16 our of 17 police officers refuse to answer IPCC questions

[Tefal]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44970963

So after bungling a serial killer case repeatedly the original officers were taken off after a family's own investigation linked to earlier deaths and a new team was brought in.

The original 17 officers all under misconduct charges asked for months to prepare for the interviews dragging things out for the family then when it came to it all but one refused to answer any questions. Oh and one quit so can't actually be sanctioned or punished in anyway now it seems.


How is this not grounds for instant dismissal for a police officer to refuse to cooperate with an ipcc investigation?


Also how bad are they that the serial killers first victim was found outside his own door he lied about it got caught lying but still was let go!?

And how in the modern age can you kill 2 people stick a suicide note in ones hand about how he was killing himself because he killed the other and have it taken at face value and not a suspicious death?

Did no one check phone records of supposed lovers who went through a murder suicide to see if they actually knew each other?

 

[FortuitousFluke]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44970963

So after bungling a serial killer case repeatedly the original officers were taken off after a family's own investigation linked to earlier deaths and a new team was brought in.

The original 17 officers all under misconduct charges asked for months to prepare for the interviews dragging things out for the family then when it came to it all but one refused to answer any questions. Oh and one quit so can't actually be sanctioned or punished in anyway now it seems.


How is this not grounds for instant dismissal for a police officer to refuse to cooperate with an ipcc investigation?


Also how bad are they that the serial killers first victim was found outside his own door he lied about it got caught lying but still was let go!?

My understanding is they chose to prepare written statements as per their rights so they haven't refused to cooperate as such . It doesn't sit well with me on a first read but i don't know a great deal about the case and at the end of the day they've followed the letter in terms of how they've responded.

 

[Resident]

It's about time the Met were classified as no longer fit for purpose.

 

[jsmoke]

Never even heard of the guy before.

So what do you think is behind it all?

I assume it's prejudice on the investigators behalf?

 

[Malevolence]

Watched a documentary about this case on iPlayer a few weeks back, 'How the Police Missed the Grindr Killer'. Shocking amount of incompetence on part of the police.

It's not available on iPlayer any more for some reason, but it is on YouTube.

 

[G-MAN2004]

Met police in: 'being useless' shocker.

 

[jsmoke]

Met police in: 'being useless' shocker.

Either that or they turned a blind eye.

 

[Malevolence]

Either that or they turned a blind eye.

Well, when they decided that there was no connection between two of the victims, despite them being found in the exact same location and with the exact same manner of death, it was either that or sheer incompetence.

 

[Dis86]

It's interesting but police in Canada recently also had an issue with a guy who preyed on other homosexual males. It's almost like they just write it off as being part of the lifestyle or something. Muppets.

 

[Tefal]

Never even heard of the guy before.

So what do you think is behind it all?

I assume it's prejudice on the investigators behalf?

Incompetence and a willingness to write this crap off as just part of a gay lifestyle.

I mean how can 2 people turn up dead with a hand written murser-suicise note and no one even check if it matches thier handwiritng

 

[jsmoke]

Well I can't see how it could be incompetence in any way. I mean they are not fools, picked because they are the best there is for the job.

 

[The Running Man]

Sir, would tou like to incriminate yourself today?

Er no thanks

Okay.

 

[dowie]

I guess as they're police officers they're already well aware that it is generally a bad idea to talk to the police (or in this case the IPCC). I assume they're sought legal advice and their choice to submit written statements is based on the advice they've received.

And yes I do somewhat agree with the OP that it doesn't come across particularly well at all, it is likely to be rather frustrating for the relatives of the victims.

 

[wnb]

Yea

I guess as they're police officers they're already well aware that it is generally a bad idea to talk to the police (or in this case the IPCC). I assume they're sought legal advice and their choice to submit written statements is based on the advice they've received.

And yes I do somewhat agree with the OP that it doesn't come across particularly well at all, it is likely to be rather frustrating for the relatives of the victims.

Never talk to the police, no on will know this better than a police officer. It does look bad though.

 

[Tefal]

So what do we think will be the outcome?
All have been cited for misconduct or gross misconduct.

The replacement team seemed to have the case wrapped up and the guy in jail in such short order they can't really say it was a hard case to solve.

The one who quit has entirely escaped punishment too

 

[jsmoke]

That's just how the establishment works, the thin blue line and all that, protect your own. It's the only way that it can work otherwise you risk spiraling into chaos.

You become desensitised to all this stuff after reading or watching the same things on the news or online over many years. I just shrug it off.

 

[andi]

They have the same rights as anyone else. They can go no comment if they wish to do so.

To be fair if I'd been papered, I'd be hesitant to speak with anyone from the iopc too, useless organisation that they are.

As for one guy quitting, what do you propose? Keep paying him until you can sack him? One case recently was thrown out after the iopc spent 7 years investigating it..

 

[LeeUK]

Never answer questions in a police interview. The right way is to prepare a statement after the interview. Speaking to police you just risk incriminating yourself.

 

[Caracus2k]

Never answer questions in a police interview. The right way is to prepare a statement after the interview. Speaking to police you just risk incriminating yourself.

But yet people get all precious when police follow the same path?

In an interview under caution no inference can be drawn if an interviewee refuses to answer a question verbally which is addressed in a written statement.

And officers are entitled to provide written statements in misconduct proceedings. Why exactly would they answer questions when they can provide all the account they need to in a written statememt?

Sixteen of them - as they are entitled to - provided "no comment" interviews and instead submitted prepared statements.

 

[PlacidCasual]

Whilst I accept they acted within their rights vis a vis investigations, one might argue that those who police the law might reasonably be held to a higher standard and that refusing to answer questions or cooperate in itself should be misconduct.