IPCC publication of Stockwell 1 report: MPA statement
56/07
08 November 2007
Len Duvall, chair of the Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA),
welcoming publication of the Independent Police Complaints
Commission (IPCC) Stockwell 1 Report, said:
"The shooting dead of Jean Charles de Menezes was a tragedy
that should never have happened, whatever the circumstances
were at the time. And we all accept the circumstances were
momentous. Suicide bombers had successfully attacked London on
7 July, there had been another attempt to cause murder and
mayhem on 21 July, and police were urgently following up leads
in their attempt to prevent further atrocities. These are not
excuses, just the circumstances in which this tragedy happened.
"I welcome the publication today of the IPCC's Stockwell 1
Report after such a long delay. Now the facts are finally out
in the open it is possible for Londoners to know what actually
happened that day and for the public debate about those events
to take place on an informed basis.
"The IPCC has identified a number of areas of concern and made
recommendations to ensure procedures and practices are in place
to prevent a repeat of those circumstances that led to the
death of an innocent young man.
"The MPA, as the independent statutory body that oversees the
work of the MPS, is determined to see that the lessons from the
IPCC reports are firmly embedded in police practice. Over the
past two and a half years the Authority has worked hard with
the Met to carry out root and branch examinations of
operational policing systems, internal and external
communication procedures, as well as Operation Kratos, the
national policing response to suicide terrorists.
"We have been assured, at public meetings by the Commissioner
and his Senior Management team, that the recommendations from
Stockwell 1 and the previously published Stockwell 2, along
with further work we have undertaken, have been implemented. I
am confident that the whole of the MPS, both individuals and
the organisation, has learned the lessons from this tragic
event. Indeed this is corroborated by the recent review by Her
Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) which indicated
just how much the MPS has already done to address all the
shortcomings identified in the IPCC reports. But Londoners
should rest assured that, in the course of our regular
supervision of the Met's work, the MPA will be monitoring
processes and procedures rigorously.
“To this end, we have set up a small group of MPA members who
will look in detail at the issues that need to be addressed,
including any that come to light during the review and those
that have been highlighted in the IPCC reports and following
the Health and Safety trial. I will lead that personally. I
also wish to make clear I played no part whatsoever in the
decisions concerning disciplinary action.
“Although we are confident changes will minimise the
possibility of an innocent person being shot in the future,
there is no copper-bottomed one hundred percent guarantee that
it will never happen again. That is impossible to promise and
we must be realistic about what might happen during a
fast-moving police operation or a terrorist threat in the
future. What I can guarantee is that the MPA will continue to
work with the Metropolitan Police to ensure policies and
procedures are developed to minimise as much as possible those
risks. No one wants a repeat of what happened so tragically on
that fateful day – least of all the police who are often faced
with impossible choices.
“Even though this was not a Kratos operation, we have reviewed
the way in which Kratos is used by police and we will continue
to do so to refine it as much as possible to ensure its
effectiveness and reduce the risks to innocent members of the
public during operations where it has been instigated.
"No one individual is to blame for what occurred on 22 July
2005, and we should remember the selfless dedication with which
MPS officers and staff displayed on that and subsequent days,
and who continue, in sometimes dangerous circumstances, to keep
London safe. However, we must remember an innocent man died
during the course of a Met police operation. Our thoughts
continue to be with the Menezes family and friends, together
with those of the other victims."
The MPA is now urging the IPCC to resolve outstanding
disciplinary issues for senior officers within the MPS.
DAC Cressida Dick
In the Stockwell 1 Report the IPCC asked the MPA to consider if
disciplinary action should be taken against DAC Cressida Dick
(Commander Dick as she then was). The Authority submitted a
lengthy memorandum to the IPCC in February 2007 setting out its
recommendations, specifically that it did not propose to bring
disciplinary proceedings against Commander Dick. This was
expressed to be a provisional view subject to reconsideration
in the light of the evidence presented at the Health and Safety
at work trial.
The MPA's assessment was that the IPCC Report did not disclose
the basis for disciplinary proceedings under any provision of
the Police Code of Conduct.
