Police complaints, investigations and misconduct: a consultation on legislation

Complaints process internally or the two further Scot Gov sister organisations are at best a joke of protection against even criminal conduct by PS Officers.

When criminal allegations are made about a serving officer or past serving officer to PS or even COPFS criminal allegations against the police department the ‘close rank’ between bodies, 3 external bodies is abhorrent.

This is why failing Met Police professional standards officers ended up with the horrific male toxicity of Sarah Everard, because of a lack of accountability on previous complaints against the Officer.

In Scotland two further Scot Gov PS investigation bodies closed rank on me, as did the COPFS on several occasions.

It is only a matter of time before PS officer behaves in the same manner as Sarah Everard perpetrator Officer and my fear is it will be a child.

PS Code in law was a failure of the 2012 PS merger, 10 years society has been left at risk from PS.

Every citizen. It is citizens Scotland’s Police Service, it should be financed and accountable to Parliament not Government.

The code should include all 9 principles of Ethics in Public Life Scotland as a base, accountable to each police officer - uphold to the public good and serving.

Currently this only applies to public body boards, but as apparently THEE public investigatory body Police Scotland officers professional decisions should be Ethical and above the existing Ethical Standards in Public Life legislation, police failures are not acceptable especially when investigating other public bodies criminal misconduct/s along with the failing COPFS dept.

On many occasions as a child my (male) police Officer neighbours were not acting within their duty to report child abuse to their employer or other appropriate body (social work/NHS).

Between 22-26 I as a man was twice sexually assaulted by male police officers on duty in full uniform.

The local constabulary would not investigate criminal behaviour but (male) professional standards would and take no action.

In 2012 with the merger I tried to have that investigated, again to no avail.

COPFS complaints against the police section again closed rank on me protecting PS.

Toxic masculinity on the unqualified ‘professionals‘ as police officers holding & running vulnerable persons databases over NHS & Council qualified Social workers, nurses & Doctors has to change no duty of candour or code will change PS databases from Pinpoint vulnerable people that are then at further sexual risk from toxic PS officers.

When a incident happened with a stranger when I was 11 years old I was placed on 8 constabulary vulnerable databases, that is when the harassment and sexual intent from Police Officers started. The vulnerable persons database/s places me at more public sector & Police risk & incidents.

All the intentions in this public consultation are essential but they also do not address the root cause how we protect the most vulnerable on databases from male Police toxicity themselves.

Parliamentary body with local delivery offices at local councils run by local council staff, local councils must have much more power to investigate complaints on the behalf of its citizens against all larger public bodies.

Complaints should also in this way allow citizens face to face appointments where a complaint isn’t suitable for calling or emailing as per the citizens requirements.

Instant access, no claim, any death in a public sector environment should entitle immediate legal representation of the public and their families against any death on public sector property or in PS case custody when physically touched by any police officer.

Public service (sector) is to serve electorate citizens, when failure happens death or otherwise Legal Aid entitlement should be available regardless of income for independent legal investigation.

Automatic no claim legal aid is a human right in any death that should be applied across Parliament & Gov & their bodies, if COPFS can Fatal Accident Enquiry as a national body the death then by right
legal aid should be automatic.

The term Fatal Accident Enquiry itself is not appropriate, it sets a agenda inside and out the probable public body and to the public. Fatal (Public) Death Enquiry or similar would be more appropriate in showing respect to the death and loved ones - ‘Accident’ is a assumption that cannot be determined until after a investigation & legal aid representation of both sides Public Sector & legally represented citizen.

As 1.4B. Legal (Aid) representation is Equality in public service investigation.

As a police complaints body it should be removed, it is more suitable that COPFS addresses to the Parliament who not only can review and vote on matters needed surrounding such but Parliament has the opportunity on behalf of the Scottish citizens to thank the Officer for their duty publicly in official capacity rather than private press and further pay respect to the Officer & their grieving loved ones.

It also should allow the Parliament to make a exceptional ‘Death In Public Duty’ expenses payment amounting of any secured debts towards the Officers debts where housing provided by a mortgage or other secured debt on the property in the Officers name ensures having lost a partner & or parent that the ‘state’ at a national level will not see them losing their home as well as loved one at their time of grief or at any point in the future.

Any public sector employee or public funded employee working alongside and on PS ground.

