44 replies to this topic

[Obain]

The DPS are obviously vital. I don't think I'd join though because frankly I think I'd rather be innocent and ignorant of what might go on!

If I joined a unit and my mentor was literally Alonzo Harris I might change my mind.

[Übèrnamè]

-SNIP-

Does that answer your question?

Yes, very much so. I do ponder about the future of British Policing though. No wonder the first words out of my trainers mouth were "This is the only job I know where everyone is out to get you". Thanks for reinforcing that.

Also, custody is not a public place and the incident took place out of public view/hearing.

So you think it's acceptable to call a prisoner a tool? Also I suspect by the fact that DPS were investigating them for something else it's that what ruined their lives for 18 months and caused the final written warning, as that seems excessive for what you're saying they did. I've known people do worse and get less than that

I've seen and heard a lot worse then mumbling "tool" under your breath. If you think that's wrong I think you're in the wrong job. Funny thing was, DPS wasn't investigating it (if you had read the posts), they were investigating something else and overheard on the audio clip.

I find this hard to believe...for minor incivility it would get passed back to borough not DPS. DPS would have much bigger fish to fry than to stick people on for calling a prisoner a tool.

DPS wasn't investigating it (if you had read the posts), they were investigating something else and overheard on the audio clip.

[Future_officer]

I find this hard to believe...for minor incivility it would get passed back to borough not DPS. DPS would have much bigger fish to fry than to stick people on for calling a prisoner a tool.

For calling a prisoner a "tool" in custody and in hearing distance of a person which could find it offensive, DPS are obliged to investigate. An officer doesn't need to make a complaint, DPS officers if they heard it and believed it to be offensive - they themselves could make a complaint to the borough DPS Guvnor and it would be his or her decision to investigate. Unfortuantely this was said in custody, there are CCTV everywhere. If an offensive word (for some) is said and a complaint is made then it has to be investigated. Custody isn't in public but still there is a code of conduct officers have to follow. If they breach it in any way they break the rules and when breaking the rules they have to be punished. That's policy. It was different in the 60s and 70s and early 80s.

FYI:

DPS has many departments. For corruption cases they get investigated either by Anti Corruption North or AC south. DPS has a misconduct unit headed by a chief inspector which deals with misconduct trials. They have a unit that investigate claims against the MET as an organisation. DPS has an Internal Investigation Command which only investigates misconduct. Most gross misconduct cases get investigated by AC. DPS has a payback unit, a financial investigation unit, a communication intellegence and witness protection unit. They also have surveillance unit. Covert work is done by AC. Every borough in London has a DPS unit headed by an inspector. Borough DPS investigate not so serious cases, cases that get dealt with by formal written warning. They don't deal with the more serious aspects or misconduct. Borough DPS would deal with cases such as racism investigations. The DPS communication (telephone) intellegence unit is the unit that bugs phones and listens in. It's how they collect intellegence. DPS has a unit called Specialist Investigation which investigate murder after an officer contact, death in custody, police vehicle collision (POLCOL) which caused death or life changing for the victim and rape by an officer.

I wonder how many police officers are under DPS witness protection? I'm curious.

DPS has a rule if something is said and one person finds it offensive than it needs to be dealt with. Most times it's deal with by words of advise by the officers guvnor.

DPS officers don't only investigate 1 complaint at a time, they investigate a few which is why it may have taken 18 months to investigate. Same thing with CID and other detective units, they investigate a few cases at the same time. Some are quick and some take time. Murder squad is different.

Without DPS criminals would be getting away with crimes and the streets of London would be more dangerous than it is now. Look at MEXICO. The drug cartels pay off the police too look the other way. Tens of thousands of people get killed every year there because of drugs. In the USA they have the Internal Affairs. They have to investigate shooting everyday by officers. Lucky DPS don't investigate shooting by officers because police officers are mainly not armed. IPCC investigates shootings by police in the UK.

