AUGUST 2025 REPORT (3-5PM)
AUGUST 2025 REPORT (3-5PM)
DCCS Panel members along with Chief Inspector Tom Cunningham, Karen Janicka (BWV Subject Matter Expert for Devon & Cornwall) and welcomed new panel members and visiting Ch Supt Ben Deer - BCU Commander for Cornwall and Isles of Scilly
This month’s cases were filtered for both Stop and Search and Use of Force as follows:
Review of officers previously RAG rated red.
Area: Cornwall
Before observing body-worn footage selected by the panel from the previous month's cases, the Chair reminded panel members of wellness practice and the opportunity for debriefing at the end of the meeting.
The following report identifies points to action, D&C Police responses, case assessments and outstanding areas that require investigation.
Body-Worn Video Assessment .
Body-Worn Video Assessment .
ASSESSING D&C POLICE STOP AND SEARCH [S&S]
AUGUST 2025 REPORT (3-5PM)
Body-Worn Videos
Via Microsoft Teams, at the start of each case BWV Systems Administrator Karen Janicka, played the clip selected by the panel before members completed their anonymous assessment, discussed and submitted the below feedback.
Chief Inspector Tom Cunningham circulated this report with actions and recommendations to D&C Police Basic Command Unit, Operations Department, Learning and Development, Force Stop and Search Lead and Force Use of Force Lead.
All confirmed discussions, decisions and/or actions taken by officers and supervisors following receipt of the DCCS Panel report are identified in bold blue text.
Panel members use GOWISELY as part of their scrutiny assessment. It is an acronym that officers must use to provide information to a subject before the Stop and Search. If the GOWISELY procedure is not followed then the S&S is highly likely to have been unlawful.
GROUNDS of the search
OBJECT of the search
WARRANT card [if not in uniform]
IDENTITY [officer name & number]
STATION [where officer is based]
ENTITLEMENT to receipt
LEGAL power used
YOU are detained for S&S
S&S Case 1 - Two subjects (white male and white female) stopped following a report of a break-in in progress. Both matched detailed descriptions given
Actions to be commended:
Necessity and Grounds: All Panel members assessed the stop and search as necessary; the subjects matched the description and were found in the relevant area.
Officers clearly reiterated the grounds for the stop and search throughout.
Communication and Engagement: Communication was calm, clear, and investigative, with officers engaging the subjects effectively to establish their movements.
Officers used the subjects’ names, aiding respectful communication.
The subjects were given the opportunity to give their side or ask questions within reason.
Officers maintained neutrality and demonstrated trustworthy motives by encouraging understanding of the process.
GOWISELY Compliance: GOWISELY was followed fully.
Use of Force and Procedural Explanation: Use of force was explained clearly and appropriately, including compliant handcuffing and the circumstances for removal.
Both subjects were arrested on suspicion of burglary, with arrest terms explained to them, including clarification when requested.
Thoroughness of Investigation: Officers immediately checked local house CCTV footage to verify what had occurred, demonstrating thoroughness.
Objects recovered included a knife and a child’s watch, the latter identified by the victim as theirs.
Proportionate: The majority of the panel agreed the officers actions were proportionate.
Ethical: Most panel members felt the encounter was ethical.
Professionalism and Respect: Positive behaviours such as patience, empathy, and active listening were observed.
The tone of voice was calm and respectful throughout, and the language used was clear and accessible.
All panel members agreed the encounter was necessary.
Investigation, responses and learning required with:
Explanation and Clarity: Some panel members noted a lack of clarity about the meaning of “PACE Stop & Search” during the interaction with the male asking what it meant but being old “I’ll tell you later”; better explanation of police language needed.
Best Practice Recommendation: officers should verbally guide the subject through the search, specifying which body areas will be touched to improve transparency and reduce anxiety.
Search Procedure: The arrest procedure was difficult to hear - officers should avoid speaking over each other to maintain clear communication.
Use of Force: Some comments suggested cuffs may have been applied slightly early, though the explanation for their use was clear.
Response received from visiting BCU Commander Antony Hart
“Really good example of how stop and search serves a legitimate purpose. Ring doorbells (doorbell cameras) are very helpful in demonstrating what has or hasn’t been done. I’m really pleased with the conduct of the staff. There was a nice, proportionate response to the report. The balance was right between stating facts and questioning - it didn’t turn into an interview.”
S&S BWV 1 ASSESSMENT
D&C POLICE RESPONSE TO S&S BWV 1
Officer’s response not received
Panel response:
The DCCS Panel recognises that there are areas of good practice from this officer and areas of learning. May the former be a strong foundation for the latter.
