In this week’s blog, I am presenting another case ‘from the archives’ because it highlights issues of Police misconduct which remain as relevant today as they were 10 years ago – specifically issues of ‘racial profiling’ in the exercise of Police Stop and Search powers and the resistance of the Police to Policing themselves when it comes to misconduct allegations.
A pasty and a patsy?
“PC Bullock had excellent detection rates as he would do a lot of stop and searches. He would frequent areas where people were known to smoke marijuana and would obtain a number of positive searches in that way. However, I would not describe his worth ethic as being good. He would go out at lunchtime to get a sandwich, get his sanctions and detections for the day and then he would think he wouldn’t have to do anything else for the rest of the day.
I remember that that day, PC Bullock had gone out for his sandwich, so I knew he would bring back a Stop and Search record form, as he always conducted a stop and search when he went to get his lunch…”
PS Balchin, Chiswick Police Station.
These were the words of PC Bullock’s Sergeant as quoted in the Complaint Investigation Report subsequently completed by the IPCC (Independent Police Complaint Commission – the forerunner of the current Independent Office for Police Conduct) in relation to the Stop and Search of my client Zac on 27 December 2012 (“that day…” to which the Sergeant refers in her statement).
Zac is a black man who was born in Somalia and came to the UK when he was 6 years old. On the day in question, he was not doing anything out of the ordinary – simply taking his dog for an afternoon walk on Chiswick Common. As it was a mild day, he was wearing only a shirt and a pair of jeans and he was carrying with him nothing more illicit than a ‘Greg’s Bakery’ plastic bag, containing a sandwich and a bottle of soft drink.
Zac let his dog off the lead, so it could stretch its legs whilst he ate his sandwich.
It was whilst doing this that Zac became the target of one of PC Bullock’s ‘2 for 1’ lunchtime deals, as described in the above quotation from his Sergeant – i.e. collecting a sandwich and a Stop/Search form for himself (or, we might say a ‘pasty and a patsy’).
PC Bullock approached Zac and demanded to know what he was doing in the area. When Zac replied that he was having his sandwich whilst his dog exercised, the Officer announced “Okay, for that smart answer, I am going to search you”. It was at this point that Zac noticed that although PC Bullock was in ‘plain clothes’, and had not identified himself to Zac as a Police Officer, he appeared to be holding a Police warrant card in one of his hands.
As matters continued to unfold, and in contravention of the GOWISELY procedure laid down by Code A of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) – which governs Police stop/searches upon members of the public – PC Bullock did not formally identify himself, provide his name or Police Station or explain the grounds for his search and the legal powers under which it was purportedly being carried out.
When Zac questioned what he had done to justify being searched, PC Bullock replied “In my eyes you look suspicious – I believe that you’re concealing something”.
PC Bullock’s response made no sense to my client, who could see no reason for the Officer’s proposed search of him – other than that he was a young black man in an affluent area.
Zac then heard PC Bullock requesting “Further assistance” via his personal radio and questioned the Officer as to why he was doing this – pointing out that at no point had he refused a search.
Although Zac was unhappy as to why the Officer had targeted him, he kept these thoughts to himself and peaceably surrendered to the Officer’s search. PC Bullock proceeded to pat him down and search his pockets – as he did so, removing Zac’s bank card and pocketing it himself.
Despite the search having proved negative, PC Bullock kept hold of Zac’s arm and now informed him that he could not leave and would have to await the arrival of other officers.
Soon afterwards, two more plain-clothed Metropolitan Police Officers arrived – a male (PC Munich) and a female (PC Waddington).
Armed with these ‘reinforcements’, PC Bullock now informed Zac that he was going to be taken away for a strip search. Zac was utterly shocked and questioned how this could possibly be necessary – his concern all the greater because his dog was off the lead, wandering around the park.
When Zac protested to PC Munich about what was happening, with words to the effect of “Why do I have to be strip searched? I have done nothing wrong. I was just walking my dog”, he was suddenly grabbed from behind by PC Bullock in a ‘chokehold’ manoeuvre, which left him gasping for breath and struggling for balance. Zac was taken to the ground, landing heavily on his chest under the body weight of PC Bullock.
Despite the distress that Zac was in, PC Bullock maintained the chokehold and made goading remarks including “Look at you now” and “You’re nothing”.
In an effort to relieve the potentially deadly pressure which PC Bullock was applying to his neck, Zac frantically tapped on the ground – the wrestler’s gesture of ‘submission’. Only then did PC Bullock loosen his grip, although he continued to taunt Zac with the words “You’re not such a tough guy after all”.
This outburst of violence from PC Bullock towards Zac had simply been watched without comment by PC Munich and PC Waddington, neither of whom made any attempt to stop or restrain their colleague (which is sadly, the default mode of Police Officers when one of their colleagues is ‘going over the top’).
Indeed, the only action that either of this pair of Officers took at this stage was to ‘warn off’ another member of the public, who came over to ask if Zac was okay and questioned what the Officer was doing to him. This man was threatened with arrest if he did not move away, which seemed to scare him off.
Zac was in discomfort to his face, throat, neck, back, ribs and left shoulder and then suffered further pain to his shoulder as PC Bullock handcuffed his hands behind his back, before pulling him to his feet.
Zac now believes that he was on the floor in the chokehold for only approximately 90 seconds – but this terrifying experience felt like it lasted a lot longer whilst it was happening.
Unfortunately, his ordeal was far from over. Once Zac was on his feet, PC Bullock attempted to escort him towards some nearby bushes saying words to the effect of “I am going to teach you a lesson”. Zac was extremely concerned for his personal safety, but PC Munich at last intervened and told PC Bullock “He’s had enough. You’ve gone too far”.
