Inneedofcoffeeandchocolate
All of what things should be known - an operation within the Met that's reorganising a department to make it less centralised and more local. What has that operation got anything to do with my force which is miles away from the Met and already works separate investigative departments. I could list hundreds of operations we have that the Met and all the other forces and the public would not know about and I wouldn't expect them to..
And if you think centralisation of police departments is the way forward - the public would disagree with you. For years, smaller forces have suggested merging with other neighbouring smaller forces to make one large centralised force. Would save a fortune in money - yet the local people/community are against it as they feel they would get less of a service.
And i am questioning what is wrong with the conviction rate - my first post says that. Where i have said that its fine as it is?
Nicegerbil
Of course there have been mistakes, coverups and corruption in the past and I'm not trying to defend them at all - but are you saying that's the norm. If you are, you first have to demonstrate the trend as opposed to individual incidents. So, of all sexual offences reported are you saying that 100% of them fail due to corruption or is it 1% (or lower) as i think the numbers are relevant here.
First responder - So, i attend all emergency calls such as burglaries, commercial breaks, sudden deaths, missing from homes, frauds, mental health concerns, fights, affrays, assaults, CSE, HBV, domestic violence - you name it really. Then if there are no emergencies we will get sent to the next priority calls - such as non-emergency breaks, assaults etc.
I am also part of the sexual offences investigation team - so if a rape/sexual assault etc comes in - i will get sent to the victim and will be left to deal with this without being diverted to anything else. So i will be able to obtain their first account, seize clothing, identify a suspect/scene, arrange for their arrest and forensic samples to be taken from them, scene management and liaise with SOCO, safeguarding, arrange a medical examination of the victim, early evidence gathering, arrange for support services to engage with them. This then gets handed over to the specific crime time who will deal with the ongoing investigation and identify a specific officer/s
I'm not saying that there are no issues as you have highlighted from the press etc - indeed I never have. I am asking if you can see anything wrong with the above process for a 'first responder' initially? At what stage am I not dealing with the victim carefully and seriously? And its not just women/girls who are victims of sex crimes as you keep alluding to.
And then from this, how can we go about increasing the conviction rate - bearing in mind that the outgoing investigation has to be impartial and has to test the evidence presented from all sides before we pass this to CPS for a charging decision.
IncessantNameChanger
Which cases have taken 3 years to get to court and what was the reason for it? Was it due to further incidents being reported, forensic issues etc.
Our turnaround for cases to get CPS charging advice is 28 days. This takes into account all the unused material submissions etc. It can be longer depending on the evidence your looking at. Low copy DNA examination can take quite a while as can computer examination.
Numbertheory
Yes, i think it was the Liam Allen case. So this was all about disclosure of messages on the phones which were not disclosed to the court. As a result he was exonerated.
We can't 'routinely' go through a victims phone. We can only do this if there is evidence on the phone which is too important not to included it in the trial. That's a stated case and now case law - R v 'something or other' - i can find out if you want me to.