Plural policing and the police custody process in England and Wales

1. Plural policing and the police custody process in England and Wales Dr Layla Skinns Visiting Fellow, Law Faculty, UNSW Teaching Associate, Institute of Criminology and Adrian Socio-Legal Research Fellow, Darwin College, University of Cambridge ls262@cam.ac.uk

2. Overview Why research police custody? Plural policing in England and Wales Plural policing and the police custody process The research base Findings and their implications: Roles and responsibilities Staffing arrangements Police-police staff relationships Suspects� experiences of plural policing Accountability

3. Why research police custody? Affects access to procedural and substantive justice. Affects legitimacy and compliance with the law in the shorter and longer-term (Tyler, 2003). A lot at stake, if staff �get it wrong�: deaths in custody. For example, the recent inquiry into the death of Sean Riggs. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/aug/21/sean-riggs-police-death-cctv

4. Plural policing in England and Wales Prior to 1829, most police work was done by private individuals and organizations, although the state had a role too. The �birth� of the modern police in 1829 meant that policing became more firmly located within the State. However, in recent years we are seeing a proliferation of complex, fragmented, differentiated forms of policing.

5. Plural policing Policing is now authorised and delivered by diverse networks of commercial bodies, voluntary and community groups, individual citizens, national and local governmental regulatory agencies, as well as the public police (Jones and Newburn, 2006: 1)

6. Plural policing Home office police services 43 police services in England and Wales Central services: National Crime Intelligence Service Serious and Organised Crime Agency (which merged with the National Crime Squad in 2006).

7. Plural policing and the police Since the 1980s, civilianization of roles that do not need the legal powers of a police officer (Jones and Newburn, 2006b). There are approximately: 140, 000 police officers 80, 000 police staff (civilians employed by the police) 20, 000 special constables (civilian constables) 20, 000 police community support officers (PCSOs) (Bullock, 2008).

8. Plural policing and the police Police Reform Act 2002 Introduced PCSOs Designated powers e.g. to use force Privatization of policing Purchaser-provider splits at the margins e.g. police charging for policing football matches (Hough, 2007). Australian police services largely insulated from such developments (Prenzler and Sarre, 2006).

9. Plural policing and other policing bodies Specialist bodies e.g. MI5 Regulatory bodies e.g. environment agency Municipal policing by local gvt. Commercial policing for profit Staffed services e.g. security guards, door staff Installation and monitoring of security equipment Investigation e.g. private investigators (Crawford, 2008)

10. Plural policing and police custody Civilianization of the police custody process: �Police staff� as custody assistants and investigators. Also, growing involvement of other criminal justice practitioners, such as: Drug workers Appropriate adults Forensic medical staff

11. Plural policing and police custody

12. Plural policing and police custody Privatization of custody areas: Police staff employed by private companies. E.g. the Reliance Security Group 2001-6 employed 340 staff as custody assistants or managers in 27 different custody areas in four different police forces. Custody areas financed through Public-Finance Initiatives Extent of privatization as yet unknown.

13. Plural policing and police custody Public finance initiatives: Successful bidder in a competitive tendering process is awarded a contract to design, build, finance and operate a facility for 25+ yrs. The state pays an annual fee to use the facility. An �elegant piece of hire purchase� (Johnston et al. 2008: 227)? Growing in use across public sector: Home Office committed to 42 projects costing �1.2 bn and of these 23 are police-related. They give large security companies a powerful role in public sector service delivery (Johnston et al., 2008)

14. Plural policing and police custody Why modernize? Pressures to minimise costs and increase �efficiency�. Police officers can be re-deployed Police staff cost less BUT may not result in anticipated savings. Consequence of the wider socio-political context of managerialism and free-market principles of �advanced liberalism�?

15. The research Mixed-method research in two custody areas, one public, one private, in February-September �07: Sunnyside � In the SE of England. The majority of staff were civilians employed by Security Ltd (private police staff). Gormiston � In one area (borough) of London. Some staff were civilians but all were employed by the Police (public police staff).

