|
Archived Transcript for 19 November 2001: Pages
251 to 279
251
1 experience?
2 PS BIRD: Well, at the time and given the situation that
3 I found myself in, and because, having spoken to
4 DI Howard -- and DI Howard certainly took it further --
5 that there was no detective cavalry going to come around
6 the corner, I thought I did the best I possibly could
7 and I went out of my way to do the best I possibly could
8 given the circumstances. However ...
9 MR SHELDON: That is effectively what you were being asked
10 to do though, was it, by DI Howard, to make the best of
11 it, pick up as much as you could as you went along?
12 PS BIRD: I do not think it is fair to say DI Howard was
13 asking me to do that. DI Howard was taking our concerns
14 further but there was nothing left in the pot to give
15 Haringey CPT.
16 MR SHELDON: I see. By taking them further, do you mean he
17 was raising them at his DI's meetings?
18 PS BIRD: That would be the forum where you would raise
19 subjects like that.
20 MR SHELDON: Was he coming back to you, talking to you,
21 saying, "I have passed on your concerns but the outcome
22 is this"?
23 PS BIRD: He would debrief us.
24 MR SHELDON: The impression you got from those debriefings,
25 there were simply not resources available for the
252
1 training?
2 PS BIRD: That is the impression I got. I knew there was
3 financial constraints within the Operational Command
4 Unit so I suppose I should not have been surprised.
5 MR SHELDON: I got the impression, and particularly from
6 paragraph 40 of your statement, that this was something
7 you felt very strongly about.
8 PS BIRD: I think we all did, but yes, I did.
9 MR SHELDON: I got the impression, and again paragraph 40 in
10 particular, that you felt somewhat let down by the Met
11 Police in this respect.
12 PS BIRD: I think -- let me just have a look at
13 paragraph 40.
14 MR SHELDON: The passage that caught my attention
15 particularly, start at the end of the third line:
16 "I applied for a post as Police Sergeant in the hope
17 that I would gain the knowledge, experience and training
18 to become a Detective. There was no training. The
19 Child Protection Manual was deemed to be out-of-date
20 and, even though senior management had been tasked to
21 rewrite and update it, this had not happened by the time
22 I left two years later. I was put in the position of
23 Detective Sergeant without the experience or the
24 training to prepare me for the seriousness of the
25 investigations I found myself dealing with."
253
1 PS BIRD: That is right and that is a very strong feeling of
2 mine. This was written however after a year of having
3 been subject to very intensive investigation, internal
4 investigation, so it was rather coming from my heart.
5 MR SHELDON: I see. Would it be fair to say then that the
6 strength of concern that would appear to be evident from
7 the way in which you expressed yourself in that
8 paragraph has increased over time?
9 PS BIRD: Yes, it has.
10 MR SHELDON: And that perhaps you were not quite as
11 concerned about those gaps in your training in mid-1995
12 in your discussions with DI Howard as you appear to be
13 in your statement?
14 PS BIRD: I certainly was not as vocal, no, sir.
15 MR SHELDON: I see. I also got the impression from your
16 statement that your understanding of the position was it
17 was not just you who was missing this sort of training,
18 that this was a problem common across the north-west
19 area crime group as a whole, is that correct?
20 PS BIRD: That is correct.
21 MR SHELDON: You also make the point in your statement, and
22 in the paragraph we have just referred to, that the
23 Child Protection Manual to which you had recourse was
24 out-of-date, is that right?
25 PS BIRD: That was my understanding then; however, when
254
1 I was using it, I certainly was not aware that it was
2 out-of-date.
3 MR SHELDON: You did not consider it to be out-of-date at
4 the time?
5 PS BIRD: I had no reason to believe it to be out-of-date.
6 It was a manual that was on my bookshelf when I got
7 there and I used it.
8 MR SHELDON: So that is an observation that has come to you
9 subsequently?
10 PS BIRD: There is a lot that has happened over this past
11 year, since the tragic death that has come to our
12 notice.
