Why is no one asking about the colleagues - policing

[Bigweekend]

Over the last 2 days I've listened to long interviews with senior police officers. They've said all the right things about how awful is and how things need to change but they've still worked for a really long time in a system that allowed this to happen.

I fully accept that it won't be all police officers, but none of these officers work alone. Even if their colleagues weren't aware that they were violent rapists, they will have known they were nasty misogynists. Why is no one asking about the responsibility of colleagues to report?

In schools it's an offence not to report a concern about a child or an adult's conduct. Why is no one saying the same for the police?

It seems to me that even if colleagues disapprove of an officer's conduct there's an entrenched culture of not "ratting" on a colleague. And before anyone says it, you don't need proof to report or investigate a concern. So why doesn't it happen? And why is no one saying it should/challenging senior officers on why it doesn't/ hasn't in these cases?

Totally agree OP

I’m guessing you weren’t in the Met, or in Wales?

I think you're blind to it if you really never once saw any misogynist attitudes. Even practically perfect workforces are going toncoem across it occasionally. This is the problem, it so widespread and normal even women don't see e.g. the "banter" as out of the ordinary.

It's like bullying in schools. Any school that says they don't have a problem, definitely has a problem because it's always going to happen. It's how you deal with it that matters.

Anyone who doubts this is systemic needs to look at the experiences of women and girls who report sexual violence. That clearly demonstrates the police have a culture of misogyny. To be frank, the misogyny rot is so deep it also infects the behaviour of female, specially trained officers.

Additional things that may work include having a code of conduct that allows unpaid suspension and dismissal for comments and things said online that are misogynistic AND internal affairs staff funded to do random checks, and shared enterprise rules. If you’re in a group chat or environment where someone said or did something dreadful and did nothing, you are also punished for the same thing.

My DP is in the police and we were just discussing that most of these serious bad apples seem to close from the Diplomatic and Parliamentary Protection part of Armed response. Both Wayne C and David were. I think some units like these attract men on a power trip who aren't good enough to make it into more tactical units and instead join this unit where all they do is walk around for hours on end carrying a gun. Enough time to get bored and give in to their darker day dreams. And I think it's horrific there isn't stricter psychological vetting for these roles. Glad to see they are changing this.

There is a lot of disciplinaries in the police. My DP is in line management now and spends most of his time managing complaints (internal and external), and performance. As part of promotion boards officers need to demonstrate occasions they have stepped in when someone was behaving in a manner that went against the values and principles of the job. But there's only so much you can do as it's a public position after all and very very very hard to get rid of anyone unless they're charged or convicted of a crime. It also requires the victims to come forward and press charges or give statements and sometimes they can be reluctant to do that too. Without concrete evidence, it's difficult to sack anyone and evidence doesn't just come by so easily.

And as someone else said, you need to be really really sure before you stick your neck out as if you've gotten it wrong or just gone off rumours and gossip, no one will ever trust you. It's very tough and not easy to solve for in any large organisation. But the additional vetting and changes to performance management should encores be a culture less tolerant of abusive behaviours.

I also don't think an all female force is the answer as a pp said. Look at all female prisons - there's violence and abuse like with all male ones. Power trips and sociopathy are not sex specific - we just see it more around us in male centric environments because traditionally that's what is more common.

And as someone else said, you need to be really really sure before you stick your neck out as if you've gotten it wrong or just gone off rumours and gossip, no one will ever trust you

I'm sure this is true, but why? If the majority want things to be right, why isn't reporting just seen as someone who had concerns doing the right thing and those people more trustworthy than people prepared to hide things that should be reported?

'I think some units like these attract men on a power trip who aren't good enough to make it into more tactical units and instead join this unit where all they do is walk around for hours on end carrying a gun.'

You have to be kidding. A friend was in SO13 before it merged with diplomatic, and the training was endless. And 'all they do is walk around for hours' is just plain inaccurate.

I think the police career as a whole attracts certain types, and police forces need to get better at weeding out the undesirables.

Well, either way - it is undeniable that they have a significant problem in that unit.

Sorry, but training isn't the day job. My DP did this for a time and it was so incredibly dull he had to quit. For many it's an easier way to get into armed response and get the training to move into more tactical units. He does remember it being a much more 'laddy' culture than where he is now as there wasn't the same accountability of other teams as they're mostly remote. A lot of ex-military personnel who carried over their culture (and PTSD) sadly. Armed response as a whole attracts and recruits a different type of officer than someone who joins Fraud as an example. Anyway this opinion is based on the fact 2 of the worst criminals are out of DPG. They definitely need to get better at vetting.