16. The research

17. Roles: Gormiston (publicly-run)

18. Roles: Sunnyside (privately-run)

19. Plural policing: roles and responsibilities Blurring of roles and responsibilities between police and police staff Such blurring may lead to: Confusion amongst the suspects. �Mission creep� �power creep� (Crawford et al. 2005: 42)? In spite of the role played by police staff, custody officers were regarded as ultimately responsible for the care and fair treatment of suspects.

20. Plural policing and staffing arrangements Less training and poorer training for public vs. private police staff: Seven weeks training vs. two weeks training Private police staff were dissatisfied with medical training and training on how to use force. Private police staff felt �thrown in at the deep-end�.

21. Plural policing and staffing arrangements Yes, use of force, I had two days, and then if you�re going on shift the next day for the first time � there are tried and tested methods that are accepted that mean you can restrain a detainee without getting into trouble. However, having two days of it, not enough really � their training methods are crap. When you do your fingerprints, I was shown on their machine once, and then I went live, and you learn live, you�re dealing with live prints, that if you cock up could like damage the outcome of a case (SNS4).

22. Plural policing and staffing arrangements Poorer pay and conditions of service �12, 449 vs. �21, 000 Unpaid sick leave vs. paid sick leave Police staff permanently based in custody. Police staff had few opportunities for career progression, other than to join the police. High staff turnover.

23. Plural policing relationships A team spirit? Co-operative behaviour in Gormiston, but less so in Sunnyside. Yet staff described themselves as a team in Sunnyside, but not in Gormiston. Hierarchical relations: Police �pulled rank� on police staff. Police staff were deputies of the police. Police custody = police territory.

24. Plural policing relationships I really want to say that I think the civilian custody staff do a great job as far as I can, but I just think they�re hampered by that hierarchy, and not being able, I�m guessing just from our experience as appropriate adults, they just can�t make some decisions that perhaps need to be made quickly, they can�t challenge some of the things which are being asked of them (Appropriate adult).

25. Plural policing and suspects What does plural policing mean for suspects? Relationships with police staff Police staff were liked more than the police Better rapport and familiarity: �you can talk to them� More responsive

26. [I]f I ask them [the police staff] for a cup of tea, I get it there and then, if I ask a police officer, I�m not saying all of them are like that, but the majority of them it�s, oh we�re too busy � and your waiting, you�re on the bell again, again, again, but right them two fellas [the police staff], they bring me my tea all the time because they know me quite well in there � Yes, and I�m always pleasant, I don�t kick police cell doors, and abuse them, and all that, I don�t do that stuff, but really, yes, they�re a lot better I would say, definitely (GMD4).

27. Plural policing and suspects Relationships with police staff �More like us� I feel they do a better job than the police without a doubt � they�re sort of like us � they�re just wearing a uniform, whereas the police � they�re working for the government, they�re higher than us. But them [the police staff], they�re sort of like us (SND2). Or lacking in authority?

28. Plural policing and suspects Relationships with police staff A neutral buffer? [B]ecause they know it�s Security Ltd staff that are looking after them, it�s civilian staff that are looking after them in the cell, it�s not a police officer, because police officers, if they�re fighting with a detainee, they�ve got the red mist and the best thing is to get those officers out of the cell, because they�re the ones that are scrapping and fighting with them, and probably sprayed them, and whatever, out on the street, so they�re adrenalin pumping like mad, and really you want them out of the situation to try and calm the situation down, and the Security Ltd staff are probably the ones doing that � they will be shouting and swearing at us, and we say, hang on, we�re not police officers, and then they�ll see, oh no, you�re the ones that feed and water us, and stuff like that, very rarely do our staff get assaulted (SNS6). Or a buck-passer?

