Examination of Witnesses (Questions 540-559)
MR ROBERT
ROOKS, BRIGADIER
COLIN FINDLAY,
GROUP CAPTAIN
EDWARD SCAPLEHORN
AND COMMANDER
DAVID PRICE
1 MARCH 2006
Q540 Sarah McCarthy-Fry: Is
that training that occurs just before they are deployed out there
or is it a matter of course?
Brigadier Findlay: It is principally
contextually relevant at the period just before deployment and
it is a six to eight week period of windup that we have. It is
done on an entirely joint Services basis now as all of the operational
deployments in Iraq and in Afghanistan are at least at the moment
represented by a large proportion of RMP SIB but also with elements
of the Royal Air Force Police SIB working in an integrated investigative
team out there and the same, I am delighted to say, is about to
happen with the Afghanistan deployment.
Q541 Sarah McCarthy-Fry: Do
you have any access to Home Office forces' investigatory facilities
out in the theatre?
Brigadier Findlay: There are no
deployed forensic assets of a civilian nature in any of these
theatres but there is a reach back capability to bring that out.
It is hugely constrained by force protection. For example, for
deaths which take place in certain of the overseas theatres, which
could be in any of the deployed locations but also in the permanent
bases such as Cyprus and Gibraltar and so on, we have in the past
moved Home Office forensic pathologists out there. Professor Peter
Vanezis, who is the resident consultant forensic pathologist for
the Army and works in London, normally flies out to the scene
of a death. That would be seriously constrained if it was in an
operational theatre where ongoing operations were in progress.
We have taken ballistics experts, for example, out to northern
Afghanistan, north of Kabul, to deal with shooting incidents.
We have standing contracts with some of these specialists in the
Forensic Science Service but particularly Home Office pathologists.
Q542 Sarah McCarthy-Fry: So
you are quite happy to use the expertise of the Home Office if
you need to do this reach back. How important is the Service context
to SIB investigations if you are quite happy to use the Home Office?
Brigadier Findlay: The main part
of the investigation has been conducted by military investigators
who understand the Service context principally because they are
out there with the deployed troops and they are actually in there
sharing the same levels of risk associated with the force protection
challenge in that theatre. Being able to understand the mechanism
and the operational circumstances in which an incident may have
taken place is absolutely pivotal to being able to put the right
context into the report which may come to trial, as Mr Jones said,
several years later. I believe it is critically important that
we have military investigators, people with Service experience,
who are actually serving out there continuously with that team.
Q543 Sarah McCarthy-Fry: Would
the other two agree with that?
Group Captain Scaplehorn: I would
agree with that. That is one of the reasons why the RAF has contributed
to this integrated SIB structure that the Brigadier mentioned.
There are RAF forces operating in Iraq as well. We see that understanding
of the Service environment as being extremely important.
Commander Price: The RN has not
been exposed in the same way as the Army and the RAF and so it
is pretty limited. In terms of contextualising, it is exactly
the same, you need, for example, to understand the submarine environment.
Q544 Robert Key: Where
there is an issue of forensic science in any of these cases and
you have described how important it is that there should be a
reach back available, is any forensic science training given to
members of boards of courts martial in how to interpret that evidence?
I say this because in the last Parliament the Science and Technology
Committee did a report on the Forensic Science Service and a Crown
Court judge gave evidence to make it clear that there was indeed
a great abuse of forensic science in the courts because permanent
judges were untrained and incapable of interpreting forensic science
efforts. What do you do about that in the military circumstance?
Brigadier Findlay: I am afraid
I cannot even comment on that because it would be improper for
me to comment on the relative qualifications of members of boards
of courts martial and it is not a Service Police matter.
Q545 Robert Key: I am
sure Mr Rooks would have a view because your responsibility is
very much wider.
Mr Rooks: My responsibilities
are for safety and security and in part I deal with overarching
police policy. I am afraid I do not deal with courts martial.
