Complaint Handling Reviews

The Complaints

The complaints in this case arose after the applicant provided a statement to officers in connection with her report that her ex-husband raped her and subjected her to sexual and domestic abuse. The applicant's ex-husband was arrested and interviewed under caution during the investigation. At the conclusion of the investigation, the Reporting Officer (RO) and Senior Investigating Officer (SIO) assessed that there was insufficient evidence to report the matter to the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS). We have reviewed the handling of fourteen complaints, namely that: 

1. a statement noted from the applicant was not taken verbatim;

2. an officer called the applicant “stupid” and told her that she had been too generous with her money;

3. during a break from providing the statement, the applicant told the officers a funny story which was then included in the statement;

4. the applicant’s statement contained multiple spelling mistakes, which showed poor standards of professionalism;

5. during the applicant’s statement, she told the officer “my blood ran cold” which the officer changed to “my blood was boiling”, which is the opposite of what she had said and how she was feeling;

6. an officer failed to note key points regarding the applicant’s ex-husband’s strength and size, despite asking her about these specific points throughout the statement which was noted;

7. an officer was argumentative and reluctant to amend the applicant’s statement, and told her that the statement had been saved and would not and could not change it;

8. at the conclusion of one meeting, an officer complained that the applicant was speaking too quickly, however did not ask her to stop or slow down during any interview;

9. the applicant believes that her report was not taken seriously, and that an officer was simply ticking a box and her complaint would not be fully investigated;

10. the applicant tried to report incidents which she believed were controlling and coercive behaviours and prepared a folder containing evidence, however an officer threw the folder and stated: “I’m not interested in any of that”;

11. no details were ever noted from the applicant regarding the domestic abuse incidents she tried to report and provided details of in a folder;

12. none of the domestic incidents the applicant tried to report were ever recorded or investigated;

13. the applicant reported concerns about her ex-husband’s firearms being kept in her home address, resulting in a number of licence breaches being detected, however no action was taken against her ex-husband in relation to this; and

14. when the applicant requested that the domestic incidents be included in her statement, an officer replied, “well you said he didn’t hit you”. 

Police Scotland's Decision

Police Scotland did not uphold any of the applicant’s complaints. 

Our Findings

We have found that Police Scotland handled complaints, 1, 6, 9, 12, and 13 to a reasonalbe standard but not so complaints 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11, and 14.

Consequently, we have made nine recommendations and identified a learning point to address the shortcomings in Police Scotland’s handling of the applicant’s complaints. In summary, we recommend that Police Scotland undertake further enquiry, reassess the complaints and provide the applicant with a further response. 

Our recommendations and learning point should be implemented by Police Scotland within two months of the date of this report.

Police Bodies: Police Scotland