Welcome 10 th September 2013

New faces Derbyshire Police MET Police North Wales Police West Mercia Police Warwickshire Police West Midlands Police MOI France Military Police Cheshire Police Gwent Police Policy Exchange Avon and Somerset Greater Manchester Police Cleveland Police Lincs Police Leics Police D&C Police MOD Home Office (borders) Beds Police Returning Inspector Daniel Inglis (Greater Manchester Police) Inspector Robert Able (Hampshire Police) Thames Valley Police Apologies Attendees

10:00 – 10:10 BWVSG - How to execute a successful BWV program in your organisation Alasdair Field, CEO Reveal Media 10:10 – 10:40 Video showcase of best uses of BWV Sgt Stuart Murrell, MET Police 10:40 – 11:10 Staffordshire – The role of a project manager 1.Chief Inspector Neil Hulme, Staffordshire Police 2.Patricia Rich, Project Manager, technology services 11:10 – 11:40 Break - tea and coffee 11:40 – 12:10 Home Office, Immigration Enforcement. Cleaven Faulkner 1:10 – 1:25 Police and Crime Commissioner’s view PCC Matthew Ellis, Staffordshire Police Staffordshire’s PCC view on BWV as part of the PCC’s strategy. 1:25 – Close Experience from American Experiment CPS – use of evidence Future of BWV as primary evidence Darren Henstock, West Midlands Community Justice Mark Paul, CPS (West Midlands and Staffordshire) Staffordshire policy and evidence handling process. Peter Hall, Superintendent Head of Justice Services. Agenda

Video Showcase Best uses of BWV Sgt Stuart Murrell – MET Police 5/10/2015 4Body worn video - Steering Gp Sept 2013

Body Worn Video The role of a project manager Neil Hulme – Ch Insp Staffordshire Police Tricia Rich – ICT Project Manager 5/10/2015 5Body worn video - Steering Gp Sept 2013

Body Worn Video Local Policing perspective on a managed project 5/10/2015 6Body worn video - Steering Gp Sept 2013

This is where we were…. Two different cameras Localised approach Broken equipment Undefined approach to support –resulting in a lack of trust and confidence in the equipment 5/10/2015 7Body worn video - Steering Gp Sept 2013

Let’s just get a few more cameras… In reality, this meant –Too much technical change –Too much ground to cover across the whole county –Not enough, or the right people, to do all the doing 5/10/2015 8Body worn video - Steering Gp Sept 2013

… hmmm, let’s get a project manager Small operational team needed some dedicated support –Provide some structure –Provide technical to business translation –Herd the cats 5/10/2015 9Body worn video - Steering Gp Sept 2013

Was it worth having a project manager? Resilience Assurance Sounding board Support 5/10/ Body worn video - Steering Gp Sept 2013

Body Worn Video The project manager’s perspective of a managed project 5/10/ Body worn video - Steering Gp Sept 2013

5/10/ Body worn video - Steering Gp Sept 2013

5/10/ Body worn video - Steering Gp Sept 2013

Ingredients of a managed project A (competent and trained ) project manager  A business objective which is specific, measurable and achievable  Clear identification of all key stakeholders and their buy in  An agreed plan to achieve the business objective  Review and measurement of delivery against the plan  Review of the realisation of the business benefit 5/10/ Body worn video - Steering Gp Sept 2013

The BWV project products 1. Governance Included business case, project brief, work package structure, highlight reports, project plan, risks and issues logs The governance provides A definition of scope Capture and management of risks and issues Details of the tasks and responsibilities of both ICT and business Defines the plan to achieve the business objective 5/10/ Body worn video - Steering Gp Sept 2013

5/10/ Accountable Project managerWP4 Pilot and roll out Description Products Start upInitiateImplementClosure Responsible Consulted Management of the pilot site and subsequent roll out 1.Identify and plan scope and timing of pilot 1.Deploy cameras 2.Desktop software installation 3.Training and awareness 4.Implement draft processes 5.Draft support processes 2.Pilot review 1.Communications and awareness plans 2.Modify policy and process 3.Modify support process 3.Implement deployment method wp1 for cameras across other LPTS 1.Communication rolled out 2.Training deployed for hardware, software and processes 3.Devices deployed 4.Handover to live Neil Hulme, Roger Craig, Stuart Crowe, LPT Commanders, LPT SPOCS, Phil Davies, Tricia Rich Sarah Woods, Paul Evans, Chris Bowen, Sharon Athwal, Performance assessment Corporate comms, Peter Hall, Supplier, ACC Blazeby, PCC Body worn video - Steering Gp Sept 2013

