Actions following missing person's report - Essex Police, May 2018

Published 10 Sep 2019
Investigation

On 13 March 2018, a man was reported missing to Essex Police by his family. They hadn’t seen him since 7 March. Essex Police declared the man to be a ‘high-risk’ missing person at 11.30pm on 14 March.

On 21 March 2018, police responding to another incident found the man dead.

Essex Police referred this matter to us in May 2018.

During the course of the investigation, we found indications that four police officers may have behaved in a manner which would justify the bringing of disciplinary proceedings. The evidence we obtained indicated that they may have either failed to accurately record or assess information regarding the man.

During the investigation, our investigators interviewed four subject officers, obtained witness accounts from other police officers and police staff employees, as well as incident reports, and data related to other incidents that were occurring during the same period. They also considered the actions and decisions of officers in relation to Essex Police policy and professional guidance.

Our investigation found evidence that officers made assumptions regarding the man’s lifestyle and circumstances, and disregarded information which may have indicated he was at risk of harm. This contributed to a delay in policing resources being made available to assist with locating him.

Based on the evidence available, we were of the opinion that one call handler may benefit from individual learning.

We were also of the opinion that three inspectors, who were responsible for reviewing the incident and assessing whether the individual should have been categorised as a missing person, may have a case to answer for misconduct. We completed our investigation in April 2019.

After reviewing our report, Essex Police agreed that the call handler would receive management action in the form of a debrief.

The force was of the opinion that the three inspectors had not breached the standards of professional conduct and had therefore no case to answer for misconduct. However, they considered that their performance had been unsatisfactory and proposed that all three would receive management action, to address their performances issues. We considered their proposed action and agreed they were appropriate.

Essex Police also identified some wider learning opportunity for the management of future cases and advised they would progress this within the force.

IOPC reference

2018/103130