30. Plural policing and suspects Length of detention (without charge) Up to 24, 36 or 72 hours without �time-outs� Average length of detention differed significantly between police stations. However, when other variables such as reason for arrest were taken into account, this difference was no longer significant (Skinns, forthcoming).

31. Accountability Difficult to untangle, given blurred roles and responsibilities between police/police staff. Line management more complex in Sunnyside than in Gormiston. Also confusion in Sunnyside about whether police disciplinary and external complaints systems applied to private police staff.

32. Accountability However, contractual arrangements in Sunnyside were an additional �tool in the box�. Security Ltd were paid per prisoner Fines for �critical tasks� such as punctual cell checks. BUT self-regulation of punctuality and fines were rare.

33. Key findings

34. Discussion Growing role for public and private police staff within police custody areas. Also a blurring of their roles, leading to �power creep� and �mission creep�. Private police staff, in particular, lacked the skills, training and necessary remuneration to ensure that they could perform these roles. When coupled in Sunnyside, with uncertainty about accountability mechanisms, this may provide scope for errors. Therefore, civilianization preferable to privatization.

35. Discussion Yet, police staff in both sites were regarded more highly than the police by suspects. Police staff may enhance suspects� experiences of procedural justice. Therefore, police staff may enhance the likelihood that suspects� comply with the law (if Tyler�s right).

36. Discussion If workforce modernisation is justified for this reason alone, does this amount to hood-winking suspects into accepting unfair outcomes? Police custody needs to be fair for the sake of being fair not because it secures compliance with the law. Attention needs to be given to substantive justice, not just procedural justice.

37. Discussion Police staff were deputized by the police and police custody remained police territory. This implies that, in both police custody areas, police-police staff relationships were not �nodal networks� (Johnston and Shearing, 2003). Authority for governing the custody area was (and should be) anchored within the State (Loader and Walker, 2007).

38. References Bullock, S. (2008) Police Service Strength, Home Office Statistical Bulletin, London: Home Office. Crawford, A. (2008). Plural policing in the UK: policing beyond the police. In T. Newburn (ed.) Handbook of policing, third edition, Cullompton, Willan. Crawford, A., Lister, S., Blackburn, S. and Burnett, J. (2005). Plural policing: the mixed economy of visible patrols in England and Wales. Bristol: Policy Press.

39. References Hough, M. (2007). Policing, new public management and legitimacy in Britain. In T. Tyler (ed.) Legitimacy and Criminal Justice. NYC: Russell Sage Foundation. HMIC (2004) Modernising the police service, London: Home Office. Johnston, L. and Shearing, C. (2003). Governing Security. London: Routledge.

40. References Johnston, L., Button, M. and Williamson, T. (2008). �Police, governance and the Private Finance Initiative.� Policing and Society 18(3): 225-244. Jones, T. and Newburn, T. (2006a). Understanding plural policing. In T. Jones and T. Newburn (eds.) Plural policing: a comparative perspective .London: Routledge. Jones, T. and Newburn, T. (2006b). England and Wales. In T. Jones and T. Newburn (eds.) Plural policing: a comparative perspective .London: Routledge.

41. References Loader, I. a. Walker, N. (2007). Civilizing security. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Prenzler, T. and Sarre, R. (2006a). Australia. In T. Jones and T. Newburn (eds.) Plural policing: a comparative perspective .London: Routledge. Skinns, L. (forthcoming) �Stop the clock�: predictors of detention without charge in police custody areas, Criminology and Criminal Justice.

42. References Skinns, L. (2009b) �I�m a detainee get me out of here�: predictors of access to custodial legal advice in public and privatized police custody areas, British Journal of Criminology, 49 (3): 399-417. Skinns, L. (2009a) �Lets� get it over with�: early findings on the factors affecting detainees� access to custodial legal advice, Policing and Society, 19 (1): 58-78. Tyler, T.R. (2003) Procedural Justice, Legitimacy and the Effective Rule of Law, in M Tonry (ed.) Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

43. Any questions? ls262@cam.ac.uk