The courts martial does have a professional Judge Advocate chairing
it. I would imagine that the training for the Judge Advocate would
be similar to the training for civil judges, but I do not know.
Can I offer to the Committee that we come back to you on that?
Robert Key: Yes, please.
Q546 Vera Baird: Do you
all have protocols about scenes of crime procedures? I am just
wondering how easy it is for Home Office people to come in and
interpret what has been done on the ground by the military investigators.
Do you have protocols amongst the three investigation bureaus
and do those protocols accord with the Home Office protocols so
that your scenes of crime officer takes photographs at each stage
and all that kind of thing?
Brigadier Findlay: The training
is Home Office accredited entirely. So we are utilising the ACPO
guidelines and we have accreditation at appropriate levels and
it is approved, for instance, by the Forensic Science Department
at Durham. So we are using identical mechanisms in terms of what
our crime scene examiners would be doing at a scene and therefore
the Home Office pathologist would come to expect exactly the same
capability. It has to be contextualised at the scene which may
not be quite as controllable in an operational theatre as it would
be in Surrey.
Commander Price: It is on a tri-Service
basis.
Brigadier Findlay: That is why
it is so common that elements of our forensic science staff resettle
into that type of employment with the Civil Police.
Q547 Mr Jones: In terms
of the preservation of forensic data not just in terms of the
police but also Commanding Officers, because often they are the
people who are the first there, do they get any training? During
the Duty of Care inquiry a Mrs Sharples told us "that
there had been no investigation into her son's death; there was
no preservation of the scene of crime; and the gun that was assumed
to have fired the fatal shot had been washed and put back on the
rack without any forensic examination." We heard about quite
a few of these cases. I had a constituent of mine who died in
Bosnia and the way in which the family was treated and also the
crime scene was treated did appal me because there were quite
a few assumptions made in this case that was put down to suicide
that it was just that. Clearly when the civilian police find a
body they do not work on the basis that it is natural causes or
a suicide.
Brigadier Findlay: As I said to
you in that Committee, a lot of lessons were learned following
the issues of undetermined death and I purposely used that term,
which I explained to you at the time last year, as it seriously
adjusted what was the relative perception and mindset at that
time. In terms of training for Commanding Officers, non-Service
Police, guidance and advice has been given to the chain of command
in relation to what to do and what not to do with a scene until
the first police qualified person comes on the scene, because
it could be ourselves or it could easily be the civil authority
themselves, to ensure that critical aspects of that scene are
preserved in its entirety until the SIO can come forward.
Q548 Mr Jones: Is that
written guidance that has been given out?
Brigadier Findlay: To the best
of my knowledge it is because it came out of a learning account
that was conducted as a result of these investigations.
Q549 Mr Jones: Could we
have a copy of that?
Brigadier Findlay: That is a matter
I will pass back to the chain of command, yes.
Q550 Jim Sheridan: I want
to pursue the reputation of the Service Police and indeed the
SIB following Deepcut and Catterick. There has been a great deal
of criticism both from the families involved but from more senior
people like the Advocate General. Putting aside the armchair critics,
has the reputation of the Services or the police been damaged
and, if it has been damaged in your opinion, what steps can be
taken to try and restore the confidence that the general public
and the families of the people in the Armed Services should have
in you?
Brigadier Findlay: Yes, the reputation
has been damaged and I am very conscious of that, but I am also
very conscious of the challenging circumstances in which investigations
are conducted. I think at that point it would be very fair to
separate the two parts of your observation, which is first in
relation to the Duty of Care inquiry and the clear acceptance
that we needed to approach investigations with a much, much more
open mind associated with undetermined death. That has taken place
and there has been a significant change in posture as a result
of it. In terms of the criticisms of the SIB on investigations
that are taking place in operational theatres, what I am grateful
to have is the unequivocal support from the Chief of the General
Staff and the Army Board and the continued support of CDS and
the Minister for the operations that the SIB conduct in places
like Iraq and Afghanistan. These are not easy and will never be
popular from that perspective. Sadly, we are dealing with very
highly charged circumstances here where incidents associated with
potentially criminal activity are taking place in what is still
a highly charged and very dangerous environment. However, if you
do want to have a police investigation it quite obviously has
to be thorough, there could not be any half measure. If there
were to be then I would stand charged with inadequacy as opposed
to what has been described in the press as over-zealousness.
