Uneasy lies the head that wears the hat!
Photo credit: the Mail
Front page credit: The Mail - courtesy: Mr Chris Hobbs
It would take an event of seismic proportions together with an individual seemingly intent on becoming one of the most reviled in history, for the Met’s Commissioner, Cressida Dick, to be removed from the crosshairs of the main stream media, notably the Daily Mail.
As the Ukraine crisis was evolving, the Met’s Deputy Commissioner, Sir Stephen House, surprised his own officers by launching a fierce attack on London’s Mayor Khan deemed responsible for the ‘constructive dismissal’ of the Commissioner. Sir Stephen’s statement, to City Hall’s Police and Crime Committee, was damning yet how far is the tsunami of criticism aimed at the Commissioner, justified?
Charles De Menezes
The death of Charles De Menezes was a tragedy and always features amongst list of ‘charges’ in respect of Cressida Dick’s career. Of course, his tragic death should never have happened and procedures have changed which should ensure that the chances of a similar occurrence repeating itself, are significantly reduced. Whilst the Met was subsequently found guilty of ‘endangering the public’ Cressida Dick, the gold commander for the day, was specifically exonerated; a fact that cuts little ice with her critics.
Also forgotten, is that this incident took place less than three weeks after the catastrophic 7/7 massacres and the day after four terrorists has attempted to cause additional carnage on the transport system by exploding further deadly devices. In fact, mercifully, the devices were faulty and just the detonators ‘popped.’ Little wonder that the police and security services were on edge and desperate to prevent further carnage. That the terrorists were later arrested, again, is a factor often overlooked.
Operation Midland
A frequently referred criticism of Cressida Dick by her critics, especially the Daily Mail, concerned the ‘VIP’ investigation prompted by an alleged victim known as ‘Nick’ who was later identified as Carl Beech and whose allegations turned out to be patently false. These allegations were directed against prominent individuals such as Lord Brittan and Lord Bramall.
There is no question that the bogus allegations of Beech should have been disregarded within a comparatively short space of time and the agonies of false allegations to which his victims unquestionably suffered, can only be guessed at.
However, some consideration needs to be given into the context and background of these investigations. The architect of the governments ‘more for less’ mantra in respect of policing; Tom Winsor, in his capacity of the head of the Police Inspectorate made it clear that sex crime victims should be believed.
Chief Inspector of Constabulary Tom Winsor told the BBC that the under-recording of sexual offences was of particular concern and more sex crimes would be reported if victims felt they could trust the police.
"The police need to institutionalise a culture of believing the victim. Every time," he said.
The name of former Rochdale MP Cyril Smith will be known to just about every police officer past and present, and indeed rumours concerning Smith were widely circulated even when he was an MP. One strand of the recent Independent Enquiry into Child Sexual Abuse considered and rejected concerns that there was ever an organised paedophile ring operating around the Palaces of Westminster. However, Cyril Smith was predictably referred to as was Conservative MP Peter Morrison together with other former MP’s: The phrase used in the report was that these and other prominent Westminster individuals were “known to be active in their sexual interest in children”
Police were accused in the report, along with politicians and political parties of ‘turning a blind eye.’ Claims have been made that during local police investigations into Smith many years ago, Special Branch detectives arrived and seized the evidence. The report however gives little indication as to what police were supposed to have known and how they would have come by it.
Police and the CPS were also accused of missing several opportunities to put Lord Greville Janner on trial in respect of 22 child abuse linked offences. He died of Alzheimer's in 2015 and both he and his family had always protested his innocence.
Perhaps a more relevant point for discussion is whether the names of suspects should be placed in the public domain before charges are laid. The most obvious recent example concerns that of Cliff Richard and the ‘raid’ on his UK home. The argument against this is that publicity could encourage further victims to come forward which could determine whether the suspect is subsequently charged and ultimately convicted.
However, placing allegations and suspects into the public domain can, even if no charges result, still lead to lives being wrecked based on ‘there’s no smoke without fire’ maxim that would accompany the judgement of many.
Added to this mix is the very recent report compiled by Dame Laura Cox which described the House of Commons as a "stark reminder of how bad things used to be" and said there was a culture of "deference, subservience, acquiescence and silence".
In her report, she detailed alleged sexual harassment by MPs, saying women reported being abused in "vulgar, gender-related terms".
There were reports of "inappropriate touching", including men "trying to kiss them, grabbing their arms or bottoms or stroking their breasts or bottoms.
Yes, Operation Midland was inept but surely the facts above provide a context that offers significant mitigation into why Met senior officers went through a no-entry sign into a blind alley.