Zac remained the Officers’ prisoner however, and was taken to an unmarked Police car nearby – the Officers did at least allow Zac to call his dog over, who was then taken with them in the boot of the car.
A Naked Abuse of Power
Zac was driven to Chiswick Police Station and taken into a side room by the two male Officers, PC Bullock and PC Munich. His handcuffs were removed – but he was then ordered by PC Bullock to remove his clothing, an instruction with which Zac unwillingly complied, fearing that he would be once again attacked if he refused.
Zac was then required to, humiliatingly, squat, turn around and bend over whilst the Officers ‘inspected’ him, before he was allowed to put his clothing back on – and PC Bullock finally returned Zac’s bank card to him. Nothing, of course, had been found on him.
My client was now issued with a Stop/Search form and told that he could leave, with PC Bullock firing what he probably thought was a last parting shot at him – “You can always try your luck and report me.”
Outraged by what had occurred, Zac, having been ushered out of the back door of the Police Station (collecting his dog along the way) immediately re-entered the Station through the front door in order to file a complaint.
Shortly after he had left the Station, Zac then received a phone call from a female Officer, now known to be PC Bullock’s Supervising Sergeant, PS Balchin – the Officer with whose quotation I opened this account. Zac gave her a full account of what had occurred, and she told him that she would investigate and report back to him. This was notwithstanding her total lack of impartiality in this matter for unbeknownst to Zac, PS Balchin was the officer who had, apparently quite casually, authorised PC Bullock’s strip search of him.
The next day, it was necessary for Zac to attend A&E in order to have his injuries checked out. He had multiple cuts and bruises across his body, including pain and discomfort in his chest, left shoulder, neck and upper back. X-rays were taken. It was found that Zac had suffered a dislocation to his left shoulder, although fortunately all of his physical injuries resolved within about 8 weeks.
The incident also had an unsurprising and significant impact on Zac’s mental health. He became depressed and withdrawn, afraid to leave his house in case he experienced a similar event, and when he did go out, he was anxious whenever he heard or saw a Police Officer or car, the sound of a Police siren being enough to trigger a panic attack. His sleep was disturbed by regular nightmares about being strangled. Psychologically, Zac felt that these events left him feeling a ‘shadow’ of his former self, for a long time afterwards.
Zac had ‘done the right thing’ by promptly bringing a complaint to the attention of PC Bullock’s superiors – but little did he know at the time, his attempt to secure justice for what had been done to him through the Police Complaint process would drag on for over five years before coming to a bitterly disappointing conclusion.
The Whitewash Watchdog?
Historically, one of the most common forms of institutional corruption in this country has been Police ‘laundering’ of Officers reputations; the lengths to which Professional Standards investigators are apparently prepared to go in order to dismiss legitimate complaints and exonerate their colleagues, even in the face of strong evidence of misconduct.
This is a system with an inbuilt resentment of complaints and strong inclination to always give the ‘benefit of the doubt’ to the accused officer, which can wear down the will of even the most determined complainant.
Three times during the five years following this December 2012 incident, the Metropolitan Police produced Complaint Reports – the first by the female Sergeant who was PC Bullock’s direct supervisor, PS Balchin – all of which either completely exonerated PC Bullock, or, at best, found him guilty of minor procedural misconduct in the exercise of his powers (essentially, failing to properly provide his details to Zac). No criticism was made in these reports of any of the substantive issues of misconduct from Zac’s point of view i.e. the Officer’s either random or racially prejudiced targeting of him and grossly excessive uses of force (which if perpetrated by a member of the public, would no doubt have been treated as criminal violence) or the degrading misuse of strip- search powers.
Zac quite rightly felt that each of these reports was nothing more than a ‘whitewash’. I agree with him; I have seen enough of such reports in my time and they are, to be frank, the main product of the Police Complaint system, at least it has existed up to the present day – after all ‘laundries’ tend to produce crisp, white sheets.
Each time Zac appealed these internal investigations, the IPCC upheld his appeal, but each time the repetition of the process was essentially fruitless – other than that, at the third time of asking it was accepted by the Met that PS Bullock had lacked the necessary authorisation for the strip search. Once again, however, any criticism of PC Bullock was confined to procedural errors rather than the real issues with which Zac was concerned.
Zac was conscious that the IPCC was frequently referred to by the media as the ‘Police Watchdog’ (just as its successor body the IOPC is today). Again, he was to learn through bitter experience something which I and other Police Misconduct lawyers have been saying for a long time – that in both of its incarnations, this Watchdog often behaves more like a ‘lapdog’, timid and unwilling to show any real bite in response to pro-police bias in the Complaints system. It has to be said that one appeals to them “more in IOPC than expectation”…
Finally, however, even the IPCC’s patience with the Police seemed to be exhausted and after Zac appealed the third iteration of the Complaint Investigation Report, they (the IPCC) finally took over conduct of the investigation themselves and went on to produce a report in May 2017 which concluded that PC Bullock did have a case to answer for misconduct.
However, in January 2018, PC Bullock appeared at a Misconduct Meeting chaired by Inspector Edwards of the Metropolitan Police, at which all of the allegations against the Officer were dismissed.
Zac – who had been allowed to attend the Misconduct Meeting, but only as a silent observer and not to give any evidence or speak for himself – was devastated. He was left feeling that the Complaint system was designed only to offer an illusion of accountability to the public, disguising its true purpose of protecting Police Officers and that the IPCC, despite all its pious words, was toothless and useless.
Nevertheless, despite all these emotional ‘knockdowns’, Zac still retained faith that there was justice to be found somewhere in the system, and ultimately turned to me for assistance in bringing a civil claim against the Metropolitan Police for false imprisonment and assault and battery.
Find out what happened when Zac’s case went to Court, when I continue his story in next week’s blog post.
You must be logged in to post a comment.