By David Young-
A shocking new report on poor police vetting standards has revealed how new recruits in the force with criminal records were dismissed as a one off.
Some applicants with robbery and drugs on their records were allowed to join the force, despite having a criminal past that would ordinarily exclude them from being hired.
The embarrassing report reveals a number of cases where concerns over family members with serious criminal links were not properly dealt with. One case involving an applicant for a special officer role revealed had “extensive criminality” within his family, including a brother heavily involved in organised crime.
The sibling had convictions for violence and drug crime, was “of interest” in murder and kidnap investigations, and intelligence was held on him by several police forces in England and Wales.
Officers staged unwarranted stops of women in an abuse of power known as “booty patrols”, with crimes such as sexual assault covered up and ignored along with large-scale harassment of female officers and members of the public.
The report lists a decade of warnings to police chiefs after past serious sexual assaults and abuses of power by serving officers, with the inspectorate finding that chiefs were “complacent” and failed to appreciate “the danger to the public”.
Officers were cleared to join after “committing offences such as robbery, indecent exposure, possession of controlled drugs, drink-driving and domestic abuse-related assaults”, the report found.
The report examined eight forces including the Met and the Civil Nuclear Constabulary, the two forces where Couzens was an armed officer, as well as Kent, where he served as a special constable. Its findings give cause for serious concern and explain why there are so many bent cops in the police force, many of whom can be a cancer to the British justice system themselves.
The lead inspector, Matt Parr, said: “We concluded that a culture of misogyny, sexism, predatory behaviour towards female police officers and staff and members of the public was prevalent in all the forces we inspected, which is a depressing finding.
“We believe that the poor behaviour towards women we were told about is prevalent in many – if not all – forces.”
The inspectorate said: “We also found 131 cases where the [employment] decision was questionable at best. In these, we found officers and staff with criminal records, or suspicions that they had committed crime (including some serious crime), substantial undischarged debt, or family members linked to organised crime.
“In other cases, officers and staff had given false or incomplete information to the vetting unit. We also found officers who, despite a history of attracting complaints or allegations of misconduct, successfully transferred between police forces. This is wholly unsatisfactory.”
Another community support officer applied to transfer to another force but did not declare that he had been involved in a domestic incident where he hit his partner two years before becoming a PCSO. Various members of his family were also criminals.
However, vetting officers agreed it would be “harsh” to turn him down and that they would give him the benefit of the doubt.
The man applied three times to the same force over a 13-year period but was rejected, before appealing and being cleared, although inspectors said this should have been an automatic rejection.
Another said he had been cautioned for shoplifting as a juvenile, and as a teenager had been accused of rape. No measures were put in place to monitor him while working as a police officer to minimise risk.
Another case involved a police officer “allegedly engaging in improper sexualised touching of a member of the public and junior officers”.
There were a number of complaints spanning several years and the claims, if proven, may have amounted to sexual assault. But none of the complainants would support action and the officer later transferred to another force which was made aware of the allegations and “other concerning information”.
A special constable cleared to join despite a past conviction for indecent exposure seven times over a two-week period as a juvenile, when he had masturbated at his bedroom window, coughing to attract the attention of a woman. He also had a caution for threats to commit criminal damage.
A police officer allowed to join despite robbing an 80-year-old woman, who was knocked to the ground and had her handbag stolen. A police officer was also cleared to join despite concerns he had a theft conviction and potential criminal links.
Assaults
A police officer arrested twice for assaults on women who were left with marks on their necks, and witness intimidation, as well as having a historical drink-driving conviction.
An officer cleared to join despite an arrest for rape while a juvenile, about 20 years earlier.
An officer, who still works with vulnerable people, given a final written warning for sending extremely sexually explicit and racist messages to a female colleague.
One officer who transferred from a different force had been subject to 25 public complaints over 10 years, many of which were for “excessive use of force and incivility”. Four of the complaints resulted in “management action”.
The officer had also been arrested for being drunk and disorderly, but no action was taken. There was no evidence the force considered the incidents as a “pattern of concerning behaviour”.
Two other cases highlighted were one involving a police community support officer (PCSO) who cleared vetting despite a previous caution for slapping his partner around the face seven years earlier, and one where an applicant for an officer post had robbed an 80-year-old woman as a juvenile nearly 20 years before.
Another police officer applicant who had accepted a caution for affray five years earlier was cleared when vetting officers wrongly concluded that he had not been aggressive when he and a friend punched and kicked a man.
One police officer who had been caught speeding five years earlier had been convicted of attempted theft in another country, and there was intelligence possibly linking him to drug dealing and cars used by violent criminals.
The report also found that forces were not taking seriously enough cases where applicants had been arrested but not charged.
Candidates who cleared vetting included a police officer applicant who had a conviction for drink-driving and driving without insurance 18 years earlier, and four years after that was arrested for intimidating a witness, and twice after that for domestic assaults.
Another police officer candidate had been convicted of drink-driving and accepted a caution for theft from an employer more than 20 years before his application, then around 10 years after that had been investigated for racially aggravated criminal damage and public order, where the victim was an off-duty special constable.
A PCSO applying to become a police officer also wrongly cleared vetting after failing to declare a warning and penalty notice for cannabis possession.
Criminal Associations In Family
A number of cases were highlighted where concerns over family members with criminal links were not properly dealt with.
One applicant for the post of a special officer had “extensive criminality” within his family, including a brother heavily involved in organised crime.
The sibling had convictions for violence and drug crime, was “of interest” in murder and kidnap investigations, and intelligence was held on him by several police forces in England and Wales.
Another community support officer applied to transfer to another force but did not declare that he had been involved in a domestic incident where he hit his partner two years before becoming a PCSO. Various members of his family were also criminals.
However, vetting officers agreed it would be “harsh” to turn him down and that they would give him the benefit of the doubt.
The findings reveal just how widespread the recruitment of dangerous and corrupt police officers have bene over the years, and the serious damage they pose on public confidence.