Mops loose out in every which way. i.e there be chaos in the system and society is failing.
Kind of understandable when 20 % of the population does not contribute to society but just consume, and 20% just play with money moving it from it on the Merry go round another 20% have done their bit and watching the games played and yet another 20 % have yet to join the adults in the game of life while the final 20% do all the work in trying to feed, clothe house and prevent theft.
Just a thought.
“Violent offences such as that against Mr Guest continue to fall in Dorset for the seventh successive year.”
How many victims have been put off reporting them by cases like this?
Couldn’t agree more about the performance culture reducing the quality of service offered by those who pander to it. The only time I ever seek a caution from an inspector is if it’s in the best interests of all involved and I always ask the a/p if they think that it’s suitable also. It might not be policy but I am not fussed, it’s my policy.
good on him, that looks VERY nasty, thet thug that did that should have got a custodial.
– I am sure though (slightly on a tangent) that he was one of the examples of “violent crime resolved only with a caution” in the news the other day…..i think i recognise his picture……so that report wasn’t strictly true was it…….”media misrepresent facts shock!”
It is about time the decision to prosecute was handed back to the police without political interference or cost implications, you cannot put justice aside for cost reasons, justice must be seen to be done, not passed off.
In my division alone we have two towns of large proportion and a city, we had a Mags in each plus a Crown Court. they were open for business every day. The population has grown over the last 30 years but we now have one mags and one CC covering that same division. Does that mean the criminal element has reduced therefore the need for Courts has reduced? I think not. We used to get by quite nicely with a prosecuting solicitor who would actually confer with the officer giving evidence prior to a case and take instruction from him, any offers from the defence would also be discussed with the officer. Now we have CPS departments where there is little contact with the O.I.C. I was lucky in that I was in a position to visit the offices and speak to the CPS solicitor personally, a luxury not available to most officers.
so- what do you do with a male that has exposed himself to a 13-year old, the 13-old will not give evidence (she is understandable scared) ???
under the present system – if he admits it (he did) he can have a caution- he is on the Sex offenders reg for two years and gets a listing on the Police National Computer.
If we return to the days WITHOUT cautions- he walks, no register and no PNC.
Justice?
Well presumably you have a s.9 from the victim that can be served as evidence at court. If he has confessed and there is nothing wrong with the way the confession has been obtained then I’d have thought that he would plead at the 1st appearance anyway.
I agree that a caution is a reasonable outcome in these circumstances and removes the risk of his pleading not guilty.
Personally, I don’t have a problem with cautions themselves, just with the inappropriate use of them. A few months ago I saw a knife point street robbery dealt with by way of caution. Have also seen possession with intent to supply class A dealt with by caution.
should be a video interview which is supposed to reduce the need for vulnerable&intimidated witnesses to attend court…..
CPS wont go to court without a servicable witness- full stop.
Under the above circs- he would walk.
There’s a bit about the Dalrymple /Radio 4 Law In Action thing here, Ranter.
The exchange at the end might appeal to readers of this blog:
A solicitor on the programme demurred slightly. ‘Actually,’ she said, ’sending people to prison will probably just send them back out again to re-offend.’
Dalrymple: ‘No, I’m not convinced by that at all. The argument that people reoffend when they leave prison is an argument for keeping them in for longer.’
Host: ‘So if we were to lock everyone up for very long periods of time, that would assist?’
Dalrymple: ‘It would assist, yes. I don’t think there’s much doubt about that.’
Sorry wrong post – meant to be a reply to Ranter on previous post.
All received! A quite amazing exchange I thought and the host and other guests really had no answer to anything he said, they almost spluttered out their responses.
If more people in positions of power and influence actually spoke from a position of common sense AND the truth then maybe society wouldn’t be in this FUBAR position, but then of course, such people invariably have vested interests to protect.
As with ‘climate change’ – to deny or fail to acknowledge the emperor’s new clothes (like Professor Ian Plimer from Adelaide University in Australia) is to be labelled a ‘denier’ or a ‘heretic’ so no proper discussion can take place.
Must go, have a two volume, 93 page manual to read about ‘How to ride a Pedal Cycle’ – well it is ACPO approved!