The man who killed Sarah Everard was known as "the rapist" among his workmates. I mean WTF? If the culture in the Met thinks that that is acceptable / funny / OK in any shape or form, then it is rotten to the core.

I salute the courage of anyone who calls that sort of stuff out - especially a women who does so.

I think because mud sticks and if you've gotten it wrong, you've effectively tarnished someone's career. For clear cut cases where inappropriate photos or messages are sent, or there's a witness, or data privacy breach, definitely easier to report and I do think those would be taken seriously.

It's the greyer area of nicknames and gossip and rumours that's hard to take a stand against. Because you've have to either suspend them or launch an investigation - and either of those would get the unions or HR up in a huff if initiated with no hard evidence. Otherwise anyone with a beef against could start a rumour about you or give you a nickname that's daft and you'd get investigated.

What is 100% needed is for any complaint or allegation made to be documented in someone's file and maintained even when they move forces or teams - this doesn't seem to happen. Which is why there may be gossip because someone remembers the allegation but because it was not documented correctly or at all, their current line manager has no visibility of it.

I don't understand why the Home Office hasn't ordered all police forces to suspend officers with outstanding allegations and made it a requirement to report concerns about colleagues. If people don't report their concerns then they should be at risk of misconduct in a public office.

It would be difficult to just suspend all officers who have allegations made against them. Its very easy for any criminal person to do this and not beyond a group of them to make complaints and have the entire force suspended.

I have had loads of allegations made against me over the years from members of the public which have be proven false by things like BWV and CCTV

Fair enough. A concerning pattern of allegations?

Absolutely - I'll be all for that

How about treating police forces more like education providers? Independent inspections with judgements for safeguarding, peer inspections and reviews, mandated values around equality, diversity and inclusion, concentrated effort on diversifying the work force. That would be a start.

No one's suggesting anyone should be suspended for one unfounded allegation, butbthose allegations should still be made, recorded and reviewed for patterns, surely?

Absolutely - i agree with that, no problem

Windthebloodybobbinup

HMIC reviews each force and cover things like that

The knickname thing is shocking on two parts.

For someone to have a "reputation" as a possible rapist is mind boggling, but for it to be acceptable for colleagues to be using the knickname is also appalling. In what world could anyone think that was funny? And if it was widely used, bosses must have known.

TBH I'd be expecting those using it to be disciplined, never mind an investigation into its origins.

So he was named Rapist when he worked at the Nuclear Constabulary because he had been inappropriate with female colleagues.

However no one at the Met knew about this (or that's what senior officers say and I'd be inclined to believe them) because obv this wasn't formally written up in his file and didn't show up during Met vetting. This is why I think all complaints and allegations should be documented and vetting more thorough.

And I don't know enough about the Nucleur Constabulary but I'm guessing they don't have the same level of vetting or accountability the Met does as they provide armed security services rather than law enforcement.

Yes, this lack of communication seems to be part of the problem, but nicknaming him rapist suggests a culture where he gets an "affectionate" knickname based on his inappropriate behaviour. I.e. it's all a bit of a laugh

Surely the main issue is now they can’t vet everyone in the police and dismiss any that don’t pass because there wouldn’t be enough left.
and honestly anyone would didn’t provide swift response to a grass should be vetted out also. I don’t love a lot of my colleagues I don’t get to be less professional to them, sure all that”brotherhood” and in the gang stuff should count for more.
like a pp said everyone in every school reports everything they should. They lose their job if they get caught though. It wasn’t that long ago a teacher could take a pupil in their car alone for a trip or to pick something up, saved time and you couldn’t get a written note from parents and a sign of from SLT every time you wanted to leave school premises. That would be unthinkable now so huge cultural changes can happen. If there’s a will for it.

I have a friend who a few decades ago worked as a Special in Brighton, at the time she said the guy recruiting her said that there were people who wanted to join up to drive fast and be in a position of power and he didn’t want those people in his force. At the time Brighton did have a reputation for thoughtful policing which contributed to people feeling safe there. Cultural change is possible but you need the right people at the top.

if you’ve never been a police officer, you can speculate all you like, but people who have actually done the job will have their own real lived experiences. Misogyny was horrendous when I worked in a Bank in the 90’s. When I was in the Police from 2008 till 2013 , I had a positive experience and never felt uncomfortable. That is my loved experience whether anyone chooses to believe it or not!