The BWV project products 2. Processes For each work package the required processes are identified, agreed and documented using working groups and work shops Processes are published in the policy database or via IT policy library eg ITIL processes Processes provide clear definitions of what, when and who, so that when the project is completed Business as Usual can proceed seamlessly 5/10/201517Body worn video - Steering Gp Sept 2013

Draft Process Body worn video - Steering Gp Sept 20135/10/201518

The BWV project products 3. Collaboration & Communication Involve subject matter experts from every area of organisational support and operations Make sure all stakeholders are engaged with regularly, with no surprises Make sure any risks and issues are addressed and managed by the senior stakeholders –The project manager’s role is to collate and assess issues and risks but not make the decisions Collaboration ensures : –That all the knowledge is at the disposal of the project –That overlaps and resource bottlenecks are surfaced and managed –That as far as possible everyone is in the picture, in a way relevant to their role –That there is group ownership, not a single hero 5/10/201519Body worn video - Steering Gp Sept 2013

Engagement model 5/10/ Project review Senior Management Support teams IT technical teams Operational teams Other forces Reveal CPSHome Office Body worn video - Steering Gp Sept 2013

Break Back at /10/ Body worn video - Steering Gp Sept 2013

Immigration Enforcement use of Body Worn Video Supt Cleave Faulkner National Operations and Assurance September 2013 Restricted

Why we are looking to use BWV To increase number of successful illegal working Civil penalties and out of court settlements in favour of the Home Office Reduce bureaucracy Obtain better evidence to prosecute persistent offenders who continue to employ illegal workers

Improve collating post critical incident data. Reduce clearly unfounded/malicious complaints. To capture evidence on contentious family visits Improve officer safety. Reassure the public. Verify training/development needs by reviewing operational footage. Other benefits for I E

We plan to issue BWV devices to Immigration Officers conducting enforcement visits. Officers will record entry to premises and interviews with those encountered. Evidence captured of illegal working will be made available to the team who pursue civil penalty action Plans for use of BWV

Officers currently make verbatim notes of interviews With offenders and others encountered on the visit in Their personal notebook. They will no longer need to do this if the BWV Contextualizes what was actually seen and said. Officers will only need to produce a summary of the Interview and just exhibit the video in their statement Transcription

We will pilot the use of BWV with two Immigration Enforcement teams based in Manchester and Cardiff. A draft process will be amended in light of the result and findings of the pilot. Findings to support a national roll out to all Immigration Enforcement teams. WE NEED TO PROVE THE CASE AND DEMONSTRATE TANGIBLE BENEFITS Pilot

To reduce by 50% the time taken to complete illegal working interviews saw over 14,500 operations Increase the number of illegal working detections Income generate to self sustain the deployment of Body Worn Video Business Benefits

Training on the use of BWV will be delivered to officers on group team basis with a full hands on approach We envisage holding a 2 hour training session with officers at the various Immigration Compliance Engagement (ICE) team locations. Training

Convincing staff to revise current practice in light of benefit and use of BWV - CULTURE Dealing with noise contamination Consistent national approach in evidence gathering Challenges

Terms of reference and project mandate complete and agreed by senior managers Policy and legal advice sought Workshops with operational staff, service providers and stakeholders held Initial guidance and process drafted Work completed so far

Any Questions ? BWV

Lunch Back at /10/ Body worn video - Steering Gp Sept 2013

Serving our communities, protecting them from harm West Midlands Police Body Worn Video Camera Experiment Rialto P.D. California T/Insp 3908 Darren Henstock

Serving our communities, protecting them from harm The public’s perception of police use of force continues to be a problem. “Too many” incidents in which officers resort to use of force. Misinterpretation of contact or aggressive behaviour? “High number” of citizen complaints against police officers. True officer misbehaviour or malicious complaints? The problem

Serving our communities, protecting them from harm The Challenges Reducing use of force and complaints without changing the frequency and nature of contact with the public Requires third-party systematic observation that would scientifically measure both the implementation and the outcome of the practice Cost effectiveness Leadership – can we implement this research

Serving our communities, protecting them from harm Cameras in Police Use 61% of police departments used video cameras in patrol cars in (U.S. Department of Justice 2010) Cameras are likely to: 1.Improve accountability 2.Reduce complaints of police misconduct 3.Save thousands of dollars in court costs 4.Lower overtime costs for investigations and court appearances 5.Improve ability to collect evidence for trial 6.Increase professionalism by forcing officers to give more attention to following agency rules. (International Association of Police Chiefs, 2004)

Serving our communities, protecting them from harm Evidence on Cameras Systematic review on CCTV – 44 studies show 16% reduction in crime compared to control conditions, but half accountable to car theft, not violent crime (Welsh and Farrington 2009). Systematic review on cameras on roads – 35 studies show 44% reduction in fatal accidents (Wilson et al. 2010). BWV – no formal evaluation.