13 MR SHELDON: I see. Could you have a look at the manual
14 which should be still in front of you. I take it from
15 your previous few answers that you have given some
16 thought to the adequacy and the currency of this manual
17 since Victoria's death, and that, as a result of that
18 review, you have come to the view that, in certain
19 material respects, it is out-of-date?
20 PS BIRD: I think the out-of-date tag has come from
21 a detective inspectors meeting, the minutes of
22 a detective inspectors meeting in 1999, where it was
23 deemed to be out-of-date. That is where the out-of-date
24 tag has come from, as far as I am concerned. However,
25 you merely have to look to see that we are talking about
255
1 detective sergeants and they just did not exist. So,
2 yes, it is out-of-date.
3 MR SHELDON: As far as the minutes are concerned, we have
4 certainly read some minutes so far during the course of
5 these hearings, firstly saying they are out-of-date and
6 secondly -- and I will take you to this one in
7 a minute -- the manual was to be withdrawn pending
8 a rewrite. So do I take it therefore that your view
9 that the manual was out-of-date has come from looking at
10 those minutes after the event?
11 PS BIRD: Yes, that is correct, sir.
12 MR SHELDON: So would it then be a pointless exercise for me
13 at this stage to invite you to indicate to us which
14 parts of that manual you regard to be out-of-date?
15 PS BIRD: Certainly, because at the relevant time I had no
16 idea that it was out-of-date. So I could not give you
17 an opinion on it.
18 MR SHELDON: It is a comment lifted from minutes of meetings
19 which were not available to you at the time?
20 PS BIRD: I certainly did not see them at the time.
21 MR SHELDON: If you could have volume 45, please, page 238.
22 This is a minute of a North West Crime Operation Command
23 Unit meeting on 19th October 1999 at Bushey Sports Club.
24 It is a passage on page 239 I would particularly value
25 your thoughts on. 45/239; do you have that?
256
1 PS BIRD: Working Party Update?
2 MR SHELDON: CPT Manual.
3 PS BIRD: It is very faint. I have it here.
4 MR SHELDON: Paragraph 4.2.1:
5 "Detective Superintendent Akers stated that this was
6 discharged today. There was a meeting today and the CPT
7 manual was discussed and because the CPT manual is old,
8 inaccurate and not user friendly a complete revamp will
9 be needed and due to current work commitments it has
10 been decided that there will not be a CPT manual."
11 That is one of the minutes you had regard to since
12 the events and upon which you base your comments about
13 the out-of-dateness of the manual?
14 PS BIRD: Yes, sir.
15 MR SHELDON: Were you aware at the time that the CPT manual
16 had been withdrawn?
17 PS BIRD: No I was not.
18 MR SHELDON: You continued to use it after the 19th October
19 1999 as you had previously, did you?
20 PS BIRD: If I needed it, that was my point of reference,
21 yes.
22 MR SHELDON: Being out-of-date is one thing, it is also
23 commented there that it was difficult to use and
24 inaccurate. Were you aware of either of those
25 deficiencies at the time?
257
1 PS BIRD: I cannot say that I was.
2 MR SHELDON: You did not have any child protection formal
3 training, I think you have made that point already. So
4 you were forced to pick up this manual without much
5 guidance and make what use of it you could, is that
6 right?
7 PS BIRD: I do not recall anybody forcing me but I certainly
8 did pick up the manual and use it as I needed to.
9 MR SHELDON: That is the position you were put in, is what
10 I should have said: you were put in the position of
11 having to pick it up and make the best of it?
12 PS BIRD: I was.
13 MR SHELDON: Did you find it user friendly?
14 PS BIRD: I do not -- I cannot recall anything that made me
15 think -- it is a police manual. Without wanting to
16 sound too condescending of police manuals, they take
17 some reading, but this had an index, if I recall, and
18 you could find what you wanted.
19 MR SHELDON: You recall finding most of the things you
20 wanted, do you?
21 PS BIRD: I do not recall it ever being a problem.
22 MR SHELDON: Turning back to the question of training as
23 a whole, we have heard evidence that Brent were in
24 a similar position as far as training of detectives s
25 was concerned, and indeed you said just now as far as
258
1 you were aware that was a deficiency common across the
2 North West Area Crime Group. Were you under the
3 impression -- and I wonder this from paragraph 10 of
4 your statement -- that Haringey was particularly badly
5 off in this respect?