Q551 Jim Sheridan: I am
absolutely delighted that you have the confidence of senior Service
personnel and senior ministers, but the question I am asking is
about the confidence that the Service personnel have in you as
a service and, more importantly, the families and the general
public. I accept that the establishment is confident in you, but
what I am trying to establish is your reputation amongst the general
public, the families and the Service personnel. What are you doing
to reassure them that you are carrying out a professional job?
Mr Rooks: We do have full confidence
in the SIB that they are a very professional force, but you are
absolutely right, it is not sufficient for us inside the organisation
to have confidence; we have to make sure that the Service earns
the confidence of the general public as well. We are looking at
a range of governance measures which we hope will improve matters
in that area. The first of which, and I think a very powerful
measure, is to invite Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary
(HMIC) to undertake an independent inspection of various aspects
of the Service Police force. We are confident the Service Police
forces will come out well from that, but that will be completely
independent of the MoD and the establishment. HMIC has agreed
to do that and we are starting with a thematic inspection of the
RMP SIB because that is the area that has been most criticised
and we hope that report will be available by the summer. It is
not quite signed and sealed yet, but that is our aim.
Q552 Jim Sheridan: And
HMIC will be privy to all the information, will it?
Mr Rooks: Yes, absolutely, they
will have a free rein.
Q553 Mr Jones: How regular
is that going to be? I think that is needed. One of the pressures
or oversights for the civilian home service is the fact that they
are regularly inspected so that they can ensure that standards
are kept up. Should we not have a system whereby this is done
on a regular basis?
Mr Rooks: That is the aim.
Q554 Mr Jones: There is
a difference between an aim and an actual thing when it comes
to civil servants.
Mr Rooks: This is really just
hot off the press. The agreement was reached with HMIC only a
week or so ago. They are not yet used to inspecting in a Service
environment. I think they are as keen to do a trial but important
inspection to start with. We can all learn from that. The full
intention is to go ahead and do inspections of the other two Service
Police forces as well and then go beyond the SIB and inspect other
aspects of the Service.
Q555 Mr Jones: You did
not answer the question. Is this going to be a regular inspection?
Mr Rooks: It is intended to be
regular.
Q556 Mr Jones: How regular?
Mr Rooks: That is something we
want to work through with HMIC. We have not yet finally decided
that.
Q557 Mr Jones: That is
not a decision for them, it is a political decision, a ministerial
decision. My police force in Durham is inspected regularly. Should
we not have the same system for the Service Police? Is there going
to be a political decision to do that?
Mr Rooks: That is the intention.
That is as far as I can go at this stage. That would be my recommendation.
Brigadier Findlay: I am very conscious
that accountability and governance are key issues. I already am
subject to inspection in a variety of ways. For example, the Office
of the Surveillance Commissioner inspects me on an annual basis.
Q558 Mr Howarth: What
on earth is that?
Brigadier Findlay: The Regulation
of the Investigatory Powers Act includes provision for the Service
Police to conduct covert surveillance activities in criminal cases.
As a result the Surveillance Commissioner and his staff inspect
the Service Police covert operations activities and the authorisations
provided by myself as the Chief Officer and that is endorsed by
the Surveillance Commissioner himself and that takes place on
an annual basis. Equally, the Interception Commissioner deals
with the same in terms of our activities on telecommunications.
Q559 Mr Howarth: How long
has that been under way?
Brigadier Findlay: That has been
in existence since RIPA came into force in 2000. So I am regularly
subjected to review by a senior judge in respect of the technical
aspects of my job, but I take your point, governance and accountability
are critical to credibility externally.
| 