Of course, solicitors who say they are concerned about criminals being imprisoned for longer ‘because they will only come out to commit more crime’ do have a potential economic animus against longer imprisonment; viz, that if all the criminals are in jail there are no clients for the solicitors!
But I’m sure that would be a wholly cynical vuew to adopt.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/8354316.stm
THIS is where the system fails. A community order for a rape conviction??? Might as well have had a caution for all the good the trial did.
Why bother with the criminal justice system anymore, it is utterly fu*ked. And for 3 years, read 18 months as this ‘individual’ is a juvenile and will come under the YJB rather than HMP. So he’ll probably end up at a secure unit where they can have temper tantrums and demand McDonalds/ KFC – not to mention threatening the staff there to their heart’s content without fear of consequences. I truly fear for the future unless politicians give the Police and others back their ability to Police without constant interference; what is there to lose? They’ve tried so many shams, stunts and tricks that have all failed so there can only be nothing further to lose and everything to gain.
Gelding would be the answer / response / justice.
Does it really matter when
crap sentanced like 3 years
For the teenage sicko who raped
And kidnapped a 5 year old,
avoided custody via community
Order.
8 days later reoffends, and now
Has been given (wait for it)
a whole (wait for it) 3 Years
Min term. Ridiculous-lets
Drop the pretence of any
Semblence of punishment in this
Country and spend the public
Money that is pissed away on the
Courts on something else since
They are fast becoming a farce.
Perhaps a new system should be
instigated where the police push
the offender into a revolving
door at the front of the court,
and there’s a judge stood just
inside the front door of the
building to say ‘off you go
my boy’ come straight back out
free as a lark.
Since that’s virtually what
happens now already why not
save everyone’s money and time?
I could pick out 5 other
examples from the media this
month alone and we aren’t
even halfway!
(Typed on blackberry,
excuse the format/spelling,
tiny keys, small screens and
large hands are not a great
combination!)
Blackberry. Ahh. That explains it. Wondered what had happened to you, Binary. Thought that either you had an imitator or had consumed strong liqueur.
Thanks for the demo. Yet another reason for me to leave off getting a Blackberry!
Thought he was writing a poem at first!
http://www.policeoracle.com/news/Crack-Users-Sickening-Violence-Against-Child_20742.html
Here’s the link for the story he’s referring to.
How can you send an email using a piece of fruit?
Dont tell me-use an apple!
Retired Sgt – sadly what you came up with there is better than half the slogans i’ve heard from a mate who works in marketing for apple!
The above is for
sale-all offers considered
What I don’t understand is the fact that the police, the media, victims, the general public, in fact just about everybody except that stupid cow Chakrabati, is complaining that the courts are crap, judges are out of touch and pathetic, sentences are an insult to victims.
This is constant, but no one in power does a thing to get a grip of criminals. They do………..nothing.
Apart from pump their gums about nothing in particular.
Why aren’t polititians falling over themselves to win millions of votes by saying, “If you vote for me, GBH merchants will get locked up for double figures, dealers the same, watch out criminals – your days are numbered.”
I’d vote for them anyway, but fuck all happens. Let down again and again and again………………………
Mate, they haven’t got the money to build the necessary infrastructure and there is a lack of political will to tackle crime. Societies crime levels are always at or near the threshold of what the public are prepared to tolerate …
The British public have shown again and again and again (until they’re bored and I’m blind through paperwork) that they are prepared to tolerate a shit load of crime and they will STILL do nothing about it.
They will moan like fu*k, to bore the ar*e off the police about everything that’s wrong with the world, but ultimately are not prepared to stand up for anything they believe in because they lack a spine. This is true of SMTs, too.
A sad reflection to offer on Armistice Day, but sometimes I wonder whether the sacrifice was in vain.
Coldn’t agree with you more, mucker; question is, what DO the British public do? I’ve personally gone down the route (at work) of simply ignoring the latest bulletin from the Politburo on the grounds that its legal and ethical foundations were shaky at best or simply outside of the law at worst but there is always someone who will happily go along with this nonsense, irrespective of what I think.
