Who police's the police.

Forums › Off topic › Who police's the police.

JaseNZ

1828 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#268158 2-Mar-2020 17:46

After reading something from the IPCA who I thought were actually there to police the police it seems that this is not so. If this is the case then is there actually a mechanism of independent police investigation and prosecution ??.

Here is what the IPCA say in an article about being underfunded with an increase of complaints.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/119944713/police-watchdog-reviewing-efficiency-as-it-deals-with-surge-in-complaints-and-funding-issues

The IPCA gets about $4m in funds each year.

Funding was essential for the IPCA, which was an important, constitutional and legislative regulation on police, he said.

"It's not to police the police but it is to ensure the New Zealand public can have trust and confidence in New Zealand police."

"We are not here to bag the cops. We see our job as learning lessons and enhancing public trust and confidence," he said.

Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding : Ice cream man , Ice cream man

1 | 2 | 3

22679 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2430269 2-Mar-2020 18:03

Oh boy, this should trigger some people :)

BlinkyBill

925 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2430295 2-Mar-2020 19:17

If the Police can’t police the Police, then they are corrupt. We don’t want corrupt Police, so it’s better to take an alternative approach. The IPCA is there to ensure the Police police the Police correctly.

BlinkyBill

JaseNZ

1828 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2430299 2-Mar-2020 19:26

So the IPCA have no real power then and can only put forward recommendations then I am assuming.

Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding : Ice cream man , Ice cream man

floydbloke

2229 posts

Uber Geek

#2430306 2-Mar-2020 19:46

I don't believe there is institutional corruptness within the NZ Police. It's staffed by human beings and when you have a large number of those there is always going to be a small percentage who aren't honest or have complete integrity, a few power-hungries, and there will be mistakes and bad judgment calls.

All in all, I think they do a pretty good job. Really my only beef with them is the over-zealous focus on speeding and not enough on other traffic offences.

"I have noticed even people who claim everything is predestined, and that we can do nothing to change it, look before they cross the road." - Stephen Hawking

dejadeadnz

2106 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#2430337 2-Mar-2020 19:56

JaseNZ:

After reading something from the IPCA who I thought were actually there to police the police it seems that this is not so. If this is the case then is there actually a mechanism of independent police investigation and prosecution ??.

Here is what the IPCA say in an article about being underfunded with an increase of complaints.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/119944713/police-watchdog-reviewing-efficiency-as-it-deals-with-surge-in-complaints-and-funding-issues

The IPCA is set up to give a veneer of oversight of the police but IMO (as an ex-criminal lawyer familiar with the prosecution, defence and judicial side of the legal fence) it's set up to fail due to politics. People keep believing the nonsense that cops are somehow hardest on their own but there's nothing in management theory or human nature that suggests this is or should be true. For a start, beyond the under-funding, it should absolutely be impossible and should in fact be a criminal offence for senior management of the police to refuse to accept the recommendations/findings of the IPCA. Recently, there was a case where tthe IPCA established that a teenager was subject to an unreasonable kick or the like during an arrest and somehow all the cops involved set up the standard blue wall of silence and then the District Commander in Hawkes Bay openly disagreed with the IPCA's findings.

Anyone with more than 2 brain cells should not find that to be acceptable. If the cops don't like the findings, the correct avenue is to either give them a right of appeal or they can exercise the right to judicially review the findings. I also believe that cops should be treated as a disciplinary force like the armed forces, where attempts to dismiss are not necessarily subject to the overly-stringent standards of proof of civilian courts but, rather, whether an officer continues to retain the confidence of the chain of command, i.e. what lawyers essentially call serving at Her Majesty's pleasure.

dejadeadnz

2106 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#2430338 2-Mar-2020 19:57

networkn:

Oh boy, this should trigger some people :)

And just what exactly does this quality contribution of yours add to the discourse?

gzt

11444 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2430428 2-Mar-2020 20:10

Who police's the police.

networkn: Oh boy, this should trigger some people :)

I'm triggered! Who grammars the grandma's? that what I want to know : ).

gzt

11444 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2430432 2-Mar-2020 20:20

Wikipedia article is interesting. IPCA has been through a few rounds of changes:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_Police_Conduct_Authority

gzt

11444 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2430444 2-Mar-2020 20:41

dejadeadnz: Recently, there was a case where tthe IPCA established that a teenager was subject to an unreasonable kick or the like during an arrest and somehow all the cops involved set up the standard blue wall of silence and then the District Commander in Hawkes Bay openly disagreed with the IPCA's findings.