Daniel Morgan
As I’ve previously written, attempting to work through the hundreds of pages that comprise the report into the brutal murder of Daniel Morgan and associated police corruption while formulating some sort of timeline of events is a daunting, time-consuming task. Details of investigations, inquiries suspects, arrests, charges, acquittals and suspects successfully suing the Met combine to create a controversy of Gordian knot proportions.
The Met, during Cressida Dick’s tenure, appear to being accused of some form of cover-up and it is hard to see that the potential revelation of whatever is being covered up (if anything) could be more damaging to the Met than the ongoing allegations of cover-up and corruption.
One possible conclusion, and perhaps the only one, is that there is still material contained in Met records, which, if revealed, could well pose a danger to certain individuals by those involved in serious organised crime. Some major players have been active for decades.
Wayne Couzens
Rumours that a police officer was responsible for the death of Sarah Everard began to circulate in horrified police circles before any official announcement was made. The arrest and conviction of Wayne Couzens called into question issues surrounded recruitment and vetting. Couzens had been a police officer in two other forces, namely the Kent Constabulary and the Civil Nuclear Constabulary and with such transfers, the officers file would be looked at and this, together with any disciplinary matters would affect the Met’s decision.
Generally, though, across the country, transfers of officers between forces are seamless and few issues result. The Commissioner of the Met can hardly be blamed for this extremely rare aberration but certainly this tragedy together with appalling behaviour of other rogue officers raises significant issues around vetting, recruitment and transfers.
Officers who colluded in the vile behaviour of Couzens are being dealt with and its worth remembering that those police who dealt with Sarah’s case were praised by the trial judge.
The Clapham Common vigil.
The ‘charge sheet’ against the Commissioner varies from media outlet to media outlet, but all include the vigil for Sarah which held at Clapham Common. ‘Heavy-handed’ policing was the most common phrase used, yet how heavy-handed was it?
I know two totally independent journalists who were present and it should be remembered that the original organisers had called the event off after a failed High Court action, but it was quickly taken over by a far-left group while anti-vaxxers, known to be hostile to police, were also present.
Despite the fact that the vigil was deemed at the time illegal, it was initially lightly policed by mainly female officers until the minutes silence at 6pm. A Sky News timeline and social media footage clearly showed officers politely asking those on and around the bandstand to disperse. Widely circulated footage also showed police being abused especially by the red-headed actress who also appeared to be encouraging others to defy police.
Her arrest was due to her refusing to provide her name and address and images of her being restrained on the floor went viral around the world. The fact that on every Friday and Saturday night around the UK, it’s not simply aggressive males who are pinned to the floor, is ignored.
Seven arrests were made on the night, but only one ended in custody and it wasn’t the actress. All were de-arrested after providing their names and addresses for possible future action concerning Covid breaches. Local A&E units were not overflowing with victims of police brutality.
The original organisers, Reclaim the Streets, recently won a High Court action against the Met. This would appear to be on the basis that, in making its decision, the Met failed to conduct an appropriate assessment as to the public health implications of holding such a vigil and thus breached the human rights of the organisers. The media and activists however, interpreted this as criticism of police action on the night, which it clearly was not.
Perhaps, however, most telling fact of all, was the inquiry by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary; they are regarded as no friends of front- line officers, yet their report other than one or two minor communication issues exonerated (that word again) police. Despite this, there was concern expressed as to the reputational damage caused to the Met by the subsequent reporting.
Partygate
Revelations about Downing Street and government employees were having alcohol fuelled fun when the rest of the country were enduring dark times was always going to be a potential banana skin.
Initial indications that the Met were going to let this pass them by plus an odd statement suggesting that officers didn’t investigate retrospectively, provoked outrage in that it was felt that ‘Boris and the government’ were ‘getting away with it’ whilst members of the public were being fined for Covid breaches.
The reversal of the original ‘no further action’ decision and news of an investigation also ensured outrage led by The Daily Mail, and, once again, the Met were faced with a familiar ‘damned if you do, damned if you don’t’ scenario.
Wembley
The inescapable fact that the Met Commissioner cannot micro-manage every aspect of policing the capital was perhaps best illustrated at the disastrous European final at Wembley. An equally inescapable fact is that the Met and its commanders normally manage potentially violent encounters with aplomb. Policing football in London is frequently a complex business and can involve violence between rival supporters whose teams are not even playing each other on the day.
However, on this occasion, events did not go well and problems at the semi-final between England and Denmark, perhaps should have raised a massive red flag.
The subsequent inquiry questioned the Met’s late deployment of its officers on ‘ground assigned’ when that ‘ground’ had already been lost to thousands of drunken drugged hooligans. The Met also had to deal with disorder in central London.
Arguments that Wembley and its surroundings are ‘private property’ and thus not directly the responsibility of police are not sustainable. Clearly police have a significant input and its refusal, along with the FA and the Stadium authorities to reveal what meetings, involving all three, took place between the semi-final and final is indicative of a fault that pervades the Met when it responds to Freedom of Information Act requests.
