to ask how to make a complaint about police? Is there an ombudsman?

[myoriginal3]

Basically, my report wasn't investigated. I've spoken yesterday and today with the police who were involved and they are saying I was 'unwilling' to assist police with their enquiries.
They are getting a DI to ring me. That's nice.
They are arse covering.

Do I need to go through the ranks or is there a police ombudsman?

For background, I was a victim of crime and they knew who he was (or suspected in their words) but they didn't arrest him because I was not well enough to go through a video interview. Less than a month later he committed a similar crime.

They have told me that I was UNWILLING to assist the police.

They are having a Detective Inspector call me - God only knows when.

Is there somewhere out of their ranks I can initiate a report?

I'm sorry for going on like this because it seems to minimise what you have been through and that is not at all my intention.

I KNOW this is not what happened. The police KNOW that this is not what happened!.

But if your, or any other, rapist was faced with irrefutable evidence that he there had been a sex act (though rape has fuck all to do with sex I have no better way of putting it) and the victim was bruised. Which somehow they could prove was caused by no person other than him. The last line of defense would be to say " yeah it was a one night stand we had really rough sex. She asked for it rough" The police would have nothing to refute that in court.

Common sense would say that someone with those kind of bruises was not happy with what was going on. But the fact is, and lawyers are arseholes when it comes to stuff like this, that there will be pages and pages of people of saying they end up with bruises after consensual sex ( eg the abusive shite that is 50 shades of grey)

The process is wrong!

The fact is also that, even if you had been able to give evidence, because of the court delays and paperwork that has to be done. He would more than likely still have been out to do it again when he did anyway.

It is all shit. The system is shit. The process is shit.

The system is wrong, in this case the police were not. Like it or not they have to work on the system they are given (I know someone who left the force because he saw too many men get away with dv because they couldt reach the required evidence threshold and just couldn't do it anymore)

You're trying to be the prosecution. Your fucking job as a police officer is to provide evidence. Not to pre-empt a jury's decision. Not to NOT investigate a rape case.

This is an interesting thread (apologies OP, if that sounds callous - you've been through a horrendous time, and I am really sorry you have had so much additional shit to deal with on top of the trauma of being raped). I find it interesting, because it makes me question what I believe. And where those beliefs come from. On one hand, I can understand needing a video interview - in your example of a burglary, the police can examine the crime scene. In a rape, the victim pretty much is the crime scene. However, this protocol has resulted in another woman being raped. So the system has failed her. In addition, you are left with some pretty awful emotions to deal with, so the system has failed you too. They always put the onus on the victim - if you don't report it, it could happen to someone else. Well, you did the right thing, you reported it, and it still happened to someone else. I think your burglary example is wrong though - a better one would be a violent mugging. I bet they would have handled that differently. YANBU, and I am deeply sorry for the way you have been treated. At the same time though, I am glad you posted this, as it has really made me think about the way we still treat rape victims. I think it's so deeply engrained in our society that we no longer notice how messed up it is.

my original

You might want to get your post deleted though, it's very identifying.

It's not identifying. I'm not named anywhere as MY CASE WAS NEVER FUCKING INVESTIGATED.

With regards to a violent mugging perhaps a police officer can post whether a video interview is required before they investigate.

From what you have said it seems like they DID investigate. You say they got a warrant to raid his house. That is investigation.

They didn't have enough for a charge.

It IS the job of the cost to second guess a jury. Because, as horrifically wrong this is, there is a very limited pot of money and they don't have the money to prosecute cases they have ZERO chance of winning if defended even reasonably competently.

Wrt video interviewing. For a violent mugging it is rightly or wrongly assumed that that person would be able to give evidence in court in front of a jury. This is not so in rape trials, it is so they have evidence if the person is mentally unable to face a jury.

I am sorry this happened to you. I do not have any advice - I have not experienced anything like this. I can see the word "special" has upset you. Is it possible the police were referring to "special measures"? This is a legal term which allows different options for certain victims or witnesses to give evidence. A rape victim would fall in this category. Your video interview would be played in court instead of you having to take the stand and relive it again.

myoriginal3, I'm very sorry for what happened to you.

It is a little unclear (or I have misread) from what has been posted so far - was the suspect interviewed about the rape against you when he was interviewed for the similar offence a month later? Was it the police who decided that there was not enough evidence to charge or was the matter referred to the CPS?