The Police and all its public sector partners must adhere to the highest level of 9 principles of Ethical Standards In Public life if PS and it’s Officers itself are to conduct themselves in such as way.

All parties should uphold the public interests above their own or public body employee interests even in collaboration with cross agency work.

Any public funded employee at Parliament or Gov body may be a member of the public off duty, the principles of Ethics in Public Life still apply as a “member of the public”.

As example it is unacceptable a NHS Nurse is not held within contempt of court of repeatedly failing to appear as a witness at court dates Mx This is not ethical for any public funded employee in their “member of the public” off duty area of life, simply the crossover of trust in the person and their role in public funded role or body has to be off the highest standards on the interest of the general public at large.

I have used PIRC, the standards are nonexistent and it’s a close rank and protect the other public sector body (PS) not the citizen or the complaint, it will not even follow its own internal complaints process.

Again the toxic masculinity in far too many public investigation bodies protect male Police Scotland officers. Female staff also seem scared to change or challenge decisions. Toxic misogynistic masculinity where the citizen is not serva

As minimum I would expect 2 legal qualified Commissioners of either gender at all times, also that at any stage 2 internal they sign off their findings in a letter to the complainer. In far too many investigation public bodies both Gov & Parliament a final stage review is being done by stage 1 staff, this is criminal maladministration.

Any Commissioner’s in Scotland should be signing in ink on their work at any stage two complaint final review or a stage 2 internal review complaint against PIRC itself.

A deputy should have legal qualification.

Two commissioners and the deputies all having legal qualification means full and proper legal investigations against failing police officers and failing PS procedures.

Conflict is interest for ex police applying even if they now have a legal qualification.

Slowly but surely ex police now even LLB qualified legal professionals infiltrating PIRC as deputy commissioners is just allowing corruption to start to grow from ten outset of the intended changes for public good.


I would apply that to any former administrative Police Scotland employee. Obviously if a previous PS domestic cleaner/maintenance person whom had obtained legal qualification applied then they would be suitable, but not a ex administrative PS employee.

Parliament.

Parliamentary statutory body. Currently PIRC is another sister organisation of Police Scotland also funded by Scot Gov, that is corruption itself, there is no independence or impartiality between sister organisations as both are Scot Gov funded.

Parliament does not fund PIRC, therefor they should choose.

Ministerial appointed is a ethical corruption.

HM could certainly give the Scot Parliament her short list of proven highly effective public sector Legally Qualified professionals she feels made a significant investment in society to be presented forward to the Scot Parliament for their selective consideration.

PIRC is corrupt as the Police Conduct Authority & PS complaints.

The fact all three are Scot Gov funded has allowed corruption.

In association with Audit Scotland - with PIRC being a Parliament led accountability & accountability over Scot Gov its funded Police Scotland body.

No, a Parliament based PIRC/Commissioners should have full access & accountability at the same level Police Scotland have as the superior public authority over the public.

Independence, impartiality, accountability of Police Scotland, Scotland led the world in policing that is why England named it’s main (Met) police force Scotland building Scotland Yard.

Scotland & the Scottish Parliament with PIRC in this century now have to lead the world by example again, that any investigatory body of a police service must be Parliament led and have full access to serve the electorate above any police force failure/s.

Example: International Parliament Standards Police Investigations (Scotland) Act.

Scotland must lead the world again in Policing as it did with the introduction of the worlds first police service pre 1800, approx 250 years ago. That should be celebrated and led by independence of police investigations by worldwide minimal standards Scotland wishes the international community to follow as it did in the history of the invention of Police by & in Scotland.

Live access. There should be no need for PIRC to request anything from PS as a Parliamentary investigatory Commissioner. This would allow PS time to withhold or destroy evidence in a public or financial/legal liability corrupt self protectionist manner.

Complainants to PIRC should have full access to Legal Aid regardless of income if the objective is to stop any public body failures within Gov body PS & it’s Parliament PIRC Commissioner body.

Faith & trust in PS & PIRC under Parliament must be of the highest accountability & ethical public standards, citizens should be told free legal representation via Legal Aid is required to lodge a complaint against PS with the Parliamentary PIRC.

Police body interviews by Parliamentary PIRC should not be planned, a PIRC member of staff should have the immediate right to ‘arrest’ a police body employee & take them to PIRC for a recorded interview. Should a police body employee wish legal representation that would be their chosen & paid for legal representation independent of Police Scotland legal representation.