However, to say the Commissioner should bear responsibility for Wembley when numerous other football related operations are policed in exemplary fashion is, perhaps, harsh to say the least.
Murder Investigations.
Failures in the Stephen Port investigation have also been used to discredit Cressida Dick. Murder or, as they are now referred to, homicide investigations are in fact, normally success stories. The Met, quite simply, solves most murders. The figure, before the cutbacks was a nine- out- of- ten success rate. The aforementioned cutbacks and reductions in murder squad units are having an effect with the number of murder teams reduced and the success rate now just below eight out of ten.
As for the Port investigation being the victim of homophobic attitudes of officers again suggests that homophobia is and was an issue within the Met. Back in 1990 the savage murder of a gay male, Michael Booth, occurred within half a mile of where I lived. I met the outraged murder squad and saw, at first hand, their anger and frustration that they were unable to gather sufficient evidence to charge and convict the known suspects. Even more than 30 years ago, thugs were only too forensically aware.
Nine years later I was on the periphery of the nail bomber enquiry, where the racist, homophobic far right terrorist, David Copeland targeted London’s black, Bangladeshi and gay communities in Brixton, Brick Lane and Soho. Again, I can clearly remember the determination of investigating officers to arrest and convict.
As for racist attitudes, in the first ten years of the new millennium, Operation Trident secured justice for the families of black murder victims during savage gang violence which resulted in a plethora of fatal shootings in London. Today, young black men are disproportionately victims of fatal stabbings, but again, justice is normally obtained for the victim’s families despite the additional pressures on police.
Gangs, knives, guns, mopeds and drugs.
The Met and its officers frequently come under attack by the media and activists for ‘racist’ stop and search which they illustrate by edited clips of contentious incidents. Critics will ignore the fact that young men within the black community are far more likely to be both the victims and perpetrators of knife, gun and gang crime in London. The socio-economic reasons for such a disparity are clearly not the fault of police who have to apply sticking plasters which help mask the generational failure of politicians from across the political spectrum and which save lives.
Linked to the above is the real issue of county lines drug dealing emanating from the capital which, over recent years, involves safeguarding children. Cressida Dick has, however, supported the tactic of stop and search despite the criticism and whilst officers acknowledge that this isn’t a solution, the Met state that knife and gun crime has fallen.
Officers will not infrequently, reach the scenes of stabbings before paramedics and begin life-saving first aid. Each deadly weapon taken off the streets is a potential life-saver, but the Met and their Commissioner will rarely get any credit for those lives saved. Had she ordered that stop and search be curtailed, as demanded by activists, then the consequences can only be wondered at.
It should also be remembered that ‘moped enabled crime’ was out of control in London before police adopted the principle of ‘tactical contact.’ The final say, in what was a bold decision, will have been that of the Commissioner.
Charing Cross and rogue officers.
There can be no excuse for the crass behaviour of those Charing Cross officers who sullied the name of the Met or indeed other officers whose appalling behaviour has a massively negative impact on their colleagues. For Cressida Dick, however, the death knell for her career was the Independent Office for Police Conduct’s statement that “these incidents are not isolated or simply the behaviour of a few bad apples.” That, despite the fact that after some three years of IOPC activity, just 14 Charing Cross officers out of hundreds were disciplined out of which, three were dismissed.
The IOPC ‘bad apples’ assertion, does not appear to accompanied by any explanation as to the methodology used to reach that conclusion and indeed, the endemic ‘bad apples’ perception was already an undisputed fact as far as much of the media was concerned.
The deplorable activities of those officers who photographed the bodies of murder victims, Nicole Smallman and Bibaa Henry when ‘guarding’ the scene was condemned across a horrified Met workforce and indeed by the many thousands who comprise the police social media community.
Other examples of appalling police behaviour resulting in dismissal and even prosecution, were and are being seized on by the media with particular emphasis on Met officers.
In fact, officers being dismissed has been a feature of life in the Met and indeed, other forces for decades. The decision that disciplinary action against officers be placed in the public domain is a relatively recent one and the Freedom of Information Act means that details are available to a generally hostile media who will use them to illustrate the ‘rotten to the core’ mantra.
As previously stated, and as Cressida Dick acknowledges, there are issues around recruitment and vetting. The very nature of policing across the world means that there is a real danger of attracting those who wish to abuse their power and with some continental forces, the abuse of power is almost a pre-requisite for recruitment.
In the UK, some unpleasant individuals will defeat the system which has been made weaker by virtue of cutbacks and the existence of the College of Policing; an organisation that appears hopelessly disconnected from the police community. Perhaps psychometric testing should be considered; perhaps there needs to be further investigation as to whether constant exposure to trauma can affect both the attitude and mental state of some officers.
