Report - Police Scotland - PIRC/00329/20
The Complaints
The complaints in this case arose after the applicant, her partner and her son were arrested for obstructing officers in the course of their duties. We have reviewed the handling of thirteen complaints, namely that:
on 9 July 2018, the applicant was unlawfully arrested;
on the same date, the applicant’s son was unlawfully arrested;
on the same date, the applicant’s partner was unlawfully arrested;
on the same date, officers tried to gain access to the applicant’s property by force without a warrant;
on the same date, an officer was uncivil to the applicant in the police vehicle while taking her to the police station;
on the same date, officers seized the mobile phones of the applicant’s son and her partner without lawful authority;
officers failed to properly lodge the seized mobile phones as productions;
the applicant’s son’s and partner’s mobile phones were damaged while being held by the police;
an officer was uncivil to the applicant’s partner when he asked for a receipt for his mobile phone;
on 10 July 2018, an officer was uncivil to the applicant when they attended at her address regarding a missing person and commented regarding the incident of the previous day that she and her family were lucky not to have been tasered;
officers made false statements in the prosecution report and statements relating to the incident submitted to the Procurator Fiscal (PF) in an effort to secure a conviction against the applicant and her family;
an officer failed to attend court on four occasions, causing the trial to be postponed and later abandoned; and
the Social Work Department were unnecessarily involved with the applicant’s children as a result of this incident.
Police Scotland’s Decision
Police Scotland upheld two of the applicant’s complaints (7 and 11) but did not uphold the other eleven 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12 and 13).
Our Findings
We have found that Police Scotland handled ten of the applicant’s complaints to a reasonable standard (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12 and 13) but not so the other three (9, 10 and 11).
We have made a recommendation and identified a learning point to address the shortcomings in Police Scotland’s handling of the complaints.
Specifically, we recommend that further enquiries are carried out in relation to complaint 11 and that a further response is then sent to the applicant. Our learning point relates to the identification of officers within the complaint response letter.
Our recommendation and learning point should be implemented by Police Scotland within two months of the date of this report.
Outcome
Police Scotland implemented the recommendation made in this case. In doing so, they conducted further enquiries in relation to complaint 11, which was then reassessed and a detailed further response was sent to the applicant.
The complaint has now been upheld in relation to one further officer, with appropriate learning identified.
Police Scotland also appropriately disseminated the organisational learning identified in our CHR in respect of the naming of officers within complaint response letters.
Police Bodies : Police Scotland