Mainly a blog site about Policing.......Mainly.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission

Last updated on September 23rd, 2023 at 03:16 pm

Reading Time: 2 minutes

Or are they?  Independent I mean.

Yesterday they casually released three tweets to the world which ignited a pure shitstorm on Twitter and Facebook.

So after FIVE years of investigation, and all that involves for both complainant and officers, they simply issued a statement announcing the withdrawal of proceedings and apologising to all those involved.

Having been most insistent that proceedings for Gross Misconduct were warranted against the officers, meaning that the officers were at risk of being summarily dismissed from the Met and all that involved, they suddenly decide to withdraw the proceedings.


Because it became apparent that not ALL of the evidence had been served on the officers’ defence team.  Witnesses who could support the officers’ version of events were neither interviewed by the IPCC investigators nor was their existence revealed to the officers and their defence team.  At the point when the reasons for this were about to be challenged the IPCC decided to withdraw from the proceedings and not even turn up for them apparently.

We’re not talking about one or two witnesses who may have been overlooked, there were apparently SCORES of potential witnesses who would have supported the officers.

There was also information available that the complainant did not do as the officers told him to do at the scene of an incident and had no desire whatsoever to help them in any way.  He was apparently behaving in a manner which could have inflamed the situation more.

When their shortcomings became apparent the IPCC merely acknowledge that their report did not meet legal requirements, discontinued the proceedings (after 5 years don’t forget) and submit a letter to the panel containing an apology.  Is this really sufficient?  Is it ethical?  It most certainly isn’t professional.

So, there is now to be an “in depth review” of what went wrong.  In my humble opinion there should not be a Review, there should be an Investigation.  Whoever is responsible for this farce at IPCC should be identified, disciplined and face the same sanctions as the officers were facing.Was this a case of Gross Negligence where the IPCC investigators were blissfully unaware of their obligations under Disclosure?  I very much doubt that on the grounds that they investigate Police for similar failings.

Or is this part of an emerging trend where Disclosure obligations seem to be simply cast aside in the rush to convict a Police Officer of something?  Could be.

The IPCC don’t like recruiting ex Police Investigators on the grounds that they might not be ‘Independent’ enough.  The other side of that coin is that they know how to investigate and know all about the relevant bits of legislation that dictate how an investigation must be conducted.

Last night I asked who the IPCC are actually accountable to

I don’t expect an answer any time soon, but it’s a perfectly reasonable question.  Who ARE they responsible to, and what do they propose to do about this travesty?

This is NOT a “one off”.  The issues raised here must be simply swept under the catpet.  Heads should roll, in the same way that the IPCC were after heads, and it must never be allowed to happen again.  EVERYBODY should benefit from the same lawful, ethical and professional standards of investigation.  If this had been the Police “stitching up” a few local criminals there would be public outrage.

Let the outrage begin.

Enjoyed the post? Share it?


  1. Soontobegone

    Thanks all received. I will watch out for the criminal proceedings against IPPC, if l live that long !!

  2. Soontobegone

    Reading the news re this it is quite obvious there will be no balanced reporting. The MET are still racist. What about innocent until proven. When will full facts be published, as one poster on the evening standard suggests the “victim,” gave conflicting accounts and admitted being aggressive uncooperative etc. So why are they not discrediting him as much as the officers or at the very least be non committal and just report the known facts.

    Oh, sorry l forgot that doesn’t sell papers or get website visits. The Police don’t have a voice in the MSM.
    I’m so glad I’m nearly done. BTW Where can I read the full facts ?

    Agree with Gordon non disclosure like this is a criminal offence and action HAS to be taken. It would be taken if the shoe was on the other foot.

    • retiredandangry

      I’ll email you copies of 2 damning documents later, can’t attach them here. Hope that’s OK with you

  3. Gordon Williamson

    This would appear to be yet another case where the IPCC seem to be anything but “Independent” in fact they seem to be totally biased against the Police.
    They have made statements prejudging cases which have be detrimental to the Police.
    The standards of their investigation fall well short of any investigation that would be expected by the Police.
    This latest case is not a minor omissions they deliberately withheld information that was pertinent to the officers defense.
    This is a criminal act!
    This omissions may also be responsible for the MPS paying out compensation that may not be deserved.
    I believe that the MPS may have a case against the IPCC and certainly the individual officers have a case against the IPCC.
    Their criminal and gross misconduct has cost these officers “5 years” of torture and worry and a half hearted apology falls well short of the mark!

    • retiredandangry

      Well said, any body such as the IPCC has a huge amount of power, and with that power comes the requirement to apply it fairly and equitably. This has been sadly lacking in a few cases now, but this is far and away the worst. I can only hope that the officers’ legal representatives pursue the appropriate course of action.

© 2024 RetiredAndAngry

Theme by Anders NorénUp ↑

Verified by MonsterInsights