Police officers should not be afraid of DPS. If you have nothing to hide than you have nothing to worry about. Don't forget Police Staff also get investigated. Last year more than 40 PCSOs were investigated by the DPS.

Edited by Future_officer, 18 July 2012 - 04:30 PM.

[Crimsoneer]

The DPS do an incredibly important job. Calling prisoners "tools" is a bull example - we've all had rough words with prisoners, and I don't see why DPS would even care, and in my experience, they don't. I suspect there's part of that story you're not telling us.

Do some complaints ruin lives? Yeah, they do. And DPS should exercises discretion in common sense in doing their job like we all do. Sometimes, they cock up.

[Numpty]

This thread has now officially jumped the shark! Somehow upholding professional standards is back-stabbing? Thank goodness I wasn't in service before 1984 and pre-Macpherson is all I can say.

Username: if the remark your "friend" made was under his/her breath then how did it end up on the custody recording? Of course custody is a place not to make unguarded comments, custody coverage is fully discloseable. Can you imagine the field day the prisoner's defence solicitor would have with stuff like that?! If you think your customer is a tool why not wait until you are in the writing room to say so? It's a fairly trivial comment but it shows a lack of judgement or more likely a loss of cool.

My speculation as to why the investigation took so long is that maybe the investigation was pending until the prisoner concerned's case reached its conclusion one way or the other.

Anyone who thinks that professionalism is second to being bessie mates with your colleauges might think about doing something a bit less likely to end up in court or in the newspapers?

[Future_officer]

This thread has now officially jumped the shark! Somehow upholding professional standards is back-stabbing? Thank goodness I wasn't in service before 1984 and pre-Macpherson is all I can say.

Username: if the remark your "friend" made was under his/her breath then how did it end up on the custody recording? Of course custody is a place not to make unguarded comments, custody coverage is fully discloseable. Can you imagine the field day the prisoner's defence solicitor would have with stuff like that?! If you think your customer is a tool why not wait until you are in the writing room to say so? It's a fairly trivial comment but it shows a lack of judgement or more likely a loss of cool.

My speculation as to why the investigation took so long is that maybe the investigation was pending until the prisoner concerned's case reached its conclusion one way or the other.

Anyone who thinks that professionalism is second to being bessie mates with your colleauges might think about doing something a bit less likely to end up in court or in the newspapers?

In the Police Service don't expect to have many mates who will have your back because when things go haywire - everyone will be looking after their own selves. And someone will always get the blame.

In the police service always justify your actions, if you do, DPS and the courts will not pester you.

Edited by Future_officer, 18 July 2012 - 04:35 PM.

[Pete999]

DPS do a lot more than the internal affairs type work. They also deal with cases where officers have reported members of the public who have tried to corrupt an officer such as offering money for PNC checks or turn the other cheek over an offence.

DPS also deal with civil action cases where a person has sued the police over malicious complaints they have made.

There is A LOT more to the DPS than what most people think.

Edited by Pete999, 18 July 2012 - 05:05 PM.

[Übèrnamè]

For calling a prisoner a "tool" in custody and in hearing distance of a person which could find it offensive, DPS are obliged to investigate. An officer doesn't need to make a complaint, DPS officers if they heard it and believed it to be offensive - they themselves could make a complaint to the borough DPS Guvnor and it would be his or her decision to investigate.

If people can be bothered to read above, no complaint was made. The DPS were investigating something else and came across the audio recording. Also, as I've stated before the prisoner wasn't anywhere near them and didn't hear.

Username: if the remark your "friend" made was under his/her breath then how did it end up on the custody recording? Of course custody is a place not to make unguarded comments, custody coverage is fully discloseable. Can you imagine the field day the prisoner's defence solicitor would have with stuff like that?! If you think your customer is a tool why not wait until you are in the writing room to say so? It's a fairly trivial comment but it shows a lack of judgement or more likely a loss of cool.

