The independent chairmen who oversee misconduct proceedings are likewise said to be too willing to indulge the accused with excessive protections, or to mete out lenient punishments.
Sue Fish, the former chief constable of Nottinghamshire Police who last year spoke publicly about her own experiences of being sexually assaulted by fellow officers, told the Telegraph the number of anonymity orders was “outrageous” and claimed officers and the policing unions “absolutely game the system”.
She said the legally qualified chairmen, first introduced in 2014, appeared much less punitive than their predecessors and often sought to minimise the seriousness of the conduct, or focused excessively on the impact on the accused’s family.
Ms Fish said: “We’ve got to the point in policing where drink-driving is unacceptable and indefensible, yet it’s quite the reverse when we come to racism and sexism.”
Officers are known to circle the wagons around accused colleagues, she said, because the culture of policing dictates that “your technical competence as a cop is far more important than your behaviours, values and attitudes”.
Highly unusual decision
Earlier this week, there was outrage from justice campaigners after three Met Police officers who allegedly shared racist and misogynistic social media messages with Couzens were granted anonymity, in a highly unusual decision by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS).
It is understood their legal representatives argued their welfare could be at risk if they were named.
A spokesman for the Metropolitan Police said: “The Met has been rocked by a series of awful events, including the appalling behaviour displayed by officers at Charing Cross police station between 2016 and 2018, the murder of Sarah Everard, the outcome of the Stephen Port inquests and the abhorrent actions of PCs Jaffer and Lewis.
“We are acutely aware that these events have deeply damaged the trust and confidence people have in us.
“There is need for real change in our organisation. More than ever before we have been looking at ourselves critically and asking hard questions to improve our culture and professional standards, and we do not underestimate the scale of the change required.
“Part of rebuilding that trust is making it impossible for such behaviour to be seen as acceptable, telling the public where we have got it wrong and what we are doing about it, and removing officers who have behaved in such an awful way. The Independent Office for Police Conduct and others thoroughly scrutinise our actions.”
Credit: Source link