If it was a CPS decision, it may be worth looking into the Victim Right to Review Scheme: www.cps.gov.uk/victims_witnesses/victims_right_to_review/

If it was a police decision, I believe you can ask your local force (via 101 or when you speak with the DI) about the scheme and reviewing the decision / evidence etc.

I wasn't given an option though.

To a pp, they only got the warrant to search his house AFTER he had raped again.

I'm about to do this against my local police force for assault; I've taken advice from my insurers as I have legal expenses insurance. In case it might end up with you suing the police, check your house contents insurance to see whether you have legal expenses insurance, it's often with a different, more specialist insurer, than the one insuring your actual contents.

You have to complain to the offending police force as a first step, and the complaint will be investigated by an officer one rank higher than the one(s) you're complaining about. If not satisfied you can then appeal against the outcome, when the complaint will be reinvestigated by the next rank up.

Only after this, if you're still dissatisfied, can you appeal to the IPCC. If you do complain to the IPCC initially all they will do is send your complaint on to the force anyway, after recording that a complaint has been made. The police have to notify the IPCC when they receive your complaint, that they've received a complaint and the date, but nothing more.

Put everything in writing, tell the police specifically that there will be no phone calls, no personal interviews, no personal contact at all. This is because the police are very bad at investigating their own, and lower level officers especially may well reveal further evidence against themselves. It also stops them arguing 'We didn't say that', 'You didn't say that', 'It didn't happen like that'. You need a paper trail of every detail. My insurers were really emphatic about this. There's also some decent advice online about how to word a complaint; being strictly factual, unemotional, and asking the police to take whatever action they think appropriate rather than suggesting a punishment are very important.

Download a copy of the Police Code of Ethics. This is a statutory document, the police are legally obliged to obey this Code and it helps to be able to identify which section of the Code they've breached. It's not a long document considering what it is, 15 pages including the cover and contents.

If your claim is worth suing for (mine is, I've had Counsel's advice on that) then your legal expenses insurance will kick in when you've exhausted the first two levels of complaint; you have to do the initial complaint and appeal yourself but having a decision go against you at those two levels in no way stops you being able to sue if you feel it's worth it.

The incident I'm going to complain about happened a year ago but I have it all documented and will start the complaint when I've settled my personal life, I'm moving house in the week after Easter and it's been hard work, with a difficult seller to deal with. I have three years to start legal action from the date of the assault.

HTH.

Random - I have no idea whether he was interviewed about my case. It was cited in his first appearance at court. I wasn't fit to do the interview thingy (in fact I've just vomited now as a result of this thread), so they proceeded with the other case.

You wouldn't have been given an option on a video interview because if you were unfit to do one of those there is no chance you would have help up against a defense barrister. They are animals in court and even the strongest and best prepared (on any case) can be ripped into little pieces.

My point is that I shouldn't have to be formally interviewed for them to investigate. I'm the victim, not the fucking perpetrator.

You don't know me. I am a legal secretary. Barristers don't bother me.

I despise police. I'm quite fond of barristers. :)

tabbymog - thank you for that but I don't have insurance.

It really sounds like you have a lack of information about how your case was handled and what was / was not done (I am NOT saying that this is your fault - you should have been told). In that respect, it is definitely worth getting the details from the DI when they call.

I think what you would have given at the time (your original statement) would have been a 'first disclosure'. This is the get an overview of the incident and then the video interview, conducted by specialist officers, is to obtain all the facts etc in greater details. It is called an 'interview' and I know that has connotations of you being interviewed as if you have done something wrong or are being 'quizzed' but it really is just to get your best evidence (a written statement is also technically an interview).

As PP have said, if you wish to make a complaint, the first thing to do would be to call 101 and speak with your local force to lodge the complaint, they will conduct an internal investigation (possibly with the aid of the Professional Standards Department, if this is not sufficient then the case can be referred to the IPCC (which, from your thread title, is basically the 'ombudsman' for the police and completely separate from them).

OP I think the best thing to do might be to seek counselling rather than pursuing a complaint to the police for the sake of your health. This thread is clearly distressing you from your last few posts so I’m not sure how going over things again with the police would help you.

As things stand Random they are humouring me by having a DI call me next week apparently.

Counselling is another thing promised which never materialised.

Can you not try and seek counselling through your GP? Or other support services? I'm sure a google would turn up some results of services in your area

I don't need counselling. Counselling is a load of bollocks.