6 PS BIRD: At that time I had nothing really to judge it by.
7 This time on now I now know that the North West OCU was
8 probably one of the worst but that is really a matter of
9 what I know now because of the job I do now.
10 MR SHELDON: So in paragraph 10 where you say, "It should
11 have had a mixture of six Detective and Uniformed
12 Constables, as was the case in other parts of London,"
13 are you referring to other parts of London outside
14 Haringey or other parts of London outside the north-west
15 area OCU?
16 PS BIRD: I would have been talking about outside Haringey.
17 MR SHELDON: So is it your view or not that Haringey was
18 particularly badly off?
19 PS BIRD: I felt so at the time.
20 MR SHELDON: But you do not feel so anymore?
21 PS BIRD: I know so now.
22 MR SHELDON: You know it was particularly badly off?
23 PS BIRD: Particularly badly off. Their child protection
24 teams especially in the south of London were well
25 trained and seemed to have it right.
259
1 MR SHELDON: And had their fair share of detectives?
2 PS BIRD: As far as I am aware, yes.
3 MR SHELDON: Where do you get that knowledge from?
4 PS BIRD: Certainly Westminster CPT had their fair share of
5 detectives, certainly the three that came to review our
6 office shared between them 60 years of detective
7 experience.
8 MR SHELDON: I see, and as I understand it DCI Wheeler drew
9 some comparison between Westminster and Haringey, did he
10 not, in his report?
11 PS BIRD: Yes, he did.
12 MR SHELDON: I understand from your statement that not only
13 were the officers in Haringey insufficiently trained in
14 detective matters through 1999, there were also too few
15 of them as well?
16 PS BIRD: Yes, there were.
17 MR SHELDON: I do not want to go through the details of who
18 exactly was in the office and out of the office through
19 1999, but it seems to be the case from your statement
20 that the net effect was that you had four constables on
21 the team between March and October, which subsequently
22 went up to five, is that right?
23 PS BIRD: That is the net effect, yes.
24 MR SHELDON: Paragraph 28 you even make the point that
25 sometimes you were down to three.
260
1 PS BIRD: On one occasion we dropped to three, yes.
2 MR SHELDON: Firstly, what was establishment?
3 PS BIRD: Our establishment at Haringey was one detective
4 inspector, two sergeants and six constables.
5 MR SHELDON: I see. So you were between two and three
6 constables short throughout mid-1999?
7 PS BIRD: It is possibly worthy of note that our -- the
8 establishment at Haringey is three sergeants and eight
9 constables.
10 MR SHELDON: That was going to be my next question, after
11 what establishment was. The next question was how many
12 did you need?
13 PS BIRD: I would have to go and ask the Detective Inspector
14 that is there now to see whether it is sufficient, but
15 they have three sergeants and they have eight constables
16 and five of those are detective constables.
17 MR SHELDON: I see. So if one was to make what may even be
18 an optimistic assumption that they are now fully
19 complemented as far as staff is concerned and they have
20 enough staff to deal with all the cases, you were
21 between four and five short, as far as constables were
22 concerned, and one sergeant short?
23 PS BIRD: Certainly if they have drawn those comparisons, it
24 would appear that is the position we were in today, when
25 we look at it, yes.
261
1 MR SHELDON: Again, was it your view at the time or has it
2 since become your view that Haringey was worse off in
3 this respect than other parts of London?
4 PS BIRD: I now know that to be the case, yes, although
5 there are others who would also want to stand up and say
6 the same for themselves. Haringey was worse off than
7 a lot of others.
8 MR SHELDON: So where you say in paragraph 48 of your
9 statement that child protection teams tend to be the
10 Cinderellas of crime OCU's, Haringey was even worse off
11 within that context than most?
12 PS BIRD: I would say so.
13 MR SHELDON: As for the consequences of that understaffing,
14 you indicate in your statement that between the 6th June
15 1999 and the 25th February 2000 Karen Jones by way of
16 example had 56 cases to deal with?
