A report into a complaint handling review relating to Fife Constabulary has ruled that five of six complaints made by a woman detained after a disturbance were not handled reasonably by the force.
The case was investigated after the woman, who was not named in the Police Complaints Commissioner for Scotland’s (PCCS) report, filed complaints against the police following an incident on May 19, 2009.
Officers were called after the woman’s partner named only as Mr A in the report alleged the woman had been shouting outside his home after the pair had rowed over theatre tickets he had in his possession.
The woman had claimed she bought the tickets and had attended Mr A’s home to reclaim them, though Mr A’s position was that the tickets were jointly owned. After repeated warnings about her shouting in the street, the woman was arrested by two officers and taken to a police station.
However, the woman went on to lodge six complaints about the way she was treated during the incident, and a written response to her complaints was issued by Fife Police on July 20, 2009.
In response to her first complaint that her arrest had been “totally unjust” the PCCS said the actions taken by the constables on the night had been entirely reasonable and pointed out that officers had given her “one more chance” to co-operate before arresting her demonstrating a willingness on their part to deal with the situation without the need for custody.
Nevertheless, the PCCS felt her complaint had not been dealt with reasonably, as a chief inspector had written to her advising her she had been taken into custody for her own well-being.
“This is clearly incorrect and understandably has led the applicant to question the response to the complaint,” the PCCS stated.
The woman also alleged the police had made no inquiry to establish why she had attended Mr A’s address; that she had been “bundled” into the back of a police van; that, while detained, she had not been provided with food and drink; and that the police did not inform her friend of her arrest.
All four of those complaints were similarly upheld by the PCCS.
While the PCCS said the basis for the woman’s arrest remains “valid irrespective of who owned the tickets,” the report said her complaint about an alleged lack of inquiry had not been dealt with in a reasonable manner, as it had not been mentioned in the chief inspector’s written response nor specifically listed in an inspector’s report into the case.
In relation to her point about alleged use of excessive force, again the PCCS said her complaint had not been properly handled as no specific reference to that matter was detailed in the inspector’s report or chief inspector’s written response although it noted the weight of evidence suggested no force had been used.
In terms of the food and drink complaint, the PCCS said that had not been addressed as part of the investigation and therefore had not been handled in a reasonable manner, while the PCCS also criticised the police for not informing the woman’s friend of her arrest.
The inspector’s report into the incident confirmed the woman had requested that contact be made with a friend but revealed a sergeant had deemed this “impractical” at that point due to the time of night.
The PCCS said the sergeant’s decision had been “incorrect and unjustified” and recommended Fife Constabulary issues an apology to the woman for its failure to notify her friend of the arrest.
A sixth complaint, that the police did not inquire if the woman’s house was secured after her arrest, was dealt with in a reasonable manner, according to the PCCS, as the police had informed her it was not common practice to check on the security of a property owned by someone taken into police custody.