Police vetting huge gaps

[LoveGrowsWhere]

Huge proportion of police staff uniformed & non-uniformed have not been vetted. To what extent do you think this has impacted the approach to violence against women?
www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-49847206

WTAF?

I can't believe what I'm reading.

Wow! I would have thought it would be standard and scrupulous?

By the language, I don't think the chief inspector of constabulary could either. It's a complete system fail in some areas.

But you know: they do turn up at Pride in cars with special decals. Priorities, priorities.

What do they mean by vetting?

The article doesn't say, which is frustrating.

How would you vet someone thoroughly?

The article mentions paedophile was on file so should easily have been picked up. Doesn't relate only to convictions.

Applies to you, anyone you live with, family.
www.westyorkshire.police.uk/jobs-volunteer/police-officers/police-officers/vetting-faqs

I saw this news this morning. Absolutely shocking.

(I presume by vetting they mean checking for criminal records. Also - from what I know of civil service vetting procedures - I'd expect them to run checks on membership of proscribed extremist groups - this has been a scandal in Germany's police force recently, IIRC).

Also in the news today. 'Clueless' police force in Cleveland. Failing in every area.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tees-49830445

What do they mean by vetting?

They mean the standard - "basic" - things such as enhanced DBS checks. But they also mean the sharing of intelligence - for example investigations into suspects that have not resulted in charges, or informant-provided intelligence - with recruitment procedures or between forces.

Beaumur, that report is shocking.

Senior officers blatantly lying to inspectors.

Misusing terror legislation to spy on journalists.

Numerous sexual harassment cases involving the most senior officers.

Det Insp Simon Hurwood found guilty of sexually harassing 21 women over a 14 year period.

In April, the force's assistant chief constable Adrian Roberts was arrested and suspended on suspicion of gross misconduct.

"The force, which covers areas including Hartlepool, Redcar and Cleveland, Stockton and Middlesbrough, has had five chief constables in six years.

Mike Veale resigned from the post in January over allegations he behaved inappropriately towards colleagues".

Barry Coppinger, who has been Cleveland's Police and Crime Commissioner since 2012, says it isn't his responsibility.

It is staggering.

Absolutely appalling.

Some 'highlights' from the Cleveland report (Beamur above). You have to ask what their priorities are because the report is clear it's not the vulnerable.

"The force doesn’t make effective and consistent use of protective powers and measures to safeguard vulnerable victims. It isn’t making disclosures under Clare’s Law and Sarah’s Law promptly, and it isn’t making sufficient use of domestic abuse protection notices. This is despite the high number of repeat incidents and the increase in domestic abuse incidents overall."

"In 2017, we inspected Cleveland Police as part of our national child protection programme. In 2018, we followed this up with a post-inspection review. During this PEEL/IPA inspection, we reviewed all the recommendations relating to our previous child protection inspections of Cleveland Police. Disappointingly, the force hasn’t made enough progress for any of these recommendations to be signed off."

"Many senior leaders (superintending and chief officer ranks, and senior police staff managers) aren’t consistently demonstrating ethical behaviour. The inappropriate behaviour of these leaders within Cleveland Police is so profound that it is affecting the efficiency and effectiveness of the force."

Gobsmacked.

A DBS/PVG check strikes me as the absolute most basic check possible. I would have expected far more rigorous vetting than that. Not sure how one would do that - Doctor's report, perhaps?

Well. That probably explains a lot. I really was wondering about what kind of person you'd have to be, as a police officer, to stand back, arms folded, and watch a mob of aggressors abuse & intimidate women peacefully gathering to discuss their own legal rights. What type of person does that? A bloody questionable type.

Honestly? I'm not at all surprised. Saddened but not surprised.

Ime 2 types of people become generally become police officers:

1 those with a hero complex, usually been either victims themselves or witnessed victimisations and are psychologically "rescuing" themselves or the person they couldn't rescue before

2 those who have a desire to hold a position that allows them to exert power and authority over others. This can include those that were victims themselves or simply people on a power trip. "Little hitlers". And this of course naturally includes rapists, domestic abusers (a known HUGE issue within the police ranks), paedophiles and other violent controlling types.