17 PS BIRD: Yes, she did.
18 MR SHELDON: And that that was about average for the team?
19 PS BIRD: It was, and that included the sergeants.
20 MR SHELDON: That was a substantially higher number, you
21 expressed the view, than the rest of London?
22 PS BIRD: Certainly Westminster, which was drawn as
23 a comparison. It was two-thirds more.
24 MR SHELDON: Could you have volume 33A, page 77. This is
25 the minutes of a meeting of the Operation Command Unit
262
1 at Bushey on 19th October 1999. DI Howard is on annual
2 leave, but you were there.
3 PS BIRD: Yes.
4 MR SHELDON: Presumably in his stead, is that right?
5 PS BIRD: Yes, sir.
6 MR SHELDON: If you could have a look at page 77, there is
7 a section headed "Resources" and underneath that
8 "Personnel". We have a reference for Highgate at
9 paragraph 5.15:
10 "One officer is on maternity leave, however they
11 have full strength."
12 Could you interpret that for us?
13 PS BIRD: Certainly. We had other than the one officer, who
14 was on maternity leave, in October, we had PC Hughes
15 arrive and PC Hill arrive. So in fact had the officer
16 on maternity leave been present, we would have had one
17 inspector, two sergeants, and six constables.
18 MR SHELDON: I see. Should we be surprised that there is no
19 reference in that minute to PS Bird indicating that this
20 was a grossly inadequate level of staffing?
21 PS BIRD: Well, perhaps if I did not say it, no.
22 MR SHELDON: You were thinking it though when you were
23 sitting around that table, were you not?
24 PS BIRD: I certainly do not remember thinking it but I see
25 the point you are getting to. I did not say it,
263
1 therefore it is not in the minutes.
2 MR SHELDON: Why did you not say it?
3 PS BIRD: I cannot give you an explanation for that now,
4 I do not know.
5 MR SHELDON: You did not get to go to these meetings very
6 often, did you?
7 PS BIRD: No I did not.
8 MR SHELDON: It is only if DI Howard was away?
9 PS BIRD: That is correct.
10 MR SHELDON: You have these concerns about understaffing,
11 the stress presumably that it is putting on officers for
12 whom you are responsible, the fact that you cannot
13 offer, as a result of insufficient resources, the sort
14 of service to the children of Haringey you would want to
15 be offering, yes?
16 PS BIRD: I think that is correct.
17 MR SHELDON: This is a golden opportunity, is it not, to
18 tell people who might be able to do something about it
19 that you have these concerns.
20 PS BIRD: I think, with hindsight, it was an excellent
21 opportunity and I passed it up.
22 MR SHELDON: Is it the sort of thing that police sergeants
23 feel comfortable about telling their superiors in the
24 Metropolitan Police?
25 PS BIRD: I do not think they feel comfortable. However, if
264
1 I felt strongly about something, I have never really
2 been concerned about challenging upwards as well as
3 downwards.
4 MR SHELDON: So are we able to extrapolate from that the
5 assumption that, because there is nothing in there about
6 it, you were not particularly concerned about it at the
7 time?
8 PS BIRD: No, I do not think that could be the case at all.
9 I think they were wanting to know what our personnel
10 numbers were, and I gave them a factual report.
11 MR SHELDON: So the reason that you did not say that you
12 were understaffed is because you were not invited to
13 express your view on that matter?
14 PS BIRD: I cannot say whether that was the case, but that
15 would have been where I was coming from.
16 MR SHELDON: Did you ever express your view on that matter
17 to anybody other than DI Howard?
18 PS BIRD: I cannot say that I did, no.
19 MR SHELDON: I do not think we have seen any, but it may be
20 we have not been supplied with them, if they exist, but
21 there were no memos for example sent by you to anybody
22 more senior indicating the problems you and your staff
23 were facing?
24 PS BIRD: No, there was a problem on the north-west OCU with
25 staff for the AMIP teams, a big problem, and whilst we
265
1 were all very upset with the number of staff or the lack
2 of resources we had, I think we were resigned to the
3 fact that there were no more coming.
