Operational risk, omissions and liability in policing

Abstract

Recent decades have seen the sensitisation of UK society towards harm and policing ‘failures’ become increasingly significant. This paper is intended to stimulate thought and debate by analysing some consequences of these developments. It reviews literature in relation to risk-taking in UK operational policing, identifying increased criminal and disciplinary liability, particularly in respect of alleged omissions. Hindsight is found to be a potentially powerful influence. The article concludes that it is unlikely that public culture will be changed readily. However, police and other bodies should be able to reach a common approach towards operational risk, omissions and hindsight.

Is there ‘discretionary space’ in rank-based police constabularies for graduate constables to think critically and make autonomous decisions?

“…These challenges are part of a wider societal change in which individuals are largely intolerant of risk and are suspicious of state authority. This means that the police must deal with a complex mix of public expectations that interweave notions of public protection, vulnerability, risks and rights, (Heaton, Bryant and Tong, 2019).…”

“…Indeed, the police have faced considerable criticism over the years, with public outcries over corruption in the 1970s, racism in 1980s, and a failure to protect vulnerable victims today. The response from police leaders has been to adopt a risk adverse mentality (Heaton, 2011;Green and Gates, 2014;Heaton, Bryant and Tong, 2019). Risk adversity manifesting as complex bureaucratic procedures that need to be completed by the response officer in virtually every incident they attend, in effect regulating and limiting the discretion previously available to officers in street level policing (Heaton, Bryant and Tong, 2019;Black and Lumsden, 2020).…”

“…The response from police leaders has been to adopt a risk adverse mentality (Heaton, 2011;Green and Gates, 2014;Heaton, Bryant and Tong, 2019). Risk adversity manifesting as complex bureaucratic procedures that need to be completed by the response officer in virtually every incident they attend, in effect regulating and limiting the discretion previously available to officers in street level policing (Heaton, Bryant and Tong, 2019;Black and Lumsden, 2020). The increasing use of information technology by constabularies to monitor incidents from the initial call from a member of the public to finalisation by a police supervisor means that officer discretion is limited and noncompliance with policies and procedures is easily highlighted and challenged (Chan, 2001(Chan, , 2003Rowe, 2007).…”

Precautionary policing and dispositives of risk in a police force control room in domestic abuse incidents: an ethnography of call handlers, dispatchers and response officers

“…Since the early 1990s, policing has taken a future oriented and pro-active approach to identifying, analysing and managing risks, driven in part by dissatisfaction with traditional reactive policing and a policy landscape of value for money (Maguire 2000). However, in operational policing the volume of apparent risk is high and it can be difficult for officers to identify those situations which require intervention (Heaton, Bryant & Tong 2018). This means that 'retrospective judgements about the selection and adequacy of interventions are likely to be affected by the nature of the outcomes of events' (Heaton, Bryant & Tong 2018, p. 11).…”

“…https://doi.org/10. 1080/10439463.2019.1568428 officers and staff before risks become known (Heaton, Bryant & Tong, 2018). This reflects a shift in policing to precautionary approaches which do not necessarily follow the intended blueprints of risk management (Ransley & Mazerolle 2009).…”