This week, at a uPSD near you, a police officer will be arrested for no justifiable reason. The Necessity Test as provided by Code G of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 will be applied to a police officer who will be arrested to allow the prompt and effective investigation of the offence which invariably will be so old that the sunshine will have bleached the Reg 14a notice received by the officer.
Recently, in my area we have had a police officer arrested for complaints which are three months old and the reason given for the arrest was for the prompt and effective investigation of the offence. It has to be noted that this officer is living at the address which is registered with his own HR department, he has been working for the three months whilst the complaint was initially investigated and then asked to parade at a local police station for interview. He was then arrested and, although representations were then made on his behalf, it fell on deaf ears.
Very often these matters for which officers are arrested turn out to be nothing more than a fishing expedition and it is clear to me that the only reason for the arrest is to put pressure on the officer. Why is it that uPSD are not taken to task by solicitors? I don’t know the answer to this but I do know that complaining appears to be a waste of time as the people you complain to are the same people who investigate their own procedures.
For the record, the officer was arrested for an assault matter which occurred off duty. What was the purpose of the arrest? Possibly it was to allow the investigators to take sample for DNA purposes from the officer but, had they asked, he would have done so immediately, mainly because the allegation was a pack of lies and he was eventually found not to be culpable. Did the uPSD care that they had embarrassed the officer by locking him up in a police station where the staff knew him? Not a chance! No doubt they went away proud of another statistic they had left behind and another disillusioned officer in their wake.
Just as long as they satisfy the wayward whim of a miscreant member of the public who is free to make allegations in the knowledge that there is no comeback to a malicious allegation.