4 MR SHELDON: While you have that volume in front of you,
5 I want to deal very briefly with the issue of
6 information technology which you refer to in your
7 statement. Again we have the details there to read, but
8 it would be an accurate summary, would it not, to say
9 that the situation as far as information technology and
10 your team was concerned was grossly inadequate?
11 PS BIRD: It was.
12 MR SHELDON: Was that again something that DI Howard was
13 aware of?
14 PS BIRD: We were promised on numerous occasions -- and
15 I think the delay was due to slippage -- to have what
16 they call Otis 4, which is the Metropolitan Police
17 computer system that links up and forms an intranet
18 within the service, and there was just slippage. So we
19 were always waiting for this to be delivered.
20 MR SHELDON: And DI Howard knew about that?
21 PS BIRD: DI Howard knew about it and so did the senior
22 management team.
23 MR SHELDON: Was that the position from the time you arrived
24 on the team?
25 PS BIRD: Yes, it was.
266
1 MR SHELDON: Could you turn to page 9 in that volume,
2 please; just to refer back to the beginning of the
3 document for your reference, these are minutes dated
4 19th January 1999. It is another one of these
5 DI meetings. Back over to page 9, third paragraph down:
6 "DI Howard was more than happy with his supply of IT
7 and already had access to Otis through the YT division.
8 However, as regards accommodation, he had greater
9 concerns."
10 So it would appear that DI Howard, a month or two
11 before your arrival, is saying that he is not just
12 happy, he is more than happy?
13 PS BIRD: Yes, I have just read that.
14 MR SHELDON: Does that surprise you?
15 PS BIRD: Very much so, because we did not have it in the
16 office.
17 MR SHELDON: So you can think of no obvious explanation for
18 DI Howard's views as they are recorded in those minutes?
19 PS BIRD: The Otis was not in the office.
20 MR SHELDON: Where was the Otis?
21 PS BIRD: At the time, there was one Otis in the front
22 office of the police station, that the station officer
23 used, and the other police officers that used the
24 station, and that is what we used.
25 MR SHELDON: Did you feel that the lack of resources and the
267
1 lack of manpower on the team meant that you were doing
2 your job less effectively than you might otherwise have
3 done?
4 PS BIRD: I believe -- yes, I believe that was the case.
5 MR SHELDON: Did you feel that you had had insufficient time
6 to perform adequately and up to your standards one of
7 the most important roles you had, which was the
8 supervision of your junior officers?
9 PS BIRD: I think so.
10 MR SHELDON: Could you be shown volume 44, please, and
11 page 14 in particular. Just flick very quickly to the
12 front of that volume, Mr Bird, please, just so you can
13 see it is the DCI Wheeler review of the team, which
14 I expect you have seen on more than one occasion.
15 PS BIRD: I know it.
16 MR SHELDON: Turning to page 14, DCI Wheeler would appear to
17 have conducted an examination of individual case loads:
18 DI Howard, none; PS Hodges, ten; PS Bird, three. I am
19 not for the moment particularly concerned about the
20 explanations for that, although there is some suggestion
21 underneath that Sergeant Hodges may have taken on more
22 than he should have done in an attempt to immerse
23 himself in the work of the team.
24 What I would like you to look at is page 25; the
25 very last paragraph on page 25. This is page 25 of the
268
1 bundle:
2 "The office is in fact very busy. However, the work
3 loads of at least one sergeant were low enough to allow
4 him to supervise more efficiently."
5 PS BIRD: Yes, I have read that.
6 MR SHELDON: Firstly, that sergeant must be you?
7 PS BIRD: It is -- well, I assume it is and I say it is.
8 MR SHELDON: It would seem logical, given you have three
9 cases and the other sergeant has ten. What do you say
10 to that?
11 PS BIRD: Mr Wheeler was very selective in what he was
12 looking at. The snapshot of my live CRIS's on that
13 graph represents what was live on that day. It does not
14 say what was live before or what was live the next day.
