NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED
Operations manual
Referrals V1.0
Definitions of ‘known factors’ and ‘core risks’ relevant to MOI
decisions
Known Factors
Fatal shooting
This factor applies wherever a shooting by a person serving with the police
causes a death. This factor applies in such cases irrespective of whose death
is caused.
Article 2 engaged
Article 2 outlines the right to life. Any case where Article 2 is engaged (for our
purposes, where it is arguable that the person serving with the police knew or
ought to have known that there was a real and immediate risk to someone’s
life and failed to take steps within their power to prevent that death)
necessitates an investigation that is sufficiently independent of that state.
Article 2 can also be engaged where someone has suffered life-threatening
injuries – these are referred to as ‘near miss’ cases. In practical terms, if
Article 2 is engaged, this will usually mean an IPCC independent investigation
or at least an investigation by a different police force to the one from which the
person serves with.
Article 3 engaged
Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights sets out that no one
shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment.
Torture
Torture is deliberate inhuman treatment causing very serious and cruel
suffering.
Inhuman or degrading treatment
Inhuman treatment is treatment that causes intense physical or mental
suffering. Degrading treatment is treatment that arouses in the victim a
feeling of fear, anguish and inferiority capable of humiliating and debasing the
victim and possibly breaking their physical or moral resistance.
Corruption
This factor applies wherever a case exhibits what the IPCC’s Statutory
Guidance refers to as ‘serious corruption’. That is:
• Any attempt to pervert the course of justice or other conduct likely to
seriously harm the administration of justice, in particular the criminal
justice system
NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED
01.04.2010
NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED
Operations manual
Referrals V1.0
• Payments or other benefits or favours received in connection with the
performance of duties where a Magistrates’ Court would be likely to
decline jurisdiction
• Corrupt controller/handler/informer relationships
• Provision of confidential information in return for payment or other benefits
or favours where the conduct goes beyond a possible prosecution for an
offence under section 55 of the Data Protection Act 1998
• Extraction and supply of seized controlled firearms, drugs or any other
material
• Attempts or conspiracies to do any of the above.
Death in custody
This factor applies in relation to the death of any person who has been
arrested or otherwise detained by the police. This includes the death of any
person that occurs while they are being arrested or taken into detention. The
death may take place on police, private or medical premises, in a public place
or in a police or other vehicle.
Firearm discharged – conventional
This factor applies wherever a standard munition has been discharged from a
standard firearm, hence it should not apply in situations where only a taser or
baton round discharge has taken place. This applies in relation to discharges
by a person serving with the police, whether accidental or intentional, at any
location.
Allegations against ACPO rank officers
‘ACPO rank’ includes Chief Constables, Deputy Chief Constables, Assistant
Chief Constables or their equivalents and certain senior non-police staff. This
factor applies where an allegation relates to the personal conduct of an officer
or member of staff who is at ACPO rank. This factor does not apply where an
allegation cites an officer or member of staff holding ACPO rank solely
because of their hierarchical responsibility for an officer or member of staff
whose conduct the allegation directly concerns.
Perjury
Perjury is the deliberate, wilful giving of false, misleading or incomplete
testimony under oath. This factor applies in any situation where is it alleged
that a person serving with the police has committed perjury.
Terrorism related
An allegation arises out of the use of police powers arising from terrorism
legislation. Such legislation includes but may not be limited to the Terrorism
NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED
01.04.2010
NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED
Operations manual
Referrals V1.0
Act 2000, the Terrorism Act 2006, the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 or the
Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001.
Assault using assigned equipment or other e.g. dog bites
This implies that an injury of any description is sustained owing to the use of
any equipment that is regularly or occasionally issued to an officer or person
serving with the police. This includes the use of a police dog, of handcuffs or
of CS spray.
Cause of serious injury indicates police fault/negligence
The scenario suggests that serious injury has befallen a member of the public
due to some failure on the part of the police, whether through action or
inaction. Serious injury should be taken as defined in the IPCC’s Statutory
Guidance, ‘Serious injury means a fracture, a deep cut, a deep laceration or
an injury causing damage to an internal organ or the impairment of any bodily
function’. For example, a dispute between neighbours entails a number of
calls to the police making claim and counter-claim. Police take no action in
respect of either party. One of the neighbours is later attacked and injured by
the other; a broken arm. The implication is that if the police had taken earlier
action this harm may not have befallen.
Serious injury from RTI or use of force
‘Serious injury’ should take the definition given in the IPCC’s Statutory
Guidance, ‘Serious injury means a fracture, a deep cut, a deep laceration or
an injury causing damage to an internal organ or the impairment of any bodily
function’.
This factor may apply where a serious injury was sustained because of an
active pursuit by the police (whether due to collision of a police vehicle or a
pursued vehicle), an accident involving a police vehicle other than during a
pursuit or the collision of a non-police vehicle following a discontinued pursuit.
It doesn’t matter whether the injuries are caused to a person serving with the
police, a person subject of a pursuit or a member of the public not otherwise
involved in the pursuit.
This factor may apply where serious injury is caused by the use of force by a
person serving with the police upon any other person.
Discrimination
Discrimination may be an allegation of disparate treatment of an individual on
the basis of their race, a disability, their gender, sexual orientation, their
religion, their beliefs or their age. Alternatively discrimination may be the
combination of a description of an individual in line with one of the six strands
described above with language or actions so as to make that description
pejorative. In either case, a perception that this was so is as important as
demonstrable fact.
NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED
01.04.2010
NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED
Operations manual
Referrals V1.0
Linked with other criminal investigations
The allegation being referred relates to the same incident as is currently
subject to an ongoing criminal investigation into the conduct of a person
serving with the police.
Mental health (e.g. Mental Health Act s135/136)
The person who has been subject of police conduct can fall (by virtue of
medical or self diagnosis) into categories where the provisions of the Mental
Health Act could be applied.
Allegations against Superintendant/Inspector rank officers
This factor applies where an allegation relates to the personal conduct of an
officer who is at the rank of Inspector or Superintendent. This factor does not
apply where an allegation cites an officer at either rank solely because of their
hierarchical responsibility for an officer or member of staff whose conduct the
allegation directly concerns.
Self harm or near miss in custody
This indicator describes an incident in custody where a person has harmed
themself or has had to be restrained from harming themself.
Previous similar allegations against force or officer
The allegation at hand suggests a pattern or trend of behaviour within a force
or with an officer. Previous instances need not necessarily have been
addressed by way of investigation or other means.
Sexual assault
The allegation implies any offence under the Sexual Offences Act 1956 to
2003.
Significant disagreement between force and IPCC
This applies in any case where, consequent to the referral at hand rather than
any broader contention, there has been significant disagreement between the
force and the IPCC. This may have been for example due to a delay in the
referral, disagreement over the need to refer or for other reasons.
Vulnerable complainant
A vulnerable person can be defined as someone who has or may need
support in order to enable or promote their independent living. This may be
because of age (old or young), mental health considerations, a learning or a
physical disability. A vulnerable complainant would be a person making a
complaint or who is otherwise subject to alleged misconduct who falls into the
category of vulnerable person.
NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED
01.04.2010
NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED
Operations manual
Referrals V1.0
Death following police contact
A death with an alleged causal link between contact with the police and the
subsequent death. This does not include situations accounted as being
following custody (unless it falls to be referred having been an apparent
suicide that occurred within 48 hours of contact), due to shooting, or due to
other direct action by the police (an RTI or use of force).
Distress/minor injury from RTI or assault
Minor injury is any injury less serious than those defined as serious injury in
the IPCC’s Statutory Guidance, ‘Serious injury means a fracture, a deep cut, a
deep laceration or an injury causing damage to an internal organ or the
impairment of any bodily function’. Distress is any claim of non-physical
harm.
This factor may apply where a minor injury was sustained or distress caused
because of an active pursuit by the police (whether due to collision of a police
vehicle or a pursued vehicle), an accident involving a police vehicle other than
during a pursuit or the collision of a non-police vehicle following a
discontinued pursuit. It doesn’t matter whether the injuries are caused to a
person serving with the police, a person subject of a pursuit or a member of
the public not otherwise involved in the pursuit.
This factor may apply where minor injury or distress is caused by the use of
force by a person serving with the police upon any other person.
Domestic violence
Allegations have arisen from circumstances involving domestic violence of
any form. An officer does not need to have been directly involved in
circumstances of domestic violence. This factor does not apply where the
officer has themselves perpetrated domestic violence, a situation that would
be covered under the various factors related to assault.
Excessive force
The alleged use of force without any demonstrable evidence. Use of force
resulting in greater injuries would attract other factors.
Failures in duty
Alleged failure of a person serving with the police to perform an action that
was expected of them. For example, failure to arrest a third party, failure to
take a witness statement.
Involvement of alcohol or drugs
This factor applies where anyone in an incident that gives rise to a referral
was under the influence of alcohol, drugs or other intoxicants.
NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED
01.04.2010
NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED
Operations manual
Referrals V1.0
Missing person
Allegations arise from a scenario of the police’s response to a missing person.
Multiple officers/multiple complainants
The circumstances referred involve allegations from or against multiple
officers or complainants.
Stop and search
Allegations arise from a scenario involving the use of stop and search powers.
This factor does not apply in cases where the stop and search power used
comes from the Terrorism Act or related legislation. Such a referral would
attract the ‘Terrorism related’ flag described above.
Supervising officer
Allegations are being made against an officer of any rank who has
supervisory (not necessarily line management) responsibility over any other
one or more persons serving with the police.
Core Risks
Media Interest
Any factor which could lead to an escalated interest from the media. This
could be because the complaint/ incident involves a high profile person, or
there is a theme to the complaint/ incident which has been in the media.
Public and community interest and concern
Any factor which could lead to escalated interest from the community local to
the incident or the general public. This could be, for instance, where the
complaint/ incident involved a person with a high community profile, for
example a priest.
MP Interest
Is there likely to be, or is there currently any MP involvement? (If there isn’t
any MP involvement at the time of the complaint then assume, unless
otherwise indicated, this is not relevant)
Confidence issues with the IPCC
Any aspect of the complaint or incident which could lead to public or
complainant loss of confidence in the IPCC. This might be a local loss of
confidence in the local IPCC presence, a national loss of confidence in the
IPCC as an organisation or somewhere in between.
NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED
01.04.2010
NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED
Operations manual
Referrals V1.0
Confidence issues with the Police
Any aspect of the complaint or incident which could lead to public or
complainant loss of confidence in the police’s ability to uphold the law.
Confidence issues with the complaints system
Whilst there is a cut across with confidence in police and confidence in IPCC
this can be seen as a distinctly separate issue and one that relates to a
complainant’s experience of the complaints process.
Force Profile factor
This is to represent experience or knowledge about a force that may impact
negatively or present a greater risk which needs highlighting.
NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED
01.04.2010