Talk about fiddling while Rome burns; I should get angry and frequently do but most of the time I’m too busy trying to get the job done while the la-la rangers talk meaningfully about total cobblers they don’t understand but sounds good.
Fair point but every time one of us MOPs stands up for himself you f***ing lock us up!
withheld,
In fairness to me, my officers would testify to the number of times I’ve interfered with their instincts to ensre that MOPs who act get protected, fully. I have never been involved in ensuring that MOPs who acted in good faith then get prosecuted. I know it happens and everytime I read / see it, I feel ashmed of what I do. I see enough examples of the police ensuring the good people get protected to believe that the public could do more.
pc hawkeye
‘It is about time the decision to prosecute was handed back to the police without political interference or cost implications, you cannot put justice aside for cost reasons, justice must be seen to be done, not passed off’.
I viewed a document today and the decision to charge is returning to the police. Full circle I believe.
Yay!!
ONLY for summary-only offences, I’m afraid…
Zambia has one solution.
Prisons don’t feed criminals.
Their families have to.
Crime has dropped by 50%.
I liked the idea that an Indian rail company has started recruiting boxers and wrestlers on trains to enforce people paying for their tickets.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/6538362/Indian-trains-recruit-boxers-and-wrestlers-in-fight-against-ticketless-passengers.html
I’m not buying the cop line on this one; no one told you to cuff serious offences. There are a lot of lazy sods out there who are selling out and pretending its for the data.
Idiot. We caution serious offences when we have no evidence to charge save for a ‘cough’ in return for a caution.
Consider the Caution as an alternative to nothing at all.
We can get them on the RSO with a Caution.
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
I find that the words coming from jack straw’s mouth are as predictable as rainy summers.We all know that there is no punishment for criminals as the bleeding hearts (and human rights act) have all but abolished personal responsibilty ! Therefore it is clearly our fault that cautions are issued,and not the fault of (1) people committing offences (2) The weakest criminal justice system in the world (3) A corrupt spineless government that would sell its soul for more time in power.
As real police officers we go out to help people,politicians go out to feather their own nest and have little real conviction or integrity now days.
The truth hurts,but only if you care….
Putting aside the pressure from government to reach targets….
£80 penalty notice for theft/crim damage etc… Gadget you hit the nail on the head – this is more than they would get in court – so it is a better outcome!
Cautions – us coppers really like putting people to court but sometimes, like gadget says, it is all you can get. And it is better than nothing!
So if for example you’ve got a sex offence that is not going anywhere in court – maybe because the victim doesn’t want to give evidence – it is far better to caution than to take no further action – they will get a criminal record and also be on sex offenders register for five years!
Not so bad after all, all these diversion from court are they?
How many colleagues here have dealt with cases which have been charged only to be sent back by the Bench for a caution to be issued? I’ve done a few.
Interesting how the courts want more work to do now isn’t it? are they feeling left out?
It’s happend several times to my officers, also where CPS have ordered cautions.
I think the problem is that so many cautions are transparently issued in breach of the guidelines that the system has fallen into disrepute … it’s also true to say, that sergeants and inspectors (depending on your force) do not understand that they cannot authorise cautions for indictable only offences. Only the CPS may do so. And, that any caution adminstered without consideration of the victims views on the subject, could be deemed to be in breach of the guidelines and subject to challenge.
Of course, like all prosecution texts, such as the DPPs Guidance on Charging and the Code for Crown Prosecutors, it’s written in such a way as to allow subjective justification of just about anything … Home Office circular 16/2008 if you need to bore yourself into submission.
What about TEW offences, please? (Save me looking it up!)
Gadget, you may be amused (or apalled) to know that the good Dr Gray has reared his ugly head again on ‘Magistrates Blog,’ in the posts ‘Short Shrift,’ and is taking your name in vain (if your ears have been burning of late this would explain it).
Here it is :
‘Apologies for posting off-topic but below is a copy of my response to outrageous attempts to undermine UK Justice by Policeman’s blog.
“Many students worked hard to dislodge prosecution powers from corrupt police. Those students would certainly not trust you to be a Judge or judge of Judges, constable ………….. of ……………..
