The Paper Chase (2)

Clearly some of you need to get out a lot more, as you have asked to find out more about the sort of paperwork that we are forced to do, either by statutory requirement or the whim of a senior officer. Don’t blame me if you nod off half way through. I’ll try and keep it as brief as possible.

Crime Recording.

Crime Report – four page booklet.

Suspect report – where a named or identifiable suspect is discovered. One page.

Additional property report – when so much stuff has been nicked/damaged that one sheet just won’t do.

Investigation report – this is when the paper really starts to get chased. Every crime report has to have an investigation report. This is a double sided A4 sheet that acts as a record of every line of inquiry or any useful information in relation to the crime report. That’s the theory anyway. Some officers are better at it than others. The way our crime recording system works is that every time something happens to a crime, an investigation report should be completed and faxed off to be stored as an image on our document management system. This means that, in theory, a double sided piece of paper is used every time an officer knocks on a door and gets no answer.

The idea of the document management system is to make our crime recording process a paperless system. What it actually does is increase the consumption of paper by approximately 500%. When the original report is completed, it gets sent to the Crime Desk for filing. This means that the investigating officer has to print off a copy of the report from the document management system. With protracted investigations, or where reports are transferred to other officers, this report can be printed off several times. Go figure!

Detection report – every now and then, someone detects a crime, either by charging a suspect or cautioning them or by some other means. PC Bloggs has produced a post giving more information on this topic. Go there for a break and then come back for more! The thing about the detection report is that all the information that is written on the form has probably been input into the custody computer system, so you would think that the custody system would tell the crime system that the crime had been detected, wouldn’t you? No – that would be far too simple and would mean that less paper would be used. I’ll tell you more about the custody system later.

Vulnerable victims report – Imagine if you will a domestic incident, where one member of a family makes an allegation that another member of the family has done something to hurt or upset them. This makes the person reporting a vulnerable victim and creates the need for this report. The VVR (I just made that abbreviation up – it’s actually given a different name in out force) asks the same information as the crime report, plus a few extra bits. There isn’t an option for leaving a box blank and saying “refer to crime report”, so the data has to be entered twice. There is also a VVR Investigation log, which works in exactly the same way as the crime investigation log, so two forms have to be filled out containing basically the same information. The reason is that the VVR shouldn’t be scanned to the document management system, so in order to make sure that someone can follow the investigation, two logs have to be done. Of course, they are two completely different forms, so it isn’t possible to use one and photocopy it for the other report!

On the subject of investigation reports, for certain offences a specific report template must be filled out. So if we record a burglary, theft of/from vehicle, theft of mobile phone or other crime that is currently flavour of the month, a separate report has to be completed. If an officer is ever tasked with taking a report of robbery, the sound of heart sinking can be heard over the Airwaves. This is because the Robbery Booklet needs to be completed. This is an umpteen page booklet, that contains similar information to the crime report, but the data has to be entered separately. Once the booklet is completed, a Robbery investigation report also has to be submitted.

And so it goes on.

© Stan Still 2006 – if you want to copy my stuff, it would be polite to ask first!

The Paper Chase

Last week, I started a post trying to describe how much paper is used in the administration of even the most basic of policing jobs.

By the time I’d reached the ninth paragraph, I was bored and I guessed that anyone who attempted to read the post would also have been very, very bored and would not have come back to my blog ever again.

So I binned it.

However, in the interests of openness, I pass it over to my readers to decide if they really want to know how many forms are required to process a simple shoplifter or record a minor assault.

Let me know and I’ll try and knock out a very brief summary.

© Stan Still 2006 – if you want to copy my stuff, it would be polite to ask first!

The traffic cop debate

I’ve long been of the opinion that the increase in speed cameras, inversely proportional to the decrease in traffic officers, has not had the desired effect on road safety that the government intended.

I’m not the only one to share this view and it seems that members of the public are concerned as well.

One worried motorist has written to his local paper to express his view.

No substitute for traffic officers

The Express & Star editorial comment which put forward suggestions regarding the tragic deaths of young motorists was excellent. However, the problem in the United Kingdom is that we have a government which believes the answer to every crisis or problem is more legislation.Increasing legal powers and the rule of law are fine, if you have a credible method of enforcement.

In the case of road traffic, the statute book is overflowing with enforceable law; the problem is that chief officers of police, for a variety of reasons, have virtually eradicated or reduced traffic policing to what can now be best described as an ad hoc strategy.

That is not a criticism of those on the ground left with the job, but directed at those at the top who make policy and budget decisions.

Policing of our motorway network has been virtually replaced by Highways Agency traffic officers, who have little more power than Joe Public. They do a first-class job in terms of what they are trained to do but the boy racer, white van maniac or HGV driver (see if I can nudge your bumper) are fully aware of their enforcement limitations.

I do not accept the argument put forward, that what is left of the “real” motorway police concentrates on the travelling criminal.

This concept, similar to technological enforcement, is a cost-cutting exercise, and if we are discussing travelling criminals, surely an aggressive or reckless driver who kills or maims on the road fits the bill adequately.

There is no substitute for a high-profile, visible presence in any form of policing and that includes the enforcement and advising of driving standards on our roads.

It cannot be acceptable that I can drive on the M5 from Oldbury to Exeter, and then on A roads to Cornwall, and not see one liveried police vehicle.