15 It does not take into account the Crown Court cases that
16 I was taking through Crown Court at the time. It does
17 not take into account the CPS files I was putting
18 through and it does not take into account the large
19 amount of administration duties that I took on when
20 I first went to Haringey and serviced on a weekly basis.
21 It takes none of that into account.
22 MR SHELDON: Although he was aware at least of the first of
23 those considerations, was he not, because on page 20
24 there are details of the cases that are currently being
25 taken through the court system by individual officers,
269
1 and we see you have a case involving two counts of rape,
2 indecent assault and two counts of gross indecency?
3 PS BIRD: I had three cases going through Crown Court at the
4 time.
5 MR SHELDON: So that is inaccurate?
6 PS BIRD: It is inaccurate.
7 MR SHELDON: We would be wrong then, would we, to take the
8 conclusion expressed by DCI Wheeler on page 25 to
9 indicate that you had plenty of time during mid-1999 to
10 do a better job of supervising officers?
11 PS BIRD: Absolutely wrong. On a day-to-day basis, there
12 was no officer in that office who had any time, even to
13 take a lunch break. They would have them at their desk.
14 MR SHELDON: Did DCI Wheeler speak to you before he wrote
15 this report?
16 PS BIRD: On many occasions in that week, yes.
17 MR SHELDON: Did you express the views you are expressing to
18 us to him?
19 PS BIRD: I had not seen the report, so I did not know what
20 he was going to write.
21 MR SHELDON: But you feel you gave him an accurate picture
22 of the amount of time you had available to you to
23 supervise officers in mid-1999.
24 PS BIRD: When Mr Wheeler came into the office, he was
25 exceedingly autocratic and made it very difficult for
270
1 any conversation to be had. But, if he asked me
2 a straight question, I would have given him a factual
3 answer.
4 MR SHELDON: I see. Thank you.
5 I know your involvement in this particular aspect of
6 the case was limited to one occasion, but have you
7 considered since Victoria's death the response made by
8 Haringey Child Protection Team to the referral received
9 on 28th July?
10 PS BIRD: Yes, I have.
11 MR SHELDON: To what extent, in your view, was that response
12 affected by The staff shortages and lack of training
13 that you have identified?
14 PS BIRD: From my point of view, from the supervision point
15 of view, I think it was affected very much, in that
16 I always seemed to have other things to do, and there
17 was not a system where I was looking at certain crimes
18 at certain times in certain periods. But I would find
19 it very difficult to comment on whether the lack of
20 staff affected the officers' investigation.
21 MR SHELDON: So the question of whether Karen Jones
22 conducted her investigation adequately or inadequately
23 because she had insufficient time is a matter for her,
24 but you can say that you were unable to supervise her as
25 effectively as you would have liked to have done because
271
1 you were overworked?
2 PS BIRD: In hindsight, at the time that was not the case.
3 I thought, when I looked at that investigation, it was
4 being investigated correctly.
5 MR SHELDON: You were the reporting sergeant, as
6 I understand it, when you arrived for Detective
7 Constable Braithwaite and Constables Mangan and
8 Ricketts; is that right?
9 PS BIRD: Yes.
10 MR SHELDON: Detective Constable Braithwaite left shortly
11 after you arrived, so you were then responsible for
12 Mangan and Ricketts as reporting sergeant?
13 PS BIRD: Until the replacement came, yes.
14 MR SHELDON: Yes, and Karen Jones' reporting sergeant was
15 Sergeant Cooper-Bland, is that right?
16 PS BIRD: Yes.
17 MR SHELDON: How formalised was that reporting sergeant
18 structure? What I am attempting to get your assistance
19 on is the extent to which you would supervise the work
20 of officers for whom you were not reporting sergeant.
21 PS BIRD: It was not formalised, sir.
22 MR SHELDON: I believe Karen Jones said something to the
23 effect earlier on today that she would report to whoever
24 was there, either Detective Inspector Howard or one of
25 you two sergeants; is that the way it worked?
272
1 PS BIRD: I think that is a fair assessment, yes.
2 MR SHELDON: So you regarded this as your responsibility to
3 keep an eye on, as far as possible, the investigations
4 being undertaken by all the constables on the team?
5 PS BIRD: Yes, I did.
6 MR SHELDON: The way in which you did that principally, as
7 I understand it from your statement, was to look at CRIS
8 records, is that correct?