And where are the cheers from your equivalent floating detritus this side of the pond?
Gadget, Ellie kkop, Oliver’s Army, Howard, Bob, Uniform, Copper bottom, Dandyfireman, Taffymedic, Mac and police Lodge Loonies, wherefore art these real enemies of the State?”
Edited By Siteowner
MTG | 11.12.09 – 8:48 am | #
——————————————————————————–
Eeh, I’m famous – the malignant Dr Gray has seen fit to procrastinate and mention my humble name in his enfeebled machinations. Twat.
Just worked out how to reply directly under a relevant comment. I never claimed to be the sharpest knife in the draw. Melvin, twat
fame at last!
Fear not- I would think it HIGHLY likely that our brother and sisters in the law enforcement agencies in the ol’ USA regard ‘Doctor’ Grey in the same light…
dim…
If it’s one thing i’ve noticed it’s that coppers anywhere in the world dislike a pontificating, pretentious, ill-informed, ill-educated, jumped up little shower of shit like “Dr” Melvin (it did amuse me that he actually managed to get some of his directly copy-pasted then change a few words quotes badly wrong – i mean how far up your own-arse do you have to be to screw up a direct copy-paste quote?)
I seem to hear a lot about targets and, as a member of the public I really don’t understand them.
What repercussions are there for a police force if they don;t hit their targets?
What happens if a copper on the beat decides to say ’sod the targets’ and use his common sense?
Basically targets are set by the Govt-to make them look good.They achieve the targets by paying Chief Constables bonuses to reach them.
In turn the Chiefs pay Supts and above bonuses of £5000 to achieve their targets.Therefore at the end of each month constables will be tasked with clearing up all their crime so the Supt can reach his target.As most Supts have never done any decent police work in their lives the only way they can move up the pole is to keep reaching their targets and having a good “diversity” and “issue” agenda.
In respect of constables Sgts and Insps they are all given targets of a certain number of arrests a certain number of detections etc.The type of target for Pcs will vary from force and may also include time taken to resond to a call file sbmission times feedback from “customers” etc.If officers fail to reach their targets they will be put on an action plan refused promotion or a posting to specialist post away from the hell hole that is current uniform policing.You can even be put on an unsatisfactory performance procedure which means you could get the sackSo you see the whole target culture encourages quick fixes and short termism(sound familiar)-because as a Pc in a busy nick if you are set a target of say 20 arrests a month you can easily achieve this by arresting someone at every domestic you go to winding up a drunk on a Friday night or nicking a couple of kids for a rabbits dropping of cannabis-anything than investigating aa burglary or a serious assault or a persistent anti social behaviour problem
So pdblake what would you rather the police do?
I think I know but try telling that to the bosses in their surreal little world.
I’d rather they were arresting people who deserve it and for reasons of combatting crime. Not arresting people to reach a set target.
Gow many of these targetted arrests actually end up as a conviction anyway, how many are given a caution based on yet another target (or the simple fact that the police know they would be laughed out of court)?
So basically, if someone joined police, not climb the greasy pole of promotion, but to actually enforce the law on the streets, then they could say ’sod the targets’, because they didn’t join for promotion or a cushy job in the first place.
Unfortunately, as you say, they would end up getting sacked.
Roll on the next election, let’s see if we can’t get some of this crap cleaned up.
20 a month?!!!!!!!! Glad I’m not on your team!!
I made that number up I would normally have expected 30.
This is how I understand it however if I’m wrong I’m sure others will correct me:
Every force is overseen by a police authority made up of local council officials, magistrates and elected members. These authorities are responsible for appointing and measuring the most senior officers such as Chief Constable. They too hold the money, although it is the chiefs discretion after consultation with an authority as to how the money is directed within a force. The authority is responsible for measuring a forces performance in line with government polices such as the ‘public confidence’ target and the ‘policing pledge’ and if a force is failing they hold the chief to account and can restrict spending.
If a force consistently fails to meet targets funding can be reduced and the jobs of the lofty put in jeopardy.