And I speak as the sister of a serving officer. But I do suspect he falls into category 1.

There's a very few who fall into a 3rd category of genuinely wanting to help people and create a better world.

It's ALWAYS foolish in my opinion to allow ANY industry to police itself (pardon the pun) we've seen that go wrong plenty of times before!

External independent overseers are crucial.

But I'm really not holding my breath expecting a PM like Johnson (who is possibly a domestic abuser himself) as his colleagues to do bugger all about this.

Goes to show how important thorough investigative journalism is, we quash that at our peril.

We don't have a truly free press or media but we do have SOME journalists with integrity and conscience willing to investigate such matters and bring them to light.

Wtf?

I, like most of public, would assume that this was standard, that checks are done.

Fucking hell.

Could there be other areas which are just as lax? Doctors, HCPs, teachers?

I would have expected far more rigorous vetting than that. Not sure how one would do that - Doctor's report, perhaps?

Negative vetting is checking for things such as criminal convictions, arrest records, sex offender registers, credit checks perhaps; anything which is likely to be recorded.

Positive vetting, which I’d assume, senior police officers have, mean things like checking passport entries, family connections, employment history, group memberships and such, as well as contacting friends, family and employees and asking them about character and behaviour. It’s quite intrusive, they’ll ask your friends if they know if you take drugs or misuse alcohol, for example.

This is the vetting procedure for entry into an Australian police force:

“After successful completion of the Victoria Police Entrance Examination, Recruiting Services will conduct a preliminary check of your previous history to determine your eligibility and suitability for the role.

To facilitate the background checks you will be sent a document pack that we require you to complete in detail. These documents require you to tell us about various aspects of your background including but not limited to; employment, family associations, education and travel. Your accuracy in completing this document package is an assessable component of the recruitment process.

Missing or incomplete information will result in your application being delayed.

Your previous history will be assessed (traffic, criminal, employment, etc.) at this stage and throughout the entire selection process.”

This is the COP for vetting for UK police forces. It’s long, but if you’re interested in the procedure it’s all there.
library.college.police.uk/docs/appref/Vetting-APPpdf.pdf

The think about rigorous vetting is that it’s resource intensive - both in terms of time and staff.

If you have a tension between governments unwilling to spend money on essential services, and a public demanding more frontline police, something has to give. Whenever governments cut essential services, they always claim that the financial impact won’t be on frontline staff.

What everyone conveniently forgets is that back-office staff, (such as security vetting services), are an essential component of police and emergency agencies.

I’d suspect that police forces are prioritising getting uniforms on the ground at the expense of vetting - with predictable results.

'It highlights the case of Ian Naude, a predatory paedophile who slipped through the net and became a PC. He went on to rape a 13-year-old girl.'

This isn't about not completing rigorous expensive long winded detailed checks.

It's about not even doing the basics.

'On average 13% of people in each force have not been vetted'.

At all.

A greater proportion have not been vetted to the standard they should have been.

I'm applying to join the police. I would say I am not in either of the first two categories mentioned above.

I am horrified that they sometimes seem to fail to be doing even the most basic of checks. Surely it's not difficult for the Police to carry out Police records checks!

@Datun I work for the NHS in Scotland. I had to complete a Disclosure when I was offered my job, then for each new job that I have been offered. I have been in my current post for about ten years and only been rechecked once since then (2014, as I recently looked out the certificate to fill out a new form for DC's school). I could have been up to anything in the intervening years.
There was a section on the new form which asked for details of membership of professional bodies which I don't remember completing before, and I don't know if you would be caught out by ticking the "no" box.
So I assume that many other professions are not vetted as closely as we would hope.

Nicketynac

Now I come to think of it, I was DBS checked, and then not checked again for many years. How often are you supposed to get re-checked?