9 PS BIRD: That is correct.
10 MR SHELDON: And the aim, or at least the practice at the
11 time, was to look at a CRIS record once every ten days
12 or less to ensure that all that needed to be done was
13 being done?
14 PS BIRD: That was the aim, yes.
15 MR SHELDON: And that that was done on an ad hoc basis by
16 whichever sergeant on inspector was free to do it at the
17 time?
18 PS BIRD: Yes, it was.
19 MR SHELDON: How did you know, as one of those supervisors,
20 when it was time to look up a CRIS record?
21 PS BIRD: Behind the CRIS machine there was a white board.
22 On the white board there was the date, "CRIS last
23 supervised ...", on this date.
24 MR SHELDON: I see.
25 PS BIRD: You would look at that, or they were job lists
273
1 that I created on my CRIS computer where you would go
2 into the CRIS, perhaps to supervise a crime you had
3 worked with a PC or one of your own investigations, and
4 I would run that to see which crimes had not been
5 updated within the last ten days. So there were two
6 ways that you would know that something had not been
7 updated in the last ten days.
8 MR SHELDON: Dealing with the first of those, when it said
9 "CRIS last supervised on ...", such a date, was that the
10 CRIS system as a whole, or was it broken down by
11 individual case?
12 PS BIRD: No, it was not. That was the supervision -- that
13 was the live CRIS's for the office on that day.
14 MR SHELDON: What I am getting at is was there a quick and
15 easy way you could say: ah, the Kouao case has not been
16 looked at for seven days?
17 PS BIRD: Yes, you could. You could put parameters into the
18 CRIS machine and check that. You could check all CRIS's
19 live on that database that had not been updated in one
20 day, two days, three days and forward.
21 MR SHELDON: I see. And when you went into the system as
22 a supervisor, having seen that it was time that a CRIS
23 was looked at, you would attempt to do all the cases
24 that were live and required supervision at that time,
25 would you?
274
1 PS BIRD: Yes.
2 MR SHELDON: That could presumably take you a substantial
3 period of time?
4 PS BIRD: It could take you the best part of a quiet morning
5 or the best part of a noisy day, or sometime it might
6 not be completed.
7 MR SHELDON: Was there a case of supervisors hoping that
8 another supervisor would do it?
9 PS BIRD: No.
10 MR SHELDON: You were always happy that it was always done
11 on time?
12 PS BIRD: Everybody -- well, yes, you would go in there and
13 see if it had not been done, then you would do it.
14 MR SHELDON: What I wanted to understand was it is left to
15 individual supervisors' own initiative to go into the
16 system to have a look, is it?
17 PS BIRD: No, it did not work like that, because there would
18 be -- because it was such a small unit and, in
19 hindsight, this should have been formalised but it was
20 not, it would be the case where somebody would say: who
21 is doing the ten-day CRIS checks this time?
22 MR SHELDON: I see.
23 PS BIRD: So, if my colleague had a case conference to go
24 to, I would do it: if I had something that was busy, he
25 would do it. If we were both busy, DI Howard would do
275
1 it.
2 MR SHELDON: This was a system that was changed following
3 the procedural review in March 2000?
4 PS BIRD: That is correct.
5 MR SHELDON: That is DCI Wheeler's view?
6 PS BIRD: That is correct.
7 MR SHELDON: The system now is this in essence -- and
8 I realise there are occasional exceptions -- sergeants
9 will supervise the CRIS records of officers for whom
10 they are the reporting sergeants?
11 PS BIRD: That is correct, yes.
12 MR SHELDON: Is that better?
13 PS BIRD: Far better.
14 MR SHELDON: Why?
15 PS BIRD: Far better because it focuses your mind on that
16 particular officer's investigations. There was also
17 bi-weekly -- or fortnightly meetings were arranged as
18 well to sit down with that officer and go through any
19 difficult cases. In practice, we tried to go through
20 all cases. The outcome of that was we took a lot less
21 investigations on ourselves and that freed us up to do
22 the job that we were employed to do, which was
23 supervise.
