13 September 2022 | Complaint Reviews
Report – Police Scotland – PIRC/00004/19
Report – Police Scotland – PIRC/00004/19
Our role is to review the way in which policing bodies handle complaints made about them. It is not to investigate the circumstances which led to the complaint or uphold allegations made. When carrying out a Complaint Handling Review (CHR) we consider a number of factors, including whether police carried out sufficient enquiries; their response was supported by the material information available and whether the police response was adequately reasoned.
See a Report Summary of the relevant CHR below. To comply with UK Government accessibility regulations we no longer publish documents in PDF form, so it’s currently not feasible for us to publish a full copy of the report.
The Complaints
The complaints in this case arose following Police Scotland’s contact with the applicant in connection with matters involving the applicant and his former partner. We reviewed the handling of twenty eight complaints, namely that:
1. the applicant was not provided with an outcome of a welfare check he requested in respect of his daughter on 23 December 2018;
2. Police Scotland failed to seize CCTV evidence and present it to the court;
3. Police Scotland failed to properly investigate claims that the applicant breached his bail conditions on 23 December 2018;
4. Police Scotland used bail legislation to antagonise and arrest the applicant on 6 January 2019;
5. officers who attended at the applicant’s home on 26 August 2018 were oppressive and threatened to arrest him if he did not leave;
6. officers asked the applicant’s ex-partner to text him and attend at his home address in a bid to antagonise him, so they would have grounds to arrest him;
7. on 26 August 2018, an officer disclosed to the applicant’s ex-partner that he had motoring convictions from 2005;
8. an officer tried to entrap the applicant by asking his ex-partner to accompany them to his home to antagonise him and arrest him;
9. an officer re-attended at the applicant’s home address on 1 September 2018 and tried to get his ex-partner to ‘make something up’ to get the applicant arrested;
10. officers provided false information to the children’s reporter by stating that the applicant’s daughter was present during a domestic incident;
11. on 30 July 2019, a call handler refused to carry out a welfare check in respect of the applicant’s daughter;
12. on 30 July 2019, a member of staff at a police station was rude and aggressive towards the applicant and refused to provide him with details of a welfare check;
13. in June 2019, an officer failed to carry out investigation in relation to an allegation of fraud reported by the applicant;
14. officers told the applicant’s ex-partner what to say about his fraud allegation and told her not to worry as it “wasn’t going anywhere”;
15. Police Scotland provided false information to the children’s reporter; in relation to the applicant attending a police station and alleged abuse of his ex-partner;
16. On 10 October 2019, an officer used excessive force which resulted in the applicant banging his head;
17. On 10 October 2019, the applicant was not provided with medical assistance in police custody;
18. On 10 October 2019, the applicant was not provided with medication in police custody;
19. officers carried out an unlawful search of the applicant’s car on 10 October 2019;
20. officers failed to advise the applicant of the reason he was taken into custody on 10 October 2019 but an officer said he would come back and speak to him about it;
21. officers failed to conduct an investigation into the applicant’s allegation of sexual assault against his ex-partner which he made on 15 July 2019;
22. on 28 October 2019, an officer failed to take the applicant’s report that his ex- partner had threatened him and his family;
23. an officer was more interested in investigating the applicant rather than his report of criminal allegations;
24. an officer failed to seize evidence from a computer relating to the applicant’s allegation of sexual assault;
25. on 31 October 2019, an officer informed the applicant that he had been ‘too busy’ to update him about his allegation of sexual assault;
26. an officer knew the applicant’s ex-partner was lying about a tracking device that was found in his tracksuit pocket;
27. on 5 December 2018, a sergeant instructed the applicant’s ex-partner to remove his daughter from the house when there was no danger to her; and,
28. officers failed to update the applicant in relation to threatening text messages sent to his mother by his ex-partner.
Police Scotland’s Decision
Police Scotland upheld complaints 1, 20 and 24 and did not uphold the remaining twenty five complaints.
Our Findings
We have found that Police Scotland handled complaints 1 to 10, 12 to 21 and 23 to 28 to a reasonable standard but not so complaints 11 and 22.
Consequently, we have made a single recommendation to address the shortcomings in Police Scotland’s handling of complaint 22. Specifically, we have recommended that Police Scotland undertakes additional enquiry into complaint 22 and thereafter provides the applicant with a further response. We did not make any recommendation in respect of complaint 11.
Our recommendation should be implemented by Police Scotland within two months of the date of this report.
Police Bodies : Police Scotland
