Dear Cambridgeshire Constabulary,

On page 145 of 'An inspection of vetting, misconduct, and misogyny in the police service' published by HMICFRS it states:

"The Counter-Corruption (Intelligence) APP lists 12 categories of corruption-related intelligence. It is good practice for forces to use these categories when recording intelligence. All forces should do this consistently to help them understand the threats they face."

The categories are listed on page 146:

"• infiltration;
• disclosure of information;
• perverting the course of justice;
• sexual misconduct;
• controlled drug use and supply;
• theft and fraud;
• misusing force systems;
• abuse of authority;
• inappropriate association;
• vulnerability;
• commit, incite, aid, and abet, or assist an offender in the commission of, a crime;
and
• other [corruption-related intelligence not categorised elsewhere]."

https://hmicfrs.justiceinspectorates.gov...

1. For the year 2022/23, please provide the figures recorded in each of the 12 categories.

2. If you do not use these categories, please provide details of the categories you use and related figures for 2022/23.

Yours faithfully,

D Moore

Our ref: FOI2024/01218

Dear D Moore,

Thank you for your request for information which was received on 12th
February. Your request is being considered under the terms of the Freedom
of Information Act 2000.

The Act requires that a response must be given promptly, and in any event
within 20 working days. We will therefore reply at the latest by 11th
March.

Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future
communications.

Yours sincerely,
Sharron Woodward

D. Moore left an annotation ()

Freedom of Information,

1 Attachment

Good Afternoon,

 

I am writing in response to your Freedom of Information request to
Bedfordshire Police & Cambridgeshire Constabulary received 12^th February
2024.

 

Please find attached a joint response from both Forces.

 

Many thanks,

 

BCH Information Rights Team

 

══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

Internet e-mail is not to be treated as a secure means of communication.
Bedfordshire Police monitors all internet e-mail activity and content.
This communication is confidential and intended for the addressee(s) only.
Please notify the sender if you have received this in error. Unauthorised
use or disclosure of the contents may be unlawful. Opinions expressed in
this document may not be official policy.

For more details please see [1]Bedfordshire Police Privacy Policy

References

Visible links
1. https://www.beds.police.uk/hyg/fpnbch/pr...

Dear Cambridgeshire Constabulary,

Ref No’s: FOI2024/01188 & FOI2024/01218

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Cambridgeshire Constabulary's handling of my FOI request 'Corruption data for year 2022/23'.

You got the PIT wrong by failing to fairly assess the public interests involved. You have asserted that disclosure would make the corruption even worse without providing any supporting evidence.

Consider, for example, an officer engaging in or inclined to engage in sexual misconduct (category 4). You seem to suggest that with sight of the figures, this officer would be motivated to boost their wrongdoing by taking precautions to avoid detection or changing the nature of their wrongdoing. If, say, the figures revealed that a lot of allegations related to sexual misconduct but not so many related to drugs (category 5), this officer, in your view, would see drug crime as a safer option than sex crime and act accordingly. You also suggest that a potential blackmailer who saw similar figures would be inclined to put more effort into honey traps than drug snares. Your objections to disclosure do not stand up to scrutiny.

Your arguments also ignore information already in the public domain. The College of Policing publishes statistical information on the reasons for police dismissals, albeit at a national level (Table 5):

https://www.college.police.uk/ethics/bar...

The categories total 32 and include categories similar to the 12 that are the subject of my information request. For example, "Sexual offences or misconduct", "Abuse for a sexual purpose", "Perverting or attempt to pervert the course of justice", "Drugs", "Fraudulent behaviour" and "Unlawful access or disclosure of information". Interestingly, Table 5 reveals only one dismissal recorded under in the category "Corruption" for all police forces in England and Wales.

Why would disclosure of the figures at the force level have a harmful impact that disclosure at the national level does not?

Your arguments also fail to appreciate the Government's commitment to root out corrupt officers as evidenced by, for example, Chris Philp's parliamentary statement regarding the establishment of procedures to send information about suspect officers and staff "directly, at pace, to the force concerned":

 https://questions-statements.parliament....

and;

The recent national rollout of the Anti-Corruption & Abuse Reporting Service:

 https://news.npcc.police.uk/releases/nat...

The public interest in disclosing the number and nature of allegations of police corruption at the force level is overwhelming. The IOPC's annual Public Perceptions Tracker summary report (May 2023) notes on page 3:

"News stories about police failings, misconduct and criminality coupled with the damning Casey Review have triggered confidence in the police to deal fairly with complaints to fall to its lowest point since testing began (32%) in 2017."

https://www.policeconduct.gov.uk/publica...

On page 6, it includes a selection of newspaper images and headlines such as: "ROTTEN TO THE CORE", "ARMED COP HELD ON SARAH MURDER" (Wayne Couzens), "COPS LET OFF HOOK" 'Met cop admits to brutal campaign of rape and terror" (David Carrick), and "Clamour for inquiry into officers who allowed rapist to stay in Met". 

Withholding the information will only add to public mistrust of the police and fuel suspicion that you have something to hide.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/c...

Yours faithfully,

D. Moore

D. Moore left an annotation ()

Northumbria Police provided figures, then wrote to say they were provided in error. You can read the correspondence here:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/c...

D. Moore left an annotation ()

This ex-officer reveals an alternative use for microwave ovens and says that the moment you hit the streets you see corruption:

I Saw Police Officers BREAKING The Law | Ask The Mask | Channel 4 Documentaries

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L98Gj3TO...

FOI Team,

1 Attachment

Dear D Moore,

I am writing in response to your request for information, received 18th
March.

Yours sincerely,
Joanne Atkins