My speculation as to why the investigation took so long is that maybe the investigation was pending until the prisoner concerned's case reached its conclusion one way or the other.

Don't try and use the quote marks to imply it was me or try to be pedantic in saying it wouldn't be heard on audio. It was said as an off-cuff comment away from the prisoner between two members of staff. The prisoner's solicitor wouldn't have a field day since it wasn't heard and no complaint was made.

If you still believe an 18 month investigation and a final written warning was fair for one minor comment is acceptable, then maybe DPS is place for yourself. That kind of police work just doesn't interest me and quite frankly makes me feel uncomfortable, which was the point I was making.

[Crimsoneer]

Your story sounds a little weird. What exactly was the final written warning for, exactly, if nobody heard it other than DPS? Whispering to yourself isn't misconduct, and could never be considered misconduct. If DPS took it unto themselves to to start an 18 month investigation every time somebody swore under their breath in custody, they'd never stop investigating. What exactly were they investigating? Did your friend contact a PolFed rep, and what the hell did they have to say to all this?

Sorry, but it all smells rather fishy. DPS know they can't go around investigating people for stuff like that, because the Fed would, quite rightly, go berzerk.

[Future_officer]

If people can be bothered to read above, no complaint was made. The DPS were investigating something else and came across the audio recording. Also, as I've stated before the prisoner wasn't anywhere near them and didn't hear.



Don't try and use the quote marks to imply it was me or try to be pedantic in saying it wouldn't be heard on audio. It was said as an off-cuff comment away from the prisoner between two members of staff. The prisoner's solicitor wouldn't have a field day since it wasn't heard and no complaint was made.

If you still believe an 18 month investigation and a final written warning was fair for one minor comment is acceptable, then maybe DPS is place for yourself. That kind of police work just doesn't interest me and quite frankly makes me feel uncomfortable, which was the point I was making.

This case doesn't matter, there is many similar cases. Thousands of officers get really irritated by prisoners and many officers say many offensive things, sometimes privately and sometimes in the canteen with colleagues. If DPS listens to a comment which they find offensive, they would probably only report it to the officer supervisor. By the way there are DPS officers everywhere in every borough. Some officers don't realise they working with an undercover DPS officer. Always be careful what you say. You never know who is listening. DPS at any moment can listen to your conversation over the phone, if you use a MET phone. I was once told that many phones are bugged but I don't know if it is true.

Some cases take 18 months, some take 4 months, some take 2 years. It all depends on the investigation. No one can factually criticise an investigation unless they were involved with the investigation.

Edited by Future_officer, 18 July 2012 - 08:21 PM.

[Future_officer]

Your story sounds a little weird. What exactly was the final written warning for, exactly, if nobody heard it other than DPS? Whispering to yourself isn't misconduct, and could never be considered misconduct. If DPS took it unto themselves to to start an 18 month investigation every time somebody swore under their breath in custody, they'd never stop investigating. What exactly were they investigating? Did your friend contact a PolFed rep, and what the hell did they have to say to all this?

Sorry, but it all smells rather fishy. DPS know they can't go around investigating people for stuff like that, because the Fed would, quite rightly, go berzerk.

DPS can investigate whatever they feel is in the public and METs interest. The decision is made by senior detectives. If they, for example, want an investigation started for something said during a confrontation which they believe is offensive and breaks the code of conduct, DPS will investigate. CPS won't prosecute unless it's in the public interest. Many officers have been given first and second written warning. Most don't take it seriously. A small number of officers go through a Gross Misconduct Trial. Some lose their jobs after being found guilty of Gross misconduct than appeal to the Assistant Commissioner and get their jobs back, but lose rank or a month worth of pay. Most officers who are have to face a Gross Misconduct trial or who are under investigation resign early so they don't face a trial which could make them loose their pensions. Best way to not lose your pension if your about to face a charge of misconduct or gross misconduct is to resign straight away. Although it will show you are guilty. A member of the public (who is a former police officer) can't face a Gross Misconduct trial. That I believe is unfair.

