Most detainees in Gwent police custody suites were treated with
respect and consideration, and were held safely in good
conditions, independent criminal justice inspectorates found in a
joint report published today.
HM Chief Inspector of Prisons, Peter Clarke, and Dru Sharpling,
HM Inspector of Constabulary, said the unannounced inspection in
July 2017 found improved medical provision for detainees, a
concern in the last inspection in 2012. They noted, however, that
more could still be done to improve support for those released
from custody, the other principal concern in 2012.
Some concerns in 2017 centred on record keeping, the inspectors
said. “The overall quality of custody records was poor. This was
disappointing because the records often did not reflect the
standard of work that we observed in practice.”
Inspectors identified some procedural shortcomings and practices
in the way the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) and its
codes of practice were applied. The force needed to make sure
that notices setting out rights and entitlements were given to
all detainees. There were also weaknesses in the governance of
the use of force in custody: staff generally did not submit
individual use of force forms to justify why they needed to use
force against detainees. However, inspectors observed that in
most cases staff dealt with challenging and vulnerable detainees
in a patient and reassuring way.
A further concern related to children being held overnight in
police custody in Gwent. Peter Clarke and Dru Sharpling noted
that this issue had come up in many police custody inspections
across England and Wales.
“Despite robust monitoring, as we commonly find on these
inspections, children charged and refused bail continued to be
held in custody overnight, with very few moved to alternative
local authority-provided accommodation,” the report said.
Inspectors found “some strong work” with partners to try to
divert children from the criminal justice system. However, Gwent
Police, they said, needed to strengthen its joint working with
local authority partners to ensure that children charged and
refused bail were always looked after properly.
Peter Clarke and Dru Sharpling said:
“Despite the weaknesses identified, overall this was a positive
report. Importantly, detainees held in police custody in Gwent
are treated with respect. We look forward to seeing the force
continue this work to make provision for detainees even better.”
- ENDS -
Notes to Editors:
- A copy of the full report, published on 20 Dec 2017, can be
found on the HM Inspectorate of Prisons website
at: www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprisons.
- HM Inspectorate of Prisons is an independent inspectorate,
inspecting places of detention to report on conditions and
treatment, and promote positive outcomes for those detained and
the public.
- On 19 July 2017 HMIC took on responsibility for fire &
rescue service inspections and was renamed HM Inspectorate of
Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services.
- HMICFRS is an independent inspectorate, inspecting policing
in the public interest, and assesses and reports on the
efficiency and effectiveness of police forces to tackle crime and
terrorism, improve criminal justice and raise confidence. HMICFRS
inspects all 43 police forces in England and Wales together with
other major policing and law enforcement bodies.
- This joint custody suite inspection was carried out between
10-20 July 2017.
- This report is part of a programme of unannounced inspections
of police custody carried out jointly by the two inspectorates
and which form a key part of the joint work programme of the
criminal justice inspectorates. These inspections also contribute
to the United Kingdom’s response to its international obligation
to ensure regular and independent inspection of all places of
detention. The inspections look at strategy, treatment and
conditions, individual rights and health care.
- We last inspected Gwent Police custody in September 2012,
when we found that, in most respects, there was a reasonably good
standard of provision. Our two principal concerns were about
weaknesses in medical provision and the support provided to
detainees on release.