Serving our communities, protecting them from harm Research Questions Will wearing body-worn video cameras reduce the number of complaints against officers compared to the control group? Will wearing body-worn video cameras reduce the number (instances) of use of force compared to the control group?

Serving our communities, protecting them from harm Research Design Random assignment of all front-line officers to shifts with or without cameras Taser Inc. HD cameras recording all police-public interactions for 12 months. Went live 13 th February 2012 after two weeks of Phase 1.

Serving our communities, protecting them from harm Results - complaints

Serving our communities, protecting them from harm Results – Use of force

Serving our communities, protecting them from harm Summary Reduction in use of force incidents from 61 to 25. Of the 25 use of force incidents, 17 were in control group and 8 in the experiment. Of the 8 use of force incidents on the experiment days, all 8 were recorded on video Reduction in complaints from 24 to 3. Contacts increased from the previous years – no backfiring effect. Survey of all officers before and during RCT shows no significant changes in officers’ self-legitimacy

Serving our communities, protecting them from harm Further work Randomised Control Trial in the West Midlands supported by Cambridge University in order to replicate Rialto project. Full Rialto presentation and wider implications can be found at: _tony_farrar.pptx

POLICE BODY WORN CAMERA: DISCLOSURE AND IDENTIFICATION ISSUES

DISCLOSURE ISSUES

REASONABLE LINES OF ENQUIRY In conducting an investigation, the investigator should pursue all reasonable lines of inquiry, whether these point towards or away from the suspect- Code of Practice CPIA paragraph 3.5 Reasonable enquiries might involve a trawl for bodyworn camera evidence (akin to CCTV trawl or ANPR trawl etc)

RETENTION It is important that bodyworn camera evidence is preserved for a reasonable period of time on the basis that it might become relevant material in any criminal investigation Criminal investigation in respect of which the officer with bodyworn camera is in attendance or another investigation

ABUSE OF PROCESS The criminal proceedings might be stayed for abuse of process if relevant bodyworn camera evidence is destroyed The burden of proof is on the defence to prove that a fair trial is not possible In any event, opportunities to bolster the prosecution case will be lost

RELEVANT MATERIAL Once bodyworn camera footage is identified as relevant to an investigation, it must be retained by the investigator (Code of Practice CPIA paragraph 5.1) Retention for the time periods in paragraphs : NFA decision/ acquittal or 6 months after conviction or on the defendant’s release from custody (if later than 6 months after conviction ) All relevant footage must be scheduled on MG6C

EVIDENTIAL FOOTAGE Page 16 National File Standard (part of Director’s Guidance on Charging) Copies of the footage must accompany the prosecution file and be served as Initial Details of the Prosecution Case (IDPC) i.e. first appearance Nothing is more likely to trigger an admission and a guilty plea than the inclusion of this Any footage that establishes the offence should be shown to the suspect in an interview

IDENTIFICATION ISSUES

PITFALLS Where identification is in issue (or might be in issue) in the criminal prosecution, extreme care must be taken where it is intended to show the footage to witnesses

NO KNOWN SUSPECT (1) The bodyworn camera footage is akin to CCTV. There will be occasions where it is appropriate to show the footage to persons (usually police officers) for the purposes of recognition This must be done in accordance with PACE Code D

NO KNOWN SUSPECT (2) D : persons must view the footage individually; no collusion; no names should be suggested; a contemporaneous record should be made of the viewing on which the court can gauge the reliability of the recognition Wherever possible, avoid showing the footage to eye witnesses: the weight to be attached to any subsequent positive identification at parade will be reduced

KNOWN SUSPECT The footage can be shown to persons who are not non-eye witnesses for the purposes of recognition even where there is a known suspect (i.e. at stage where there is sufficient evidence to arrest a suspect). Viewing procedure must comply with D At known suspect stage, the footage must not be shown to eye witnesses

ANY QUESTIONS

Future of BWV as primary evidence Superintendent Peter Hall – Staffordshire Police 5/10/ Body worn video - Steering Gp Sept 2013

Thanks for listening 10 th September 2013