If someone is interested in joining DPS they should be supported all the way. It's like any other detective department, only difference is you deal with mainly complaints.

Edited by Future_officer, 18 July 2012 - 08:39 PM.

[Fenix]

. Some lose their jobs after being found guilty of Gross misconduct than appeal to the Assistant Commissioner and get their jobs back, but lose rank or a month worth of pay.

Fines and/or reduction in rank are not available sanctions

[owenred]

I defo would join dps corruption should be stopped in the job people abusing their powers or travel entitlements should be sorted
People have always thought I was dps because I'm too nice and trusting apperantly but no for sure I would join dps for sure

[Corbs]

One of the things I find ridiculous in this thread is people saying that they disagree with the way something has been handled so they wouldn't do it themselves. Surely that's an excellent reason to do it yourself, if you think current DPS aren't seeing things in a balanced way.

That's like saying 'I wouldn't join the police because I know someone who got section 5'd.'

I did always used to be accused of being a DPS plant, turning up at random stations being friendly and talkative to check my email before I got a proper posting!

[Fenix]

Not to mention the fact that people who are saying they would be moronic enough to work alongside anyone corrupt without doing anything about it are putting themselves and their families at risk. I assume they are aware that criminals try to use police officers to obtain personal information of other officers through aware, book 1 etc.

[Numpty]

Terrible points!

My mate got stuck on for something but he is a nice bloke therefore everyone at DPS should hang their heads in shame blah blah blah...

[Übèrnamè]

Terrible points!

My mate got stuck on for something but he is a nice bloke therefore everyone at DPS should hang their heads in shame blah blah blah...

Has anyone actually said that in this thread?

[Fry]

This whole thread reads like those awkward and slightly immature conversions you have with anti-police friends. "Why did you join the police?" Because crime happens and someone needs to deal with it. "Yes, but back in the day I got stuck on for not wearing a seat belt/fighting in the high street/sheep rustling, so all coppers are rhyming-words-with-runt" Ah right. Oh look at that, I've got to go and wash my hair...

The police are a necessary evil to police society, and DPS (or PSD for most other forces that aren't the Met) are a necessary evil to police the police. There has to be someone to keep an eye on the police to ensure there is integrity to what we do and how we do it. Personally, I'm quite glad that the police in this country aren't corrupt and nasty people, and I'm glad we have internal departments and external oversight to ensure that we're not, because I'm not a nasty person and I don't do this job to get an erection through causing pain and misery.

I therefore get a little bit irked when people suggest that we are corrupt egotistical evil bar stewards. I actually had a kid, probably less than 5 years old, with a smile on it's face and entirely innocently asking when/whether I (or the police) was going to kill someone. I was genuinely speechless...

[Guycpw]

This whole thread reads like those awkward and slightly immature conversions you have with anti-police friends. "Why did you join the police?" Because crime happens and someone needs to deal with it. "Yes, but back in the day I got stuck on for not wearing a seat belt/fighting in the high street/sheep rustling, so all coppers are rhyming-words-with-runt" Ah right. Oh look at that, I've got to go and wash my hair...

The police are a necessary evil to police society, and DPS (or PSD for most other forces that aren't the Met) are a necessary evil to police the police. There has to be someone to keep an eye on the police to ensure there is integrity to what we do and how we do it. Personally, I'm quite glad that the police in this country aren't corrupt and nasty people, and I'm glad we have internal departments and external oversight to ensure that we're not, because I'm not a nasty person and I don't do this job to get an erection through causing pain and misery.

I therefore get a little bit irked when people suggest that we are corrupt egotistical evil bar stewards. I actually had a kid, probably less than 5 years old, with a smile on it's face and entirely innocently asking when/whether I (or the police) was going to kill someone. I was genuinely speechless...

Couldn't agree more, well said Fry.

[SBG]

Ok this has gone way off track........

Thank you all