Federation Overview Ché Donald PFEW National Lead for Firearms, Taser and Police Officer Mental Health

Police Speak APP Authorised Professional Practice PIP’s Post Incident Procedures PIM’s Post Incident Managers / Management DSI’s Deaths or Serious Injuries following police contact.

Introduction Why hold a PIP Seminar? DSI’s a National Picture IPCC Draft Guidance 2014 PIP Training and Re-Accreditation Welfare Support Programme

Why hold a PIP Seminar? No current national forum for PIP Organisational Learning Professional Development Networking Training opportunities The future Discussions with Simon and Mark about the need and importance of this subject matter No forum to share learning good/bad Further development Who is your IPCC Lead / Force Trained PIMS Meet and speak to those who have active involvement IPCC Guidance on dealing with DSI’s

DSI’s a National Picture Category 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 Road traffic fatalities 48 36 24 40 29 26 19 31 12 14 21 Fatal shootings 5 1 3 2 Deaths in or following 28 27 22 15 17 11 police custody Apparent suicides 47 45^ 56 54 46 39 65 70 70~ 60 following custody Other deaths following 31~ 35 57*~ 44~ 43~ 102** Police Contact* * Change in definition of other deaths following contact in 2010/11 to include only cases subject to an independent investigation. ** Expansion of IPCC investigative resource and capacity to conduct more independent investigations into serious and sensitive matters – this has a direct impact on the number of other contact deaths that are reported ~ This table presents the most up-to-date set of figures for these categories; any changes to previously published data are indicated. RTA -12 Pursuit Related (13) – 2 Response (2) – 6 Other (6) Custody most significant and most at risk – 14 IN 60 Out Other deaths include searched for Mispers / Self Harm and Suicide / Domestic Incidents

DSI’s a National Picture Operational front line police officers at significantly more risk of involvement in DSI Followed by custody officers Then firearms officers Large majority of incidents still not subject to PIP Absence of National Guidance for Non-Firearms DSI Argument that less firearms officers still doesn’t change figures

IPCC Draft Guidance 2014 PFEW and Supts Association joint submission Reflects submission by NPCC Awaiting ratification by Home Secretary Separation/Conferring Conferring is NOT Collusion Detailed Initial First Account (DIFA) Consultation anecdote – Poked in the eye Separation – APP SAFE NECESSARY AND PRACTICAL Conferring - Protections within APP and PIP – Designated Senior Officer present to prevent inappropriate conferring. Allowances for access to reference materials There may, however, be a need speak to one another following the discharge of a police firearm in order to resolve an ongoing operational or safety matter in a particular case a need to confer on other issues does arise, then, in order to ensure transparency and maintain public confidence, where some discussion has taken place, officers must document the fact that this has taken place, highlighting: time, date and place where conferring took place the issues discussed with whom the reasons for such discussion.

IPCC Draft Guidance 2014 The September 2014 APP was found by the Court of Appeal to be lawful and it has been further improved since that (Duggan) ruling to address the imperfections identified by the Court. At paragraph 58 Lord Justice Richards described the 2014 APP as “an imperfect document” but went on to say that: “Despite those drafting deficiencies, however, if properly applied it goes a long way towards reducing the risk of collusion” and in this regard he cited, in particular, two factors in the ACPO guidance, namely (i) its general prohibition against conferring (and associated requirement to record any departure from this general prohibition) and (ii) the supervision provisions which guard against conferring. Lord Justice Richards also said at paragraph 59 that: “I shall proceed on the basis that separation of officers is an exceptional measure and that the normal position is that separation will not be required"  and at paragraph 60(iii) that:  “It seems to me, however, that the regime of supervision in the post-incident suite, considered above, provides a reasonable safeguard against collusion without any general need for separation at this stage”.

PIP Training and Re-Accreditation Phasing out of pre 2013 Training Review conducted of current training package Ability to deliver locally Opportunity to extend training beyond representatives. Re-Accreditation 3 years/2 days. Fed Reps under old course are the ONLY people who have NO degree of assessment around competence and accreditation within a PIP

Concept started by Mark Williams PFOA Initially considered for PIP and Suspensions Expanded for those in need, particularly around Mental Health Significant issues around PTS/D Plans to extend service Over 400 officers using this service NLP Practitioners working for WSP 27/7

Ché Donald Che.donald@polfed.org 07715889385 Questions and Answers Ché Donald Che.donald@polfed.org 07715889385