Anyone with more than 2 brain cells should not find that to be acceptable. If the cops don't like the findings, the correct avenue is to either give them a right of appeal or they can exercise the right to judicially review the findings. I also believe that cops should be treated as a disciplinary force like the armed forces, where attempts to dismiss are not necessarily subject to the overly-stringent standards of proof of civilian courts but, rather, whether an officer continues to retain the confidence of the chain of command, i.e. what lawyers essentially call serving at Her Majesty's pleasure.

I had a quick look for that case on the IPCA site. No luck so far: https://www.ipca.govt.nz/Site/Outcomes/

On the disciplinary angle I'm interested to know how other countries do that part.

In the case as you outlined it an officer retained the confidence of the command in that case. On that basis it's not immediately clear to me how that military type process would work there.

dejadeadnz

2106 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#2430456 2-Mar-2020 21:05

gzt:

I had a quick look for that case on the IPCA site. No luck so far: https://www.ipca.govt.nz/Site/Outcomes/

On the disciplinary angle I'm interested to know how other countries do that part.

In the case as you outlined it an officer retained the confidence of the command in that case. On that basis it's not immediately clear to me how that military type process would work there.

Look for the media release section - 2- February 2020. As for what the moronic Hawkes Bay AC said, look at this article. The police media release is here. The none-to-subtle digs at the IPCA shouldn't be tolerable and, IMO, the only place the AC for Hawkes Bay should be in right now is a jail cell. And as for retaining the confidence of the comnmand, IMO, a properly administered system should mean that the IPCA get to determine whether cops should be disciplined.

Hawke's Bay Area Commander Inspector Jeanette Park says Police come to work every day to keep the community safe, and are often required to make decisions to ensure that safety for the public and for our people.

...

Through our own robust investigation based on evidence available, Police were not able to establish the boy’s injuries were as a result of any use of force other than the force the officers stated they used to restrain the boy during his arrest.

So we have the age old "We had an emergency! You amateurs who know no better should shut up!" defence, in addition to a subtle dig around the safety of the IPCA's findings. Then we found that the only relevant investigation's outcome was markedly different to that of the cops'. If the cops couldn't find sufficient evidence to criminally prosecute the cops involved, another matter. And that finding would inspire confidence only if the decision not to prosecute was referred to an independent crown prosecutor's office, i.e. not the Napier one, which the cops in the area necessarily work with daily and closely.

Geektastic

14605 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2430461 2-Mar-2020 21:11

[Tries to avoid being triggered by errant apostrophes]

quickymart

5283 posts

Uber Geek

#2430462 2-Mar-2020 21:12

JaseNZ

1828 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2430473 2-Mar-2020 21:27

Wow interesting wiki read, I did not realise they had so little people and the whole organisation is not what I really thought it was. There is no real outside accountability its all internal via the police.

Really love the old Simpson's episodes, I dunno coast guard hahahah

Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding : Ice cream man , Ice cream man

Geektastic

14605 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2430475 2-Mar-2020 21:38

Who polices the IPCA?

gzt

11444 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2431471 2-Mar-2020 22:33

Dejadeadnz:

Got it. https://www.ipca.govt.nz/Site/publications-and-media/2020-media-releases/2020-feb-20-use-of-force-13-year-old-napier.aspx. In the other articles you linked it's clear that IPCA could not identify the person who administered the kick. Presumably the independent witness on the scene could not.

In this instance it looks like the kind of case only video can resolve, for the purpose of identification and prosecution only of one of several individuals on the scene.

Other than that you just have to hope in the case the alleged offender is a complete psycho that colleagues will talk and eventually dob in if that continues.

I'm not sure what the alternatives were in this case based on the evidence available to the IPCA.

1 | 2 | 3