Sign in to follow this  
cheese_puff

Sue the Police at your peril

Recommended Posts

I don't know about the rest of you but I tend to agree with the family on this one it was a bad decision. WE don't know all the evidence but from what I have read and heard it looks as if the Duty Inspector in charge of the Force Control Room at the time seems to have been relatively inexperienced  and failed to order the control room staff to put out an immediate warning indicates this. It is actually basic common sense and a duty of care.

 

Look forward to more of this if the direct entry Senior officers ever get charge of the helm

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've not read anything that the Inspector made a decision NOT to put out a warning, or indeed any decision. I've not read everything but I did read it was 8 (eight) minutes from phone call to shot. Now 8 minutes would seem like a long time if you were wrestling a bear but in a high pressure situation where a call taker, of unknown experience, takes the call - refers it to their supervisor - who goes to the Sgt - who asks a couple of questions - then passes it to the Duty Inspector, that 8 minutes would flash by.

I don't really know how the quip about a direct entry senior officer is relevant but seeing it has been raised then isn't this another example of the traditional route to Insp didn't work in preparing him/her for this eventuality and maybe a direct entry person with previous years experience of making high pressure snap decisions could well have done a better job?

Sent from me using witchcraft

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand it was a bit longer than 8 minutes. The ex cc Sue Sim was in the control room at the time and apparently there was a discussion between her and the D/Inspector about the threat. - ample time to put out a message. Just how long does it take? The Chain of Command in a control room would, I suggest, be circumcented when a serious credible threat, connected to an ongoing incident was feared. I have worked in two different control rooms in two different forces and this certainly would have been the scenario in both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I worked in one control room in one force (not winning Top Trumps here, am I?) as a Sgt but acting up at times. There the FIM was the FIM and made the big decisions, taking the associated accountability. Senior officers giving their opinion, or usually just asking pointless questions, just delayed that decision making.

This is another case though where a panel listened to weeks of evidence to come to a conclusion then individuals question that conclusion based on a few inches of news copy written by people who (apparently) we can't trust.

Sent from me using witchcraft

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just read part of the court transcript and I was partly wrong in the time span between the warning and the actual attack - It was 10 mins and not 8 as staed by RM, but not as long as I had previously read,  but still enough time to put out some sort of warning.

 

I know the area very well and the distance betwen the place the 1st attack took place and where David Rathband was parked up is about 5 miles and connected with each other by the Newcastle Western Bypass and at the time of the warning and the attack there would have been little traffic. So the call by Moat could easily have been made at any time.

 

Whilst the warning had very little time to be put out, it may have made a difference.  Imposing the costs on the family is a double blow for them and I feel that they have been harshly treated. I wonder if there was any meaningful discussion between the CC and the family before the decision was made to sue. I'm assuming Mrs Sim was still in office when there would have been approaches by the family or the families solicitors?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was a tragic case and I suspect I wasn't alone when I was quietly pleased to hear that the outcome was such that there would be no need for a trial. 

 

Having also worked in control room, I wonder what practically useful information could have been got out within 8, 10, 15 minutes or even up to an hour: 'We've had a call from a man who has threatened to kill a police officer. We have no description, no idea where he is, and no idea idea if he has a car' is probably not a million miles from what could have been broadcast. I'm not sure what actions officers could take other than spending the rest of the day running away from the public.        

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It could have made them aware that there was an threat against the officers rather than remaining in the dark. Irrespective that they had no idea where Moat was, knowing a threat had been made could have saved a life - David Rathband's

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've known control room operators that would have taken the call and passed a warning out to officers straight away. However, that was in the days where control room didn't have call handlers, who then had to create the message, then pass it through to supervision who would then pass it on. I can easily see how that would take time in the present set up. It's a shame that no one person at the initial call felt confident enough to break the chain.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What would the comeback have been if an operator in the Control Room had bucked the system and issued a warning directly over the air before telling the superviser.  If it was a hoax call coming in - red faces all round and perhaps a milde rebuke for the person who called the alert. But if a call had gone out, officers would have been aware and an attack may have been prevented. The incoming call would have been recorded so there would be plenty of evidence to back up calling the alert.

 

Too late now of course, but it seems like a lack of decision making at the time.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My experience would suggest that the reaction would have been a lot of calls asking for description, location and type of vehicle etc which weren't known, followed by a lot of slagging the control room off in the canteen.

 

Newsflash: There are people in society who would like to hurt a police officer given chance. Don't know who, don't know where, don't know when. However serving officers are now warned so everyone can take appropriate action and will be fine.     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So they could have given a warning but what warning? 'Someone has threatened to shoot a police officer.'?

So if PC R had done nothing different and still been shot then whose fault (other than Moat's) would that be?

'Officers to remain mobile and do not park up.' But Moat shoots a moving officer, or sticks his gun through the window of a police station. Whose fault?

'All officers return to their stations.' I am sure there was criticism of that tactic a few months ago by some posters on here.

I really don't understand this desire to criticise and scapegoat colleagues. Especially when an enquiry has heard ALL the evidence has exonerated them.

Sent from me using witchcraft

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are 12 hidden replies in this thread that you do not currently have access to as a Guest User of our forum. To unlock the forum register for an account for FREE today by clicking HERE
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.