S&S Case 2 - Black male subject - reported trying car doors in wooded car park, detailed description of clothing worn
Actions to be commended:
Necessary: The majority of the panel assessed this encounter as necessary.
Proportionate: The majority of the panel assessed this encounter as proportionate..
Ethical: Most of the panel assessed this encounter as ethical.
Communication: Officers greeted subjects with pleasantries.
Informed subjects that Body Worn Video (BWV) was active.
The officer showed awareness of the language barrier and sought assistance from a second male subject to translate, due to lack of mobile signal.Respect and Professionalism: Positive use of polite language during the search (e.g., saying “please” and “thank you”).
Officers gave warnings before searching sensitive areas (e.g., waistband).
The officer circled back after the search to confirm if the subject wanted a copy of the search record, showing thoroughness and adherence to GOWISELY.
Courtesy: Officers explained the report and what must have happened, identifying a mistake and thanking the subjects.
Investigation, responses and learning required with:
Language and Explanation: More communication at the start would have been beneficial to explain delays caused by technical issues (e.g., lack of signal), as silence was noted to be potentially intimidating for the subject.
Interpretation: Using another subject as an interpreter, while pragmatic, raised concerns about confidentiality and safety; a professional interpreter service would have been preferable, but signal issues complicated this.
There was some uncertainty about the subject’s understanding during the search and the interpreter’s role in conveying officer details.
Operational Feedback: Officers could have explained actions more thoroughly during the search despite the language barrier, though it was acknowledged this might have limited effect in this case.
The use of hard copy translations of GOWISELY was suggested as a useful tool in low-signal environments.
GOWISELY Compliance: The phrase “You are detained” was not clearly heard during the encounter, which is a procedural gap.
Response received from visiting BCU Commander Antony Hart
“Another good example of Stop & Search. I agree that additional communication at the start could have been better. We do have LanguageLine for interpreters, but with no reception, using someone involved was a pragmatic decision given their compliance. It was good to see that GOWISELY was not avoided despite language issues. The conclusion and summary at the end explaining what happened was helpful - I am pleased with the explanation provided by the officers.”
S&S BWV 2 ASSESSMENT
D&C POLICE RESPONSE TO S&S BWV 2
Officer’s response not received
Panel response:
The DCCS Panel recognises that there are areas of good practice from this officer and areas of learning. May the former be a strong foundation for the latter.
ASSESSING D&C POLICE USE OF FORCE [UOF]
AUGUST 2025 REPORT (3-5PM)
Body-Worn Videos
Panel members use PLANTER as part of their Use of Force scrutiny assessment:
PROPORTIONATE amount of force implemented
LENGTH of force used
ACTIONS of subject warranted use of force
NECESSARY to use force to protect the subject, officers or members of the public
TYPE used was minimum appropriate
ETHICAL to use force in the situation
REASONABLE for officer(s) to employ
UOF CASE 1 - Two underage sisters, reportedly intoxicated, were removed from a music festival after attempting to enter with an over-18 wristband. The situation escalated with one sister becoming highly distressed
Actions to be commended:
Necessary: The majority of the panel assessed this encounter as necessary.
Proportionate: Most of the panel assessed this encounter as proportionate..
Transport Logistics:: Officers made efforts to avoid further escalation by bringing the police van to the subject, rather than walking her there, which would have caused further distress and use of force.
Officer Conduct: The officer, introducing himself to the subject as “Richie”, was repeatedly highlighted for showing empathy, maintaining calm, and building rapport with the distressed subject. His compassionate behaviour, including re-adjusting handcuffs and helping the subject maintain dignity by fixing her hair, was particularly commended.
Constructive Communication: The office was noted for clear, respectful communication and effectively using his presence to calm the subject.
Family Engagement: Arrangements were made for the subject’s mother to attend the custody centre. The sister was brought to the mother separately and was not arrested.
PLANTER Compliance: Majority of the Panel assessed PLANTER as being followed, though not all were confident
Investigation, responses and learning required with:
Use of Force: Some Panel members noted the female officer appeared to physically react to the subject pointing near her without clear verbal warning or attempt at de-escalation, which triggered the physical intervention. This lacked proportionality given the subject’s age and mental state.
Lack of Leadership: Panel members repeatedly noted the issue of multiple officers speaking at once, which confused the subject and potentially escalated the situation. A lack of clear leadership or designated rapport-building was evident.
Concerns over Handcuffing: The subject repeatedly stated the handcuffs were incorrectly applied ("you're hurting me", "my hands aren't straight"). Officers did not appear to respond immediately, which may have increased distress and resistance. Some panel members felt earlier adjustment could have prevented escalation.