The Met have improved systems for those officers wishing to report inappropriate behaviour, be it bullying, racism, homophobia or misogyny. However, the unanswered question, as at Charing Cross, is whether officers, whatever their status, race, sexual orientation or gender overwhelmingly find their colleagues, professional, friendly, protective and respectful.
One fact which most Met officers agree upon, is that the current Commissioner ‘has their backs.’ She is popular and has a genuine concern for officers’ welfare. I can personally vouch for this following her actions after my mother died whilst I was working out in Jamaica and then, just weeks later, when a close personal friend, who was an immigration officer, committed suicide. My small unit were later embedded with officers at Gatwick and that Sussex police unit suffered two tragic deaths in quick succession. Again, Cressida Dick, as a very senior Met officer, wrote personally to the officer’s families.
Long after I retired, I was present at the last pre-pandemic Notting Hill carnival amongst dense crowds, where I was surprised to see, in full uniform, the Commissioner accompanied by two nervous plain clothes, protection officers. She was clearly determined to greet as many officers as possible on what is always a challenging day for policing.
Debit
There is however, a debit side to the Commissioner’s account. Her SLT (Senior Leadership Team) have, with several exceptions, been less than impressive, especially during periods of adversity. Despite outstanding work by its officers on a daily basis, the Met ‘Comms’ seem incapable of promoting a positive image. Its Press Bureau is criticised, by even friendly journalists, as being frequently uncooperative. It’s insistence that journalists provide a precise location of a critical incident is but one ludicrous example.
The Commissioner herself, whilst facing an unfair criticism, should have realised or been told that the occasional appearance on the Nick Ferrari breakfast programme, isn’t sufficient in terms of ‘getting the message across.’. Whilst newspaper editors from the Mail to The Guardian have been openly hostile to Cressida Dick, there is not one of those editors who wouldn’t bite the Commissioner’s arm off for an article even if those articles defend police officers.
When Commander, Cressida Dick was well known for being approachable, however this changed when she reached the next rung on ladder as Deputy Assistant Commissioner: Surrounded by staff-officers and secretaries, there is always a danger that a cross between a ‘King’s New Clothes’ and siege mentality develops; that the persons at the top loses some, if not all, contact with the reality endured by those on front line. Who on earth, for example, decided that Met response officers, working shifts and dealing with the violence and trauma of 999 calls, should, in addition, be allocated crimes to investigate? Unfair on the officers and grossly unfair upon those victims of crime.
Another criticism is a failure to clearly explain how government cutbacks have affected the Met. Even Sir Tom Winsor has conceded that only 20% of police time is devoted to crime. In London, community policing has suffered and there has been little comment on the adverse effect of closing police stations, especially in high crime areas dominated by gangs.
Of course, having two ‘masters’ at opposite ends of the political spectrum, can only be a handicap and indeed the Mayor’s apparent ‘constructive dismissal’ of the Commissioner simply illustrates how difficult the role has been and will be.
The police have, with the advent of body-worn cameras (BWC), the opportunity to show the public (and both the Mayor and Home Secretary) how demanding performing duty can be. I’ve witnessed numerous, shameful attacks on, and abuse of, police officers at public order events. All will have been captured on BWC footage.
Officers, as stated above, are often first on the scene of stabbings and shootings and do their best to save life. Of course, when using BWC footage, the dignity of victims and sensitivity of relatives must be preserved, but there will be instances where victims or their relatives will give their consent and others where obscuring faces will satisfy the concerns raised.
In essence, the public need to be made aware of the challenges faced by front-line police and even with the occasional BBC programme; ‘The Met, policing London,’ that is not happening. The fact is that the response of officers to these challenges is outstanding and the evidence is there, yet the failure to communicate this to the public is, perhaps, the greatest failure of Cressida Dick’s time in office.
Having said that, we are seeing a good, compassionate, caring officer being hounded out of office having been publicly humiliated by a Mayor who has now totally lost the confidence of London’s officers.
I’m not sure that it is in Cressida Dick’s nature to take the Mayor to an employment tribunal or to pen an autobiography but if it’s the latter, I’ll be first in the queue.
Finally, it’s perhaps worth nothing the final report of Sir Tom Winsor, before he retires. He points to many improvements needed to make policing more effective; as stated above, critics will doubtless point out that he was architect of the ‘more for less’ philosophy which has precipitated the current policing crisis. However, in commenting on policing in England and Wales he states: that whilst the undesirable should be ‘rooted out’ of the police service; ‘the vast majority of officers display commendable bravery and behaviour and deserve the trust and admiration of the public.’
I suspect the current Commissioner will be saying something similar upon her retirement.