Common Travel Area is
4 independent countries & their Parliaments of the U.K., that should also apply to Cross jurisdiction in policing as a minimum standard.

“ The Scottish Government engages with the UK Government and Northern Ireland Executive on cross-jurisdictional matters”

The Scottish Government as a independent country is part of the Union of the U.K. Government under the 1960 UN Ruling of Independence & Decolonisation was accepted by the Northern Ireland Act, Scotland Act & Government For Wales Act, all of 1998, and opening of each countries Parliaments under the Labour government in 1999.

This surely means ‘UK Government’ as English Government, The Act of Union of Great Britain 1707 was dissolved in 1999, Britain regions was separated back into 3 countries of Scotland, Wales & England, and with Northern Ireland make up the United Kingdom Union of 4 countries in-line with the 1960 United Nations ruling.

Where I can understand the question proposed, the question is not accurate of the representation of our current U.K. 4 country U.K. Union status and misleads other people responding to this consultation.

Under the U.K. & CTA of Ireland (serious incidents on Ireland/NI border) this proposal should not exclude Irelands Police or their police bodies given the EU/U.K. border.

Under these circumstances the ‘U.K. Gov’ reference comment for English Gov is not valid as Scottish Government, Wales & NI Gov are equal partners with England in the U.K. Gov & not addressing such is to believe Great Britain (3 regions) mainland U.K. (excluding N Ireland) still exists past its 1999 abolishment into only the United Kingdom of four independent countries Union we now have.


This question and references are perplexing, I was born almost 20 years after the 1960 UN ruling, and in 1998 I don’t think Labour understood the impact of that on devolution & Britain, but I think whoever wrote this question is younger than myself and does not understand the impact of 1960 UN the 1999 dissolution of Britain and the U.K. from 1999.

Highest legal authority in public service for public safety must be open, honesty and transparent in all circumstances.

3.1E. If you answered “Yes” to Question 3.3D, under which circumstances should attendance be restricted


?? 3.3D is not on this webpage, the final question below this one is 3.1FF

Errors.

Parliament should be used for proceedings when not in use by MPs, televised. Full Police Officer accountability in full view of the public - BBC Parliament channel.

Equality Act 2010.

A witness protection program for citizens or other public sector employees that are not the Officer subject to the proceedings - they should have no access to this or private hearings - but should have access to witness protection program if they in a Public Hearing disclose something they feel may endanger them and they publicly should ask for witness protection program inclusion from Parliamentary PIRC.

Transparency, honestly & accountability in-line with 9 principles of ethical standards in public life deserves police officer witness protection.

Misconduct is gross misconduct for any public servant employee, it is not appropriate to define misconduct & gross misconduct when you bring the public body employer into disrepute by your public servant failure/s.

All public servants in public bodies proceedings should be accessible on a Parliament website. This should also include a section of gross failure where a public servant should not be employed in any other public funded employee position again, this allows other public bodies & organisations reviving public funding open & transparent information on applicants, much the same way a Director can be barred from holding such responsible role again.

This may preempt or inform a Officer of their questioning line area/s and allow preemptive answer grooming preparation, as per my 3.1K answer this should not be published in the public interest of honesty & transparency of a hearing by any witnesses including the Police Officer themselves.

This Consultation should be sent to all persons on Police Scotland Vulnerable Persons databases for their input by Parliament before proceeding forward, they should also be pin pointed to all advocacy services that can help them compete the consultation such as necessary.

Ethical Standards in Public Life Scotland Act applying to Police Officers therefor the same applies to any hearing & Chair and other persons needed, all having legal qualifications to hold the hearing to account as a high level legal proceeding for Police Officer failures.

Failure of Duty In Public Office (Criminal Law of Scotland) carries a unlimited jail sentence and applies to all Scottish public servant staff, any hearing should apply the legislation in a hearing setting with only legally qualified persons.

Ethical Standards in Public Life Scotland Act.

Ethical standards in Public Life Scotland Act.

Conflict of interest, LP is a Scottish Gov body funded Judiciary employee, PIRC moved to Parliamentary Commissioner means Parliament appoint independent legally qualified hearing Chair/members.

All circumstances:

Public servant misconduct.

Ethical Standards in Public Life Act.

Breach of Public Duty/Office (Scottish Criminal Law)

Answers above self explanatory.