Wellbeing Concerns: The subject was seen with a mouthful of sand and expressed difficulty breathing. Questions were raised about whether medical attention was considered at the time.
Neurodiversity Awareness: The Panel highlighted the need for earlier and clearer identification of neurodivergent individuals. The recent rollout of neurodiversity indicator wristbands by Devon & Cornwall Police was positively referenced, with suggestions for visibility and integration into officer briefings.
Training and procedural gaps were highlighted, especially concerning neurodiversity awareness, restraint techniques, and coordinated communication.
Ethical: Some panel members felt as well as the female officer who appeared to react in anger, an assisting officer shouted “It’s because you won’t stop shouting” in the subject’s face. Panel members also questioned the overall ethical impact of restraining a distressed, intoxicated neurodivergent teenager in public and the long-term trauma caused.
Post-Incident Follow-Up: The panel suggested that young or neurodivergent individuals should have access to follow-up engagement with police outside of crisis situations.
Response received from visiting Chief Superintendent Ben Deer:
“This was a very challenging incident to watch. On a human level, there’s no one who would feel comfortable with what they saw - it was a hard scene.
We attend events to keep people safe and prevent or detect crime, not to get involved in issues like obtaining wristbands. Officers must protect themselves and others, but not make things worse.
In cases like this, where someone is drunk and disorderly, the preferable approach may be to arrest and de-arrest later at home or in a safe space; we don’t want to criminalise people unnecessarily.
The female subject lashed out at an officer, which led to the handcuffing. I believe the response was appropriate.
I was pleased to see how one officer managed to calm the subject down and showed real compassion.
We train officers to identify when talking over one another is unhelpful, and to assign a relational officer to lead communication.
The handcuffs were safely adjusted despite risk to the officer - this was his judgement call once deemed they were no longer necessary.”
D&C POLICE RESPONSE TO UOF BWV 1
Officer’s response not received
Panel response:
A mixed assessment from the panel, with concerns about the initial escalation and restraint, but also recognition of positive conduct and efforts in managing a complex incident.
UOF CASE 2 - White female subject report of domestic incident - assaulted by daughter. While the mother did not wish for an arrest, officers followed mandatory arrest procedures.
Actions to be commended:
Necessary: The panel assessed this encounter as necessary.
Proportionate: The majority of the panel assessed this encounter as proportionate
Ethical: Majority agreement with minor flags / learning points around physical contact and language clarity
Professional Demeanour: Officer spoke in a calm, friendly tone, maintaining professionalism and a human approach.
Clear Explanations: Officers explained what was happening and why, including purpose of the arrest, BWV use and search procedures (female officer at station, male officers only outer clothing)
Respectful Treatment: Subject allowed to finish her phone call, hand over her phone and gather necessary belongings rather than escalating the situation.
Minimised Family Strain: Reiterated to subject that her mother did not want her arrested, helping to de-escalate family tension.
Careful Communication: Officers shut down a potentially inflammatory conversation about the subject’s boyfriend tactfully while still offering safeguarding advice (Clare’s Law).
Investigation, responses and learning required with:
Consent for Physical Contact: Officer permitted the mother to hug the daughter without asking the daughter’s consent - a human approach but potentially sensitive action requiring greater care.
Policy Clarity: Officer referenced the arrest as a “government initiative.” This is not technically correct. While aligned with evidence-led prosecution and positive action policies, it is not statutory government policy.
Officer Commentary: "Shouldn’t allow this but…" - any casual or unclear remarks could introduce ambiguity and should be avoided to maintain professional clarity.
Response received from visiting BCU Commander Antony Hart:
“I am pleased with this interaction. It is an interesting point raised by the panel about whether the subject wanted a hug, she should have been asked. Although it’s not government policy to arrest as the officers stated, we do have a positive action policy, especially when dealing with violence against women and girls. That’s why it went to an inspector - to assess if non-arrest was appropriate. Now with evidence-led prosecutions, we act where there’s sufficient evidence even without victim support. The officers acted with good intentions, but the reference to government policy needs to be addressed with them.”
UOF BWV 2 ASSESSMENT
D&C POLICE RESPONSE TO UOF BWV 1
Officer’s response not received
Panel response:
The DCCS Panel recognises that there are areas of good practice from this officer and areas of learning. May the former be a strong foundation for the latter.
“Thank you - I find it really helpful to see the view of the public in relation to our service. It’s really good to see how we are observed by the community and to know that we do genuinely listen”
Interested in making a difference?
Improve accountability, transparency and trust between D&C Police and the communities they serve.
Receive free training, work alongside inspiring individuals and help make positive changes.
Scrutinise Stop & Search and Use of Force, or join sub-committees to share your skills or learn new ones.