Each force is split into divisions and wards and these in turn have their own local authority who hold to account the local senior management, police inspector and policing team. Each deciding there own local priority and setting targets in line with national policies and targets. If a ward is failing then the inspector is held accountable and moved on. Likewise if a lowly constable is failing he too is moved on. Often to the property store!!
I consider myself to be a good bobby and do sometimes challenge direction and go against targets, however if a decision ever backfired I would be held accountable often with no support and hung out to dry.
There are many constables, sergeants and inspectors who regularly decide to challenge the senior management and have resided themselves to the fact that they will probably retire at that rank. For those wishing to progress in the service you daren’t stick your head above water or you’ll find a big foot pushing you back down.
‘Whom the gods wish to destroy they first send mad’ (Euripides)
IG,
According to the Home Office there is but a single target for Police Force’s these days:
“Police forces will only be required to meet one national target – increasing public confidence by 15% by 2012.
Home Office figures published today show that confidence levels currently vary across the country, with the latest national average at 46%. The new target will be 60%.
Police forces and authorities have also been set a level of confidence that they should reach by March 2011. This, along with the 2012 target will be measured by questions asked in the British Crime Survey”.
Where does the caution target you detail in your post come from?
Although the ‘public confidence’ target is the new found fad amongst the lofty, all forces are still measured on detections as they are an indication of how well a force is tackling crime. And if a force is tackling crime and has a good detection rate then surely the public confidence will increase.
Its just another case of the government pulling the wool over peoples eyes, and looking at the public confidence in the police I would suggest it was marginally higher then the current confidence in the government.
Thanks for this. However, “measurement” and “target” are different things. I can understand the need to measure and record detections but is there a target for how many you should do? If so, then who sets it and what happens if it’s not met?
Generally speaking, such targets can vary slightly between BCU’s (sub-divisions) depending on their current performance, overall Force performance and other factors, but essentially they strive for 100% detection rates. Acknowledging that this is impossible, they set lower targets that are still above current performance figures to provide encouragement to improve.
If targets are not met, then there are a variety of sanctions that can be imposed upon the BCU. If the targets are important enough, then the Chief Supernintendo of that BCU may not get a performance payment that year. The BCU may not get the funding it requested for training or other ’second-line’ demands and will have even further to go to reach next years incrementally-higher target too.
…I guess?
Oh, and they can be set by the Home Office, Police Authority, Headquarters or even BCU Senile mis-Management Team in response to larger, more general targets set by those above.
It comes from the Divisional Commander by email, and yes, I have a copy. It’s also on the Divisional Performance Meeting slide, it’s a target in my annual appraisal, I have to answer for it to the Ch Insp every week and finally, if we don’t play ball, our names go on a poster in red, which is then pasted up around the police station, with the ‘best’ performers in green. This is the public bullying I have spoken about. If I fail, I face being posted to the northern part of the Division, where no one wants to work because it is so far from where any of us live and that means an extra expense, plus we are paid less so I probably couldn’t afford the petrol. Also, up there, there are so few officers that if you are assaulted, assistance takes a long, long time to arrive. Any more questions?
There are well over one hundred “measures” that will be used to “indicate” that we have achieved our public satisfaction “target”.
Also I have been told that as of next year our “discretion” is to be returned to us, WITH the support of SMT……
Fame at last. For the record, Melvin, you’re still a twat.
ditto…
He never mentioned me, though he did have a right pop at me and say that he could get me sacked once (on Ellie Blogg’s blog). Does that count?
uncivilised servant
‘I’m not buying the cop line on this one; no one told you to cuff serious offences. There are a lot of lazy sods out there who are selling out and pretending its for the data’.
Your utterance in itself prove that you do not know what you are talking about.
I can understand the anger of the serving plod on this matter, nobody likes carrying the can for the politicos. However, uncivilised servant does have a valid point. Some of the decisions made on who to caution have been truly appalling, and that reflects directly on the police officers deciding.
I’m a serving soldier, and readily admit that not all squaddies are lantern jawed heroes (modesty forbids). Some are bloody hopeless, more of a danger to themselves than the enemy. I’m sure that each serving plod on here can think of coppers who fit that description. The only way to deal with the problem is firm leadership. Or a firng squad.
first rule of life-eat, 2nd, keep warm,3rd, have a bed.