24 MR SHELDON: As I understand your evidence so far, and what
25 you have written in your statement, there would seem to
276
1 be the following ways in which it would have been
2 possible for you to supervise Victoria's case as of
3 mid-1999: that is, looking at the CRIS record in the way
4 you have described; informally around the office. So
5 bump into her and say "how are you getting on with that
6 case", and the three-monthly office meeting that you
7 describe in paragraph 30 of your statement. Is that
8 all?
9 PS BIRD: There were occasions when, certainly with the
10 officers that I was responsible for reporting for, where
11 I would sit at their desks and look through their
12 correspondence to see exactly what was going on.
13 MR SHELDON: But you were not doing that in respect of
14 Constable Jones, because she was not reporting to you as
15 at mid-1999, is that right?
16 PS BIRD: I did not do that, no, and that is the reason,
17 yes.
18 MR SHELDON: As you are aware, one of the matters I have to
19 put to you is that you failed adequately to supervise
20 PC Jones, by any of those mechanisms, in her handling of
21 the referral in July 1999. You have gone some way to
22 answering that by indicating you could not do all you
23 would have wanted to have done because you did not have
24 time, but is that a criticism you accept?
25 PS BIRD: I do accept it in hindsight. I think it is a very
277
1 fair criticism, but at the time I truly believed I was
2 doing all I could.
3 MR SHELDON: Do you still believe you were doing all you
4 could?
5 PS BIRD: Yes, I do.
6 MR SHELDON: So, although there are things that you should
7 have done or would like to have done in supervising
8 PC Jones, even now, looking back, you cannot see a way
9 you could reasonably be expected to have done them?
10 PS BIRD: I think if I had come into the office with a
11 knowledge, a better knowledge, of working with CIPP
12 teams, which is one sergeant and dedicated constables,
13 then perhaps I could have done. But I had no experience
14 of that.
15 MR SHELDON: As you understand it now, what would good
16 practice require as far as supervising her case in
17 mid-1999 is concerned?
18 PS BIRD: Good practice now would be that each sergeant has
19 a specific named number of constables to supervise.
20 They would look at their CRIS's and their CRIS's alone,
21 within a period of time, which I believe is still ten
22 days, and they would sit down with the officer. Brent
23 do it monthly, but the review of Haringey was that it
24 should be done every 14 days, and go through every
25 investigation and see where they are. That is very
278
1 intrusive, very intrusive supervision, for such an
2 experienced team of officers and mature officers. It is
3 not normally the case that you would be doing that with
4 people of that service.
5 MR SHELDON: I see.
6 Sir, there is substantially more on that topic than
7 I think it is convenient to deal with tonight. So, if
8 that is a convenient moment, perhaps we will adjourn
9 until tomorrow?
10 THE CHAIRMAN: Indeed it is Mr Sheldon, thank you very much
11 indeed.
12 Detective Sergeant Bird, you remain, as you will
13 understand, under oath and you are not allowed to
14 discuss your evidence with anyone else, including any
15 members of the media or your advocate.
16 PS BIRD: I understand.
17 THE CHAIRMAN: We have two kinds of adjournments, ladies and
18 gentlemen: for those of us who are involved in the early
19 morning video conference, we adjourn until 8 o'clock
20 and, for the rest of us, we adjourn until 10 o'clock.
21 And that is your position, Mr Bird. Mr Garnham?
22 MR GARNHAM: Sir, only to say I had not formally brought to
23 everybody's attention the fact we are having an early
24 morning video evidence-gathering exercise tomorrow.
25 Yolande Viljoen from South Africa. We are expecting to
279
1 have for that the same sort of structure of team as we
2 did on the previous occasion. So I think it will be
3 somebody from Brent.
4 THE CHAIRMAN: I am grateful to you, Mr Garnham. I hope
5 that is clear. So, for those of us who are involved in
6 the video conference, 8 o'clock; for the rest,
7 10 o'clock.
8 For those who are not involved in the 8 o'clock
9 video conference, I hope you have a peaceful night.
10 (5.10 pm)
11 (The hearing adjourned until 10.00 am on Tuesday,
12 20th November 2001)
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
|