Following careful and extensive consideration of the IPCC
report and the evidential materials supplied to the MPA by the
Commission, the Authority considered that Commander Dick and
other police officers on 22 July 2005 were operating in the
context of a real, immediate and unprecedented level of threat
to public safety and an intensity of counter terrorism activity
and investigation never before experienced in Britain. (This
context is well described in the IPCC Report itself.) The
Authority considered that she was systematic and methodical in
her approach to her command of operations on the morning of 22
July 2005, that she had a clear understanding of her
responsibilities, and that she set out to create an appropriate
structure for the achievement of the strategy set by Commander
McDowell.
The Authority judged that she established an operating
framework in which public protection was the key objective;
that she developed and put in place suitable lines of command
and communication; and that she made reasoned decisions and
issued instructions that were sound, consistent, cohesive and
clear in a fast developing situation.
It was clear to the Authority that at material times she was
convinced from the information she was receiving that the
identification of Jean Charles de Menezes as a suspected bomber
was positive. It was also clear that she took steps to secure
the arrival of CO19 Specialist Firearms Officers to support the
operation, and should not be held personally responsible for
the delayed arrival of those assets. The Authority considered
that throughout the operation she acted and gave commands with
due professional skill, care and responsibility. For all these
reasons the Authority decided that disciplinary proceedings
should not be brought against her.
The MPA is informing the IPCC today that its provisional view
reached in February 2007 has been reconsidered in the light of
the Health and Safety prosecution, and the provisional view is
confirmed as final.
AC Andy Hayman
In the Stockwell 2 Report published in August 2007 the IPCC
invited the MPA to consider whether AC Hayman should be charged
with misconduct. The MPA submitted a memorandum to the IPCC on
6 November 2007 setting out the Authority's recommendation that
no disciplinary proceedings should be brought against AC Hayman.
The MPA accepted that there did appear to be some mismatch
between what AC Hayman said and/or agreed during the period of
about 2¼ hours from about 16:30hrs to about 18:45hrs. The
Authority considered that it was more realistic to suppose that
this was caused by carelessness amounting to a lack of
conscientiousness and diligence rather than by deliberate
dishonesty or lack of integrity on his part.
The MPA is satisfied that, even if AC Hayman were found by a
disciplinary tribunal to have failed to meet the appropriate
standard under Code 5, the conduct would not justify the
imposition of any sanction under the Police (Conduct)
Regulations 2004. The MPA therefore concluded that there should
not be disciplinary proceedings and that the matter should be
dealt with by the Commissioner and the Chair of the MPA
Professional Standards Committee giving AC Hayman advice on the
standard of his future conduct.
The final decision whether disciplinary proceedings should be
brought against DAC Dick or AC Hayman rests with the IPCC. The
MPA is urging the IPCC to resolve both cases swiftly.
Notes to Editors
1. Since July 2005 the MPA has been working with the MPS to
radically improve the way the organisation communicates
internally and externally, and in the context of operational
policing.
The following reports presented by the MPS to the Authority,
and initiatives by the Authority, draw together the work
completed to date.
Operation Kratos
The strategy for responding to the threat of suicide terrorism.
www.mpa.gov.uk/news/press/2006/06-011.htm
MPA scrutiny of MPS media and communications
The Authority was concerned about the approach taken by the MPS
to managing the press coverage of Forest Gate and conducted a
short scrutiny of the Directorate of Public Affairs (DPA) to
consider what lessons can be learnt from that experience.
www.mpa.gov.uk/committees/cop/2007/070405/05.htm
MPS Review of internal communications systems
This report outlines the progress made in relation to MPS
procedures and resilience in a range of key areas that
developed from the response to the unprecedented policing
challenges in July 2005. It specifically updates on the role of
MPS Management Board sitting as a Crisis Management Team,
reassurance and community engagement, command resilience,
support to Crisis Management and Investigative teams, the
Operation Kratos Review Group and training.
www.mpa.gov.uk/committees/mpa/2006/060223/08.htm
MPA 'Counter-Terrorism: The London Debate'
The MPA sought the views on terrorism and counter-terrorism of
a diverse selection of over 1000 people who live and work in
London.
www.mpa.gov.uk/news/press/2006/06-036.htm
2. Matters relating to the conduct of senior officers of the
MPS are dealt with by a sub-committee of the MPA members led by
the Deputy Chair Reshard Auladin. In both cases (DAC Dick and
AC Hayman) the sub-committee considered not just the IPCC
reports but the underlying evidence, as supplied by the IPCC.
The sub-committee was advised by the Solicitor to the Authority
and by a QC in once case and an experienced barrister in the
other.
Further media information
For further information, please contact the
MPA press office