In business, or civil servant, in order to keep your job, it requires one to follow the leader, come what may , be it incorrect, to hell with the Nuremburg syndrome.
‘Tis why that most that know right from wrong but keep mouth shut and so have monies for this months credit card bill [the modern version of a cat of nine tails, a whip], I know a Bank executive that knew it was crazy to loan monies to penniless, but the quarterly results were more important and the bonus be a nice incentive.
As most of your Leaders be brain washed by the same Idiots [ sorry, highly educated ] that brought you the well run money institutions and manufacturing organizations, you get this technique of corruption , bribes,…. no rewards I mean , so how to justify these rewards, numbers be the way, who can dispute numbers, they are facts right!!!!!!
An example, A Motorcycle Officer having a quiet day with offending autos, chose to issue Jay walking ticket on a quiet side street, as it was easier to catch an eighty year old walking than a speeding Maserati, [ took 100 yards of chase to apprehend the offending speeding OAP] of course he was trying to impress his watch commander as he had just been hired.
There will always be AHL’s trying to butter up his alpha.
So these number requests trickle down from up high down to the lowest rank, and like most at the bottom, why jeopardize your daily bread, work to rule, as the good old Union man use to say, if it is tickets you want ” I will issue them”. who likes to be given a bollocking by an “Alpha ”
Many live by a simple rule, Do not rock the boat.
Too many spent the first 20 years of doing what they be told, as that gets them the rewards, and many of those that never do as they are told become your customers, then there a few that do the moral and correct duty in spite of the majority that are NOT always right.
Answer to get respect from the GP, go back to basics.
2020hindsight
I can understand the anger of the serving plod on this matter, nobody likes carrying the can for the politicos. However, uncivilised servant does have a valid point. Some of the decisions made on who to caution have been truly appalling, and that reflects directly on the police officers deciding.
I’m a serving soldier, and readily admit that not all squaddies are lantern jawed heroes (modesty forbids). Some are bloody hopeless, more of a danger to themselves than the enemy. I’m sure that each serving plod on here can think of coppers who fit that description. The only way to deal with the problem is firm leadership. Or a firng squad.
Agree with you but the there two debates in one here. Lazy police and NFAs, or cuffing as uncivilised servant put it.
Yes there are lazy officers’ OF ALL RANKS. When it comes to cuffing a serious offence then the decision to NFA is made by the CPS.
The reason being is that the police and CPS have directly competing target set by our glorious leaders.
The police are measures on charges (detections) and CPS on convictions at court. Subsequently CPS will NFA cases that should go to court if there is a chance they will not get a conviction (target) and the police do not get a charge (detection target) on a CPS NFA decision.
lol- how little people know about the Police…
ask your self this question:
how many people do I know that have been in front of PSD for being lazy?
verses
how many people do I know that have been in front of PSD for using excessive force, complained about etc?
lol…
THAT is the issue in my job…
When I first joined the cops there was a computer in the intelligence office that I could carry out fis checks on! no one used it! we just got the lio or the station cat to do the checks as we were busy thief taking…… as i left there was a terminal on every desk a terminal in every car and a terminal on every officer (airwave) nowdays officers spent hours booking on duty booking in property researching int they would know if they were out on the ground kicking arse and taking names! no wonder the country is phucked you need a home secretary to pull the plug get back to index cards recruit some ex military or rugby players with backbones disband psd s working parties tasking and co-ordinating meetings safer community teams! (hellooooo!! communities dont feel safe) PCs are not beat managers who sit at computers managing their squad of pcsos they are constables!
Sgts should be managing them not sitting writing daily appraisals checking kpi s and talking bollox at management meetings! that is the job of the insp! that said i have not seen one in years as they all wear suits sit on working parties at fhq or visit foreign countries to see how they police abroad no wonder TJF!
Jack, I suspect that the only cards your likely to see in the future are smartcards used to access all those nice new CONFIDENTIAL systems such as PND