Barry A Mason, Bullmeadow Lane, Wombourne.

Thank you Mr Mason – I couldn’t have put it better myself.

© Stan Still 2006 – if you want to copy my stuff, it would be polite to ask first!

Lucky escape

So the Home Office is to be split into two?

This would be the same Home Office that last year insisted that police forces could only be efficient by merging into larger superforces?

I think this goes to prove that they hadn’t quite got it right, had they?

© Stan Still 2006 – if you want to copy my stuff, it would be polite to ask first!

Tough choices

Save The Children have published a report, commenting on low income families and the choices they have to make. Do they feed the children or put the heating on? That kind of thing.

I’ve had a quick squint through the report and they are missing several key points. You can read it here.

I’ve had some experience of visiting low income families. After all, they are by far the most regular of our customers. It’s something to do with not paying any tax and wanting to benefit from a service provided by those who do.

The key points that Save The Children are overlooking are these.

• The vast majority of “parents” in low income families are smokers, either of tobacco or other less legal materials.
• A large proportion of low income families have at least one huge great TV parked in the corner of the lounge somewhere. This TV will be hooked up to the full Sky package and will have a DVD player, video recorder, PSP and cinema sound system wired into it.
• Designer labels are a must have.
• Every member of the family above the age of three must have at least two mobile phones

Admittedly, there are some genuine low income families out there, but a significant proportion of supposed low income families are actually those who have no idea how to prioritise their spending and believe that those luxuries in life are actually essentials. If Save The Children are planning on helping these people, perhaps they could start by showing them how to live within the means that they have?

© Stan Still 2006 – if you want to copy my stuff, it would be polite to ask first!

Isn’t this what we’ve been saying for years?

No apologies for lifting yet another article from the Wolverhampton Express & Star. I wish I could have written this myself!

The ability of this government to spend our hard-earned taxes on fatuous projects involving hordes of non-jobs knows no bounds.

A classic case, as we report today, is the recruitment of “Communication & Reassurance Officers” to let people in the West Midlands know that crime is under control and all is well.

There are two immediate problems. The first is that the message is a grotesque lie. Violent crime is steadily rising.

And while the overall level of recorded crimes may be falling, no-one seriously believes this reflects the true situation.

In an age when shoplifting and burglaries are not even investigated, who bothers to report crimes?

Millions of times every year, despairing victims of crime realise there is no point in either making an insurance claim or calling the police.

The second problem in this new exercise is that it diverts money from important things.

Genuine reassurance and communication come not from soothing words and dodgy statistics but from big, reliable, police officers on the beat.

Instead of more beat officers we get a new generation of £23,000-a-year spin-doctors trying to tell us crime is not all that bad.

The prospect of well-paid, bright-eyed optimists breezing into sink estates to preach contentment to the battered and burgled locals is revolting.

But it is what we have come to expect. For this is Blairism in action. It is presentation over performance, spin over reality.

It is New Labour reaching out from Whitehall into our neighbourhoods to bend the facts before our eyes.

It is not reassurance but pure propaganda. And we are paying for it.

© Stan Still 2006 – if you want to copy my stuff, it would be polite to ask first!

Something for the IPCC to try.

The Met are inviting people to try a firearms incident simulation to see how difficult it is to make snap decisions under high pressure, where the outcome could prove fatal.

Instead of carrying live rounds, the participants are given a laser gun and follow a video of an incident. They have to decide whether or not to shoot a suspect and once the decision is made, the video goes on to show the outcome of their decision.

As an example, there is a scenario where a suspect is confronted. If the “officer” decides not to shoot, the suspect then goes on to shoot an innocent member of the public.

I tried this a few years ago – it is bloody difficult, even when you know that the outcome is only recorded on video. How it must be for those who have to do it for real is something that I can only contemplate. I hope never to be in that situation, but I’m grateful that some of my colleagues have taken on the responsibility.

What is their reward? Apart from a seemingly bottomless pit of overtime? They get to have their split-second decisions analysed by people with no concept of the immense pressure that the officer was under at the time the decision was made. The officer has their authority to carry a firearm withdrawn while a protracted investigation takes place. This is an implication of guilt without the benefit of a trial. The officer has to carry the burden of having taken another person’s life.

A question to all members of the IPCC – Would you want to be a firearms officer?

© Stan Still 2006 – if you want to copy my stuff, it would be polite to ask first!

Getting connected

The BBC are reporting that the Home Office are looking into a scheme to allow prisoners access to the internet whilst they are serving a sentence.

No doubt there will be complaints from people about prisoners getting even more free perks that are not available to the tax paying public. However, you people need to realise the benefits of introducing access to the web for these convicts.

You see, it means I can write something like.

STOP COMMITTING CRIME, YOU LOWLIFE SCUM!

and it will be read by the very people that it is targeting.

I suggest that anyone with a similar message gets writing in anticipation.

© Stan Still 2006 – if you want to copy my stuff, it would be polite to ask first!

Honours

The New Year’s Honours are out.

Once again I’m not on the list.

What am I doing wrong?

Nice to see that despite the problems, the senior management in Essex are getting rewarded.

© Stan Still 2006 – if you want to copy my stuff, it would be polite to ask first!