1995, 1999, 2007-8 & post Police merger 2012 I approached Police about misconduct of harassment by off duty officers between 11-16 years old and a rape, later dates sexual misconduct from Police Officers towards me.

No criminal action taken and no appropriate Professional Standards investigation in writing - only by telephone, HM Inspectorate Of Police were equally as useless as PIRC now is when I raised serious issues of current child protection issues of my neighbours grandchildren to PS under Children’s Act 1993.

Police Scotland is predatory in nature as the individual Constabulary was, if not more so, 2016 Police S recording defamation on databases, changing alleged witness DOB to arrest informant.

Threatening manner & behaviours towards informant for trying to protect 2 female minors.


Two Senior PS inspectors refusing in writing stage two complaints to investigate 2 parents with substance abuse issues and the vulnerability of their children.

Being proactive in child protection led to harassment by male PS Senior Officers.

In 2021 younger PS officers, 2 female, 1 male had informed me just exactly what other officers had been recording about me on databases.

PIRC was useless and dismissive as a Scot Gov body, closed rank. Refused to investigate.

Independence & impartiality from all other Svot Gov Police sister funded organisations.

Balance of probabilities is tipped by the evidence, as per Judiciary.

Legally qualified professional Commissioner or deputy.

COPFS itself isn’t appropriate, deliberate criminal maladministration complaints against their Criminal Allegations Against the Police dept went unprocessed by COPFS. COPFS work with PS in a daily basis. PIRC moving to a Parliament body means all decisions should be independent at PIRC.

By proceeding to public hearing. Accountability, openness & transparency.

Legal Aid representation for all complaints will allow independent analysis and reports to be submitted to Parliament PIRC or the appropriate Commissioner body by a independent qualified legal professional, who may feel it is not worth pursing if such is malicious allegation anonymously or otherwise. A complainant would need to find another legal aid professional willing to continue, keeping the decision making process independent and impartial before Parliament PIRC or alternative receive a complaint. Where a legal professional carries forward they represent fairness & equality access of representation against the PS public servant to PIRC or Parliamentary body alternative (replacing PIRC).

All public and transparent by Parliaments PIRC/ other alternative (PIRC) body.

This is not independent and impartial, one Chair with a police and Judiciary appointment panel who are both sister public organisations of their funder the Scottish Gov. All three panel members need to be independent of Scot Gov or its organisations and appointments. Parliament led.

3.5J - only non Gov body fully independent appointees to a panel should have such access.

Internal corruption whilst still on duty.


Is it not appropriate that SPA holds such power as a police body. Parliamentary PIRC (Or replacement) should hold full power not a recommendation as not to corrupt or prejudice Parliament PIRC/other sole duty & function, protect yeh public where Police Scotland fail that duty.

3.5O: Answered no

Because the SPA as Gov body should overrule or have power over a Parliamentary PIRC/Body decision let alone Recommendation when the public safety top Scot Gov body Police Scotland has failed to protect the public it sole duty.

All citizens should have access to Legal Aid for complaints against public funded bodies and those employees in organisations & organisations even part funded by public funds, that should be 6 years before 1p of funding and 6 years after any public funding financial year - in line with the Data Protection Act.

Legal professionals are then independent, impartial appropriate and fair to decide to peruse the complaint pre stage 1 submission at any public/public funding recipient body, GOV & Parliament full representation and accountability to the public and THEIR public purse via free legal representation for accountability of failures in public servant, bodies and contractors/sub contractors.

“3.7E. If statutory guidance on conduct is to be prepared, should the Scottish Ministers consider using this to make clear where matters relate to conduct and where they do not (i.e. where they may relate to performance or grievance matters instead)?“

These are all conduct matters of individual officers of all ranks and PS as a whole.

Statutory Guidance is improve your conduct in any area, failure in public servant bodies is failing the public - gross misconduct.

Liability of conduct of officers conducts towards the public also needs addressed, PS financial liability to members of the public should not come out PS budget nor Scot Gov (as per the NHS National Services Scotland Central Legal Office) officers Pensions should pay financial liability to members of the public and where a individual officer to date pension contributions cannot carry the financial liability compensation cost from their sole contributions to date then PS pension fund must pay that as a organisation fund and take shared responsibility for their colleagues behaviour being a failure of PS as a whole. Shared responsibility, shared values, shared compensation for failure/s.